-
ENABLING CROWN ENTITIES TO ADOPT MĀORI NAMES BILL
First Reading
SHANAN HALBERT (Labour): I move, That the Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Governance and Administration Committee to consider the bill.
[Authorised reo Māori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
Like many of my colleagues before me, I have the privilege to introduce my member's bill to this House this evening. I am presenting the Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill. I am proud that te reo Māori is recognised as an official language in this country, and we've been on a journey in Aotearoa New Zealand since the Māori Language Act 1987. However, we are still yet to fully embrace the language. I myself am on a te reo Māori journey as a second-language learner with both Māori and Pākehā whakapapa, like many in this House also.
In recent years, weeks, and months, we have seen increasing friction over the use of Māori names and te reo Māori in public spheres. Today, even, I have seen Ngāti Kahungunu calling for the reinstatement of te reo Māori signs after they were removed from roads in the Hawke's Bay, where I grew up. This is just the latest incident in a string of back and forth about where we should and should not use te reo Māori. We can think of other examples, like Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand or Waka Kotahi – NZTA. And after reading through the recently introduced Education and Training (Vocational Education and Training System) Amendment Bill, we see that Minister Penny Simmonds has decided to remove the te reo Māori name Te Pūkenga, and instead of using a bilingual name, replacing it with the New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology.
Decisions like these are backward steps for Aotearoa New Zealand. Many of us walk our lives with a foot in both the English and Māori world, and I believe that Government, including our Crown entities, can and should do the same. Therefore, we don't have to make a choice between English and te reo Māori; we can simply have both. Many have talked about the importance of te reo Māori as an integral part of our nationhood, that enriches our lives and it does not divide. But we have seen division and te reo Māori being used as a political football. If we learn anything about the outcome of the recent debate on the Treaty Principles Bill, where 90 percent of 300,000 submissions opposed the legislation, then we see that our country wants to move forward, building nationhood in partnership with Māori. This bill today is a step towards doing that.
[Authorised reo Māori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
The bill enables, on the recommendation of the relevant Minister, for Crown entities to adopt Māori names in addition to, or instead of, the names given them to them by the Acts that established them. This is a simple but symbolic step towards greater inclusivity, bilingualism, and support for te reo Māori revitalisation. Crown entities, including statutory entities, Crown entity companies, school board of trustees, and tertiary institutions. For those of you in the House today and those of you at home, you will be familiar with many of these: Te Kaporeihana Āwhina Hunga Whara – ACC; Manapou ki te Ao – Education New Zealand; Nō te rere moana Aotearoa – Maritime New Zealand; Te Ratonga Toto o Aotearoa – New Zealand Blood Service; and the list goes on. But while a number of Crown entities already use a Māori name, these aren't their legal names and are not currently recognised in New Zealand's legislation.
It is important to note—because Māori names, as we've seen, can become political—that this bill does not mandate all Crown entities to adopt Māori names. It simply allows relevant Ministers to recommend this shift where and if they see fit for their organisations and their ministries. The legislation would, for example, allow Minister Simeon Brown to make Health New Zealand, Health New Zealand – Te Whata Ora again, or Minister Mark Mitchell to give Sport New Zealand – Ihi Aotearoa the mana of being enshrined in legislation. And while I have the opportunity again, I'll make the suggestion for Minister Penny Simmonds that she can in fact take on a bilingual name that will save her a lot of money. How about Te Pūkenga – New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology?
Importantly, the bill strikes a middle ground and a way forward. It's not one or the other. It gives us both the English and the te reo Māori, and tonight I encourage Government members in the House to seriously consider supporting this at first reading, sending it to select committee for further consideration. Governments now and in the future should reflect the communities they represent, the constitutional foundations of Aotearoa New Zealand, as well as how we represent ourselves in the future, locally, and abroad. Bilingualism as a sign of this partnership is the essence of our country, as reflected in our founding document, Te Tiriti o Waitangi. We must collectively uphold and protect this. This bill offers that protection through legislation. By supporting this bill, we can collectively shift something that has been tagged as tokenism by some, or taken backwards by others, to a more meaningful reflection of the country that we aspire to be. In saying that, I do not believe that there is anything tokenistic about being proud to be a bilingual nation and being proud of our rich te reo Māori language identity. Normalising the use of te reo Māori is an important part of the continued effort to revitalise the language, and this bill can help to play a part in that journey.
When we travel abroad, our coat of arms, Te Tohu Pakanga o Aotearoa, is an illustration to the world that our nation was founded on the partnership between two cultures. Giving Crown entities Māori names helps set us apart. Aotearoa New Zealand's identity is unique from anywhere else in the world, and that should be reflected in the institutions of our Government. There are a variety of countries worldwide who choose to honour their unique cultural heritage by engaging in bilingual naming practices: Ireland, Wales, Canada. When I travelled in 2022 as part of a parliamentary delegation to Canada, I was impressed by the work that they had done there. Economically, too, these names provide us with a unique point of difference when we go offshore, and in particular, we've seen New Zealand Trade and Enterprise use Te Taurapa Tūhono when they do business overseas to help market our unique Aotearoa New Zealand brand.
This bill will allow for a Crown entity to adopt a Māori name, and ensure that it has the mana and the integrity behind it using legislation. We have successful examples of Māori names that have been used for Crown entities—Oranga Tamariki by Tracey Martin; I have been impressed that the Minister for Housing, Chris Bishop, has continued with Kāinga Ora—because many of the reasons why people would be against this legislation already played out when the last Labour Government passed legislation to establish the Matariki public holiday. Yet here we are, with multiple celebrations across the country that bring communities together through the kotahitanga of te ao Māori. It is with no doubt I am also sure that many Government members will be attending and enjoying these wonderful celebrations in the coming months.
This is an omnibus bill which enables the Governor-General, by Order in Council made on the recommendation of the relevant Minister, to adopt te reo Māori names for Crown entities, in addition to, or instead of, the names given to them by the Acts that established them. This reflects the process that exists for public service departments outlined in section 23 of the Public Act 2020. I note, again, that this is not mandatory. It's a tool available to Ministers and their organisations. Finally, can I acknowledge the Hon Dr Duncan Webb for his support in this piece of legislation. Without further ado, I commend this bill to the House.
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): The question is that the motion be agreed to.
-
TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill—and I do just want to start by going through, in case it wasn't crystal clear, because there are some technical differences between different Crown agencies and departments, the intent of this bill, which, as I understand it, is to allow Crown entities to adopt a Māori name. As Mr Halbert just specified, on the recommendation of their Minister, the Governor-General can then have their name changed by Order in Council. I do want to congratulate Mr Halbert on having his bill drawn. Apparently, it's a very exciting day. I wouldn't know yet; I haven't had one drawn. But it's great to get something this far.
The difference in this case, between the listed Crown entities and other departments—because you might notice, for those following along at home, if you're looking through the bill, it's very specific to the Acts that it changes and the Crown entities that are changed. You'll notice, for example—I was about to say Oranga Tamariki, but that is a Māori name. The New Zealand Defence Force, for example, isn't listed, because there is, in the Public Service Act 2020, a provision by which certain Government departments can change their name, can be established or disestablished, and that includes a name change provision. This one is about these specific entities, which are separated out, and I would just like to go through some of those in the time that we have available.
As you look at these different Crown entities, there's a range. For example, the Accident Compensation Corporation (ACC) has its own legislation: the Accident Compensation Act 2001. Now, ACC was actually established in, I think, 1996, but the Act that would need to be changed here in this bill is the 2001 Act. If you go to the ACC website, for example, actually it's one of the most bilingual websites I've seen across different Government entities. Every heading and every sort of section is broken down with te reo as well as with English. But can I just go through some of the other ones that are listed. For example, the Civil Aviation Authority—and they've got a great Minister looking after them, but, in this case, we're talking about them. They could have, under this bill, a te reo Māori name. For example, it could be "Te Mana Rererangi Tūmatanui o Aotearoa". I pick that name because that's the name they've already chosen. They already have a te reo Māori name.
If we go to the Earthquake Commission Act—and it used to be called the Earthquake Commission; now it's called the Natural Hazards Commission—a name for that could be "Toka Tū Ake". Again, I pick that name specifically because that's the name, in te reo Māori, that they already have. But that's OK, because there are some others. For example, we might look at the Tertiary Education Commission, and I wonder if they could be called, under this bill, "Te Amorangi Mātauranga Matua". Again, I've specifically chosen that one because that's the name, in te reo Māori, that they already have. I looked at some other ones—for example, the New Zealand Qualifications Authority (NZQA) is the next one in this bill. I'm up to new section 430A, if you're following along. The name I'm wondering about is "Mana Tohu Mātauranga o Aotearoa". Again, the reason I'm suggesting that as a possible name is because that's the name that NZQA actually already have.
Stuart Smith: There's a pattern here.
TIM COSTLEY: Well, there is a bit of a pattern, but I want to keep going, because then we have the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, established under their Act from 2000.
Hon Member: "ECA"
Hon Member: "EECA"
TIM COSTLEY: Well, you can call it "ECA" or "EECA"—also pronounced "EECA" by some. Some other people would call it "Te Tari Tiaki Pūngao". Again, that is the name, in te reo Māori, that they already have.
There is nothing wrong with these names. The member in charge of this bill makes a very good point: we don't want this to become about tokenism. We don't want this to become a political football. This is just about whether or not they can, and by which means they can, have a name. What I'm trying to illustrate here is that a number of these Crown entities already have a name in te reo Māori: the Environmental Protection Authority, Te Mana Rauhī Taiao; Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ), Whakaratonga Iwi. As I keep going through, the trend that you would see is that, almost without exception, they actually already all have a name in te reo Māori. Many of them have been gifted these names. There has been a lot of thought go into this. These are very appropriate names they have got. Even, I mean, entities like the Health Research Council. I can't read my own writing here: "Te Kaunihera Rangahau Hauora". One that will be more familiar to many members would be the New Zealand Transport Agency, Waka Kotahi. And on and on they go.
The next one here is the New Zealand Antarctic Institute. Now, I want to take just a minute on the New Zealand Antarctic Institute, because it's one of many examples where most people, when you think of the New Zealand Antarctic Institute, they don't actually go by the name of the New Zealand Antarctic Institute, even though the New Zealand Antarctic Institute Act 1996, section 4, specifically sets them up as that. These days they trade as "Antarctica New Zealand". They are not known as the New Zealand Antarctic Institute, and yet that's the name in the legislation. There are many other examples like it—for example, Sport NZ. Their name in the legislation is not actually Sport NZ, though "Sport NZ Ihi Aotearoa" is what they trade as. They are actually "Sport and Recreation New Zealand".
The point is that a number of these agencies, a number of these Crown entities, have actually changed their English name as well. While Sport New Zealand has changed from "Sports and Recreation New Zealand" to "Sport New Zealand Ihi Aotearoa", the point is that they have already changed their names. They have adopted te reo Māori names, they have changed their English names, and nothing has stopped them doing this. Nothing has stopped them doing this. Another example: the Walking Access Commission—the Walking Access Commission—
Stuart Smith: What's that called?
TIM COSTLEY: Thank you for asking. It's now called the "Outdoor Access Commission". Well, it's actually called "Herenga ā Nuku Aotearoa", and if you go to their website, their website isn't walkingaccess.govt.nz. It's not even the new name of outdooraccess.govt.nz. The website is herengaanuku.govt.nz. These Crown entities have already adopted Māori names; they've changed English names. To do that, nothing had to change in the law. There was no need for legislation. If a Minister really wants to do that, they still can go and do that right now, today. There is nothing stopping them from doing this. There is no need. As the member said, this is not about English versus te reo, because names in both languages have been changed without needing to change the legislation. And I could give countless more examples. In fact, if you go through the bill itself, almost every single one has either changed its English or Māori name. The point is that we can do it, and we don't need this.
This is the ultimate example of a solution looking for a moral high ground or a problem. That's what this is, and that's why we don't need this. I just wonder, when I look at this bill, where are their priorities? As I look at some of these entities, like FENZ, like New Zealand Trade and Enterprise, and the work that we are focused on to double the value of our exports, to bring growth to this country, to increase our trade—there is so much work that could be done. There are so many ideas that could be bought in the form of a member's bill. When I look at things like Tourism New Zealand—again, they've changed their English name and adopted a te reo Māori name. As we look to grow our tourism and bring that back to being one of our top exporters, there is so much work that could be done and so many ideas that could be brought by members right across this House for the good of all New Zealand. They are the kinds of ideas that we should be seeing in these members' bills.
So, while it's a great point that he makes—that we should be able to have te reo Māori names; we should celebrate the bilingualism, as he described it; we should celebrate the different cultures that make up this country—actually, we don't need to spend the next six months of a select committee and two more readings and a committee of the whole House to go through this process. There is nothing—and we have to be really clear—there is nothing today that stops any of this happening. Whether it is changing the English name, which has happened; whether it is adopting a te reo Māori name, which has happened, it is absolutely possible today. The National Party will not be supporting this bill, not because we don't support te reo Māori, not because we don't support it, but because there is no need for the bill.
-
FRANCISCO HERNANDEZ (Green): Thank you.
[Authorised reo Māori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
I want to thank my colleague Hūhana Lyndon for supplying me with those words, and I want to apologise to our Māori caucus, Te Mātāwaka, for my pronunciation. I rise in support of this bill. The Greens support the idea of enabling more Crown entities to use te reo. We did have some internal debate and discussion in the caucus about it. It's only natural that as a result of the long process of colonisation and the violence that many Māori have endured under the colonial State and under the Crown, there was some wariness of enabling the taonga of having Māori names to be given to these institutions that have done so much and inflicted some violence towards—you know, not all Māori feel this way but some Māori certainly feel this way. But, on the other hand, we do acknowledge that it's a voluntary process. When Crown entities have adopted names in te reo, it's been as a result of long discussion and consultation with iwi Māori, so it's not as if any institution is going to be forced to adopt a Māori name.
So congratulations to my colleague Shanan Halbert for getting this bill drawn and drafting this bill. We encourage all Government parties to support this bill. We certainly support it, and we hope you do the same.
-
TODD STEPHENSON (ACT): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I rise on behalf of ACT to talk about the Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill. Firstly, I just want to acknowledge the member Shanan Halbert for having his bill drawn. It is always exciting to have that drawn out of the biscuit tin and to, at least, have the chance to have your bill debated and discussed.
Look, Mr Costley really, I think, summed up pretty eloquently why this bill really isn't needed. There's a difference between, obviously, the legal entity names of organisations and the way they brand themselves and present themselves to the public. As we've actually heard from Mr Costley, this bill covers around 21 Crown entities. A majority of them already have te reo branding and the ability to communicate in that way. He used the example of ACC, which, I think, he said had one of the best bilingual websites he's seen.
We actually have over 2,700 different agencies or organisations in our public sector.
Stuart Smith: That's way too many.
TODD STEPHENSON: I know. We probably need to rationalise that, but that is way too many. But the point is we're not obviously doing this bill to address all of them; we're only doing it for a select number. And the select number actually don't need it, because they're already doing it.
So I do, sadly, think this is actually tokenism in this case, because if organisations are having a te reo name, we actually want them to genuinely embrace it and make sure they are able to communicate it to the people you serve. And so we would rather that we focus our Crown entities, our departments, and our public services actually on delivering the services and things that New Zealanders need and making sure they're up to scratch. And if they choose to have a te reo name, then they can absolutely do that today, and we don't need this piece of enabling legislation.
So that's ACT's position. We, unfortunately, won't be supporting it, because it is unnecessary. Obviously, it's good, tonight, to be able to highlight some of the organisations within our Government that already have te reo names and are using them to do their business every day, and I think it's, obviously, a worthy policy intent of the bill to actually be encouraging and revitalising te reo. We just don't think this bill is needed to do that, so we, unfortunately, won't be supporting it.
-
JENNY MARCROFT (NZ First): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First and speak to the Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill. Congratulations to the member Shanan Halbert for having a member's bill drawn from the ballot; it is a great day for you this evening.
The bill enables Crown entities to adopt Māori names by an Order in Council either alongside or replacing existing names. But as we've heard so eloquently from my colleague from the National Party Tim Costley, many entities are doing this already. So, really, this piece of legislation is unnecessary. In fact, he highlighted a number of entities already have a name in te reo Māori.
I thought a priority, really, for New Zealand First is: what outcomes can we influence? What can we do that will make a meaningful difference for Māori, rather than a little bit of virtue signalling, as this bill does? One-point-five-million dollars for Māori wardens, now that's an outcome; $10.2 million for infrastructure rebuild at the Waitangi grounds, that is an outcome for Māori—and that is what we're focused on, on this side of the House—$7.1 million for Māori economic development, that's an outcome; changing the name is not an outcome. It won't make a meaningful difference at all. How about improving water infrastructure at Parihaka, in Taranaki? Well, that's a great outcome; never mind putting a name that really is unnecessary when that could be cone already without needing legislation. There are a number of ways that we can improve outcomes for Māori, and this is not one of them. In fact, if I look at the coalition agreement which was agreed between New Zealand First and National, it was to ensure all Public Service departments had their primary name in English, except for those that are specifically related to Māori.
So New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill. I'd just like to quote from my leader, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, who said, "This is not an attack on the Māori language … [but] … on the elite virtue signallers who have hijacked the language for their own socialist means." I do not commend this bill to the House.
-
TAKUTAI TARSH KEMP (Te Pāti Māori—Tāmaki Makaurau): Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Tēnā tātou e te Whare. I rise tonight, proud to be Māori and proud to support this bill, the Enabling Crown to Adopt Māori Names Bill. We do this because this bill has good intentions that it serves in terms of inclusivity, bilingualism, and support for the revitalisation of te reo Māori, and this House has a priority to whakamana te reo Māori.
This isn't just about Government names; it's about giving te reo Māori names mana. Te reo Māori is the only official language of this country. I must remind this House that English is not, despite what New Zealand First have to say. Te reo Māori is and shall remain the only official language of this country, alongside New Zealand Sign Language.
We have to protect our reo. Article 2 of Te Tiriti o Waitangi guarantees protection of our taonga. This includes te reo Māori, as it does our whenua and our kiwi.
This bill is a small step towards the revitalisation of te reo Māori and, on balance, it does have good intentions. However, our tautoko comes with caution and with some reservation. We must stand up for the injustices of te reo Māori—that's our taonga. This House continues to attack our tikanga, it continues to attack our reo, and it continues to attack our people. Our reo is constantly bastardised or dragged through the mud, mispronounced, misunderstood, and misrepresented, but it's normalised in this House. Seventy percent of the members of this House mispronounce our reo, and it's normal and it's OK.
I can remember that when we came into this House, our names were mispronounced. Now, our names hold mana. Our names have meaning for us, just like the Māori names that are given to Government agencies. They have mana.
We have a Prime Minister that can't say te reo properly, yet he wants to call us out. He says, "When I see it, we call it out." Well, it's time for us to call it out when our reo is misrepresented, mispronounced, and dragged through the mud. Our reo cannot be used for those reasons. There's just no respect. It's just ignorance, mockery, and the resistance to our ātahu reo. We must ensure that our reo is protected. We have to try harder.
I have to ask: why is this Government so proud to be monolingual? If people can't tell the difference between a red and a green stop/go sign without reading te reo, is it just that people are thick, or are these people just really racist? How would they ever survive a trip to a foreign country without English on their phones?
Our reo carries mana and this bill has good intentions. Te Pāti Māori will support this bill to select committee stage, where we give our people the voice and the right to have their say. Tēnā tātou.
-
[Authorised reo Māori text to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
[Authorised translation to be inserted by the Hansard Office.]
Well, it's been an interesting kōrero so far, hasn't it, in terms of this kaupapa. It's a fabulous kaupapa. I want to mihi to Shanan Halbert. I want to just answer a couple of things. The reo, as particularly our Māori members here will know, has been under threat for many, many years. So every little bit helps. Yes, we support the wardens—of course we support the wardens. Of course we support pūtea going to Māori housing. But every little bit helps.
Here's the thing: the reo is for everyone. Greg Fleming knows over there. He's been learning the reo for a long time, and I mihi to you. I mihi to him for his commitment to the language. You see, you might be a bit surprised sometimes, but I do believe the language is for everybody. In this country, more Pākehā are learning the reo than Māori, which is terrific. You go to wānanga, you'll see more Pākehā because they love the reo. The reo is incredibly important.
But, sadly, our people out there are seeing so much division in this House. So I'm proud to tautoko this language. We're happy to live in towns and cities with Māori names like Whanganui, Kaitāia, Whangārei, but when it comes to Crown entities, we draw the line. What's wrong with calling our department Oranga Tamariki or Kāinga Ora? Good on Chris Bishop for not removing that name. Waka Kotahi. People start asking, do Māori names count? In Gisborne, for instance, over half of the population are of Māori descent according to the 2023 Census—a clear majority—56 percent, but they have to all have their signs and names of Government departments in English. What happened to democracy?
Some people need to remember that Māori are members of the community too. That's what our people are saying. Bayden Barber is saying that. Bayden works with any party. Now he's calling the latest call from the Government to remove bilingual signs racist. That's the type of kōrero that you're going to get out there. Bayden ain't no radical. He just wants to see our reo out there. He's part of the fight for the language.
So some people have to realise that the Māori populations out there, they just want to see the language develop. They don't want to be called supporters of apartheid when this type of kaupapa comes up. The fact is there's nothing to fear about a Māori name. Across the world, our culture and language are being celebrated, except, it seems right now, in this country. Now, I know the National Party have been supporters of the language before, but the kōrero coming from the Prime Minister says something else to us. What is this Government so scared of? That's what people are saying: "What are you so nervous of here?"
We've had Shanan Halbert say that this is not a compulsory set-up. You don't have to absolutely take the name. But by allowing Crown entities to adopt a Māori name, it will further enhance and support the language. It doesn't mean some in the Government will need to improve on their pronunciation. I'm not so picky about people mispronouncing the reo. As long as everyone makes an effort, I'm fine. I won't condemn anyone. The Prime Minister—as long as everyone has a crack, good on you. That's what it's all about. We don't live in a fundamentalist world. But I say to everyone tonight that to support Shanan's bill would be great in supporting the language, and maybe take away the image at the moment of this Government being the biggest anti-Māori Government in the last generation. Kia ora, Mr Speaker.
-
Hon ERICA STANFORD (Minister of Education): Thank you, Mr Speaker. Well, I wasn't going to take a call this evening. In fact, I'm not on the speaking list. But after listening to the last couple of speeches, I thought it would be an important thing to do to take a call to set the record straight, especially after that last statement.
This Government, in education, has done more for te reo Māori than that Government did in six long years. This, as my colleague said, is a solution looking for a problem. We've already had the very long list of Crown entities that already have te reo names, but here lies the problem with the Government's position, and the fact that they think that we are anti-Māori—as I've said, we've done more for the Māori language in education in the last 18 months than they did in six years.
Here are a few things that should be put on the record when we're talking about te reo language revitalisation, because we have a bilingual education system and we've heard nothing from the other side of the House when we launched all of the pāngarau, or the maths, resources in te reo Māori consistently across the country. Guess what? For the first time, consistently, in te reo Māori, high-quality curriculum-aligned resources created by Māori experts. Nothing in six years happened on that side of the House for pāngarau, for language revitalisation in maths, in our education system until now. And then when we do it, completely silent.
What about structured literacy? For the first time ever, consistent nationwide te reo resources in te reo Māori for structured literacy, including an assessment—Hihira Weteoro it's called—which is a check to make sure that our young learners are on track with their learning.
Now I know, Mr Speaker, you're getting ready to tell me to speak to the—
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): Oh yes, I am. Well predicted, Ms—
Hon ERICA STANFORD: I can tell that you're leaning in. But I think that it's only fair that when things like that are said across the House—that this is the most anti-Māori Government—it's important to put on the record all of the things that we have done in structured literacy and in maths, all of those things to make sure that we are—
Hon Willie Jackson: What does Greg think?
Hon ERICA STANFORD: I know—that we are properly resourcing a bilingual education system.
So when it comes to this bill, it is well-intentioned. We understand that it's important to have names in English and te reo Māori, however, as has already been laid out this evening, almost all of the Crown entities that were listed in the member's bill already have te reo Māori names. And so, as I said, it's a problem looking for a solution. But it goes wider to the priorities of an Opposition when this is the best that they have. Are they out here tonight talking about a bilingual education system or properly resourcing it? No, they're looking for something that's already done, in most cases. It's a waste of this House's time to ford a bill that can already be done. There are so many ways that we could properly be investigating the revitalisation of te reo Māori names in this country. Bringing a bill forward that does something that already exists, that we don't need legislation for, just shows the level of incompetence of the Opposition when this is literally the best that they've got.
How bereft of ideas are they that this is the bill that they bring to the House? And that is why, in six long years, it's really difficult to point to anything when it comes to the revitalisation of te reo Māori that you can point to. Because this is a Government who cares about the language, who is investing in things that actually matter, not only in education but across other areas as well, which is why we don't bring bills like this to the House. Not only are they a waste of our time or a waste of our resource, we have so many other more important things that we could be doing to revitalise the language, to properly resource it, rather than bringing a bill like this.
And I have to say to them all, congratulations for getting it drawn out of the House, but try harder next time. There are so many more things that are more important when it comes to properly resourcing te reo Māori and properly resourcing a bilingual education system that he could be bringing rather than, as we say, a solution that's looking for a problem.
And as we say, we're not—look, we're not opposed to the use of te reo Māori names.
Shanan Halbert: Yes you are!
Hon ERICA STANFORD: What we're opposed—if we were opposed, like that member just yelled out, to the Māori language, then why on earth would we be spending millions and millions and millions of dollars doing everything in the education system in te reo Māori that we're doing in English? Why would we be doing that?
-
Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB (Labour—Christchurch Central): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. Well, what a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth over there! It's really strange that they're all of a sudden saying, "No, no. We're supporting Māori.", when one of the very first things they did when they came in as a Government was to issue a direction to get rid of te reo throughout the Public Service, including Māori names.
Do you remember when I think it was Chris Bishop didn't know the actual English name of Waka Kotahi? Do you remember that? But they made a point of using English names only because they don't like te reo. You can have the tokenism if you like. You can talk about your education kits, as the Minister of Education, but, frankly, that speech was a D. It was D for duplicitous. It was saying one thing out of your mouth and doing another thing throughout Government. This bill is well-thought-out—and I congratulate the member for bringing it to the House—because there are plenty of Public Service agencies that use a te reo name when it's not the official name. In fact, every time these agencies go to court, they have to use their English name, and every time they enter into a legal contract, they have to use their English name, because—
Tom Rutherford: Who cares?
Hon Dr DUNCAN WEBB: "Who cares?", one member yells out. You know what? That's the point, because you don't care that you are alienating our indigenous population. You don't care that all of the people for whom te reo is their native language—you're saying, "I'm sorry, use English. That's the proper language." Well, it's one of the languages we speak in this country, but it also sits alongside and—here's the point—equal to te reo. That is what this bill does. It doesn't elevate; it brings alongside. And that's not that much to ask.
Here we have a bill that simply says, "Here's an easier way to make it official, to make it legal, and to make it appropriate." And to be dismissive and say, "We don't care; it doesn't matter", is actually emblematic of the approach of this Government, the tokenistic approach that it takes, and the fact that in terms of meaningful change, it's going backwards. It's actually reviewing our legislation to get rid of references to the Treaty and to de-Māorify our statute book, and that is really offensive.
And this is one easy step for the Government to put its money where its mouth is, but it chooses not to. So it's sad that we've got members over there, when we're talking about one of the taonga of te ao Māori, saying, "I don't care." Well, I care. I think this is a great bill. I think this is one small and simple step that this Parliament could take, but that side doesn't care.
-
Hon MELISSA LEE (National): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's a real pleasure to rise to—
Hon Willie Jackson: Are there any Māoris over there?
Hon MELISSA LEE: —debate this bill.
Hon Member: What about Duncan?
Hon MELISSA LEE: I'd like to congratulate my colleague across the House—
Shanan Halbert: Fake Dan—useless.
Hon MELISSA LEE: —on having—did you just say congratulating you was useless?
Hon Willie Jackson: No, we're just asking if there's any Māoris over there, that's all.
Hon MELISSA LEE: Well, I was going to say congratulations, Shanan, for having your bill drawn from the ballot, but perhaps I actually spoke a little too early, because I'm getting offensive interjections from that side. I think it's just ridiculous members want to abuse speakers on this side when they haven't even heard anything—
Ingrid Leary: Point of order, Mr Speaker. I heard the member reference my colleague Shanan Halbert by his first name, and I'd ask that she use both names, please.
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): The Chair will decide when to intervene with these things, but thank you for reminding me. Carry on, Miss Lee.
Hon MELISSA LEE: Thank you, Mr Speaker. What I was actually going to say is that I wanted to give a little bit of perspective from someone who actually speaks English as a second language, who actually comes from a country where we struggled to revive the language after 36 years of—how would you call it? "Colonialism" is what I think a lot of people call it. Korea was annexed by Japan for 36 years, where Korean people lost their language. We weren't allowed to speak Korean. We struggled to revive the language, and we're very proud Korean speakers.
I actually feel for Takutai Tarsh Kemp when she said that she gets offended when people mispronounce te reo. And I apologise if I mispronounce te reo because I'm not a native speaker. But having said that, I too get offended when, in this House, often people actually call out things like "Hyundai" and "Samsung". They're Korean brand names, but I get offended because I'm Korean and I know how "Hyundai" is supposed to be pronounced: it is supposed to be "Hyundai" [Member emphasises Korean pronunciation]. Samsung is not "Samsung"; it's "Samsung" [Member emphasises Korean pronunciation]. But we actually understand that people try, and we do try.
I think my colleague Tim Costley earlier actually laid out that this bill is not necessary because virtually every single one of those Government departments or agencies that Shanan Halbert has said that we need to name in te reo Māori already have te reo Māori names. I was actually looking at them because I didn't know the te reo Māori names. I looked up some of the names. For example, the New Zealand Qualifications Authority, it says Ngā Poutoko Aromatawai o Aotearoa. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority, Te Tari Tiaki Pūngao. New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE), Te Taurapa Tūhono.
Ryan Hamilton: Good pronunciation.
Hon MELISSA LEE: Thank you. Even the Ministry of Ethnic Communities is called Te Tari Mātāwaka. The Ministry of Pacific People, Te Manatū mo ngā Iwi o te Moana-nui-a-Kiwa. All of these agencies and Government departments already have te reo Māori names. We don't actually need to adopt this bill and say they all need to use them; they already do. Having said that, on this bill Shanan Halbert included Callaghan Innovation, which is being disestablished, so we actually don't need that.
But one of the concerns that I actually have, which hasn't been talked about, is that when we are trying to trade with overseas countries—like when we are trying to promote our tertiary institutions, our education sector; New Zealand Trade and Enterprise—instead of saying NZTE, which is very well known around the world as our agency that deals with trade, if we tell the world Te Taurapa Tūhono is our NZTE, nobody will know that that is. The other one is, for example, ACC, Te Kaporeihana Āwhina Hunga Whara. A lot of people who have accidents in New Zealand—I mean, even tourists are covered by ACC. When they are looking for ACC, if they have the te reo Māori name, they will not recognise it. That is one of my biggest concerns.
Ricardo Menéndez March: Well, what do people do when they go to Korea?
Hon MELISSA LEE: Road signs—even Korea is changing their road signs to English so the foreigners who visit Korea can actually understand. I think, when we have people who do not understand road signs, we are in for a major issue where there will be more accidents, people looking for more compensation through ACC, Te Kaporeihana Āwhina Hunga Whara, will be very busy with all of those visitors who cannot read those road signs. I do not commend this bill to the House.
ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Greg O'Connor): In reply, Shanan Halbert.
-
SHANAN HALBERT (Labour): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's been an honour to present this bill to the House in its first reading. I've tried to play a straight back tonight because I do believe that this country is at a crossroads of how we move forward; that through the actions of this Government, we have gone back decades in race relations and in the progress of te reo Māori.
I'm surprised tonight that not one Māori member from the National Party was allowed to speak on a bill. I'm also surprised that the most senior Minister in this House this evening stood up and called this legislation that offers te reo Māori names to be recognised a waste of time. Not only did she do that but she stood up on her high horse and pretended to be the saviour of Māori learners, which we both know she is not.
Not only that, but over this period of not any Māori speaking on this bill, there's been a series of attacks, unnecessary criticism from Tim Costley, from Jenny Marcroft, who rattled off a bunch of dollars that this Government is spending on Māori outcomes, yet this legislation costs nothing but goodwill and effort on the Government side. They've attacked it and called it virtue signalling, being woke. That's not what this legislation is; this legislation is about mana and dignity, and I would have thought that after the rocky time that this Government has had with race relations in Aotearoa New Zealand that, tonight, they may have some sense, just some sense of humility.
There are members over there that I know recognise to the te reo Māori, that don't agree with the speakers who have spoken on their behalf tonight. But if that is the will of the National caucus, that is their will. Dan Bidois has said zip—zip, no contribution. But what is most important is that something that could have been easy to do tonight has launched out into full attacks across this House. Unbelievable—absolutely unbelievable.
So to finish off my contribution, can I say that for all the things that this Government has taken Māori and this country backwards on, you will be held accountable. Each and every one of you will be dragged out in front of your communities and be held accountable for the decisions that you have made. I can list them off, just like Tim Costley's contribution tonight that actually didn't make sense to this bill. I acknowledged that, yes, organisations do have Māori names, but the intention and purpose of this legislation is that they don't sit in the actual legislation. Therein lies the point.
It is not a waste, particularly when the last bill that we did was about the Takapuna Boating Club, and can I give another example of the waste of money and the time of this House on the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi Bill that New Zealand Aotearoa absolutely rejected. It won't end here and in fact I look forward to the way forward because I know that this Government, like New Zealand is also coming to realise, is not fit to govern.
-
A party vote was called for on the question, That the Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill be now read a first time.
Ayes 55
New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 6.
Noes 68
New Zealand National 49; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8.
Motion not agreed to.
Enabling Crown Entities to Adopt Māori Names Bill — First Reading
Sitting date: 21 Hara 2025This page displays your selected transcript. You may view the recorded PTV video using the "Video" tab. Please note that the video tab displays all available video for the sitting day of the transcript. A filter will be available to find the specific debate / speech you wish to view.