Flavell Te Ururoa: Affiliate Te Arawa Iwi and Hapu Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Affiliate Te Arawa Iwi and Hapu Claims Settlement Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:648;Page:16833] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
Kei taku ariki e Tumu tena koe. Kei nga iwi o te kainga kua tau mai ki te Whare Paremata i te rangi nei tena koutou katoa. Kei te mohio tonu tatou mo te parekura o-mate kua tau mai ki runga i a tatou i nga wiki tata kua hipa hoi ana ko ta tatou ko te tangi ko te tuku i te roimata me te hupe kia heke hei tohu i te mamae o te ngakau. No natatanei ko tera o tatou o Tuhourangi ko Sonny Sewell. I mua i a ia ko Hamihuna ko Riparata ko Leah ko Sharon ko Ani ko Mihipeka ma a kati. Waiho ratou kia moe. Anei tatou kei te Whare o nga Raiona i korerohia mai e ratou ma. No reira tena koutou kia ora tatou.  
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
Greetings to you my paramount chief and greetings to you all the people from home who have arrived here today in Parliament House. We are mindful of the calamity of death that has descended upon us in weeks just past and so ours is to mourn shed tears and release the mucus as a symbol of the pain within. Just recently there was that one of ours of Tuhourangi Sonny Sewell; prior to him Hamihuna Ripatara Leah Sharon Ani Mihipeka and the rest; enough leave them there to rest. As for us we are here in the “House of the Lions” as they refer to it. So greetings to you collectively and to us 
.]  
Let me acknowledge all of those who have travelled here today. As the translator said the settlement has been a long road. I want to reflect on the many Te Arawa koeke who have passed on without seeing the end results of the mahi. I speak of Bishop Manuhuia Bennett Archbishop Whakahuihui Vercoe Pinda Pirika my own Sam Hahunga Bonita Morehu and many others. We think of those who have passed the battle on to another generation simply because settling grievances is a tiring and stressful business. I think of all of them this afternoon. I pay tribute to the actions of the new Treaty negotiations Minister Dr Cullen in driving a wider settlement of central North Island forest claims. There have been significant changes in the process over the past 18 months and we recognise the impact Dr Cullen has made in that time. 
The number of settlements coming quickly to the table is of course of interest to the Maori Party. I ask myself what has happened to up the tempo and make settlements a reality when over the last 12 months claimant groups in the Waiariki region were bogged down in tribunal hearings and in fact were heading to court. This settlement itself was halted because the Crown was taken all the way to the High Court—all to do with the settlement that we will be debating tomorrow. I ask why we could not have had intervention earlier when tribunal report after tribunal report said there were issues with the process. Things could have been far and away easier. 
I acknowledge also the part that may have been played by the negotiators on behalf of the Crown in possibly facilitating some of the discussions more recently because inevitably that would have had an impact on the outcomes today. I also acknowledge all of those involved in bringing this settlement to the House i tenei rangi nga mea nga ringaringa nga waewae o tenei kaupapa. [ 
today the things the arms and legs of this scheme 
.] Tena koutou katoa. 
I want to place on record some korero about this settlement from someone who was there and who was involved in some of the phases of the development through to this day. I will draw on an analogy. On 15 October 2007 the Tuhoe tribal nation was invaded by the police force and although things have settled down and the court cases are still to happen—and Tame Iti is able to go about his acting career—if people have been to Ruatoki they will know that one is constantly reminded about the consequences of police actions on that day. It seems however that no one has really taken any interest in the people and in how they are or are not coping. Similarly although it is not openly discussed the process used to get to this point in this settlement has had significant impact on individuals whanau hapu and iwi and my hope is that this is recognised today. For when people are driven by time lines and political conditions whakapapa relationships can be left to the side. Kinship ties of hundreds of years can be forgotten all because of the dangling dollar. These are the issues that will be spoken about on our marae for years to come when maybe many of us are gone. So a comprehensive settlement that could have had all of the Te Arawa confederation settling together and therefore utilising our collective strength as stated in our korero Nga Pumanawa e Waru o Te Arawa did not quite happen. We see about half of Te Arawa here today and thankfully again Dr Cullen has heard the issues and has taken appropriate steps to look after the interests of those who have been left to the side. 
I believe that if a process is not set in place properly from the very beginning things are doomed to fail or be punctuated with problems along the way. It is my experience that this is what has happened and Dr Cullen alluded to some of that as did other speakers. How do I know? I have been there I have felt it I have seen it and I have learnt from it. There have been four Waitangi Tribunal reports: in 2004 and 2005 a mandate and two particularly damning statements in 2007. In June 2007 the tribunal report expressed concern for Te Arawa as a whole and found “serious flaws in the way the Crown consulted with non-settling Te Arawa groups.” The report itemised the gross dissatisfaction of a number of iwi concluding that the tribunal was left “fearing for the customary future of the Te Arawa waka.” 
Just 2 months later in August 2007 the tribunal added more parties to the list of those aggrieved criticising the Crown’s failure to communicate proposals to affected parties such as the Crown Forestry Rental Trust the New Zealand Maori Council and the Federation of Maori Authorities. In fact the tribunal could not endorse the Te Arawa settlement in its form at the time as it held grave concerns regarding potential negative impacts of the settlement on overlapping iwi and the durability of future central North Island settlements. 
The August report detailed further Crown failures to protect the customary interests of various tribes condemning a “dearth of direct engagement” with the overlapping claimants. The tribunal laid it all out for us to see—that aspects of the deed of settlement and the Crown’s process are inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi that the experience with the Te Arawa settlement process was likely to have a negative impact on the durability of future central North Island settlements that the tribunal had grave concerns regarding the adverse impact on overlapping iwi that with the Crown picking favourites there was high risk of significant prejudice being experienced by central North Island iwi outside of Nga Kaihautu o Te Arawa and that the Crown was making decisions in isolation based on inadequate information. As a consequence the tribunal urged the Government to delay the proposed settlement recognising that failure to achieve reconciliation amongst iwi could create enormous conflicts within and between iwi. 
That I think has been one of the singular most tragic outcomes of this whole process. Not only has the process exacerbated tensions between the Office of Treaty Settlements and iwi but it has also pitted iwi against iwi. Against this backdrop of disengagement and division it is actually quite remarkable that we are even here today. 
I have a deeply personal interest in this legislation by virtue of whakapapa through Ngati Rangiwewehi. No we are not a signatory to this settlement but I will tell some of the story—the story of Rangiwewehi—to give substance to the grief that some have experienced in getting to this point. In June 2004 I appeared before the Waitangi Tribunal to speak to the Te Arawa taumata claim. My submission outlined how distressed the tribal nation of Ngati Rangiwewehi was by the way in which Crown agencies and the former Kaihautu Executive Council had misrepresented our interests. 
In essence our aspirations in looking to resolve a Treaty settlement were that we would participate in an open and honest process free of manipulation. Unfortunately that was not our experience. I have seen the outcomes of advertised hui of Te Arawa declared invalid by the Crown even when the hui were advertised by an accepted facilitator. I have seen hui called on consecutive days—one by the elected governance group and one by the management group—that told me that there were communication problems. I know of physical confrontation on marae over issues of mandate that went on to court and was finally settled by a vote of around 400 to 500 people that was won by a dozen votes. I know of Ngati Whaoa’s case in being tied to Ngati Tahu when there have been three Waitangi Tribunal reports telling the Crown to call a hui to sort out the issue of mandate once and for all. I know of people who have been allowed to vote more than once at mandating hui while other individuals have not been made aware of or allowed that privilege. Ngati Rangiwewehi ourselves were excluded from the mandating process until after the executive council was elected and we have been offended at times by the way in which a number of our submissions appear to have been given less weight than the mandate from the iwi. 
Over months and years the relationships have deteriorated as demonstrated by key presenters walking out of hui and subsequent ambiguity being recorded relating to resolutions passed in hui where the full story was never heard. Yet despite that officials recorded that “The [mandating] process undertaken was fair open and transparent.” and that “The Executive Council has demonstrated strong support from the iwi and hapu of Te Arawa”. 
There is a huge gap between fact and fiction and the Crown has been complicit in it. This was not the experience of Ngati Rangiwewehi in isolation—other tribes have shared it also. But that was but a small part of the history that we have come past. With this bill we can put it behind us and start to build relationships that at this point in time need to be rekindled. Whakapapa should never be compromised. This first reading I hope signals not just a new era in respect of the economic and social development of those who will benefit from the settlement of this bill but more so a determination from all of us—including me—to link us to each other once again kia taea ai te ki Te Arawa upoko takitahi. 
[ 
so that we can say Te Arawa of a single head 
.] 
The Maori Party will support this bill at the first reading and hope the progress remains positive.