Hereora Dave: Third Readings 
Hereora Dave: Third Readings 
[Volume:636;Page:7024] 
DAVE HEREORA (Labour) 
: 
 I take this opportunity to take a call in the third reading of this Maori purposes legislation. As chair of the Maori Affairs Committee I intend to share some of the views formed by members in their deliberation and consideration of this legislation. 
I move toward the issues surrounding the validation of decisions and the concern raised by in particular National members about that validation being retrospective. I suppose that the questions we pondered on were to some degree about the fairness of those decisions given that the judge at the time did not realise he was making those decisions without the appropriate warrant and about whether there was justification to further that concern by sharing it with those affected by those decisions. There was quite a lengthy debate—and that is reflected in National’s view in the commentary—but the majority of members focused specifically on the fact that those decisions were done in good faith and that the issues from the subsequent validation which arose from those decisions that did affect people in the transfer of land have moved on since then. 
To open up that can of worms would have been too negative simply because at the end of the day the validation would give these people some certainty and enable them to continue with their lives without the disruption and possible costs that could otherwise result. I believe that the consensus of the committee concerning that issue—that we proceed under that bill to validate—was the proper one. 
I acknowledge that that part of the amendment increases the number of judges from eight to 14 it also clarifies the procedure and discretion of the Maori Land Court in relation to its jurisdiction under the Maori Fisheries Act and it provides for the Chief Judge duties to be carried out by the Deputy Chief Judge. There was some consensus from committee members in endorsing the position of that particular amendment. 
On the issues surrounding the cut-off date we received in all about 20 submissions. There were mixed feelings in relation to support and non-support of this particular issue. Quite rightly the matter of the cut-off date was a policy that Labour had led into the previous election with. The cut-off date for the submission of historical Treaty claims is 1 September 2008 and that gives us another 20 months’ lead-in. There is still a lot of time for iwi and groups to submit their historical claims. 
MetiriaTurei raised yesterday that she felt a better date would be 2050. But at the end of the day I think this policy is about setting up a time frame so that preparations can be made and claimant groups can be confident that their claim once it is heard has the appropriate historical data. I think if we left it until 2050 that would just be extending the time out unnecessarily. This part of the amendment is about getting to a point so that people can move on deal with their future and just get on with things. 
Let us be reminded that the provision does not prevent a historical claim submitted on or before 1 October from being amended in any way after 1 September 2008. I think that is a point to be raised. It is primarily designed to ensure that the claims are submitted before September 2008 but if there is any amendment that claimant groups consider beyond the date of 2008 they are still entitled to make those amendments. I think that will be helpful as we move into those changes. 
Another area of change is to do with the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act. Clause 27 of the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Amendment Bill amends section 20 by restricting the definition of pre-commencement space to include areas subject to permits for exclusive occupation of space for aquaculture activities including spat gathering but to exclude areas subject to permits for free gathering of spat. That had been an ongoing issue that was raised with the committee on many occasions and this amendment comes a long way towards addressing those concerns. 
Clause 22 of the Maori Fisheries Amendment Bill inserts a heading and new sections into the Maori Fisheries Act. These sections provide prospectivity for the adjustment of the recorded number of quota shares if there is a reduction in the number available through the application of section 23 of the Act. We heard quite an extensive submission from Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd in relation to the disparity caused by the Maori Fisheries Act in that based on the criteria their allocation to iwi was substantially reduced. There was a real need to make that adjustment to give some satisfaction that the iwi groups were getting their appropriate allocation. 
Throughout the discussion the matter was also raised in relation to the stocks of red crab that the definition for inner-coastal and outer-coastal needed to be addressed as well. Furthermore the amendments ensure that the legislation reflects the necessary quota changes and balances that up. So the validation on any applications made under section 157 of the Maori Fisheries Act by Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd before the commencement of the bill and any registration effected by the chief executive under section 152 must be treated as having been made or effected in compliance with the reduced number of quota shares provided for by the amendments made in the schedule. 
Finally I think it is appropriate that I acknowledge the work that committee members have exercised in their consideration of this legislation. It was good to see a committee that was genuinely working together to try to achieve the best outcome. I also acknowledge the quality advice that we heard from all officials and assistants. I commend these bills to the House.