Turei Metiria: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Turei Metiria: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15429] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party was a very strong advocate of the withdrawal provisions in Part 1 particularly clauses 14B to 14F but we are putting forward an amendment to clause 14E. Our amendment would delete clause 14E(2) from the bill in its entirety. 
In terms of the withdrawal provisions there are two conglomerate iwi structures in the bill: Hauraki and Te Arawa. The negotiations that occurred around the establishment of those conglomerations were significant. The Greens do not want to undermine completely those negotiations and we understand the history behind them. However the issue remains one of whether the independence and status of iwi are entitled to be equally recognised and provided for in the legislation. We heard from iwi from both those groupings who did not necessarily want to be forced to remain included in those conglomerates if their choice at some point in the future was to exercise their right to manage their assets of their own accord. The officials the Minister of Fisheries and Te Ohu Kai Moana all agree that the groupings listed in the notes in schedule 3 are in fact iwi in their own right. They are entitled to assets and they are entitled to be identified as populations and treated exactly the same but negotiations in the past have meant they are now included in a large grouping. But they are entitled to be properly recognised to have their entitlement made plain in the bill and to have the choice in the future as to whether they want to remain in the conglomerate. 
In our view the legislation—any legislation—should treat like with like if that is the right way to put it. Those who are the same should be treated the same and there should not be discrimination in the bill. Iwi should not be given first-class second-class or third-class status which is what the provisions in Part 1 do by effectively identifying three separate kinds of iwi: those listed in schedule 3; those listed in the notes in schedule 3 as being part of the conglomerates; and Rongomaiwahine and Ngati Hine who are given third-level status of not quite being iwi except they may be later sometime in the future under some other provisions. So the Greens are proposing that clause 14E(2) be deleted. That clause provides that any iwi that does withdraw from their conglomerate whether it is Rongomaiwahine Ngati Hine or any of those from Hauraki or Te Arawa will be entitled to all of the same rights and voting rights as other iwi except that they will not be able to vote for a member of Te Kawai Taumata which is the board that enables full voting on other structures and which would enable them to have some control over Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd. 
Clause 14E(2) was put there specifically as a disincentive to those iwi withdrawing. The vote for members of Te Kawai Taumata is the only way that iwi have any control over Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd and therefore Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd the company that will actually control 50 percent of the assets that are supposed to be being allocated to iwi in the first place. The vote for members of Te Kawai Taumata might seem like a small thing but it is in the end the only access that any iwi has to voting for the structures that control the majority of its assets. It is not appropriate it is not fair and it is not right that some iwi are entitled to that vote and some iwi are not because of past negotiations when in fact those iwi are recognised by the Government recognised by Te Ohu Kai Moana and recognised by everyone as being the same as those other iwi who do have that vote. 
The Greens sincerely hope that other members of this Committee will support the amendment to delete clause 14E(2) because it is unfair. It is discriminatory. It treats those iwi as second-class iwi and it is completely unjustified. There is no reason why they should not have exactly the same rights once they withdraw. They have mandated iwi organisations. They have to have the same constitutional structures as every other iwi. They have to have an asset-holding company like all other iwi. They have all the other rights and obligations of all other iwi except in this single instance. The Greens are sincerely hoping that other members of this House do support that amendment. It is right that we ensure that any legislation passed in this House treats people and iwi equally.