Davidson MaramaMARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): Tēnā koe tēnā koutou. Where are we going? The Greens of course will be supporting the Māori Purposes Bill. The bill appears to be consistent with the Green Party principle of giving Māori organisations greater autonomy over their own affairs particularly from the Crown. It appears to remove the ministerial involvement in the governance of the Wī Pere Trust. For those and other reasons upholding the Green Party's commitment to Te Tiriti we will be supporting this bill. I want to take a short call. I just have a couple of main questions concerning the Supplementary Order Papers (SOPs). Minister Flavell I listened to your response regarding my colleague Meka Whaitiri and her SOP 205 which wants to retain the status quo with the Māori Land Court. Forgive me I am trying to make sure that I have caught up but it appears that a lot of the concerns about retaining the cultural knowledge and the institutional knowledge of whenua Māori are why the Green Party will be supporting Meka Whaitiri's SOP. You have it seems explained that actually the concerns have been taken care of in the amendments but then I note—and I am happy for the Minister to correct me—that even though the Māori Land Court will retain jurisdiction over issues relating to Māori freehold land interest the High Court still retains the jurisdiction to determine the lineal descent the whakapapa succession purposes and discussions. So we would still actually support Meka Whaitiri's SOP even though all Māori land is being held under the authority of the Māori Land Court. We would still argue and debate that Māori issues are also better held by the Māori Land Court because of the issue of tikanga relating to whenua. We would feel comfortable with the Māori Land Court retaining its jurisdiction because of issues relating to whakapapa. I am just making sure I have caught up on where the Minister has replied on that. So that quick clarity on the Minister's response to Meka Whaitiri's SOP would be appreciated.I did want to put on the record being from Te Rarawa that we of course will be supporting the catch-up SOP I guess SOP 234 the Minister's SOP which just wants to rectify that when the Te Rarawa settlements were put in place they had to make sure that they had their mandated iwi organisation for each iwi. Of course we want to support that and I want to put that on record. Now—yes I have 2 minutes—I could continue this but the Green Party did have a specific question. This is to do with land status. The bill I think removes the provision in the current Act deeming all land held by the trust to be Māori freehold land. This means I think that the trust may after this bill is passed own general land that would not be protected. I am just asking about that. General land that would not be protected as freehold land would be under compulsory acquisition from the Public Works Act. I am wondering then whether for example the public works amendment legislation should—sorry I will go back. I am wondering whether we need to consult with the Wī Pere Trust over whether it would prefer that general land held by the trust should also be protected from Public Works Act compulsory acquisition. Those were the main sorts of points at this stage that I would like to put to the Minister for clarity. Thank you.