Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill

Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Māori Affairs) Link to this

I move, That the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be considered by the Māori Affairs Committee, that the committee report back to the House on or before 27 March 2008, and that the committee have the authority to meet at any time while the House is sitting except during oral questions, during any evening on a day on which there has been a sitting of the House, and on a Friday in a week in which there has been a sitting of the House, despite Standing Orders 192 and 195(1)(b) and (c).

This bill transfers ownership of the fee simple estate in the Mauao historic reserve, generally referred to as Mount Maunganui, to the iwi of Tauranga Moana—Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga—in recognition of the significant cultural, traditional, historical, and spiritual importance of Mauao to them. It also recognises the relationship between Waitaha and Mauao, and the importance of Mauao to the wider public.

I would like to acknowledge the initiative of Kiri Toha Tangitu in the mid-1990s, who started discussions on Tauranga Moana, and with my colleague the Hon Mita Ririnui, regarding Mauao. Mike O’Brien and Wī Parerā Te Kani, who have both since passed over, should also be mentioned because of their energy in progressing the proposal on behalf of iwi for the Crown to consider returning Mauao to the ownership of tangata whenua.

I would also like to recognise the kaumātua of Tauranga Moana Iwi and the trustees of the Mauao Trust, who have demonstrated considerable patience while the technical aspects of the bill have been finalised. I recall meeting the trustees and iwi representatives on 11 August 2007 in Tauranga when we signed an agreement to introduce this bill. That in itself was a significant milestone after many, many months of discussion, negotiation, and finalising the finer points of the transfer proposals to return Mauao to the iwi.

The bill transfers the fee simple estate to iwi. Like other maunga tapu, the hapū and iwi of Tauranga Moana are bound to their ancestral mountain, Mauao. The whakataukī “Ko Mauao te maunga, ko Tauranga te moana” reflects the central part of Mauao in their collective identity from times gone by and into the future. This bill gives effect to the agreement that was signed by the Crown, Tauranga Moana Iwi, the trustees, and Waitaha representatives on 11 August 2007 to introduce vesting legislation.

The bill will transfer the fee simple estate of the Mauao historic reserve to Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga. Mauao will retain its historic reserve status under the Reserves Act 1977, but, as the Act does not provide for the transfer of reserves, enabling legislation is necessary. The bill guarantees that the public will continue to enjoy access to Mauao, and the Tauranga City Council will continue to administer the reserve. The increased involvement of iwi over time will complement and enhance the already iconic status that Mauao has for the country. This bill and the agreement it seeks to implement are not consideration of any Treaty settlement, nor will the bill affect any historical Treaty negotiations in the future.

The bill is not long with 16 clauses. Its brevity, however, should not be seen to overshadow its significance. The vesting of the fee simple estate in iwi recognises the mana of Mauao. It is not concerned with determining ownership or mana whenua at 1840. It recognises that each of the four iwi have, through the ages, had significant ties to Mauao that are enduring for those iwi and hapū today. The Waitangi Tribunal understands that all the hapū of Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāti Pūkenga, and Waitaha have associations with Tauranga Moana and Mauao. This bill fulfils the initiative of those representatives of Tauranga Moana and makes good on the agreement brokered by the body mandated by the iwi to progress the proposal through to legislation—Te Rūnanganui o Tauranga Moana.

For these reasons I consider that the bill should proceed without delay to the Māori Affairs Committee and be reported back on or before 31 March 2008. This will allow the Māori Affairs Committee sufficient time to receive submissions on the bill after the Christmas break. I commend the bill to the House.

Hon TAU HENARE (National) Link to this

After 8 years we all of a sudden have four bills from the Minister of Māori Affairs. That is an amazing stint. Why now, and what is the rush?

First of all, I want to concentrate on Mauao. Myself and my colleagues the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, Chris Finlayson, and the local member Bob Clarkson sat down with some of the local people. We asked them whether the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill was a good thing. They said that it was, but they had one big gripe. And that one big gripe was that it was a Clayton’s bill. Basically, the bill says: “You can have Mauao, your historic maunga, but you don’t really get it; all you get is a name on a piece of paper, and that is all you’re going to get.” And it says so in the bill: “the Crown, for all legal purposes, continues to bear the rights and obligations in respect of the reserve … as if the fee simple in the reserve were still vested in the Crown.” That is what the bill states; that is not from us. That is, I suppose, an issue with the local people. They still think that there could be some movement on this bill, even though they, and we, support the Government in putting it forward.

Members will hear from my colleagues and me that we are not opposed to this measure. What we are opposed to, I suppose, is the fact that these sorts of bills are becoming far too frequent—where someone is gifted something, but not really. One does not really get the Christmas present. One is getting a Christmas present, but Santa Claus is saying: “You can have this, but not really.”

Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (National) Link to this

E ngā iwi o Tauranga Moana, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa. I am very pleased to take a call on the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill. Unlike the bill that the Minister rammed through its first reading last night, the Waka Umanga (Māori Corporations) Bill, which no Māori leader, as far as I know, and no Māori tribe, as far as I know, requested, asked for, or wanted, this bill is different. The presence of some of the locals from Tauranga Moana in the House today hopefully says something about the level of support for the bill now before us. That makes me feel comfortable about standing and, on behalf of National, supporting this bill through its first reading and on to the Māori Affairs Committee.

My colleague the Hon Tau Henare is right, though. He and I, and two others of our colleagues, did meet recently with some of Ngāi Te Rangi and we got a sense that they felt a little bit cheated that on the one hand Mount Maunganui is being returned to them, at least in the form of a vesting in trustees for the Tauranga Moana iwi, but on the other hand, as Tau Henare said, it was a Clayton’s return. That is a shame and it takes some of the gloss off what should otherwise be a very important and significant moment in their history.

However, we are very happy to support the bill’s first reading because we are told there is a general level of support for it. It is something that the iwi of Tauranga Moana have been asking for over a long number of years. Here we are today considering this bill, admittedly under urgency, but I guess that for them they would see it as a priority for the House to give this bill some urgency. Most Māori who have been waiting for the return of assets, or the vesting of various pieces of land or landscape to be returned to them, have been waiting for a long time, so if we are in urgency this is a bill that ought to get priority, anyway.

This House will have become accustomed to the importance of maunga to tribes, and although parliamentarians may not have been aware of it 15 years ago or two decades ago, they are certainly now aware of the importance of natural landscape features to Māori. All of us Māori in the House who sit here today can be identified through our maunga, our awa, and our land, and that is why this should be seen as something very important for these several iwi.

The example was set by a National Government back in the 1990s, which recognised the importance of these things. I guess there is room in the future for further recognition of other maunga. We will not say where they sit, but it is not far from here. Who knows whether there is a way of getting a form of ownership back. Even though it is not really ownership, it is certainly a recognition of the importance of maunga to iwi and no doubt other iwi will be very interested in seeing what is going on here today.

As the Minister has outlined, Mount Maunganui, which was acquired by the Crown in the 1880s, has been administered as a historic reserve since 1981. Essentially, it will carry on in that vein, except that it will be vested in trustees consisting of representatives of the three iwi—Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga—and all of the activity that has gone on before on this maunga will continue. That was an issue that my colleague Bob Clarkson, the local member for Tauranga, was intent on ensuring, as we all were. No doubt he will articulate these issues when he takes a call.

Bob was with us when we had a meeting with representatives of Ngāi Te Rangi, and it is very clear that he is a good local member. He is a very good local member. He is an excellent local member, because he has this pretty wide view of the interests of all, but he has a keen sense of how important the vesting of this maunga is to the iwi. That is why he is in the House today, and that is why he will also support this bill going to a select committee.

National members support this bill, and there is probably not a lot more that could be said about it. We support it for very good reasons. This vesting is wanted by the iwi, it is something they have yearned for for a long time, and it is part of the way that they identify themselves. Like all iwi, of course, I identify myself with Ngāuruhoe and Tongariro, the mountains in the middle of the North Island, and I can totally accept why this vesting would be important to them. It is just a pity that they feel this reservation that they supposedly get ownership but they do not. But I think that on the other side of that equation, the upside is that if they were to get complete ownership, they would also get all the liabilities and obligations that go with it—

DAVE HEREORA (Labour) Link to this

I rise in support of the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill, which will acknowledge the significance of this important ancestral mountain to the tangata whenua of Tauranga Moana while preserving the conservation values of Mauao to the nation. One of the principles of this bill is about the Tauranga community coming together with the iwi and Tauranga Moana, and supporting the principle of preserving the conservation values of Mauao to the nation. I think that is quite significant, because it shows that where there is a willingness within the community to work together and support a common goal, we end up with good legislation that supports that principle.

The transfer will recognise the value of Mauao to iwi and will elevate the values already associated with the Mauao historic reserve. The bill does not include the recreation reserve at the foot of Mauao, but it includes the three parcels that comprise the historic reserve—the bulk of the mountain. From the outset kaumātua have expressed their desire to protect Mauao from alienation and commercialisation.

This bill provides for the continuance of the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, which already provides for those key planks. Clause 6 of the bill prohibits the trustees from disposing of, transferring, or charging the reserve or any part of it. Similarly, the bill prevents the Minister of Conservation from exercising any power under section 26 of the Reserves Act 1977 to vest the reserve in other persons. The bill therefore achieves the transfer of the fee simple estate in Mauao historic reserve to Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga in perpetuity. The only remunerative activity that could occur would be under the provisions of the Reserves Act. For example, interpretive tours could be undertaken and the receipts paid back into the administration of that activity. Third-party access and use rights for the incumbents, such as those regarding the reservoir navigational beacon and trig station, will continue, and public access is guaranteed.

There is no intention to revoke the reserve status of Mauao historic reserve. The Minister of Conservation will retain the power to appoint the administering body of the Mauao historic reserve. I consider this bill to provide a great compromise that provides for iwi to own the reserve as its registered proprietors, and for all New Zealanders to continue to enjoy Mauao. The bill does not preclude iwi from investigating options with the Crown and the Tauranga City Council around the joint management of the historic reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 in the future.

I would like to mention some of the finer points of the bill. Clause 7 has been the source of some debate. It provides that the Mauao historic reserve must be treated as if the fee simple estate were still vested in the Crown. Although that clause may sound contradictory with the proposal to transfer the ownership of Mauao, it is necessary for several reasons that clause 7 provides that the Crown, for all legal purposes, continues to bear the rights and obligations in respect of the reserve as if it were the owner of the reserve. This clause ensures that the trustees of the Mauao Trust are not liable for any obligations that currently fall to the Crown, such as those under the Building Act 2004 that the holder of the fee simple estate may have in relation to the structures, or alterations to structures, on the reserve.

Clause 8 is a particular application of clause 7, and it provides that the Mauao historic reserve remains a historic reserve and that, in respect of it, the Minister of Conservation continues to have the functions, obligations, and powers of the Minister in relation to a reserve vested in the Crown. Clause 8 also maintains the current position of the Tauranga City Council as the administering body for the reserve. Without the explicit provisions in clauses 7 and 8, the Minister of Conservation would not be able to appoint that administering body, and the legal status of the reserve would be unclear.

The Tauranga Moana iwi and Waitaha are to assume more of a role in managing the Mauao historic reserve in future. When the administration infrastructure is in place the full extent of the rights, obligations, and potential liabilities associated with that will fall to the trustees of the management body. Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāti Pūkenga, and Waitaha are currently represented on an advisory committee that has input into council management decisions over the reserve. A revised proposal recently submitted to the Government, which formed the basis of the agreement by iwi to progress this bill, includes Waitaha also being represented at the management level. Tauranga Moana iwi and Waitaha have signed the agreement and have indicated broad support for the bill.

In summary, speaking as the chair of the Māori Affairs Committee, we look forward to receiving this bill. We look forward to being given the opportunity to analyse this bill through the select committee process, and obviously we will be commending it when it comes back to the House. Kia ora.

METIRIA TUREI (Green) Link to this

I will take just a short call on the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill. The Greens are very pleased to support the bill going to the select committee, and we are pleased to hear that there is generally broad support for this legislation.

I agree with the Hon Georgina te Heuheu that it would be nice to see more of this kind of legislation, where recognition is given to Māori for their ownership, where there is recognition that title is not something to be feared by the community, and where one can enable Māori and iwi to have title of their traditional properties without it being used as a scaremongering tactic, as we have seen in the past with other kinds of properties. It does not have to be done within the framework of the Treaty settlement but through other more rational processes with the Government and with Government agencies.

Unfortunately, I was not able to meet with the iwi before this bill came to the House, but I do understand that there is generally broad support, and I certainly take the advice of other colleagues who have spoken with them about that. In so far as the bill provides for the maunga to go back to those who are its traditional, original, and rightful owners, the Greens are very pleased to be able to enable that to occur to some extent. Thank you.

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Customs) Link to this

I rise to take just a very brief call also on the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill. I support the bill’s intent, and I support its being sent to the select committee. There would have been a time in New Zealand’s history when Mauao would have been known only as Mount Maunganui, which is tied to the shackles of our colonial past, but this bill certainly signals a new way forward. The bill should be supported. The intent with which those people who want to see the restoration of the maunga back to iwi happen should be supported. The bill should also be supported because there is clearly an intention to maintain a link with everybody who now sees Mauao as their maunga, not just the iwi of Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga but also the people of Tauranga. This is a model of what is perhaps possible.

Some of the members who spoke before me pointed to the issue of what the benefit would be of giving back a maunga in fee simple title when the management still rests, to some extent, with the local authority. I will tell members what the benefit is. Partly, the benefit is to ensure that iwi are now a very critical part of the management of Mauao. The other aspect is that it locks in a long-term relationship with the local authority, no matter who the people around the council table of the day are, and it enables iwi to say: “This is what we want to see happen with our maunga.”

The other benefit, which is made clear by the very nature of the name of this bill—the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill—is that the identity of that maunga within that rohe will now be forever known as Mauao. I think the benefits of that, when leveraged by iwi, will be realised in the tourism sector, because now, more than ever before, it is not just our clean, green image that is well recognised in terms of our identity throughout the world but also the living landscapes that exist and the stories we have within our areas. So people will want to know about Mauao. Just as people know about the volcanic cones in Ngāti Whātua land, and now a whole industry shares the history of Tāmaki-makau-rau with all visitors—New Zealanders and international visitors—so too can the opportunity be for Mauao. Therein lies the benefit of vision.

I certainly support the intent of local iwi to see their maunga returned and vested in them. Clearly, recognition of the mana of Mauao within the district will be realised in current-day opportunities, and certainly tourism is one part of that. More critically, the opportunity to leverage a long-term relationship with local authorities in the long-term management of Mauao is something that we will continue to see realised as a result of this bill.

I applaud the hard work and effort of the local member Mita Ririnui, and also the Minister of Māori Affairs, Parekura Horomia, for bringing this bill to the House. In spite of the assertion by Tau Henare that the bill has come forward all of a sudden, I say that, no, this bill has taken some time, and people have had to get their minds around it. What does it really mean? Is it of benefit or is it not? Is it something that will realise opportunity or will it not? Those types of things take time, and, really, in the sense of good faith, both the Minister of Māori Affairs and the Associate Minister in charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations have taken a coordinated approach to ensure that they are working in sync with the people who are really set to benefit from this.

I say to the people of Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga that they have set a fine model. It is our role, along every part of the way, to ensure that that can be realised. I see future opportunities and potential models for other iwi, but it could be something else. We should always uphold the principle that where there is greater benefit to the broader interests of all New Zealanders, then surely we should support that. I would hate to see people make politics of it at this stage of the process, and I would like to see full support for the intent of this bill. Tēnā koutou katoa.

TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) Link to this

Madam Speaker, kia ora tātau katoa. Tauranga Moana, mēnā kai te whakarongo mai koutou i te wā kāinga, tērā pea kai runga i te rori, ā, tērā pea kai te noho mai i ngā pakitara o te Whare nei, ko tāku noa ake ki te whaiwhai haere i ngā mihi ā tēnā, ā tēnā ki a koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātou.

[Greetings to us all, Madam Speaker. To you of the Tauranga Harbour, whether you are listening in perhaps from home, on the road, or seated within the confines of this House, my part is merely to follow up the acknowledgments made by each of those before me, saying: greetings to you, greetings to you, and to all of us.]

There is a short video clip on YouTube called “Mauao Bombs”, which features some Māori kids in baggy, black pants doing bombs off Salisbury Wharf in Tauranga. The creative acrobatics and diving prowess of these young rangatahi is capped off at the end of the clip by a close-up of a sign that states “NO JUMPING”. The comments alongside the video clip state: “It’s a shame the council decided after decades of fun to ban jumping from this wharf.”

With a healthy appreciation of the skills that are required to jump off a bridge, having spent some of my childhood perfecting the art of bombing at school and anywhere else I could show off, I can say that the video grabbed my attention as I was thinking about this Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill. For those who are unfamiliar with the name, by the way—and it has been discussed already—Mauao is the original name for what is now known to most as Mount Maunganui in Tauranga.

The video made me wonder whether the mana and integrity of Tauranga Moana iwi will be as constrained by the enactments of this bill as the Mauao boys are constrained by the local council by-laws. The big question, as we consider this bill, is how the ownership rights of Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga will be respected, when all rights remain with the Crown through the Minister of Conservation, devolved in part to the Tauranga City Council. That is the question.

Who will end up doing the jumping and who will end up nailing down the signs of possession and control? I ask this question with all due respect to the signatories from Tauranga Moana. As I understand it, Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga sought a comprehensive package in respect of the transfer of title, management arrangements, and Treaty settlement negotiations for Mauao. Their expectation was that they would receive the entire Mauao historic reserve. Their expectation was also that the process and outcome would uphold the mana of the three iwi of Tauranga Moana.

To cut to the chase, I say that they want their maunga back. It is that simple. In case someone tries to use the old scare tactic of saying that Māori will not allow access, I am clear that that claim is absolute rubbish, just as it was for the seabed and foreshore legislation. The challenge for this House is to gauge whether the way in which this bill vests the fee simple estate of Mauao historic reserve in the trustees of the Mauao Trust goes anywhere near to reaching this expectation.

In its most practical form, the bill gives effect to the agreement to introduce vesting legislation in relation to Mauao, signed by the Crown and iwi in August of this year. Importantly, the bill makes explicit the objective of the Crown. The Crown says that it is all about building healthy relationships with Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāti Pūkenga, and Waitaha. On the face of it, it all seems to be pretty good stuff—positive expectations of the iwi, constructive commitment from the Crown, and, at the heart of it all, acknowledgment of the historic significance of Mauao.

As the story goes, I am told that the Patupaiarehe gave the name Mauao to this mountain following a battle of love between a humble nameless hill and a great chiefly mountain, Ōtānewainuku, both of whom were vying for the love of Pūwhenua. Unsuccessful in his pursuit for the heart of Pūwhenua, the nameless one longed for the sea. The Patupaiarehe drew on all of their magical powers to drag him to the places where he now stands, which marks the entrance to Tauranga Moana. He became known as Mauao—caught by the dawn—and, in time, he has assumed greater mana than his lifelong rival Ōtānewainuku.

Mauao features throughout the mythologies, whakapapa, and kōrero known to Ngāti Pūkenga, Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Waitaha. The archaeological landscape within the Mauao historic reserve is also of lasting local, national, and international significance. It represents the physical remains of approximately 600 years of human occupation. The archaeological features of Mauao have considerable cultural significance to iwi of Tauranga Moana. In short, it is the most sacred landmark of the whole Tauranga area, and is the reason that Tauranga iwi have actively resisted any commercial imposition on the mountain.

Huge pa sites from Ngāti Ranginui and Waitaha were located on the mountain. The history also includes the occupation of Ngāi Te Rangi iwi through the battle of Kōkōwhai, and the archaeological heritage of Mauao as a wāhi tapu ensures that the cultural and historical significance will never be lost.

There is also a post-contact history in which the Government of the late 1800s forcibly acquired ownership of the maunga by forcing owners to pay for expensive surveys of the land—surveys that in themselves were so prohibitive that the owners were eventually placed under no alternative but to sell their interest to extinguish the debt. According to other records, fossicking by European settlers also desecrated the maunga.

The sacred maunga of Mauao was central in the stories and whakapapa of Tauranga Moana iwi and Waitaha. His name features in the tribal pepeha. He is central to the mana, rangatiratanga, and kaitiakitanga of the three Tauranga Moana iwi. Members should think about it. Clause 7 of this bill states that the general law continues to apply as if the Mauao historic reserve was still vested in the Crown. What I am saying is that iwi have only the title. That is right; this is a Clayton’s return of the maunga, which has the potential to completely stifle the ownership interests of Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Ranginui, and Ngāti Pūkenga.

Yet again we remember the words of Nōpea Panakareao at the signing of the Treaty, who passed comment: “The shadow of the land goes to Queen Victoria, but the substance remains to us.” The problem is that only a year later he was to rephrase that original statement, concluding: “The substance of the land goes to the Europeans, the shadow only will be our portion.”

In the case of Mauao it must be said that there was concern about the difference between the shadow and the substance, even before the vesting agreement was signed. As I understand it, on 14 July this year Ngāti Pūkenga attended a ratification hui at Hairini Marae, at which 87 percent of them voted against the signing of the agreement. At this stage, the understanding was that if the vote of the four iwi was split, or consensus was not reached, another hui would be called a month later for a final vote to be taken. But, hello, what happened? Suddenly, the Crown intervened and shifted the threshold of the vote, concluding that a mere 66 percent of all voters would be sufficient—a decision made without consulting or notifying the iwi rūnanga, and in particular the people of Ngāti Pūkenga, in this case. It was all done in the shadow of the Crown.

We have on record information that informs us that Ngāti Pūkenga twice voted resoundingly for not signing the agreement. We also have statements that describe how the resolve of Ngāti Pūkenga has been tested unduly and unnecessarily, and I quote: “The process thus far has been seriously flawed and our people have been alienated because the mana of our iwi was not respected.”

We contrast this statement with the emphasis the Crown gave in the preamble of the bill about its so-called commitment to healthy relationships with the iwi of Tauranga Moana. But yet again the Crown comes up sadly wanting. We have a situation in which to all intents and purposes Mauao remains in Crown ownership. We have a situation in which Tauranga Moana iwi were unable to find resolutions to their concerns about the long-term impacts of clause 7, which clearly sets out that the Crown continues to bear the rights and obligations as if it was the owner of the reserve.

Iwi wanted to know exactly how clause 7 would have an impact. Ngāi Te Rangi remind us that although their old people wanted the maunga returned at all costs, the price of clause 7 may be too high. I have met with representatives of Ngāi Te Rangi, and some of them are not happy. It is the classic divide and rule tactic. It is the same old story with settlements: “Take it or leave it. But if you leave it don’t come back and don’t do a tangiweto.” So what happens? The people become divided. It is an all too familiar feature of the interactions set in train by Crown intervention.

What makes me angry is that the Crown will never fully understand the long-term impacts and trauma that come about through provoking such division. These are iwi, just like the high-spirited young boys jumping off the wharf, who see Mauao as being central to their identity and to the sense of who they are. They deserve the House’s full respect for the way they have acted and for the integrity and commitment they have always upheld in trying to achieve the best outcomes for Tauranga Moana iwi and for Mauao.

We will support this bill going through to the select committee to ensure that all the voices that need to be heard in this debate have the chance to put their concerns. But we will be watching to see that securing Mauao remains of the highest priority for those iwi who have always called it “He maunga tipua, he maunga tapu, āe, he maunga nui”.

BOB CLARKSON (National—Tauranga) Link to this

It is good to see everybody heading in the same direction. We are not actually even slagging off each other, which I think is a pretty good sign. I keep going up to the Waitangi celebrations on the top of the Mount, and I have to say “sorry” every time I go up. The various Māori groups know what I am talking about. I am talking about the ownership of the Mount. I have done that for several years now and it is quite sickening. So it is good to see a bit of movement here. I am pleased to talk on this Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill, of course, because the Mount is in my area and is quite dominant within it. I do not see too much wrong with doing this deal. It will help to build a healthy relationship between the Crown and the different Māori groups. Sad to say, it is a bit of a Clayton’s deal. We are vesting it to the Māori groups; we are not giving it to them. This needs to be debated in the select committee to see whether there is a better way to do it. By partly giving it, it will be kept out of the Treaty settlements, because there is no monetary gain in the future. If it was a simple transfer of title, it could be argued that it could be part of a land Treaty settlement—which might drag on for years—and have a value put on it. I do not think that the people of Tauranga would be happy to give full title; they want free access to walk around or up the Mount at any time—

Hon MITA RIRINUI (Minister of State) Link to this

Kia ora tātou. I rise, naturally, to support the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill. But before I do that I want to acknowledge something very important that I almost overlooked. A tremendous event took place this morning in Parliament: the signing of the Te Ātiawa (Te Whanga-nui-a-Tara) agreement in principle in relation to their historic claim. That is a huge achievement not only for the Government but, in particular, for Te Ātiawa. The kōrero here in the meeting room echoed how we must appreciate our arrival at this point. So I congratulate the Minister, and all the Ministers—including me—who were involved in bringing the claim to this point.

I want to make it clear in this House that our ancestral association with our maunga Mauao has never, never, never been severed—not by anyone. I recite these words, which we call our popular pepeha: “Papaki tū ana ngā tai ki Mauao, i whakanukunukuhia, i whakanekenekehia. I whiua reretia e Hotu rawa, he mea rua ki te wai, ki tai wiwī, ki tai wawā, te whai ao, te ao mārama, tihei mauri ora.”

[The tides rendered and crashed upon Mauao, casting the waters about in turbulent movements. Hotu cast two things upon the tides here and yonder. Upon the physical world and the world of enlightenment as well, and behold there was life.]

Essentially that pepeha is attributed to the arrival of the Tainui waka into the Tauranga Harbour. On its arrival there was not much of a welcoming committee. The seas were high, the winds were strong, and the weather was bad. The ariki of the Tainui canoe, Huturoa, said that there was a bad spirit here, and that we had to make a sacrifice. So an old woman from the canoe said “I will be the sacrifice.”, and threw herself into the tide. From that moment on the seas settled, the clouds cleared, the wind went away, and settlement began. So we called Mauao, Mount Maunganui, our maunga iringa kōrero. All our history, all our poetry, all our culture surrounds this particular maunga at the mouth of the Tauranga Harbour. When people go on and on about transferral, fee simple title, and Clayton’s arrangements, I wonder to myself what those people are talking about. This is our ancestral maunga. Its mana has always been with us.

The purpose of this legislation is basically to bring authorities at a local level into line so that we can manage this very important taonga resource in an appropriate manner. That is what this is about. But there are roles and responsibilities for all those involved. Clause 3 of this transfer bill highlights what some of those are, including the obligations of the Crown. In other words, it removes the obligation of the trustees of the Mauao Trust from any public liability, and that is an honourable thing. That is an acknowledgment of the status of local tangata whenua, and we applaud that, regardless of what has been said in this House.

When people use the word “Clayton’s”, the only Clayton’s phrase that comes to mind for me is “Clayton’s consultation”. What the Hon Georgina te Heuheu, the Hon Tau Henare, the local member, Bob Clarkson, and the member for Waiariki, Te Ururoa Flavell, had with a small organisation in Tauranga is Clayton’s consultation. If they had gone right through the moana and talked to everyone, they would have come back with a better appreciation—and certainly with a better line. So when I use this tone of voice, it is because I realise that although some people who have spoken in this House live very close to the vicinity of the maunga, they have no understanding of its people and iwi dynamics.

When I stand to support this Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill, I have to make it clear that our relationship with our ancestral maunga comes in many different forms. We describe it in the first sense as spiritual. In the second sense, it is historic. In the third sense, it is cultural. In the fourth, and very important, sense, it is economic, because it did form part of the base of the economic development in the times before colonisation.

I want to respond to the member for Tauranga’s comments around his desire to be buried up on that maunga. I say to Bob that I am sorry, but it cannot be done. There was a point some time this year where he made that statement clear and I offered to do it for him straight away, but that was not to be.

I need to acknowledge the wisdom of many of the kaumātua of Tauranga who have been involved in this project right from its inception, but to do that I need to go right back to our old kaumātua rangatira, who have always asked the question of why our maunga has been alienated from its people. As I come forward into more contemporary times, up to the 1960s and 1970s, and I think about the decisions that were made by local authorities to alienate the Mauao even further from the people, including the public, I am reminded of people like my kaumātua Turirangi Te Kani; Charlie Kuka; Bill Ōhia; and my uncle and predecessor, the member for Eastern Maori, Paraone Rēwiti, who lobbied Parliament for justice in terms of the return of this ancestral maunga to the people of Tauranga.

But as you will recall, Madam Speaker—and I must acknowledge your role in bringing this legislation into the House—even in the year 2000 a delegation of Tauranga moana kaumātua met with you for the very purpose of discussing ways and means of returning their maunga to them, although they did make it clear at that time that kei te pupuri tonu mātou i te mana o tō mātou maunga.

[We will continue to retain ownership of our mountain.]

Even though we still hold the mana of our maunga, we want it recognised in law, for its protection and everybody else’s protection. So that is very important and it needs to be acknowledged.

I acknowledge those who have passed on since that first meeting—Wī Parerā Te Kani, a very, very instrumental person in bringing about very difficult decisions; the late Mike O’Brien; and Kiri Toha Tangitū, as mentioned by the Minister of Māori Affairs. I also acknowledge other kaumātua, including my uncle Kihi Ngātai and his wife; the representative from Waitaha, Tame McCausland and his wife; the Ngāti Pūkenga kaumātua, Monty Ōhia and his wife; and also Ngāti Ranginui kaumātua Mōrehu Ngātoko and his whānau. Very important, wise, and level-headed people in Tauranga have been involved throughout these negotiations. They decided, following that first meeting with you and myself, that they wanted the return of the maunga in fee simple form, although they understood that public access was important. They had no intention whatsoever of preventing that from continuing.

So when I hear people in this House say that the people of Tauranga were forced to sign the agreement that transfers the maunga back to the people, I wonder where they get those stories from, because I have not been at any meetings where anybody has been forced to do anything, and I say that in all sincerity. The kaumātua of Tauranga made a decision. They wanted the maunga back, understanding that public access issues were involved. They can never be forced to do anything, and you yourself, Madam Speaker, are aware of that. They are very clear-minded people. I suppose some people, when it came close to signing the deed of transfer, regardless of the positions they took thought it important to have their names on the document. They were given the opportunity to do that. But to turn around in the next breath and say that they were forced to do it is a load of rubbish, and that needs to be said in this House.

Once again, there are a lot of stories I could tell about this incredible maunga—this maunga iringa kōrero—in this House, but I believe I have only 10 minutes, and one of the bells has already gone. So in closing, I thank yourself, Madam Speaker; my colleague the Minister of Māori Affairs; the Hon Nanaia Mahuta, who spoke in this House earlier on and who does have an ancient association with the maunga with the arrival of the Tainui waka; and also the member Dave Hereora, who was very humble and modest when he spoke in the House and who also has the same connections to the maunga as I have.

I appreciate in particular all those members on the other side of House—the Greens, the Māori Party, and others, including the member for Tauranga—because throughout this whole process an incredible level of patience has been shown by all parties. In conclusion, I thank the Mayor of Tauranga, Stuart Crosby, his councillors, his chief executive, and all the officers of the Tauranga City Council who did all the groundwork, all the legwork, to make sure this day happened. On that note, I thank everybody who contributed to the positive outcome of the return of the maunga Mauao to the people of Tauranga moana. Kia ora.

Hon PAREKURA HOROMIA (Minister of Māori Affairs) Link to this

I move, That the Mauao Historic Reserve Vesting Bill be considered by the Māori Affairs Committee