Samuels Dover: Treaty of Waitangi (Final Settlement of Claims) Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Samuels Dover: Treaty of Waitangi (Final Settlement of Claims) Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:618;Page:13898] 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS (Minister of State) 
: 
 A tena koe. Te meatuatahimaku ki te mihi atu ki te iwi Maori te ao Maori e whakarongo mai ana ki eneikorero. Kore rawateneiKawanatanga e tautoko i te pire a Rodney Hide. 
[ 
Thank you. First I extend greetings to the Maori people and the Maori world listening in to these deliveries. The Government will never support Rodney Hide’s bill 
.] 
Today I rise to explain the Government’s reasons for not supporting Mr Hide’s bill. I want to tell Mr Hide very clearly that this Government Maori MP certainly is not going to enter into being very careful as a member of Parliament in not allowing Maori their day in court. I want to say to him that quite clearly he—an academic an intellectual—has not read the provisions of that bill. The reality is that my whanau and hapu look forward to making an application in the Maori Land Court and they have already prepared such an application. If there was no provision in the bill to make such an application they would not be so dumb as to do that. There are a few people around here suggesting that there is no provision in the bill for an application to the Maori Land Court. But it is not only to the Maori Land Court; it is to the High Court and it may very well go to the Court of Appeal. So the humbug and propaganda of misinformation being spread around by people like Rodney Hide are unfortunate. I think perhaps they should have looked at the bill more carefully as Gerry Brownlee has done—hopefully—and understand that there are provisions in the bill for my whanau and hapu to go to the Maori Land Court. 
I can say that we do not support the treaty claims going on forever and ever. Once again that is misinformation propaganda and humbug. I think and I acknowledge that all responsible New Zealanders including Maori recognise that it is a process that is finite. It may very well be that ACT’s existence in this House is finite—until the end of next year or until the next election. But surely we cannot compare that to the process prescribed in terms of treaty claims. 
This bill is Mr Hide’s third ill-considered attempt to pull the handbrake on the treaty settlement process—No. 3. Mr Hide’s bill seeks to bring it to a screeching halt before its time with no thought to the resulting pile-up. This Government wants the mutual process of negotiation and reconciliation to carry on. Like its predecessors this bill is misnamed as it will not result in the final settlement of claims. Rather it obliges the Crown to act within 5 years with regard to any findings or recommendations made by the Waitangi Tribunal. In an ideal world negotiated settlements would quickly follow tribunal reports but we know and he knows that it is not as simple as that. We do live in a complex world. Claimants need to decide who speaks for them and how they will work together. The Waitangi Tribunal cannot do that for them and neither can the Crown. 
This Government is in discussions with more claimant groups than ever before. We have achieved that by giving advice and assistance to claimants where we can and where it is appropriate—not by interfering in internal iwi decisions or by setting artificial deadlines. Mr Hide’s bill does not even talk about negotiations and I would have thought that when he talked about treaty settlements and time frames he would actually give some recognition to the importance of treaty negotiations. But this bill does not do that. Instead the bill obliges the Crown— 
Rodney Hide 
: Tell us about the foreshore and seabed. 
Hon DOVER SAMUELS 
: —I will tell the member about that later if he wants to listen—to act unilaterally. Governments tried that approach in the first half of the 20th century. I tell Mr Hide that we have already been down that track—passing legislation that granted some groups of Maori a few thousand pounds in full settlement as redress for the confiscation of their land without those payments even being discussed with the same people. As history shows us simply declaring something to be settled does not make it so. If this country is serious about resolving the claims of the past we should do that in a way that ensures both parties consider them resolved—not swept under the carpet for another generation to deal with. Negotiations can take a long time or a short time as the Crown and claimant communities work through the painful grievances of the past and the difficulties in exploring each other’s views before deciding whether they can accept each other’s position. There is also a great deal of technical work to be done throughout the negotiations to ensure that the rights of third parties are protected and to ensure that a settlement is unambiguously final and comprehensive for the entire claimant group concerned. Putting artificial time pressure on that stage would put the finality and ultimately the durability of the settlements at serious risk. And I can say that Mr Hide knows that. 
Once again Mr Hide shows no understanding of the difference between historical and contemporary claims. The Waitangi Tribunal is a venue for Maori not just to address the grievances of the past but also to air current issues. The Government might not always agree—and in fact does not have to agree—with the tribunal’s recommendations but it recognises the role that the tribunal has for Maori in balancing the different views of the treaty partners and proposing a way forward. In recent years the tribunal’s recommendations about the settlement process itself have been a very valuable tool. The tribunal’s recommendations have been endorsed by the Crown which has taken cognisance of them. Mr Hide’s bill removes the tribunal’s capacity to serve in that function. 
The Government is on record as stating that we believe that the vast majority of historical claims can be settled by negotiation within the next 15 years. I want to make that quite clear. The Government believes that the claims can be settled within the next 15 years but not in the fast-forward rapid way that is suggested by Rodney Hide. We are committed to that time frame and we are always looking at ways to improve the process for both the Crown and the claimants in order to help us achieve it. Mr Hide’s bill offers no ideas whatsoever as to how his artificial deadline of 5 years could be met. It gives absolutely no consideration to dealing with the inevitable mess of unsatisfied claimants and unfinished business that it will leave. This Government will happily consider any genuine proposal to increase the pace of settlements but not at the expense of their durability. 
We have already established a strong record of achieving settlements. This year we are aiming to have two bills that settle claims on the basis of fair final and negotiated settlements. They will be introduced into the House. We hope to sign two deeds of settlement in the coming months which will bring the total number of settlements signed by this Government to six. We are in discussions with more claimant groups than ever before and we look forward to the final settlement of their claims. Recently the Crown has recognised deeds of mandate for the important central North Island iwi of NgatiTuwharetoaTe Arawa Ngati Manawa and Ngati Whare. Terms of negotiations have been signed with Ngati Manawa and also with Ngati Whare. Those claims which will eventually settle over 150 individual treaty claims will present their own complexities in terms of the size of those groups and the forestry involved. We will work through those issues as quickly as we can but we will be respectful of the pace that claimants wish to proceed at. We will do that in good faith and with high hopes of reaching a final and durable settlement. 
That is what genuine progress in negotiation is all about and that is the way to progress a settlement situation. It is durable—it will last—and sustainable. If we want to put the past behind us we should do so on the basis of genuine reconciliation. I remind the House that basically we all want that—genuine reconciliation—so that there is no redress further down the track no coming back for a second go. We do not want a rush job that will come back to bite us in the future. 
I do not believe that Mr Hide’s assertion that a deadline for settlement is necessary to ensure that the pace of settlements is increased. I do not believe that by forcing settlements into an artificial time frame we will have the outcome of reconciliation and better race relations. I do not believe that this bill will result in the final resolution of treaty grievances. Therefore this Government will not be supporting Mr Hide’s bill and it will not support it going to the select committee. Kia ora tatou. Tihei mauri ora!