SPEECH

Hon TARIANA TURIA; CO-LEADER MĀORI PARTY

Post Settlement Governance Entities for the Development of Iwi

Launch of Chen Palmer’s nationwide stocktake on the issues and challenges facing Post Settlement Governance Entities

Level 8, 138 the Terrace, Wellington

14 May 2013; 6pm

E te kāhui kua tau mai nei i tēnei ahiahi pō ki te matapaki i tēnei kaupapa whakahirahira, tēnā rā koutou katoa. It’s great to be here this evening to speak about what is one of the most significant kaupapa for hapū and iwi this century - the Treaty Settlements Process and Post Settlement Governance Entities.

Every New Zealander believes in fairness and justice for all. So I ask - has the treaty settlements process been fair and just for Māori? Where in the world does the perpetrator of the crime - in this case the Crown - also get to be judge and jury? When is the perpetrator ever allowed to determine whether a crime was committed or not-how bad the crime was-and what compensation will be paid - if any?

Who has access to millions of dollars of funding to back their side of the story-to hire the best lawyers to put their case?

Who has limited access to legal aid and research to tell their side of the story? How does that equate to a fair and just process for dealing with Treaty claims?

Māori are not - and will not - be fully compensated for what was stolen or lost in the colonisation process. The Crown says the country would go bankrupt if they had to compensate Māori fully for everything that was stolen from us. So instead they came up with a process to deal with their past crimes. They proposed that a compensation package would include some money as well as Crown assets.

But let’s look at the value of some of those assets that are being offered back. Are they in pristine condition? What is their true market value? If the Crown claims it cannot compensate Māori fully then why are they not offering back some of their more highly valued assets such as Ag Research or Land Corp? Is that fair and just I ask?

I raise these questions not because I have or can purport to know what the most enduring solutions are – but more because these are exactly the questions you would hear on any marae – and they are questions we must all consider.

I would like to pay tribute and remind us of the vision of the former Northern Māori MP the late Matiu Rata, a former Minister of Māori Affairs and the architect behind the Waitangi Tribunal which was established in 1975 – without his commitment, foresight and dedication we would not have even reached the level of engagement with the Crown that we have today.

While the Waitangi Tribunal as an agent of the Crown is extremely limited, Matiu Rata planted the seed that formally acknowledged the treaty as New Zealand's founding document and gave Maori a channel for claims for the return of their land or compensation. We should not forget that or the vision that was to ensure that Māori would get a fair and just settlement.

I entered Parliament in 1996, and the year before that, the government had released their policy to settle Treaty of Waitangi Claims. It included the "fiscal envelope" which capped the settlement of all historic Māori claims at a mere $1 billion.

Effectively the fiscal envelope limited what the Crown would pay out in settlements. Māori vehemently opposed and rejected the limitations in advance of the extent of the claims being fully known.

Since 1996 governments have progressed their Treaty process system and have signalled they wish to complete all claims by 2014. The deadline seemed tight and unachievable and yet the momentum has been awe-inspiring to say the least. The creative courage of so many iwi who stylised the process to respond to the unique needs of their hapū has been one of the most exciting developments in public sector policy.

A fortnight ago at Onetahua Marae in Golden Bay, Ngāti Tama ki Te Tau Ihu and the Crown signed the final deed of settlement for historical claims in the South Island. Some 36 Deed of settlements have been signed since November 2008; with almost sixty groups now actively engaged with the Crown in various stages of ratification, negotiation, or pre-negotiation towards that goal. It is quite simply a breathless work programme for many – and I am not talking about Wellington.

It’s the researchers at hapū level; the kuia and kaumātua sharing their stories; the younger ones learning their own waiata to enhance their histories; the tribal analysts and advocates for a new generation who have embarked on a journey to achieve post settlement.

I would also like to acknowledge the number of hapū and iwi who through much adversity have settled with the Crown in what is often a difficult and immensely painful process.

After 170 years of colonisation including land alienation and confiscations which stripped Māori of their right to economic development of their own lands - the Crown now expects iwi to use our settlement money to fix up all the issues caused by colonisation that have detrimentally affecting our people.

The Treaty settlements process will never fully return to Māori what was stolen. Let us not forget that. When mainstream media portray the settlement monies as millions of dollars handed out to iwi let us remember that in fact, iwi only get back between one to three percent of what was actually stolen from us. I ask us again, how is that fair and just?

The Treaty settlements process is underpinned by structures that are foreign to our people and have constrained us. They have been determined by the Crown for the Crown’s benefit. For example the issue of mandate and who has the authority to represent iwi interests has caused much contention.

The parameters of how claims will be settled – the time frame, who is to settle, the processes through which mandate will be achieved, and how much the settlement amount will be – have all been determined by the Crown. The ability of hapu and iwi to alter or negotiate these parameters remains very limited.

The mandating process should have been driven by claimant groups and their own institutions, processes and policies as an expression of their rangatiratanga that the Crown should have been obliged to recognise.

That is a key reason why the Māori Party continues to advocate for increased claimant funding. We have always argued that the accelerated process is likely to increase the demands already placed on claimants to advance settlements. In last year’s budget this demand was recognised with $12.602 million (7% of the Vote) dedicated to claimant funding.

One of the other policies which has worked against some of our hapū is the Crown’s desire to settle with large natural groupings – this has exacerbated a number of tensions. Some hapū and iwi want their claims addressed and settled in their own terms, and not blurred or compromised by being a part-claimant with others; some hapu do not necessarily have a ‘natural’ alignment.

While this has been to the detriment of hapū and iwi the Crown has benefited from this collapsing of as many claimants together as possible, as this reduces the total number of claimants and the total amount of time and money required to achieve the settlement of all historical claims. In other words keep the number of claimant groups small so that settlements can remain within a fiscal cap.

I hasten to say that not all hapū feel constrained by the large natural grouping – and they have felt it works for them.

The result of this Crown process for hapu and iwi is insufficient redress. Ironically - while settlements are to ‘redress’ historical Crown breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi, the Crown’s settlement processes become another breach. Rather than ‘full and final settlement’, the nature of these breaches includes the fact of insufficient redress.

The challenges that lie ahead for us now for the Post Settlement Governance Entity debate is to not only utilise our wealth for current generations but also grow our wealth in a safe and sustainable way for future generations - now is the time to build new models of governance from a kaupapa Māori approach.

Business and commercial models like charitable trusts, incorporated societies or limited liability companies are based on a neoliberal agenda that places the individual and the individual’s interests at the centre of operation. The land that was confiscated from us was land that was in the hands of hapū not individuals.

Our tupuna fought for the collective good of the people. So to transform that into the modern context-let us build models of governance that are developed for the collective good of the whānau and hapū.

I believe this is one of the most critical challenges facing our people – to build our future knowingly from our past experiences. And I want to just share my own story from Ngā Wairiki/Ngāti Apa as an illustration of the depth of the pain our stories are built on.

In 2010, I stood in the House to deliver a speech at the third reading of that Bill.

As I traversed our history; I wept for our tupuna, who back in 1899 had pleaded with the then Premier Richard Seddon, to appreciate the impacts that flowed from the effects of the Turakina-Rangitikei transaction some fifty years earlier in 1849.

The economic toll of that transaction was severe - the Crown purchased the 260,000 acre Rangitikei-Turakina block for 2500 pounds (a little under tuppence an acre).

But the damage to the people was even more harrowing. That one deal created the mass alienation of our lands from us – it was a Crown-iwi partnership that produced enduring poverty while our ancestors believed within it, lay the promise of peace, protection and prosperity.

To lay insult upon injury; the Crown didn’t properly protect the 35,000 acres of reserves from the Rangitikei-Turakina sale. The operation of the native land laws in effect made our lands more susceptible to partition, fragmentation and alienation.

And now we no longer know the names of our sacred site; we no longer know the names of our ancestors. Not one of my generation have the reo. It has been very painful.

What does it do to the soul of a people who are known as tangata whenua; literally the people of the land, to be robbed of their whenua?

The answer to that question continues to drive us onwards - and is a key reason why we are so passionate about the need for success in establishing Post Settlement Governance Entities which truly work for the development of iwi.

To just touch on some of our solutions that we are committed to, for an example:

• We are applying our settlement funding to assist with compiling a comprehensive historical record – to know who we are.

• We have a grand plan - a cultural redevelopment plan. This includes marae development and investment in programmes and initiatives covering areas such as te reo, the arts, and taonga or mātauranga. We are committed to financial and health literacy, building our whānau capacity and capability to restore our self-belief and uphold our responsibilities and obligations.

• And of course the financial redress part of the settlement package will help Ngāti Apa/Ngā Wairiki re-establish and grow our economic livelihood.

Iwi are now faced with the management of millions of dollars of assets – be it only one to three percent of what actually was stolen from us. Now that we have some resource and the power to do for ourselves, how will it be utilised? We have the opportunity now to be bold and develop new and better models in a way that sits naturally with Māori aspirations of autonomy and self-determination.

I was so proud that our settlement was lead by our young people who took our iwi through a very difficult process and came out the other side.

The concepts of Māori asset management have drastically changed from pre-contact with non-Māori where communal living and guardianship of the natural resources were achieved by Māori tikanga such as rahui and kaitiakitanga.

Today Māori tribal entities are developed and engaged in negotiations for the return of assets and are increasingly engaged with the design of these entities and the commercial policies that guide these entities.

The reality is though those tribal commercial entities and their policies are still young and in need of further development particularly to better articulate how to achieve the tribal objectives.

My point in sharing our story with you from Ngā Wairiki/Ngāti Apa is to remind ourselves that our future livelihood must be about rebuilding and restoring the essence of who we are.

All the time in the world producing one dimension portfolios that deliver to the single imperative of a commercial aspiration will never achieve the future that our tupuna fought for. We must move forward, united and revitalised in all aspects of our life – our social, educational, cultural, spiritual, physical wellbeing along with our economic investments.

Whānau Ora – reflects that richness that we aspire to in the transformation of whānau – with whānau who set their own direction. It is driven by a focus on outcomes: that whānau will be self-managing; living healthy lifestyles; participating fully in society; confidently participating in te ao Māori; economically secure and successfully involved in wealth creation; and cohesive, resilient and nurturing.

In other words – single silo thinking around commercial enterprise will not create the transformation we require.

I think that Treaty Lawyer Damien Stone summarizes the challenge that faces our tribes in the post settlement governance phase and how they must set up their entity within the existing Westminster statutory framework but also in a manner that incorporates tikanga Maori. He talks about the dilemma of operating commercially, but at the same time having philanthropic purposes. The result is an entity that, while incorporating some concepts that are familiar to Westminster law, is essentially a new model.

Will our successes be judged on how much money we grow? Or how much the people grow?

That is the challenge for us in establishing a robust culturally appropriate entity to take care of the assets that have been fought so hard for by our elders.

Tēnā tātou katoa.

ENDS

© Scoop Media