Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:622;Page:17305] 
11.  
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
 to the  
Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations 
: Will the Government continue treaty settlements giving iwi preferential tender rights to aquaculture space; if so why is that when all iwi will get up to 40 per cent of new space under the Aquaculture Reform Bill anyway? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON (Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) 
: 
 Yes if there is a breach of the treaty and the outcome of negotiations is that the appropriate redress is a right of first refusal to coastal space. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Minister aware that 81 separate iwi are listed in the Maori Fisheries Act which means that possibly 81 iwi can line up for further aquaculture space from a pre-1992 settlement as well as getting up to 40 percent of new space under the reform bill and what does she have to say about 81 iwi lining up for more space? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I will take the member's word on the numbers but I think he is confusing the process post 1992 and pre 1992. The claimants for a historical breach are not determined by whether they are on the register of iwi that he referred to. 
Moana Mackey 
: Will every treaty settlement incorporate a right of first refusal to coastline provision? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No. There is no automatic inclusion of that clause. It will depend on the nature of the breach and the redress negotiated. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Which words in article 2 of the treaty give Maori preferential rights to aquacultural space and what clause in the 1992 settlement gives Maori preferential rights or tender rights over their fellow New Zealanders? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: The nature of the breach in any particular case obviously depends on its circumstances but normally those breaches are found to be in article 2 of the treaty. As to the second part of the question the whole point really is that it was omitted from that settlement and it became unfinished business as the record has shown. That is why this settlement was required. 
Phil Heatley 
: Does the Minister acknowledge that some of these 81 iwi will get 50 percent of aquaculture space based on 10 percent from pre-1992 settlements and up to 40 percent through the reform bill—up to 50 percent altogether—if so why should iwi get a 50 percent stake in an industry that is only 40 years old and cannot possibly be regarded as being protected by the treaty? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: The member makes the assumption that there is an automatic allocation under the historical breaches. It is a right of first refusal. In fact if Maori wish to buy more than that they would also be able to do so if there were a willing buyer and a willing seller at market rates. 
Stephen Franks 
: With reference to the Minister’s answer to my colleague exactly what record showed “unfinished business” until the Government revived this a year or so ago and exactly what words in the treaty give one race an entitlement in preference to their neighbours to something nobody owned or could own in 1840 or until a few years ago? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: If I understood the question correctly the answer is that the reason why the matters relate to Maori is that the treaty was negotiated with Maori; they were the people in New Zealand at the time. That is why there is “preferential treatment”. In terms of why and evidence which is what I think the member was asking about I am very happy to provide that evidence to the member in terms of statements made by Ministers at the time to the effect that this matter was not to be considered as part of the deed of settlement of fisheries. It was all just too difficult. As we know these problems do not go away. They keep on coming back because there is a legitimate grievance that is a breach that has to be addressed. It is this Government that cleans up the mess of the Governments in the past that did not have the courage to do so. 
Phil Heatley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I will be seeking leave to table deeds of settlement over and above the 40 percent given to them. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection to their being tabled? There is not. 
Documents by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Phil Heatley 
: I’ve got to list them. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has been given leave to table them. He asked to table them all I asked for leave and he has been granted it. 
Phil Heatley 
: Point of order— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the member asked for leave. He got leave. He has done it. He does not have to go any further. 
Phil Heatley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If you check the  
Hansard 
 you will see that when I raised a point of order and you called me I told you that I was going to ask for leave; I did not ask for leave. What is more when I do ask for leave I will be listing the date and what the document is briefly. I hope to get leave for that. As it is I have not asked for leave yet. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I took it that the member was asking for leave. I asked the House for leave and it was granted. 
Hon David Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In the answer the Minister just gave the House she said she was very happy to provide to the member Mr Franks evidence of documentation that would help us with this issue. I am wondering whether there is a procedure for that because the select committee has been asking for this information from the officials and to date it has not been made available. So the select committee would certainly find it useful if the Minister is prepared to table it. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is up to the Minister to do that if she wishes to. 
Phil Heatley 
: I seek leave to table the Ngati Tama settlement of 2001 the NgaiTahu settlement of 1998 giving preferential rights to 10 percent of allocated space— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thought I had already asked if there was any objection. 
Phil Heatley 
: No I haven’t asked— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection? There is. 
Phil Heatley 
: I seek leave to table the Ngati Awa settlement of 2002 giving Maori 5 percent of aquaculture space. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection? There is. 
Phil Heatley 
: I seek leave to table the Nga Rauru Kitahi and NgatiRuanui settlements giving an open-ended settlement of aquaculture space to Maori. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table those documents. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is an interesting situation. It appears to me that the member actually was anticipating asking for leave to table those documents when you first put it to the House. He then specified what he wanted and it was turned down. Am I correct in assuming that in fact once leave is given by the House it cannot be taken away and so he can still table the documents even though if we had known what it was he was asking for we would not have given to it him? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is as usual perfectly correct. I call question 12. [ 
Interruption 
] I have called the next question. It is obvious to me and it should be obvious to members of the House if they read the Standing Orders and listen to my rulings—they are pretty clear.