Turei Metiria: Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
Turei Metiria: Ngati Ruanui Claims Settlement Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:608;Page:5270] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 Tena koutou katoa. He mihi nui ki a koe e te rangatira Pat Heremaia. He mihi aroha nui ki a Tangahoe Pakakohe me Ngati Ruanui. 
[ 
Greetings to you all and to you especially Pat Heremaia the chief.Loving greetings to you the people of Tangahoe Pakakohe and Ngati Ruanui 
.] 
The Greens have weighed very carefully our support for the restitution of claims—and we do support the restitution of claims—and our deep concerns about the justice in the treaty settlement process. We have decided in these circumstances that we support and will support this bill. The restoration of land and in particular wahi tapu to the iwi of Ngati Ruanui through this settlement is a significant gain. We acknowledge Ngati Ruanui’s efforts to achieve some form of justice and restitution for the grave losses suffered by the mana whenua. 
However we are deeply aware of the strong opposition to this bill felt by members of Tangahoe and Pakakohi by some members of some hapu and by others in Ngati Ruanui. So I want to acknowledge those people kaumatua and kuia and others who are here today from the hapu involved in this settlement who do not support the bill and who come to bear witness to what they consider is an injustice and another breach of the treaty. Their concerns are serious and they raise important issues about the Government policy on treaty settlements and the processes by which these settlements are reached. The Greens share some of those concerns. 
The Greens recognise Te Tiriti o Waitangi—the legitimacy of the Maori text that was signed by hapu signatories. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is an agreement between hapu and the Crown. It is a solemn pact and the treaty settlement process is designed to provide some redress for the historical grievances that arose out of the Crown’s failure to adhere to it. The Greens acknowledge that delegated representatives of the Crown have breached and continue to breach te tiriti rights of Maori. We support the resolution of and restitution for all outstanding historical and current breaches. 
We too look to the settlement process for justice but we too find it wanting. There are steps that we believe could be taken to improve the process and that are necessary for a robust resolution of historical claims and for the continuation of a healthy treaty relationship into the future. 
The first is that the process should undergo a comprehensive review. It is not sufficient to claim that the process is acceptable to Maori because Maori engage with it. That is wilful blindness and demonstrates a failure to understand the complexity of the social and economic milieu within which Maori operate. Such a review needs to engage specifically with the mechanics of the process the mandate requirements and primarily the “large natural groupings” policies. 
Questions about the relationship between the Office of Treaty Settlements and the Waitangi Tribunal also need to be asked. There are two processes relating to the resolution of historical claims. Claimants are increasingly encouraged to go to direct negotiation as that process is slightly speedier than that of going through the Waitangi Tribunal. 
 But the tribunal is an inquisitorial body that is ostensibly independent of the Crown and is able to give a balanced perspective of the justice issues between the two parties. The tribunal must be a well-resourced primary part of the claims process; otherwise the Crown which funds the tribunal holds all the political power and committed the historical wrongs becomes the sole arbiter of the questions of justice and the level of reparation. That is simply not a genuine robust and just compensation process. 
Issues of funding for claimants also need to be addressed in any review. Claimants may be more likely to proceed to direct negotiation because it is a shorter and therefore less costly process than going through the tribunal. It is not sufficient for a robust and durable settlement to be negotiated when the aggrieved party must appear and present its case at a severe financial disadvantage to the offending party. 
But when the time comes—and it will come—that the historical claims have been dealt with that reparation in whatever form has been made and that that part of the process is over there will remain the need for the Crown to have developed an ongoing relationship under te tiriti that is not property based but that takes into account the constitutional aspects of te tiriti. I read Michael Cullen’s speech on the treaty very carefully for some indication from the Government that that issue is being seriously considered but I was very disappointed. I am aware there is some money in the Budget for treaty education but until we hear a clear statement about that programme we should remain highly sceptical. 
I agree with Mr Cullen on some things. Non-Maori have nothing to fear from the treaty. Much of the rhetoric from various areas is little more than bigoted rants of absolutely no consequence that cause considerable distaste among the public. I also agree that the treaty right in article 2 is not in any way modified by article 3. But I certainly disagree when Mr Cullen characterises article 2 as broadly some form of property right—no matter how much he might extend that to issues such as language. There are constitutional implications in article 2 that have not been properly considered by the Crown nor by the courts. There is a multitude of different views about what those consitutional implications are but no Government so far has had the will to enable that dialogue to happen in any kind of coherent way. 
Mr Cullen went on to say that sovereignty has been exercised unbroken and largely unchallenged ever since. But of course that is completely untrue and in the context of this bill an absolute insult. The tangata whenua have been challenging that sovereignty ever since the wars when the Crown through the settler Government abrogated its obligations under the treaty and forcibly stole Maori land using armed forces and legislation. The preamble on page 5 of the bill outlines how the New Zealand Settlements Act 1863 was enacted specifically to confiscate Maori land from those who had challenged the sovereignty of the Crown. That challenge has continued and still continues but there remains absolutely no will on the part of senior Ministers even to engage in a discussion about it; rather the Deputy Prime Minister made a speech that flies in the face of documented historical record. 
The Green Party is committed to an ongoing national dialogue grounded in te tiriti. We believe that this will both give effect to the relationship that it enshrines and build a high level of awareness among all citizens of Aotearoa New Zealand of the unique role of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in the evolution of our nation. Rangatiratanga is guaranteed under te tiriti to hapu and iwi not to “large natural groupings”. Until the Crown accepts this and resources the settlement process in a way that recognises this reality there is a real risk that settlements will simply perpetuate grievance and injustice among some hapu. We need to work now as a nation on the institutions that give effect to the relationship that is enshrined in te tiriti. The Crown needs to assist Pakeha to understand their own identity so that they feel less threatened by Maori identity. Above all we need to restore the mana of te tiriti as a living document that helps to shape Aotearoa New Zealand as a role model for indigenous relations in the world. The treaty is nation building and not a weapon. 
Finally the Greens extend to Tangahoe and Pakakohi and to Ngati Ruanui me o whanau our very best wishes for the future. Kia ora koutou katoa.