Ririnui Mita: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — In Committee 
Ririnui Mita: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10470] 
Hon MITA RIRINUI (Labour) 
: 
 I thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for seeking leave of the Committee for the provisions of the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill to be heard as one question. I think it would be very difficult to focus on various parts of the bill without going beyond those parts and talking about other issues that are important to the whole process of treaty settlement. 
I listened very carefully to Mr Garrett’s contribution. I think he is somewhat confused about what we are talking about this evening. The Waikato raupatu settlement was about land—it was about land. Mr Garrett also failed to acknowledge that regardless of what happened prior to 1995 the Crown acknowledged that Waikato-Tainui had been dealt with unfairly and that there were good reasons to revisit and settle all land confiscation matters pertaining to Waikato-Tainui. 
That was about compensation. This Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill is about reinstatement—the reinstatement of a number of things. It is about the reinstatement of the health of the Waikato River which is important to all the people of Waikato and it is also about the reinstatement of a longstanding relationship. Like David Garrett said this is a longstanding issue. Members would have heard it said in this Chamber on many occasions: “Waikato taniwha rau he piko he taniwha he piko he taniwha.” 
[ 
Waikato of a hundred chiefs at every bend of the river is a chief 
.] 
In other words for all the tribes of the Waikato River wherever there is a bend there is also a rangatira of Waikato-Tainui. Through the actions of the Crown the particular relationship that those iwi had with each other and with their ancestral awa was broken. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations the Minister in the chair acknowledged the importance of that relationship during the second reading of this bill. 
To return to what David Garrett said about time lapses from 1865 onward and about things that were mentioned and were not mentioned I am reminded of the statement made by Sir Robert Te Kotahi Mahuta in 1975 when he said: “No tatou te awa no te awa tatou. E kore e taea te wehe te iwi o Waikato me te awa. He taonga tuku iho na nga tupuna. E whakapono ana matou—” 
David Garrett 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I am genuinely sorry to interrupt but the interpretation is not audible and I would very much like to hear it. 
Hon MITA RIRINUI 
: I will accommodate that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Eric Roy) 
: Thank you. Proceed. 
Hon MITA RIRINUI 
: He was saying in terms of the relationship between Waikato-Tainui and the river that no tatou te awa we are of the river and the river is of us. Waikato-Tainui can never be separated from their river—the Waikato River. It is a treasure handed down to them from their tupuna and they are faithful to their tupuna and they are faithful to their river. What they are saying is that their particular ownership when defined comes in the form of a responsibility: a responsibility to take care of the river a responsibility to ensure the health of the river a responsibility to ensure the sharing of the river and a responsibility to ensure the legacy that is passed on to future generations is a sound legacy a legacy that future generations will be proud to receive and take responsibility for. So that is what I mean when I talk about this particular bill being about reinstatement. It is different from the approach of the Waikato raupatu settlement which David Garrett referred to. 
I also found interesting the comments made by my colleague Nanaia Mahuta on the history of Waikato-Tainui and on the contributions that many people have made over time and also the sentiments she expressed not only during her second reading speech but also during the Committee stage of this bill about that particular relationship. She mentioned that when the iwi of Tainui resisted the actions of the Crown in order to protect their estates they were branded as rebels which was the sort of stigmatisation that no iwi could be proud of. That being the case they are seeking more than just reinstatement of the health of the river; they are also seeking the reinstatement of their integrity and in this case the Crown apology will be very very important if it is worded properly. 
My people of Tauranga Moana joined Waikato-Tainui when they took up arms and resisted the actions of the Crown and they were also branded or stigmatised as rebels. The Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations will have the opportunity to meet Tauranga Moana iwi to talk about such issues about the relationships that we have with our waterways with our moana with our awa with our maunga—with our lands—and how important it is for that relationship to be reinstated. I am sure this particular bill will provide the Minister with considerable insight into how to deal with those matters. He will find that as with Waikato-Tainui he will be dealing with a people of immense integrity; a people who want to deal with the issues of the past put them behind them and move on. They want to share their development and their triumphs with the people of all of Tauranga regardless of who they are and where they came from originally. 
I take this opportunity to take a call to emphasise the importance of reinstating a relationship a relationship which can be defined in the case of Waikato-Tainui in many many different ways. I look forward to the Minister’s response to the speeches made today and I hope he will provide us with some insight into how he will deal with similar matters in the future.