Tirikatene RinoRINO TIRIKATENE (Labour—Te Tai Tonga): Thank you Madam Chairperson Tolley. I'm pleased to make another contribution on the theme around powers and obligations. I want to talk to a clause that is quite dear to my heart at the moment and that is clause 96. This clause confers on the Minister a power by Order in Council to prohibit the import and export of pounamu. This is a matter that was of great concern to Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu who are by virtue of their settlement the outright owners of all pounamu in Aotearoa and we know that it's all in the South Island in Te Wai Pounamu. So there is an existing prohibition on the export of pounamu but what I want to speak to is if we look at this clause the Minister must recommend a prohibition by Order in Council and that prohibition must be in the public interest. So there's a public interest test that applies in the granting of the export prohibition or import prohibition as well. What Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu were wanting to advocate for in their submission was would their established iwi interest that they have be a relevant interest and that it should take precedence over and above the public interest test in the case of pounamu. What transpired I guess after consideration was that the select committee in its report said that the relevant iwi interest is also taken care of in the public interest test. So what I would want to ask the Minister is if she could—I guess I can see positives for Māori in general by the application of saying that an iwi interest is also in the public interest.If I look at other situations where customs have put export prohibitions in place one issue that is also dear to my heart is the prohibition on the SILNA lands in the South Island. For those that don't know the SILNA lands are the South Island Landless Native Act lands and those lands were granted to landless natives of the South Island due to unfulfilled promises that took place which is very historical but very relevant because those lands were in places like the bottom of Stewart Island—far remote places far away from where Māori actually lived where Māori weren't able to draw any compensation or any economic benefit from those lands because they were literally waste lands right at the bottom far-right far corner of the South Island.So I'm aware that customs has imposed export controls on the harvest of logs from the SILNA lands and by looking at what's happened in the case with pounamu here surely a relevant iwi interest could be argued and that the use of the sustainably logged harvest from those lands which are compensation lands to the people of the South Island surely that could also be in the public interest. And why wouldn't it be in the public interest? I'm just wanting to use an example of where customs has actually imposed export prohibitions that have been to the detriment of Māori in trying to utilise or gain benefit from those lands. So it hasn't worked all the time but I see a glimmer of hope that possibly—and hopefully the Minister could clarify—that an iwi interest is also in the public interest.In another case in point I look at another iwi at the top of the South Island Ngāti Kuia—and they also call themselves Te Iwi Pakohe which is the argillite which is a stone—[Time expired]