Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill

Hon TARIANA TURIA (Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector) Link to this

I move, That the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill be now read a second time. Last weekend over 200 descendants of Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa gathered at Whangaehu Marae to celebrate the special significance of Puanga at the start of the Māori New Year. In our tribal records Puanga was the time of wānanga, a time to feed the mind and spirit, and to learn whakapapa and histories. It was a time to share hospitality, to be entertained, and to learn. And it was a time to reflect on our past, acknowledging those who live on in our memories, inspiring the promise of a stronger future. It is therefore an entirely appropriate time to be advancing the bill to settle all the historical claims against the Crown by Ngāti Apa.

I firstly acknowledge the work of the Māori Affairs Committee, which considered this bill and reported back to Parliament within 3 months. The chairperson, the Hon Tau Henare, is to be commended for his leadership and for ensuring that progress was both comprehensive and expeditious. The committee considered 34 submissions on the bill. Submissions in support of the bill were received on behalf of each of the hapū collectives of Ngāti Apa, including Ngā Ariki, Ngā Wairiki Ki Uta, Ngāti Tauira, Ngāti Kauae, and Ngāti Rangiwhakatūria me Ngā Uri o Taitapu.

The committee has now examined the bill and unanimously supports it. The committee has recommended that it be passed with a number of technical amendments. For Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa this settlement is life changing. It provides a springboard to the future that is forever associated with our foundations back to the whenua.

Our research describes Ngāti Apa as an alliance of Ngā Wairiki and Rangitīkei people, which emerged from events in the 1820s, 1830s, and 1840s. From that period on, we have been linked together by whakapapa, our connections strengthened by relationships to the five rivers of Mangawhero, Whangaehu, Turakina, Rangitīkei, and Oroua. As we move forward, it will be because of the importance we are giving to unity between Ngā Wairiki, Rangitikei, and Oroua, the rivers along which our ancestors dwelt.

In coming together we are joining together the autonomous hapū collectives that make up Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa because we are intrinsically connected. Our whakapapa is indivisible. It has also been important to work collaboratively with overlapping claimants. The need to sit down early on with Ngāti Raukawa, Whanganui iwi, Rangitāne o Manawatū, Ngāti Kauwhata, and Ngāti Hauā, and others has required a huge commitment from all parties. It was wonderful to read the submission of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Hauiti and their reference to the Pourewa Accord. The accord demonstrates the deep respect between Ngāti Hauiti and Ngāti Apa, the mutual acknowledgment of the validity of each other’s overlapping interests, and the agreement that identifies clear boundaries for future management and development.

Although some submitters felt that Ngā Wairiki should not be included in this settlement, the committee’s view was that the vast majority of Ngā Wairiki gave their mandate to Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Apa. They were also satisfied that the mandating and ratification processes were robust. There has never been a separation of Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa, certainly in my lifetime. Indeed, it is impossible to remove strands of one’s whakapapa when our whakapapa, sites of significance, and rivers are intrinsically linked together. The committee was finally assured that te rūnanga has left the door open for members who were not supporting the settlement to still participate in the post-settlement affairs of the iwi, including the right to participate in elections in respect of the governance entity.

I firmly believe that out of the growth of kotahitanga, Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa is now moving to a new phase; a time when Mt Curl will be known as Parae Karetu, and when Round Bush Scenic Reserve will be called Ōmarupapakau. The settlement includes the gifting of five papakāinga properties, AgResearch lands, Parewanui School, part of Santoft Forest and Lismore Sands Forest, and Kauangaroa School.

The settlement allows for the implementation of the cultural redevelopment plan, including marae development and investment in current programmes or initiatives that focus on areas such as te reo, arts, taonga, and mātauranga. This is a unique initiative to revive the life force of the people. The revitalisation focus has been recognised as a first in Treaty settlements, and it is something to be immensely proud of given that many of the Ngāti Apa hapū are probably lucky if they have one te reo speaker on each marae.

The immediate history of this legislation started on 16 November 2004 when the Crown recognised Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Apa’s deed of mandate. But, of course, the enduring story for Ngāti Apa tracks back to 1849 when the Crown purchased the 260-arce Rangitīkei-Turakina block. Our circumstances reflect that today. Ngāti Apa own less than 1 percent of their traditional rohe, the lands have been alienated, and the people have been disenfranchised. This bill confronts the failure of the Crown to adequately protect 35,000 acres of reserves set aside from the 1849 transaction.

The bill also takes into account the impact of the native land laws. They contributed to the erosion of traditional tribal structures and resulted in the alienation of nearly all of Ngāti Apa’s remaining land. It also brings to the fore the consistent perseverance of our tīpuna in challenging the injustices meted out by the Crown. It reminds us of the petitioning of the Premier in 1899 seeking the establishment of the reserves for the Ngāti Apa Act; a call on the Crown to pass an Act of Parliament to protect our lands.

Through all of the land transactions, Ngāti Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown. They sought to strengthen this relationship by going so far as to expressing loyalty to the Crown, but it was to no avail. The Crown failed to ensure that the arrangements in 1849 were given effect. The Crown failed to take steps to adequately protect the tribal and hapū custodianship of their lands.

The settlement enables us to gain a clear appreciation of the historical relationship between the Crown and Ngā Wairiki / Ngāti Apa. A history is documented; the disillusionment that grew out of the transactions resulted not in prosperity but in poverty. We know now that the Crown’s policy was to acquire land as cheaply as possible on the pretext that the growth of European settlement all around us would have ongoing benefits. The partnerships aspired towards in those times did not eventuate, and the wealth of a secure living was rarely experienced except by those who settled the land.

Now, with the progress of this settlement, we are poised to build a strong foundation to carry all our descendants of Ngāti Apa / Ngā Wairiki forward. The deed of settlement was signed by kuia and kaumatua appointed by their respective hapū. All the hapū provided the runanga with information to negotiate the statutory acknowledgments, to write the statements of association, and to negotiate the deeds of recognition.

We are also indebted to the leadership and vision of a very young negotiating team, Te Roopu Rangahau, and the strength of their w’anau in supporting them through such a demanding process. Many complex negotiations have been required, and our young people have made us proud through their skills and talents, and, most of all, the great integrity they brought to the task.

We mihi today to all those previous Labour Government Ministers who began the process of negotiation. Ki a koe, e Mita, he mihi noa tēnei ki a koe.

Finally, I want to mihi to the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Chris Finlayson, who has brought a fierce intellect, an irrepressible enthusiasm, a gracious dignity, and a genuine sense of understanding to the settlement of Ngāti Apa, as indeed he does to every Treaty settlement. It has been a privilege to work alongside him, and I thank him for the honour of being able to speak first in this debate, for my own iwi. Nā reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. I commend this bill to the House.

Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) Link to this

Tēnā koe, Mr Deputy Speaker. E te whaea, te Minita, tēnei te mihi ki a koe. It is an extraordinary moment, I think, that a descendant of the tribe, the hapū, the iwi in question is the Minister of the Crown who moves the second reading of the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. The Minister may have missed it, but my halting Māori at the beginning of my speech greeted her. It was a short mihi of acknowledgment of her role and some acknowledgment from a Pākehā who tries to understand what this might mean. Suddenly we are coming to the end of 100 or more years of struggle and protest on behalf of the Ngāti Apa people in order to reclaim some of the land that was theirs originally.

I will talk about a couple of things that I think are particularly significant in this settlement bill. I recommend that anybody who wants to know why this Parliament does these things read the preamble to the bill. The history that is recounted in this bill in the preamble is worth more people knowing about than just this House and the immediately affected iwi. It is the story of an indigenous people who were trying to get on with those who arrived more recently. They were trying not only to get on with them but to benefit from living together in that part of the country, which is largely around the Rangitīkei area but includes part of the country that runs between—if I remember correctly—the Whanganui River and Whangaehu River. Being brought up in Taranaki, I had to learn from the Hon Tariana Turia, out of respect for where she comes from, to pronounce the w-h as a “wh”, and I acknowledge that. It is difficult to unlearn things, but saying “Whangaehu” when I have always driven across it, over it, and around it and pronounced it “Fangaehu” is something that I will make an effort to do out of respect for those who come from there.

One of the amendments I am pleased to see that the Māori Affairs Committee put in was one in which they insisted on putting the “h” into Whanganui. They insisted on that, regardless of protests from outside that it should not be spelt that way. I acknowledge the work of the select committee not only in that respect but also for the fact that, with the submissions that they heard and the protests that were registered with them, they arrived at the conclusion that there was not much to amend in the bill as it was first put forward.

In pledging Labour’s support for this bill, which I hope has been obvious from my comments so far, I recognise some of the history and the length of time it has taken for this bill to get where it is. In fact, negotiations were led by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen, and the deed of settlement was signed on behalf of the Crown by the Hon Parekura Horomia in October 2008. The bill’s introduction came in August 2009 and the first reading in November 2009. From there it was referred to the Māori Affairs Committee and finally has emerged today after report-back for its second reading.

The area we are talking about in this bill is that part of the Rangitīkei-Manawatū area that anybody who is familiar with that country knows is beautiful—beautiful pastoral land, and a beautiful part of the North Island. I commend to people to read the story of purchase and quasi-agreement that started this process of alienation of land. Much of it, as I said, is recounted in the preamble. It is worth noting that Ngāti Apa never felt that they were properly consulted when an agreement was being drafted, and that they were never properly taken into account. Regardless of whether they received £1,000 in exchange for 86,200 acres of land, and regardless of whether that was fair at the time, it is true that the reserve lands that were set aside for Ngāti Apa were also alienated later.

It is hard to find a piece of Aotearoa New Zealand that has been subjected to more laws, quite frankly. By the time one has gone through the events of the 1830s, the 1840s, and on into the 1850s, and the application of a number of laws to the settlement of this piece of land, it is a wonder that anybody can track exactly what went on, particularly, as we are told, because in some instances the diary of the Pākehā negotiator was the only record available.

I refer to some of the content of this bill. It provides a number of critical things that now people ought to be becoming familiar with as we move through Treaty settlements. One is an acknowledgment of the obligations of the Crown. Another is an apology, because there are times when an apology is the only way that we can proceed as a nation to move forward. There has to be some recognition of wrongdoing and an apology, even generations later. Beyond that, the critical things that also are contained in the bill are to do with cultural redress and commercial redress. The settlement includes a historical account, much of which I have alluded to in my speech; the Crown acknowledgment of historical breaches of the Treaty; a Crown apology; a cultural redress package featuring the transfer of a number of sites of cultural significance to Ngāti Apa, including two lake beds; and a quantum of money, including the opportunity to purchase four Crown properties in the Rangitīkei region.

In winding up, I acknowledge some words that my colleague the Hon Mita Ririnui said in his first speech on this bill’s first reading. They echo the statement of the Minister, and recognise the young people who came forward to negotiate this settlement. I pay tribute to them.

Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations) Link to this

Ngāti Apa rohe, Ngāti Apa tangata, te iwi o te maunga tupuna i a Parae Karetu, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

[To the region and people of Ngā Apa, the people of the ancestral mountain Parae Karetu, greetings to you, greetings to you, and greetings to you all.]

I acknowledge the contribution of both previous speakers. I consider I am one of the lucky ones in Parliament in that my opposite number, Maryan Street, is such a sensible person; it does not always apply when one is dealing with Opposition MPs.

The Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill recognises and addresses the historical grievance of North Island Ngāti Apa. Those grievances are longstanding. They relate primarily to the Crown’s purchase in 1849 of the Rangitīkei-Turakina Block, and the subsequent failure to protect reserves set aside from this transaction. As the other speakers have said, from 1848 the Crown purchased many hundreds of thousands of hectares of land in which Ngāti Apa held interests. Through these transactions Ngāti Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown, and they sought to strengthen this relationship by expressing loyalty to the Crown. But the Crown failed to ensure that the arrangements in the 1849 deed were given effect, and the Crown also failed to take steps to protect collective tribal and hapū custodianship of the land.

North Island Ngāti Apa have worked over many years to have their claims addressed by the Crown. The Crown recognised the mandate of Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Apa in November 2004. The negotiation reached a significant milestone when an agreement in principle was signed on 12 July 2007, followed by an initialled deed of settlement in September 2008. The settlement is well supported by North Island Ngāti Apa. In September last year 35 percent of the registered adult members of Ngāti Apa voted on the deed of settlement and proposed governance arrangements. Of these, 97 percent voted in favour of accepting both the deed of settlement and the proposed arrangements. The Crown and North Island Ngāti Apa subsequently signed a deed of settlement on 8 October 2008. I acknowledge the work of my predecessor, Dr Cullen. On 25 August 2009 the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill was introduced to Parliament.

I agree with the other speakers when they say that settling this claim is an important further step in this country’s progress towards settling all historical Treaty grievances. The settlement redress provided by the bill recognises the history of North Island Ngāti Apa’s interaction with the Crown. It includes Crown acknowledgments and an apology for historical breaches of the Treaty. Ngāti Apa have significant aspirations for the development of their iwi. The redress included in this bill will help them make progress towards those aspirations in the future. The commercial and financial redress totals $16 million, including a right to purchase approximately 6,500 hectares of Crown forest licensed land and certain other Crown-owned properties. The redress includes innovative cultural revitalisation elements, including the gifting of five papakāinga properties, provision of funding to develop and implement a strategy for revitalising North Island Ngāti Apa customs, and funding to assist in compiling a comprehensive historical record. Although it is not possible to fully compensate Ngāti Apa, nor any claimant group, for the loss their people have suffered, the cultural redress in this bill seeks to recognise Ngāti Apa’s longstanding cultural and spiritual association in the region.

The bill was referred to the Māori Affairs Committee on 17 November last year. The committee reported back to the House on 17 March 2010, and I thank the committee for its excellent work on this bill and for considering it in such a timely manner. The committee received and considered 34 submissions on the bill. Submissions in support of the bill were received on behalf of each of the hapū collectives of Ngāti Apa. The committee heard oral submissions on the bill in Marton on 17 February at the Turakina Māori Girls College. The committee has examined the bill, it has proposed no major amendments, and it unanimously supports it. The committee has recommended that it be passed with a number of technical amendments. Ten properties listed in schedule 2 have been surveyed since the bill’s introduction. The technical amendments recommended by the committee reflect the updated legal description of these properties.

I acknowledge the North Island Ngāti Apa people who suffered from the breaches of the Treaty and who carried the grievances. I particularly acknowledge those who are no longer with us. I also acknowledge Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Apa, including the members of the negotiating team; their dedication and determination have been vital in the path towards settlement. I thank other Ministers and departments involved in this process. A wide variety of people from across the political spectrum have made really important contributions to this settlement over the years.

The second reading is part of the last stage of the settlement process that seeks to recognise what is important to the people of Ngāti Apa, and to provide redress for historical breaches of the Treaty. It is one of the many settlements that this Government is progressing toward a goal of settling historical Treaty of Waitangi claims by 2014.

Hon MITA RIRINUI (Labour) Link to this

Otirā, kia ora tātou e te Whare. Kia ora tātou e te Minita, ahakoa kua wehe atu, nāu tonu nei te pire i whakapānuihia ki te Whare, otirā, ki te motu katoa. E tika ana rā te tikanga, māu tonu rā te pire e pānuihia i te mea rā, ko koe rā te uri o rātou i ārahi mai tēnei kaupapa kia tae mai ki roto i te Whare nei.

[So greetings to us all, the House. Greetings to us, and the Minister; even though you are no longer present, you personally presented the bill to the House and to the whole nation. That you should present the bill is appropriate, because you are their relative and the one who guided this matter here into this House.]

In the time I have been a member of this House I have had the good fortune to have been involved in many settlement bills. Some have been quite massive and I could run off a list, just to highlight those particular settlements. But this one, the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill, is of particular significance to myself, not so much for the way that the Ngāti Apa people were treated during the 1800s and in the early 1900s, but for the manner in which they conducted themselves throughout this whole process.

The Minister, the Hon Tariana Turia, who is also the member for Te Tai Hauāuru, reminded us of the sad history of this claim, particularly as it relates to her people of Ngāti Apa. If one reads the history of this settlement, the historical account, one would understand why over the years many people carry grievance to the point where it dominates their lives.

When we consider the commitment of the negotiating team, young as they were and still are, given that this settlement has progressed quite well—they did not start young and finish old; they started young and they are still young—and their attitude throughout the negotiations, it is obvious that they were the right people to lead us. Those who stood behind the negotiations and supported them were the ones who felt the harshness of Government policy and its effects over a period of time. Those young people had a clear vision that in order to overcome the grievance they needed to show leadership, lead the way, finalise the settlement, and provide for their people the opportunity to move forward. They have done an excellent job, as the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations reminded the House this evening. Apart from his unkind opening statements the rest of his speech was very positive.

This bill gives effect to the deed of settlement in which the Crown and Ngāti Apa agree to a final settlement of Ngāti Apa’s historical claims. I am proud to say that Labour supports this bill, and does so for obvious reasons. The negotiations on behalf of the previous Labour-led Government were led by the Hon Dr Michael Cullen. The deed of settlement was signed on behalf of the Crown by the Hon Parekura Horomia, Minister of Māori Affairs, in October 2008. Soon after the deed was signed, Dr Cullen reminded us that this settlement was a historic moment in the relationship between the Crown and Ngāti Apa. It allows both parties, the Crown and Ngāti Apa, to move forward into the future. I am very pleased that Minister Finlayson continues to support the positive initiatives initiated by the previous Government, particularly when it comes to Treaty settlements. If the Minister is to meet his 2014 deadline, he will need the cooperation of every party in this House. I thank the Minister for his positive moves in this portfolio.

I will spend some time talking about the select committee process, because that was very, very interesting. As with most settlements, issues developed along the way between competing interests, competing tribal groups, and also between competing tribal groups and their local mainstream communities. Ngāti Apa had it all. So it was really a test for them to see how they managed those different dynamics, those competing interests, so that they would be able to finalise this settlement legislation.

I am reminded of the differences, in terms of status, between Ngāti Apa and iwi belonging to Ngā Wairiki and the manner in which they resolved those issues. The select committee was reminded that many of those who belong to Ngā Wairiki also claimed that they had whakapapa to Ngāti Apa. In fact, they overwhelmingly supported the mandate of Ngāti Apa. To that point, Ngāti Apa was able to proceed, even though some dissenters came to the select committee. Also, those in support of the Ngāti Apa mandate belonging to Ngā Wairiki were happy with the way that the legislation was to be written and the way that the post-governance settlement arrangements were to be constructed. They will continue to enjoy, by right, the benefits from the settlement and the assets. The select committee recommended in its report back to the House that there be no changes in terms of the inclusion of Ngā Wairiki groups in this settlement legislation.

The area of cultural redress properties was interesting also. Many of the properties that are included in the cultural redress are situated in areas of tremendous significance to the Ngāti Apa people. Although these properties may not have a significant commercial value—in fact, many of them have none in so far as Ngāti Apa is concerned—the areas of land on which these buildings are erected are of tremendous significance to Ngāti Apa. For that reason, and that reason alone, it was important that these properties not be overlooked in the negotiations, and that they be included in the settlement package as part of the cultural redress. I am glad that the staff of the Office of Treaty Settlements did not recommend to the Minister that these properties be classified as commercial redress, because that would have been a grievance upon a grievance; that would have been wrong.

I remind the Minister that his officials advised the select committee that in so far as schedule 2, the list of 17 cultural redress properties, is concerned, AgResearch lands are not yet included in the land bank properties. We were given the assurance that by the time this bill completes its passage through the House that land would be included in the land bank and form part of the redress. I am hopeful that the Minister will be able to conclude this small technical matter by the time the Committee stage is finished. It is important that we all have a discussion on that. This is something new in Treaty settlements. We have included a parcel of land as part of the redress, and it is important that it is in the right place—for want of words—and that is the land bank. That indeed is a minor challenge, but nevertheless it is a challenge for the Minister.

The fisheries protocol is very interesting. Anyone who knows the area of Whanganui or Ngāti Apa’s rohe well knows that in the rivers and lakes—small as they are—there are massive populations of tuna, of eels. One person who submitted on the bill—and I know that the committee members were surprised to hear it—referred to small eels. We said to ourselves that anyone who has been there—to Whangaehu and those particular areas—would never have seen a small eel. They are massive; we call them taniwha. But that was a good example of a competing interest. Somebody believed that their commercial interests would be severely compromised because Ngāti Apa were going to catch small eels. Ngāti Apa do not catch small eels, and that is one thing we had to tell that person. But that is a good example of self-interest rather than of competing interests, of having little consideration for the customary rights of others, and of having consideration for doing the right thing, which is what this bill is about.

In the short time I have left I will take the time, as everybody else before me has done, to congratulate the select committee—and rightly so, because the chairman conducted a very open and flexible process when we heard the submissions. He allowed members to be quite broad in their questioning of submitters and officials. As a result, we have before us a well-considered bill. I hope that he keeps up those standards. Thank you.

DAVID CLENDON (Green) Link to this

Tēnā koutou katoa. I will open by acknowledging the Hon Tariana Turia, the Minister who opened this debate, and by recognising the unique situation that she is shepherding through the House a bill that is of such significance and personal importance to her and her whanaunga. I will take only a short call on this Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill, which we in the Greens have already undertaken to support through all of its readings. Although we have not participated directly in the select committee process, it is clear that a great deal of very valuable and useful work has been done in the Māori Affairs Committee, and that issues have been honestly and openly dealt with, if not in every case resolved, which is inevitable. Clearly, there has been a great deal of goodwill in relation to that process, and it shows in both the documents and the outcome.

We acknowledge the work of the Minister and the members of the Māori Affairs Committee, who have supported this process, and most of all we take the opportunity to acknowledge Ngāti Apa and wish them all the best for the progress of this bill, to the extent that it will restore their tino rangatiratanga and their mana motuhake over their own lands. This bill reflects that Ngāti Apa, like so many other iwi and hapū, have for over a century been engaged in a struggle, a very real struggle, to have resolution of wrongdoing and the receipt of justice, and to see the honouring of solemn commitments that were made on both sides of the Treaty relationship in 1840. Again, we acknowledge and offer our respects for that struggle, and to those who have participated in it over many generations.

It is clear that the progress of this bill, and the negotiations that have underpinned it, have followed a pattern whereby certain elements have emerged, which are becoming commonplace, or familiar at least, within these Treaty settlements processes. It is clear within the report that some serious concerns have been expressed, from particular hapū who have felt that their inclusion in this process, against their wishes and preferences, could to some extent compromise their own preferred outcomes in this process. But objections of that sort are common to just about every settlement process, current or past. I think it is fair to say that the Crown’s policy of negotiating settlements with large natural groupings is one that must be constantly challenged and under constant review, to ensure that we do not get outcomes that deny the settlement of legitimate concerns, and the right of hapū to self-identity and the self-determination of their futures. We note that there have been claims that some of the lands that will be returned under settlement, in this case, are also claimed by other iwi. Again, that is a typical effect of colonisation and the imposition of Western property law—rather than of tikanga over generations—which has confounded to some extent the appropriate resolution of inter-iwi disputes that otherwise could have been resolved.

Again, it is in common with other settlements—and it was referenced by the previous Speaker—that there are those within the wider community who seem to have a concern, or even a degree of suspicion, that the settlement, and the return of assets and mana to the affected iwi and hapū, are somehow too much—that somehow the proposed settlement might reduce or compromise the rights or expectations of those who have become accustomed to a particular situation or practice. The reality is, of course, that Ngāti Apa, as with so many other iwi and hapū, have been extraordinarily patient, and have been equally modest and realistic in their expectation of what can be done in the 21st century to put right the transgressions of the 19th and 20th centuries. The detail of the Crown purchases contained in the preamble to this bill tells a story that highlights very well the almost complete lack of generosity and lack of empathy—the almost complete selfishness—of those who embarked on purchasing land from Ngāti Apa. I think we can consider ourselves very fortunate that in the 21st century Māori are much more generous of spirit in accepting only part of what was taken away as resolution and redress from the Crown.

It is encouraging and very positive to see that significant material assets will be returned to Ngāti Apa, and that there will be some wealth that will enable them to build an economy and to utilise their resources in ways that are appropriate for them and to the exercise of their mana. Equally important to that tangible return, and to those tangible assets, is the sincere apology from the Crown, which acknowledges the mana of these people, and acknowledges that their objections and their claims—their grievances over a century—have been justified, have been realised, and in fact were legitimate. I cannot stress enough, as others have, the significance of the apology, of the symbolic return, as much as the tangible redress and return of assets.

There is not much more I wish to say, except to acknowledge again the good work of those in this House who have put through this bill, and of those who are no longer here but who made significant contributions to it. This bill is clearly about settlement, but it is also an opportunity for the truth of our shared history to be spoken and heard, and, we hope, to be better understood. Knowing a little more of our own history, of our shared history, will perhaps progress us towards a speedy resolution of this settlement and of those that will follow it. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.

HONE HARAWIRA (Māori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) Link to this

Kia ora tātou katoa e te Whare. Sitting on the Māori Affairs Committee to hear stories from whānau, hapū, and iwi is a real privilege, as it was to hear the submissions of Ngāti Apa on the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It was an opportunity to hear them speak with pride of their whakapapa, their descent from Apa-hāpai-taketake, another tūpuna of Rangitikei and Ngā Wairiki.

Four months ago, we travelled up to Marton to hear submissions at Turakina Māori Girls’ College, and also, of course, to enjoy the sweet melodies of the beautiful young Māori women who attend that wonderful school. We heard submissions in support from various hapū of Ngāti Apa, including Ngā Ariki, Ngā Wairiki Ki Uta, Ngāti Tauira, Ngāti Kauae, Ngāti Rangiwhakatūria, and Ngā Uri o Taitapu.

We also heard submissions lodged by Wai 655 claimants and the Southern Whanganui Cluster / Tūpoho working party, several of whom felt that Ngā Wairiki should be left out of the Ngāti Apa settlement and dealt with perhaps as a separate iwi or as a hapū of Whanganui. But we noted that three major Ngā Wairiki hapū groups had already chosen to be included in the Ngāti Apa settlement, and that the rūnanga had left the door open for all of Ngā Wairiki to participate in the post-settlement affairs of the iwi, including elections to the new governance body. We recognised the differences, but we also accepted the fact that those matters were best resolved in-house by Ngā Wairiki themselves.

The other contentious issue was that presented by members of the Southern Whanganui Cluster / Tūpoho working party, who said that they wanted to take issue with the part of the settlement that involved the Lismore Hills Forest, which both Ngāti Apa and Whanganui have interests in. Some objected to the transfer of 65 percent of the forest to Ngāti Apa, because they felt that there was a stronger Whanganui claim to the part of the forest being offered to Ngāti Apa. They felt that they were being shut out of gaining any interest or settlement from that area. That was one of the more complex issues that we had to consider, but our research showed that a lot of time had already been given to enabling the various interest groups to resolve that issue, including extensive litigation through the Waitangi Tribunal and the Court of Appeal, which upheld the tribunal’s decision. Given the number of meetings, the litigation, and the outcome of the litigation, and the very strongly held but differing view of the parties, we simply did not believe that more time would necessarily lead to a positive agreement. We noted, though, that 35 percent of the Lismore Hills Forest had actually been set aside for use in any future settlement with Whanganui iwi.

The Hon Tariana Turia, herself of Ngāti Apa and Ngā Wairiki, has already spoken of the Pourewa Accord between Ngāti Apa and Ngāti Hauiti. It was interesting to note that Ngāti Hauiti felt that any concern they might have had regarding the settlement and other redress was covered in that accord, and that they therefore had no major issues with the bill. That is a precedent that other iwi and hapū might do well to consider. It is unnecessary in the north, of course, but certainly worthy of consideration in some of the more rebellious areas south of the Tāmaki River.

Ngā Wairiki ki Uta spoke of the ongoing support they have received from and given to Te Rūnunga o Ngāti Apa over the years, their continued representation at the rūnanga level, how the rūnanga itself could help represent Ngā Wairiki ki Uta. They spoke about a number of other important issues, including fisheries, resource management, iwi representation, and other dealings with the Crown, and their gratitude to the rūnanga itself, following the devastating floods of 2004, which had severely damaged their marae and a number of their homes.

I come back to Ngāti Apa. The various hapū collectives of Ngāti Apa have come together to give their support to Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Apa negotiating and settling their historical claims. They told us that their hapū had freely and willingly participated in every aspect of the negotiations and the settlement process, including a number of information hui held throughout the rohe, and that the deed of settlement had in fact been ratified by 97 percent of those who had voted. Ngāti Apa clearly are people on the move, rebuilding their culture and their identity from a time when they were almost landless. Their tikanga was under threat, and their capacity to speak the reo was seriously endangered. The progress they have made is a credit to their commitment and their vision to rebuild and restore themselves as Ngā Wairiki and Ngāti Apa. The Māori Party is proud to acknowledge their efforts and to support this bill today.

Hon TAU HENARE (National) Link to this

Te mea tuatahi, kei a koe e te Tumuaki o te Whare nei, tēnā koe. Kei a koutou e aku rangatira, ngā mema o te Komiti Māori, tēnā anō koutou katoa.

[The first thing, Mr Assistant Speaker of this House, is greetings to you. To you, my illustrious colleagues, members of the Māori Affairs Committee, my acknowledgments once again to you all.]

I will not take too long on the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. Nothing gives me more pleasure than to be able to play a part in the theatre of Treaty of Waitangi settlements. One of the reasons is that I get a sense of national pride, a sense of nationalism, and a sense of patriotism when the House enters this stage of a Treaty settlement.

I take my hat off to my colleagues. Somebody on the other side is whispering and not listening to what I have to say, but that is OK. I take my hat off to the members of the Māori Affairs Committee, from both National and Labour, and to the Greens, who were sometimes there. I am not saying anything disparaging about them; it is just that they have a big workload.

I will briefly mention something that is in every Treaty settlement bill that I think we do not pay enough attention to during the process. If members cast their eyes over the preamble to the bill, they will find a précis of the history of the involvement of Ngāti Apa. Although it is not a huge historical tome of where Ngāti Apa has come from and where it may end up, it is a small historical account of a people’s struggle. I am sure that one day we will be teaching this stuff in our schools, and not for any other reason than to be patriotic and nationalistic about the history of our country. It will not be taught with any feeling of guilt or any thoughts other than this nation can, through this process, become closer as one nation.

I will not ramble on too much more, other than to say that our select committee meeting at Turakina Māori Girls College to hear submissions was one of the best of our session.

KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) Link to this

Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. Te mea tuatahi mihi kau atu ki tērā te Minita a Tariana nōna nei te iwi e kōrerotia nei e tātou i te wā nei.

[The first thing is to acknowledge Minister Tariana Turia, whose people we are discussing at the moment.]

I would like to start by touching on what the Hon Tau Henare has just mentioned about the wealth of history that is in these Treaty settlement bills. I agree totally with him and say I think it would be great if we could teach this history in our schools. I encourage Ngāti Apa, as part of its cultural redress, to consider developing this history just a little further and taking it to schools, so that schools and the local iwi can work in partnership and cooperation to make sure that local iwi history is not simply forgotten. I encourage that not just for Ngāti Apa but for all schools in the areas covered by Treaty settlements, using the information in these bills.

It is important for us to consider that in 1840 Ngāti Apa had considerable land interests in the Rangitīkei and Manawatū areas. That is the first point. The second point is that it is also important for us to know that three members of Ngāti Apa signed the Treaty of Waitangi in 1840. The way that the land was broken up, which became a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi, disenfranchised Ngāti Apa from their land and from their culture, and that is at the crux of this bill. It is important that the Crown has acknowledged that Ngāti Apa have been raising grievances with the Crown for over 100 years, and that the Crown failed to deal with the longstanding grievances of Ngāti Apa in an appropriate way. The recognition of the grievances of Ngāti Apa is long overdue. It is also important for us to realise that from 1848 over 400,000 acres of the considerable land interests of Ngāti Apa were purchased. It was through these land transactions that Ngāti Apa endeavoured to establish a relationship with the Crown.

The deed for the 1849 Rangitīkei-Turakina purchase stated that approximately 35,000 acres of that land would be reserved for all of Ngāti Apa to collect and settle on. However, later native land legislation enabled these reserve lands to pass through the Native Land Court, which awarded land interest to individuals rather than to all the tribe, and that excluded many Ngāti Apa from ownership of the tribal reserve land. That failure of the Crown to ensure that the arrangements recorded in the 1849 deed were given effect to was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. The native land laws, in particular awarding the land to individual Ngāti Apa rather than to iwi or hapū, made the lands that Ngāti Apa were able to retain more susceptible to partition, fragmentation, and alienation. It is a classic case of divide and conquer. This contributed to the erosion of the tribal structures of Ngāti Apa, which were based on collective tribal and hapū custodianship of the land. The Crown failed to take steps to adequately protect those tribal structures, and that had a prejudicial effect on Ngāti Apa. Again, that was a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Despite Ngāti Apa’s contributing lands for settlement purposes, the significant benefits that Ngāti Apa expected to flow from its relationship with the Crown were not realised. The cumulative effect of the Crown’s actions and omissions left Ngāti Apa virtually landless. The Crown failed to ensure that Ngāti Apa retained sufficient lands for their present and future needs. Therefore, today we have the situation where most of Ngāti Apa live outside their tribal rohe, and the loss of their traditional lands has impacted on the access of Ngāti Apa to resources such as their rivers, lakes, forests, wetlands, and traditional walking paths. Ngāti Apa have lost control over many of their significant sites, including wāhi tapu, and this has had an ongoing impact on their physical and spiritual relationship with the land.

So it is important that we acknowledge the apology that has been offered by the Crown. It is important that we acknowledge the work that was started by Dr Cullen, the Hon Parekura Horomia, and the Hon Mita Ririnui, and that has been continued by the Hon Chris Finlayson. It is also important to note that four Ngāti Apa people signed the original document. They were Lillian Te Aweawe, Rōpata Te Hina, Arikihānara Mare Mare, and Mariana Shenton, all from Ngāti Apa, of course.

The apology is really important. An apology does not bring back everything that was lost, but it is important that the Crown has apologised and recognised the efforts and struggles of Ngāti Apa in pursuit of their claims for justice and redress. It is also important, in the apology, that the Crown has said it profoundly regrets and unreservedly apologises to Ngāti Apa for the breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. It is also important to note that the Crown regrets and apologises for the cumulative effect of its actions and omissions over the generations through to the present day. These matters have all had a detrimental impact on the traditional tribal structures of Ngāti Apa. With this apology the Crown seeks to atone for the past wrongs, to begin a process of healing, and to make a significant step towards rebuilding a lasting relationship with Ngāti Apa, based on mutual trust and cooperation.

The cultural redress is that there are protocols to be issued to the trustees by the Minister of Conservation, the Minister of Fisheries, and the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage. There is an acknowledgment by the Crown of the statements that were made by Ngāti Apa of their cultural, spiritual, historical, and traditional association with nine statutory areas and the effect of the acknowledgment, deeds of recognition between the Crown and trustees, and also the vesting in the trustees of the fee simple estate in 17 cultural redress properties. It is really important for everyone and for the House to understand that the 17 cultural redress properties represent but a fraction of the land that was denied or that was partitioned and removed from Ngāti Apa. I can imagine all the rednecks out there saying the blimmin Māoris are getting more land handed back. But the rednecks have to realise that this is just a fraction of what Ngāti Apa lost.

Finally, there is a part of the cultural redress that talks about the alteration of place names. We know about the most obvious example of altering place names, from the debate over whether “Wanganui” or “Whanganui” is correct. I believe it is really important for us to recognise that to Māori it is important that our language, our places, and our place names are given the due respect that they deserve. It is not fair or right that a group of people can come and change names, often not just by removing a letter from the name but actually by supplanting a name in another language, and then to say that is the way it is and Māori just have to get over it.

This settlement has been great. I endorse what the others have said about being part of the Māori Affairs Committee and the work that has gone on with regard to this legislation. It is well overdue. Ngāti Apa have waited far too long for this settlement to occur, and Labour, of course, supports this bill. Kia ora.

NICKY WAGNER (National) Link to this

Tēnā koutou e te Whare; e te Tumuaki, tēnā koe. I rise to support the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It is great to see that this historic claim has finally been settled. It is particularly pleasing to see that the settlement package is a mixture of cultural redress and financial and commercial redress, and also that there is an agreed historical account and Crown acknowledgment that form the basis of a Crown apology to Ngāti Apa. All members of Ngāti Apa, wherever they live, will be pleased to see this final settlement.

National is committed to our goal of reaching just and durable settlements from historic Treaty claims by 2014. We are putting our money where our mouth is. Budget 2010 provides an extra $6.5 million over the next 3 years to achieve the Government’s goal of settling all historical Treaty of Waitangi claims by 2014. This Ngāti Apa settlement is part of a significant acceleration in Treaty settlements that we have seen over the past year. The Government has signed 11 agreements in principle and six deeds of settlement in the last 12 months. The extra funding that we have put in Budget 2010 will continue speeding up that process by providing resources for our successful team of Crown chief negotiators to employ extra staff to support negotiations and draft the deeds of settlement.

More groups are also keen to ramp up the speed of negotiations since they have seen the benefits that settling claims in a timely fashion can bring for people by creating jobs and unlocking economic development opportunities. Coming from Ōtautahi, or Christchurch, in Te Wai Pounamu, or the South Island, I am particularly pleased to see more settlements taking place. Our local iwi, Ngāi Tahu, led the settlement process and the whole South Island community has benefited form their proactive stance. Because they settled early they have the opportunity to grow their assets, to grow their businesses, and to strengthen their iwi. They are now dominant and highly respected players in the business community of the South Island. Ngāi Tahu companies are involved in retail, education, agriculture, fishing, and forestry. But they are best known—and perhaps best loved—for their tourism ventures. The story of Whale Watch Kaikoura, in particular, illustrates powerfully everything that is good about economic independence for iwi.

The Treaty settlement process is about acknowledging unfairness, making amends for mistakes, and accepting each other’s apologies. This Government is committed to its goal of reaching the just and durable settlement of historical Treaty claims by 2014 because we understand the importance of getting down to the business of settling the claims with as little delay as possible. We must settle those claims so that all New Zealanders can look to the future and move forward together.

NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) Link to this

Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa. I am pleased to speak on this Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill, but I will start by recognising the members across the House, including former Labour Ministers, who have contributed to this process. I also acknowledge the recognition by the previous speaker, Nicky Wagner, of the significance of this settlement to a member of this House. This settlement is for Minister Turia’s whānau, her people. Occasionally in this House members are able to look back on the words they said as a newbie MP. In my maiden statement I said: “In supporting this National Government the Māori Party MPs have shown that they are not bound by rigid left or right-wing ideology in their pursuit of better lives for all Māori.” I acknowledge Minister Turia and the Māori Party for the purposeful and hard-working job they are doing in walking a line that is enabling them to keep their independence as a party while making extraordinary progress for Māori. This week’s announcement on the foreshore and seabed is a real achievement, which guarantees access to our beaches while restoring the ability of Māori to have the fundamental right to test their rights within our court system. That is a fundamental right of all New Zealanders, and I support that.

I will touch on why we are here, and on why we are doing these settlements for all New Zealanders. Firstly, we believe that Māori are seeing the benefits that settling claims in a timely fashion can bring to their people, and we know that by doing that in a timely fashion we can see that new jobs are created and economic development is unlocked. Secondly, we are doing this because we fundamentally acknowledge that there is unfairness, that we need to make amends for mistakes, and that we need to accept each other’s apologies. Thirdly, we are doing this because we want to live in a country that moves beyond grievance to the empowerment of people.

I have just a few other comments to make. Obviously, we acknowledge the pace our Government is working at, and I acknowledge Mr Finlayson for the huge amount of work that he has done. I think that previous speakers have called him someone who has a huge intellect and graciousness, and I support those comments. We have put a lot of money into speeding up the pace of these settlements, and I think that people are acknowledging that.

But this settlement is really about Ngāti Apa, and I acknowledge Minister Turia’s comments that this bill is life-changing for them. Ngāti Apa has more than 3,200 members. The historical grievances of the iwi relate primarily to the Crown’s purchase in 1849 of the 260,000 acre Rangitīkei-Turakina block, including the Crown’s subsequent failure to adequately protect approximately 35,000 acres of reserves set aside from that transaction. I acknowledge that this is the final settlement of all of Ngāti Apa’s North Island historical claims. Nicky Wagner acknowledged the fact that the package includes cultural redress, and financial and commercial redress.

I acknowledge members of the Māori Affairs Committee, and in particular Tau Henare for the way that he has led that committee. In closing, I speak to the people of Ngāti Apa when I say: Ngāti Apa, mauri ora ki a koutou katoa. Thank you.

Dr RAJEN PRASAD (Labour) Link to this

It is a delight to take a brief call in support of the Ngāti Apa (North Island) Claims Settlement Bill. It is pleasing that Ngāti Apa has progressed this bill. A huge process has been entered into to get to this point.

One of the wonderful things about what has happened in this Treaty settlement period of New Zealand history, as Māori reach a post-renaissance period, is the many examples where a particular iwi or tribe, Ngāti Apa in this case, is mandated to develop a process to identify all of the issues that are before it, and then to enter the process of negotiations with the Crown over a long period of time. It is something special about New Zealand society that this has happened many times now. It is now Ngāti Apa’s day. We acknowledge the grievances that have been raised, we acknowledge the hurts of the past, and we find a way to the future.

One of the defining aspects of contemporary New Zealand society is that we are able to do this. It sets us apart from many, many other countries and it makes us unique. In many countries indigenous people and tribes have been colonised and have had their rights and their land taken away. Sometimes they never reach the point that Ngāti Apa is reaching today. That is the special characteristic that I acknowledge and celebrate as a New Zealander and as a member of this House speaking at this stage of the bill.

The bill is a credit to previous members of Parliament and previous Governments that have worked on this process. In this particular case, we note that the part of Mr Cullen has been acknowledged, and that of others. I also acknowledge the part of the Hon Christopher Finlayson in bringing it together. They all do this House and this country proud by engaging in the process and taking their own time to make it so special. It falls on the present Government to bring this legislation to a conclusion, so I acknowledge the Hon Christopher Finlayson, the Māori Affairs Committee, and others who have worked on this bill to bring it to this phase.

This bill has all of those unique aspects that have become a hallmark of settlements in New Zealand. Firstly, the main provisions acknowledge the harm that was done and offer an apology. That is quite special about New Zealand society. Some do not realise that. At times, in many conversations outside the House, there are those who say that they did not do anything wrong, so why should they apologise. But, indeed, in a symbolic sense, these apologies are unique to us as New Zealanders at this point in our history. So this bill also provides an apology, and there are several aspects of it. The bill also includes cultural redress aspects as well as commercial redress. Together those aspects make the bill a cause for celebration. It provides a pathway forward and puts to rest certain matters of the past. It provides compensation to the extent possible, which is never enough, clearly. Most important, it enables this particular tribe to move forward as equal partners in this society.

My call is a brief one to acknowledge that particular work and to acknowledge unique aspects of our society at this time. I wonder what aspects people listening to this debate will focus on. Will they think that it is just another settlement and that Parliament is going through the motions again? Or is it more important than that? Clearly, it is particularly significant for Ngāti Apa. It is their time; it is their process. It is their time to be compensated, to have resources, and to move forward. But would it not be nice if others also moved forward with it? That is the symbolism of the apology, which I mentioned earlier. It is us as a nation trying to put to rest some aspects of the past. As we do that, it provides a way to move forward. I urge others who are listening, others who might not be 100 percent behind what this bill is about, to accept the symbolism of the apology and the importance of the settlement. It provides us as a society with an opportunity to move forward, as well.

I congratulate those who have taken part in bringing the bill to this stage. I acknowledge the work of this Government and of the previous Labour Government. I acknowledge Ngāti Apa and Minister Turia, in particular, who introduced the bill. I stand proud to support this particular bill. Thank you.