Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Question No. 7 to Minister  
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members Question No. 7 to Minister  
[Volume:620;Page:15369] 
5.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Maori Affairs 
: Does he stand by his reported statement that changes were likely when the foreshore and seabed legislation was returned to the House and he promised that they would take a “huge level of heat” out of the debate; if so why? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE (Associate Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 I have a great respect for the select committee process. It is usual for legislation to come back to the House improved after benefiting from a range of public submissions. I commend the member for working on the committee and for reporting on the bill when he does so. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Mr Tamihere has been going around the countryside giving his views on how he expects the seabed and foreshore legislation to turn out. He has gone as far as to tell a major newspaper that there will be changes that will take heat out of the debate. It is just not acceptable for a Minister to speak outside the House and to refuse to give answers inside the House. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: The Minister has not refused to give an answer. He simply stated quite obviously that select committees are likely to make changes to legislation. One would hope that the changes are such as to reduce some of the criticism of legislation. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want the Minister to come a little closer to the question that was asked and to comment on it further. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The member said: “if so why?”. Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister’s original answer was that he had confidence in the select committee process and he thanked the member for being a part of it. Then he sat down. If we look at the question we see that the Minister is clearly required to address the issue of the changes that are likely. That is at the heart of the matter because the purpose is to get rid of the “huge level of heat” in the debate. The Minister still has not answered the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister did say “Yes.” but he needs to give a reason. I want the Minister to give the reason. The answer “Yes” was perfectly adequate for the first part of the question but to “if so why?” an answer is deserved. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: Yes because I have great faith in the select committee process. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We are no further ahead than we were a couple of minutes ago. I think it is time we decided whether it is acceptable for Ministers to go around the countryside giving their views to public audiences—quite often conflicting views depending on the particular audience—and then to come to the House and refuse to give the House that information. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister did answer the question. The member may not be satisfied with it but that is what supplementary questions are for. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Speaking to the point of order Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No I have ruled on it. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You invited the Minister to come closer to the question. He stood up and said: “if so … Yes.” The question invited him to state whether he stood by his statement and if so why. He said “ ‘if so why?’. Yes.” “Yes” is not an answer to “if so why?”. Could we have an answer to that question as you specifically asked him to give the House? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the member to listen carefully because I heard the Minister say when I invited him to do so “Yes.” He did not qualify it at all. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: When the Minister said that he expects changes to be made to the bill that will take heat out of the debate what changes does he expect to be made? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: If the member would read the article properly he would see that it states: “Mr Tamihere indicated that changes were likely when legislation was returned by a select committee …”. It states that changes were likely. The detail of those changes is a matter for the select committee. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Members are required to be as concise as we possibly can here. I could have submitted a question that went to a whole A4 page-length and stated that Mr Tamihere had also said that if the changes he wanted were not in there he and his Maori colleagues would be very very grumpy. He clearly knows what changes he wants. He is telling other audiences what changes he wants. Why can he not tell the House that? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister addressed the question. 
Dave Hereora 
: Why is it important that this Parliament enact the Foreshore and Seabed Bill? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The bill is hugely important in that it gives effect to the four principles this Government set out at the beginning of the exercise. They are access regulation protection and certainty. The bill does not extinguish or confiscate customary rights. Rather the legislation provides the legal avenue for customary rights and interests to be recognised and protected. The principles behind that are sound and I am proud to support the bill. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Minister agree that a huge amount of heat would be taken out of the process if the select committee heard all the submitters who requested a hearing and would he support a request by the select committee to travel to coastal areas such as Taranaki Gisborne Whangarei Nelson and Dunedin to hear those submitters who are directly affected by the bill? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: That is a matter for the select committee. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: How does he reconcile his statement with the submission of numerous iwi who have warned the select committee that this Labour Government legislation will result in widespread disturbances and civil disorder on the New Zealand coastline this coming summer and what assurances can he give New Zealand families that this year’s beach vacation will not be ruined? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: We can have that conversation once the select committee has reported back. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Can he confirm that the Government is negotiating foreshore and seabed deals that recognise ownership interests with a number of iwi hapu and whanau groups; if so how will that fit into the seabed and foreshore being placed in Crown ownership? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: I am advised that—as we always do as an open robust and transparent Government—a number of negotiations and discussions are occurring relevant to this matter. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There were two parts to that question. I asked him whether the Government was having negotiations. He has confirmed that the Government is negotiating deals to recognise ownership of the seabed and foreshore with Maori. The question is and was: how is that going to fit in with the proclamation from the Labour Party that the foreshore and seabed will remain in Crown ownership? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The member asked for a hypothetical— 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No I did not. 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: I have no idea what outcomes will be achieved in terms of discussions and negotiations that are ongoing. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member has now addressed the question. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: No he has not addressed the question. Last Thursday Parekura Horomia the Minister of Maori Affairs told the House that those negotiations were taking place. I have just asked the Minister whether he can confirm that they are taking place. He has confirmed that. What I have asked is: how can the Government’s doing deals with Maori around the country to create some sort of ownership interest for them in the seabed and foreshore be consistent with the claims it is making that the seabed and foreshore will remain in public ownership? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister said he did not know what the outcome would be which is a proper reply. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Why is the Government putting up a piece of legislation that is supposed to apply to all New Zealanders but then doing deals behind closed doors with iwi such as Te Whanau-a-Apanui Tainui and NgatiPorou ki Hauraki that exempt them from the legislation and give them an ownership interest? 
Hon JOHN TAMIHERE 
: The select committee process is ongoing and we look forward to the report back of it with regard to the legislation. There is a range of discussions and negotiations that occurs notwithstanding that process because iwi have a whole range of other issues notwithstanding the foreshore and seabed.