te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
te Heuheu Georgina: Ngati Awa Claims Settlement Bill — In Committee Procedure 
[Volume:623;Page:18849] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 My colleague is correct in the respect that the completion of the deeds of settlement of the three ancillary claims occurred pretty close to the end of the select committee process. In reality I do not think that the Maori Affairs Committee really had the opportunity to explore those claims so I guess it is inevitable that some questions will now arise. 
I am advised by one of the claimant’s negotiators that these three settlements arise out of three separate claims before the Waitangi Tribunal. I remind the Committee that the Treaty of Waitangi Act makes it possible for a Maori or any descendent of a Maori to lodge a claim. If we think about the fact that Ngati Awa lodged its claim years back—1988 I think—we can understand that it is not surprising that other ancillary-type claims had also been filed. I guess that in this case those claims were filed. 
I think with all due respect to my colleague Dr Mapp that the process is not something the National Opposition would want to see happen too much. In other words a select committee is having to deal with a major iwi claim when on the side other ancillary claims are still being tidied up. I suggest to the Minister in the chair Mita Ririnui that that kind of thing should be avoided in the future because in my view it just does not make for a neat and cohesive approach to that process. 
However I think it is proper to avoid the situation whereby major claims are settled but a whole lot of little ancillary claims have still to be done. That is a position we would not want to see either. 
On balance although these three claims have been rolled in under the umbrella of the major one we know that the claimants are all Ngati Awa people. They are all descended from the same ancestors. It just so happens that those three sets of claimants saw fit to file separate claims. I guess in respect of the claim concerning Awakeri Springs which seems to me to be a pretty neat and discrete claim that is understandable. 
The process leaves something to be desired in terms of the way that the Minister and the Office of Treaty Settlements have dealt with all this. I hope that in future when a select committee holds hearings all the information it needs will be before it. That is the only way it can properly do its job which is basically to scrutinise the settlements and legislation before it. Maybe it is due to my background as a tribunal member but I can certainly see the sense in bringing ancillary claims under one umbrella. 
There was an issue about signing though. I want the Minister to check that all three deeds of settlement are properly signed and dated. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: One’s got 1 December which is odd. 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: Yes it must be the fact that the date of 1 December 2004 came after the matter had been dealt with by the select committee. I think I am right about that; someone will no doubt correct me if I am not. So if that settlement were concluded after the select committee had wrapped up its hearings then I again caution the Government against that sloppy kind of process. I think my colleague Dr Mapp would agree with me. I do not think there is any room for sloppiness in respect of a settlement that has attracted controversy in some quarters.