Hon MITA RIRINUI (Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) on behalf of theMinister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations: I move, That the Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill be now read a third time. Otirā, kei te Kaihautū nā runga i tēnā tono, e tika ana kia huri atu ki a Ngāti Mutunga kua tae ā-tinana mai, mai i te marumaru o tō rātou maunga tītōhea a Taranaki. Hei aha? Hei whakarongo, hei tautoko i tēnei tā rātou pire mō tō rātou kerēme. Nō reira, e mihi ana ki a rātau, mihi ana ki te Whare. E whakaaro anō hoki ki a rātou kua whetūrangihia, ō rātou mate huhua, kua tomo atu, kua ngaro atu ki tua o te ārai. Nō reirā, Ngāti Mutunga tēnā koutou, nau mai haere mai.

• [An interpretation in English was given to the House.]

[Indeed, Mr Assistant Speaker, in taking that call it is apt that I turn to acknowledge the presence of Ngāti Mutunga having come here from the shadow of their barren mountain of Taranaki. And for what purpose? To listen and to support this bill of theirs about their claim. And so I greet them and the House. I also acknowledge those who have passed away, theirs and ours who have entered the void and are lost beyond the veil. And so greetings to you collectively, Ngāti Mutunga, welcome, welcome.]

I took a brief opportunity to acknowledge the presence in the gallery today of Ngāti Mutunga representatives who have come from Taranaki to listen to this, the third reading of their settlement bill. In so doing, I also acknowledge the many Ngāti Mutunga kuia and kōroua who are no longer with them, or with us, and the contributions they made to bring this very, very important settlement legislation to this point. I welcome Ngāti Mutunga representatives here today.

I also want to acknowledge the significance of the settlement legislation to Ngāti Mutunga. This bill brings to an end the longstanding and significant grievances of Ngāti Mutunga and settles all of its Taranaki-based historical Treaty claims. The historical wrongs committed by the Crown that are acknowledged in this legislation contributed to the loss of Ngāti Mutunga land and resources, and to the collapse of its social structures. The Crown’s breaches of the Treaty have had a devastating effect on the welfare, social, and economic development of Ngāti Mutunga. What happened to the people of Ngāti Mutunga was at the most serious end of the scale of the Crown’s breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi .

The historically based Treaty claims of Ngāti Mutunga relate mainly to the confiscation by the Crown of all of Ngāti Mutunga’s land following the wars in Taranaki. The effect of this on Ngāti Mutunga was severe. When members of Ngāti Mutunga iwi joined the peaceful settlement at Parihaka they were arrested, imprisoned, and endured harsh conditions including forced labour. I encourage all New Zealanders to read the historical account outlined in the Ngāti Mutunga deed of settlement. Stories such as those relating to Ngāti Mutunga are a tragic and shameful part of our history, but remembering them is essential in order to understand the relationship between Māori and other New Zealanders and the contribution Māori have made to the development of this country.

We must know and understand our history if we do not wish to repeat it. We must also seek to reconcile the damage caused to the Crown’s relationship with Ngāti Mutunga. This Government has set itself the goal of building a strong sense of national identity. This bill furthers that goal. The additional effort this Government has put into settling Treaty claims is now showing results. This is the second claims settlement bill to pass through this House this year, and a third bill is set for introduction later this year.

Ngāti Mutunga began negotiations with the Crown in 1996. The heads of agreement, setting out the basis for settling Ngāti Mutunga’s Taranaki-based historical Treaty of Waitangi claims, was signed on 24 September 1999. After signing the heads of agreement Ngāti Mutunga decided to suspend negotiations temporarily while it considered the best way forward for the iwi. In November 2002 Ngāti Mutunga re-engaged with the Crown to continue negotiations. A draft deed of settlement containing the Crown’s proposed settlement offer to Ngāti Mutunga was prepared and the approval of the iwi was sought. Forty-eight percent of eligible Ngāti Mutunga voters voted on whether to accept the Crown offer and 94 percent agreed to accept it. On 31 July 2005 the deed of settlement was signed.

The passage of the settlement bill represents the final steps of a long and arduous journey for Ngāti Mutunga to have its claims properly heard, accepted, and addressed. I acknowledge that it has been a difficult journey for Ngāti Mutunga to make. I commend the current membership of Ngāti Mutunga and the Ngāti Mutunga negotiators for negotiating in the utmost good faith and for demonstrating that they were willing to cooperate, and even to compromise, in order to reach an agreement.

I am pleased to acknowledge all of those from Ngāti Mutunga who have worked hard to make this day possible. I particularly want to acknowledge Bill Tuuta, who led Ngāti Mutunga to the heads of agreements stage but sadly passed away before negotiations resumed. I also wish to acknowledge those who undertook these negotiations at great personal cost to themselves to achieve this important milestone for their iwi. I acknowledge, too, the kaumātua and kuia who provided leadership and inspiration to the Ngāti Mutunga negotiators and to their wider iwi.

Like everyone else in this House, I wish all the best for Ngāti Mutunga, its elders, its descendants, the negotiating team, and the trustees of Ngāti Mutunga’s governance entity. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Mutunga—that is who they are—will soon begin the task of managing the settlement assets. I am certain that they will do so with the judgment, tenacity, skills, and commitment that they showed throughout the settlement process. I am also certain that with the benefit of Ngāti Mutunga’s leadership and the revitalisation of its mana and identity, future generations will receive a strong, enduring legacy because of the decisions made here today. I commend this bill to the House and thank Ngāti Mutunga. Kia ora.

Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) : E ngā mana, e ngā reo, e te tupuna maunga whanaunga, Taranaki, tēnā koutou i tēnei rā hōhonu.

[To the authorities, languages, and Taranaki, the ancestral and kindred mountain, greetings to you collectively on this auspicious day.]

I am pleased to support the third reading of the Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill. As a member of this august institution, and as a Māori New Zealander of Tūwharetoa, Te Arawa, and Ngāti Awa descent, I congratulate Ngāti Mutunga, in particular, and the Government on concluding the settlement of the historic grievances that form the basis of the bill that is now before us, which we, as parliamentarians—with the exception of only one party—are about to pass into law.

I make a comment about that one party, the ACT party, which will take its line of opposing all Treaty settlements. Of course, in the end, if a party is against everything and stands for nothing—especially for something as important as this bill—then that party will find itself reduced to two members in this House, and those members will have to either go dancing or be in the army. The reality is that matters such as those dealt with in this bill are important. The ACT party has shown no empathy for what we do in respect of these settlements. That situation would not be so bad if ACT proposed something different, but in all its years in this House—10, I think; the same period of time as those of us who came to Parliament in 1996—it has never proposed a different settlement model.

To come back to the matter in hand, I point out that it is important to emphasise the significance of the near-universal parliamentary support for this settlement. This bill represents the mighty step on the part of Ngāti Mutunga to finally make the decision to settle and to put the grievance behind them. But the settlement also sends a signal about the maturing of our nation, Aotearoa, and of our willingness as New Zealanders, in the end—because it has taken a long while—to do the right thing. I think that that is important. New Zealanders should be proud that in this country some of us regard these settlements as being so important that they form part of our national identity.

In respect of the settlement before us the Crown can, through the Government of the day—in this case, the Labour Government—and on behalf of all New Zealanders, admit to injustice and wrongdoing, apologise for it, and move to make reparation for it. Māori claimants—in this case, Ngāti Mutunga—are acknowledged for the grievance they have carried for such a long period, through generations, and they are relieved of that today. Hopefully, the words that were uttered by the people of Ngāti Mutunga who appeared before our select committee provided an opportunity for them to look forward and move on. We wish them all the best in that regard.

These grievances signify for most Māori the illusory—indeed, the discriminatory—nature of the so-called British system of justice. Until these claims are settled, most tribes would say that their tūpuna—their ancestors—signed up for the introduction of British laws and justice into this country in 1840, on the basis of the protection of tino rangatiratanga. But, of course, as we all know, the events that followed the signing of the Treaty were more about a nation that practised inequality of citizenship. That is a total injustice, for the circumstances that give rise to most, if not all, historic grievances are about the application of a different standard of citizenship to a certain section of our community. Some Māori would say that that injustice is still being applied. I would like to think that slowly but surely our system of justice is being seen to apply in an even-handed way.

In a nation that prides itself on being a modern democracy, it is an unacceptable state of affairs that these historic grievances are still on our books, and that is why it is National’s policy—and it has been since the 1990s—to place due importance on the conclusion of durable Treaty settlements. But I would add that today, in 2006, we urge the conclusion of more timely settlements. When we get into Government in 2008 we will certainly be looking to put a little bit more vigour, a lot more passion, and a lot more commitment into having these grievances cleared off our books so that we all, as New Zealanders, can go forward.

Historic settlements are only a beginning. They take us back to the supposed “level playing field” of 1840. However, the fact that two cultures of a vastly different nature gave certain undertakings to each other meant that it was always going to be a bit questionable as to whether the playing field was even. But the intentions were sincere, I think, and I am proud of both our British and Māori antecedents. If the Treaty’s purpose was only to put things right that had gone wrong, then we are attributing to our British antecedents a deception of the most significant magnitude, and to our Māori tūpuna a lack of either the wit or understanding to make a judgment on what they should have done. Māori signed the Treaty and ceded sovereignty, but in return they expected certain guarantees to be honoured. The last 20 years have seen our nation working through those guarantees, and endeavouring to understand them and give life to them in these settlements.

I pay special tribute to Sir Doug Graham and the Rt Hon Jim Bolger because I think they had enormous courage in the early 1990s to develop a platform for settling these injustices. If someone in 1980 had said National would be the party to develop a platform for settling these injustices, some people may not have believed that person. So I am very proud to be part of the party that had the courage to develop that platform. It took long enough to do so, I know, but that is why it is important to acknowledge the contributions of Sir Doug Graham, Jim Bolger, and their colleagues of 1992—the year that marked the first of the big settlements.

I join with Minister Ririnui today in wishing Ngāti Mutunga all the best. I congratulate their leaders, including those who are considerably younger than I am. I acknowledge them because I think they have done extremely well.

Before I finish I would like to raise one issue. I understand that yesterday in the Committee of the whole House my colleague Chris Finlayson had a Supplementary Order Paper around the request by Ngāti Mutunga for the Crown to enable them to use legislation to effect a liquidation of their existing iwi representative entity and to replace it with a new one. They were denied that request. I can understand their strong feelings about the issue, given that this House has seen the same thing happen in previous settlements, namely the Waikato Raupatu Claims Settlement Act, the Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act, the Te Runanga o Ngati Awa Act 2005, and, more recently, the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act. We must remember that those Acts, apart from the Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act, were largely completed by a National Government. I would like to think that when we are in Government in 2008 my colleagues will give serious thought to this matter, because not being able to replace the iwi representative entity puts Ngāti Mutunga at a huge disadvantage and to enormous cost, even though a very simple solution is available to them.

I am very proud to take part in this debate. I am very proud to see this bill pass through its third reading this afternoon. Again I congratulate Ngāti Mutunga. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa.

DAVE HEREORA (Labour) : I take the opportunity to contribute to the debate in the third reading of the Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill. As chair of the Māori Affairs Committee that processed the bill I want to revisit the question raised yesterday by the member Chris Finlayson surrounding the matter that Georgina te Heuheu has just raised. It is important to apply some clarity because, at the end of the day, it is about giving some certainty to the process. To do that I want to recall the commentary in the bill itself. It states: “On 19 July 2004, the proposed settlement package was approved by Cabinet. On 14 December 2004, the Iwi Authority and the Crown initialled a deed of settlement. Following ratification, the deed of settlement was signed on 31 July 2005.” This is the bit I am leading to: “The governance entity structure was also ratified at this time. On 21 December 2005 the Ngāti Mutunga governance entity Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Mutunga, was established.”

The issue raised yesterday was surrounding the information or advice that the select committee had received from parliamentary counsel and the Office of Treaty Settlements. There was some reference to the commentary we had adopted; that the commentary was, in effect, incorrect in relation to the advice that we had received.

I thought that again it was important to revisit exactly what the commentary said so that we can have on record confirmation of whether, indeed, the matter is correct. It reads: “The Office of Treaty Settlements advised us that amending the bill to provide for the disestablishment of the iwi authority and the establishment of the post-settlement governance entity was not feasible. The Parliamentary Counsel Office advised us that amending the bill to disestablish or establish private trusts would be very unusual and could have implications for previous settlements. They told us that establishing a new governance entity is a private matter. Settlement legislation addresses matters necessary to achieve the settlement which cannot be achieved with certainty under normal (non-legislative) processes. Although settlement legislation has been used in association with private trusts to the extent that the trusts are made perpetual instead of being subject to the rules that limit the life of a trust, the Crown will not use government legislation to establish a legal entity to receive and manage settlement assets.”

I find that that part of the commentary, for me, clarifies the advice that we received from the Office of Treaty Settlements and Parliamentary Counsel, confirming that it cannot be done through the process of this bill. So I think it is important to add some clarity to that matter, particularly for the members of the Māori Affairs Committee who spent a lot of time making sure to get this process right.

From there I would also like to look at the historical aspects of the bill, because I think it is important to give that some acknowledgment—acknowledgment of the wrongs committed by the Crown and acknowledged in the legislation, which contributed to the loss of Ngāti Mutunga land, resources, and social structures. The Crown’s breaches of the Treaty have had a devastating effect on the welfare and the social and economic development of Ngāti Mutunga. What happened to the people of Ngāti Mutunga was at the most serious end of the scale of Crown breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The historical Taranaki-based Treaty claims of Ngāti Mutunga relate mainly to the confiscation by the Crown of all Ngāti Mutunga’s land following the wars in Taranaki. The effect of this on Ngāti Mutunga was severe. When members of the Ngāti Mutunga iwi joined the peaceful settlement at Parihaka they were arrested and imprisoned, and endured harsh conditions, including forced labour. I thought it was important to give some acknowledgment to the historical part of this debate on this bill.

From there I think also that it is necessary to talk about the negotiation, because, obviously, the negotiation is the area where one finds whether there will be a settlement. Ngāti Mutunga began negotiations with the Crown in 1996. The heads of agreement setting out the basis for settling the Ngāti Mutunga Taranaki-based historical Treaty of Waitangi claims were signed on 24 September 1999. After signing the heads of agreement they decided to suspend negotiations temporarily while they considered the best way forward for the iwi. In November 2004 Ngāti Mutunga re-engaged with the Crown to continue negotiations. A draft deed of settlement that contained the Crown’s proposed settlement offer to Ngāti Mutunga was prepared, and the approval of the iwi was sought. Forty-eight percent of eligible Ngāti Mutunga voters voted on whether to accept this Crown offer, and 94 percent agreed to accept it.

On 31 July 2005 the deed of settlement was signed. The passage of this settlement bill represents the final steps of a long and arduous journey for Ngāti Mutunga to have their claims properly heard, accepted, and addressed. I acknowledge that it has been a difficult journey for Ngāti Mutunga to make.

To that end I would like to move on to some acknowledgments, particularly to Ngāti Mutunga, and the spirit of cooperation that they have shown and exercised through the negotiation process. I recall when Ngāti Mutunga were giving evidence to the select committee the position that they put very clearly to us. That position was that they adopted a pragmatic view, and the reason for adopting that pragmatic view was to ensure that they were able to arrive at a settlement that they could accept so that there were no barriers put in place and they could, as an iwi, move on. So I acknowledge the manner and the spirit of cooperation that they adopted, and also acknowledge the committee members for their involvement and participation throughout the process. I think it is necessary to say that the advice and help from the Office of Treaty Settlements and the Parliamentary Counsel Office must be acknowledged also.

In ending, I would also like to congratulate Ngāti Mutunga not only on their participation and involvement, but also on the opportunities that they now face, once this legislation is put in place.

Hon TAU HENARE (National) : I seek leave to table an amendment to the Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill: first, to dissolve the Ngāti Mutunga Iwi Authority; and, second, to transfer the assets and liabilities with regard to taxes and duties—final report of the Ngāti Mutunga Iwi Authority.

Madam SPEAKER: The member has sought leave of the House. Is their any objection? There is objection.

METIRIA TUREI (Green) : E ngā manuhiri tūārangi, ngā kuia me ngā koroheke, ngā tuakana me ngā tungāne, koutou ngā uri o Ngāti Mutunga kua tae mai nei ki te tautoko i tēnei kaupapa o tēnei rā, nau mai, haere mai, whakatau mai rā.

[To the visitors from afar, the elderly women and menfolk, older siblings and brothers, and to you, the descendants of Ngāti Mutunga who have arrived here to support this matter today, welcome, welcome, and alight here.]

The Greens are pleased to support the Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill at the third reading. We want to acknowledge the very hard work of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Mutunga in negotiating the settlement for its people. We believe that it has demonstrated real, genuine leadership in dealing with both the Government and the Office of Treaty Settlements in this process. We specially want to congratulate the kuia and kaumātua of Ngāti Mutunga for all of their hard, hard work over many, many years. That hard work has meant that the iwi and the rūnanga were able to take on this challenge and succeed. I do not doubt for a minute that we all understand and recognise that all the achievements that we make now are based on the work that has been done in the past—the strength of our elders in keeping these issues alive, so that we can take them just a little step further.

When Ngāti Mutunga came to the hearings at the Māori Affairs Committee, what was most obvious from their submissions and discussions with us was the desire to put this process behind them, so that they could properly plan for their collective future. Their whole approach to the settlement was about the future opportunities that the settlement gives them. I do not mean just the financial and land resources, but the sense of having worked through what is a very difficult, long, expensive process that, in the end, has strengthened them. They said to us that their Ngāti Mutungatanga was strengthened, that their unique identity within Taranaki was strengthened, and that their collective work had reconnected the ahi kā with Ngāti Mutunga across the country. Their work had built a collective understanding of their history, with all of the past hurts that that includes—that is true, and that is difficult—but also with all of the joy and passion that comes from being Ngāti Mutunga. They told us that this work had made them much stronger as a people. This is not the most common experience post-settlement, but it was theirs, and it means that they are perfectly placed to build a strong and successful future based on their Ngāti Mutungatanga, based on their successes, and based on their desire for a strong, healthy, well future for their people.

I will conclude by saying that the Greens are very pleased to have played even a small part in recognising and witnessing this process, and we wish Ngāti Mutunga all the very best for their future. Kia ora.

PITA PARAONE (NZ First) : Tēnā koe e te Kaiwhakawā, tēnā hoki tātou o te Whare nei. Kei te tautoko ngā mihi ki a Ngāti Mutunga i a koutou i tū i mua i a au.

Ngā mihi hoki ki a koutou ngā kaumātua, ngā kuia, ngā rangatira katoa i tau mai i roto i te Whare i te rā nei, koutou hoki i kawe nei i te kaupapa e whakatakoto mai i mua i a tātou ināianei. He mihi hoki ki a koutou e noho ana i raro te maunga tapu o Taranaki e whakarongo ki ngā kōrero whakamutunga kia whakatau atu i te pire nei.

Engari i mua i te haere tonu o ngā kōrero, e mihi hoki ki a koe e kara, e Jamie me tō rōpū mō ngā mahi pakeke, ngā mahi whakahirahira i mahia koutou ki te whakaotingia ngā mahi taumaha i hoatu tō iwi i runga ōu pokohiwi.

I te rā nei ka hoki mai te pire nei mō te wā tuatoru i runga te huarahi e kawe mai tēnei kaupapa.

• [An interpretation in English was given to the House.]

[Greetings to you, Madam Speaker, and to us also of this House. I endorse the acknowledgments of Ngāti Mutunga by those who stood before me.

My greetings to you the elders, the elderly womenfolk, all the chiefs who have arrived in the House today, those of you responsible for the matter that is before us at this moment. I also acknowledge those of you at home beneath the hallowed mountain of Taranaki listening in to the closing speeches that are to settle this bill.

Before I continue, I offer my congratulations to you, Jamie, and your team on the hard work and tremendous efforts undertaken by you collectively to complete such an onerous task that your people placed upon your shoulders.

This bill comes back for its third reading in much the same way that brought this matter here. ]

Madam Speaker, before I continue I want to acknowledge your presence, because I think history is being made in that I think you are the first person to, as Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, initiate a Treaty claim, and also to sit in the Chair, in your position as Speaker, to oversee the progress of the legislation to its conclusion. Quite clearly, history will show the uniqueness of your position at this very time.

On behalf of New Zealand First it is my pleasure to participate in the third reading of this Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Bill; a bill that provides a chapter in the history of Ngāti Mutunga that evidences the settlement of their claim arising from breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi by the Crown. This bill is intended to help bring some closure to events of the 19th century that were manifested in actions commenced on 5 September 1866. Such events, as I have already stated during earlier debates, saw the people of Ngāti Mutunga, and, of course, other iwi of Taranaki, subjected to one of the darkest hours in our history as a nation. It is significant to reiterate the comments of the Waitangi Tribunal during its consideration of this claim: “There may be no [other claims] where as many Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time …”.

It is important to say at the outset that any amount of apology and compensation cannot truly amend the events of the past. Having said that, the passing of this legislation today will, however, provide some redress for the people of Ngāti Mutunga. To this end, I say that the offer that was made by the Crown and was accepted by the negotiators on behalf of Ngāti Mutunga is of a quantum such that it raised concerns within the Māori Affairs Committee, which considered this bill. I say this, again, in the context of the view expressed by the Waitangi Tribunal: “Generous reparation policies are needed to remove the prejudice to Maori, to restore the honour of the Government, to ensure cultural survival, and to re-establish effective interaction between the Treaty partners.” I suppose that the comments made recently by the chairman of the tribunal that suggested that the total amount of all the settlements, once concluded, would rise to about $3 billion should not have come as any surprise.

This bill will bring finality to the claims made by Ngāti Mutunga—that is, the descendants of Mutunga—and it follows the consideration of submissions made to the Māori Affairs Committee. Compared with other settlements of this nature, I ought to say that the submissions received on this bill were, in the main, of a supportive nature. The only concern expressed was that of the local body, which was concerned about the fee simple of a reserve that is currently its responsibility being vested in Ngāti Mutunga. I should say that this support was further evidenced by the iwi ballot to accept the negotiated settlement and the new body to receive the proceeds from this settlement. Although the agreement was not as strong as we all would like to see, the fact is that people were given the opportunity to participate in the process, and if they chose not to, then that should not be a reflection on the ability of the negotiators to advance this settlement.

The question of a new entity to receive the proceeds from this settlement raised some discussion during the Committee stage, particularly with regard to having it included in this bill. I think that the essence of the intent of this was articulated in a point of order raised by a member from National. I am disappointed that it could not proceed any further, and I ought to say that the only reason why it did not proceed was a technicality. The saddening part was that it was supported by the claimants themselves.

During the hearing of submissions, representatives from Ngāti Mutunga—although having completed a deed of settlement, entered into negotiations, and accepted the settlement with the Crown to be fair in the circumstances—expressed some disquiet about elements of the final settlement. The source of this disquiet included the formula used by the Crown negotiators to arrive at the quantum that was used to reach this settlement. In the view of Ngāti Mutunga, the total area of land that was originally confiscated amounted to 150,000 acres. However, the settlement is based on a much lesser amount, and is drawn from Sim Commission evidence and findings—the source of information in developing this quantum offer. The Office of Treaty Settlements might want to review the approach it takes with future settlements, given the comments and the lessons we have learnt from this particular settlement.

Another point of disquiet was the apparent reluctance to provide the claimants with the full formula used to arrive at the quantum for this claim. Although I accept the explanation given by the Office of Treaty Settlements to the select committee, I think that the time taken to address that particular issue could be minimised if, in fact, the formula was provided to the claimants during the negotiations. However, we also found that, in ascertaining this formula, the size or population of an iwi contributed to the overall quantum for each claim. Notwithstanding the extent and the seriousness of the breaches of the Treaty, if an iwi is of small numbers, then that contributes to the size of the settlement. Given the small size of this iwi against the amount of land confiscated and its commercial value, one can easily see Ngāti Mutunga’s position. Also, if any credence is to be given to the recent comments of the chairman of the Waitangi Tribunal, this becomes an issue for future settlements.

I conclude by making reference to my party’s concern about the inclusion of references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Looking at the bill, I see that reference is made to breaches of the Treaty and its principles. I suggest that not including any such reference to the principles of the Treaty would make no difference to the need to settle claims such as this one.

In conclusion, I wish the people of Ngāti Mutunga all the best for the future, and also say to this House that a lot of members here will never appreciate the responsibility that has been put on the young shoulders of Jamie Tuuta and his whanaunga by the people of Ngāti Mutunga. In years to come people will be critical of the size of this settlement. They will be critical of the process that was taken. In terms of Māoridom, Jamie and his descendants will have to bear the brunt of this.

Hiahia ana ahau ki te mihi atu ki a rātou ngā manaakitanga o Te Runga Rawa kei runga i a koutou mō ngā rā kei te heke. Nā reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou huri noa ki tēnei o tātou Whare. Kia ora mai anō tātou.

[I want to extend the blessings of The Almighty Above upon them for the future. So greetings to you and to us throughout this House of ours; once again, greetings.]

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) : Ko te tītōhea ka mēngiatia he puna koropupū ahakoa tukitukia e te poaka. E kore e mimiti, ka koropupū, ka koropupū, ka koropupū.

[The land, even though it has been made barren by uprooting by pigs, is like a pool that continues to bubble up. It will not diminish but will continue to bubble up.]

Tītōhea makes reference to a free-flowing spring whose flow, despite being defiled by pigs, will not diminish. Indeed, it wells up and gushes forth, in spite of the pollution and the filth that surround it. This kōrero is extremely appropriate today.

Ngāti Mutunga nō koutou tēnei kōrero. Kei te mihi te Pāti Māoriki a koutou, Ngāti Mutunga, mō tā koutou māia ahakoa tukitukia e te hau, e te ua, e te pū, e te raupatu, e te muru o te whenua, tēnā koutou katoa. Hara mai me ngā mate, hara mai me te raukura.

[This is about Ngāti Mutunga. The Māori Party commends you for the courage and perseverance to withstand the devastations caused by elements of nature, land wars, confiscation, and loss of lands, for being so resolute despite being battered about by the elements, the musket, conquest, and confiscation of land; greetings to you all. Welcome with your grievances and plume.]

Today we commend Ngāti Mutunga for the courage and perseverance to withstand the devastation of raupatu in the context of confiscation and colonisation. Ko koutou ko ērā atu iwi, hapū o Taranaki, me kī, ko ngā iwi o Tokomaru, Kurahaupō o Aotea waka.

[Let us say that you and other tribes and subtribes of Taranaki are those of the Tokomaru, Kurahaupō, and Aotea canoes.]

The Māori Party is mindful of the analysis of the Waitangi Tribunal in the 1996 Taranaki Report. That report described the context of Taranaki as beyond comparison, stating: “There may be no others where as many Treaty breaches had equivalent force and effect over a comparable time.” Not many in this country will know that military action in Taranaki, on behalf of the Crown, did not end until the invasion of Parihaka in 1881, or that conflict with the use of arms was spread not over one, not over two, but over 40 years of violence, and that Taranaki experienced relentless attacks on the people who placed their faith in the prophets of peace, Te Whiti, Tohu, and Tītokowaru.

But the tribunal went further to suggest that while the pain of war may soften over time, the real issue that remains the central problem is the relationship between Māori and the Government. The passive resistance of Taranaki iwi and hapū was punished with land deprivation, the burning and ransacking of homes, the destruction of crops, and the assault of the pen. These matters are well recorded in our history. Special legislation was enacted to deny all rights of trial. Several hundred of Taranaki Māori were sent to jail indefinitely, to places like Otākou—to Dunedin. The imprisonment and sedition charges laid against their leaders were intended to annihilate the movement, and to force the people to retrench from their position and to retreat into submission. E kore e mimiti te puna, ka koropupū, ka koropupū, ka koropupū tonu. The spring will never diminish. It will continue to bubble.

And so it is that Ngā Uri o Ngā Tūpuna o Ngāti Mutunga are here today. It would benefit members of this House to travel to Taranaki, to places like Parihaka and Urenui, to sit in the whare puni of Taranaki, to understand the depth of feeling about confiscation, about the locking away of their leaders. The songs and the haka of Taranaki capture that history. Piki mai Pungarehu, ka tangi mai te piukara—climb the hill at Pungarehu and one can hear the sound of the bugle. E rere rā te motu nei ki roto koia o Parihaka.

[This part of the land must seek refuge at Parihaka.]

Reference is made to the arrival of soldiers at Parihaka. Despite the histories that have been told and the waiata that are sung, the mamae must remain in the hearts of the Ngāti Mutunga people.

So to assist the House to understand the context, I thought I might try to use a role play to convey the effect of the deed of settlement in which the Crown and Ngāti Mutunga agree to a full and final resolution of all Ngāti Mutunga historical claims. For the purposes of this role play I will enlist the support of the Hon Mita Ririnui. Our key prop in this scenario is a fictitious house belonging to the honourable member. For the purposes of the exercise it has been valued at $250,000. Think about this. Two years ago, when the Māori Party was getting established, we had to take Mr Ririnui’s house off him to set up the national headquarters of the Māori Party. We did this in the best interests of the nation. That is what we are here for—the best interests of the nation.

With the benefit of hindsight and on careful reflection we realise that it was not really fair, so we are prepared to fess up and suggest that it would be in the best interests of the nation that we, the Māori Party, acknowledge that we were at fault and that we are willing to enter into a process of negotiation to make amends for the confiscation of his property. We hope that Mr Ririnui will agree to the settlement, which we can both accept as fair in the circumstances. We believe that it would be fair in the circumstances to offer Mr Ririnui a settlement price of approximately 1 percent of the value of the house—a value that we believe represents the value that will stand for at least another 25 years. We are here, with our cheque in hand for the sum of $2,500.

We based this amount on an evaluation we got from a commission that we have used in similar situations. We understand that Mr Ririnui has another valuation, different from the one that we prefer. Aroha mai, we will stick with our one, thank you. Unfortunately the Māori Party is unable to pay any more for the house because our long-term goal is to expand into other areas. We need to consider the overall quantum, in order that we are able to afford to take the houses of other Ministers in due course.

We are, however, always willing to be reasonable and, indeed, our generosity knows no bounds in that we are prepared today to table an apology for having to take his house for the best interests of the nation. I am sorry, but we did want the member’s house. We know that the Ririnui whānau has a vested interest, as such, in the house, through the Ririnui family trust, and, ever wanting to be helpful, we suggest that Mr Ririnui disestablishes the family trust and transfers all of the assets and functions of that body to another post-settlement governance body—well, actually our offer is conditional upon this.

Fairness, however, must always operate within fiscal constraints. So we further direct that we set up a board, to which we appoint some representatives to ensure that the new post-settlement governance body will be accountable for the settlement funds—remember, they are $2,500. We would like Mr Ririnui to let everyone know in his whānau and take a roll-call at all of his meetings, so that we can trust that they have participated in the process. His children and grandchildren have a vested interest in knowing what kōro and kuia are doing. Everyone can have a vote for the $2,500—the 1 percent. Any costs involved shall be met from Mr Ririnui’s own resources. The $2,500 that Mr Ririnui will receive for his house shall be put into a trust fund, and we have some helpful suggestions about how that fund can operate.

We believe that this settlement is fair in the circumstances, and we will celebrate with Mr Ririnui and his whānau as we take the nation forward. To prevent any further problems we recommend that this settlement is full and final. There will be no coming back. We thank Mr Ririnui for the spirit of cooperation.

The question is whether anyone would sign it—$2,500. If it was a “take it now or go to the back of the queue” offer, I suppose some probably would. The Māori Party has consistently raised our concerns that the Treaty settlement process is fundamentally flawed. On the one hand we respect the right of iwi to do as they will, provided that people know what is happening. This is tino rangatiratanga. On the other hand, the process, the quantum, is wrong. We say that the Crown will go to whatever means it can to achieve settlements—settlements that stand the risk of creating divisions in whānau, hapū, and iwi.

Thankfully, this was not the case with Ngāti Mutunga. Settlements resolved with a quantum that Ngāti Mutunga humbly described as modest, we describe as outrageous. The quantum is not negotiated. A cash settlement of $14 million, with $400,000 of that already set aside for negotiation costs, does not cut it when one considers the travesty of justice experienced in Taranaki. Ngāti Mutunga were required to carry the bulk of the cost themselves.

A lot of questions remain unanswered, one of which is why Taranaki, which suffered the worst excesses of war and raupatu, had to struggle to find resources to undertake settlement. We welcome Ngāti Mutunga back, and some time in the future, when circumstances may indeed be fair, we will speak to Ngāti Mutunga about how justice can not only be seen to be done but in fact be done. Ngāti Mutunga, tell your children and their children that the Māori Party has extended that invitation. Tērā te wā ka hoki mai koutou ki konei.

[A time will come when you collectively will return here.]

This is an invitation that we will give as a priority when the time comes for us to form a Government in the future. Kia ora tātou.

Hon MAHARA OKEROA (Labour—Te Tai Tonga) : Ka hoki mai ngā kupu waiata ki ahau e noho mai i rongo atu i ngā kōrero kua whakaputa mai a taua tangata e noho mai rā. E tū kau ana rā Taranaki te uru. Kua riro rā ngā manu e noho i runga e. E toru rā ngā waka o Taranaki, ko Tokomaru, ko Kurahaupō, ko Aotea. E tū kau ana ngā pou o Parihaka ka mihi atu . Mihi mai rātou ki a koutou e noho mai i runga rā, mai i Waitara te tangata, mai i Te Whiti te Pouwhenua, mai tētehi atu o ngā tau heke e tino kaitautoko. Ā, me koe hoki e teUpoko o te Whare nei e noho mai i runga i tō torona. Ka meatia mai taua tangata mai a Tai Tokerau e mihi mai ki a koe, tō whakaarahi mai i tēnei pire mai i te tīmatatanga tae noa atu ki te mutunga. Ahakoa ngā piki me ngā heke e riro mai i runga a ngā uri nei, ka haere tonu te waka kua whakatūtuki mai pea i te kaupapa ahakoa kua riro ai a roimata e hupē, i runga i te kaupapa o te auwētanga i te ngarotanga o ō rātou nei whenua katoa.

• [An interpretation in English was given to the House.]

[The words of a song came back to me as I sat listening to that member over there who has resumed his seat. Taranaki stands barren in the west. It is bereft of bird life. Taranaki has three canoes: Tokomaru, Kurahaupō, and Aotea. I acknowledge the pillars of Parihaka, Tohu and Te Whiti, and the legacy that they left. I extend my greetings to you sitting up there in the gallery. I acknowledge you as well, Madam Speaker, and endorse the acknowledgments by that member from the north. You played a significant role in this bill from the beginning, and continue to do so in its concluding stages. Despite the highs and lows upon these descendants, the grief shed, and the grievances over lands lost through confiscation, the journey of the canoe towards a settlement continues.]

I will make a brief reference to the previous speaker, Te Ururoa Flavell. In spite of what I would call the grievance rhetoric, and in spite of what I heard about tino rangatiratanga, manaakitanga, me ērā atu o ngā kaupapa hōhonu ki tā te whatumanawa a Māori, [sovereignty, respectability and other such matters of deep significance to Māori,] nowhere in that speech did I hear, and I could stand to be corrected, that member, as a representative of the Māori Party, support this bill. I find that to be hugely significant; that a party representing a certain sector of our population is not stating or articulating support for an iwi who exercise their own tino rangatiratanga in making their decision about where they want to go in the future. I am not concerned about waiting for invitations in the 22nd century—we will probably have developed scales by then and learnt how to swim underwater. My concern is about the here and now.

In spite of the rhetoric, if we are not clear in our agreement in front of the konohi of the people about where we sit, then we should not be here. This is a major, significantly critical occasion on which to show a cohesiveness and a collective will to allow an iwi to go forward into the future. That is what this is about, and if we are not going to be upfront about that, then we should not be here. We should not use this stage of campaigning and articulating tino rangatiratanga, manaakitanga, tiakitanga, me ēra atu o ngā tanga katoa [sovereignty, respectability, protection, and all those other “tanga” things] if, when the time comes to exercise it, we are not sufficiently courageous to do so in front of our people.

The honourable Minister Mita Ririnui made reference to people who are not here, to people kua whakawairua mai, [who have passed away spiritually,] and I thought about that statement over time. I would also like to make a reference to the whole collective of those people who are not here and who cannot be here. Ka rongo atu rātou i ō rātou nei taringa ki te tangi mai, karanga mai, ā, ngā māreikura.

[With their own ears they hear the laments and calls from female supernatural beings.]

In particular, in my time, I make reference to Hāmiora Raumati, a koroheke who for 40 long, long years—members opposite talk about 9 long years; well, they are going to get another 3 years, and then it will be 12 long years—sat on the Poari Matua Māori o Taranaki and spent most of those 40 years, along with those other kaumātua, wāhine, and tāngata, finding a way forward to get some satisfaction for what every speaker has spoken about, which is the confiscation of our land. I was fortunate to be able to sit with Hāmiora and others as they told the history of their sufferings in auwētanga. Rātou katoa mai i Paranīnihi ki Waitōtara tae noa atu ki Taipake. [grievances. All of them from Paranīnihi to Waitōtara, including Taipake.] One statement was made, which was probably made in terms of a prophecy. It goes like this. Nōu te pāhua tuatahi anei te kōrero a Te Whiti mā ki a rātau rā, ngā tuatara. Anā, mā mātau pea te pāhua whakamutunga. He aha te tikanga o aua kōrero? He aha te tikanga aua kōrero poropititia e rātau?

[You plundered first, was what Te Whiti said to them, the reptiles. Perhaps the final plunder will be by us. What did those statements mean? What did those predictions by them mean?]

Maybe we are starting to see that there could be some elements, some threads, and some strands of that prophecy, because they have had the courage to take the waka Tokomaru forward. I do not quite agree with what the honourable member Pita Paraone said, when he referred to the tino taimaha rawa atu i runga i ō koutou nei pokohiwi. [weighing heavily upon your shoulders.]I do not quite agree, because to me that is a kōrero mākutu. Ka taka mai te tangata i raro i te toimahatanga o ngā kōrero i runga a pokohiwi. [] I say this. I say they take the responsibility and they look to it as an opportunity. Go forth!

We know of the extraordinarily difficult situation—well, I personally know it. I just want to recall, for the benefit of the House, the kuia at Parihaka, and I recall them humbly. Of the four kuia, there is only one left. Her name is Auntie Matarena Rau Kupa. She is about 90-plus years. To the other three, who included Auntie Neta, my mother, and Auntie Sally, kōrero. They had this extraordinary belief in this phrase: “Whāngai mai te hoariri.” It means: “Feed thy enemies.” What an appalling thing to insist that I do! But they carried that as a kind of precedent in regard to their relationships. It was a central part of their passive resistance ki a rātau ngā tuatara. [to them, the reptiles.]

I congratulate Ngāti Mutunga. They are here not because of; they are here in spite of. They are here because of their collective implacable will, unremitting commitment, and determination; their wellspring of indomitable strength; and their capacity to overcome gut-wrenching disappointment and despair. May I say with due humility that I am proud to be part of such a whakapapa. Tēnā koutou.

I end with this. This is a new dawning—e āta pōhou tēnei nā. May Ngāti Mutunga apply the same kinds of capacity, determination, commitment, and collective implacable will in their future, and I wish them the very best for their future, hei huarahi mō tātou katoa kei roto o Taranaki. [as a way for all of us in Taranaki.]

I end by singing a very quick waiata:

Nā wai te po-i, po-i, e poia mai te ni’o nā,

Nā’au nei e Te Ati Awa, a titi a iho tō rauku-ra,

Auē ka titi, auē ka titi, titi ka titi, ka titi ahau—e, ka pai rā!

I finish by saying that that waiata is a poi waiata that was celebrated at Parihaka on the return of those people who were jailed unjustly in Otākou. It was sung by the women, our kuia. Mutunga, mai i Te Āti Awa, mai i ngā iwi katoa, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora mai tātou katoa.

[And so from Mutunga, Te Āti Awa, and all the people, greetings to you, greetings to you and to all of us.]

• Bill read a third time.

• Waiata