Hereora Dave: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hereora Dave: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:16963] 
1. DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: What recent progress has been made on Treaty of Waitangi settlements? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Substantial progress has been made most recently with yesterday’s deed of settlement signing with central North Island iwi over the Crown forest lands. Yesterday’s event was a reminder of the importance of Treaty settlements as a part of our process of reconciliation. Through such settlements we are given an opportunity to acknowledge the injustices of the past while building shared ambitions for the future. 
Dave Hereora 
: In addition to the central North Island forestry lands settlement what further progress is expected in the Treaty settlement process? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: This afternoon we will be signing a deed of settlement with Taranaki Whanui. We expect before too long to be signing a deed of settlement with Waikato-Tainui over the Waikato River. Negotiations are under way from Northland to the top of the South Island with iwi in Te Tau Ihu where we expect to sign agreements in principle shortly. There is therefore a great deal of momentum in this process reflecting the goodwill of iwi around New Zealand towards working with the Crown. 
Dave Hereora 
: Why do final settlements include an apology from the Crown? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I think that in the last couple of decades Maori have shown that when the Crown is willing to be honest about the failures of the past iwi are eager to put those past differences behind us. This underlines the importance of understanding our past and of acknowledging that as a country we saw war we saw internal fighting and we saw for decades a failure to keep peace between our people. That is why I was so disappointed to see Mr Key’s attempt last night to gloss over difficult aspects of our history. Those comments were better suited to a revisionist tourist brochure than to a man who wants to be Prime Minister of all our people. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Has the Minister seen a report stating that New Zealand is a country “with a continuous political tradition unbroken by civil war or revolution for over 150 years something a bare handful of countries can celebrate.”; and can he confirm that he not only was the author of those words but also delivered them in a speech on Waitangi Day 2005; and might he reflect on why he is so condemning of Mr Key when he himself has proclaimed this from the pulpit of his local cathedral? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Yes indeed and no. What happened in the 1860s was an invasion by Crown troops of areas; the taking of that land; the use of overwhelming force to retain that land; and subsequently—even if that had not happened—the use of the Native Land Court to take lands improperly; and the breach of article 1 of the Treaty within the space of 4 or 5 years of the Treaty being signed. Even if the Land Wars of the 1860s had not occurred the Crown was in serious breach of the Treaty within a few years of 1840. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Tena koe Madam Speaker. Kia ora tatou. Does the Minister agree with Dr David Williams that the notion that New Zealand Governments may have been responsible in the past for cultural oppression seems to cause a significant backlash in public opinion—a notion that explains the use of the word “holocaust” in debate and in the Waitangi Tribunal’s 1996 Taranaki report to describe colonial Government policies of war land confiscation and the invasion of the pacifist Maori community; if so what actions has he taken to address the backlash to the Treaty settlement process? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I think the word “holocaust” is best used for a particular event in history when some 6 million Jews were gassed and otherwise killed. That did not ever occur in New Zealand’s history in that form. However there were many injustices which need to be addressed. They should not however be dealt with as a matter of guilt on the part of the present generation of Pakeha. It is a matter for the Crown as legatee of those who signed the Treaty in 1840 to address those injustices. 
Hone Harawira 
: Tena koe Madam Speaker. Kia ora tatou e te Whare. Congratulations on yesterday’s settlement first of all. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please just ask his question. 
Hone Harawira 
: What advice has the Minister received about concerns that certain iwi in the far north may have to sacrifice their own claims to facilitate the united settlement being proposed for the far north; and what steps will he take to address those concerns before any settlements are signed with far north iwi? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I can assure the member that every effort will be made to ensure that any issues of cross-claims and competing claims will be dealt with to the satisfaction of those involved. Good progress is being made at the moment in a regional forum around some of the issues relating to the forests for example. This bodes well for achieving a solution that does not have the implications the member refers to quite properly as being of concern. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Can I ask Dr Cullen whether he has received any reports as to why that question was asked by Gerry Brownlee; and is it his responsibility as a historian or otherwise to educate the leader of the National Party on the history of this country? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I am not sure about the first part of the question but the Minister could address the second part. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: When I was a history lecturer I did my best to teach people but not all of them were ever able to learn. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: What was missing in the Minister’s understanding of New Zealand history that led him to make this statement in his speech in St John’s Cathedral Napier on 6 February 2005: “New Zealand is a country with a continuous political tradition unbroken by civil war or revolution for over 150 years something a bare handful of countries can celebrate.”; and why is it that it is OK when the Minister says it and OK when Governor-General says it but when Mr Key makes a comment which is taken totally out of context suddenly the Minister is all over the top of it like a cheap suit? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The difference is that I am sure that the Governor-General understood the context in which he made his remarks; there is no evidence that Mr Key understood his context. If the member cares to refer to the remainder of that speech he will find that a great deal else is being explained. But let me help him. I was referring to the fact that we have had a Parliament since 1854 and that it has an unbroken tradition. The member might care to remind himself that Maori were not guaranteed representation within that Parliament until some years after it was set up. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: What reports has the Minister received that would suggest that the leader of the National Party has been properly informed by the one-time Maori affairs spokesperson for the National Party—namely Gerry Brownlee—on a modicum of what happened in our history? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: At the risk of appearing totally politically incorrect it would seem to be a case of the blind leading the blind if Mr Brownlee was to try to instruct Mr Key about the nature of New Zealand’s history. I think he would do much better if he instructed him about the nature of joinery. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I seek leave to table a series of emails between various parties including the editor-in-chief of Newstalk ZB—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That member will leave the Chamber if there is to be an interjection. Members know that the member is on a point of order. It is important that members do hear what in fact they are being asked to grant leave for. That is the last warning. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I seek leave to table a document from Newstalk ZB acknowledging that it had reported Mr Key’s speech out of context. 
Document not tabled. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Initially the member sought leave to table an exchange of emails. We would like to see the ones that were trying to bully Newstalk ZB before we saw the response. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Speaking to the point of order we do not use ninth floor tactics on our side of the House. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Thank you very much. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: I seek leave to table a paper presented to the foreshore and seabed conference by Dr David Williams “ 
Wi Parata 
 is dead long live  
Wi Parata 
”. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.