Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 June 2012. Volume:680;Page:2951. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill 
First Reading 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Kia ora tatau e te Whare. I move  
That the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill be now read a first time. 
 I intend to move at the appropriate time that the bill be considered by the Local Government and Environment Committee. 
I hiahia ko te iwi ra ki runga o Kopukairoa papa te whatitiri ki runga o Maunga Mana papaki tu ana nga tai ki Karikari te tere o te Waitao whakapapa pounamu te tahuna o Rangataua. I whakanukuhia i whakanekehia ki tai wiwi ki tai wawa ki te tai papaki onepu ki te whai ao ki te ao marama ti-he mauri ora.  
[ 
In accordance with the wishes of that tribe upon Kopukairoa the thunder claps over Mount Mana the tides crash against Karikari the current of the Waitao River and the calming beach of Rangataua. It then disperses here there and upon the repelling beach to the world of light and of understanding behold the breath of life. 
] 
Can I start by saying that I am honoured to sponsor this very important bill into this House. What is really pleasing to me is how the council and mana whenua have come together to bring about a positive outcome. I want to say congratulations to the Tauranga City Council and Nga Potiki on showing the way. The purpose of this bill is to repeal the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act 1975. This bill for members in the House takes us back to another time some 40 years ago in 1972 when the Mount Maunganui Borough Council proposed a sewage disposal scheme—[ 
Interruption 
]  
I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I appreciate there is allowed to be some banter here but actually it would be good if the banter was about the bill as opposed to something else. Could I ask that I be given a little bit of leeway in being able to present this korero as there are a lot of people listening back in Tauranga Moana who think it is quite important. I would like to think that the House thinks so as well. 
Hon John Banks 
: Some of us are sick and tired of the inane interjections and we ask you to give this learned member an opportunity. I am sitting beside him and I am interested in what he has got to say. Give him a fair go. If they want to go away and do something else in their spare time they should. But this is Parliament; it is not a kindergarten. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Order! The House has been in reasonably light-hearted mode this evening. There have been interjections and at times they have been over the top. I would just ask members to show some courtesy. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I would just like you to affirm your ruling in respect of conduct in this House. When that member was on the telephone we thought he had fallen asleep or fallen off his perch but he was on the telephone— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Order! The member was not creating any disturbance whatsoever. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I have already ruled on it. Please sit down. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: A separate point of order? 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Yes Mr Speaker. With respect you have had points of order from Mr Flavell and Mr Banks on conduct. I have raised a legitimate point which is a rule and I invite you to rule on it. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I have ruled on it. I will just say this. When members raise points of order they are not opportunities to attack other members of the House and in that regard one of the people speaking to the points of order did use that as an opportunity to degrade other members of the House and that is not appropriate. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL 
: Can I just start again. This bill takes us back to another time some 40 years ago to 1972 when the Mount Maunganui Borough Council proposed a sewage disposal scheme that required substantial reclamation within the Rangataua Estuary in Tauranga. That council is now defunct but the legacy of its actions remains. The legislation we are repealing today established the construction of oxidation ponds from which effluent would temporarily be discharged into Te Tahuna o Rangataua or what other people refer to as Rangataua Estuary.  
I want to just acknowledge the work done to ensure that Te Tahuna o Rangataua as of 10 May 2012 is now the official geographic name of this area characterised by the tidal mudflats and sandy area of the inner south-east reaches of the Tauranga Harbour. The Nga Potiki hapu of Tamapahore Marae submitted the proposal to alter the name Rangataua Bay to Te Tahuna o Rangataua. Rangataua Bay was gazetted in 1974 as an area of Tauranga Harbour. It makes for great timeliness that at the same time we are adopting the new official name we are also repealing the legislation of this time.  
Going back a little bit the 1972 proposal I referred to earlier would have eventually been supported by the construction of an ocean outfall at Papamoa. For Nga Potiki and indeed Tauranga Maori the discharge of human waste into the pristine Te Tahuna o Rangataua which had served as a pataka kai for centuries was and remains an issue that has caused deep resentment. The proposal was particularly abhorrent for Nga Potiki as the area designated for reclamation was part of the ancestral landscape.  
For the purposes of the record let me just go back a little bit to the history of this land. It traces its history back to the award of the Papamoa Block to Nga Potiki by Crown commissioners in the 1880s. Nga Potiki and its close relation to Te Tahuna o Rangataua is celebrated through its rich oral traditions including pepeha whakatauki and waiata and is demonstrated by the location of marae in close proximity to the shoreline.  
The deep relationship where the health of one is believed to be linked with the health of the other and vice versa was referred to in many briefs of evidence submitted by Nga Potiki kaumatua to the Waitangi Tribunal held at Maungatawa Marae in 2000. Throughout the early 1970s the late Paraone Reweti MP for Eastern Maori and Wiremu Ohia chairman of the Tauranga Moana Maori Executive on behalf of tangata whenua were particularly vocal in their opposition to the Mount Maunganui Borough Council’s proposal. Even the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries and the Ministry of Transport also opposed the proposal to reclaim foreshore and seabed. All recognised the importance of protecting an asset of significant environmental and cultural value and maintaining water quality.  
An environmental impact report entitled  
Crown Acquisition and Desecration of Nga Potiki Land 1999 
 commissioned by the Waitangi Tribunal acknowledged that “a flourishing ecosystem on the tidal flats would be lost” through the reclamation but claimed that the effects of the oxidation ponds would be minor. This is a really damning statement which adds to the history of this bill and I would have to say that as the local member for Waiariki I am pleased that we are at long last making efforts to rectify this to make right something that was wrong. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment in a report around this same time concluded that the reclamation could not be justified because of the impact on the area and the possibility of other sites being used. In or about 1977 the Mount Maunganui Borough Council completed the construction of the easement to enable the discharge of effluent into the ocean.  
But it gets worse. This easement was constructed through an ancient Nga Potiki urupa or cemetery located in the sand dunes at Papamoa. Nga Potiki again opposed this work on the grounds that human waste in close proximity to a wahi tapu was grossly disrespectful and abhorrent. That effluent was to be discharged into the pristine ocean environment at Te Akau ki Papamoa or Papamoa Coast which has for centuries served as a pataka kai and was equally offensive. In 1989 the Mount Maunganui Borough Council and the Tauranga District Council were amalgamated and their sewerage systems became jointly managed. Some 10 years later the Tauranga City Council embarked on a consultation process with Nga Potiki that eventually led to the establishment of extensive wetlands in addition to other filters aimed at removing solids from waste water prior to discharge into the ocean.  
However the concerns on the part of Nga Potiki around the discharge of effluent through its urupa have not been completely allayed even four decades later. For Nga Potiki the reclamation of the foreshore and seabed the construction and continued presence of oxidation ponds and the discharge of effluent represents a failure by the Crown to protect Nga Potiki and their ancestral landscape as provided in the Treaty of Waitangi. These issues form part of the settlement currently being negotiated with the Crown as well as an application before the High Court seeking a customary rights order under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011.  
Although the repeal of the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act 1975 brings a certain amount of closure it also represents a vindication of the many many Nga Potiki kaumatua in the 1970s and 1980s who as a group protested against what they viewed as an invasion of their ancestral landscape and cultural values. In spite of their advocacy and widespread community opposition legislation was enacted anyway.  
In the year 2000 the Tauranga City Council established the Tangata Whenua Tauranga City Council Standing Committee to facilitate improved engagement between Maori and the council. In 2004 the Tauranga City Council established the Tauranga Moana Tangata Whenua Committee to encourage numerous hapu of Tauranga Moana to engage with the council. In 2006 Tauranga City Council established the Wastewater Management Review Committee comprising elected councillors and appointed tangata whenua representatives. Te Runanga o Ngai Te Rangi Iwi Trust and Ngati Ranginui are each represented by one person and Nga Potiki represented by two people reflecting the significance of issues relating to the area.  
Nga Potiki say they enjoy a good relationship with Tauranga City Council based on mutual respect and underpinned by their relationship as Treaty partners. The joint approach by Nga Potiki and the Tauranga City Council to Parliament represents the latest initiative reflecting the commitment on the part of both parties to work together collaboratively and constructively. It will have the effect of helping to heal the past and strengthen an already positive relationship. It is therefore most appropriate that Nga Potiki and the Tauranga City Council jointly sponsor the application to Parliament to repeal the legislation. The Maori Party is delighted to stand alongside them and to commend this bill to the House.  
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to be speaking on the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill. Can I start by acknowledging the member who has just spoken Te Ururoa Flavell the member for Waiariki. I also want to acknowledge the Hon Simon Bridges who I know did work hard and I know he has had a number of discussions with the previous member on this piece of legislation. The Hon Simon Bridges is a very hard-working member for Tauranga. He has a small majority of about 17000 and I know there are other members in this House who care deeply about Tauranga.  
I want to touch on a few things that have been previously said by the member who spoke before me. The first thing is that this bill is being obviously sponsored by the Tauranga City Council but also with support from Nga Potiki. I think we need to acknowledge in this House the speech we have just heard from Te Ururoa Flavell about some of the cultural issues that have obviously been involved in some of the background to this bill coming to the House. We also need to acknowledge something that the member has just said. He said—and this is a bit of a positive point—that we can see a good relationship between the council and Nga Potiki. That is a really positive thing for the future.  
When I think of the Mount—I have visited there and I have done public meetings with the Hon Simon Bridges—I think of a place of the future. This is a city that is growing. We know that it has gone from something like 48000 to 103000 in a very short period of time. What is really important for the future is that we are able to look to it and really ensure that there is good community infrastructure there. That is why it is very relevant that with this bill we are dealing with waste water and discharge because that is actually fundamental to a city being able to develop in the future. I acknowledge Te Ururoa Flavell’s speech and the cultural issues that obviously still surround this particular area of land. But the reason we are here is that the council and Nga Potiki have come together along with local MPs to say that we need to repeal the original Act.  
If we look at some of the history in terms of the legislative history what we see is that the original Act the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act authorised the Mount Maunganui Borough Council to reclaim tidal lands constituting part of the bed of the harbour of Tauranga and to develop such reclaimed land for sewerage and other municipal purposes. The land was then transferred as part of the seabed of Tauranga Harbour to Mount Maunganui Borough Council which was authorised under the Act to transfer a total of about 73.5 hectares. The council reclaimed only about 23.5 hectares.  
We then saw that the authority to reclaim the balance of the area was revoked by the legislation of 1991 so that the principal Act had no legal effect. But what happened here was that during an application process to upgrade Tauranga City Council’s waste-water treatment plant iwi and other stakeholders expressed grievances regarding the scope of the land that could be reclaimed under the Act and the adverse effects as has already been mentioned by the previous speaker in terms of the waste-water treatment.  
So where we are at is that both the Tauranga City Council and stakeholders concur that we need to repeal the principal act returning the legal status of the land to what it was before 1975. We on this side of the House believe that this bill should go to the Local Government and Environment Committee. We believe that it is appropriate in the context of these grievances and concerns to repeal the original legislation. That is why we here on this side of the House are supporting this bill. But we also believe as we have seen with other local bills that have gone through this House that it is important to have local members of Parliament—like the Hon Simon Bridges and like Te Ururoa Flavell—who really get into the community and talk to people who are involved and affected by situations like this and ensure that people have their voices heard.  
Some people will see this as a small piece of legislation but for other people who have been affected in the past it is significant. I acknowledge the work of local members to bring it to this point. I acknowledge the future of the Mount the fact that it is a growing city and that some of these issues are integral in terms of community infrastructure and development in the future. I support this bill to the House.  
Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato) 
: 
 I rise to speak on behalf of Labour. We will support this bill the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill at its first reading. Having listened to the previous speaker from the National Party Nikki Kaye I say that if National is so passionate about ensuring that iwi concerns are taken account of especially on resource management issues it would have supported my member’s bill the Resource Management (Enhancement of Iwi Management Plans) Amendment Bill which sought to have regard to and provide for iwi management plans and planning documents of regional councils but it did not. However it is important to recognise the Maori Party member Te Ururoa Flavell and his comments regarding the history of Nga Potiki and their relationship to the site on which waste-water treatment plants are currently sited because they have a particular interest. I will pick up in some part where that member left off to say that when the Tauranga City Council got together and established the Maori consultative committee in 2004 it had a document that went out for consultation in which a number of iwi in Tauranga Moana contributed and had a say about their particular views as tangata whenua with regard to continued developments in their area.  
There are a few points that I would like to mention. Firstly I would like to mention Nga Potiki’s particular relationship with the area on which waste-water plants are. I am noting from the document on te maunga wastewater treatment facilities. I really wanted to raise in the House an important meeting that Nga Potiki had a hui-a-iwi or hui-a-hapu on 3 October 2004 when RereamomoOhiaand Tai Taikato presented some key recommendations to the council from the hui-a-hapu. Firstly “That Nga Potiki do not support the application by Tauranga City Council to continue to discharge wastewater from the Sewage Treatment and Wastewater System located at Te Maunga into Te Moana A Toi Te Huatahi.” Secondly “That Tauranga City Council ‘commit’ to decommissioning the entire system at Te Maunga within a specified time frame.” and thirdly “That there be no further ‘hook ons’ including those proposed in the list contained in the consent application and those omitted from the list.”  
I make that point in reference to this debate only to ensure further on down the track when negotiations are occurring that it is clear in this House that Nga Potiki have expressed their interests in their area through successive consultations over time as cited by the member for the area and successively in terms of engaging in resource consent processes. That is important to mention because there is great hope and aspiration that in working together for the future the interests of tangata whenua in that area are not overlooked. They in particular made a point about the repeal of the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowerment Act because they did not want any further reclamation to take place and as the previous speaker Nikki Kaye mentioned the full reclamation of land intended here in Tauranga was not utilised. Nga Potiki supported the repeal of this Act because they did not want to extend reclamations on the basis of their ongoing interests.  
 It is also important to recognise that tangata whenua in the Tauranga Moana area have had very strong views about the ways in which waste water should be managed and treated. The expression that there should be land-based treatment prior to discharge has been a view that is long held. It is clearly cited in this particular document which I did a little bit of research and study on. I think it is important again to state and continue to state that these are not new issues for the iwi. They continue to be issues that pervade the ongoing best-management practice for the care and responsibility not only of land-based activities but of whatever happens within the marine environment. Again I want to reiterate that Labour will support this bill in its first reading to the select committee. We look forward to hearing ongoing process on the other hand with Nga Potiki and their broader interests as tangata whenua in the area. We certainly look forward to a continuing positive relationship with tangata whenua in Tauranga Moana on all issues within the Tauranga Moana area. Kia ora. 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I rise to speak to the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill. As we have been saying on this side of the House there is a lot of accord around this. We heard Te Ururoa Flavell talking about it; one wonders how much there is to debate around this. If Labour has agreed to get it through to the select committee that is certainly where we would like it to be. 
But having heard Te Ururoa talk about the history of this and the clear need for redress and putting the things that were wrong to the right to rectify the situation it does seem as if the repeal of this Act is long overdue. In respect of the protection of ancestral areas it seems like the discharge of effluent as Nikki Kaye pointed out a few moments ago is a growing area that will have growing sewage issues as a result of that. Really one wonders how you could continue on without referring it— 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Thanks for that. 
MAGGIE BARRY 
: Yes nothing personal Mr Bridges—everybody has to do it. But of course it does appear that this is something that has been caught up in the local authorities for some time. If council and iwi and politicians on all sides of the House are agreeing for it to go forward there does not seem to be a heck of a lot more to be said about it. 
I think taking Te Ururoa Flavell’s line of healing the past and strengthening the relationships and people joining together to rectify past wrongs is something that the National Party has stood by. Repealing legislation that is unnecessary is also something that has been a hallmark of this Government. So without further ado I recommend that this bill goes to the select committee and that we refer that to the House. Thank you. 
EUGENIE SAGE (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Thank you. I am pleased to take a short call on the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill. Although as the previous speaker Maggie Barry noted it may not be controversial I think it is instructive to look at some of the history of the bill and I am very grateful to Te Ururoa Flavell for explaining some of it. 
The bill repeals a 1975 Act that gave authority for the transfer of 73 hectares of seabed to what is now the Tauranga City Council for its sewerage scheme and other municipal purposes. The Green Party supports the bill because it will prevent further ecological damage from infilling of the harbour and because it recognises the grievance of Nga Potiki in relation to its Treaty claim. 
Even a very brief reading of the Waitangi Tribunal’s report on Tauranga Moana’s 1886 to 2006 claim highlights the importance of this ancestral landscape and the natural environment of Tauranga Harbour to tangata whenua. Chapter 7 of the tribunal’s report begins with the words: “By 1840 Tauranga Moana had become one of the most continuously occupied and densely settled landscapes in New Zealand. It is not hard to understand why. It is a place of great natural beauty and diverse and productive ecosystems: open seas offshore islands coastal sandy beaches and rocky shores the large harbour lagoon and its many estuaries mudflats tidal pools and wetlands together with many waterways draining densely forested hills.” 
Tangata whenua told the tribunal that over many decades in which the town of Tauranga had burgeoned into a city they had been shut out and excluded from decisions that influenced the city’s development. They had been unable to act as kaitiaki to guard and protect their taonga—the harbours the waterways the forests the fisheries and the sacred mountains of their ancestors. When you read the tribunal’s report it talks about widespread typhoid amongst Maori populations because of the very poor way in which sewage was discharged; the fact that even in the 1950s effluent at Mount Maunganui was ending up in an open drain there were septic tanks that were seeping into the harbour and the borough council’s “solution” was to develop this reclamation and sewerage scheme. It was strongly opposed by iwi at the time because of the impact of the discharge on the estuary and the fact that it would diminish the very flourishing ecosystem there. The estuary discharge did not proceed but there was further work which the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment opposed as well. There was opposition by iwi to the reclassification of the waters in the harbour to allow the sewerage scheme to proceed. So there has been a whole history of Nga Potiki and others putting forward their concerns about the impact of the sewerage scheme. 
This was at a time when we had the Town and Country Planning Act 1953. Unlike the Resource Management Act it had no specific provisions for local authorities to have regard for either Maori land or Maori interests. That was characteristic of that time and it was very much the poorer for it. 
So this Act that we are repealing is a creature of its time. We have moved on since then. The repeal of the Act will go some way towards assuaging the very well-founded grievances of Nga Potiki. It does reflect its time. We hope that with the Resource Management Act and the much greater concern the statutory recognition in that Act for kaitiakitanga there will be much greater attention paid in future to making sure that sewage discharges and sewerage treatment schemes do not impact on the values of mana whenua and the ethic of kaitiakitanga for their taonga. Thank you. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I call Andrew Little—sorry Andrew Williams. I apologise. That is the second time I have done that. 
ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First) 
: 
 I think that is the second time you have made that mistake. Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. I rise on behalf of New Zealand First to speak on the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill. I would firstly like to acknowledge also the work that our colleague Te Ururoa Flavell from the Maori Party has put into this bill before the House today. I would also like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the people of Nga Potiki whom this legislation most concerns. I know that for some and for them it is a matter that is very close to their hearts. Also I would like to acknowledge the Tauranga City Council in this whole business. It was the architect of this bill.  
My background as many of you will know is from local government. As the former Mayor of North Shore which has the longest urban coastline in New Zealand—some 150 kilometres of coastline—I am only too aware of how important our foreshore and seabed and coastline are to every citizen in this country. As the House has been told this bill is intended to repeal the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act 1975. The Act’s purpose back then in the 1970s was to authorise that reclamation of 73.5 hectares of the Bay of Plenty harbour. That authority of course has since been revoked rendering the Act null and void. That has been the case for more than 20 years. So now in 2012 the 50th New Zealand Parliament finally confronts this matter.  
But this is not simply about uncluttering the statute book by removing unnecessary legislation; it is also about acknowledging past wrongs. This is a symbolic gesture to Nga Potiki. It is a fundamental step towards forging a new future as one people and one nation. We cannot go forward into the 21st century without first recognising the historical injustices committed against our fellow New Zealanders. Only then can we move on. In that respect I want to commend the Tauranga City Council and Nga Potiki for this enlightened approach that they have taken. New Zealand First is proud to stand with them.  
However—and there is a however—New Zealand First urges all parties in this House to stop and take note. That includes the National members on the other side of the House. No one community or group—including Mr Tau Henare there who should be aware of this—can ever claim to be the sole owner of any precious coastal or marine areas. The division seen in this country during the passing of the Foreshore and Seabed Act in 2004 could very well emerge again should this Government continue to pursue the wishes of the Maori Party and further perpetuate the Treaty gravy train in what we call the “bro-rocracy” of which it and its supporters are so fond.  
 I would like to give you a personal example. When I was the Belgian trade commissioner and vice-consul the Belgian Ambassador to Australia who was accredited to New Zealand visited from Canberra and he visited Northland for a few days. He was most upset when he was confronted by a group of young Maori on a beach where he was walking with his wife to be told: “Get the hell off our beach.” He reported this back to me when he came back to Auckland. He said that he did not realise that this was occurring in New Zealand and he did not feel that that was the way New Zealand should go forward. He did not see a future for New Zealand if that was the way New Zealand was going to be separated and divided.  
We certainly do not want to see that sort of happening occurring in our country. Any legislation concerning the foreshore and seabed particularly ownership should be treated delicately. This legislation applies in respect of all areas of our coastline and as this refers to the Mount Maunganui former borough council we also take note that the maunga the Mount itself is under some questioning as to what its status will be in the future. Again I would say that that treasure that national icon must have open access to all New Zealanders; there must be free and open access for all New Zealanders to enjoy that national icon.  
New Zealand First supports this bill and commends this bill to the House but we do make note of some of those reservations that we have about the continued open access to our foreshore and seabed. 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
: 
 Kia ora ano tatou. Tena koe Mr Speaker. I arise to support earlier speakers. We will support this piece of legislation the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill but there is an element that crept into Mr Flavell’s contribution that suggested that effluent drew a distinction between brown white yellow and black people. The reality is that a number of these changes over the years have been egregious but a number are absolutely necessary. If we are to have civic works and if we are to retain essential services that all of us in the community are going to be the beneficiaries of and pay for then that must not be lost sight of.  
I actually know quite a bit about the history of the hapu Nga Potiki-a-Tamapahore the ancestors who moved into that area several generations before my ancestors went through the area. Nga Potiki have been right to remain vigilant. They have been right to challenge both the Crown and sub-national levels of government. But at the end of the day it is to the benefit of all groups in our community if essential works are to take place.  
I am the first to say that the takutai moana seabed and foreshore piece of legislation was certainly the nadir of that particular time and our contribution as Labour politicians in response to a furore that had developed but we have moved on beyond that. This legislation—fortunately brought forward by Te Ururoa Flavell—does endeavour to correct some of the effects of that legislation. But there are two elements to be borne in mind here: there is the importance of ancestral land and there is the importance of balancing the scales of justice. But if you want to live in a modern society there is the importance of enabling those who were put in power to proceed with the creation and the maintenance of essential services. I do not think it is very sensible that we allow those two issues to be mixed up because there is always going to be a trade-off.  
It is good to see that the Tauranga City Council is working effectively with this group of tangata whenua a hapu of Ngai Te Rangi. It is good to see that they have moved on from the very bleak time when the library was ransacked and—if I recall accurately—was almost burnt down as a consequence. I actually attended that particular protest in the 1980s by Ngai Tamarawaho—if my memory serves me correctly. A lad from St Stephen’s School—Hugh Sayers I think was his name—was playing some sort of role there. It is good to see that Tauranga Moana District Maori Council has moved on from those times.  
Although we want to actually support this bill this is a part of Aotearoa where there is a great deal of growth and where there is a great deal of attractiveness of wanting to live there so essential services are required. And this is a timely reminder. Let it not fall disproportionately on groups such as Nga Potiki. But I also say to those of us in the Maori community that we have got to take a balanced approach as well because we are the beneficiaries when civic infrastructure is expanded. 
 Not only has Tauranga Moana got a rich history in terms of Maori but also it is now turning into such a successful port that it eclipses the Port of Auckland. I will not say too much more about that for fear of being seen to have lobbied for the expansion of Marsden Point the diminution of the Ports of Auckland and the restoration of the Auckland port back to the citizens of Auckland but that is another matter. I seem to remember a famous Labour parliamentarian Mr Mallard wanting to improve the quality at that time but—[ 
Bell rung 
] I presume that is a signal for 1 more minute and it is not what I fear it could be.  
We will support this bill. It is an important area of Aotearoa but two things are to be borne in mind: sure be sensitive to those concerns of ancestral land claims etc. but bear in mind that no city no country and no nation can advance itself in the absence of an evolving improving civil infrastructure. Kia ora tatou katoa. 
Hon SIMON BRIDGES (National—Tauranga) 
: 
 It is a real pleasure to speak on this great little bill the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill which has come before this House and to do so proudly as the happy member for Tauranga and as a proud Mount Maunganui resident. I have very proudly been a resident of that suburb for over a decade now. Of course I think it is right to reflect that when this law that we are repealing first became a law in 1975—the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act—Mount Maunganui was physically in many ways some way away from the city or the township as it probably was then of Tauranga because people had to take a long journey to get to the Mount for a holiday. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: We solved that with a couple of bridges. 
Hon SIMON BRIDGES 
: That is right. Of course there was a lot of progress between 1975 and the 2000s—we have bridges now. We will not dwell on how that came to be. We will not get into the details of that because we all know there are many sides to that story. But be that as it may it is good that there are two bridges in Tauranga connecting the area there and making the city connected and much smaller. I have to say that there still is though—and I have found this when first standing for Parliament—a sense of the “Mounties” and of those who are city-side and that is still present to some extent.  
But this is a good bill. It is not I think going to be the most exciting or controversial bill that comes before this Parliament but it is a good one none the less. Can I pay tribute to Te Ururoa Flavell who has brought it before this House. I did have responsibility for it at the very beginning but he is the member who has done the lion’s share of work and who has spent a lot of time with the council and on getting the details into place. Can I acknowledge the Tauranga City Council for its work in this piece of legislation and Nga Potiki as other members have said for their work. I know it is a happy evening for them.  
The story of this bill and the substance of this bill are pretty straightforward. The old law is now defunct. It is pointless. The purpose for it and the land reclamation no longer are necessary. As I say I know there will be many in Nga Potiki and indeed the workers at the council and Te Ururoa Flavell who will be very happy indeed that we can pass this repeal bill and get on with life again in the great suburb of Mount Maunganui in the great city of Tauranga. 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatu) 
: 
 Just briefly I want to acknowledge two of the contributions in this debate. The first was by Te Ururoa Flavell who gave us a fulsome account of the history behind the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill and the experience of Nga Potiki and how they feel about the waste-water treatment plant and the effect of that particular infrastructure on their ancestral lands and waters. 
I also want to acknowledge the contribution of my colleague Shane Jones which was typically erudite and thoughtful. If it had not been for his contribution in this debate tonight we could not have really called it a debate actually. I think that Shane made the point that it is important to recognise the sensitivities and the aspirations of the tangata whenua in a situation like this but equally we have to balance that against the need for essential infrastructure and economic development and the costs and the burdens of that infrastructure should not be allowed to fall unduly on one particular section of the community. 
I was really struck in listening to the contributions this evening by how this story is almost a universal story. It could have taken place almost anywhere in New Zealand. Any town or city has a similar story. In fact in Tamaki-makau-rau there are countless examples where the land and the harbours have been used in a way that has really had an impact on the sensitivities of the mana whenua. The journey towards properly managing the effects of that kind of economic development is one that has seen both Maori and Pakeha making huge strides in the last couple of decades in dealing with these issues. I would submit that we are in a much better place as a country now than we were a generation ago in reconciling these differences. Labour supports this bill to select committee. 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Kia ora ano tatou katoa. Firstly can I thank all members for their contributions and for adding to the story. I very much appreciated that we have all of that discussion on the record.  
I have to say I feel a little bit embarrassed about the accolades being given to me for leading this bill the Mount Maunganui Borough Reclamation and Empowering Act Repeal Bill into the House because all I did was sponsor it. The big accolades really should go to the Tauranga City Council and Nga Potiki who came together on this project to present it into my hands fortunately this time but it could have been Mr Bridges or it could have been Mr Ryall. So I do want to acknowledge very much the council and Nga Potiki whom I met just 1 week ago in Tauranga where we sat in the room and went over the final details to make sure that everything was signed off before we came to the House. I can say with pretty much hand on heart and also with a list of people that this was fairly much put out there amongst the Tauranga community and wider to ensure that everybody was in the know about this bill and that we generally had a good sign-off on it.  
I just want to take a minute to pick up on a couple of points. I think everybody acknowledges that what we are talking about here is righting a wrong and under those circumstances I am pleased that we have got cross-party support for this bill and I am hoping that we can move it pretty rapidly through the whole process.  
I was a little bit disappointed about some of Mr Williams’ comments. To say that some people go on to land and are told the hell to get off implies that Maori for one reason or another are the only ones who tell people to get off land. That is I think a little bit out of place. In fact in Rotorua there are a number of people who tell me when I go fishing to get off their land as well so let us just put that in perspective. For Mr Williams to say that no one should claim the foreshore and seabed he should check with some of those private owners of the foreshore and seabed throughout the country and ask them how they feel about the same issue. I think that those points need to be challenged so as not to denigrate this particular bill in the way it has been.  
I wanted to pick up on Mr Jones’ point in respect of his saying: “Well some land over history has been taken for the betterment of the country.” Yeah sure but you add it all up and in this particular scenario it is right smack through the middle of a urupa. As Mr Twyford has talked about there are other examples of this. I think in this case people have got something to jump up and down about. In fact if you add it all to things like battles like Te Ranga add it to confiscation in places like Taranaki and Tauranga Moana and add it to raupatu and the loss of land over time which has been well documented in Waitangi Tribunal hearings I think you would understand why people should be pretty angry and upset about these sorts of things. But in a positive way and staying with the positive at least at this point in time the two parties have come together in a way forward.  
I just wanted to say one last point and it is that in about a couple of weeks’ time there will be a commemoration or at least the signing of a move forward on the part of a number of the Tauranga iwi. Te Ranga was an important part of Tauranga history—not that I know it all—but there will be a time when people will go up there to commemorate in a sense the battle of Te Ranga at Gate Pa which is documented in history. Again all of that is about healing healing our time as a nation just as much as this bill albeit small is a positive move if you put it in the context of the many other things that are happening. It bodes well for the future and I hope that may continue.  
In the last part I will say on the back of all this discussion about being together just to think about the  
Rena 
 disaster last year when again iwi were involved in decision making at the highest level with the authorities through Maritime New Zealand and so on and the outcome was absolutely wonderful to see. It was Tauranga people coming together to address that.  
So with those few words I thank the House for all your contributions and look forward to ongoing support as the bill goes through on its journey. Ka nui te mihi ki a koutou ki a tatau i tenei po tae ra no ki a koutou e whakarongo mai na i te wa kainga Tauranga Moana Tauranga tangata ka mutu ki te Kaunihera o Tauranga ka nui te mihi. Tena koutou tena koutou kia ora tatau. 
[ 
I greatly appreciate you and us collectively here tonight as well as those of you listening in from back home in Tauranga the people and of course the Tauranga City Council. I am overwhelmed by the huge acknowledgment. Greetings to you greetings to you and greetings to us collectively. 
] 
Bill read a first time.  
Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.