edithatogo/nz-hansard-corpus huggingface dataset:
Street Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeStreet Maryan: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18087. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]11.Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) to theMinister of Justice: Does she stand by all her statements?Hon JUDITH COLLINS (Minister of Justice): Yes especially my statement that this Government is focused on the big issues.Hon Maryan Street: Did she express any concern to the chief executive of the Ministry of Justice after the release of the PaulaRebstock report into the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade leak regarding the employment of Nigel Fyfe?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: No and it would be most inappropriate for me to do so.Hon Maryan Street: Was she or any of her staff involved in any discussions with the chief executive of the Ministry of Justice about Nigel Fyfe being put on gardening leave before or after theRebstock report was made public?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: No—in fact Mr Andrew Bridgman the secretary advised me of the situation based on the no-surprises policy. I note that that member has previously put out a press release saying that I “could have moved to reinstate Mr Fyfe much earlier except that PaulaRebstock is a close friend and trusted ally of Ms Collins.” as in me. I completely reject that allegation. I think it would be most improper for me to have taken her advice.Hon Maryan Street: Has she ever referred to Nigel Fyfe as a “bad egg”?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Certainly not.Hon Maryan Street: Did she discuss theRebstock report with the chief executive of the Ministry of Justice prior or subsequently to its release in December 2013?Hon JUDITH COLLINS: I think I have already made it very clear that the chief executive on the no-surprises policy as he should do advised me of the situation. I was advised of the—Grant Robertson: You said nothing. You were mute at that point.Hon JUDITH COLLINS: Well actually I never make comments about employees. I am not a Labour Government Minister; I am a National Government Minister.
Calder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCalder Cam: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]6.Dr CAM CALDER (National) to theMinister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment: How will Budget 2014 advance the Government’s work to strengthen the New Zealand tertiary education system?Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Tertiary Education Skills and Employment): Budget 2014 contains an additional nearly $200 million over the next 4 years from new spending and reprioritisations for tertiary initiatives that will further improve the quality of our universities and help maintain their international competitiveness. It continues the Government’s focus on increasing funding for science technology engineering and maths—areas that are critical to innovation and to New Zealand’s economic future and where there has been long-term underfunding relative to other subjects. The funding lift provides a lift in tuition subsidies for science agriculture and selective health sciences. This comes on top of funding increases for engineering and science in previous Budgets. Since 2008 we have increased the average funding rate for science by 23 percent and engineering by 20 percent.Dr Cam Calder: How does Budget 2014 support excellent research?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: Budget 2014 boosts operating funding for the centres of research excellence by $53 million over 4 years. This means that the Government will be now funding 10 centres of research excellence from 2016-17 up from the six that were recently selected through the competitive process run by the Royal Society. The Government has decided that one of the four additional centres of research excellence shall be dedicated to Māori developmental research. I want to thank the Māori Party for its strong advocacy for this approach. Centres of research excellence are research networks that produce world-class research and make an important contribution to our society and economy and we are very pleased to support the programme.Dr Cam Calder: What investments has the Government made in tertiary education since 2008?Hon STEVEN JOYCE: The Government invested $2.25 billion in publicly owned tertiary institutions in 2013. That is an increase of 14 percent since 2008. This has been a significant increase in tough economic times. Funding of universities has increased greater by 19 percent from 2008 to 2013. We have significantly increased the size of the Performance-based Research Fund. That will hit $300 million a year in 2 years’ time. We have also seen increases in the Marsden Fund. Our reforms and increased investment are paying off. The tertiary system produced more qualifications than ever before in 2012. The number of domestic students who completed a Bachelor’s degree in 2012 was the highest ever at 25400—up by nearly a quarter since 2010.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I withdraw and apologise.Mr SPEAKER: Thank you.Question time resumed.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will stand withdraw and apologise according to the rules without adding—
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): Yes I did make that reference it is true and I apologise.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I never heard anything that I thought was offensive. But as is the practice of this House if the member did make a remark at which offence has been taken then the member should stand withdraw and apologise.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Sorry. Then I apologise to the House. I never heard anything that I considered—Hon Anne Tolley: He referred to him as Jimmy Savile.
Tolley Anne: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeTolley Anne: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There is a protocol in this House which is in the Standing Orders that if a member takes offence at an offensive remark aimed at them the House upholds it. That was a really offensive remark.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18081. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 20/8: “Constantly raising trifling points of order is itself disorderly.”
Horan Brendan: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to Standing Order 116 and I take offence at the disgusting comments from—
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat at the back. I have put the leave. The House has decided. That is the end of the matter.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Brendan Horan: Point of order Mr Speaker.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think if the member had properly explained what he was trying to table there would not have been opposition. He referred to the word “ownership” and Jimmy Savile—
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: I am not sure whether it is available. Possibly it might have been better to do that.
Mallard Trevor: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMallard Trevor: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Is this one of these documents that is available online? The question is why that member was not asked that. My understanding is that it is.
Carter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has described the document. This is information from the New Zealand Racing Conference. Leave is sought to table it. Is there any objection? There is objection.
Horan Brendan: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document from New Zealand Racing that shows the ownership of the racehorse—
Peters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First) to thePrime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister of Justice; if so why?Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister): Yes; because the Minister has made a significant contribution to the Government and to the people of New Zealand in the portfolios she either has held or holds.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does he believe the Minister of Justice has provided him with all the information required to make his decision that she should remain as a Minister?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I believe she has advised me of all the pertinent information.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Has the Minister of Justice given him all the details and information including the name of the Chinese border official who was at theOravida dinner?Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I cannot remember who gave me the name of the official but I certainly have the name. That was the very name the agency and the role that I took to the Cabinet Office.Question time interrupted.
Carter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! I need no further assistance. The way forward is for the House to decide this matter. Leave is sought to table particular minutes of a politicalparty dated—I have forgotten—March some time. Leave is sought for that document to be tabled. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is objection.
Carter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Brendan Horan: Point of order Mr Speaker.
Peters Winston: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePeters Winston: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This House should not be used in that way particularly by the Jimmy Savile of New Zealand politics.
Carter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Leave has been sought. I will allow the member the Rt Hon Winston Peters to speak before I put the question.
Horan Brendan: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHoran Brendan: Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document the New Zealand First board meeting minutes from March 2013 which point to improper use of—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order Mr Speaker.
Carter David: Privilege — Question of Privilege Regarding Use of Social Media to Report onParliamentary ProceedingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeCarter David: Privilege — Question of Privilege Regarding Use of Social Media to Report onParliamentary Proceedings[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr SPEAKER: Honourable members following discussion in the Business Committee I have considered as a matter of privilege the recent use of social media to report on parliamentary proceedings and to reflect on members including the Speaker. Although Standing Order 400 requires an allegation of breach of privilege or contempt to be formulated as precisely as possible so as to give the member or person against whom the allegation is made full opportunity to respond no allegation against a particular member has been made out. However the issue is a significant one.The longstanding and carefully nuanced rules of the House do not necessarily sit comfortably with the informal and instant nature of the new information and communications technology with its potential to reach a very wide audience very quickly. Although members tweeting from the Chamber during question time or debates is clearly not a proceeding in Parliament this is not well understood and nor are the House’s wider rules protecting parliamentary proceedings and the various participants in them. Tweets may be actionable in the courts. Members could find themselves held in contempt by the House for publishing a false or misleading account of proceedings or reflecting on the character or conduct of the House or members. Furthermore accusations that the Speaker has shown partiality in discharging his or her duties have in the past been judged very seriously given the special position the Speaker holds.Some uncertainty surrounds the application of parliamentary privilege to official social media usage for disseminating information about what Parliament is doing and facilitating wider public participation. The level of engagement with social media is such that it cannot be ignored. I believe that the House’s rules need to be examined in light of this new technology. Members and those participating in or commenting on parliamentary proceedings need to be clear about the rules and how they will be applied.Consequently I have determined that a general question of privilege does arise. The question therefore stands referred to the Privileges Committee.
Points of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — Racehorse Ownership—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18080. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderRacehorse Ownership—Leave to Table DocumentBRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document from New Zealand Racing that shows the ownership of the racehorse—Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member has described the document. This is information from the New Zealand Racing Conference. Leave is sought to table it. Is there any objection? There is objection.Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Is this one of these documents that is available online? The question is why that member was not asked that. My understanding is that it is.Mr SPEAKER: I am not sure whether it is available. Possibly it might have been better to do that.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think if the member had properly explained what he was trying to table there would not have been opposition. He referred to the word “ownership” and Jimmy Savile—Mr SPEAKER: Order!Brendan Horan: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat at the back. I have put the leave. The House has decided. That is the end of the matter.BRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I draw your attention to Standing Order 116 and I take offence at the disgusting comments from—Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I refer the member to Speaker’s ruling 20/8: “Constantly raising trifling points of order is itself disorderly.”Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Deputy Leader of the House): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There is a protocol in this House which is in the Standing Orders that if a member takes offence at an offensive remark aimed at them the House upholds it. That was a really offensive remark.Mr SPEAKER: Sorry. Then I apologise to the House. I never heard anything that I considered—Hon Anne Tolley: He referred to him as Jimmy Savile.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I never heard anything that I thought was offensive. But as is the practice of this House if the member did make a remark at which offence has been taken then the member should stand withdraw and apologise.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): Yes I did make that reference it is true and I apologise.Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will stand withdraw and apologise according to the rules without adding—Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I withdraw and apologise.Mr SPEAKER: Thank you.Question time resumed.
Points of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePoints of Order — New Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table Document[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Points of OrderNew Zealand First Board Minutes—Leave to Table DocumentBRENDAN HORAN (Independent): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek leave to table a document the New Zealand First board meeting minutes from March 2013 which point to improper use of—Rt Hon Winston Peters: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! Leave has been sought. I will allow the member the Rt Hon Winston Peters to speak before I put the question.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Leader—NZ First): I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This House should not be used in that way particularly by the Jimmy Savile of New Zealand politics.Mr SPEAKER: Order!Brendan Horan: Point of order Mr Speaker.Mr SPEAKER: Order! I need no further assistance. The way forward is for the House to decide this matter. Leave is sought to table particular minutes of a politicalparty dated—I have forgotten—March some time. Leave is sought for that document to be tabled. Is there any objection to it being tabled? There is objection.
Privilege — Question of Privilege Regarding Use of Social Media to Report onParliamentary ProceedingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumePrivilege — Question of Privilege Regarding Use of Social Media to Report onParliamentary Proceedings[Sitting date: 20 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18073. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Tuesday 20 May 2014Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.Prayers.PrivilegeQuestion of Privilege Regarding Use of Social Media to Report onParliamentary ProceedingsMr SPEAKER: Honourable members following discussion in the Business Committee I have considered as a matter of privilege the recent use of social media to report on parliamentary proceedings and to reflect on members including the Speaker. Although Standing Order 400 requires an allegation of breach of privilege or contempt to be formulated as precisely as possible so as to give the member or person against whom the allegation is made full opportunity to respond no allegation against a particular member has been made out. However the issue is a significant one.The longstanding and carefully nuanced rules of the House do not necessarily sit comfortably with the informal and instant nature of the new information and communications technology with its potential to reach a very wide audience very quickly. Although members tweeting from the Chamber during question time or debates is clearly not a proceeding in Parliament this is not well understood and nor are the House’s wider rules protecting parliamentary proceedings and the various participants in them. Tweets may be actionable in the courts. Members could find themselves held in contempt by the House for publishing a false or misleading account of proceedings or reflecting on the character or conduct of the House or members. Furthermore accusations that the Speaker has shown partiality in discharging his or her duties have in the past been judged very seriously given the special position the Speaker holds.Some uncertainty surrounds the application of parliamentary privilege to official social media usage for disseminating information about what Parliament is doing and facilitating wider public participation. The level of engagement with social media is such that it cannot be ignored. I believe that the House’s rules need to be examined in light of this new technology. Members and those participating in or commenting on parliamentary proceedings need to be clear about the rules and how they will be applied.Consequently I have determined that a general question of privilege does arise. The question therefore stands referred to the Privileges Committee.
Vote: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeVote: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]A party votewas called for on the questionThat the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill be now read a second time.Ayes113New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party 14; Māori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1.Noes7New Zealand First 7.Bill read a second time.
Hauiti Claudette: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17674. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to take a short call on the Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill. I want to touch on several aspects that were found during the select committee process.The Māori Affairs Committee examined the bill and recommended that it be passed with the following amendments. Regarding the land-banked properties at Arapuni the select committee considered whether a mechanism is needed to preserve future interests of any iwi in two land-banked properties at Arapuni. When it came to the time to sign the deed of settlement the Crown felt that the positions were irreconcilable and there was no available mechanism for the parties to find a resolution. When the Raukawa and Ngāti Koroki Kahukura settlements are completed these properties will be sold on the open market and both iwi will have the opportunity to purchase them if they wish.In relation to land subject to the right of first refusal the select committee recommended amending the bill so that that land could cease to be subject to the right of first refusal in circumstances where the governance entity waived or varied its rights in relation to the land. This would then allow the land in question to be transferred in accordance with the waiver or variation.I wanted to raise those issues because in and around that there was a lot of discussion challenges and push back on both the Crown and the select committee. I would like to acknowledge Linda Te Aho for leading the negotiations. I would also like to acknowledge Willie Te Aho as well. Willie and his contribution to the economic and social development of Māori over the years is very well-known and very well respected. The Māori business economy is worth around $38 billion. The return to GDP is between $8 billion and $12 billion. In and around that has been the work that Willie Te Aho has done on behalf of iwi to ensure that rangatiratanga is met to ensure that motuhake according to the definition of the iwi and the hapū is adhered to and to ensure that kotahitanga the relationship between the two Treaty partners is enduring.Although we as individuals may not like the challenges or may not like the comments or criticisms at the end of the day we are here to serve. We are here to serve the people of New Zealand. We are here to serve Māori Pākehā—all New Zealanders.If we do not like those criticisms and if we do not like those challenges then we should not be here. This is the Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill. I commend it to the House.Bill read a second time.
Moroney Sue: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMoroney Sue: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17673. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SUE MORONEY (Labour): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. It is an honour to rise and take a short call on the second reading of the Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill. This is a bill that has been given a lot of serious consideration by the Māori Affairs Committee and I wish to congratulate the members of that committee and the officials who have worked on this bill on getting it to this stage. As the last speaker Tau Henare said I very much look forward to the third reading of this bill because again this is an area that is close to my heart. Geographically it is very close to where I live. I know of much of the hard work and challenges that have been going on with discussions in this area. I want to particularly acknowledge the cultural redress part of this package with Maungatautari the importance of that maunga to many people living in and around the Waikato area and the foresight of various community representatives.Again I want to put forward my utter faith in the ability of the people who will have governance to ensure that this maunga which is groundbreaking—if I can use that term about a mountain—in terms of being an ecological island continues to progress forward as an ecological island. I was certainly present on the maunga the day the Rt Hon Helen Clark in her role as the then Prime Minister ensured sufficient State funding went into helping to bring about that ecological island. It was a very proud day for many many people. I know there has been a lot of controversy surrounding the management of that maunga but I feel confident about the approach taken with this settlement bill and the way in which the iwi will ensure their guardianship of the land. Those things will stand us in good stead as we go forward.The only other thing I really want to comment on here is how much I am looking forward to seeing the Te Manawa o Matariki tangata whenua facility that is to be developed at the Lake Karapiro domain. I think that will be something that will be a cherished taonga for many people living in the area and obviously many visitors as well because Lake Karapiro is of course an area that attracts many tourists and many visitors. I think that will be a wonderful development and I really look forward to seeing that as it develops.As always with Treaty settlement bills there are many stories that need to be told. There are many stories yet to be told. There is the reflection of this House across parties that needs to happen in a very thorough manner at the third reading. I will in recommending this bill to the House now resume my seat so we can work towards that third reading taking place before this House rises for the election.
Upston Louise: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17670. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupō): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I am pleased to be able to stand and take a brief call in the second reading of the Ngāti Koroki Kahukura Claims Settlement Bill. The iwi is of course in the electorate of Taupō. Actually the area where I live is Karapiro which of course is a very significant part of Ngāti Koroki Kahukura’s lands.This has been an interesting process working through some very challenging issues with the settlement. I think there have probably been some highs and lows in the process. I will keep most of my comments to the third reading which is really the opportunity to traverse it in more detail with the iwi here. But I do just want to make the point that I think Minister Finlayson was incredible in coming up with a solution for Maungatautari that some would argue was not perfect but it was actually acceptable to everybody. It was a very fractious issue. To be honest I was quite revolted by the extent of what actually occurred and how divisive it became in the community. What impressed me more than anything was the Minister’s commitment to finding a solution that was accepted and the fact that I would request his involvement at meeting after meeting after meeting and he would come back every single time to find a way through.The solution of vesting the mountain in the community has never been done before. I really admire the fact that we have a Minister who is so committed—so committed—to endurable and lasting solutions that he is willing to explore all sorts of avenues in orderto do that. So I want at this stage to commend the Minister for his creative thinking in solving what are some very challenging and fractious issues.The other thing I want to say is that I was pleased to be able to rejoin the Māori Affairs Committee—albeit only temporarily—for the hearings and submissions at Karapiro. I think it is really important to be able to hear the submitters and understand them although I do regret that I was not a member of the Māori Affairs Committee in taking the next step of the process to getting to today. But I am very confident that we have got the bill to a place that is acceptable. Yes there are a couple of issues that potentially we can pursue further but more important we have a solution that the iwi are happy with and that the community can also accept and enjoy. I think that is where we have got to—a really great place. Thank you.
Henare Tau: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHenare Tau: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17662. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon TAU HENARE (National): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker mauri ora ki a koe. Ngāti Hauā tēnā koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou i a koutou i haere mai nei i tēnei rā. Nō reira piki mai kake mai ki tēnei wahi tautohetohe. Nō reira tēnā koutou katoa.[Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker and good health to you. Greetings to you all Ngāti Hauā who came here today. Welcome aboard this place of debate.]I will be very brief. I want to be able to say this in a manner that does not offend anybody. It is not my intention to offend anybody. I have prided myself on moving through my life without offending anybody. Whether they take offence is their worry. That is their problem.A couple of speeches in this House have talked about truth and reconciliation. It is not about that. This is about justice. This is about righting a wrong. Truth and reconciliation will come later on. If we imagine a 100-metre sprint—or for those who are older than me Pita the 100-yard sprint—where we are is about say 20 metres into the race. Truth and reconciliation will come once that move to justice is complete. I just want to put that out there. It is not that I am dissing those who believe that this is a truth and reconciliation process but I think that we are not even there yet. We are still in the mode of seeing whether we can sort out some justice for a wrong. That is the background.Ngāti Hauā like everybody else deserve at least a modicum of justice from where they were. They deserve their place in history. They deserve to be able to move from where they are to where they want to be on their own without being told what to do told how to do it and told when to do it. That is about tino rangatiratanga. That is aboutmana motuhake. It is about people figuring out for themselves where they want to go with the sort of package that has been agreed to between the Crown and themselves.Like my colleague Joanne Hayes I will leave the pearls of wisdom to my third reading speech if and when they come. Nō reira kāti mō tēnei rā. Anei anō te mihi nui ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou katoa.[Therefore enough for today. Here again is my huge acknowledgment to you all and congratulations.]
Hauiti Claudette: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17661. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. The Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill sponsored by the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations the Hon Christopher Finlayson has been set down for its second reading. The purpose of this bill is to give effect to the deed of settlement signed by the Crown and Ngāti Hauā.I would just like to touch on some of the aspects that were raised during the select committee process. The Māori Affairs Committee examined the bill and recommended that it be passed with the following amendments. The committee recommended amending the bill so that right of first refusal land could cease to be subject to a right of first refusal where the governance entity waived or varied their rights in relation to that land. This would allow for the land in question to be transferred in accordance with the waiver or variation. We also amended the bill to enable notices to be sent by electronic means because we are very modern these days.I would also like to reiterate what colleagues around the House have been saying earlier and throughout the Treaty claims settlement readings. This John Key - led National Government is making great progress on completing final endurable settlements of Treaty of Waitangi claims. The settlements recognise and right the wrongs of the past and strengthen the partnership between the Crown and Māori. These settlements are about rangatiratanga. They are about mana motuhake for each individual iwi and hapū to define their motuhake according to their iwitanga. These settlements are also about kotahitanga the building of our nation collectively as two partners in the Treaty of Waitangi. I commend this bill to the House.
Hayes Joanne: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17660. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. Mihi atu ki ngā whānau o Ngāti Hauā. Tēnā koutou.[Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. I acknowledge the families of Ngāti Hauā. Greetings to you collectively.]I stand to support the second reading of the Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill. I must say reading all the information and listening to the submissions I am very impressed with the process that Ngāti Hauā has gone through. The documented evidence of the ratification process and the submissions that came through when we were up in Hamilton talking with you and listening to you was just absolutely amazing. I was very impressed.This bill is a Crown offer of statutory acknowledgments over the following areas: Waiōrongomai part of the Kaimai Mamaku Conservation Park; Ngatamahinerua part of the Kaimai Mamaku Conservation Park and Maurihoro Scenic Reserve; Te Wairere the Wairere Falls Scenic Reserve part of the Gordon Park Scenic Reserve and part of the Kaimai Mamaku Conservation Park; Te Weraiti part of the Kaimai Mamaku Conservation Park; Whewells Bush Scientific Reserve; Te Oko Horoi a marginal strip alongside the Waikato River; and the Waikato River and tributaries within the Ngāti Hauā area of interest. This is just absolutely going to be a changer for Ngāti Hauā and I congratulate you. I am not going to go on any more today because I am going to save that for the third reading. So without any further ado I commend and support this bill to the House.
Banks John: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBanks John: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17659. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon JOHN BANKS (Leader—ACT): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I have not taken a call on Treaty settlement matters in this House in the last 10 Parliaments but I thought I should today. I want to acknowledge all the Māori members of this House and the great contribution that they make in the best interests of the multicultural society that we are today. I also want to pay tribute to my friends Pita Sharples and TarianaTuria in the Māori Party for being such great workmates around this place in recent years.I rise to take this call today to update the record on Māori claims settlements in this House in the last 25 years. Firstly I want to give credit to Sir Douglas Graham and his negotiation team of the early 1990s and the great work that that fine New Zealander contributed to in this House in Māori claims settlements some of them very substantial very complex quite difficult and surrounded by much controversy. So I give praise and I give credit to Sir Douglas Graham and his team of officials in the early 1990s as I do to the Bolger Government of the time where I sat on the front bench and served for two terms.I want to now come to the present. This Government under the leadership of John Key has grasped this nettle and what I would call the mopping-up exercise of 25 years of Māori claims settlements. It is mopping up because many of the claims are small. They are not small in terms of the significance because I understand the significance of what happened in the Waikato in the 19th century. I understand it well. I know the area from where these good people have come this morning—they have migrated from the Waikato to Parliament Buildings—and which they represent. I know the pain and hardship caused to those people by the injustice done to them—from in particular around 1860 to 1865.I want to give praise to Chris Finlayson QC for the work he has done in the finest traditions of setting aside party differences and getting these Māori historical land claim grievance settlements once and for all settled on behalf of the people of this country.I know where these people come from. I have fond memories of flying gliders well above this place to great heights many many years ago. This is a small iwi significant in their historical value to this country and its future a great people and dignified citizens who have worked tirelessly to bring this settlement together today with the Minister Chris Finlayson QC and his officials. So I want to join this House in congratulating them in saying to them that we remember the past and we must never forget it and in wishing them every success for the future.
Finlayson Christopher: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeFinlayson Christopher: Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17653. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations): I moveThat the Ngāti Hauā Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time. The bill gives effect to a deed of settlement signed by the Crown the Tumuaki and Ngāti Hauā in 2013 to settle all remaining historical Treaty claims of Ngāti Hauā. I think I said this in my first reading speech but this was an iwi who came and saw Bill English and me towards the end of 2012 and said they wanted to conclude their settlement negotiations by signing a deed 6 months hence and we said: “Yes let’s go for it.” We did not believe that it was possible but they did it because they are excellent negotiators. They were focused on the task. They had dealt with overlapping claims. It was a very very impressive effort and once again I commend them and their negotiators for their splendid work. The settlement provides financial commercial and cultural redress and acknowledges the losses suffered by Ngāti Hauā arising from serious breaches of the Treaty by the Crown.Once again I want to thank the chair and members of the Māori Affairs Committee for their hard work in considering the bill and exploring the issues raised in submissions at hearings held earlier this year in Karapiro and in Wellington. The committee received four submissions from interested groups and individuals and heard three of them. I am very happy to hear that people took the time to examine to make submissions on and to think about the bill. It was especially pleasing to hear from those who supported it and in particular I want to acknowledge the warmth expressed from a neighbouring iwi. Treaty bills like this one reflect prior agreements between claimant groups and the Crown. It is not always possible for the committee to make the changes suggested by submitters but I want to assure submitters that the committee investigated the changes to the bill that they suggested.In 2008 the Crown and Waikato-Tainui signed a deed of settlement in relation to the great Waikato River. This settlement will geographically extend the co-management instruments afforded to Waikato-Tainui to cover the Ngāti Hauā area of interest and that means that Ngāti Hauā will play an important role in the co-management of the Waikato River within their area of interest through Waikato-Tainui. The committee has incorporated a small number of changes to the bill. These changes are technical in nature and they do help to clarify aspects of the redress. I look forward to the third reading and seeing this wonderful iwi move into a positive future. I commend the bill to the House.
Macindoe Tim: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMacindoe Tim: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]TIM MACINDOE (National—Hamilton West): I too thank the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations for his considerable work and all members—all but one member—who have contributed to this debate. I acknowledge the iwi and I support the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill.
Lees-Galloway Iain: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLees-Galloway Iain: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North): This is not a split call. Labour supports the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill and we look forward to its further passage through the Committee stage and third reading.
Roy Eric: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRoy Eric: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER: I call Iain Lees-Galloway. I understand this is not a split call.
Hayes Joanne: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): Tēnā koe Mr Deputy Speaker. Ā ka huri au ki ngā whānau whānui o Tūhoe ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou.[Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. And so I turn to the extensive families of Tūhoe to acknowledge you all greatly. Greetings.]I am pleased to take this very short call on this omnibus bill the Te Urewera-Tūhoe Bill. I am pleased and I am going to do this on a three-step method. I attended a conference last year the E Tū Whānau conference and the keynote speaker was none other than Tāmati Kruger. When he stood up he said: “You know when people stand up to speak there are three things that the audience are looking at: you get up you get it out and you sit down.” So I have got up ladies and gentlemen. I am getting it out. I totally support the second reading of this bill.I want to acknowledge that there are not many more words that I can say to support this bill. All the words have been said by my colleagues on the Māori Affairs Committee by our Hon Chris Finlayson who does a fabulous job in the Treaty negotiations work and also by my colleague Tau Henare who leads our committee. I am now going to sit down because I am now going to commend this bill to the House. Kia ora.