Mahuta Nanaia: State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: State Sector and Public Finance Reform Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 02 July 2013. Volume:691;Page:11702. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato):Ka nui te ora. Pēhea tērā ki a koe mō tēnei wāhanga o Te Wiki o Te Reo Māori?[Very well thanks. What do you think about that for this part of Māori Language Week? ]I just wanted to pick up where my colleague Darien Fenton left off. There are some issues with the State sector and if the intention of this legislation the State Sector andPublic Finance Reform Bill is to enable Government departments to work more collaboratively together by way of merging some of the aspects of their statements of intent to some higher-level priorities then that will be a positive thing. The Government must have mechanisms through the State sector to be able to drive its priorities. That is absolutely clear. But if the Government is unclear on the nature of its priorities we have got some big problems.When I think about I guess the litmus test from a perspective that I bring to the Chamber for Māori that would be how the Government would work in partnership with Māori to advance economic and social development. It is a very important space to be considering the nature of this legislation because what we know is that since the emergence of Treaty settlements and more definitely in the post-settlement landscape significant resources have been transferred to iwi who are then in a position to take on some quite critical partnerships with the Government and with third-sector parties to focus on regional growth strategies and outcomes to invest more in social development outcomes and to be innovative in a very different way. The interface between the State sector and iwi I believe is part of what could be a litmus test as to whether or not what we are trying to do here today will achieve some broader outcomes.As I said I have listened to the debate all the way through this particular bit of legislation and it got me considering a number of things. If the Government has a priority around Māori development Māori economic growth and social development why then did National reject the proposal of Te Ururoa Flavell in terms of making some stronger recommendations around the way in which the Treaty would be recognised within this legislation? Silence. So that then urges me to ask that if the intent of the Government—Hon David Cunliffe: It’s not question time.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Silence except from the backbenchers who will not take a call on the bill. If the intent of the Government is to ensure that there are going to be productive collaborations with iwi and iwi who have growing economies—Tainui just this week announced it has got around about a $780 million asset base and Ngāi Tahu will be slightly over that amount. There are significant opportunities for the Government to partner with iwi to be able to better effect transformational change within specific regions so that we are looking at innovative solutions to some very age-old problems not because the Government is taking a parochial approach to these challenges but because it is expressing itself in ways that are actually more reflective of what is being urged through a regional community iwi type of perspective. On that basis alone I would have thought that the Government would consider quite seriously what the positive implications of Te Ururoa Flavell’s amendment to the legislation could provide for.The next point I want to raise is in relation to the task force that the National Government set up and that is the Crown Māori Economic Development Panel that was established looking at priorities between 2012 and 2017. It outlines six particular goals: in the area of education lifting educational participation; lifting the skilled workforce and certainly the skill sets amongst Māori; improving the financial literary and savings aspects amongst Māori especially at the grassroots; invoking more collaborative relationships with iwi and Māori; developing natural resources and having an ongoing dialogue about how that could coexist with strong kaitiaki principles amongst iwi; and having a concept of where the “Māori Inc.” strategy sits within the broader Government growth strategy. All of those have been identified by the National Government as key priorities to lift Māori economic growth and to support it but the way in which this legislation seeks to try to achieve that is unclear.It is unclear because obviously this provides structural change for inter-agency collaboration but it is unclear also because the Government on the one hand will have a certain conversation with iwi and Māori around the necessity to ensure a collaborative relationship for growth but on the other hand when it has the instruments or mechanisms to try to achieve that through legislation like this it does not make some of the hardest yet most important calls so that we can get to a really good point where actually the Government is saying that we must work differently together just as we need to get out of that silo way of thinking. That whole bringing the whole of Government approach together engaging in critical partnerships and in this instance with iwi and certainly with Māori—that whole aspect of the nature of relationships going forward for the State sector is not contemplated within the context of the changes and the amendments that were rejected.I am slightly sad by that silence over there in the corner from people who initially criticised my comments. I would say that going forward the real litmus test for Māori on the effectiveness of the changes that have been achieved and promoted today will come back to some very critical points of convergence: where there is a common interest to have a growth strategy that is more aligned and where there is a common interest to have a social development strategy that lessens the level of inequality and poverty in our communities. That is a point of convergence between the Crown the Government and iwi where the necessity to improve the skills of our people is not just a Government objective; actually it is a nationwide objective where iwi can play a critical role to help achieve that outcome.At the end of the day we have heard colleagues certainly on the Labour side of the Chamber say that the new normal for the State sector is a stronger reporting framework around outcomes. I would have to absolutely endorse that. If we take an outcomes perspective in the way in which the Government asserts its leadership on fundamental priorities of economic growth and development and social advancement then the extension of changes to the State Sector Act could go a little bit further taking into account the role—the critical and positive role—that iwi and Māori can play in this space.I had said that I wanted to comment very briefly—I have taken two part-calls on this. I want to say that although this is a start this is by no means a finish. This is an opportunity to have in the top of our minds the question of what some of the litmus tests are to ensure that the State sector is operating in a way that will I think change the nature of the way the Government interfaces with iwi but also with community. Kia ora koutou.