Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
Heatley Phil: Maori Fisheries Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:620;Page:15600] 
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
: 
 I would like to touch on some issues of the bill as first introduced. The Fisheries and Other Sea-related Legislation Committee in its process heard from both individual Maori and from those coming as whanau hapu and iwi groups. They put issues of accountability to the committee in which there seemed to be two rules—one rule when it came to Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd Te PuteaWhakatupu Trustee Ltd and Te Wai Maori Trustee Ltd with a review period of 12 years for those overarching organisations yet another rule when it came to the mandated iwi organisations whose report back and accountabilities were quite strenuous. It was starkly obvious to us even before we heard from submitters that there was an issue of iwi having to be highly accountable to their members—iwi having to report back all the time cross their t’s and dot their i’s and have financial reports in all with very little flexibility—yet when it came to the overarching organisations such as Te Ohau Kai Moana Trustee Ltd Aotearoa Fisheries Ltd and the other trustees they did not have to meet those same criteria. In fact they had a review period only in 12 years’ time which was in a decade plus 2 years. That is phenomenal when one thinks about it. 
The select committee made some amendments—and National Party members were quite proud to make those amendments—particularly to Part 2 which included a provision in the constitution of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd for iwi to be able to table non-binding motions. So there was involvement there which is covered in clause 28. Clauses 26 70 and 83 cover the increase in the reporting requirements of those overarching groups. If members flick to those they will see the reporting obligations of Te Wai Maori Trustee Ltd in clause 83. Clause 70 deals with the reporting requirements of Te PuteaWhakatupu Trustee Ltd and clause 26 deals with the reporting obligations of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. Those reporting times had been 12 years but it seemed quite absurd to us that one would go for a decade plus 2 years before bringing clear accountability to those groups. 
Of course there was also an expanded role for Te Kawai Taumata to monitor their performance which is covered in clause 40. That particular group—that trustee or “electoral college” of Te Kawai Taumata—is able now through clause 40 to have much greater powers in terms of monitoring the performance of those overarching bodies. That will allow it to receive and consider reports and reviews on those entities and to take action through its powers to dismiss directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. 
So where we had a report back after a 12-year period for Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd now we have that time broken up into several groups of years and Te Kawai Taumata can consider reports and reviews on the entities under Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd’s charge. If it considers them and finds them wanting and serious enough it can actually take action now through its powers to dismiss the directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. Certainly it should be able to. In fact members will see in clause 40 that the sole role of Te Kawai Taumata is to appoint and remove directors of Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee Ltd. I of course have expanded that role through my Supplementary Order Paper.