Mahuta Nanaia: Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 23 July 2014. Volume:700;Page:19492. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato):Tuatahi tēnei e mihi ana ki a koutou ngā iwi ngā pou o te rohe o Tāmaki-makau-rau. Nā koutou te kaha hei whakakotahi i raro i te maru o te kāhui o Tāmaki Makaurau kia haria mai tēnei kaupapa i mua i te aroaro o te Kāwanatanga arā te Pāremata. Nō reira nei te mihi maioha ki a koutou katoa tēnā koutou tēnā koutou. E te Minita tēnā koe mō tēnei wāhanga ki a mātou.[First of all I pay a tribute to you the tribes and pillars of Auckland. It was your courage to unite under the shelter of the Tāmaki Makaurau cluster to bring this proposal before the Government—namely Parliament. And so an affectionate tribute greetings and acknowledgments to you all. To you the Minister thank you for allowing us this part.]It gives Labour great pleasure to be able to support the third reading of the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau Collective Redress Bill. I want to acknowledge each of the 13 iwi that have come together under this particular settlement in what is an innovative example of what is possible. Might I say it may have had its challenges but to get to this point it could well be an example that other iwi and other towns might look to in terms of how to bring some common interests together.I want to acknowledge the Mayor of Auckland City Len Brown. Your leadership to steward through the statutory board in a way in which Māori can imprint on and have a voice in such a huge city is significant and should not be understated. I do want to acknowledge that this is a time of innovation and a time for change. We are in the period of Matariki—the beginning of things and the end of things. It is an opportunity to think about the way in which our great city might grow and thrive so that the iconic features that are in the city of Auckland can be celebrated so that the history of Auckland can be better understood by those who live there but certainly by tourists who visit Auckland City and also to provide a window for how to do things differently.It frustrates the heck out of me when I hear for example discussions around the Resource Management Act and such negative comments around the way in which Māori concerns are taken into account. It is not unreasonable when developers want to do things in Auckland City to get geotechnical reports but if you want to seek reports about how this particular development might impact on Māori heritage and values it is juxtaposed in such a negative space. I think that time needs to pass. We need to move through it. So what is happening with the Tāmaki Collective redress bill the Māori Statutory Board and the types of changes in Auckland City itself provide obvious tensions but will provide I think helpful learning points about how we as a nation can go forward taking into account the aspirations of Māori who want to contribute to the aspirations of New Zealand.I had not intended on taking too long a call on this third reading speech except to say: what a challenge. What a challenge it must have been to get 13 iwi together to come up with a model of management for some of the most iconic places in Auckland that are well renowned the names of which the Minister has talked about. What a challenge it has been to assure the broader Auckland community that this is a positive way of looking at how the future of maunga within Auckland can be better managed. What a challenge in terms of identifying a new governance structure and a commercial structure that could represent the collective aspirations of the iwi represented in this settlement but it has been achieved.Today’s third reading is really an opportunity for Parliament to look at the settlement in its totality—the consequences leading to such an approach but also the opportunities arising from it. I for one want to mention only two things that challenged us at the Māori Affairs Committee that were somewhat significant. One was regarding Watercare Services—no surprise to many. The ongoing thirst of Auckland for meeting the needs of growth for sustaining the thirsty Auckland if you like gets to a sharp point when you talk about infrastructure and providing water to the city. The type of debate that the select committee had around Watercare Service’s ongoing and future requirements was interesting in so far as this settlement was concerned. Were we to absolutely I guess embrace the debate that Watercare Services had there would have been a reverting to the status quo that Watercare Services would deal with the Auckland Council for its future needs and consenting processes.However we did not go that way. We were assured by the good representation of Paul Majurey I might add probably from his experience in this space that there was enough scope within the way in which the authority is intended to operate that the existing easements and the discussion around how future easements would happen would be able to be achieved under what was proposed in the bill. So we did not change it. We accepted Watercare had issues. We accepted future demand could be a prospect that might impact on areas covered in this particular settlement but that is a process and the process can be covered in the bill.The other thing that challenged us—this is probably more a broader point of principle and it came to a sharp point because we have got so many different iwi in this settlement—was place names. You will remember that a colleague of mine who has since left the House and is now in the Pacific challenged the thinking of us as Māori members that if we cannot name a place or consider that a place has a Māori name then perhaps we do not have any connection to it. I accept in part what he was challenging us to do which was decide on a name but many of the iwi will see that as we pursued information around what the challenges were here it was different histories and layers of time where there are two names a couple of names at least for the same place.We investigated whether the New Zealand Geographic Board could have three Māori names or two Māori names for the same place—all too difficult. So where there was an agreement on one name that is an easily achievable outcome. Where there were two names or so such as that for Mount Albert: Ōwairaka and Te Ahi Kā a Rakataura; Mount Roskill: Puketāpapa and Pukewīwī; Mount St John: Te Kōpuke and Titikōpuke—where those types of scenarios existed there was a process where the New Zealand Geographic Board could gazette two Māori names and it would be on the record so to speak but for official purposes it could not be recognised in what we commonly understand as dual naming.So maybe what this settlement has done in this instance is urge us to think through how going forward we might better capture what is intended which is a full telling of the New Zealand story. Auckland City over time has been flooded by a number of iwi. A number of histories have come into play and it has been flooded by a number of other people. But that should not prevent the accurate telling of our story and the accurate capturing of our names.I have taken something from the settlement in a positive way that if we could do anything we might in the future look at the New Zealand Geographic Board and how it accurately captures the names of our special places. I am under no shadow of a doubt that with a commitment to and an intensity of focus on what is in the best interests of the collective members under the settlement that has been presented to the House today good things can happen. Great opportunities are ahead but the biggest opportunity Mayor Len Brown is how we immerse our way of working through this type of model within the broader issues of Auckland City so that the city as a whole can benefit from the fruits of better engagement with iwi within the isthmus of Auckland. Nō reira ki a koutou katoa tēnā koutou tēnā koutou kia ora mai tatou.