Donnelly Brian: Waka Umanga (Maori Corporations) Bill — First Reading 
Donnelly Brian: Waka Umanga (Maori Corporations) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:644;Page:13864] 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 One or two issues were raised in the previous speech that I think need to be referred to. The first one is that the member continued to use the expression “lumpenproletariat”. He actually does not understand who the lumpenproletariat are. He was referring to the lumpenproletariat as being Maori. Well Karl Marx used the word “lumpenproletariat”— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Well workers don’t understand so you— 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: They were not the workers. The proletariat were the workers. The lumpenproletariat were the criminal class—the prostitutes thieves and pickpockets. What that member just said shows that he believes that all Maori are lumped in with that class. He has insulted every Maori in New Zealand with the use of that expression and he needs to go back and do his homework. 
A second area he needs to do a little bit of homework on is in relation to kohanga reo. It is absolutely correct that National said it would put in five kohanga reo per annum. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: No no. It was kura. Get it right! 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: Oh kura kaupapa—the member is correct. It was five per year for 3 years starting in 1995. As the then Associate Minister with responsibility for Maori I knew that in 1998 we were not going to put in any more—none. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Well actually that’s wrong because there were— 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: And that member was the Minister of Maori Affairs at the time and I had to say “Sorry we aren’t putting any more in because there’s nothing budgeted for.” But New Zealand First said: “Listen! You’ve got all these kura kaupapa and they are having to work in broom cupboards with no support no help—nothing. We will put in place a policy whereby those developing kura kaupapa can be connected with an established kura kaupapa. We will put in additional money so they can be supported until they get to the stage where they are independent and have been reviewed by the Education Review Office. And we don’t care how many are developed each year as long as they are meeting the quality.” That was a policy put in place by New Zealand First in 1998 to develop kura kaupapa in the absence of any policy by National at that particular time. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Rubbish—what a load of rubbish! 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: And the Minister of Maori Affairs did not even know that was going on. He took no interest at all and never talked to me about it. He did not even know what was happening. 
I will go on with one or two things. I think it is fitting that a Minister from Ngati Porou is bringing in this bill. Tau Henare got another thing wrong. New Zealand First has said we will support this bill going to the select committee and that we will listen to the arguments there. We believe that some genuine issues have to be worked through. Remember it was the leader of New Zealand First who introduced  
Ka Awatea 
—a document about empowering Maori. It was Winston Peters the leader of New Zealand First who resolved the Taranaki leasehold issue by producing an extra $60 million—not the Minister of Maori Affairs at the time. 
But I will go back in history and remember that corporations were a concept introduced by a great New Zealander—and I mean a great New Zealander. Many New Zealanders of both Treaty partners do not understand the greatness of the man Sir Apirana Ngata of Ngati Porou. When we sing “Pokare Kare Ana” do we think he created it? He did not have the words “wai a Rotorua” in it; “Waiapu” should have been in there. Te Arawa—[ 
Interruption 
] They stole it. Poi was not a thing the wahine did; it was a male thing. 
Sir Apirana Ngata introduced all those sorts of things but he also introduced the concept of corporations to Maori—and I will now refer to a Marxist concept—who had had the means of production taken away from them. It is part of our shameful history. Sir Apirana Ngata asked how the means of production which is the land could be utilised in a productive fashion. He came up with the concept of corporations and he worked it. As a result places like the East Coast became very very economically viable and in fact did very well. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: It’s because they owned their own land. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: And Tau Henare knows that that was a great period. By the way the party Apirana Ngata belonged to was the embryonic party of the National Party. So I ask those members to stand up and say that he was one of theirs. But in fact Apirana Ngata imposed a Pakeha structure. He was viewing the world with a Pakeha perspective. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: So is that the reason we’ve got this here? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: I want to say—if that man over there will just shut up—that all I am prepared to do is speak with a Pakeha voice as somebody who has attempted to walk across the bridge who knows full well that he will never ever get fully across it but who is prepared to continue to make the effort to get as far as possible in order to understand. 
We in the Education and Science Committee have been looking at how we can make the system work for every person. We had a very good encouraging presentation from Apryll Parata in terms of Ka Hikitia. I talked to my colleague Te Ururoa Flavell who said that yes it was good but he still did not have confidence that it would eradicate the gaps. And I had to agree with him. I could empathise with his frustration. It was going to help to close the gaps I was totally confident but it was not going to eradicate them. 
We have to realise that there have been dynamics of subjugation and of removal of the means of production—which is land—within our country. That is a fact and we as a Parliament have to front up to it. As a nation we need to recognise that and say that yes it occurred and continue to rectify it. 
I see in this particular bill the issue once again of wanting to look at how we are operating and how we are giving back to Maori entities the potential to use the means of production. We will put the bill through the select committee process we will listen and we will ask whether it will further empower Maori and whether it is really in the same line as  
Ka Awatea 
. 
I will use an example which is a bit of a hobby horse of mine of the subtle way in which Pakeha have been able to impose their will on the people of this nation. I ask the question— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: And they’ll do it again tonight. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: No. I tell the member there that I have said right here and now that I am speaking with a Pakeha voice as much as possible to a Pakeha audience and Maori can agree or disagree with me but— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: You’re doing it again tonight. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: Surely that member is not going to close down freedom of speech or freedom of expression? But here is the point: we have departments ministries of education and everything else that keep calling this nation Aotearoa New Zealand. But we have to ask ourselves when New Zealand was actually named New Zealand. How many people in this House know who actually named this land New Zealand? There is one person because I told him. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Abel Tasman. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: It was not Abel Tasman; no he named it Staten Landt. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Who was it? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: It was a guy by the name of Blaeu who was a Dutch cartographer. Who named it Aotearoa? It was another Pakeha not a Maori. He was a Pakeha by the name of Stephenson Percy Smith. He named it Aotearoa. I will give the reason why the traditional name of this country was not Aotearoa. [ 
Interruption 
] Hang on a second! I ask Tau Henare to tell me something. There had been linguistic contact between Pakeha and Maori for over 70 years when the Treaty of Waitangi was translated by missionaries into Maori so why did they not use the term “Aotearoa”? 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What about it? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: Well if that was the traditional name for this country then surely they would have put “Aotearoa” in there. The Declaration of Independence would have used the term “Aotearoa”; instead it used “Niu Tireni” because there was no traditional name. I tell members here and now that Pakeha have subtly imposed this story through the school journals and through the education system so we have all come to believe a Pakeha myth. That is the way we have operated. 
Hon Member 
: It was a Smith. 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: It was a Smith; the member is right. It was a Smith myth. Let us go back to the bill itself. New Zealand First will be supporting it going to the select committee but not beyond the select committee. 
Hon Georgina te Heuheu 
: Why? 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY 
: We will listen to the arguments and do the necessary because if we believe that this bill gives greater empowerment to Maori groups to utilise their means of production then we believe that that is a positive direction for New Zealand. Thank you.