Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements)
Rahui Katene, MP for Te Tai Tonga
Wednesday 24 March 2010; 5pm

I come to this third reading of the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement (Regional Agreements) Bill with a great deal of joy.

In fact almost as much joy as I have in biting into a succulent Bluff Oyster, or ripping apart the delicious Green lipped mussels from outside of Catherine’s Cove that form the focus of this Bill.

It is the same joy that takes me back to the 6 June 2009 when the Prime Minister, the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Māori Affairs Sharples signed a deed of settlement with the iwi of Te Tau Ihu, Ngāi Tahu, and the iwi of Hauraki.

It is the same joy that we experienced in December 2004 when the Māori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act was passed. For those who may have missed the detail, the 2004 Act provided for a full and final settlement of Māori commercial aquaculture interests since 21 September 1992.

It opened up the opportunity for the marine farming industry to continue to grow while at the same time ensuring iwi access to coastal marine space to develop their marine farming interests.

As a direct descendant of Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Toa, Ngāti Kuia, and Ngāi Tahu, we remember the terms of that Act in lucid detail. The 2004 Act committed the Crown to provide the equivalent of 20 percent of 'existing' aquaculture space in the coastal marine area, issued on or after 21 September 1992.

But importantly, the legislation also required 20 percent of all new aquaculture space identified in the coastal marine area to be transferred to iwi, via the Māori Commercial Aquaculture Settlement Trust.

The 2004 was an Act of great promise. Maori enterprises were well placed to capitalise on growth in the fisheries and aquaculture industries, and could see considerable potential for being able to contribute to the export markets in the fishing sector.

It signalled new horizons which would see increased utilisation of the Maori asset base in economic and social development. There was a call for investment to support potential Maori aquaculture interests, including innovative research and development.

It was, however, a horizon that we would wait some time to see.

Indeed, in the years that passed by since the 2004 Act, we saw as much progress as one would standing on a bank of the Orari River, waiting to spot eels hiding beneath the rocks of a river bed.

We waited and waited and waited, and still the tuna never appeared.

Because the trick is, as any good eeler from Ahuwhenua Marae would tell you, the tuna will never come all on their own. One needs to get in the water, shift a few rocks to flush them out, and be prepared to act.

And that is what we have seen happening with this Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Bill.

When the Maori Party came into the Relationship Arrangement with this Government, we inherited a space in which we were well aware that aquaculture policy had stagnated under the previous Government.

In particular, the costs, delays and uncertainties inherent with the aquaculture regulatory process were simply unsustainable.

Quite simply the previous Government’s aquaculture reforms didn’t work, with no new marine farming space populated since 2004 and little prospect of some being opened up in the future. In fact nine long years of inaction.

The amendments to the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004 that we are welcoming today, provide the Crown with an additional option for complying with its aquaculture pre-commencement space obligation.

In particular, this Bill incorporates provisions into the Act to deal with regional agreements.

The Bill, therefore must be seen in the context of the $97 million early settlement of the Crown’s pre-commencement space obligations to iwi.

It gives effect to an agreement between the Crown and the iwi of Te Tau Ihu and Hauraki, for an early settlement in the pre-commencement space obligation in these regions.

The Crown is demonstrating a genuine commitment to fulfil their obligations to iwi albeit in a limited way given that there is a general consensus that there is very little space available for new aquaculture – mainly mussel farming – developments.

Mr Speaker, the Maori Party has advocated for urgent progress to ensure iwi get full value from settlements.

And so in this regard, we welcome the intention from the Crown to make up for lost time and previous efforts.

And most importantly of all, we welcome the proactive movement of the people.

Today I stand in this House to commend Nga Iwi o Te Wai Pounamu me Hauraki : a conglomerate of Ngati Apa ki Te Ra To, Ngati Koata, Ngati Rarua, Ngati Kuia, Ngati Tama ki Te Tau Ihu, Ngati Toa ki Te Tau Ihu, Te Ati Awa ki Te Tau Ihu, Rangitane ki Wairau, Kai Tahu, and the Hauraki Maori Trust Board.

These iwi have come together, motivated by two powerful drivers.

Firstly, they seek to make the difference in enabling early settlement in respect of Te Wai Pounamu and Hauraki. It provides a solution to the limited prospects for generating settlement assets for iwi by 2014.

The second effect of their initiative is that it will allow the same scenario to be negotiated in other regions. Iwi who were consulted appear to favour regional agreements, seemingly based on the fact that there is no new space.

The Select Committee also spoke enthusiastically about this first agreement as a template and exemplar for other regions. Their report also note the willingness of Te Wai Pounamu and Hauraki iwi to help other iwi to achieve similar settlements. All of this is very positive.

I want to remind the House that some estimates suggest there is great potential for aquaculture to be a one billion dollar industry by 2025.

The Maori Party also fully endorses the response from the Select Committee which identified the overwhelming support from iwi and industry for the early pre-commencement space settlements provided for in this bill.

There are, however, some issues inherent in the context of mussel farming that I want to just touch on. Mussell farms, of course, are an artificial construct and there are some adverse effects which must be taken into account as we develop further.

Issues such as the debri of mussel shells that litter the seabed floor; or the loss of juvenile fish who become entangled in the farms and depleted as prey.

We must always weigh up the ecological balance, the arguments around sustainability.

In this light, I recognise the initiative of Golden Bay Cement who are removing the debri from the seabed, and recycling them as a form of pure lime.

We want to support the aquaculture industry to be an ecologically sustainable one, and we would welcome any initiatives they can bring forward to ensure environmental quality and biodiversity.

Mr Speaker, this is a great day to celebrate the initiatives that iwi have taken in advancing the Maori aquaculture development.

And I want to build on the comments of Minister Smith who talked about how well these negotiations have gone and how important that will be in the future development of discussions around the repeal of Foreshore and Seabed Act.

We see this as something that we can build on for the Foreshore and Seabed context, and we hope that they will go as well as this has.

We in the Maori Party, fully agree with the Select Committee that the process undertaken to agree the Deed of Settlement and this bill is an excellent example of cooperation and collaboration between iwi and between the Crown and iwi.

We are delighted to support this Bill.

Tena tatou katoa.

ENDS

© Scoop Media