te Heuheu Georgina: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
te Heuheu Georgina: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16952] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 It is at times like this when Parliament behaves at its worst that New Zealanders like us the least. The Foreshore and Seabed Bill is one of the most significant pieces of legislation to come before this House in recent times but from the way that the Government has behaved one would not think that. That is an insult to New Zealanders. Even the way that the Government has ignored most of the submissions in the select committee process and has ignored a lot of what Maori have said is an insult. In terms of the way the Government has handled the issue it has ignored not just Maori but a lot of other New Zealanders as well. To put this House into urgency for such significant legislation and to ram this bill through in 2 days tabling Supplementary Order Paper 302 in the name of the Hon Dr Michael Cullen at about 5.30 this afternoon a Supplementary Paper that is as substantial as the bill itself without so much as having subjected it to any sort of scrutiny by people outside this place—it is all very well that we in this House have it—is symptomatic of the cynical way that the Government has handled this issue. Having reacted in an entirely inappropriate manner when the matter first burst on to the scene with the Court of Appeal decision in June last year—a knee-jerk reaction I would say—this Government will pass this bill into law some 17 months later in a similar knee-jerk fashion.  
Something needs to be said about the Government’s reaction when the Court of Appeal issued its decision last year. Winston Peters said that that decision came from left field. It did not come from left field. Any Government worth its salt would have been prepared for a decision that went against what it wanted. The Government ought to have been prepared for that. Any competent and careful Minister or Government would have prepared for that outcome to the case that had started to wend its way through the courts—the NgatiApa case—from 1996 onwards when National was still in Government starting with a judgment stated in the Maori Land Court by Judge Hingston and eventually reaching the Court of Appeal. Any competent Government should have been prepared for a decision that might go the other way—against what it expected. 
 This Government was not prepared for that. People may have felt that the law was settled. They may have assumed that the Crown owned the foreshore and seabed but as I say the very fact that the case had wound its way up through the tiers of our courts should have been a warning that maybe someone ought to be properly prepared for it. The Attorney-General was not prepared; neither was the Prime Minister. So what we had on the day after was politics at its worst. It was a knee-jerk reaction that raised the heat—raised the bogey—by saying that Maori could not own the foreshore and seabed because they would bar New Zealanders from going to the beach. From that point on it was all downhill.  
Winston Peters makes reference to and chides those political parties that are not supporting the bill. He is scathing of us and says we are playing politics. He should talk! What does he think he is playing? Principle? I do not think so; he is not. The Court of Appeal decision did not raise any bogeys. Basically the Court of Appeal decision stated that the Maori Land Court had jurisdiction to entertain claims. That is all it stated. On the basis of what it had seen the court thought it was unlikely that Maori would succeed—they might succeed but in very few cases. So there was no need for the Government to raise the heat in the way it did—no need at all. But of course the Government did that because it wanted to reach out and assure New Zealanders that Maori would not get their way and wanted to tell people not to worry because it would do the right thing.  
The Attorney-General who spoke just before me went through the legislation in the way that she does as if it is all nice and tidy. Well it is not nice and tidy. I had Maori people ringing me from outside this afternoon and they were saying I was the one ramming this legislation through the House. [ 
Interruption 
]  
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise for interrupting the member’s speech. I was very interested in what she was saying but we are getting a barrage of sustained and noisy interjections from the Government benches. Government members obviously do not like what they are hearing from the Opposition in this debate. I would ask you that interjections be rare and reasonable and preferably witty. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: I am very grateful to Mr Shirley As I say politics has been the order of the day. Nobody in this House should deny that this place is all about politics. Let us not pretend that it is about anything else. The Government as I was saying has played politics on this issue right from day one and Winston Peters now on the eve of supporting the passage of this bill into law is playing politics to the nth degree as well so he cannot point the finger either.  
I want to say something to Maori people. I hope the New Zealanders who are listening to this debate will not take that to mean that I am necessarily on the side of their arguments. There is no doubt that the foreshore and seabed belong to all of us. We are all New Zealanders. Most certainly a way had to be found to balance the interests of all. This bill does not do that. [ 
Interruption 
] I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I do not mind a barrage of interjections from the Government side of the House but those members are not sitting in their proper seats—certainly John Tamihere is not. If he wants to sing out he should go back to his own seat. [ 
Interruption 
] I say to Government members they do not have to be kind to me but they should be kind to New Zealanders. We ask for what we get in this House but New Zealanders out there do not. They deserve something better than this. They deserve something better than a bill that on the one hand states to Maori they should not worry because their mana is protected yet on the other hand states to New Zealanders at large that they should not worry because they will have public access. The Government cannot have it both ways. This bill does not deliver either of those things to either group of people and does not make either of them feel that their mana is protected or that they can have confidence in anything this Government has done.  
I want to send a message to Maori people. That should not be taken to mean that I take their side. I hope I am here for the good of New Zealand like everybody else. But I want to say that during the select committee process some angry words were spoken to the Fisheries and Other Sea-Related Legislation Committee at some of the hearings and there was talk of civil action being taken. I want to say to Maori that they should not go in that way. They should keep their dignity. The one thing Maori people asked for and did not get was due process of law. It is very ironic that Maori should seek to have the rule of law upheld and this Government should step right over it. That is absolutely ironic. But Maori can go down in history as seeking only to have the rule of law upheld. They should be proud of that. I want Maori people to think about this. They should not let this setback intrude upon the momentum of development that is clearly coming through. Maori are everywhere in business—they are everywhere in enterprise. They are earning export dollars for this country and are running innovative businesses both here and overseas. So Maori should not let this Government step on their dignity. They should just keep on rolling through and there will always be another day.