Brownlee Gerry: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15423] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 I am very pleased to speak to the Maori Fisheries Bill. I hope that in the preceding speeches colleagues of mine have mentioned some of our reservations about this bill. These reservations will become clear as we progress through the many hours of the Committee stage that we expect the Chamber will take in its consideration of this bill. 
During the debate on the preamble to the bill I want to speak particularly about clause (8A) which is new and was inserted by majority. It is worth noting firstly that this bill is supposed to be a bill that sets up the regime for fisheries allocation to Maori from this point onwards. 
 Everyone knows it has been a very long road to get to this point. Clause (8A)—a new clause inserted by majority—in the preamble to the bill states: “The enactment of this legislation will complete implementation of the agreements in the Deed of Settlement between the Crown and Maori in respect of Maori claims to commercial fisheries as outlined in the Preamble to that Deed and in the Preamble of the Treaty of Waitangi (Fisheries Claims) Settlement Act 1992.” 
What worries us is that this which is supposed to be an end point and at the same time a commercial beginning could well be just another step along the way in this very long discussion so far. One of the alarming things that we have heard at the Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee in recent days is the repeated comment from various iwi groups that whatever settlement is reached in this generation is just for this generation. We have heard over and over again that many Maori view these matters as interim settlements and it concerns us that the Government it seems with this bill is in a position of not having strapped down that this is full and final. 
If members want a further example of how things get pushed out and how new opportunities are created the foreshore and seabed issue itself appears to do that. We have heard Maori talking about the confiscation of the sea from them and the economic opportunity that that provides. One submitter yesterday—only one but a very significant submitter—suggested that the sea space that his particular iwi would lay claim to in a single chain—not a chain in measurement but a chain if one likes of marine licences along that coastline—would be worth some $40 billion to the tribe over a very short period of time if it were able to be commercialised by them. I have to say that while those sorts of wild claims are out there there can be no certainty at all that the legislation this House is being asked to pass will stick. 
The trouble is that over the past 15 or maybe 20 years we in this country have made genuine efforts to try to sort out all these issues only to find that the ground shifts over and over and over again. No one will dispute that there are genuine grievances between the Crown and Maori that should be sorted out but what worries me increasingly is the number of Maori leaders who are prepared to tell their people that they are not part of the Crown. They tell them that in New Zealand in 2004 they are not part of the Crown. Under our current arrangements the Crown in this country is simply the people. We cannot have a Government trying to pass legislation in an environment where some people believe that they are owed a greater due by the rest of the people. In the ancestral sense if one likes in the grievance sense yes there are duties that have to be met and they will be.