Mahuta Nanaia: Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMahuta Nanaia: Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 11 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:11007. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato): Labour makes no apologies for opposing the first reading of Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill because it deserves to be put under a bright red-line test which Labour believes is necessary: (1) to ensure that the protection of whenua is at the heart of the bill and (2) to ensure that owners big or small no matter where they are throughout the country have their interests protected. And we will be vociferous in our attention to the detail. We could get carried away on the emotions but we will not because owners deserve a thorough look at the detail of this particular bill which we believe actually challenges some of the fundamental aspects of what Māori believe the protection of land is all about.Let me just point to a couple of things. There is a subtle change in language. In the bill that is being proposed there is a great emphasis on retention and utilisation. However at the heart of the Te Ture Whenua Māori Act 1993 the presumption was around protection albeit with a heavily framed role for the Māori Land Court but the presumption was about protection—two very different meanings if you care to look at the dictionary. We will be testing officials on this matter.We also believe that certain questions should be asked. Are the provisions of the bill weighted in favour of protection to ensure that disposition or sale or you know loss of land will not occur? If I was to take on board Marama Fox’s contribution it is absolutely not going to happen. Yet clause 140 which deals with disposition actually allows land to go to an engaged recipient or a governance body—no mention of whakapapa. So we will put a brightline test on those types of positions.The other areas where we have concerns are on decision-making thresholds and participation of owners. We would like to know whether there is an ability all through the process to re-enfranchise owners who may have previously been cut out of a process as promoted in the bill. It deserves attention because if we absolutely believe that our Māori connection to our whakapapa and to our whenua is fundamental to who we are—our sense of identity—then it deserves questions and we will ask them. We are not afraid to be challenged on that.We will also say “Be careful what you wish for” because this is a diminishing of the role of the Māori Land Court. Yes it is re-engaging owners to make decisions but we would like to know whether or not this is just a kick and a flick to the Māori Land Court and its role because it has built a judicial body of knowledge that is very helpful and which many people have to look to in terms of building a case to make their connections in terms of succession to land ownership and the like.I do want to comment briefly on the points made by Meka Whaitiri. There are a number of issues that are not addressed by the bill. The select committee will give due attention to that because if we are looking at fundamental barriers to utilisation rating and valuation of Māori land is absolutely necessary. Without a word of a doubt I have to follow the lead of my colleagues Meka Kelvin and Peeni because the great majority of interests affected by this bill are in their electorates. So we need to be sure and robust and give the absolute confidence to owners in terms of whether or not this bill actually achieves what it says it is going to. We have questions. We are not convinced. We do not believe it should pass the first test. We were concerned at the exposure draft and some of the omissions noted along the way as a result of consultation and concerns from people started to get slotted in.This bill deserves a whole heap of attention. It has undergone a number of iterations. The speaker for New Zealand First Pita Paraone made the comment around the reference to tikanga but no particular definition. I had another look at the bill as well. I could not see the definition in the interpretation clause. Again it is a simple point made by a colleague but it deserves to be addressed because again whether or not you would define tikanga and have it within the context of a bill is a question that deserves the attention of the select committee.We will not be criticised for politicising this issue because if members of the Māori Party wanted this issue to be totally non-partisan they would have consulted with all parties in the House prior to the exposure draft going out for consultation and they did not. They are politicising this issue; they are making this a wedge issue for Māori. We have demonstrated that we have been constructive through Te Pire mōTe Reo Māori. We will not be criticised for being political on Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill—it is far too important an issue. Owners deserve better answers than what they are getting from the Māori Party.JOANNE HAYES (National):Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I am pleased to stand to support this bill Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill. Te toto o te tangata he kai te oranga o te tangata he whenua. [The blood of man is sustenance the welfare of man is land.]The lifeblood of a person is food; the livelihood of a people depends on the land. For me this sums up Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill as outlined by the Minister for Māori Development in his speech today. He said that to Māori land is everything. It is land that identifies us as Māori. The mountains the rivers lakes and ocean coasts the forests are all our landmarks—landmarks of the origins of Māori in Aotearoa New Zealand. These can be heard in our mihi in our tauparapara along with our linkages to our tupuna.Since the original Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 was enacted much has happened—we know this. Much has happened in this House. There are a number of Treaty settlements that have gone through. There are the many many debates that have gone on in this House and people have come in from various iwi. They have come in and our whole process for Māori land has moved on. So too must an Act—one that will reflect that; a more robust Act that brings into it the various changes that have happened over time.But I have heard in my office the various dissentions around why this bill should not go ahead. We hear this from the benches on the opposite side opposing the bill. Some say that we are not ready. Some say that they do not like what is in it. That is what this whole process is about. This is about putting this bill here passing it through its first reading and bringing it into the select committee for the provision of submissions.I have listened to the many contributions tonight around the role of the Māori Land Court. My experience with the Māori Land Court was not a good one. I went with an iwi so they could put forward a proposal that they actually decided as an iwi to do with some Māori land. It was to do with the establishment of an education institution and they were stopped from doing that. It was through the Māori Land Court process that they were stopped from doing that. Today that building sits idle and decrepit. Nobody is looking after that building because the iwi cannot get to it. The bill that is going through its first reading today will actually help to resolve that for that particular iwi as the Māori Land Court moves into a different phase of its role and the Māori Land Service comes into being. This must be—it has to be—some relief for Māori landowners who have spent much of their time in the Māori Land Court fighting to utilise their land.As a member of the Māori Affairs Committee I do look forward to the many submissions on this bill from the many who attended those 70-odd hui. The Minister through his hard work and his diligence helped to make sure that we had as much input from whānau and hapū and iwi out there in our rohe throughout the country. It will be during this time when the submissions come to us and the many concerns are brought to us that the robust debate will be laid out in print for all of us to see. This will be the time—if the Opposition wants to put a “red line” or whatever it is test on it that is the time. I am pleased to stand here to support our Minister. He has done an amazing job.Ko au te whenua ko te whenua ko au.[I am the land and the land is me.] I commend the bill to the House.