Katene Rahui: Unit Titles Bill — First Reading 
Katene Rahui: Unit Titles Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1720] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 It is entirely appropriate that I stand here today as a Maori woman to talk to the Unit Titles Bill. Our whakatauaki our tribal traditions have always made explicit the connection between wahine our women and whenua our land. As we say: “He wahine he whenua ka ngaro te tangata.”—“For a woman and land men perish.” Women will be revered and respected as te whare tangata—literally the house of people. Our words are interchangeable—to be hapu also means as well as “subtribe” “to be pregnant”. Whanau relates to the act of giving birth as well as to the family. And when we give birth our whenua the placenta or afterbirth and the pito the umbilical cord are returned to the whenua the land making forever the link between that newborn baby and Papatuanuku—Mother Earth. 
I give this very brief summary of our world views on land as a means of an introduction to the importance of land to Maori. Just as we must value every woman as the bearer of the iwi—the generations to come—we must also guard and protect Mother Earth with that same reverence. It is because of the strength of our beliefs that our people have literally walked the land in hikoi acknowledging the special cultural spiritual emotional and physical significance of this relationship. We are tangata whenua people of the land; the land and people are inseparable. 
So we take great interest in the proposal in this bill to update the law regarding the subdivision development and management of land. We take great interest in the issues around ownership and management of land buildings and facilities and we will always be concerned to see whether any developments that are put forward will diminish Maori rights or whether they can create opportunities. In our world view land is a taonga tuku iho a treasure to be preserved respected and protected. If land and buildings are to be subdivided into unit title developments owned by unit holders we want to be assured that tangata whenua are fully involved. 
Those members who have looked at the Order Paper over the last few days will have noticed that sitting at No. 5 place for members’ bills is a Maori Party bill generated by the call that no more Maori land should be taken under the Public Works Act. In that bill my colleague Te Ururoa Flavell is recommending that Maori owners be given the first right of refusal to purchase land that the Crown no longer requires for use as intended. I am interested to see whether in the Unit Titles Bill there will be any recognition made for land taken under the Public Works Act and never returned. 
In this bill today we are being offered the opportunity for a deviation from section 11 of the Resource Management Act which applies to restrictions on the subdivision of land and from Part 10 of the same Act which is about subdivision and reclamation. The question that raises for the Maori Party is whether it creates the potential for confusion as another critical part of section 11 is the requirement that any subdivision that is to be considered for Maori land can be dealt with only under Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. We will be looking for clarity therefore on section 11. We wonder what other considerations may need to be made in relation to Maori land including lands upon which Treaty settlements are currently in negotiation. 
As I said earlier the importance we place on land as tangata whenua is all-encompassing. Our land provides us with a tangible link to our tupuna. It is the site of our genealogical connection to all of our bloodline so we take seriously the role of guardianship our kaitiakitanga responsibilities on behalf of those who have come before us and those who descend from us. But it would be stretching the rainbow to say that the management of the multiple ownership of land is easy. Indeed the ongoing fragmentation of multiple ownership is a direct result of the individualisation of title and of a failure to recognise the principles of collective use and occupation. Maori communities on multiple-owned land will also often not face the standard market conditions that other landowners face. They may have limited access to markets capital is often scarce information is frequently incomplete and the requirements for the decision making of the collective are highly complex. 
There are currently serious problems with the subdivision of Maori land and particularly with the fact that the Maori Land Court will not agree to the partition of Maori land. Getting an application for an individual partition of land through is difficult because of the thresholds of agreement needed. We need to find another way in which to protect lands from misuse and/or sale while also allowing whanau and hapu to develop papakainga housing projects if there is a reasonable level of consent. One way might be to identify land suitable for a Maori housing scheme and to lower the thresholds for the partitioning of those lands while also placing restrictions on the sale of the partitioned land. 
At present under the law there is also no capacity to enable the owners of Maori customary and freehold land in a particular area or papakainga to join with another one and collectively manage their lands—to do things like restrict the sale of land in order to maintain the integrity of the papakainga. The question that needs to be put to the select committee is whether the bill can be modified to take into account special Maori needs to protect their papakainga. This is a potential opportunity offered by the bill and we will be interested to see how submitters address it. 
Another approach we as a party have considered is to introduce proposals to enable leasehold titles to be commercially bankable. We are interested in the possibilities of third-party financial institutions that may be interested in investing in multiple-owned land so we are interested in the management proposals around bodies corporate that would bring together all unit owners in a development to cooperate and manage unit title developments. Suffice it to say we have as many proposals and solutions as there are issues inherent in the development of land and resources to better enable whanau hapu and iwi to advance on a socially and economically sustainable basis. So we are extremely interested in the evolution of the modern framework that the Minister suggests is needed to achieve the joint ownership and management of land buildings and facilities. 
Of course we are always going to be wary of the actions of the State as they pertain to the upholding of the rangatiratanga of our land. We have to think back only to the sale of prime Coromandel land at Whenuakite the controversy regarding Rangiputa Station on the Karikari Peninsula or the proposed sale of the Taurewa land blocks to know how deeply our people feel about the mismanagement of land and land disposal processes. We will be interested to see whether Hauraki Tuwharetoa Ngati Kahu the Tainui Waka Alliance the Maori Council and other iwi who have been so closely involved with these activities will take up the opportunity to scrutinise this bill and to share their views about whether it creates opportunities or whether in fact it does threaten Maori rights. 
Finally I will leave with the oft-quoted words “Whatungarongaro he tangata toitu he whenua.”—“Each generation passes in its turn but the land remains.” We are absolutely dedicated in our pursuit of protecting the integrity of our land but we are also absolutely dedicated towards the possibilities of development and opportunities for advancing the social economic and cultural progress of tangata whenua. We are not satisfied that this bill adequately facilitates Maori housing development and we will also be keenly listening to the Minister in subsequent stages to hear how those aspirations will be meet. We will support this bill in order to enable the korero to be heard.