Luxon Christopher; Mahuta NanaiaCHRISTOPHER LUXON (National—Botany): Can I say thank you Minister for being prepared to talk through our questions that we've got today and to discuss this bill. I guess the first thing is really—I've got probably three questions really all around problem definition and exactly what problem are we trying to solve for and why and trying to get a good understanding of that.If you don't mind the first question is really fundamentally around if our problem is defined as we want to facilitate and utilise land that's underutilised and not being utilised so that it can be more productive and we can improve the productivity of that land then what is the thinking that leads the Government to only look at the problem through a Māori-only lens versus looking at it through a broader New Zealand lens? And I guess—because it's not just Māori that have unproductive land or who have land that they own collectively or who may benefit from rates remissions but general landowners also have that same challenge—if we're interested in improving productivity why not allow all New Zealanders to have the same flexibility and actually do it for both as we go through this piece of legislation? I just genuinely don't understand from a local government portfolio point of view why general landowners are being dismissed and excluded when the same problems sit with them as they do with Māori. And I just wonder whether you could help us clarify that.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): The question is germane to the whole consideration of whenua Māori issues and this debate has been around for a long time because essentially New Zealand has two land tenure systems. The introduction of the Native Land Court in effect tried to individualise title which was uncommon in terms of the historical way in which whenua Māori was held. That said we have a system now that recognises that whenua Māori can be multiply owned and that at its heart Te Ture Whenua Maori Act assures Māori land owners that the inalienable nature of whenua Māori is at the forefront of the way in which you approach Māori land interests.But coming back to the point specifically in terms of facilitating the use of Māori land. What you will find around the country when you travel through and look to land blocks that perhaps sit dormant within the context of other developments that are happening in the area are likely to be Māori land. It's really difficult in practical terms for whānau to succeed to their land and develop it if there's a big breaking penalty sitting on that land and that's a practical challenge that some landowners have faced which has a whole domino effect in the way in which whānau may or may not succeed to the land or want to organise themselves in governance units to be able to develop the land. So at the heart there part of the change is the intent that if there is the provision to remit rating arrears primarily penalties that have incurred over a period of time then there would be an opportunity for whānau to actually say I can now go back to the whenua and start to organise my whānau succeed to land and then have a conversation with council to be able to really contemplate the development and utilisation of land."This solution is borne out of practical examples and challenges that have been longstanding. Many of the members of the Māori Affairs Committee could probably point to examples that they are very familiar with which better illustrates what I've tried to do in my response to the member."