te Heuheu Georgina: Maori Purposes Bill — In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Maori Purposes Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:636;Page:6971] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) 
: 
 Part 2 of the Maori Purposes Bill deals with amendments to the Treaty of Waitangi Act. The majority of submissions received that opposed the bill were in respect of this part. It deals with a closing date for submissions to the Waitangi Tribunal of historical claims. The date set is 1 September 2008. 
National supports this part and we certainly support the setting of a closing-off date for the lodging of historical claims. In fact if I recall correctly we were the first party to suggest this provision back in 2002 and it was part of our Treaty of Waitangi policy. The National Party having raised the issue early on—and now other parties see the sense in it—takes credit for the provision. But that is no surprise anyway given that the settlement process was largely kicked off by our party in the 1990s. 
Given that there were objections to this part I think it is very important that we state why we support it. Firstly we should be very very clear that we are talking about only the lodging of claims—the submission of historical claims to the Waitangi Tribunal. Historical claims are defined as encompassing claims relating to events occurring before 21 September 1992. That date has been properly chosen in my view because that was the date on which the Government of the day—again the National Government—under Sir Douglas Graham settled upon the principles to guide the settlement of Treaty claims. The intention of this provision is to provide certainty to not only the tribunal but also claimants around first of all what constitutes a historical Treaty claim. I understand that the Maori Party member Te Ururoa Flavell said yesterday in his report-back speech something to the effect that this is the first time that date had arisen. Indeed it is not. Back then in 1992 historical claims were deemed to be those occurring before 21 September 1992. 
The main reason for introducing a closing-off date is the issue around certainty—certainty for the tribunal certainty for Governments whoever the Government is and certainty for the claimants. My experience as a member of the Waitangi Tribunal was that the major tribal claim would be lodged well in advance—most were lodged in the 1980s. But in the way that the tribunal approaches and hears claims and I hope in the way that the Office of Treaty Settlements guides the Government in settling the claims there is always a possibility for claims—usually minor in nature though not insignificant to the parties involved—to arise in the course of hearings. I suggest that most historical claims are now known. 
I guess if the claims are not known then that puts a difficulty in the way of those planning for some end in sight to this process as to how they should plan for that time. If those claims are not known then it is extremely unlikely in my view—after sitting on the tribunal as a member some 10 years ago—that they would not become known anyway as part of the bigger claim. These minor claims would not necessarily constitute a claim by themselves but most historic matters would be revealed during the hearing of a claim. National supports this part and we think it is proper. 
Amendments are being proposed by both the Green Party and the Maori Party for other dates. I have looked at those amendments and National will not support them. None of them actually make sense in terms of the way the settlement process has proceeded. But I guess if one has never been in Government then sometimes one has a bit of difficulty in seeing the sense in some of these issues. No doubt my colleagues to the back of the Chamber will have something to say about that comment. When one is in Government one actually has to govern—that is the point—to the best of one’s ability in the best interests of all New Zealanders. 
Pita Paraone 
: What about when you’re in Opposition? 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU 
: In Opposition one can advocate the same principle—that is the point. Whether I am sitting over there or over here it is the principle that matters. The principle is that at some stage we need to have some forward-thinking about how we might bring this whole claims process to a logical and durable conclusion. In my view if one is in Government the only way to see a light ahead is to know what one is dealing with. For as long as there is no closing-off date for the lodging of claims we will never know what is ahead of us. That does not make for good efficient planning in Government. New Zealand First having been sort of in Government or perhaps in Government right now—whatever New Zealand First is—will have a sense of this anyway. New Zealand First was certainly in Government in 1996 in coalition with National so it will have a sense of the need to be able to plan to be able to see a light ahead and to be able to adjust the necessary resources in order to get that process working to a proper time frame. 
Of course when National is in Government in 2 years’ time it will put some proper resources into the Waitangi Tribunal because if there is a bit of a hole in the thing right now it is right there. The tribunal has been starved of funding under a Labour Government so it is no wonder that the tribunal sort of crawls along. We will make sure that the tribunal is properly resourced so that we can give claimants some confidence that their claims are moving along and so that they see the sense in there being some sort of finality to the process. That is what is happening with that. A statement in our report back basically says that in the interests of a more timely settlement of historic claims a closure date for the submissions of claim is warranted and we certainly support that.