Thursday, 14 April 2016

THURSDAY, 14 APRIL 2016

THURSDAY, 14 APRIL 2016

Mr Speaker took the Chair at 2 p.m.

Prayers.

Business Statement

Business Statement

Hon SIMON BRIDGES (Deputy Leader of the House): When the House resumes on Tuesday, 3 May, the Government will look to complete the Appropriation (2014/15 Confirmation and Validation) Bill, the third reading of the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Bill, and make progress on a number of other bills on the Order Paper. Wednesday, 4 May will be a members’ day.

Oral Questions

Questions to Ministers

Health Services, Dunedin—Hospital Food

1. Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) to the Minister of Health: Does he agree with the comments by the Chief Executive of the Southern District Health Board on Tuesday that “there is clearly an issue with the food otherwise patients would not be complaining”; if not, why not?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): I have spoken with the chief executive and I have noted her comments, and I expect that if she feels there is a problem she will fix it. She tells me that in the recent survey of 153 patients, 75 percent said the food was OK and 25 percent wanted improvements. I had a meal there, and I am with the 75 percent. I also accepted that Southern District Health Board is delivering over 2,600 more surgical operations than 8 years ago and is steadily turning round a 12-year financial deficit situation.

Hon Annette King: If his food experience at Dunedin Hospital was “very good”, why have complaints over hospital meals prompted the introduction of “patient experience coordinators” who will patrol wards during and after each meal service, acting like some sort of Mr Bumble from Oliver Twist?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I am not aware of that new appointment. What I do know is that if this is question No. 1 on a Thursday, we are clearly covering off the big issues pretty well.

Hon Annette King: Given that 13 district health boards have not signed up to Compass Group hospital food, what are the total revised savings over the 15-year period of the contract, minus the $4 million spent on the business case?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: If the member would like to put that down in a written question, I would be very happy to give her an answer. What I can say is that there are considerable savings that will help to fund those 50,000 extra operations and 110,000 appointments a year, and make up for the 400 operations that Mrs King cut from—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The last part is not going to help the order of the House. Supplementary question, the Hon Jonathan Coleman.

Hon Annette King: Can he—yes, it is me, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: The Hon Annette King.

Hon Annette King: Thank you, Mr Speaker. I do not look like him do I? Can he understand the anger of patients at his penny-pinching at their expense leading to families bringing in meals to Dunedin Hospital—something that happens in Third World countries?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Oh, I do not think that patients are angry. As I said, 75 percent are happy with the food.

Hon Annette King: Is he relieved that Compass Group has now removed the muffin and sausage lunch, but should it go further and remove the half-a-burger-bun and runny mince option, or the 1½ pie option, or the macaroni and mash spread choice, for the sake—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Bring the question to a conclusion.

Hon Annette King: —of sick patients’ health?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I am just relieved that this is the biggest health issue in New Zealand. [Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Hon Annette King: Is he aware that this is a big issue for patients, which he minimises and laughs at but they certainly do not, so when he said that I should man up and eat the Dunedin Hospital food, did he not realise that he was admitting that the food was so damn terrible you had to have courage to eat it?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No. I am aware that the big issue in Dunedin was the 400 operations that Mrs King cut down there, and the 2,600 operations extra that we are doing now, compared with when we took over from her disastrous regime.

Navy—Fisheries Patrols

2. RON MARK (Deputy Leader—NZ First) to the Minister of Defence: Does he believe that our Navy is sufficiently resourced to protect our fisheries from foreign poachers; if so, why?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health) on behalf of the Minister of Defence: Yes; because the navy is meeting the patrol days that are set by the agencies such as the Ministry for Primary Industries and the New Zealand Customs Service. As reported in last year’s annual report, 90 percent of pre-planned patrols were achieved and 100 percent of response tasks were undertaken.

Ron Mark: What assurances can he give New Zealanders that our navy is sufficiently crewed and resourced to patrol our fisheries properly, when in 2015 our entire navy spent only 33 days at sea on fisheries patrol, and so far in 2016 it has spent only 9 days—is that what was planned?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is enough of the question.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: The 33 days that Mr Mark refers to actually refers to only Ministry for Primary Industries tasking, so he is not giving a full picture of what was going on. In actual fact, the navy does much more patrolling than that in the exclusive economic zone. So far in this calendar year—contrary to what he has just asserted—all ships have actually completed 137 days within the exclusive economic zone, and last year actually spent 639 days there. So, actually, what he is saying is incorrect, completely.

Ron Mark: I seek leave to table the answers from the Minister’s office that gave us—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The member will resume his seat. Those answers are published. They are available to all members. Point of order, Ron Mark—and it had better be a fresh point of order if he wants to stay for the balance of question time.

Ron Mark: Well, this is one about protecting MPs from what are—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The member will resume his seat. He sought leave to table answers to written questions; they are published and are available. If the member feels that he is being misled in some way in the answer, then there is another appropriate course of action, and I suggest that he becomes more familiar with Speakers’ rulings and the Standing Orders.

Ron Mark: How can our fisheries be adequately protected from foreign poachers raping and pillaging them when the navy’s entire fisheries patrol has dropped from 6 months—from his own answers, his own answers—in 2013 to only 1 month in 2015?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: That is absolutely, totally incorrect. As I have just said, all ships spent 639 days in the exclusive economic zone last year, so I am surprised—with Mr Mark’s defence experience as an army cook, he would have been better asking about the Southern District Health Board.

Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. That is a completely inappropriate answer with a completely inappropriate attack on a member of Parliament asking a reasonable question.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! As soon as the Minister transgressed in the last part of his answer, I rose immediately and ceased the answer. I could not act until those comments were made, but when I consider the tone of the question and the answers that have previously been given to the member, it is clear that there is a substantial difference in the figures being supplied by the member and by the Minister. I cannot stop that.

Ron Mark: Well, how does the Minister explain providing answers to written questions—these ones here, Minister—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Just ask the question.

Ron Mark: —which say one story, and now he trots along to the House and tells everyone—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Questions must be shorter.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I hope Mr Mark could read his recipe book better than he does the answers to written questions, but I can only go on the answers supplied by the Ministry of Defence.

Ron Mark: Must be an early Christmas. Is the Minister saying, in his statements to the public, that our inshore patrol vessels, which he now says he is going to sell, are not up to the job, something that is disputed by those naval staff who designed them, and if he is saying that, why is it then that—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The questions are too long. That is now leading to a second supplementary question. The first question can be answered by the Hon—

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Why are you being harder on me today than you are on other people?

Mr SPEAKER: The member will be very lucky to continue in the Chamber, the way he is behaving. The Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman can answer the first question.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No, I am not saying that.

Ron Mark: Noting his statements to the public today, will he not admit that the navy is under-resourced and that currently we have two of the inshore patrol vessels mothballed and that they will not be sailing anywhere because we do not have the naval staff to crew them?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: No.

Hon Phil Goff: Is the Defence Force correct when it has told the select committee every year since 2012, the year in which the navy lost—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Again, bring the question to a conclusion.

Hon Phil Goff: —a quarter of its complement, that the reason that the inshore patrol vessels are not being put to sea is skill and staff shortages?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: I would have to go back and check the transcript of that select committee, because I have found from experience that it is always—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! We do not need that part.

Hon Phil Goff: I seek leave to table the transcripts of the financial reviews by the select committee in 2012, 2013, and 2014, which say just that.

Mr SPEAKER: No. Again, the Standing Orders were modified at their last revision, and those papers are now available to all members.

Ron Mark: What is the point of announcing to the United Nations and the people of New Zealand that this Government intends establishing a new marine reserve in the Kermadecs when the fact is this Government cannot even patrol our current fisheries, cannot crew our current vessels, and is totally ineffective?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Actually, what the member is asserting is totally incorrect. As I have said, we can patrol the areas. And, frankly, he seems to be the only person who thinks the Kermadec reserve is a bad idea.

Hon Phil Goff: How can the Minister’s primary answer be correct when he said that the Defence Force was meeting the needs of the customs agency, when both the Customs Service and Police are recorded in the annual report this year as saying that the Defence Force, the navy, was not able to meet their expectations for the provision of resources like inshore patrol vessels?

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: There are two different issues there. The navy is absolutely meeting its contracted patrol days with those agencies.

Budget 2016—Business Tax Package

3. TODD MULLER (National—Bay of Plenty) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by his statement that one of the Government’s main priorities is “to build a more productive and competitive economy”; if so, what recent announcements has the Government made that will save businesses time and reduce costs?

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I just want to deal with another matter. If I continue to hear those interjections from Ron Mark, I will be asking him to leave.

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. Can you tell us how long the appropriate questions—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! If it is a primary question, it will be inevitably—or often—longer than is allowed for supplementary questions. I have already told the member on one occasion that I am not going to put a limit on them, but when questions go on for too long, either I will ask them to come to a conclusion or, if the member would prefer a stronger action, I can just rule them out of order immediately.

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes, and yesterday the Prime Minister announced the Budget 2016 business tax package, which includes a new pay-as-you-go option for provisional tax. It is part of a wider transformation programme of the Inland Revenue Department (IRD), which will provide it with completely new technology and make it easier to deal with. About 30 to 40 percent of businesses currently use cloud-based accounting software, and this is expected to grow to 90 percent in the next 10 years. The changes mean small businesses will be able to pay provisional tax through their accounting software on a pay-as-you-go basis rather than through a separate process.

Todd Muller: How else will the tax package support small businesses around New Zealand, including the 22,000 small-business owners and sole traders of the western Bay of Plenty?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Because of that member’s and other members’ advocacy on behalf of the small businesses in their electorates, the Government has moved to reduce a number of the irritant factors around the payment of tax by business owners, who are generally pretty busy trying to make a living. These measures include eliminating use-of-money interest for most taxpayers, increasing flexibility on the withholding rates for contractors, which have not been changed in about 30 years, and reduced penalties for new debt. In total, the changes will reduce IRD tax on businesses by $180 million over the next 4 years.

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I have just received a phone call—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The fact that the member has received a phone call is not a point of order, but if the member wants to raise a point of order, I am happy to hear it, and I want to hear it in silence; I just want to warn my right-hand side.

Ron Mark: The stand-in Minister of Defence, in answering questions today, called me, in his answers, a “cook”. Now, if I am a cook, he is a lying prat, and I want him either to withdraw—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! In my mind, the member is making a significant effort to create disorder today, but if the Minister did say that at some stage of his answer, then the Minister will stand and withdraw that comment, and apologise.

Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I withdraw and apologise for calling Mr Mark a “cook”—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I am now going to ask the Minister to stand and do it in accordance with the Standing Orders.

Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I withdraw and apologise.

Mr SPEAKER: Thank you.

Tracey Martin: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I hope it is a fresh point of order, Tracey Martin. [Interruption] Order! It is a point of order. I must hear it, and it must be heard in silence.

Tracey Martin: I am going to ask you to go and reflect—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I cannot hear the member because of interjections coming from over here. Start again.

Tracey Martin: I am going to ask you to go and reflect. I am going to ask you to go—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Can I just have the point of order.

Tracey Martin: This is continual from this particular Minister. Insults are made, there are suggestions that Opposition members are liars, and this Minister—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! That is not what was said. [Interruption] The member will resume her seat if she wants to stay. I have dealt with the matter. It does not need to be relitigated continually by members from the New Zealand First Party.

Todd Muller: What other steps is the—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I did detect certainly a very strong interjection from my left there. The member knows whom I am talking about. If that continues, she will be leaving.

Ron Mark: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker.

Mr SPEAKER: I will hear it, but if it is just continuing to create trouble, I will be asking you to leave.

Ron Mark: Well, I am not going to drag it out any longer. From the New Zealand First side, we say that your behaviour today has been totally inappropriate, and we have had enough of it.

Mr SPEAKER: Well, then that member can certainly leave; if the others want to volunteer, that is their business. Now we return to supplementary—[Interruption] Order!

Todd Muller: My supplementary question to the Minister of Finance—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Would Mr O’Rourke please go if he is going. Would you please leave, so we can get back to it, if the member wishes to leave; he does not have to. I am trying to get back to question time. [Interruption] Good. [Interruption] Right, supplementary question, Todd Muller.

Todd Muller: What other steps is the Government taking to support a more productive and competitive economy, particularly in terms of increasing exporters’ access to overseas markets?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: The future of small businesses is, in many parts of New Zealand, tied to the success of our export industries. The Government has worked to increase the number of new markets available to our exporters, including free-trade agreements with Malaysia, Hong Kong, ASEAN, and Korea. We are currently negotiating a free-trade agreement upgrade with China, which has been a very successful free-trade agreement, signed by the last Government, but it needs to be upgraded and improved. Of course, we have signed the Trans-Pacific Partnership, opening access to two of the world’s three largest economies.

Todd Muller: How is the Government’s focus on supporting a more productive and competitive economy translating into more jobs and higher wages for New Zealand families?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Over the last 3 years, there have been 175,000 more jobs, and it is expected that there will be a further net gain of 173,000 by 2020, with the unemployment rate around 5.5 percent. At the same time, the average annual wage has, up to now, increased by 24 percent since 2009, compared with inflation of just 11 percent. We would expect these trends to continue.

Overseas Investment Office—Mossack Fonseca - connected Application

4. GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) to the Prime Minister: Does he have confidence in the Minister for Land Information?

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Prime Minister: Yes.

Grant Robertson: What advice has the Minister for Land Information provided to him or Cabinet regarding an application to the Overseas Investment Office that is connected with Mossack Fonseca?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: As far as I am aware, no particular advice. The Overseas Investment Office has statutory responsibility to apply various tests, including the good character test, not just when the application is made but also after. I would expect that the Minister for Land Information ensures that it fulfils its obligations.

Grant Robertson: Does the Prime Minister think that the Minister for Land Information should be updating him about an application to the Overseas Investment Office that is connected with Mossack Fonseca, given that this is one of the largest tax-evasion scandals in history?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: He is certainly aware of the transaction, but the Government is not in a position where it can direct the Overseas Investment Office in its investigations. If it forms a view that there are questions of good character involved, then I would expect that it would investigate those.

Grant Robertson: In light of the answer that the Prime Minister is aware of the application, from which country does it originate?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: I do not know.

Grant Robertson: Is he concerned that directional foreign investment from the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands, both known as tax havens, was more than $4 billion as at September 2015, nearly seven times more than China, Germany, and France combined?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am not particularly concerned. The investment has to pass through the Overseas Investment Act criteria, of which there are around, I think, 23 tests. There have been court cases recently that have, effectively, lifted the thresholds. So wherever the investment came from, it has still got to pass our tests.

Grant Robertson: I seek leave of the House to table a table prepared by Land Information New Zealand with a summary of approved investments by country from 2011-15.

Mr SPEAKER: Is it publicly available?

Grant Robertson: It was sent to me directly by them, so I cannot tell you.

Mr SPEAKER: I am asking the member whether he has checked whether it is available on the internet.

Grant Robertson: I have no idea.

Mr SPEAKER: I am going to put the leave, and the House will sort it out. Leave is sought to table that particular table from Land Information New Zealand. Is there any objection? There is objection.

Grant Robertson: Does it cause him any concern that between 2011 and 2015, $304 million of foreign investment came from the Cayman Islands—more than Russia, India, Italy, Spain, and Sweden combined?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, not particularly. It is always a bit tricky trying to decide where investment actually comes from. People can be of one nationality, with a head office located in another country. The critical thing is that every one of those investments had to pass the tests agreed by this Parliament and laid out in the Overseas Investment Act.

Child, Youth and Family—Reforms

5. MATT DOOCEY (National—Waimakariri) to the Minister for Social Development: What measures will help engage New Zealanders in the care and protection of vulnerable children as part of the overhaul of Child, Youth and Family?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister for Social Development): We need to ensure that all New Zealanders support our vulnerable children, as they are not Child, Youth and Family kids; they are our kids. To do this, work is under way on a strategy that engages all New Zealanders on how they can support children and young people in care. A national awareness campaign will build an understanding of what good care looks like, enable people to take action to support our vulnerable children, and champion their voices across our agencies and communities so that they can live successful lives. Barnardos has said that it agrees wholeheartedly that we must all step up. Ensuring that no child gets left behind involves all New Zealanders.

Matt Doocey: What other measures will help encourage New Zealanders to care for and support vulnerable children?

Hon ANNE TOLLEY: Ensuring our caregivers have the right support to provide long-term, loving, and stable homes for children and young people is vital if we are to help them thrive. To do this, a recruitment strategy is being developed to attract a wider pool of quality caregivers. They will receive more help, including increased financial support and quicker access to services. Additionally, national care standards will be introduced so that there is a clear expectation for the standard and quality of care. Together, these measures will help ensure that children and young people find a loving and stable home at the earliest opportunity, allowing them to live successful lives.

Child Poverty—Fairness for Children Report

6. METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to the Deputy Prime Minister: Ka tū a ia i runga i te mana o tana tauākī e mea ake nei, “We want to ensure Government activities are effective in changing the circumstances that trap people in poverty”?

[Does he stand by his statement that “We want to ensure Government activities are effective in changing the circumstances that trap people in poverty”?]

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister): Yes.

Metiria Turei: Is the Deputy Prime Minister reviewing those activities, given today’s Unicef Fairness for Children report that shows that not one of the Government’s policies has improved income inequality in New Zealand?

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Deputy Prime Minister): Yes, I am constantly reviewing them, and I am a bit surprised that Unicef does not regard $25 a week for all of New Zealand’s lowest-income families—at least $25 a week—as having some impact on the income of that household. We think it does and, actually, the families think it makes—probably not enough impact, but, certainly, some.

Metiria Turei: Does the Deputy Prime Minister agree with Children’s Commissioner Russell Wills that $25, for those few who will get that much, will not do enough to alleviate child poverty because the gap between the bottom and the middle is growing so fast?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: It certainly does not meet the Children’s Commissioner’s requirements, although I gather he has indicated some positive reception of it. Of course, alongside the direct income issues and core hardship, the Government is investing enormous amounts of time and money in dealing with all of the sociological and employment and education-related aspects that keep people trapped in poverty. Most families can handle a low income for a short time, but it is pretty difficult when they have got to handle it for years and years. Government in the past has, frankly, been a bit passive about that, and we are trying to change it.

Dr Parmjeet Parmar: What changes has the Government made recently to increase support for families in need?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Probably one of the more important ones has been that from 1 April this year we have increased work obligations for beneficiary parents, provided additional childcare subsidies for low-income families, and, also, low-income working families are benefiting from an increase in Working for Families. For those who cannot get a job and are on a benefit, the rates for those families with children have increased by $25 a week after tax—the first such increase in 40 years, and something that the Greens actually did not support when they were part of a previous Government.

Maureen Pugh: How is the Government supporting the creation of jobs to help people move from a benefit and into work?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: We are very keen to work individually with thousands of people on benefit who could move into work, and we have had considerable success with sole parents, where we have the lowest number of sole parents on benefit that New Zealand has had, I think, since 1986. But further success remains dependent on an economy that keeps creating new jobs, and the good news is that over the next 3 or 4 years we are expecting around 173,000 new jobs. The Government wants to make sure that a proportion of those jobs go to people who are currently locked into lifelong welfare.

Metiria Turei: Is it not the case that Government activities have continued to trap people in poverty, given the Unicef evidence that shows that the gap between the poorest families in New Zealand and the average New Zealand family—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! Bring the question to a conclusion.

Metiria Turei: —has not improved at all?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: If the member thinks that the actions this Government has taken have made poverty worse, then she just, clearly, is not doing the job of a member of Parliament. She must be missing turning up to select committees, reading nothing in the newspaper, and not following any policy, because, in fact, this Government has spent quite a lot of time and money in changing a lot of how the Public Service works, precisely to deal with the long-term dependency that is so hard on families and so expensive for the taxpayer.

Metiria Turei: So is he saying that it is a successful outcome for the Government that we currently have the poorest New Zealand families living on only about half the income of the average New Zealand family; is that a success for his Government?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Income measures are one measure. In fact, there is any number of income measures; you can pick the ones you like. The fact is that the benefit system has been indexed to inflation, and you can decide whether it is good news or bad news but wages have been rising faster than inflation. The Opposition is always trying to say the cost of living is out of control. Well, you cannot have it both ways. In fact, wages have risen faster than benefits. That is why it is so important that, for those who can work, we provide personalised services to tens of thousands of them so that they can get into work and cover that income gap.

Metiria Turei: Does he agree with the Unicef Fairness for Children report that failing to close the inequality gap will risk children’s health and education outcomes?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, I think that is a real oversimplification. What puts children’s educational and health outcomes at risk is when Government does not try hard enough to educate them when they get to school, regardless of their circumstances. Fortunately, we have a Minister of Education who understands that, and, school by school, is bringing about significant change in attitudes. Actually, it is the same in health. That is, when a child turns up we should care for their immediate need, but also understand the context in which it occurred and act on it. That is why further changes in primary care and Whānau Ora are starting to have an impact for New Zealand’s most needy families.

Metiria Turei: So is the Minister satisfied by the drop in New Zealand’s ranking to 31 out of 37 OECD countries for worsening educational inequalities for our poorest children?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, of course we would be dissatisfied even if it had not dropped, because New Zealand’s education system has historically not been that good at overcoming socio-economic disadvantage despite its good intentions. That is why the changes going on in education now around understanding children’s progress and what it takes to improve it are so important, and it is good that the education sector has stopped resisting those changes and is now enthusiastically embracing them. I would expect over the next 10 years that we will make a lot of progress.

Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill—Historical Significance and Effects

7. MARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party) to the Minister for Māori Development: He aha te hiranga o Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori i roto i te hītori o te motu?

[What is the historical significance of the Māori Language Bill?]

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL (Minister for Māori Development): Kātahi te pātai pai ko tērā. E te tuahine, ka nui te mihi ki a koe mō tērā pātai ki a au i tēnei rā! Me pēnei te kōrero, kātahi nei te rangi pai nei mō te kōrero i Te Reo Māori, i tēnei rangi tonu nei, ā taihoa ake nei. Ko te tūmanako ia, ka eke tēnei pire ki tona taumata ēngari ko te kaupapa nui o roto i tēnei pire, ka hoki reo rua mai ana ki roto i Te Whare Pāremata ēngari, ko te kaupapa nui mēnā ka noho tukituki ngā reo e rua, ē, ko Te Reo Māori ka eke panuku, ka eke Tangaroa. Koinā te kaupapa nui.

[What a wonderful question that is. Sister colleague, a huge compliment to you for that question to me today. Let me put it this way: what a great day for speaking in Māori, particularly on this day and later on. Hopefully, this bill will reach its pinnacle, but the great thing in this bill is that it comes back into Parliament House in two languages; but, importantly, should both languages clash in meaning, the Māori version will prevail over the English version. That is the big difference.]

Marama Fox: Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Me pēhea Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori e whakaū ai i Te Reo Māori hei Reo mō te hātepe ture o Aotearoa?

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does the Māori Language Bill give effect to the Māori language being a language of the New Zealand legal process?]

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL: Kātahi te pātai pai, tuahine. Me pēnei te kōrero, kua mau pai i a mātau te āhuatanga o te ture i tōna hanga, tae rā anō ki tēnei wā ēngari, ko te tino aki o tēnei pire, he aki tonu i te āhuatanga o Te Ao Māori kia hanga i tōna ake rautaki ēngari anō, ko te taha ki Te Karauna i roto ngā take hātepe ture nei, ā, ko tā matau, ko te whakarahi ake i te āhuatanga o te kōrero Māori ēngari; he aki tonu i ngā tari o Te Kāwanatanga, tuatahi, kia kaha tonu ki te kōrero i Te Māori, tuarua, kia tuku kōrero i roto i Te Reo Māori hei whakapakari ake i Te Reo o roto i ngā āhuatanga katoa i Te Motu.

[What a good question, sister. Let me put it this way. We have captured the situation well in drafting it right up to the present time, but this bill actually urges Māoridom to create its own strategy. In regard to the Crown, it is in terms of the legal processes, and ours is to increase how the Māori language is used in Government departments: firstly, to speak the language more; secondly, to communicate more in the Māori language and to strengthen its use in all situations in the country.]

Marama Fox: Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Me pēhea e taea ai e Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori, te whakamana i Te Tiriti o Waitangi me te nohotahi o ngāi Māori me Te Karauna?

[Thank you, Mr Speaker. How does the Māori Language Bill reflect a Treaty partnership?]

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL: Ē te tuahine, kai runga noa atu koe! Ko te āhuatanga o tēnei pire, he hanga i tētahi Whare Reo Māori nei, ko tētahi wāhanga ki Te Kāwanatanga, ko tētahi taha, ā, ki Te Karauna, he tohu tērā mō te āhuatanga o Te Tiriti o Waitangi i kōrerohia e ō mātau mātua, e ō mātau tūpuna, koinei te whakatinanatanga o ngā take i roto i Te Reo Māori—tukuna te pire kia eke, tukuna Te Reo Māori kia kōrerohia.

[Well done to you, sister colleague! In terms of this bill it intends to construct this Māori language house. One part is for the Government and the other for the Crown; that is a reflection of the situation about the Treaty of Waitangi our parents and old people talked about. This is the implementation of matters in the Māori language: allow the bill to reach the pinnacle; allow the Māori language to be spoken.]

Tax System—Small-Business Changes

8. MELISSA LEE (National) to the Minister for Small Business: How will small businesses benefit from changes to the provisional tax system?

Hon CRAIG FOSS (Minister for Small Business): The changes to the provisional tax system announced yesterday are yet another way that this Government is helping small business grow and thrive. This Government understands how important cash flow is for small businesses and that the complexity of the tax system is a key issue to them. It is constantly raised with me by business owners, local chambers of commerce, and associations around New Zealand. I know that the member who asked me the question also has that issue raised with her across various ethnic communities. The package announced yesterday will make paying tax simpler, easier, and more certain, and it will lower the burden of interest in penalties, helping small businesses tailor their payments to their circumstances.

Phil Twyford: Good speech! Sit down.

Hon CRAIG FOSS: This Government is consistently looking for better ways, for fairer means—you might want to pay attention.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The answers are too long. Get your office to help you with shorter answers.

Melissa Lee: What reports has he seen that are supportive of the tax changes?

Hon CRAIG FOSS: I have seen many, many reports supporting the changes announced yesterday. I quote a few: Rod Drury from Xero says this is a “huge [win] for small businesses”. James Scollay from Mind Your Own Business says “This will be a game-changer” for small business. The Ernst and Young executive director of tax policy says these new measures are a sensible move, and Business New Zealand is also in support. These comments are but some of the positive comments that show how beneficial this announcement is for small businesses across New Zealand.

Melissa Lee: What other initiatives has this Government implemented that improve the cash flow of small businesses?

Hon CRAIG FOSS: The changes to provisional tax are but one of a number of other recent initiatives helping cash flow for small businesses. For example, reducing ACC levies by $2 billion a year helps improve cash flows. Reducing company and personal tax improves cash flows for small businesses. Policies that lead to lower interest rates help positive cash-flows for small businesses. These changes and many others help improve cash flows for our small businesses and show why this Government is so much better for business.

Finance, Minister—Statements on Unemployment

9. CARMEL SEPULONI (Labour—Kelston) to the Minister of Finance: Does he stand by all his statements?

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): Yes, in particular a statement I made to the Federated Farmers meeting in Feilding in April, where I said “And the dairy industry has rightly said that a lot of Kiwis that are turning up are pretty damned hopeless.”, and finished off a description of that by saying “And if we don’t work together to get them working, then they will be with us a long time.”, with reference to a cohort of Kiwis who need a lot of support into work. The Labour Party MP left that out of his description of the speech.

Carmel Sepuloni: What proportion of the 57,100 unemployed young people whom he says are “pretty damned hopeless” cannot read and write properly and do not look to be employable?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: I did not say they do not look to be employable; I said what employers are saying. And if that member, like the other one, has not heard that, then she is out of touch. The fact is that a lot of these young people, in addition to those problems, cannot pass a drug test either, and that is why we have to work with them so intensively to get them into work.

Carmel Sepuloni: How can he say that Ministry of Social Development clients “will not stay in the jobs that they are offered.” when the Minister for Social Development states that “There is no reason for Work and Income to continue to monitor people who have left the benefit”; is he just out of touch?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No. What is becoming increasingly clear from the very significant amount of detailed analysis we are doing around these issues is that what was traditionally regarded as a successful work placement—that is, a young person turning up to a job, and that is it—we now realise that they are cycling regularly in and out of work and benefit because they will not turn up to the job, for instance, for more than 3 days in a row. Then they are back on the benefit, and it actually was not a successful job placement. We have to do a lot better in supporting them to stick to work, because a lot of them find it really challenging.

Carmel Sepuloni: Is he reliant on the advice from a handful of employers regarding the capability of former Ministry of Social Development clients to work and stay in work because of the fact that, for 8 long years, the Government has failed to collect and report on long-term employment outcomes for people who have exited the benefit?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Actually, it is exactly the opposite. Coming into Government, I was appalled at how lazy, complacent, and ignorant the Government machine was about what happened to our precious young people. Since then, we have done an enormous amount of analysis, and have made an enormous amount of change in the way the Ministry of Social Development works—from being passive to being active—backed by hundreds of millions of dollars. It is starting to work, but we have got a long way to go.

Carmel Sepuloni: Does he maintain—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! There are too many interjections coming, particularly, from my right at this stage.

Carmel Sepuloni: Does he maintain that “Each vulnerable family and individual matters to us.” when he is arrogantly telling prospective employers that many of our young people are pretty damned hopeless?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: No, that is not the case. But this Government does employers and beneficiaries the respect of talking about how it is, not what the strategy says would be nice, and we are finding that that kind of gritty discussion directly, one by one, with people on welfare is showing that we have hope for them and we can support them to get into work. And, I tell you, I think quite a lot of them are starting to be weaned off the Labour Party, which they realise is patronising and—

Mr SPEAKER: Order!

Anzac Day Centenary—Commemorations

ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa): My question is to the Minister of—[Interruption]

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I asked for silence between the two front benches. It has continued. It must cease.

10. ALASTAIR SCOTT (National—Wairarapa) to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: How will New Zealand be marking the 100th anniversary of the first Anzac Day commemorations?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY (Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage): One hundred years ago this month, the first Anzac Day services were held in New Zealand to mark the anniversary of the Gallipoli landings. The New Zealand Government announced the establishment of Anzac Day on 25 April as only a half-day holiday in 1916. Over the last 100 years we have continued to remember those who served and the 18,000 who died. There is a national service at Pukeahu National War Memorial Park in Wellington, with the Governor-General and Prime Minister both in attendance, as well as dozens of other services across the country.

Alastair Scott: What are some examples of local events marking the centenary?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: The WW100 website has a full list of events across the country. In the Wairarapa a special ceremony will be held to commemorate the Rev. Basil Ashcroft leading people to the top of Mount Maunsell to erect a wooden cross—the first in the world to be permanently dedicated to the memory of the Anzacs killed at Gallipoli. As well, Steam Incorporated has organised a special Anzac train excursion from Wellington to Paekākāriki, the steam locomotive “Passchendaele”, in memory of the railwaymen who fell in World War I. In Kaikōura, Anzac 100 Years 100 Horses will re-enact the Kaikoura Mounted Rifles leaving to join the Canterbury Mounted Rifles Regiment.

Alastair Scott: How will New Zealand mark other significant First World War anniversaries this year?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: This year the focus of our commemoration moves from Gallipoli to the Western Front battlefields of France and Belgium. In September we will mark the 100th anniversary of New Zealand’s involvement in the horrific Battle of the Somme, where our forces were exposed to poisonous gas and to mechanised warfare. More than 2,000 New Zealanders were killed on the Somme, with another 6,000 wounded. Many of those who died have no known graves. On 15 September the New Zealand National Memorial, near the town of Longueval, will host three services, marking the anniversary of our first action on the Western Front.

Rimutaka Forest Park—Release of TB-infected Possums

11. Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) to the Minister of Conservation: Is she satisfied with her department’s stewardship of forest parks, and if not what are the major problems she has identified?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY (Minister of Conservation): Yes, I am satisfied, and of course even a department as outstanding as the Department of Conservation is always striving to improve.

Hon Trevor Mallard: When was she first briefed on the introduction of deliberately TB-infected possums to the Rimutaka Forest Park?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: I have received no such briefing.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Has she read the papers on the spread of TB from possums deliberately infected with TB and released into the Rimutaka Forest Park?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: I have no knowledge of such papers, but if the member would care to approach me in a formal way, with written questions, I would be very happy to supply him with answers.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Will her Government pay compensation to any farmer who can prove they have lost their decade-long TB-free status as a result of infections that have spread from possums deliberately introduced by a Government agency into the Rimutaka Forest Park?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: As I said before, I have no knowledge or information about the allegations coming from that member. If he has anything that he wants to share, by way of a factual nature, then I would strongly suggest that he comes to me, via the usual channels, which a member of his experience ought to know by now. As for the member to his side, it is very unclear what kind of obscene picture—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! The question has been answered.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I seek leave to table the picture. I will make it clear that it is available on the website. It was not very hard to find.

Mr SPEAKER: Order! I do not need any further assistance. It is freely available. The member has acknowledged that.

Hon Trevor Mallard: Will she take ministerial responsibility for the deliberate release of TB-infected possums into the Rimutaka Forest Park, or will she leave it to Mr Guy, who is the Minister responsible for Landcare Research?

Hon MAGGIE BARRY: I refute what the member is saying, and in the absence of any facts, and with a lot of wild accusations—and strange ones at that from that member—I would, again, urge him to give factual information that can be assessed in the proper way.

Hon Trevor Mallard: I seek leave to print and make available a copy of the Landcare Research New Zealand document that makes it clear that Landcare Research has deliberately released—

Mr SPEAKER: Order! What the member is seeking leave for is to table a Landcare Research report. I need to just check again whether that is available to members if they go on the website and search for it. Is it available?

Hon Trevor Mallard: It could be on the internet.

Mr SPEAKER: Then I will not be putting the leave.

Freshwater Management—Drinking-water Supplies

12. CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) to the Minister for the Environment: Is he concerned that pure, fresh drinking water could be bottled for sale from the Canterbury region, where the water that the locals have to drink has been described as a “ticking time bomb” by the Canterbury District Health Board medical officer of health?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): No, firstly, because the member only half quotes the medical officer of health’s comments about nitrate levels; secondly, because the Government’s freshwater programme is for the first time putting limits on nitrate pollution in Canterbury through the work of the commissioners at Environment Canterbury and the Government’s national policy statement; and, thirdly, note that of the 325 wells that were tested in 2004, none of them was in Christchurch or Waimakariri, where the bulk of the Canterbury population lives.

Catherine Delahunty: Does it make any sense to use water from the over-allocated and polluted Hakatere River to refill the aquifer because we are selling off the aquifer’s clean water?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I note that, by international standards, Canterbury actually has incredibly clean water. There are areas where there are nitrate issues, and they are being addressed by the challenging work of the commissioners. In respect of the bottled water that is being exported, much of that is from deep wells that have incredibly pure water-testing results.

Scott Simpson: What proportion of New Zealand’s total water resource is taken by the bottled water industry, and why has he rejected calls for a moratorium on the export of bottled water?

Mr SPEAKER: Either of those two supplementary questions can be answered.

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I will certainly cover the latter part. Proposals for a moratorium on bottled water, given that it makes up only 0.004 percent of New Zealand’s water volume, are about as sensible as pretending that you would solve Auckland’s transport problem by banning bicycles or—to be more mathematically correct—tricycles.

Catherine Delahunty: If there is so much water available in New Zealand, why have Ashburton locals been advised, by the same council to which he is selling the consent to bottle 40 billion litres of water, to practise water conservation throughout the year?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Because there is a fundamental point that the member seems to miss. That is, there is a big difference between the 500 trillion litres of water that New Zealand has each year in natural water bodies as compared with the limits that individual councils have on their water infrastructure—and that is a big difference. Perhaps if the member supported more water infrastructure, then we would have more water available for irrigation and town water supplies.

Catherine Delahunty: How will the Government support rural Cantabrians, whose water is so badly polluted by nitrates that their unborn and formula-fed babies are at risk, to access the fresh drinking water from Lot 9—the lot that has been sold to a water-bottling company?

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I would urge the member to actually refer to the actual test results. There are 325 wells that are tested for nitrates. Of those, there are 8 percent that have concerning levels and they are actually in areas where there is a very small population, so 95-plus percent of people in Canterbury have levels of water quality that are, by international standards, excellent. The second thing that I would ask the member to do is to support the Government’s work around the national policy statement and the work of commissioners, who are actually, finally, getting on and doing something about the water quality issues in Canterbury.

Bills

Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill

Recommittal

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL (Minister for Māori Development): Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. For fear of doing this in the wrong place, I seek leave for the Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill to be recommitted for the consideration of style and grammar amendments to the Māori text of the bill. I further seek leave for the bill to be set down for the third reading forthwith on the reporting of the bill back to the House by the Committee of the whole House.

Mr SPEAKER: Leave is sought for that course of action. Is there any objection to that course of action being followed? There appears to be none.

In CommitteeCWH

Te Wāhanga tahi AA to Te Wāhanga wha, Parts 1AA to 4, te āpitihanga tahi o te āpitihanga waru, and schedules 1 to 8 (recommitted)

The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave has been granted to recommit Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill to the Committee of the whole House to consider style and grammar amendments to the Māori text of the bill. The question is that the amendments set out in these tabled amendments be agreed to.

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL (Minister for Māori Development): Kia ora tātau katoa. I te mea he manuhiri kua tae mai i tēnei ahiahi ki te whaiwhai haere i tēnei pire, me whai wāhi au ki te tuku i tētahi mihi poto nei, ki a rātou kia hāngai tonu, kia rere tonu atu te kōrero ki te pire nei. Nō reira, haere mai kei aku rangatira, ngā mātāpuna o tō tātau Reo, ngā mea kua kawe nei i tō tātau Reo ki uta, ki tai, Kōhanga Reo mai, Kura Kaupapa Māori mai, Whare Wānanga mai, ngā hapori katoa o Te Motu.

I tangihia ngā mate o Te Motu i tēnei ata, nō reira, waiho tērā ki reira i te ekenga mai o Tauranga Moana, o Ngātikahu. Ko tāku ko te whaiwahi haere i ngā poroporoaki ki a rātou, me te kī atu, koutou i Te Pō, e moe, e moe, e moe!

Tātau te hunga ora, e aku rangatira kua tae mai i tēnei rā, ngā mātanga o tō tātau Reo, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa! Ka rua, ki ngā mema Māori e noho nei, ka nui te mihi ki a koutou i whakawātea mai i tēnei wāhi poto nei mō tātau, me te kī atu, ko te tikanga o tēnei āhuatanga, me poto, me poto, e kore au e whakaroa i ngā kōrero kia roa.

Kai runga i te tēpū nei ētahi paku hapa i kitea mai ai i ngā rā tata kua hipa ake o roto i te tuhinga o Te Reo Māori, ko Te Reo Māori tonu. Ēhara i te mea nui, he ā, he ō, ērā momo āhuatanga katoa, ō runga, ō raro he aha rānei, ērā momo kōrero! Nō reira, ko tāku īnoi ki a tātau, kia whakaae mai ki tēnei o ngā kaupapa, kia mutu tēnei wāhanga o Te Komiti, ā, ka rere tonu atu ki te mea tuatoru, mā reira, ka taea e tātau te ruku ki te hōhonutanga o te pire nei. Nō reira, ēhara i te mea nui ngā kōrero, pēnei tāku e kī nei, he ā, he ō, he ī, he ō, ērā momo kōrero, ā, nō reira, kāti! Ka waiho ērā kōrero ki a koutou ēngari, mēnā kāre he kōrero, ka pai. Ka rere tika tonu atu ki tā tātau kaupapa, kia ora tātau katoa.

[Acknowledgments to us all. Because visitors have arrived here this afternoon to follow up on this bill, I must accord them a brief welcome and then go directly to this bill and focus on it. Therefore, welcome, my esteemed ones, the sources of our language, the bearers of it in the hinterland and foreshore, from Māori language nurseries, Māori-medium language schools, Māori language tertiary institutions, and all communities of the country.

This morning we mourned the deaths of the nation when Tauranga Moana and Ngātikahu arrived; let us leave that there. My part here is merely to follow up on the farewell tributes to them by saying, those of you in the Void, close your eyes, rest, and slumber on.

To us, the living—my leaders who have arrived here today, the experts of our language—greetings, acknowledgments, and salutations to you all. Secondly, to the Māori members seated here, a huge appreciation to you collectively for giving leave to allow us this brief moment. Let me assure you that the purpose of this situation is very much a brief one, really short, and I will not allow prolonged contributions.

On the table are some minor errors that were found recently in the written version of the Māori language, in the Māori language version. Not significant ones, more to do with ā and ō ones, all those kind of things; ō above, ō below, or whatever, those kinds of things. So my plea to us is to allow these matters to take place. When this part of the Committee stage is completed, then we will go directly to the third reading. There we will be able to delve into this bill at depth. Therefore, there is not much more to add, and, as I alluded to, just minor ā and ō amendments, those kinds of things, so enough. I leave those comments for you to make, and if there are no contributions, that is fine. We go directly to our bill, with my appreciation to us all.]

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato): Tēnā koe e Te Minita, tēnei e tautoko ana i tō mihi ki ngā manuwhiri kua tae mai nei ki te whakarongo ki te wāhanga tuatoru o te pire nei. E tautoko ana mātou a Reipa i ngā tīnihanga i runga i te mōhio, ka noho matua Te Reo Māori i roto i tēnei pire. Nō reira, koinā te take, e tika ana me whakapoto tēnei wāhanga o te tau patupatu. Me whakaaetia, kia haere tonu tēnei pire, tēnā koe.

[Thank you, Minister Flavell. I support your welcome to the visitors who have arrived here to listen to the third reading of this bill. We of Labour endorse the amendments, knowing that the Māori language in this bill is the primary one. So that is the reason why it is appropriate that this part of the debate be shortened. That should be approved to allow this bill to continue; thank you.]

PITA PARAONE (NZ First): Chairman, e tū wāhi poto pēnā i te tuahine a Nanaia mō tana Rōpū Reipa, kai te tautokongia e mātou nā te mea, tēnā pea wētahi o mātau kārekau kē e ‘hakaaea ana ki te pire ēngari, e tika ana kia ‘hakatikatikangia ngā tuhinga i roto i te pire. Nā reira, kia mōhio mai koe e Te Minita, Te Heamana, Te Whare hoki, kei te tautokongia e mātou te hiahia o Te Minita i tēnei wā, kia ora.

[I stand for a short moment, Mr Chairman; and, like sister member Nanaia and her Labour Party, we are supporting it because there may be some of us who do not agree with the bill but it is right that what has been written in the bill must be amended. Therefore you must note Minister, Mr Chairman, and the House as well that we support the wish of the Minister at this moment; thank you.]

The question was put that the following amendments in the name of the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell to Te Wāhanga tahi AA Te Wāhanga wha, Parts 1AA to 4, te āpitihanga tahi to te āpitihanga waru, and schedules 1 to 8 be agreed to:

in clause 3(1)(b), insert “hoki” before “te Broadcasting Act” and delete “hoki” after “1989”;

in clause 3(1)(c), delete “hoki” after “Act 2003”;

in clause 3(3)(c), delete “e panoni hoki” after “Whakaata Māori”;

in clause 5, and in the heading to clause 5, replace “mō” after “mana ā-ture” with “nō”;

in clause 5A(1)(b), insert “hoki” before “kua whakaūngia” and delete “hoki” after “kua whakaūngia”;

in clause 6(1)(b), replace “kē” with “rānei” after “taraipiunara”;

in clause 6A(2)(h), replace “ki” with “i” after “Karauna”;

in clause 6A(2)(k), replace “mō” with “nō” after “mana ā-ture”;

replace clause 7C(2) with the following new subclause:

(2) He ōrite te mana o te whakaputanga reo Māori ki te mana o te whakaputanga reo Pākehā o tēnei ture, engari ki te ara ake he tohe mō te rerekē o te tikanga o ngā kōrero, i roto i ngā whakaputanga e rua, nō te whakaputanga reo Māori o te ture te mana o runga ake.;

in paragraph (a) of the definition of “ngā iwi me ngāi Māori” in clause 8, replace “ko ētahi rānei o ngā iwi” with “ko ngā iwi rānei”;

in clause 10(5)(a), add “ā,” after “1987;”;

in clause 10(5)(ab), delete “hoki” after “waeture”;

in clause 10(6), add “ā,” before “e whakatakotoria ana”;

in clause 11(3)(a), add “ā,” after “mahi hoko;”;

in clause 11(3)(b), delete “kei a ia” after “rerenga (a),”;

in clause 13(2), add “i” after “e tohutohu”, add “i” before “tētahi kaiwhakapāho kē atu”, and add “i” before “tētahi kaihanga hōtaka kē”;

in clause 15(1)(ba), add “hoki” after “me whakaaroaro rawa”;

in clause 16B(2)(c), replace “ā,” before “mō ia putanga” with “pēnei”;

in clause 16B(2)(c)(iii), replace “o te putanga mahi.” after “aromatawaitanga” with “o te kawenga o te putanga.”;

in clause 20(1)(a), delete “o” after “māramatanga,”;

in clause 20A(1)(a), add “ā,” after “pūtea rā;”;

in clause 20A(1)(b), delete “hoki” after “te nui” and add “ā,” after “$10,000;”;

in clause 20A(1)(c), delete “hoki” after “te wāriu katoa” and insert “ā,” after “tōpūtanga;”;

in clause 20A(1)(d), delete “hoki” after “ngā kōrero” and insert “ā,” after “tau pūtea;”;

in clause 20A(1)(e), delete “hoki” after “ngā kōrero”;

in clause 20B(a), insert “ā,” after “ana;”;

in clause 20B(b), delete “hoki” after “whakamārama rawa” and insert “ā,” after “te tau pūtea;”;

in clause 20B(c), delete “hoki” after “whakauru rawa”;

in clause 20B(c)(i), insert “ā,” after “kirimana hoko;”;

in clause 20B(c)(ii), delete “hoki” after “whakatauritetanga”;

in clause 20C(2)(a), add “ā,” after “whānuitia ana;”;

in clause 20C(2)(b), delete “hoki” after “whakauru rawa”;

in clause 20C(2)(c), delete “hoki” after “whakauru rawa”;

in clause 20D(a), insert “ā,” after “kei roto i ērā;”;

in clause 20D(b), delete “hoki” after “whai rawa”, insert “i” before “tētahi tauākī o te haepapatanga”, and insert “ā,” after “pūtea;”;

in clause 20D(c), delete “hoki” after “whai rawa” and add “ā,” after “mō taua tau pūtea;”;

in clause 20D(d), delete “hoki” after “tohu rawa” and insert “i” after “tohu rawa hoki”;

in clause 21(1)(a), add “ā,” after “māna;”;

in clause 21(1)(b), delete “hoki” after “ā-tau”;

in clause 21(2)(a), add “ā,” after “(1)(a);”;

in clause 21(2)(b), delete “hoki” after “tuku rawa”;

in clause 21A(2), replace “me whai rawa e ia te—” with “me whai rawa ia ki te—”;

in clause 21A(2)(a), insert “ā,” after “arotake;”;

in clause 21A(2)(b), delete “hoki” after “whakaaroaro”;

in clause 21B(2)(b), delete “mehemea” before “rānei”;

in the cross-heading before clause 21C replace “mana” with “taumata”;

in clause 24(2), insert “o Te Pūtahi Paoho” after “ngā āheinga”;

in clause 27B(4)(a), insert “ā,” after “wehenga;”;

in clause 27B(4)(b), delete “hoki” after “kaua rawa” and insert “ā,” after “kaiurungi;”;

in clause 27B(4)(c), delete “hoki” after “kaua rawa” and add “ā,” after “2004;”;

in clause 27B(4)(d), delete “hoki” after “i te kopoutanga” and replace “me noho rawa te aronga me ngā āheinga o Te Ratonga Whakaata Māori hei ārahi i a Te Mātāwai.” with “me ārahi rawa e te aronga me ngā āheinga o Te Ratonga Whakaata Māori.”;

in clause 1 of te āpitihanga 1, insert “ānō nei” before “kāore i”;

in clause 5A of te āpitihanga 1, replace “i” with “o” after “tae atu ki te mutunga”,;

in clause 6 of te āpitihanga 1, replace “i” with “o”, and replace “i” with “ki” after “te wā”.

in clause 7(1) of te āpitihanga 1, add “ai” after “i whakaaetia”, insert “ai” after “i waihangatia”, and insert “ai” after “i tukuna atu”;

in clause 8(1)(a) of te āpitihanga 1, delete “i tētahi whakaotinga o tētahi take,”.

in clause 2(2) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “hoki” after “me te (b)”;

replace paragraph (d) of clause 2(5) of te āpitihanga 4 with the following new paragraph:

(d) kaua rawa e kopou i te tangata ka tupea i raro i te wehenga 30 o te Crown Entities Act 2004, ki a Te Mātāwai.;

in clause 4(b) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “te” after “te mahi a”;

in clause 8(1) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “ki te” after “Te Mātāwai”;

in clause 8(2) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “i” after “i te wā”;

in clause 9 of te āpitihanga 4, insert comma after “i tōna tūranga” and insert “hoki” after “ka noho”;

in clause 17(4) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “mahi i” after “rārangi iti (1)(b),”;

in clause 19(1) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “e āhei ana” and replace “te āheinga te kawe, te mana whakahaere rānei te whiu,” with “te kawe i ngā āheinga, te whiu rānei i te mana whakahaere,”;

in clause 19(1)(c) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “me” before “noho motuhake”;

in clause 22(2)(a) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “ā,” after “kia whai hua”;

in clause 22(2)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “hoki” after “hāngai tonu” and insert “ā,” after “marea;”

in clause 22(2)(c) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “hoki” after “i te taha”;

in clause 22(3)(b)(ii) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “ai hoki” after “kia tū”;

in clause 22(5)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “rānei” after “i runga” and insert “rānei” before “i runga”;

in clause 26 of te āpitihanga 4, delete “e” after “Me whakaatu rawa” and insert comma before and comma after “i a ia e mahi ana hei mema”;

in clause 27(1) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “atu—” with “hāunga—”;

in clause 27(1)(a) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “i” before “ngā wā”;

in clause 27(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “i ngā wā rānei” with “rānei ngā wā”;

in clause 27(1)(c) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “i ngā wā rānei” with “rānei ngā wā”;

in clause 27(1)(d) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “i” before “ngā wā”;

in clause 27(2)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “kāore rawa hoki” with “hoki kāore rawa”;

in clause 28(1)(a) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “ā,” after “Te Mātāwai;”;

in clause 28(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “hoki” after “pānga”;

in clause 28(5) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “mehemea” after “te take”;

in clause 28(5)(a) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “mehemea” before “ka whiwhi”;

in clause 28(5)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “mehemea rānei” before “he makau” and delete “rānei” after “he makau”;

in clause 28(5)(c) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “mehemea rānei” before “ka whai” and delete “rānei” after “ā-pūtea”;

in clause 28(5)(d) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “mehemea rānei” before “he hoa kōtui” and delete “rānei” after “he hoa kōtui”;

in clause 28(5)(e) of te āpitihanga 4, insert “mehemea rānei” before “he tautika” and delete “rānei” after “he tautika”;

in clause 32(1) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “unuhia” with “inihua”;

in clause 34(1) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “Ka whai wāhi ka tika ngā mema o Te Mātāwai ki te whiwhi utu,” with “E tika ana kia whiwhi utu ngā mema o Te Mātāwai,”;

in clause 34(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “i ngā āheinga me ngā mahi o Te Mātāwai.” with “i ngā āheinga o Te Mātāwai, i āna mahi hoki.”;

in clause 34(2) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “i tēnā wā, i tēnā wā” with “i ōna wā”;

in clause 35(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 4, replace “ōna” with “āna” before “kaimahi;”;

in clause 35(3)(d)(ii) of te āpitihanga 4, delete “hoki” after “hiranga”;

in clause 1(2)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “i” after “reo ā-tuhi”;

in clause 4(1) of te āpitihanga 5, add “reo ā-waha rānei,” after “ki te whakawhiti”;

in clause 4(1)(a) of te āpitihanga 5, add “ā,” after “horopaki):”;

in clause 4(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “hoki” after “kua tika”;

in clause 4(3) of te āpitihanga 5, replace “ko” with “tā” after “tā tērā rānei,”;

in clause 4(3) of te āpitihanga 5, replace “kē” after “taraipiunara” with “rānei”;

in clause 4(4)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, replace “kāore rānei” with “rānei kāore”;

in clause 5(1) of te āpitihanga 5, insert “rānei” after “i runga”;

in clause 5(1)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “rānei” after “kaipupuri”;

in clause 5(3) of te āpitihanga 5, insert “rānei” after “ka āhei”;

in clause 5(3)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “rānei” after “whakatārewa”;

in clause 5(4) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “a tētahi” after “ki ngā kawenga”;

in clause 5 (4) of te āpitihanga 5, insert “rānei” after “ka āhei”; and

in clause 5 (4)(b) of te āpitihanga 5, delete “rānei” after “whakamana”.

Amendments agreed to.

Te Wāhanga tahi AA to Te Wāhanga wha, Parts 1AA to 4, te āpitihanga tahi o te āpitihanga waru, and schedules 1 to 8 as amended agreed to.

Progress reported.

Report adopted.

Third Reading

Hon TE URUROA FLAVELL (Minister for Māori Development): Kia ora tātau katoa! I move, That the Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill be now read a third time. E hoa mā kātahi te rangi ātaahua ko tēnei. Kātahi te rangi whakahirahira ko tēnei! I puta te kōrero inā tatanei, i te ata nei mō Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Pūkenga, Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa, ka mutu, kua tukuna te kōrero mō Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill. Anei tātau i tēnei ahiahi, ko Te Reo Māori te kaupapa. Nō reira, ka nui te mihi ki a tātau e hoa mā. Hara mai ki Te Whare Pāremata.

He rā nui tēnei mō Te Reo Māori. Koinei te wā tuatahi kua eke mai tētahi pire i roto i Te Reo Māori me te reo Pākehā ēngari, ko Te Reo Māori te reo ka whai mana i roto i ngā nekeneke o te wā. He mea nui tērā kia taea ai e tātau o Te Whare Pāremata, te kōrero i Te Reo Māori me te mōhio anō hoki, ko Te Reo Māori te reo matua i roto i ngā ture, i ngā āhuatanga katoa. Tuarua, ko Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori e kī ana te kōrero, he reo whai mana i roto i ngā nekeneke ō roto i te ture ēngari, ō roto i ngā āhuatanga katoa, Ao Māori, Ao Pākehā.

Mēnā ka hoki tāua ki te tau 1987, i tae mai tētahi Minita ko Koro Wētere tana īngoa, ko Te Minita mō ngā Take Māori i taua wā. I tae mai ia ki konei me tana kī atu, he hiahia nōna ki te whakatakoto i tētahi Reo Māori ki roto i Te Whare Pāremata. Tīmata ia i tana mihi, ki te pērā ēngari ā wā poto ka tū mai tētahi ki te whakahē i tērā āhuatanga. I tū mai tētahi ki te kī atu ki a koe, Mr Speaker, anei tana kōrero: “I wonder whether you, as distinct from the rest of us, know what he is saying. Do you have a translation before you so that you can rule on the content of his speech?”. Mēnā ka rongo i tērā kōrero, ka rongo tonu te āhuatanga o te kawa o wētahi ki tēnei mea o te kōrero i Te Reo Māori ēngari, ko te mea pai, ē, nō ngā tau kua hipa tērā āhuatanga! Te tikanga, te tikanga! Ko te tau 1986! Kua rerekē tērā āhuatanga i tēnei wā.

Nō reira, nei au e tū ki te whakaiti i te mea, kua riro māku tēnei kaupapa e kōkiri ki roto i Te Whare Pāremata i tēnei rā. He nui te mahi! He nui te mahi i te roanga o ngā tau. He nui ngā kōrero i kōrerohia i roto i ngā wānanga, i ngā hui. Ka hoki ngā mahara ki tētahi hui mō Te Reo Māori i Pōneke nei. Ko Tā Tāmati Reedy, ko Te Koingo Reedy i roto i tērā hui. I pātai rātau i te pātai mō te oranga o tō tātau Reo. Me pēhea hoki! Ā, ka mutu ka puta te kōrero, titiro ki te ture mō Te Reo Māori. Whakahōungia, whakaora anō rā mō tēnei wā tonu nei. Kōrua tahi, anei te whakatinanatanga.

Nō reira, he aha ngā painga ō roto o tēnei pire? Tuatahi ko ngā reo e rua, pēnei i tāku e kōrero nei, tuarua ko Te Reo Māori te reo whai mana, te reo matua. Ka toru, ko te mana o Te Reo ka whakairia ki roto i tēnei o ngā pire, he reo taketake o Aotearoa, he taonga o Te Iwi me Te Māori, he reo e ngākaunuitia ana e te marea, e Te Motu whānui tonu. Ka whā, he reo whai mana i tēnei whenua. E hāngai ana tērā ko te āhuatanga o Te Whare o Te Reo Mauri Ora, he rite ki Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

He wāhi ki Te Karauna, he wāhi ki Te Iwi Māori. Nō reira koinei taku harikoa! Ko ōna maihi, ki te taha ki Te Ao Māori, Maihi Māori! Ka riro māna anō rā e kōrero. Ko Te Maihi Karauna, māna anō rā, mā Te Karauna tonu e kōrero. Ēngari ko te mahitahi, ē, nā runga i te āhuatanga o te nohotahi o Te Karauna me Te Iwi Māori, arā, ko Te Mātāwai tērā i te tēpū kotahi, ko Te Rūnanga Reo tērā, māna anō rā e whakatau i ngā āhuatanga katoa mō Te Reo Māori. Ko te tūmanako mō te painga, kaua mō Te Reo Māori ēngari, mō ngā tamariki, mokopuna e hiahia nei ki te kōrero i tō tātau Reo. Nō reira, kai te harikoa, ka taea e Te Maihi Māori te hanga i tōna ake rautaki. Waiho ake mā Te Karauna anō rā tōna taha e whakatika.

Nā, kia whai wāhi ki te kōrero mō Te Mātāwai. Ko Te Mātāwai, 13 pea ngā tāngata ka noho nā i tērā o ngā kaunihera. Ko tāku īnoi ki Te Ao Māori, āta titiro ki te hunga ka noho nei i Te Mātāwai. Kaua e haere tika tonu atu ki tētahi e kōrero Māori ana. Āe, he painga o te kōrero Māori, te matatau ki te kōrero Māori ēngari, arā, anō ētahi, rangatahi tonu ētahi. E mōhio nei ki te whakariterite i ētahi rautaki mō Te Reo ā-iwi, ā-hapori, ā-marae. Nō reira, kia kaua tātau e hereherea ki tētahi reanga i tōna kotahi, ka mutu ki te tāne i tōna kotahi. Me whai wāhi anō rā wā tātau wāhine, otirā, wētahi o wā tātau rangatahi e matatau nei ki ēnei āhuatanga i roto i Te Mātāwai.

Ko tētahi wāhanga i kōrerohia whānuitia i roto i te pire nei, ko tētahi kupu whakaū o Te Karauna ki Te Reo Māori. Ko ētahi ka kī mai, ē, me tuku i tētahi kupu whakapāha. I rongo ake au i te wairua o tērā hiahia ēngari, nā runga i tāku kawe i tēnei kaupapa, ā, kua hāngai tonu taku kōrero ki te kī atu, me te whakaae mai o te katoa o Te Whare, ā, me tuku i tētahi kupu whakaū, āe, i hapa Te Karauna, i hē Te Karauna i ngā tau kua hipa ake, nā reira, ka tau mai ngā uauatanga ki te hunga kōrero Māori. I puta te kōrero i wepua ētahi, ē, kua whakaaetia mai e Te Karauna ki tērā, kaua ki tērā momo āhuatanga ēngari, e te ture anō hoki, e tika ana tāu ēngari, ko tā Te Karauna e kī ana, āe, āe! Nāku tērā hē, ā, he hiahia nōku ki te whakatikatika i ngā huarahi katoa kia taea ai e te hunga taiohi, otirā, te hunga hiakai mō Te Reo Māori, te whai i tērā huarahi. Nō reira kei te harikoa nā runga i tērā āhuatanga.

Mēnā ka hoki au ki te ōrokohanga mai o tēnei o ngā pire, me mihi rā ki taku tuakana ki a Pita. Ē, tērā i noho nā i taku tūru i ngā tau kua hipa ake, anā, kua eke hei Tā, ko Tā Pita Sharples tērā i kōkiri i tēnei kaupapa. Kai taku rangatira ahakoa kāre koe i konei ko koe tērā i ārahi nei i tēnei kaupapa, ko tāku ko te whaiwhai haere i ō tapuwae. Kia whai wāhi au ki ētahi o ngā mema o Te Paepae Motuhake. Ko rātau te hunga i noho nei hei taringa, hei mea takawaenga, me kī, mai i Te Minita ki te hapori. Nā, i haere rātau ki Te Mata o Te Whenua. Ko Tā Tāmati Reedy tērā, ko Pānia Papa, Hana O’Regan, Cathy Dewes, Rāhora Shortland, Toni Waho, Pem Bird, te uri o Ngāti Manawa, ā, tae atu ki a Te Kahautū Maxwell. Kai aku rangatira, koinei te mihi o te ngākau, ko koutou tērā i whakatakoto i tētahi huarahi hei whāinga mā wētahi atu.

Taku ekenga hai Minita i puta te whakaaro, ā, kāti, me toro atu au i taku ringa ki ētahi ki te āwhina i a au, ki te whakatika i ētahi panonitanga, i ētahi paku hapa i roto i te pire i tēnei wā. Nōku te waimarie i whakaae mai, e Rāwinia Higgins kei taku tuahine, ka nui te mihi ki a koe. Ko koe tērā i noho tata nei, noho piri nei ki tēnei pire, ka nui te mihi ki a koe, Te Wharehuia, ko taku pāpā kai tāwāhi koe me aro mai ō taringa ki tēnei kōrero. Ka nui te aroha ki a koe, kia kaua tētahi āhuatanga māuiui nei e pā ki a koe i tāwāhi ēngari, ko koe tērā e noho nei hei koroua mō tēnei rōpū. Kai te tuahine Charisma, kai te kite atu i a koe i runga ake nei. Tiare, ko taku taokete anō hoki a Ruakere, ka nui te mihi ki a koe.

I te wā poto, me mihi anō rā ki te hunga whakamāori i tēnei o ngā kaupapa. E hoa mā, kei te mōhio tātau, arā, anō ngā uauatanga ēngari i eke. Ka nui te mihi ki a koutou, otirā, ki te Parliamentary Counsel Office, ē, ka nui te mihi ki te wahine i kaha nei ki te whaiwhai haere i tēnei kaupapa ki tōna taumata. Kai te tuahine, tēnā koe, tēnā koutou, otirā, ngā mea o te tari o Te Speaker. Ki ngā mema o Te Komiti Māori, ka nui te mihi. I noho tata nei koutou ki tēnei kaupapa ahakoa ōna uauatanga i te tīmatanga mai, i aro mai koutou, i kōrero tahi tātau mō ngā painga o tō tātau pire, ka nui te mihi ki a koutou, otirā ki a koe, Cath Nesus, ko ia tētahi o ngā āpiha i kawe nei i tēnei kaupapa, kua tata Cath! Kua tata! Taihoa ake nei, 15 o ngā kaikōrero ā, kua eke!

Taku kupu whakamutunga, ko te hunga e noho nei, ko ētahi o rātau, me kī, i te tīmatanga mai o te orangatonutanga o tō tātau reo. Kai te kite atu i a Kahurangi Iritana e noho nei, otirā, ā, ko ētahi, kāre e pai kia whakahua īngoa kai mahue ake tētahi. Ēngari ko tāku ko te kī atu, mei i kore koutou i kōrero Māori, mei i kore ngā Reo Irirangi Māori, mei i kore a Whakaata Māori, ē, kua āhua ngoikore te whaiwhai haere ake i tō tātau Reo. Nō reira, nei te mihi o te ngākau ki a koutou, otirā te hunga kua ngaro atu i te tirohanga kanohi. Kai te kōrero au mō ngā mea pēnei i a Ngoi Pēwhairangi mā, Te Ātaarangi, Te Heikōkō mā, kua ngaro rātau! Ka tangi ake i te mea, kua kore rātau e kite i tēnei pire ēngari ko ngā tamariki, ko ngā mokopuna kai konei! Koinei te mihi o te ngākau e hoa mā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātau katoa.

[Acknowledgments to us all! Friends, what a beautiful day this is. What an important and significant day this is! This morning the debate pertaining to Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi, Ngāti Pūkenga, and Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa took place, along with the introduction of Te Ture Whenua Māori Bill. And here we are this afternoon speaking about the Māori language. And so I salute you all, my friends. Welcome to Parliament.

This is an important occasion for the Māori language. This is the first time a bill has been presented in both the Māori and English languages, but the Māori language will take precedence. And, crucially, it enables members of Parliament to speak Māori, with the understanding that Te Reo Māori is the primary language in all law and in all aspects of life. Secondly, Te Pire mō te Reo Māori asserts that the Māori language has legitimacy in the law, whether in Māori or Pākehā society.

If we go back to the year 1986, Koro Wētere, the Minister of Māori Affairs, arrived here and stated his desire to speak Māori in Paliament. And so he began his greetings in Māori, but another member quickly objected. That member rose to speak to you, Mr Speaker, and this is what he said: “I wonder whether you, as distinct from the rest of us, know what he is saying. Do you have a translation before you so that you can rule on the content of his speech?”. If you could hear those comments you would hear the distaste that some people had about the Māori language. But, fortunately, that was the situation in the past. It should be in the past—in 1987. It is different now.

So I stand humbly because I am advancing this bill in the House today. There has been much work over many years. Much was discussed in conferences and other meetings. I remember a conference about the Māori language here in Wellington. Sir Tāmati Reedy and Lady Te Koingo Reedy were present at that conference, and they posed a question regarding the survival of our language. What can be done? Furthermore, a determination to consider amended legislation for the Māori language was voiced. To the two of you, here is the fruition of those discussions.

So what are the gains in this bill? Firstly, it is in two languages, one of which I am speaking. Secondly, it provides primacy to the Māori language. Thirdly, the mana of the language will be enshrined in law as an indigenous language of New Zealand, a treasure of tribes and of the Māori people, and a language that the entire country is committed to. Fourthly, it provides legitimacy to the language and likens it to the house of an everlasting language, similar to the Treaty of Waitangi.

There is a part for the Crown and a part for Māori. So that is why I am delighted. It has two maihi strategies, one, the Maihi Māori, pertaining to the Māori language—that is the responsibility of Māori. The Maihi Karauna is the responsibility of the Crown. However, it enables cooperation between the Crown and Māori through Te Mātāwai, which operates in both strategies. Hopefully it is beneficial not only for the Māori language but for children who want to speak our language. Hence the reason I am elated that the Maihi Māori can formulate its own plan. Leave the Crown to address its own side.

Now I will speak about Te Mātāwai. There will be 13 members on the board of Te Mātāwai. I urge the Māori people to carefully consider the appointment of members to that board. Do not appoint someone just because they can speak Māori. There are benefits to being a fluent Māori speaker, but there are others to consider, such as our youth. They know how to organise strategies around the language with regard to the iwi, the community, and the marae. So we must not confine the appointments to only one generation, or only to males. Our knowledgable women and youngsters must also be appointed to Te Mātāwai.

One particular part of the bill that has been debated extensively is the Crown acknowledgment of the Māori language. Some have stated that there should be an apology. I felt the spirit of that desire. However, because I am responsible for this bill, I am adamant—with the consensus of the House—that an acknowledgment is delivered. Yes, the Crown made mistakes and committed wrongdoings in the past that suppressed Māori language speakers. It has been said that they suffered corporal punishment. The Crown accepts that is what happened—and, yes, you are correct: it will be recognised in law. The Crown also accepts responsibility for its wrongdoing and has stated its intention to provide improved pathways for the youth and students of the language to pursue. And so I am delighted at that development.

If I may return to the genesis of the bill, I must salute my elder Sir Pita Sharples, who was the previous Minister of Māori Affairs and who was the initial sponsor of the bill. To my leader, even though you are not here you lead this matter. I am only following in your footsteps. I would like to acknowledge the members of Te Paepae Motuhake advisory panel. They travelled around the country and heard submissions and served as intermediaries between the Minister and the community. Sir Tāmati Reedy, Pānia Papa, Hana O’Regan, Cathy Dewes, Rāhora Shortland, Toni Waho, Pem Bird of Ngāti Manawa, and Te Kahautū Maxwell were some of the members of the panel. I want to express my heartfelt thanks to the esteemed panel members who provided a pathway for others to follow.

When I became Minister, I reached out for support to make amendments and slight corrections to the bill. To my good fortune they agreed to help. I want to thank my sister Rāwinia. You have worked closely with the bill and left your imprint. Thank you very much. My uncle Te Wharehuia is overseas and I urge him to listen to this speech. I have much empathy for you and wish you good health while you are overseas. You sat on the panel as its elder. To Charisma, I can see you up in the gallery, along with Charlie and my brother-in-law Ruakere. Thank you very much.

I would like to take a brief moment to acknowledge the team who translated the bill. My friends, we understood there were many difficulties, but you accomplished the work. Thank you very much. I also want to thank the female representative of the Parliamentary Counsel Office, whose efforts ensured the success of the bill. I thank you and your team. To the officials of the Speaker’s office and members of the Māori Affairs Committee, much appreciation to you. You worked closely on the bill despite the difficulties encountered at the beginning, you remained focused, and we spoke together about the benefits of our bill. I thank you hugely for that. But now to you, Cath Nesus, one of the officials who bore the brunt of this policy—almost there, Cath! It is close! It will not be long! There are 15 speakers to go and it is done!

My final comment goes to those seated before us, some of whom, should I venture, were at the forefront of efforts to save our language. I see Kahurangi Iritana, along with others, even though I know it is not polite to mention names in case someone is left out. But I do want to say to them that had you not spoken Māori, had it not been for Māori radio and Māori television, addressing our language would have been somewhat powerless. And so a heartfelt acknowledgment to you collectively, but at the same time to those lost from view, in particular Ngoi Pēwhairangi, Te Ātaarangi, Te Heikōkō, and others. They have gone! I lament because they will not see this bill. But the children and grandchildren are here! This, then, is an appreciation from the bottom of the heart, fellow colleagues, so well done, and my thanks to us all.]

Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Labour—Hauraki-Waikato): Tēnā koe, tēnā tātau, e Te Minita tēnei te mihi atu ki a koe. He rangi whakapiki wairua tēnei, e tika ana. Ahakoa kāre i konei tō mātau nei kaikōrero mō tēnei pire, a Peeni, e tika ana me whakatakoto ō mātau nei whakaaro mō ngā momo āhuatanga e pā ana ki ngā wāhanga katoa o te pire nei. Ka nui te mihi atu ki ngā kaikawe i Te Reo Māori, rātau katoa, rātau i haria mai te petihana ki mua i te aroaro o Te Pāremata. Rātau i tīmata i ngā kōhanga reo, aua kaupapa ngā kura kaupapa, ngā wharekura. Rātau i tīmata i Te Ātaarangi me ngā wānanga Māori, ō tātau nei koroheke, kuia rūruhi. Rātau i kawea tērā tino hiahia, he oranga i roto i tō tātau nei Reo Māori, me ōna tikanga! Nō reira, ka nui te hoki o ngā mahara ki a rātau katoa. Kāre au e tino hiahia ki te whakahuahua i ngā īngoa katoa kei waihotia tētehi ki waho!

Ko tāku nei me tūpato tātau ki te peke ki runga, inā, ka nuku atu te tūāpapa o te hiahia o tēnei pire. Me mataara tātau! He roa te wā ka tae ki tēnei wā kia kite i tētehi pire i Te Reo Māori. E koa ana te ngākau! Ka hoki ngā mahara ki te wā i tae mai taku tupuna a Mahuta ki tēnei wāhi. I aua wā, ā, ahakoa kua mōhio pai ia he wāhi mō te whakature i ngā āhuatanga mō Te Motu, he roa te wā ka tatari ia mō te whakapākehā me te whakamāoritia o ngā mahi o tēnei wāhi ka haria atu ki waenganui i a mātau o Te Iwi. Nō reira, he rangi whakahirahira, he rangi whakapiki wairua tēnei!

Ka hoki ngā whakaaro ki ētehi pou o tēnei pire. Tuatahi, e ū tonu au me whakapāha Te Karauna, e ū tonu au ki tērā i roto i tēnei pire. Ka hara mai a Tauranga Moana me ō rātau nei take katoa i mua i te aroaro o Te Pāremata ēngari, karekau he wāhanga e pā ana ki Te Reo Māori. Koinei te wāhi tika! Ko tēnei pire te wāhi tika hei whakapāha mā Te Karauna ki ngā Iwi Māori katoa puta noa i Te Motu mō ngā mahi i mahitia e ō tātau nei kura. Ka hoki ngā whakaaro ki ngā momo kōrero a ngā kaumātua me ō rātau mamae ki ngā āhuatanga o ngā kura i ō rātau nei wā. Nō reira, e ū tonu au ka tae ki te wā kia kite i tētehi whakapāha a Te Karauna i tēnei pire.

Tuarua, e pā ana ki te whare. I pātai au i te pātai he aha te hanga o tēnei whare? He whare Māori, he whare Pākehā rānei? Ko te whakautu a Te Minita he whare hou! Ko Te Maihi Karauna, arā, Te Maihi Māori me te tāhuhu o Te Mātāwai. He whare hou hei whakaora ai i ngā hiahia e pā ana ki tō tātau nei Reo Māori, ā, ka tika! E tino hiahia ana te kite i te tutukitanga o te hiahia.

I pātai au hoki i ngā wāhanga e pā ana ki ngā whiriwhiri o ngā rautaki Māori ki ngā rautaki o Te Karauna, me kaua e waiho mā te kotahi kia haere noa atu. Tāria te wā ka kite tātau mēnā ka taea te titiro, te tuitui i ngā hiahia o ngā rautaki e rua ēngari ū tonu au. Kua whakaaetia a Waikato ki te whakatū i tētehi rautaki ā-iwi. Ko tāku nei ka pai tērā! Atu i te tau 2025, ko tō mātau hiahia kia kite e 80 paihēneti ngā tāngata e kōrero i Te Reo Māori, Te Reo o Waikato. Me taku mōhio anō, mei kore tātau e aro atu ki ngā kura auraki, ngā kura katoa kei waenganui i ā mātau nei rohe, kāre e taea. Koinā te take he pātai tonu ki ngā āhuatanga o Te Mātāwai me Te Reo Tukutuku.

Kua kite i ngā wāhanga e whā me ngā rōpū i whakarōpūtia e Te Minita. Kei te tū tonu te whakaaro me whakamanatia aua rōpū kia āhei ai, kia tutuki ai ō tātau nei hiahia kia ora ai Te Reo, pērā ki ngā kōhanga reo, ngā kura kaupapa, ngā wharekura, Te Ātaarangi, ngā wānanga. Mēnā ka mahi ngātahi aua rōpū ki ngā mahi o te iwi ka tutuki pai ngā hiahia. Nō reira, mōhio pai koe ki ērā o ngā kōrero!

Ko te mea whakamutunga pea e pā ana ki te taha o Te Karauna, ngā Maihi o Te Karauna. I tukuna mai te whakaaro ki waenganui i tō mātau komiti whiriwhiri, me aro atu Te Tāhuhu o Te Mātauranga ki ngā āhuatanga o te pire nei. Tēnā pea, he wāhanga kia kuhuna ā rātau nei mahi kia haere ngātahi. Ko te whakautu, kei waho tonu te nuinga o ngā mahi mō Te Tāhuhu o Te Mātauranga. Kei te pai tērā, kei konei Te Minita hei whakautu i ērā o ngā hiahia ēngari, ki taku mōhio, ko ngā mahi nunui kei waenganui i ā tātau nei kura, hei whakamāmātia, hei whakapai ake i ō tātau nei ake hiahia, kia whakawhānui ake Te Reo Māori mō tātau katoa. Ēhara mō Te Māori anake ēngari, mō tātau katoa. Ko ngā mahi kei waenganui i a tātau, ngā kura, ngā mahi nunui, kāre au e tino hiahia ki te whakatoimaha rawa i tērā, tā te wā tēnā pea nā Reipa te mahi nunui.

Nō reira, i tino mihi rawa atu, i tino mihi rawa atu ki tō rōpū whāiti, tō rōpū tohutohu me ā rātau mahi nunui ki te haere ki waenganui ō tātau nei iwi, arā, kei waenganui i ngā hapori ki te kohikohi i ngā kōrero, ki te rapu i ētehi o ngā whakaaro kia whakahokia mai ki roto i tēnei pire. Ko te mea pai ki a au, he tino rerekē te hanga o te whakautu i tērā hiahia, ka pēwhea ai tātau e whakaora ai i Te Reo Māori? Anā, he whakautu hou tēnei, he whakautu hou!

Nō reira, i roto i tērā o ngā hiahia, ka tino tautoko mātau a Reipa ahakoa i pātai i ngā pātai, i wero i ngā wero, i whakatakoto i ō mātau nei ake whakaaro. Ko te mea nunui, kia haere tonu tēnei pire, kia whakaturengia, hei tauira, hei tauira! Tēnā pea, mēnā ka tutuki pai ngā āhuatanga katoa i roto i te pire nei, tā te wā ka tīnihia anōtia ki te whakapakari ake. He tīmata tēnei i runga i tētehi huarahi pai kia mahi ngātahi Te Iwi Māori, arā, ki te taha o Te Kāwanatanga, Te Karauna. Nō reira, i roto i tērā me hoki mai au ki te tino wairua o te rangi nei, me te tino mōhio i waenganui i a mātau ngā mema Māori, kei te ora Te Reo Māori i roto i te whatu manawa o te tangata, i waenganui i ngā hapū, i ngā whānau, arā, i ngā iwi. Mēnā kei reira tonu te hiahia, ka taea e tātau, kia ora.

[Thank you, thank you, everyone, and thank you, Minister Flavell. This day uplifts the spirit, and it is indeed appropriate. Although Peeni, our spokesperson for this bill, is not here, it is fitting that we outline our views on aspects relating to all parts of this bill. Much appreciation to all those who played a part in the Māori language—all of them: those who brought the petition before Parliament; those who started the kōhanga reo, who were involved in those schemes and Māori-medium primary and secondary schools; those who began Te Ātaarangi teaching method and Māori tertiary educational institutions, our esteemed male and female elders; and those who carried that passionate desire in terms of the well-being of this Māori language of ours and its cultural aspects. So there is a huge recollection of memories about them all. I do not really want to mention all their names lest someone is left out!

I think we must exercise caution when leaping aboard, in case the fundamental desire of this bill shifts. We must be vigilant! It has taken a long time to arrive at this moment to see a Māori language bill. I am greatly overjoyed within. My thoughts go back to the time when my grandfather Mahuta arrived here at this place. In those times, and although he fully understood it was a place where legislation of national significance was created to deal with matters that affected the nation, he waited a long time for the Māori translation of business here in English for distribution among us of Māoridom. Therefore this is an inspirational and spiritual, uplifting day indeed!

I reflect on some of the pillars of this bill. Firstly, I am committed to the view that there be an apology by the Crown in this bill. Tauranga Moana came before Parliament with all their matters, but there was not a provision at all about the Māori language. This is the right place for it. This bill is the proper place for the Crown to make an apology to all Māori tribes throughout the nation for actions by our schools. My thoughts reflect on the kinds of stories the old people related, and their hurt due to situations they experienced in schools in their time. And so I maintain I have yet to see an apology by the Crown in this bill.

Secondly, and in relation to the house, I ask the question: what kind of house is this? A Māori house or a Pākehā one? The Minister’s response was a new house, with Crown and Māori bargeboards—the Maihi Karauna and the Maihi Māori—and a Te Mātāwai ridgepole. A new house to revitalise aspirations for this Māori language of ours—how appropriate! I long to see that aspiration achieved.

I also asked about provisions concerning negotiations relating to Māori and Crown strategies, and not leaving it for one to merely go along to it. Only time will tell whether we can examine or knit the needs of the two strategies together, but I remain committed. Waikato has agreed to establish a tribal strategy. For me personally, that is wonderful. From the year 2025 and onwards, we want to see 80 percent of Waikato Māori speaking in the Waikato dialect. I am also aware that without engagement of mainstream schools, and all the schools in our regions, it will not be successful. This is why I have been diligent in questioning Te Mātāwai and Te Reo Tukutuku entities.

I have seen the four clusters and groups proposed by the Minister. The view remains steadfast that those groups be empowered to enable them to fulfil our desire for the Māori language to survive, and similarly kōhanga reo, primary and secondary Māori-medium schools, Te Ātaarangi, and Māori tertiary institutions. If those groups work collaboratively with tribal-aligned activities, the aspirations will be met. So as far as the other stories are concerned you are aware of them!

Perhaps the last point relates to the Crown’s part in terms of the Crown strategy, the Maihi Karauna. One suggestion was left among us, the Māori Affairs Committee, that the Ministry of Education should give due consideration to aspects of this bill. Perhaps there should be a provision in its role to work collaboratively. The response was that the majority of the Ministry of Education’s functions fall outside the scope. That is fine—the Minister is here to respond to those aspirations—but my understanding is that its primary functions are actually in our schools, easing and improving our aspirations for the Māori language and broadening its accessibility for all of us; not just for Māori alone, but for all of us. What with the work amongst us, schools, and those of huge significance, I do not really wish to burden us even further with that; perhaps Labour might alleviate that in due course.

Therefore, I truly appreciate your group of experts, the advisory group, and the important role it played when it undertook the task of travelling among our tribes—in other words, among communities—gathering information and seeking out views to bring back to be reflected in the bill. What I found most appealing was the innovative response to that aspiration: “What must we do to revitalise the Māori language?”. So there you are, this is an innovative response—a novel one.

Therefore, within that desire of all desires, we of Labour do strongly support this, despite the questions posed, the challenges issued as we expressed our views. The important thing is that this bill continues to move forward to be enacted as an example, a model. Perhaps in time, when all aspects within this bill are fulfilled, further amendments might be made and the bill strengthened. This is a beginning of a wonderful procedure for Māoridom to work collaboratively with the Government and the Crown, in other words. Therefore, on the basis of that, I must go back to the very spirituality of this day, knowing full well that the Māori language within us Māori members of Parliament is alive, as it is in the heart of the person and among the hapū, families, and, namely, the iwi. If the desire is there we will achieve it. Thank you.]

Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakahaere, otirā, tātau huri noa i tō tātau Whare i tēnei ahiahi. Ko Hikurangi me Aorangi aku maunga, ko Waiapu me Waitaki aku awa. Ko Porourangi me Tahu Pōtiki me tō rāua wahine a Hamoterangi aku tīpuna, tēnei au he uri whakaheke o rātau mā, e mihi ki a tātau i tēnei ahiahi, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa!

Ā, kei te tika ngā kōrero kua kōrerohia e pā ana ki tēnei pire, he taonga Te Reo! He taonga te reo me ngā tikanga e pā ana ki tō tātau Reo, kāo! Me ngā tikanga e pā ana ki ō tātau Reo. Kei tēnā, kei tēnā, kei tēnā o ngā iwi katoa, ngā rerekētanga, ngā ātaahuatanga, ngā mita o ngā iwi katoa o Aotearoa nei. E tautoko ana ngā mihi ki a koe e Te Minita, nāhau tēnei mahi e hari, e kawe, e waha mō tēnei wā roa; kōrua ko tō rangatira i tō taha, ki a koe hoki Mārama! Ko kōrua ngā kanohi o Te Pāti Māori i tēnei wā, ā, me Tā Pita, me Kahurangi Tariana hoki i ō rāua wā! Hoi anō, ki ngā kaikawe katoa, ngā mihi nui ki a koutou katoa!

I ahau e tipu ana i te kāinga ki te wā kāinga o Ruātōrea, ko Te Reo anake, ki taku mōhio, e rere ana i ahau e tipu ana, ko Te Reo o Ngāti Porou. Kāre ko Te Reo Māori, ko Te Reo o Ngāti Porou, ā, me Te Reo o tēnā hapū, o tēnā hapū, o tēnā hapū, o tēnā whānau hoki. Nā reira, ka ako ahau i Te Reo i mua i taku haerenga ki te kura, ahakoa ngā kōrero mō te whakakorehia Te Reo e Te Kāwanatanga o tērā wā. I waenganui i ngā kāinga ko taku kōkā tētahi i tērā whakatipuranga.

Ko taku pāpā i hara mai mai i Te Wai Pounamu. Kāre Te Reo o Ngāi Tahu i taea a ia te kōrero ēngari, ko tōna whakahīhī mō tōna taha Ngāi Tahu i waenganui o Ngāti Porou. Nā, ka rongo ahau i Te Reo ēngari, ka ako ahau i Te Reo i ahau e haere ana ki te kura. Kei konei ētahi o ōku kōkā, ētahi o aku pāpā e whakarongo ana ki ēnei kōrero i tēnei ahiahi. Nā, i haere ahau ki te Kāreti o Ngata, tērā kāreti whakamaumahara mō Tā Apirana, i reira i ako ahau i roto i Te Reo.

Ā, ka haere au ki Te Whare Wānanga o Waikato, i reira katoa ko ngā kaiako nō Tūhoe, nō Waikato hoki. Ā, kei a rātau ō rātau reo ātaahua hoki! I ahau i reira ka tuhituhi ahau i taku kōrero roa mō te tohu Masters i roto i Te Reo o Te Whare Wānanga. I tēnei wā, ka pānui ahau aku tuhituhi, kāre rawa atu ahau ka mōhio he aha te tikanga o ēnei kōrero! Ēngari, i tērā wā ko taku tino hiahia kia whakaatu atu ki Te Ao, āe, he mana tō Te Reo Māori. Nā reira ahau, ka tuhituhi i roto i Te Reo! Āhakoa kei te rongo tonu tātau ka tapepe taku kōrero, ka hauā i ētahi wā, hoi anō, koirā te tino wero ki a tātau! Kāre ko tēnei pire ēngari, me kōrero tātau i Te Reo! Ahakoa piki, ahakoa heke, ahakoa pai, ahakoa he aha! Ēngari, me kōrero tātau i Te Reo! Mehemea, kāre e taea tērā, ka mataku katoa tātau ki te kōrero i tēnei Reo ahakoa kua whakamanahia e te ture, nē? Koirā te tino wero ki a tātau katoa!

Me tāku e kī ana hoki mō te ture, kāre tēnei Reo o tātau e whai mana i roto i Te Ture. He mana anō tō Te Reo ēngari, he ture mō roto i tēnei Whare, mō te hapori whānui. Ka noho āwangawanga ahau mō tēnei āhuatanga, te kōkiri, ā, kia whai mana ngā tikanga, ngā mana whakahaere o ō tātau tikanga, Te Reo i roto i ngā ture nei! Ka noho āwangawanga ahau mō tērā! Nō te mea, kei waho i tēnei Whare ka rongo tātau katoa: “Oh, ko te mahi o Te Kāwanatanga o Te Karauna! Ka patu i a tātau i ngā tau kua pahure ake nei ēngari ka hara mai anō tātau ki roto i tēnei Whare te whai haere i tēnei ture kia whakamanahia ō tātau tikanga!”. Hoi anō rā, kei te pai tērā. He ao hōu mō tātau katoa.

Nā, mō tēnei āhuatanga ki Te Reo. Kua kōrerohia kēngia e te mema a Nanaia, te pātai pea: he Reo tēnei mō tātau anake? Ngā iwi, Te Iwi Māori? Mō tātau katoa rānei? Mehemea, ka tino whakapono tātau he reo taketake o Tēnei Ao, nō konei katoa tātau ahakoa Māori mā, ahakoa Pākehā? Ēhara te iwi Pākehā nō tētahi atu whenua! Nō konei tonu, nē? Mehemea ko te tino hiahia kia rongo tātau i tō tātau Reo, ō tātau Reo, kei te taha o ngā mahi tākaro, kei roto i ngā kura, kei roto i ngā wāhi mahi, kei whea ake rānei, ko tāku ki a tātau, me kōrero katoa tātau i tēnei Reo, kia pakari ai i roto i tēnei whenua kia pakari hoki ai te whakapāoho atu ki te ao whānui. Koirā, tētahi o ngā tino wero ki a tātau!

Nā, mōku i roto i tēnei tūranga Te Minitatanga mō Te Mātauranga, anei! Āe, tino tautoko ahau kia akonatia tēnei Reo ki roto i ngā kura katoa o Aotearoa; me ngā rawa hei whakapakari i Te Reo ēngari anō ko te wero ki a tātau, ka taea e ngā kaiako katoa te noho ki roto i ngā kura? He uaua te mahi, he uaua te mahi! I tēnei wā ka mihi ahau ki ngā Kōhanga. Kei roto i ngā Kōhanga te pūtake o te ako i Te Reo mā ō tātau kōhungahunga, ō tātau pēpi. Ka tonoa atu aku pēpi ki ngā kōhanga. Ka tīmata au i tōku ake kōhanga nō te mea ki a au, he tino kaupapa tēnei. Ka īnoi atu ki taku kōkā me taku tipuna kia hara mai mā rāua aku tamariki e ako, e whakatō ki roto i aku tamariki te tino aroha mō Te Reo nei.

Nā reira kua tangi te pere! Me mihi au ki Te Kōhanga, ki ngā kura, ngā kura kaupapa Māori, ngā kura ā-iwi, ngā kura auraki e kawe nei Te Reo. Ka mihi hoki ahau ki ngā Wānanga, ko rātau e kawe ana hoki i tēnei Reo. Ēngari mehemea kāre e puta atu ki te rāngai mātauranga, ki waenganui i a tātau katoa, he Reo mō te mātauranga, kāre mō tātau katoa. Nā reira, anei anō tāku, me akiaki, me whakahau tātau, kia kōrerohia tēnei Reo ahakoa he aha. Nā, ahakoa ka wareware Te Minita ki te paku mihi ki tēnei rōpū tōrangapū, e tautoko ana i ngā mahi kia whai mana ai tēnei pire. Kei te tautoko hoki Te Pāti Nāhinara tēnei mahi, nā reira, ka taea ki roto i tēnei Whare. Nō reira, huri noa ki a koutou katoa e mahitahi ana mō tēnei kaupapa ātaahua. Tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, kia ora tātau katoa!

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, but, at the same time, acknowledgments to us throughout our House this afternoon. Hikurangi and Aorangi are my mountains. Waiapu and Waitaki are my rivers, Porourangi and Tahu Pōtiki, who married Hamoterangi, are my ancestors, and I am a descendant of theirs; greetings, salutations, and welcome to you all!

The sentiments expressed about the Māori language in regard to this bill are correct. The language and its protocols are a treasure—correction—the protocols that relate to our Māori languages. Each and all of our Māori tribes here in New Zealand have their own variations, attractive aspects, and dialects; the different languages of all peoples here in New Zealand. I endorse the tributes accorded to you, the Minister for Māori Development. This responsibility was borne by you for this lengthy period; by you two and your co-leader, and you as well Mārama! You two are the faces of the Māori Party at this point in time, and Sir Pita and Dame Tariana in their time. And so to all of you who bore this responsibility, my huge compliments to you all.

When I was growing up back home, back in Ruātōrea, Māori was the only language that flowed as I was growing up. And to my understanding it was the Māori of Ngāti Porou. It was not the Māori language; it was the Māori language of Ngāti Porou; and the Māori language of that hapū, that hapū, and that whānau as well. So I learnt Māori before I went to school, despite statements made that Māori was banned by the Government of that era, and amongst the homes was my mother of that generation.

My father came from the South Island. He was not able to speak the Ngāi Tahu Māori but he was very proud of his Ngāi Tahu side in the midst of Ngāti Porou. Consequently I heard Māori while I was at school. Some of my aunties and uncles are here this afternoon listening to these contributions. So I went to Ngata College, that college which commemorates Sir Apirana Ngata; it was there I was educated in the Māori language.

I then went on to Waikato University. All the tutors there were from Tūhoe and also from Waikato—each of them showcasing the beauty of their dialects! While I was there, I wrote my thesis for my Masters in University Māori. When I read my writings now, I have absolutely no idea what these statements are saying. But at that time I really wanted to show the world that, by crikey yes, the Māori language has a status. That is why I wrote it in Māori! Even though we—us here—continue to hear that my delivery in Māori is not too flash or inarticulate at times, so what; that is my challenge to us. It is not about this bill but rather that we must speak Māori. Regardless of the ups, the downs, or whatever, it is imperative that we speak this language. If we do not do that, it will not happen! We will continue to be afraid to speak this Māori language, even though it has been enacted by law—right? That is the real challenge for us all.

In regard to the bill as well, I will say it will not enact this language of ours. The Māori language has its own place in the bill, but it is a must-have in this House and in the wider community. I remain uneasy about the speed at which our protocols and the Māori language are being enacted into these laws. I am concerned about that because outside of this House we are all hearing: “Oh, the Government and the Crown are doing it! They punished us in past years but we come back into this House once again to follow up on this bill, and to enact our protocols!”. However, that is fine. This is a new world for all of us.

Now, in regard to the Māori language, perhaps the member Nanaia addressed the question: is this a language for us only, for tribes, for Māoridom, or is it for all of us? If we truly believe Te Reo is the indigenous language of this country, we are all from here, be it Māori or Pākehā who are from another country—they belong here, do they not? If you genuinely want to hear our language and theirs as well alongside our sport, in our schools, and in our workplaces or wherever, I say to us all, let us speak this language, all of us, to strengthen it in this country and broadcast it worldwide. That to me is going to be one of the biggest challenges for us.

Now, in regard to this role of mine in the Ministry of Education. Yes, I am very much in favour of the Māori language being taught in all New Zealand schools with the resources to strengthen the language—but the challenge once again for us is whether all teachers will remain in the schools? It is a hard one to work through; it is really difficult. At this point I pay tribute to the Māori language nurseries. Learning the Māori language by our wee ones, our babies, is the root of what goes on in Māori language nurseries. I sent my babies to kōhanga by starting my own one because I considered this a matter worth pursuing. I begged my aunt and grandfather to come. I got those two to teach and instil into my children a real empathy for this Māori language.

And there goes the bell! I salute the Māori language nurseries, the primary and secondary Māori-medium schools, the tribal, and the mainstream schools teaching the Māori language. I also acknowledge Māori and mainstream universities and those teaching the Māori language too. But if it does not extend beyond the education sector and reach us all, it will become a language for academics and not for all of us. Therefore, I must reiterate, we must encourage and exhort ourselves to speak the Māori language, regardless of the consequences. Despite the fact that the Minister overlooked a small acknowledgment to this political party, it endorses the actions taken to enact this bill. The National Party supports this and, consequently, makes it possible in this House. Therefore, to all of you throughout who worked together on this beautiful initiative, well done and congratulations to you collectively. My appreciation to us all.]

KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau): I tipu ake ahau i roto i tētahi whare reo kotahi, kore e taea tōku pāpā rāua ko tōku māmā ki te kōrero i Te Reo Māori nā reira, waimarie ana mātou ko ōku tuākana, taku tuahine, i whai mātou tētahi kaiako tino rangatira, tino tohunga rawa, ko Charles Berryman tōna ingoa, te teina o Mānu Paul, nāna mātou i whakaakongia ki te kōrero i tō tātou Reo. I tīmata mātou i te tīmatanga o te haikura, reo kotahi, e 5 tau kua pahure ake nei, kotahi te mahi i pahurengia ahau i roto i te seventh form, arā, ko Te Reo Māori. Ahakoa te 51 paihēneti taku tatau i roto i te whakamātautau, kua pāhorengiakētia ahau. Koia te mea nui!

Nā reira, kei te mōhio ahau ngā piki me ngā heke o tēnei mea te ako i Te Reo Māori. E mōhio ana ahau i te whakamā ki te eke ki runga i tō mātou marae me te kore mōhio he aha ngā kōrero e whakahaerengia ki runga i te marae. I rongo hoki ahau te whakamā o tōku pāpā e eke ana i te marae, kore i te mōhio, me pēhea ia. Ko te mea tino nui rawa atu, pouri rawa atu, ko ōna mātua, tōku koroua rāua ko taku kuia, tino matatau rawa rāua ki Te Reo. Ko rāua ētahi i pōhēhē ko Te Reo Pākehā, te reo mō te ao ēngari, waimarie ana ahau kia whiwhi i tētahi mōhioranga i āianei ki te kōrero i tō tātou Reo.

I te tīmatanga o te pānuitanga tuarua i tīmata a Marama Fox me āna kupu “Hareruia, hareruia!” mō tēnei pire. Nāku i mea atu, ka whakataihoa ake ahau i aku hareruia kia kite rā anō i ngā hua o tēnei pire. Kua mutu te wāhanga māmā noa iho, arā, ko te tuhinga o tēnei pire. I nāianei ko ngā mahi pakeke, ngā mahi uaua, kia whai hua tēnei pire mā o tātou tamariki, kōhungahunga, rangatahi me ngā hapori Māori, me kī, ēhara mō ngā hapori Māori anahē ēngari mō ngā hapori whānui kei roto i Aotearoa ahakoa Māori, Pākehā, a wai atu rānei. Mehemea ka ora tō tātou Reo me kōrero te katoa.

Mehemea kei roto i tēnei pire ngā kupu “He taonga Te Reo Māori”, he taonga mō Te Motu whānui. Ko tātou ngā kaitiaki, kāre e kore, ēngari, mō tātou katoa o Te Motu tēnei taonga Te Reo Māori i te mea, nā Te Minita a Hekia i mea mai “Me kōrero Te Reo ahakoa kei hea, ahakoa ki a wai!”. E pai ana tēnā kōrero ēngari, mēnā e hiahia ana ahau te haere ki roto i te toa kei roto o Kaitāia ki te hokohoko āku mea, mēnā kore e taea e te tangata kei tua o te counter ki te kōrero Māori mai ki ahau, e kore e taea e au te kōrero i Te Reo i ngā wāhi katoa. Nā reira, koia tāku e akiaki ana i Te Motu whānui kia tautokongia tēnei pire.

E tika ana he mea pai kua tuhia te pire ki roto i ngā reo e rua, Te Reo Māori me Te Pākehā, ā, he mana tō Te Reo Māori ki runga ake i tō Te Reo Pākehā mehemea, he raru i waenganui i te whakapākehātanga. E pai ana tēnā! He mea tika ēngari koia tāku i kī ai, e pai ana wēnā āhuatanga ēngari, ki te kore tātou e kite wētahi hua kei roto i ngā tau e tū mai nei, he maumau taima! He maumau taima te tuhia tēnei ki roto i Te Reo Māori mehemea i roto i te 30 tau, e kore e taea e ō tātou tamariki te pānuihia tēnei ture.

E tautoko ana ahau i ngā kōrero o te tuahine nei a Nanaia e pā ana ki te whakapāhatanga. Tētahi o ngā kōrero a Te Karauna mō te kore whakapāha ki te iwi Māori mō te wēputanga ō ō tātou tamariki kei roto i ngā kura ko ngā pire Tiriti ka kāhorengia. Kei roto i aua pire he whakapāhatanga ēngari i te ata nei, e toru ngā pire Tiriti, tā Tauranga Moana, tā Ngāti Pūkenga, tā Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa. I roto i aua pire e toru ngā whakapāhatanga mō te muru whenua, te raupatu whenua, wērā āhuatanga katoa ēngari, horekau he whakapāhatanga kei roto i aua pire mo te wēputanga o ngā tamariki kei roto i ngā kura, me te raruraru kua pā nei ki tō tātou Reo. Nā reira, koia tāku e kī ana mehemea e pai ana ki te whakaae i wēpuhia ngā tamariki i roto i ngā kura, e pai ana ki te whakapāha mō aua hara o ngā kaiako, o te ture. Nā te ture i whakamanahia. I pai kia wēpuhia ngā tamariki e kōrero Māori ana.

[I grew up in a monolingual household. Neither my father nor my mother could speak Māori; however, my older brothers, my sister, and I were fortunate to have an excellent teacher, an absolute expert by the name of Charles Berryman, the younger brother of Mānu Paul, who taught us to speak our language. We began monolingual at the start of high school; 5 years later the only subject I passed in the seventh form was Māori language. Although I got only 51 percent in the exam, I passed it. That was the main thing!

So I am aware of the ups and downs in regard to learning the Māori language. I know about being embarrassed when I go on to our marae and do not know what is being said in the talk during the proceedings. I also felt the embarrassment of my father in that situation in terms of not knowing and not knowing how to deal with it. The most significant and saddest thing about it was that his parents—my grandfather and grandmother—both of them, were absolutely fluent and native speakers of the language. They were two of those who mistakenly thought the English language was the language of the world, but I was lucky to get some understanding now about speaking our language.

At the start of the second reading Marama Fox began with the words “Hallelujah, hallelujah!” in regard to this bill. I said to her that I would be cautious about my hallelujah until I see what the outcomes of this bill are. The easy part is done—in other words, writing the bill. The more onerous and more arduous task now is to ensure that this bill realises outcomes for our children, preschoolers, youth, and Māori communities—let us say not just for Māori communities, either, but for the wider communities in New Zealand, be they Māori, Pākehā, or whoever!

If our language is to survive, everyone must speak it. If the words “The Māori language is a treasure” are in this bill, then it is a treasure for the nation at large. Without a doubt we are the guardians; however, this treasure, the Māori language, is for all of us, the nation, because Minister Hekia said to us “Speak the language regardless of the place and to whomever!”. It is fine to say that, but if I want to go into a shop in Kaitāia to purchase things for me and the person on the other side of the counter cannot speak Māori to me, then I am unable to speak the language everywhere. So that is why I am urging the nation to support this bill.

It is a good thing indeed that the bill has been written in two languages, Māori and English, and that the Māori language version is above the English version should there be any discrepancies in the translation. That is fine! That is appropriate. However, as I keep harping on, those situations are all right, but if we do not see any benefits in the coming years ahead, it would be a waste of time! Writing this in the Māori language, if in 30 years’ time our children are unable to read this bill, will have been a sheer waste of time.

I support the contributions by this sister colleague Nanaia relating to the apology. One of the statements the Crown made as to why there was no apology to Māoridom for the corporal punishment administered to our children in schools was that the Treaty claims bills that have been passed already have an apology in them. But this morning there were three Treaty bills, belonging to Tauranga Moana, Ngāti Pūkenga, and Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa. In each of those three bills were apologies for land confiscation, land taken by force, all those kinds of things; however, there was no apology in those bills about corporal punishment administered to children in schools and the problem concerning our language. So that is why I have been saying that it is fine to admit that children were punished in schools for speaking Māori and to apologise for sins committed by the teachers and the law. The law enacted it. It was accepted that children were to be punished for speaking Māori.]

I will just translate some of the things I have said because I really want to make myself clear. It is great that this bill is reaching its final stages. In the second reading Marama Fox started off her speech with: “Hallelujah, hallelujah! It’s about time this has happened.” I agree. The big thing is that I am going to hold off my hallelujahs until I start to see the results of this bill because every 3 years the number of speakers declines by 1 percent. So in the next 3 years—so by 2019—we do not just expect to reverse that 1 percent decline; we actually want to see a 1 percent growth. In fact, we want to see more than 1 percent growth in the number of speakers of Te Reo Māori.

During the select committee process and the Committee stage, also, I spoke about the purpose of the bill not being explicit enough, because I joined the Māori Affairs Committee right at the end of this process, and the thing that jumped out at me from the bill was that it did not have the purpose of the bill being that we would increase the number of speakers of Te Reo Māori and that we would increase their fluency. I believe that should have been front and centre in the purpose of this bill. It was added. It is about the third clause down in the purpose clause and under a couple of other subclauses—clause 3(3)(b). I think that that should be right front and centre, because if we are not going to grow the number of Māori speakers and if we are not going to increase the fluency of Māori speakers, then what is this bill going to achieve? If we are going to see a 1 percent decline every 3 years in the number of Māori speakers, then in 30 years’ time we are basically going to have nobody left who can understand and read this bill, and that to me is more important than it actually being written in Māori.

There is a lot of work to do. The easy part has been completed. We have got this bill, and now we have to move on into the future. We are going to have the Maihi Māori and the Maihi Karauna. I say that the Maihi Māori must increase the number of contexts within communities where Te Reo Māori can be spoken. It needs to be able to support homes. Yes, schools—we have got to be careful that we do not put the burden or the onus of ensuring the survival of Te Reo Māori on schools. I think that is really unfair. I think that this is something that all corners of our community, all people in our communities, need to support us with, because if I want to walk into a shop in Kaitāia to buy something and the person over the counter there cannot speak Māori, then I cannot use Māori in all the contexts that I could use English in.

I think I said it before in a debate on this bill that people take for granted that we can just speak English wherever and whenever we want, but for the Māori who wants to speak Māori we cannot actually do that. We do not have the numbers of contexts any more in our communities where we can speak Māori to whomever, whenever. We need communities to get in behind and we need Pākehā to get in behind us, because in this bill it does say that Te Reo Māori is a taonga. It is a taonga for the whole country, not just for us. We are the kaitiaki, but it is a taonga for everybody.

Just one last story: when I was in Cardiff I remember standing on the train station and looking up. There was this sign written in Welsh. It said “Platform 9” in English underneath, and in Welsh it said something that looked like “Cwllcllcwll”—the Welsh language is all “C”s and “L”s. I just thought: “Well, is that not wonderful? Here in Wales, just on the train station, this is just a little sign, and it is bilingual. Why do we not have that sort of thing in New Zealand?”.

That is what we need. That is the sort of thing that this bill needs to ensure that we can see Māori everywhere, we can hear Māori everywhere, and we can speak Māori anywhere and to anyone at any time. Thank you.

NUK KORAKO (National): Ā, tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā, ā, huri noa i Te Whare nei. E ngā tohuka o Te Reo Māori, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, e mihi atu ki a koutou katoa. E Te Mana Whakawā, kua tae tonu te Pire mō Te Reo Māori ki tōna whakamanataka. Ēhara i te huarahi māmā te haere o tēnei pire kia tae ki te pānuitaka tuatoru, ēhara hoki i te mahi māmā mō Te Minita Te Hōnore Te Ururoa Flavell ki te arataki mai i te pire ki konei. Me mihi au ki Te Minita mō te mutuka pai mai o te pire nei, mō ngā whitiwhitinga kōrero mō te pai hoki o tā tātau mahitahi kia eke ai te pire.

Ka mihi au ki a Tā Pita Sharples, koinei tana pire mutuka i mua i tōna wehenga i Te Whare nei. Ahakoa ngā panonitaka ki te pire, mai i tōna kuhunga tuatahi mai, ka mihi tonu ki a Tā Pita Sharples mō tēnei āwhina nui mō te oranga o Te Reo Māori. Me mihi rā ki ngā āpiha mō ngā āwhina mai i te komiti whiriwhiri i ngā take Māori. Kia ora Tīmoti, kia ora Ben, mō tēnā, tae rawa atu ki ngā āwhina o Te Tari Ture o Te Pāremata, Briar, Tīpene/Stephen, tēnā kōrua.

Kia huri ki tēnei pire, te pire tuatahi kei roto katoa i Te Reo Māori, me te reo Ingarihi kia mara ake i te taha o Te Reo Māori te tuakana. Kāore e mutu aku mihi ki ngā kaiwhakamārama reo ā-waha mō ngā āwhina ki te komiti whiriwhiri i ngā take Māori. E Te Mana Whakawā, i kapi te taha mō ngā take o te pire e te komiti. He rā nui, whakaharahara mō Te Reo Māori tēnei rā, i te whakamanataka o te pire nei. E whakapono ana au, ka haruru te rongo i te pire whakaora reo, pēnei ki tēnei whakatupuraka.

I mua i te otinga o aku kōrero, me mihi au ki Te Hōnore Nanaia Mahuta mō tēnei tāpiritaka nāna i whakatakoto. E Te Mana Whakawā, kāore mātau o tēnei taha i tautoko i te tāpaetaka nā reira, kāore e whai wāhi ki te pire nei. Hoi, ka mihi ahau ki te mema me tōna hiahia kia whānui atu ki te whakaaetaka me te whakapāha a Te Karauna me tana wāhi mō patunga i Te Reo Māori. Kino, kino rawa atu ngā mahi a Te Karauna ki Te Reo Māori, kia mārama pai ki tērā. Hoi, kei roto i ngā whakataunga kerēme, kei waenganui i Te Karauna me tēnā iwi, me tēnā iwi, he whakaaetaka a Te Karauna mō āna mahi ki Te Reo Māori. Ko te mea pai ki a au, he whakaaetaka ka hāngai ki tēnā ake iwi, ki tēnā ake iwi. He rerekē te oro o Te Reo i tēnā rohe, i tēnā rohe. He rerekē hoki ngā whiunga a Te Karauna ki Te Reo i tēnā rohe, i tēnā rohe.

I Te Wai Pounamu, tērā te wā i tata mate Te Reo Māori. E kore e mutu ngā mihi ki ngā tāngata o Te Ika-ā-Māui e moemoe ki roto i a Kāi Tahu. E mau te aroha mō Te Reo ki a mātau. I ngā tau tata nei, ka pau te kaha o ngā mea pērā i a Hana O’Regan, i a Tahu Pōtiki, i a Rev. Maurice Manawaroa Grey, i a Eru Tārena, nā, ki te whakaora i Te Reo Māori ki roto o Kāi Tahu. Kia mahara tātau, ēhara nā ngā mahi a Te Karauna anake i pāheke ai tō tātau Reo.

Kei wareware tātau ki ngā rakatira whai mana pērā i a Tā Apirana Ngata, i kaha ki te tautoko kia reo Ingarihi ngā kaupapa ako i ngā tamariki. Ko te titiro a ngā rakatira nei, ka ngāwari ake te kuhu a Te Māori ki te ao tāwhitiwhiti a te Pākehā mēnā, e mōhio rātau ki te kōrero Pākehā. Hoi, i te kuhunga ki te ao Pākehā kātahi ka hē rawa atu tō tātau Reo. E Te Mana Whakawā, ko te whakaaetaka me te whakapāha a Te Karauna, me te patu i tō tātau Reo tētahi mea tino nui rawa atu. Ahakoa tērā, kāore i te tika kia whānui rawa taua whakapāha.

Kei te rongo ake i te aroha i roto i te hiahia o Te Hōnore Nanaia Mahuta, kia pērā te horapa o te whakapāha i runga tonu o ētahi ngā takahitanga i ngā tau ki mua. Hoi, ko te huarahi kua takoto e Te Minita, kua whai wāhanga ki tēnei pire, koirā pea te whakapāha tika ake. Kei roto i tā Te Minita whakapāha, e rārangi ana ngā tūkinotaka i rongo ai e Te Rōpū Whakamana i Te Tiriti o Waitangi, tae atu ki ngā whakaaetaka a Te Karauna kei roto i ngā whakataunga o ngā kerēme a tēnā iwi, a tēnā iwi, tata noa ki tēnei rā. Kei konei te pūmautaka a Te Karauna kia mahitahi mō ngā iwi me ngā Māori ki te whakaora, ki te tiaki i tō tātau Reo ā ngā rā kei te tū.

He hōnore ki ahau te noho hei heamana mō te komiti whiriwhiri take Māori i te wā o te pire nei. Whakapono ai au he pire nui tēnei mō te whakaora i tō tātau Reo. E Te Mana Whakawā, ka tāpae au i te pire ki Te Whare. Nō reira, tēnā koutou, e mihi atu ana ki a koutou katoa.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and everyone throughout the House. I acknowledge you, the experts of the Māori language; greetings and acknowledgments to you all. The Māori Language Bill is nearly at the end of its journey. This bill’s journey to its third reading has not been an easy one; neither has the Hon Te Ururoa Flavell’s task in guiding it here been easy. I acknowledge the Minister for Māori Development for finishing off this bill well, for undertaking the negotiations, and how well we have worked together to get the bill here.

I pay a tribute to Sir Pita Sharples, as this was his final bill before he left Parliament. Despite the amendments to the bill when it was first introduced, I acknowledge him still for this massive assistance in terms of the revitalisation of the Māori language. I must acknowledge the officials for the assistance they provided to the Māori Affairs Committee. Thank you Tīmoti and Ben for that, as well as the assistance by the Parliamentary Counsel Office, notably Briar and Tīpene/Stephen—yes, you two.

And so I turn to this bill, the first one that is totally in the Maori language, which takes precedence over the English version alongside it. My acknowledgments remain boundless to the interpreters and translators in terms of the assistance they provide to the Māori Affairs Committee. The purpose in regard to this bill has been covered. Today is a significant and great day for the Māori language when this bill is enacted. I believe the fame of the revitalisation of the language bill, like to this generation, will reverberate.

Before I conclude my contribution I acknowledge the Supplementary Order Paper 165 that the Hon Nanaia Mahuta submitted. We on this side do not support the submission, and as a consequence there is no place for it in this bill. However, I do acknowledge the member in her desire to expand the Crown’s acknowledgment and apology and the part it played in the punishment of the Māori language. The Crown’s actions upon the Māori language were really terrible and despicable; let us be clear about that. However, there is a Crown acknowledgment, between the Crown and each tribe, relating to its actions against the Māori language. What I like about it is that it is tribe specific. The dialect in that region and that region differs; Crown regional punishments vary.

The problem in the South Island was that the Māori language had all but disappeared at the time. We are ever grateful to the people from the North Island who married into Ngāi Tahu. We caught the passion for the Māori language from them. Much energy was expended in recent years by people like Hana O’Regan, Tahu Pōtiki, Rev. Maurice Manawaroa Grey, and Eru Tārena to restore the Māori language within Ngāi Tahu. We must remember that the decline of our language was not due to Crown action.

We must never forget noble leaders like Sir Apirana Ngata, who pushed hard for English to be the main language for educational purposes. The viewpoint taken by these leaders was that it would be easier for Māori to make their way through a Pākehā world if they were proficient in English. But this proficiency in English impacted badly on our language. There is an acknowledgment that the punishment of our language was a really significant factor in the demise of the Māori language, and for that we have an apology from the Crown. Regardless of that, a blanket apology is not the right way to go.

I feel the empathy in the desire by the Hon Nanaia Mahuta that the apology be a broad one over the injustices of years past. But there is provision in this bill for the pathway presented by the Minister. That apology is perhaps the more appropriate one. It refers back to the injustices that were heard by the Waitangi Tribunal, and the acknowledgments that the Crown has made in Treaty settlements to date. It also goes on to reiterate the Crown’s commitment to working with tribes and Māoridom to revitalise and protect our language in the future.

I deem it an honour to be the chairman of the Māori Affairs Committee during the period of this bill. I believe this is a significant bill to revitalise our language, and so I submit the bill to the House. My appreciation and thanks to you collectively and to us all.]

MARAMA DAVIDSON (Green): Tēnā koe e Te Māngai, huri noa ki a tātau i tēnei Whare, tēnā koutou katoa. Āe, ka tū au, he mokopuna tēnei nō ngā iwi o Te Tai Tokerau, ā, nō reira, nō Ngāpuhi, nō Te Rarawa hoki; whakawhiti atu ki Te Tai Rāwhiti, he uri tēnei nō Ngāti Porou. Tēnā koutou katoa. Ā, ka pōti whakaae ana Te Rōpū Kākāriki i Te Pire Reo Māori nei. Nō reira ko te tuatahi, i rongo au i tō kōrero e Te Minita Hēkia Parata me te wero, ahakoa te aha, me tū mātau ki te kōrero i Te Reo i ngā wā katoa. I mua i tōku tū i noho ahau e whakaaro ana: “Mmm, ka pīrangi au ki te tuku kōrero pai, ā, me tū au ki te kōrero i te reo pihikete—te reo Ingarihi. Ō, pai tēnā, āe.” I tuhi au i ngā tau kua pahure i tēnei kōrero e pā ana ki te haerenga o taku Reo: “English slides from my lips like silk and makes rough the sandpaper utterance that is currently my mother tongue.”

Ēngari, ahakoa tērā i rongo au i tō whakaaro rangatira, mēnā ka noho mataku mātau, ka noho wahangū mātau, ngā ihu hūpē ki ngā take Reo Māori katoa, ā, ka noho mataku mātau ngā ihu hūpē ki ngā take reo Māori katoa. Nō reira, auē, ka tū au ki te kōrero mō tēnei kōrero katoa i roto i Te Reo Māori. Kaua e pōhēhē, ko ngā kupu Māori tēnei pepa, ko ngā kupu Ingarihi anake. Auē! I titiro au; āe, he pai tēnei pepa, he pai hei tautoko hou māku ki te tuku kōrero hōhonu, āe! Ēngari, i roto i te reo Ingarihi anake. Ā nō reira, tērā pea ka karawhiua aku taringa e kaimahi ā muri i tēnei—kāo, kāo! Nāku tēnei pepa i hanga hei pou tautoko ēngari, kei hea ngā kupu Māori? Horekau? Horekau ngā kupu Māori ki tēnei pepa. He pepa e pā ana ki te pire, āe, ēngari i roto i te reo Ingarihi anake. Nō reira, nōku te hōnore ka tū au ki te kite i a koutou ngā tohunga reo, ngā kaiako reo, ngā kaitautoko, ngā kaimahi hoki o tēnei pire, he mihi hōhonu ki a koutou katoa. Tēnā koutou.

Ā, ko te tīmatanga o taku kōrero, ko te huarahi o tēnei pire. Ō, tuatahi tērā pea me mihi ahau ki a koe, e Te Tohunga, e Te Taniwha hoki, Tīmoti Kāretu, tērā pea me whakakapi ō taringa ki ōku hapa—kāo, kāo; a haere tonu ahakoa te aha. Mihi atu ki a Tā Pita Sharples mō tana mahi i te tīmatanga, ahakoa ki a mātau ngā Kākāriki, ahakoa ō mātau āwangawanga i tērā pire hukihuki, hoi anō i aua raru kua puta mai tēnei pire pai ake. Nō reira, mihi atu ki Te Minita Te Ururoa Flavell, me Te Rōpū Tohutohu Reo Māori mō te mahi whakapaipai—kia ora, kia ora!

I ngā wā katoa, i ngā kōrero mō te huarahi reo mō tātau o Aotearoa, tika ana ka hoki aku mahara ki ngā piki me ngā heke o te huarahi o Te Reo. Nō reira, ka huri au ki a rātau kua whakamanahia tō tātau Reo Haerenga, mai rā anō ki tēnei wā. Nō reira, mihi aroha, mihi hōhonu ki a koutou—pērā ki tōku kuia nō Hokianga, a Patricia Charlotte Grace Broughton, kia ora!

OK. Hā! Hei tā mātau o ngā Kākāriki, e rua ngā rautaki—Te Maihi Māori me Te Maihi Karauna. Ki a mātau ko te mea nui, ka pupuri tonu Te Karauna ki te mahi whakamana i Te Reo. Ki a mātau ko tērā te mea nui o ngā kaupapa e rua; e mahi ngātahi ana Te Maihi Karauna me Te Maihi Māori, he pai tēnā. Pai ki a mātau hoki, ka noho kaha tonu Te Taurā Whiri me Te Māngai Pāoho ki te tautoko, ki te hiki i te mahi o Te Karauna mō Te Reo Māori; pai ki a mātau hoki. Ka tirotiro mātau i te mahi, te haere o te mahi a Te Mātāwai. Pēhea te mahi whiriwhiri i ngā tāngata mō te poari? Pēhea te mahi tuku pūtea mō te mahi whakakaha i Te Reo? Ka noho mātau o ngā Kākāriki, ka āta tirotiro e pēhea ana tēnā ngā hua, ka aha rānei? Anō hoki, ō, kāo. Kua kōrero kē mō tēnā.

I tautoko mātau o ngā Kākāriki i ngā pepa tautoko, ngā pepa whakatika e toru pea: ko te pepa whakapāha, tuku whakapāha, te pepa tono mā Te Karauna ki te tuku whakapāha. Nō reira, he mihi atu ki tōku tuakana, a Nanaia Mahuta. Āe, he whakaae tonu kei roto i te pire, āe, he tika tēnā ēngari, i tautoko mātau ngā Kākāriki ki te tuku whakapāha kē. I tautoko hoki mātau i te pepa whakatikatika mō ngā rangatahi me ngā wāhine mō te poari o Te Mātāwai. Ka tautoko mātau i tēnā. Anō hoki, ka tautoko mātau ngā Kākāriki i tāku pepa whakatikatika ki te hanga arotake motuhake. Āe, kai te mōhio ahau he arotake tonu kei roto i tēnei pire ēngari, he arotake i Te Karauna kē. Ki ahau, ki a mātau, i kaha rawa atu te arotake mana motuhake i tēnei arotake Karauna. Auē! Āe, āe!

Kai te mōhio mātau, ko tēnei te tīmatanga noa iho. Āe, kua tuku kōrero pērā, ki te whakaaro ko tēnei te tīmatanga noa iho. Kāore tēnei te mutunga o Te Reo. Kāore tēnei te katoa o te haerenga mō te mahi whakakaha i Te Reo—ā, nō reira, hoki mai ki ahau. I nāianei, ka taea e aku tamariki katoa—tokoono, āe, āe, āe! Ki ō karu, āe, e tamariki tonu ana ahau, āe! Ngā tamariki tokoono ka taea e rātau te mātakitaki, te rongo i tō rātau māmā te tū ki roto i tēnei Whare, e kōrero ana i tō rātau Reo Tūpuna ahakoa taku wiriwiri, ahakoa ngā hapa katoa. Ā, nō reira, he pai ki ahau tēnei mahi a Te Minita. He pai ki ahau tēnei wāhanga, ka tū mātau katoa i tēnei Whare Pāremata ki te kōrero i roto i Te Reo, ki te tautoko i tēnei pire. He rā whakahirahira tēnei, nō reira. Tēnā tātau katoa.

[Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker, and acknowledgments to you all throughout this House. Yes, I am this grandchild who belongs to the tribes of the North and, therefore, of Ngāpuhi and Te Rarawa too; and across to the East Coast, this one is a descendant of Ngāti Porou. I therefore rise and acknowledge you all! The Green Party votes in favour of this Māori Language Bill. In the first instance, I heard your statement, Minister Hēkia Parata, and the challenge in that, regardless of the situation, we must express ourselves in the Māori language at all times. Before I got up I was wondering: “Mmm, I want to say something nice so it might be better if I say it in biscuit talk—in English. Of course, yes, I must do that.” Years ago I wrote in an essay about how my Māori was progressing: “English slides from my lips like silk and makes rough the sandpaper utterance that is currently my mother tongue.”

That aside, I heard your profound message in that if we choose to live in fear, we the novices in all matters pertaining to the Māori language will remain silent forever. So I stand with some trepidation to deliver my entire contribution in Māori. No worries, this paper is about Māori words, but it has English words only! Heck! I have had a look—yes, this paper is fine, it will be a good one to help me deliver something of deep significance—great—but it is all in English. In that case my ears might get slapped afterwards by the office staff—no, no, not true! I put these notes together to help me, but where are the Māori words? Nothing? The Māori bits are not on this paper. It was a paper relating to this bill, yes, but it was solely in English. Therefore, it is my honour indeed to stand here and to see you experts, tutors, and supporters of the Māori language, and the officials, as well, of this bill. My profound acknowledgments to you. I salute you.

My address will commence on the bill’s procedure. Oh, but perhaps, in the first instance, I need to take cognisance of your presence the expert of all experts, the deity of all deities, Tīmoti Kāretu, and seek that you might cover your ears please to any grammatical blunders I make during my delivery in Māori—no, no, only joking; regardless of what happens, I forge on. I acknowledge Sir Pita Sharples’ contribution in the beginning despite the concerns of the Green Party with that first draft, but out of those issues has emerged this very much improved bill. So I commend the Minister for Māori Development, Te Ururoa Flavell, and the Māori Language Advisory Group for the improvements—thank you and well done!

In all the times and discussions about the procedure of the Māori language for we of New Zealand, it is fitting that thoughts go back to the ups and downs of the Māori language procedure. Therefore, I turn to those who enacted our Reo Haerenga, from way back to the present time. So, an affectionate and deep-hearted love to you collectively—like my revered elder nanny from Hokianga, Patricia Charlotte Grace Broughton, thank you!

Now then, we of the Green Party note that there are two strategies—the Maihi Māori one and the Crown one. The vital thing to us about the Crown strategy is that it maintains the power to enact the Māori language. Of the two strategies, that is the most important one to us; the Crown and Māori stategies work to collaborate and that is good. We are also pleased that the Māori Language Commission and the Māori Broadcasting Funding Agency will continue to work hard to support and lift the performance of the Crown where the Māori language is concerned; we like that as well. We will continue to monitor the performance and operations of Te Mātāwai. How does the selection process for the board work? How does funding to assist activities that revitalise Māori language recovery work? We of the Green Party will sit down to critically discern how those outcomes are doing, what is happening to them, or determine whether they be reviewed or not. That has been accounted for.

We of the Green Party have endorsed the three Supplementary Order Papers: the apology one, the submitting the apology one, and the one seeking the Crown apology. In that regard I acknowledge our elder colleague, Nanaia Mahuta. Yes, it is confirmed that there is an apology. That is correct, but we in the Green Party wanted to submit a separate apology of our own. We also supported an amendment that sought seats on Te Mātāwai board for youth and women. We support that. The Green Party also supported my own Supplementary Order Paper 167 to create a special review framework. Yes, I am aware there is a provision for a review in this, but it reviews the Crown instead. I think we consider that the review of the Crown should be a more robust and an independent one than the one proposed here. Heck yes, even more so!

But we do concede that this is merely a beginning. Yes, we have submitted a statement like that with the suggestion that this is only a starting point. This is not the end as far as the Māori language is concerned. This is not all of the trips to seek an apology for the Māori language—and so I come back to me personally. It is possible now for all my children, all six of them—yes, yes, yes! Yes, to your eye, I am still one, quite so! It is possible for the six of them to watch and hear their mum as she stands in this House, speaking in their ancestral language despite my nervousness plus all my grammatical errors. And what the Minister has done appeals to me. All of us standing up here in this House speaking Māori resonates with me. I enjoy this part where we speak Māori to support this bill. This is a significant day, so I therefore acknowledge us all. Thank you.]

PITA PARAONE (NZ First): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker, tēnā hoki tātou, tēnā hoki ngā kaimahi o Te Minita e noho nei i waenganui i Te ‘hare nei. Ki a koutou hoki karekau kē au i kite atu i a koutou ēngari, koutou mai i waho o Te ‘hare i kawe atu i tēnei kaupapa, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou. Ā, i maranga au i te ata nei, ‘hakaaro ana au i te urunga mai o te pire nei mō te wāhanga mutunga, hiahia ana au kia kōrero i roto o tō tātau reo Pākehā nā te mea, tōku hiahia kia mārama mai te katoa o te āhuatanga o aku kōrero ēngari, tae mai au ki konei ‘hakarongo ki ngā kōrero i puta, mai i Te Minita, i tēnā o ngā kaikōrero i tū ake i mua i a au, ‘hakaaro ana au, ā, tēnā pea e tika ana kia kōrero i roto o tō tātou Reo Rangatira. Ēngari kia mōhio mai koutou ēhara mā tēnei pire e tohu mai ki a au kia kōrero Māori. Nā reira, he tohu tēnā kia mōhio mai kua tae kē te kanohi mangū o Tāmati e pā ana ki te pire nei, kia ahatia? Ngā mihi ki Te Minita, ka mihi hoki ki ngā mema o te komiti ‘hakawhiriwhiri i ngā take Māori, kia kawea mai te pire ki tēnei wāhanga.

Kei konei ētahi o ngā mea māharahara kei a mātou i roto o Aotearoa Tuatahi. I roto o tō mātou ‘hakaaro, ēhara tēnei i te pire kia tino ‘hakaorangia tō tātou Reo Rangatira nā te mea, kei konei ētahi o ngā huarahi i wātea ki a tātou i āianei nā. Mēnā ka titiro atu mātou te kaupapa a te Kāwanatanga i roto i ngā Kōhanga Reo, ngā Kura Kaupapa, ngā Reo Rua, ā, me ngā Whare Wānanga hoki. Ahakoa kei reira ngā huarahi ēngari, kei te taka haere ngā kaikōrero o tō tātou Reo Rangatira. Māku e mea atu ko te rongoā, kia ‘hakakahangia e te Kāwanatanga ngā pūtea o ēnei rōpū. Ēngari i roto te pire nei, horekau he kōrero mō te pūtea. Kāo! Koinā te mate, kei taihoa mātou mō tēnā. E aha ana te take kia taihoa mātou? Koinā te mate. Nā reira i a au nei i kōrero ki te āhuatanga o te pire i āianei nā.

Tuarua, ka kite atu i ngā rōpū ā-rohe, e kī nei regional clusters of iwi. Ahakoa, horekau e mōhio ana he aha nā ngā whakaaro o tēnā o ngā rōpū i waho o Te Tai Tokerau ēngari, tēnei tū ka kōrerohia te āhuatanga o te rōpū mō Te Tai Tokerau. Pai atu kia ‘hakarārangi ngā iwi o te kāinga—ēngari aro ana au, ko Te Kawerau-ā-Maki, ko Ngāti Rehua, ko Ngāti Manuhiri, ko Ngāti Whatua-ō-Kaipara, ā, ko Ngāti Whātua-ō-Ōrākei, nō waho o Te Tai Tokerau aua iwi. Nā reira, koinā te take i tū tetahi hui ki roto o Te Tai Tokerau kia ‘hakawhiriwhiringia te kaupapa nei. Ka kī mai tetahi rōpū, he rōpū tino nui rawa atu o te kāinga ēngari ki a au, o te ao—Ko Ngāti Hine tēnā—ka mea atu ki wā rātou kaikōrero, kia muku atu ngā īngoa, kia ‘hakarārangitia te rohe, waihotia ki reira nā te mea, i raro i tā rātou kaupapa e korekau e tika ana, kia tukuna atu tetahi iwi hei kaikōrero mō rātou. Nā reira, wēnā te take i tono atu ki a rātou ki taua hui ēngari, karekau kē i tau tēnā whakaaro.

Ēngari te mea e kata ana au, ko ia tetahi o ngā rōpū i roto i Te Tai Tokerau, e tū kaha ana ki te kawe atu i tēnei kaupapa ēngari ko te nuinga o ngā iwi o te hau kāinga, horekau he kaupapa pēnei. Tua atu i tēnā, mēnā ka kite ana i ā tātou te āhuatanga o te rōpū nei Te Mātāwai; he rōpū kaikōkiri i te kaupapa kia whakaorangia tō tātou Reo mō Te Iwi Māori, ā, me Te Māori hoki. Wēnā ngā kupu i roto te pire nei. Mēnā e kite ana tātou ki Te Iwi o Kahungunu, Ngāi Tahu, me Tainui, kua riro kē i a rātou i āianei nā. Kāre rātou i tatari mai kia ‘hakamana i te pire nei. Nā reira, e hakaaro ana mēnā kei a rātou te kaupapa nei kia whakaorangia tō tātou Reo i roto i wā rātou rohe, he aha ana te take kia whai pire? He aha ana te take kia hangangia te rōpū Te Mātāwai ki te tohutohu ki a rātou? Nā reira, koinā te take e mea atu ki Te ‘hare nei, kei roto te rongoā whakaorangia i tō tātou Reo Rangatira i wō tātou ringaringa.

Mēnā e hiahia ana tātou ki te noho tonu kua kore tātou e kite atu i te maha o ngā kaikōrero o tō tātou Reo rangatira e piki ana i roto o Aotearoa. I rongo au i te kōrero o te tuahine a Hēkia i tana pātai, ko wai tēnei pire, mō wai? Mō te iwi Māori nahe? Mō te iwi whānui o Aotearoa rānei? Nā te mea taku kitenga i tēnei wā, ā, ko te iwi whānui e tū kaha ana, e hiahia ana ki te ako i tō tātou Reo Rangatira i tēnei wā. Inapō, ka kite au i tētahi tauira Pākehā, tū kaha ana ki te kōrero Māori, i runga te pouaka whakaata. Nā reira, māku e mea atu ki a tātou o Te Ao Māori, kia tūpato—kua riro te kaha ki te kōrero i tō tātou Reo Rangatira i ngā Pākehā! Ahau nei nā, horekau he raru ki tēnā, ēngari, karekau kē e hiahia ana tātou o Te Ao Māori kia amuamu anō.

Tua atu i tēnā, ka kite ana au i tētahi rārangi schedule 3A, “Organisations comprising Te Reo Tukutuku”. Mēnā e kite ana i a tātou te pire nei, kei konei tetahi rōpū karekau kē e hiahia ana kia noho ki roto te rōpū nei. Horekau mōhio ana he aha te tino take e hiahia ana rātou i tēnā. Ēngari, ko te rōpū Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i Te Reo Māori, nā rātou i tono atu ki Te Minita, kia mukua atu tā rātou rōpū mai i tēnei pire. Ki a au nei, koinā tetahi o ngā mea e māharahara ana au—he aha ana te take?

Ka mutu, ka huri taku whakaaro ki te ‘hakapāha i uru mai i Te Minita. Mōhio ana au, mēnā karekau kē tā mātou tangata i roto o Te Tai Tokerau, a Dover Samuels, i puta mai i wana kōrero, auē, kārekau i tēnā pea. E tika ana kia tono atu ki Te Karauna kia hakapāha mai ki a tātou o Te Ao Māori, i te wā i wepua rātou mō te haere ki te kura ki te kōrero Māori; nā reira, koinā te take, ki a au nei, e kite ana tātou i te ‘hakapāha i tuhia atu e Te Minita i roto o Te Whare nei. Ahakoa kei te tautoko wēnā whakaaro a Te Rōpū Reipa, kia ahatia. Ēngari, i tae atu ki te mutunga o taku mihi, taku kōrero, kārekau mātou e kite atu i tēnei pire, he pire rongoā hei ‘hakaora tonu i tō tātou Reo Rangatira. Nā reira, tēnā koe tēnā tātou katoa!

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. Acknowledgments to us all, to the Minister’s officials seated in our midst here in this House, and to those of you whom we are unable to see but are out there away from this House and this debate that is being broadcast to you; salutations, greetings, acknowledgments to you collectively. When I got up this morning and thought about the arrival of this bill before us for its final stage, I was intending to deliver my speech in our English language because I wanted to ensure that every aspect of my contribution would be covered and understood. But when I got here and listened to the Minister for Māori Development and to the others who preceded me, I reconsidered and decided it might be more fitting perhaps if I spoke in our esteemed language. But you must understand that the mind change was not due to this bill compelling me to speak Māori, in actual fact it is signalling that Tāmati’s face—of darkened complexion, as far as this bill is concerned—is speaking to it. Acknowledgments to the Minister, and also to the Māori Affairs Committee who progressed the bill to this point.

There are some concerns here for we in New Zealand First. It is our view that this bill will not assist the revitalisation of our noble language, because there are procedures that are readily available to us at this very moment. Let us consider the Government’s policy in regard to kōhanga reo, Māori-medium schools, bilingual schools, and Māori-medium at tertiary level as well. Although systems are there, the number of fluent speakers of our esteemed language continues to fall. I assert that to remedy this decline the Government needs to make more funding available to these institutions. However, there is no funding provided in this bill. That is the problem; we cannot hang on for that. Why must we wait and see what happens— hanging on is the problem. That is an aspect of this bill as I am talking about right now.

Secondly, I note the regional groupings are as per regional clusters of iwi. Even though I do not know what the situation is in regions outside Northland, I can stand here and talk about the situation as it relates to us in the North. Grouping ourselves back home as a tribal cluster is fine, but as far as Kawerau-ā-Maki, Ngāti Rehua, Ngāti Manuhiri, Ngāti Whatua-ō-Kaipara, and Ngāti Whātua-ō-Ōrākei are concerned, those ones are deemed to be outside of Te Tai Tokerau. And that was the reason a meeting to negotiate this matter was held in Te Tai Tokerau. A rather prominent and sizeable group at home, but to me in the world—I refer to Ngāti Hine—asked their representatives to delete the list of iwi and replace it with a regional map, and leave it at that because, according to their policy, it is not right for some other representative to speak for them. That is the reason why they were invited to that meeting, but the matter was not resolved.

But what amuses me is that Ngāti Hine is one of the clans in the North who is a strong supporter of language revitalisation. Most of the other iwi clans back home have not progressed their Māori language programmes to the point that Ngati Hine is at today. Furthermore, if we look at what this Te Mātāwai group is about, it is one that has been established to revitalise the Māori language for the Māori people and Māoridom as well. Those are the words in this bill. If we look at what the tribes of Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāi Tahu, and Tainui have done, they have already instigated initiatives to restore their language. They have not waited for this bill to be enacted. So I am wondering, if they have found a way to restore our language in their regions, why is there a need to have this bill? Why set up a Te Mātāwai group to advise them? That is what I have to say to this House—the remedy to restore our noble language is in our very own hands.

If we do nothing we will never see the growth of Māori language speakers in Aotearoa. I heard the tenor of my sister colleague Hēkia’s sentiments when she asked who this bill is for. For Maori only? Or for the people of New Zealand at large? Because as far as I can see at this point in time, the general population’s support is strong, and they are really wanting to learn our noble language. Last night I saw an example of a Pākehā talking fluently in Māori on television. My warning to us of Māoridom is to be careful—or the ability to speak our esteemed language fluently will become dominantly Pākehā! For me, personally, I do not have a problem with that, but I do not want us in Māoridom to moan about that as well.

Further to that, I refer to the line, schedule 3A, “Organisations comprising Te Reo Tukutuku”. If we have a look at this bill, there is a group here who do not want to be in this panel. I do not really know the real reason why they do not wish to be a part of that. However, the Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i Te Reo asked the Minister to delete their group from this bill. That is a somewhat perplexing situation to me—what is the reason?

Finally, my thinking turns now to the apology the Minister introduced. I know for a fact that if our man from the North, Dover Samuels, had not come out with his passionate comments about it, heck, there would not have been an apology. How apt indeed that an apology be sought from the Crown to those of us of in Māoridom for the time it punished us for going to school to talk Māori; to me, that is the reason why we are seeing an apology in this House. And at the same time we endorse those sentiments by the Labour Party, regardless. And so I have reached the end of my congratulatory statements and address. We really do not see this bill as a long-term remedy in the revitalisation of our noble language. So acknowledgments to you, and my appreciation to us all.]

JOANNE HAYES (National): Tēnā koe, e Te Mana Whakawā, i mua i te tīmata ki taku kōrero e hiahia ana ahau he kōrero e pā ana ki te karanga waea i tōku mokopuna i te pō.

“Ring ring! Nanny J! Nanny J! Kei te ako au he Reo Māori i taku kura!”

“Aw! Ka pai mokopuna! He kura Pākehā?”

“Āe, Nanny J, he kura Pākehā!”

“Kei te aha koe i ngā kupu e mōhio ana e mokopuna?”

Ā, he kōrero ia, he kōrero ia, he kōrero ia. Kei te tū au ki te mutunga o te waea nā te mea, ka kōrero ia i te pō e roa.

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. Before I start my address I want to relate a telephone conversation with my grandchild last night.

“Ring ring! Nanny J! Nanny J! I am learning some Māori at my school!”

“Aw! Well done, grandchild! A Pākehā school?”

“Yes, Nanny J, a Pākehā school!”

“What are you doing with the words that you know, grandchild?”

He talks, and talks, and talks, and I stand up to end the telephone conversation, because he will talk long into the night.]

What I was just saying there is that my mokopuna is learning Te Reo Māori at his playgroup. I am really proud that he is doing that, because I have not had a chance to teach him anything in Te Reo Māori. So when he rang me last night and told me that, I posted it on Facebook, and a whole lot of my friends came on and said: “E kuia, you’d better hurry up yourself, so you can have good kōrero with him.”

Kei te mihi au ki ngā kaimahi a Te Minita mō ō rātou mahi mō tēnei pire, ā, tēnā koutou. Ki te whānau tautoko i tēnei pire, ka nui te mihi atu ki a koutou katoa.

Ā, tīmata i te pire, e rua ngā mea i whakakore ia Te Ture mō Te Reo Māori 1987 me te Wāhanga 4A o Te Ture Pāpāho 1989. Ka whakatū te rōpū Te Mātāwai, whakaū ēnei huringa Reo Māori hei taonga o Te Iwi me Te Māori. Whakahē ana te iwi ririki kei te ako i Te Reo me Te Māori hei Reo e pā ana mō Aotearoa (i), he (a). Te whakatū Te Mātāwai hei hinonga ture motuhake ki te whakarato i te ārahitanga mō ō whakahaere reo iwi me Te Māori i roto i tō tūranga hei kaitiaki o Te Reo Māori, he rārangi 19(1)(e) i roto e tautoko o taua tūranga. Whakarato hoki i te hokohoko o Te Taurā Whiri i Te Reo Māori, me Te Reo Whakapuaki Irirangi rite ki te hinonga Karauna motuhake.

Kua riro nui te mahi ki tēnei pire tika ki runga ki tēnei rā me te pīrangi meinga tātau hohoro. Nā reira, ka mutu taku kōrero, he kōrero iti ki te whakataukī i te rangatira wahine nō Tainui ia, ko Te Pūea Hērangi: “Ko te pūāwaitanga o ngā moemoeā me whakamahi.”

[I acknowledge the officials of the Minister for Māori Development for their efforts on this bill, and so I commend you. A huge acknowledgment to all of you who supported this bill.

I commence with the bill, and there are two things: the repealed Māori Language Act 1987 and Part 4A of the Broadcasting Act 1989. Te Mātāwai is established to affirm these changes of the Māori language as a treasure that belongs to the tribe and Māoridom. A minority teaching the language with Māoridom oppose the Māori language as a language for New Zealand in (i) and (a). Te Mātāwai is established as an independent entity to provide leadership in terms of your administration of tribal dialect and Māori in your position as a guardian of the Māori language. There is a clause 19(1)(e) in it supporting that role. It also markets the Māori Language Commission and the Māori Broadcasting Funding Agency like independent Crown entities.

Much effort has gone into this bill; let us focus directly upon this day in the hope that we get on with it quickly. Therefore I end my address with a few words from that proverb by that noble lady from Tainui, Te Pūea Hērangi: “Implement that which will come to fruition through dreams.”]

Dreams become reality when we take action, and today we will take action on this bill. Kia ora.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The call is a split call. Marama Fox—5 minutes. Tēnā koe.

MARAMA FOX (Co-Leader—Māori Party): Tēnā koe e Te Mana Whakawā. Harerūia, harerūia, harerūia e Te Whare, kua tae mai ki tēnei rangi! Ēhara i te mea ko te pire nei tēnā hai whakatika i tō tātou Reo, kārekau! Ēngari anō he huarahi tēnei, he huarahi hōu! Mai rā anō mātau kua whawhai, kua hīkoi, kua porotēhi i runga i te huarahi mō Te Reo, te rangatiratanga, ngā take whenua katoa. Hōmai te pūtea ki a mātou e Te Kāwanatanga mā mātou tēnā e kawe! Koirā te karanga, koirā te take e hīkoikoi ai tātau Te Iwi Māori ki runga i te whenua. I nāianei, kua riro i a tātau te pūtea me te mana i roto i Te Mātāwai! E hika, kai hea atu i te iwi, te tiaki pai i tō tātau Reo?

Mai rā anō tātau kua whawhai mō tēnei kaupapa, kua wero i Te Kāwanatanga, i nāianei, kua whai mana Te Reo i roto i Te Ture, kua whai mana tō tātau iwi hai kawe i tēnei kaupapa, te kaupapa whakaora ai i tō tāua Reo! Koirā te take e harerūia atu ana! Me kōrero tātau i te kāinga ka tika! Ko tō tātau tupuna tēnā a Paora Pōtangaroa, nāna te kī i roto i tana ōhākī, “ka ngaro Te Reo o Wairarapa ēngari mā ngā tamariki Te Reo e whakahokia mai”, ka tika, ka tika! Kua mate mate haere ngā kaumātua i te kāinga, kāre mātau i te mōhio ki tō tātau Reo ēngari anō, kai Te Whare Pukapuka o Aotearoa nei, e 120 ngā pukapuka i Te Reo Māori nā ō mātau ake tūpuna i tito, ngā kōrero o Te Whare Wānanga, ngā kōrero mō Mohi Mātorohanga, mō Nēpia Kōhūhū.

Nā Te Whatahoro tēnā, nā Kumeroa Āporo tēnā, ngā kaitito kai roto i Te Whare Wānanga. Ēngari anō mō Te Wairarapa ake, kāre e paku mōhio te whānui mō aua pukapuka i ngā tau kua hipa atu. Kai roto i ngā Whare Wānanga aua kōrero e rere haere ana, kāre tonu mātou i te kāinga e paku mōhio ki aua kōrero, kua ngaro kē Te Reo! Ēngari, harerūia, harerūia mō ngā kuia i whakatū ai i ngā Kōhanga Reo, kai taku ngākau te mahi o Te Kōhanga Reo, e Te Kahurangi Iritana, kai te mihi atu ki a koe me tō kaupapa. Ēhara i te mea ko koe anake, mōhio pai au ki ngā kuia kai roto i ō rātou whare, ō rātou whare rau e akiaki ana i tō tāua Reo. Kararaina, ko koe anō tēnā e tautoko ana i Te Kahurangi i tēnei wā ēngari anō, mō te kaupapa o Te Kōhanga Reo. Kātahi ka whai atu ki te whakatinana i Te Aho Matua hei kaupapa mā Te Kura Kaupapa Māori. Kai konei aua ngā kura, Ngā Mokopuna, tēnā koutou!

Kanapū, tēnā koe, i kawea mai ō tamariki, mai i Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Ngā Mokopuna. Te Kura Māori o Porirua, kai konei koutou. Kai te mihi atu ki a koutou me ō koutou kaiako! Mel, kei te tika tēnā nō te mea, kei roto i te ringa o ngā tamariki, mokopuna, tō tāua Reo. Koinei taku wero atu ki ngā iwi, ngā māngai i runga i Te Mātāwai, tukua, āe, tukua ki te hunga rangatahi. Tukua ngā tūru ki te hunga rangatahi, wāhine mā, tāne mā! Kāre au i te āwangawanga mō Te Mātāwai. Kai te mōhio au mehemea ka tukua ki ngā tangata tika, ka ora tonu ai tō tāua Reo. Kai roto i ō koutou nā ringaringa tamariki mā, mokopuna mā, rangatahi mā, mō ngā rangi kai te heke mai. Kāre Te Ture i te oranga o Te Reo, ko te tangata kē! Kai roto i te ringa o te tangata!

Paku mihi whakamutunga, ki a koutou o Te Taura Whiri, o Te Māngai Pāoho, he mahi kai te haere i roto i Te Kāwanatanga, hei whakaora ai i tō tāua Reo. Nā reira kai te mihi ki a koutou! Tāngia Te Reo, whakatōhia mai te kākano i roto i te ngākau, kia puāwai ai tō tāua Reo i runga i te whenua mō tātau katoa, tēnā koutou, e Te Mana Whakawā!

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. Hallelujah, hallelujah, hallelujah in the House; this day has arrived. It is not as though this bill will fix up our Māori language; not at all. Rather, it is a pathway, and an innovative one. We have been fighting, marching, protesting for some time now on the road for the Māori language, for sovereignty, and for all issues pertaining to the land. Oh Government, give us the funding; we can administer it. That has been the call. That is why we of Māoridom marched throughout the country. Who else but iwi will do a better job at taking care of our Māori language?

We have been fighting for this for a long time. We have been challenging the Government, and now the Māori language has status through the Act. Our people have the authority and responsibility to advance this matter in terms of revitalising our Māori language. And that has given cause to exclaim “Hallelujah!”. Of course, it is imperative that we speak it at home. It was that ancestor of ours Paora Pōtangaroa who uttered in his dying speech: “The Māori language of Wairarapa will be lost, but it will be our children who will bring it back.” How true, how right.

The elders who used the Māori language back home have all gone now, and we do not know our Māori language. However, in the National Library there are 120 books in the Māori language that our ancestors wrote for their records—about Mohi Mātorohanga and Nēpia Kōhūhū. It was Te Whatahoro and Kumeroa Āporo who were scribes in the university. But for us born and bred in Te Wairarapa, we were totally unaware of those books as the years went by. Those stories are flying around in the universities, but we back home were totally ignorant of those stories because we had lost the Māori language. And so, hallelujah, hallelujah, and hallelujah for the kuia who set up the Māori language nurseries.

The work of the kōhanga reo is quite dear to my heart. I salute you, Dame Iritana, and your scheme. It was not as though you were alone in that scheme. I am very aware of the many other kuia who were in their homes, in hundreds of homes, encouraging the use of our language. Kararaina, you too are one of those who supported Dame Iritana at the time of the Māori language nurseries scheme, and then you went on to develop Te Aho Matua philosophy as one for Māori-medium schools. Such schools are here today. Ngā Mokopuna, greetings to you all.

To Kanapu, my thanks to you for bringing the children of Kura Kaupapa Māori o Ngā Mokopuna, and Te Kura Māori o Porirua are all here as well. I pay tribute to you and your teachers. Mel, it is correct, is it not, that our language is in the hands of our children now. And this is my challenge to the tribes and to the representatives of Te Mātāwai: let it be passed on. Release it to the younger generations. Give up the seats to the young people—the young women and young men. I have no concerns for Te Mātāwai. I know that if the right people are appointed, our language will indeed survive. So the future is now in your hands, children and grandchildren, and all the young people. It is not the law that will bring back our Māori language; it is people. It is in the hands of people.

In conclusion, a brief acknowledgment to you of the Māori Language Commission and the Māori Broadcasting Funding Agency—there is still work to be done by the Government in reviving our language and so I compliment you all. Create the Māori language and plant the seed in the heart so that it will flourish upon the country for us all. I commend you collectively.]

DENISE ROCHE (Green): Ka tangi te kākā, ka tangi te tītī, ka tangi ko ahau, tihei mauri ora!

[The kākā laments, the muttonbird laments, and so do I. Behold the breath of life!]

I rise to take this call for the third and final reading of Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill, which, I feel, is truly historic. Ko tōku nei wawata ka taea e tātou katoa e nohonoho nei ki a Aotearoa te tuku i Te Reo Māori, Te Reo o ōku rangatira, Te Reo taketake o Aotearoa kia rere ai.

[My real wish is that all of us living here in New Zealand can unshackle the Māori language, the language of my esteemed ones and the indigenous language of New Zealand, and let it flow.]

All New Zealanders—all of us—should be able to speak our indigenous language. Some of us struggle with it, and we will continue. I see that if we learn this language, then we strengthen our nationhood. Of our total population, only 3.73 percent can hold a conversation in Te Reo Māori, and I am one of those 3.73 percent.

Language is not just about how we communicate; language forms us. Language—our language—expresses who we are and where we are from, and language dictates how we think. Twenty one percent of Māori speak Te Reo and it is slowly declining. The statistics show that there are more speakers of Te Reo Māori in the over-60-year-olds, and that kind of explains why there is that slow decline. As people get older and we are not bringing the others through, the reo starts to decline.

My hope—and I am sure it is the hope of this entire House—is that this bill and the revitalisation strategies within it will reverse that decline. The benefit of Te Reo is that we know where we are from. We know who our people are. We know who we are. Essentially, we know our place in the world. And to be without that knowledge is to be dislocated from an essential part of the story about ourselves. It is all too common among Māori across this country, and that plays out in the woeful statistics that we see in health outcomes, in the early death rates, around our low educational achievements, in employment, and even in our pay rates. Te Reo is a taonga, and it is the Government’s duty and the duty of all people in this country to protect it and work on it becoming the flourishing and beautiful language that it should be and that we should all have access to.

The story of the decline of Te Reo in this country is the story of colonisation, and the true story of colonisation is not known by most New Zealanders because it is not taught in schools. We do not commemorate those who died in the Land Wars in the Waikato, for example, or have the mainstream understand that the true meaning of 5 November is not Guy Fawkes. The true meaning of 5 November is when 1,600 volunteers and armed constabulary invaded the peaceful settlement of Parihaka and arrested Te Whiti o Rongomai and Tohu Kākahi.

Without that understanding of who we are, where we have come from, and the history of this land, then our nationhood is fractured, and the sad histories that are outlined in every Treaty bill—the sad histories of iwi and hapū—are unknown to many New Zealanders . It is so, so terrible that most mainstream non-Māori New Zealanders do not even get to understand, or get an inkling of, what happened.

I have heard of kids my daughter’s age talk about the fact that they do not learn anything about the Treaty of Waitangi, anything about the true history of this land, until they are at university. That is a sad indictment on all of us, and on all of us here in this Parliament, where we should be making laws to ensure that all our kids have access to the true history of this land and access to Te Reo Māori as a core subject in schools. We have got a long way to go, but this is a beginning. It is a continuation, but it is also a beginning, and the Greens are committed to getting there.

Dr SHANE RETI (National—Whangarei): Tēnā koe, Mr Assistant Speaker. E rau rangatira mā, e ngā iwi katoa, tēnā koutou. Ko Ngāti Maniapoto rāua ko Ngāti Wai ōku iwi nō reira, kia ora mai tātou. E hikohiko ana ki te kōrero e pā ana tēnei mahi hirahira i tēnei rā. Mō ngā iwi katoa Te Reo, he taonga. Mō ngā iwi katoa tēnei pire, e kaha Te Reo mō te wā e heke mai nei. Nā te mea i tēnei tāima, e tū ana ahau i roto i te aroaro o whaikōrero whakamiharo, ka mahi te kupu nā, ā, ka huri ki te reo tuarua.

[Greetings, Mr Assistant Speaker. To esteemed ones and to all tribes, I acknowledge you collectively. My tribes are Ngāti Maniapoto and Ngāti Wai, so greetings. I am enthused to make a contribution today on this significant matter. The Māori language is for all tribes, and it is a treasure. This bill is for everyone, and the language must be resolute in future times. At this moment I am standing before an audience of eloquent speech-makers in Māori who use it well; because of that, I turn to the second language.]

In the presence of such beautiful Māori language speakers, my humble offering pales. None the less, I want to commend this bill for how it embodies and preserves Te Reo in New Zealand culture. Clause 6A(2)(e) in Part 1 of this bill talks about how “knowledge and use of the Māori language enhance the lives of iwi and Māori:”. I believe this to be true, and I believe it to be true for all New Zealanders.

Educational organisations recognise that being bilingual conveys definite benefits to students. They are more creative in their thinking, they have greater awareness of the syntax of language, they are more sensitive to the nuances of communication, and they are better able to detect hidden patterns and figures. In the learning context, I did enjoy Minister Parata’s description, in the Committee of the whole House, of learning Te Reo and coming home and being corrected by her whānau.

There are many paths to learning Te Reo. My path was different. I had been in and out of night courses over the years and could not quite get to the next level. For me, the tipping point actually came in my early 40s. For my path, I had been running a free marae-based medical clinic west of Whangarei for 10 years. We reached our 10-year celebration and the local people said: “Shane, you do everything for us. What can we do for you?”. I said: “I really need to get to the next level of Te Reo. That’s my goal. I’ve been in and out of it, but I haven’t got there. Can you help me with that?”. What they said to me was: “Yeah, sure, Shane. Here’s what we’ll do. First of all, everyone who comes to the clinic from now on who speaks Māori, ka kōrero i Te Reo anake—they will only speak Māori to you.” The second thing they said was: “Kura kaupapa is not an environment for adults to learn Māori, but the principal of the local kura kaupapa is of this area. If we speak with him and he agrees, here’s the deal: one morning every week you will go to the kura kaupapa and you will take a 20-minute health message and teach it to the children there.”

So around about 2005, for the first term, every Thursday morning if you looked at my appointment book, you would see it struck out with “home visit”. No, I was not on a home visit; I was sitting on a children’s chair at the kura kaupapa, immersed in Māori, learning Māori with the children. Children were forgiving—they forgave me my poor pronunciation. But what that immersion did do was tip me into that level of confidence and to the next level of speaking. For that, I am very grateful. I am grateful to the community, and I am certainly grateful for the people at the kura kaupapa.

This was my path to Te Reo, but many paths can arrive at the same destination. What is important is that we start the path and keep moving. In that spirit, then, and in the short call that I have here, I would like to commend the Minister for Māori Development, I would like to commend officials, and I would like to commend the Māori Affairs Committee, led very ably by my friend and colleague Nuk Korako. In conclusion, I commend this bill to the House.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): The next call is a split call of 5 minutes—Adrian Rurawhe.

ADRIAN RURAWHE (Labour—Te Tai Hauāuru): Tēnā koe Te Māngai o Te Whare, otirā, ko Pāraikaretu Te Maunga, ko Whangaehu Te Awa, ko Whangaehu Te Marae, ko Rangitāuaua Te Whare, ko Ngātirangiwa’o te ‘apū, ko Ngāti Apa te iwi, ā, tihei mauri ora!

Ā, tino hari koa ahau kia tū ake ki te tautoko i tēnei pire, Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori. I te wā o te wāhanga komiti o Te Whare, ka tuku ahau i tēnei kōrero: “ ‘Kia mau ki tō Reo e te iwi. Ka nui te ngaro haere o tēnei ā’uatanga. Nā tō Reo oki, ka mō’iotia ai he Māori. Ka kūare koe ki tō Reo, ka meinga koe nō ngā whenua noa atu.’ ” Koinā te kōrero o tōku tipuna i te tau rua tekau mā whā o tērā rau tau, ā, e tū tonu ana taua kōrero.

I te wā e haere ana āku mātua tūpuna ki te kura, ka patua rātou e ngā māhita i te wā ka kōrerotia e rātou Te Reo Māori. I te wā e haere ana ōku mātua ki te kura, ka kōrero Pākehā anakē rātou. Otirā, ko ōku mātua tūpuna e kōrero ana ki a rātou i Te Reo Māori, ā, ka whakahoki rātou i te reo Pākehā. Ā i te wā i tipu ake au ka tipu ake au i roto i te reo Pākehā anakē. Otirā, i ngā wā ka haere au ki te whakamoemiti i te Rātapu, ka rongo au i Te Reo, ka tukuna atu rātou i ngā karakia whakamoemiti i Te Reo Māori anakē. I pātai atu au ki taku whaea ki roto i Te Reo Pākehā: “He aha ai ka kōrero Māori rātou anakē? Kāore au e mārama ki ā rātou kōrero!”. Nāna i kī mai ki ahau: “Koinā te reo reka ki a Ihowā!”. Ā, ka whakamārama hoki a ia i taua kōrero ki a au i roto i te reo Pākehā. Nō reira, e tautoko ana ahau i te korōria, harerūia, ka tukuna atu e Marama i tēnei rā.

Nō reira, ka whakapiri atu, whakamoemiti atu ki a rātou mā i roto i Te Reo reka ki a Ihowā me pēnei ai: “E Te Māngai me ngā anahera pono, e te tokotoru tapu, anei ahau e tuku whakamoemiti atu ki a koutou, kia hōmai ki a mātou te kaha kia tautokohia Te Reo Māori i roto i tēnei āhuatanga. Ka tono atu ahau ki a koutou kia whakapiki ake te tokomaha o te hunga e ako ana i Te Reo Māori, ā, kā kōrero hoki i Te Reo Māori. Koinā taku tono atu ki a koutou i roto i te korōriatanga o ngā mano, Matua, Tama, Wairua Tapu, Ngā Anahera Pono, mā Te Māngai e tautoko mai, aia nei, ake nei, āe.”

Nō reira, e Te Māngai o Te Whare, ēhara au i te māngai o ngā ‘āhi! Tēnei taku hiahia, kia whai mana ake Te Maihi Māori ki Te Maihi Karauna, otirā, taku hiahia mā Te Maihi Karauna e tautoko ana, e whakakaha ana Te Maihi Māori. Nō reira, koina tāku whakaaro mō tēnei pānuitanga tuatoru o te pire nei. Nō reira, kāore e roa tēnei tū, e tika ana kia tuku mihi atu ki a tātou katoa. Nō reira, kia ora mai tātou!

[Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. But, at the same time, Pāraikaretu is the mountain, Whangaehu is the river, Whangaehu is the marae, Rangitāuaua is the house, Ngāti Rāngiwa’o is the hapū, and Ngāti Apa is the tribe; behold the breath of life!

I am very pleased to rise and support this bill, the Māori Language Bill. At the Committee stage of the House I made this statement:“ ‘People, hold fast to your language; this loss is huge. It is through your language that you will be recognised as being a Māori. If you become ignorant of your language, you will be regarded as being a foreigner from somewhere else.’ ” That is what my ancestors said in 1924, and that statement still stands today.

When my elders went to school, they were punished by teachers because they spoke Māori. When my parents went to school, they spoke only in English. But, at the same time, my grandparents would speak to them in Māori and they would respond in English. When I was growing up, I grew up speaking solely in English. When I went to thanksgiving on Sunday I heard Māori; all the prayers of thanks were totally in Māori. I asked my mother in English: “Why are they speaking only in Māori? I can’t understand what they are saying!”. She said to me: “That’s the sweetest language to Jehovah!”. And then she proceeded to explain in English. And so I support the glory and hallelujah that Marama issued today.

Thus I add my thanks to all of them in the language that is sweet to Jehovah in this manner: “To you the Mouthpiece, the Faithful Angels, and the Holy Trinity, I hereby offer my gratitude to you three and plead that you give us the strength to support the Māori language in this situation. I seek that the number of people learning and speaking Māori increases. Those, then, are my urgings in the glory of the innumerable thousands, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, the Faithful Angels, and for the Mouthpiece to endorse here, now, and forever, yes!”

So, Mr Assistant Speaker, I am not the speaker for the churches! My wish is really that the mandate of the Maihi Māori should be greater than that of the Maihi Karauna, but, at the same time, I want the Maihi Karauna to support and strengthen the Maihi Māori. This, then, is my contribution for this third reading of this bill. This call has not been a long one, but it is fitting that I acknowledge us all. So my appreciation to us!]

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I call Louisa Wall—5 minutes.

LOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Kia ora, Mr Assistant Speaker. E ngā mana, e ngā reo, rau rangatira mā, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā tātou katoa. Last week a few of us—Jo Hayes, Poto Williams, and I—were in Samoa. One of the issues that we discussed over there, actually, was the use of Samoan in the Samoan Parliament and whether or not bills could be and should be written in Samoan. The reality for that Parliament is that at the moment the members write only in English. We had a member of the Fijian Parliament with us, and they are not allowed to speak Fijian in their Parliament—they can speak only English.

While the bill was being debated over here and we were having that kōrero over there, it was actually a time for celebration, because we, today, have a bill that is in English and Te Reo. Most of the debate today has been in Te Reo and, actually, it speaks a lot about our society, our Government, and our progression in terms of Te Reo and our use of Te Reo here in Parliament.

I really want to speak to a couple of Supplementary Order Papers, and I have to because one of them was in my name and I was not here. So I want to acknowledge that the Minister for Māori Development said on Te Karere that the members of Te Mātāwai should be those who are knowledgable and most experienced at managing language programmes in the community, and they have to be fluent.

I just want to highlight that the reason I put in Supplementary Order Paper 166 to ask the Minister to make sure that there are women on Te Mātāwai is that I hope that of those seven iwi representatives, there will be a woman, and of the four clusters, there will be a woman. If there is not, because we have processes that, for whatever reason, do not allow Māori women to be on that board, the Minister has two appointees.

So I just wanted to put it out there that if we are looking at who has managed those language programmes in our community, it is Te Kōhanga Reo National Trust. I want to take the opportunity to mihi to whaea Druis Barett and her whānau in Waitomo. I was at the tangi of her husband, Jim, on Monday, with members of Te Rōpū Wāhine Māori Toko i te Ora. It was a very sad time, but it was also a wonderful opportunity for us to be together and to hear all the reo and to hear how much love there was for matua Jim.

The other Supplementary Order Paper I want to highlight is Supplementary Order Paper 165 in the name of my colleague the Hon Nanaia Mahuta. I think the apology that she proposed really was an opportunity for the Government to say sorry—because, actually, that is what it is all about. If you look at the reference that Nanaia made to suppression by the Crown and our inability to use Te Reo, we really need to look at the Waitangi Tribunal hearing in 1985 that, basically, stated that Māori who spoke Te Reo were punished. So the Crown failed to uphold Treaty of Waitangi obligations to protect the language.

In response, we have an acknowledgment in the bill that the Crown supressed Te Reo Māori. What does that actually mean? Well, it actually means that the Crown, by its authority, abolished and stopped our ability to use Te Reo at school—because we were talking about the Native Schools Act. We were not allowed to use Te Reo. Every one of us in our whānau has got stories about that. In my case, it was about my father and my uncles being strapped. They were not allowed to use Te Reo. We did not use Te Reo at home. Some of my uncles did, but in our particular whānau my father just said: “You’ve got to get an education. Forget about the Reo—get an education.”

I think the acknowledgment of suppression actually puts a huge onus on the Crown because if our inability to use our language was because of the Native Schools Act, then, actually, the solution lies in making sure that every single Māori kid at school has an opportunity to learn Te Reo. So if this piece of legislation takes us to a place where every Māori kid gets to learn Te Reo in school, then that will be an amazing day. And it will be a day to say hallelujah, which is my middle name, by the way, Marama Fox—Hareruia. So that is what I hope for this piece of legislation. That is what we all hope for this legislation. Nō reira, tēnā tātou katoa.

JONO NAYLOR (National): Tuatahi, he mihi ki Te Atua, nāna nei ngā mea katoa. Ngā mihi ki ngā manuhiri o Te Whare Pāremata kua tae mai nei i tēnei wā, tēnā koutou katoa. Ngā mihi ki a koutou, ki ngā hoa o Te Whare Pāremata, ā, tēnā koutou. Tuarua, e hiahia ana ahau ki te tautoko i Te Minita, e kōkiri haere ana i Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori. Tuatoru, e mihi atu ana ahau ki a Nuk Korako, i te komiti mō ō rātou mahi ki te whakarite mai i Te Reo Māori mō ngā tāngata katoa o Aotearoa. E whakamōwai ana ahau mō ngā kōrero i tautoko mai i taku kōrero i te pānuitanga tuatahi o te pire nei.

[Firstly, a tribute to God; it was he who provided everything. Acknowledgments to the visitors to Parliament House who have arrived here today, I salute you all. Salutations to you collectively, fellow colleagues of Parliament; hello there. Secondly, I want to endorse the Minister for Māori Development, who is driving the Māori Language Bill along. Thirdly, I congratulate Nuk Korako and the Māori Affairs Committee for their work in preparing the Māori language for all of New Zealand. I am put at ease by the supportive comments to my contribution in the first reading of this bill.]

I am humbled by the response that I got to my speech in the second reading of this bill, not simply because the post from Facebook went to over a million people or that the video was viewed by over 100,000 people, because I am not humbled by that at all—I am just showing off. I am humbled because of the responses that I got from both Māori and non-Māori in response to that. I do not think they responded because of my witty repartee, or my good looks or otherwise; I think they responded because they heard of something in my journey that touched their hearts. They heard something in the story of my whānau and my whānau’s journey with Te Reo Māori that meant something to them. Because it came from someone who was non-Māori, they were touched, because here was a middle-class, middle-aged white guy from the National Government talking about the importance of Te Reo Māori.

Some of the things they said included this: “E Jono tenei te mihi i to mihi tautoko......o Te reo Maori tenei te mihi tenei te mihi MAURI ORA!!!!!!!! thank you for your wonderful speech”. “Thanks for your support in recognising our well-being.” Marty Toto said: “I remember my Dad saying he got caned for speaking te reo at school growing up [and I] wish he was alive to hear this”. People spoke to me about the support for their language, their Reo, and how it was important to them. So I am humbled to stand in this House as a non-Māori, one of the few non-Māori speakers to this bill, because I think it is incredibly important for us, if we are going to follow through on that phrase that is contained within this bill that I think is incredibly important, which is “reo hoki ka kaingākautia e te motu”—this language is valued by our nation.

I am encouraged by what I see as the Māorification of New Zealand English. When I grew up in west Auckland in the 1970s, the only Māori words that we ever used were the words for which there was no English word. So we knew what a hāngī was and we knew what a hongi was, but we did not know words like whānau and kaupapa and kai—those were not words that we used. We are now growing up in a New Zealand where some of those words are starting to take a place. But if we are going to see New Zealand English develop to incorporate and envelop more Te Reo Māori, then Te Reo Māori must not continue to decline; it must continue to grow. It must continue to grow because of what this House is doing and the example that it is setting. It must continue to grow because our Government reflects the importance of Te Reo Māori, right through our Government departments and otherwise. As a culture of New Zealanders, we continue to embrace this language because as this language grows, we as New Zealanders will grow, and this country will be a better place.

I was reminded today by my colleague Peeni Henare that I should finish this speech in the same way that I finished my maiden speech, which was to quote his grandfather Sir James Hēnare: “Kua tawhiti kē te haerenga mai kia kore e haere tonu, kua tino nui rawa ōu mahi kia kore e mahi tonu.” [“You have travelled a great distance to get here so you will not have to carry on; your workload has been excessively huge so you will not have to work.”]—we have come too far not to go further. I commend this bill to the House.

A party vote was called for on the question, That the Te Pire mō Te Reo Māori / Māori Language Bill be now read a third time.

Ayes 104

New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 28; Green Party 13; Māori Party 2; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1.

Noes 11

New Zealand First 11.

Bill read a third time.

Waiata

Annual Review Debate

In Committee

Debate resumed from 13 April.

External Sector (continued)

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): The House is in Committee for further consideration of the Appropriation (2014/15 Confirmation and Validation) Bill. When the Committee last considered the bill, it was debating the reports of committees relevant to the External Sector, and the Hon Gerry Brownlee had the call. He has 1 minute and 30 seconds remaining if he so wishes. No other members?

Hon Ruth Dyson: Mr Chair.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): External Sector?

Hon Ruth Dyson: No, no, it is the next one.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Next one—premature.

Reports noted.

Finance and Government Administration Sector

Hon RUTH DYSON (Chairperson of the Government Administration Committee): For a moment there I did think that I was going to be mistaken for the Hon Gerry Brownlee and I am very pleased that we avoided that coincidence. It is a pleasure for me to take a call in this debate, but it is not a pleasure in terms of the content that I have been considering in relation to this presentation. This is because for the first time in the history of New Zealand the next generation is going to be worse off than the generation that came before it, and I think that is something that all New Zealanders should be ashamed of and they should be looking to the Government to see what measures it is considering implementing to address this. So our children and our grandchildren are going to be worse off than we were and our parents were.

That is not something that I want as a New Zealander who grew up thinking that we had a fair society, that we were better than pretty well any other country, because in New Zealand it did not matter where you were born—if you worked hard and did your best you could get ahead in the world. We were very proud of so many things about New Zealand, and that pride is seeping away. What we used to call the Kiwi Dream—that you could have a job and a home and you could have something to look forward to; Norman Kirk’s vision—is still as relevant today as it was when Norman Kirk first talked about having a job, a home, someone to love, and something to look forward to. But now what we are seeing is that dream just slipping away. Young people in our country now do not have that to look forward to in the way that we had.

So the National Government members are creating an economy that gives less to our children and grandchildren than they had themselves. How can they be proud of that? How can members of Parliament and Ministers be proud of that as their contribution to New Zealand society? Most of us came to this House so that we could improve things for New Zealanders—we all have different ways of thinking we can achieve that, and we all have different beliefs—but it is hard to imagine how members of the National Party can be proud of their contribution to making New Zealand a worse society than it was when they came into office. We have got an economy now that is stacked in favour of the people at the highest income level rather than middle New Zealanders, and middle New Zealanders are finding it harder each week to get ahead. We have got a housing market that is not for New Zealanders, not for New Zealanders who work hard, save up, get a deposit and are able to own their own home. It is now a place where speculators make big money. That is not the New Zealand that I grew up in and the New Zealand that I want my children and grandchildren to grow up in.

We have got a health system where not only the food is rubbish but people who need operations cannot get an assessment, let alone get into the hospital for their operation. And the Minister of Health’s response to that is: “Well, they might not need an operation; they just think they need an operation.” I do not know a single New Zealander who gets up in the morning and says: “What shall I do today? Shall I go to the beach, shall I go to the movies, shall I go to work, or shall I have a knee replacement?”. That is not the sort of thinking that I am familiar with, but clearly the Minister of Health is.

We have got a growing gap between people who have got lots of money and people who just cannot get by week after week. Again, that is not the sort of society that I grew up in. We always had richer people and poorer people, but the growing gap—the growing inequality—is being driven by Government policies and it is not taking any responsibility for that.

As we look at this particular review—the review of the Finance and Government Administration Sector—I want to point out to the Committee that I am taking the first call in this debate because I am the chair of the Government Administration Committee. Clearly, a lot that comes into this sector is in the mandate of our select committee—not all, but a lot of it. As the speeches go on, I am sure we will hear more about the specific votes. Before I conclude, I want to acknowledge a member of that select committee who was unfortunately deposed from her position as deputy chair. Sarah Dowie was very unceremoniously sacked, and I welcome the new member Paul Foster-Bell to that position.

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (Minister of Revenue): I think there is a lot that this Government can be proud of. I am certainly proud of the fact that there are tens of thousands more elective surgeries every year, that not a single cancer patient has had to fly to Australia for treatment, and that immunisation rates are at record high levels—particularly amongst the most vulnerable and those that traditionally have not had high rates, Māori and Pasifika. I am very proud of the fact that our National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA) level 2 rates are now tracking towards the optimal rates, because NCEA level 2 is the baseline for getting on in life. I am very proud of the fact that we require our job seekers to seek jobs, actually. And I am proud of the fact that this is the first Government in more than 40 years to increase social welfare support for the most vulnerable. So there is plenty to be proud of, but there is more work to do.

I stand to speak specifically, in respect of the annual reviews, to the annual review of the Inland Revenue Department. Some might think that that is being a bit masochistic, given the 12 days or so of breathless revelations that we have had around matters to do with tax. In fact, I have to firstly acknowledge my predecessor, the Hon Todd McClay, the former Minister of Revenue, who said to me in December around the issue of revenue: “You will really enjoy it,” he said, “being a chartered accountant. It’s quite policy focused—a bit pointy-headed—but it doesn’t get much publicity. One oral question from the Opposition in 2 years and 4 months, and it’s really quiet on the media front.” Well, it has not been that quiet lately. It has been rather busy on the media front when it comes to matters in relation to tax, but I want to acknowledge that department for the excellent work it does.

In order to pay for the sorts of social services and supports that Ms Dyson talked about, which I am very proud of, we need two things. We need a very strong tax policy framework, and we need a very strong tax administration framework. In the tax administration space, of course, the Inland Revenue Department carries out that very important function. In reviewing its performance, it takes on two dimensions. It is, obviously, a very large organisation. It has over $700 million appropriated to it, and it employs over 5,800 staff. But, of course, it is also responsible for collecting over $60 billion from the taxpayer, and it needs to be able to do that efficiently and effectively. So it is against that backdrop that it is embarking on what can only be described as perhaps the single largest transformation of the way in which a Crown entity does business in this country’s recent history. It is a $1.5 billion commitment of expenditure—at least on the face of it—to an IT system. But, of course, those who are in the middle of that transformation know that this is much, much more than just a computer system. This is about the way in which we engage with the taxpayers, particularly the business taxpayers; the way we encourage compliance with our tax rules; and the way we ensure the efficient collection of the funds that we require to provide the health, education, social services, law and order, transport, and so on in this country.

I must say, having had the experience of going through the Immigration New Zealand transformation—a much, much smaller project—it was a fairly daunting prospect to have a $1.5 billion transformation project under way. I have to say that I am very greatly reassured at the manner in which the Inland Revenue Department and its stakeholder partners and software providers are embarking on this, because there are so many risks in this. I think there are things that can certainly go wrong, but I have confidence that we have got the right people, the right resources, and the right programme to be able to deliver that.

And it is pretty important now, because yesterday we made some very, very big announcements about simplifying the process of paying tax for our small-business community, and what we know is that more than 97 percent of businesses in New Zealand are small or medium. They employ 50 staff or fewer. That is the backbone of this economy.

Paul Foster-Bell: What percentage?

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Ninety-seven percent—and 90 percent of them employ fewer than 20 staff. So we really do have a large archipelago of small businesses in New Zealand that are the backbone of this economy. They are the farming community, the plumbers, the carpenters, the people who are helping us rebuild Canterbury, and so on. So it is important to be able to have a tax framework that fits their needs, and not the other way round. For far too long the tax system in this country required the business community and the individual taxpayers to comply with rigid structures that the Inland Revenue Department set for them.

The best example of that is in provisional tax. Anybody who has spoken with the small-business community will know that this has been a significant bugbear of its for years. This is because payment three times a year does not fit with a normal business cycle, it does not fit the seasonal businesses—many of which are in our primary industries—and it certainly has been difficult to comply with, easy to get wrong, and quite costly to get wrong. So to announce yesterday that—thanks to this transformation—from 1 April 2018 the business community will be able to pay its income tax as it earns it has been very, very well received. And it is a quite simple concept of using its accounting software to fit in with the Inland Revenue Department’s, and not the other way around. Having calculated its accounting income, a small business will then be able to pay the income tax due on that, or claim a refund on it, of course, if—because of seasonal fluctuations—it produces an accounting loss in that 2-month period. It is already going along with the GST changes that we have announced.

As a consequence of that, there will be a much reduced burden of use-of-money interest. We have increased the number of small businesses that, if they still choose to pay in the traditional provisional tax way, will be able to be covered by the “safe harbour” provisions of the uplift. We are removing the punitive monthly penalties for late payment or non-payment, which will also be very gratefully received. This is a very smart package, but it does require the business transformation to proceed in a timely manner, so that we can get to the start line on 1 April 2018 and enable businesses to benefit from it.

I want to finish by commending the Inland Revenue Department and all its staff, because they have been caught in the crossfire of a political narrative that has been most unhelpful, I think, and—frankly—untrue. We can be very proud of our tax policies in this country, and our tax disclosures. They are policies that were established by Governments, including the fourth Labour Government, and were endorsed by the fifth Labour Government—particularly by Dr Michael Cullen, when he was Minister of Revenue in 2006 and said: “We need a disclosure regime around foreign trusts and will put one in.” And it was fit for purpose.

Grant Robertson: It’s a few years on, now.

Hon MICHAEL WOODHOUSE: Ah, I see. So Mr Robertson says it is a few years on now—but it is not time that is the difference; it is who is in Government. Let us be very clear about why this is such a political opportunity for Labour. It is a pity that those members do not understand tax, and the fact that foreign citizens earning income in foreign countries have no tax liability here in New Zealand. That seems to be completely lost on them. In fact, a lot is lost on them. They are being either very tin-eared or a bit obtuse about what the tax rules actually are.

I want to say to the Inland Revenue Department staff, and particularly to those working in international tax and multinational base erosion strategies in combination with the OECD, that I have confidence in them, that I hold them in high regard, and that you will not hear me coming to this House and criticising public officials who are doing an excellent job. I think there are members of this Committee who need to reflect, as they go through this annual review, on the very highly regarded and very good public sector officials that we have—both in the Inland Revenue Department and right across Government—and the excellent work that they do. When we compare ourselves with other jurisdictions, I think that is something that we can be very proud of.

MEKA WHAITIRI (Labour—Ikaroa-Rāwhiti): It is a privilege to make a contribution in the debate on this Appropriation (2014/15 Confirmation and Validation) Bill, and to participate in this annual review debate focusing on the Finance and Government Administration Sector. Can I just make a comment around what the Minister the Hon Michael Woodhouse said—and it is great that the Minister supports his tax officials and ensures that he endorses and follows the advice that they give him. It seems to me that if the Minister has that commitment, I wish other members on that side—the Government benches and particularly Minister Brownlee—would also take on some of the advice that officials give. You cannot have it both ways. But that is for another time.

I want to focus on the Department of Internal Affairs, particularly around local government. But before I get there, it is important that we do look at and, I guess, challenge this Government’s perception of being very good fiscal managers. Fiscal management is not only about what you do with the money but what results you gain from the money. If I may, I would like to do a bit of a stocktake on the status of this Government when it comes to their being prudent financial managers. I note that Government borrowing is forecast to be not $50 billion, not $100 billion, but $116 billion—the highest that we have ever seen. According to the Crown’s own accounts, we are looking at having core Crown debt at $1.7 billion higher than forecast for February this year. And I also note that $51 billion of our debt is now held overseas, which is obviously creating a very strategic risk to our economy; this has increased by more than $30 billion since National came into power. So I challenge the Government—whose members have got up and talked about how well it is doing and how proud they are of this Government—with that debt hanging over us. The fact that half of it is overseas does, I think, expose this country to major risk.

The second part of the perception was around what has been achieved, and let us have a look at what has been achieved. There has been—and I will give credit to the Government—a surplus up until February this year, but we have to ask whether that has been achieved through underspends in education, justice, transport, and, of course, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority. Our regions are struggling, and as the proud member for Ikaroa-Rāwhiti I see it every day when I am out and about in my electorate. In fact, when I came into Parliament, in 2013, the Minister for Economic Development’s plan for raising regional prosperity in Ikaroa-Rāwhiti was two things: one was to go and explore for oil, and the other one was cycle trails. Our economy is much more diverse than that and we do need Government attention if we are going to realise opportunities for people throughout Ikaroa-Rāwhiti. We still have families and children in poverty, and there is definitely a shortage of decent housing for all families throughout my electorate.

But, actually, as I said in the opening of my speech, I want to turn, in the time I have got, to local government. When I look at the statement of intent of the Department of Internal Affairs, it talks about “Improving the efficiency of the local government system through completion of the Better Local Government Reform programme”. Specifically, I want to highlight two of those services that talk about how this is going to be achieved. One is council-led reorganisations, and we have got a classic example happening right now with a body in my electorate—the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company, which shows all the bad sides of what a council-controlled organisation is capable of. Removed from the owners, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, and defiant in the face of ratepayers, it invested $6 million into a scheme that has not measured up in terms of the Ruataniwha Dam. And all I say to the Minister, when we are talking about doing more council-controlled organisations, is that I encourage him to look at the performance of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company, and at what has happened in Kaipara with the waste water. There are many examples, Minister, for us to ensure that we do not go down the track that some of these council-controlled organisations are presently experiencing.

The other one was the note of the Local Government Commission. I again implore the Minister to ensure that when we are giving more powers to an unelected body, it is adding value to the local government sector. I am not sure whether the Minister has that quite down pat.

PAUL FOSTER-BELL (National): Thank you very much, Mr Chair, for allowing me to take a call in this annual review debate on the Finance and Government Administration Sector review. I want first to pay tribute to the previous deputy chair of the Government Administration Committee, my colleague Sarah Dowie, whom I replaced in the last couple of weeks. I am just coming to grips with the wide and varied remit of the committee, and so this will be a many and varied speech covering some of the interesting grab bag of departments and agencies that fall within the remit of the Government Administration Committee.

The Fire Service Commission, a very important institution of State, is currently under review, and the Government is proceeding with Mr Swain’s recommendations. This is the review conducted by the Hon Paul Swain, the new chairman of the Fire Service Commission and a former Minister in the previous Labour administration. We want the structure of the New Zealand Fire Service to reflect the modern realities of the 21st century. The current legislation is based in the 1970s. The Fire Service has an incredibly important job to do, but increasingly it is not simply putting out fires; it is rescuing people from car accidents, it is conducting valuable training, and there are a wide range of both urban and rural fire services. Let me make this clear: the Government will not be reducing the Fire Service in terms of what it is actually providing. This is not about terms and conditions for firefighters, who are highly respected servants of this country and often the saviours of members of the community who find themselves in trouble. This is simply a look at the structure and governance of both rural and urban fire services, to bring them up to date and to modernise them.

In the digital area—delivering digital services to the public—we are making excellent progress, with over 50 percent of the top ten services used by New Zealand citizens now conducted digitally online. This makes it easier, simpler, cheaper, and more efficient for people. One example that does fall within the remit of the Government Administration Committee is passports. Increasing numbers of people are applying for their passport online. Going to the 10-year passports has also been a hugely popular success story. People can not only have the greater convenience of getting a longer duration out of their passport but also save themselves significant costs. I have some comparisons to make. A 10-year Australian passport costs A$250, whereas our 10-year adult passport, if applied for online, costs only NZ$180, including GST. This is an average saving of over NZ$90 compared with the system that had been in place under the previous Government.

The digital uptake, generally, is shooting ahead. We are up 6.6 percentage points over the last year, compared with the same quarter in 2014. We have now got a 52.9 percent uptake of those most common transactions. This puts us well on track to our target of 70 percent of all of New Zealanders’ common online transactions with the Government being conducted in the online space by 2017. This is a very positive result and it reflects the work not only of the Department of Internal Affairs but across all agencies—everyone, from the health sector through to the police, playing their part to ensure New Zealanders have simple, easy, and affordable access to online services.

We have heard from the Minister of Revenue about the changes—the massive business transformation being conducted in the Inland Revenue Department—and there are many other transformative things happening within the sector that will directly contribute to New Zealanders being wealthier, better off, better paid, and enjoying better lifestyles.

Tourism contributed $10.6 billion to the New Zealand economy in 2015, which is a 5 percent increase on the year before and a significant addition to our GDP. Within the Wellington region we had our best-ever year for bed nights. I would attribute this in part to the work of the Government, as well as the hard work of individual businesses. There was an increase in the Tourism New Zealand budget, from $83.8 million to $115 million—a significant extra investment in the promotion of New Zealand as a destination. But film co-production agreements and film tourism have also been significant additions to our market here in Wellington, along with the air services agreements that are being concluded. I am very interested to see the negotiations with Qatar and how they will result in the addition of extra services into Wellington. Wellington Airport is doing very well, and visitor numbers grew around 20 percent over the last 5 years. There were over 200,000 Australians who spent at least one night in Wellington. I personally believe—this is my own view—that any enhancement of the service at Wellington Airport will be of further benefit.

CLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): Here we are, on the annual review debate for the Finance and Government Administration Sector, and I am going to be speaking this afternoon on the New Zealand Fire Service Commission. I was very pleased that the honourable member across from me, Paul Foster-Bell, started his contribution by talking about the Fire Service. I even sat forward at my desk—something similar to Simon Bridges, when he got all excited—waiting to hear some absolutely captivating information with regard to this review that is currently under way. However, nothing much further than just a mention of the review came from Mr Foster-Bell, so it was a little bit disappointing.

Hon Simon Bridges: Oh, it’s a conspiracy.

CLAYTON MITCHELL: The reality is that this is the 17th review in 22 years, Mr Bridges—the 17th review in 22 years. We are not hearing anything other than “We’re going to shuffle the pieces of paper around on our desk a little bit more, everybody”, because there is nothing that is going to really significantly change the funding model of the New Zealand Fire Service. The only thing that is really going to be implemented is the inclusion of our urban search and rescue teams. When I look at the National Government’s motto for the 2014 general election, it was “Working for New Zealand”. But I think its motto should have been “operatur in nobis privata agenda”. That is: “Working on our private agenda”. Certainly, when you look at what is going on in New Zealand to do with our most honoured and highly recognised and respected organisation, the New Zealand Fire Service, its motto could actually be “postulatum auxilium Magis et minus”. That means, in translated English: “More demand and less help.”

Last night I spoke for the Department of Conservation, and it is in a very similar situation to the New Zealand Fire Service when it comes to its funding model, because there is a huge expectation from this Government that the people of New Zealand volunteer themselves to go out and fix this problem of lack of funding. Under-resourcing was the key feature in last year’s Budget, and we are expecting the same nonsense coming out when the Minister starts talking for his Budget debate next month.

For those people in this House who may not be aware, and certainly for some of the people back home, I have to bring our attention to just how large and important our New Zealand Fire Service is. It has 13,900 people working for it. However, only 1,730 paid firemen and women are on the books, plus another 600 administration staff. There are 8,100 urban volunteers doing the job because this Government will not fund them adequately to enable them to get full-time paid employment in the Fire Service. There are another 3,500 rural firefighters who have to go and do fund-raising to get equipment updated, not to mention the absolutely nonsensical approach to the buildings that are not up to scratch and that are in serious need of repair. We have got fire stations in Christchurch that have still not been repaired and replaced. As it was pointed out by the honourable member across from me, Paul Foster-Bell, this is an organisation that does not just put out fires. This organisation comes to the aid of New Zealanders when it comes to severe weather incidents. It helps out with flooding and helps out the councils, it attends car accidents, emergency rescues, and when there are gas leaks or when there are issues to do with hazardous substance releases. In fact, we have got a case where a small rural town policeman needed some assistance to arrest somebody, and who came to his aid? It was the New Zealand Fire Service.

We need to get real. This Budget needs to include some severe support and funding for one of our most treasured organisations, which is on its knees. We have got an urban search and rescue team that has been qualified in the top group of the world in relation to what it is delivering on, and we have not even got an ability to get these people to the locations overseas to actually help them out when they need them, like these countries did for us in our hour of need when we had our Christchurch disaster. We could not organise ourselves because we do not have the right transportation, we do not have the right make-up and the right set-up, and this current review that is under way is just nothing more than a paper shuffle.

Just to finish off, we can see that our fire levies are the major contributor to how this gets funded, and we have just outlined the fact that that does not fit in with the model that we are currently using, because the services of the fire department mean that a much wider, broader approach is required.

GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): No choice this time, you have to give me the call. The Minister of Revenue, the Hon Michael Woodhouse, stood up—or at least I think he stood up—and cried a series of crocodile tears for the plumbers and the carpenters and the small-business people who are sitting around doing their tax returns and doing the right thing. He stands there and says that to this Chamber at the same time that he sits on his chuff in his office and fails to do anything about closing the loopholes around tax avoidance and tax evasion in this country. It is all very well to praise the efforts of the hard-working staff of the Inland Revenue Department (IRD), but it is in the mirror that the Minister should be looking when it comes to what is going wrong in the tax system of New Zealand.

Have we not had a window on the soul of the National Party in the last 2 weeks when it comes to what has been happening with the Panama Papers? John Key’s very first reaction—his very first reaction—was to leap to the defence of his old mates the mega-rich around the world who hide their money. They were the first people whom John Key thought of. He did not think of the taxpayers of New Zealand, who work hard and pay their fair share, and he did not think of the taxpayers of countries around the world, who work hard and pay their fair share; he leapt to the defence of the greedy. He leapt to the defence of the people who make it their mission not to do the right thing—that is who John Key is on the side of: the mega-rich, the people at the very top, not the middle New Zealanders working hard every day who do pay their fair share. That is what we have seen from the National Party over the last couple of weeks. And now Bill English decides to add to it: he says that working people in New Zealand are “pretty damned hopeless”. We are hearing from the National Party what it really thinks: Bill English, when he is talking to his mates in Federated Farmers, and John Key, when his first reaction is to defend the people who rip off the system.

You know, the National Party is very quick to get into people who they say might be bludging somewhere, if it is in the welfare system. Well, Simon Bridges, what about the bludgers at the top? What about the people at the top who go out of their way to make sure that they do not pay their fair share? Michael Woodhouse should have been on his feet today saying: “We won’t stand for that. We are finally going to listen to the advice that the National Party has been given time after time.” What Chapman Tripp said about the changes made in 2010 and 2011 by the National Party that made it tax-free—tax-free—for investment funds in New Zealand that are owned by foreigners was: “This puts us on a par with Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands.” John Key might be a bit disappointed about that, because he wanted us to be the Jersey of the South Pacific, an ultimate tax haven—it has actually gone bankrupt now—or the Switzerland of the South Pacific, because that is all about where those people who are the mega-rich make their money. But the National Government was warned. It was warned that its changes were going to make a big difference. And they have—nearly doubling the number of foreign trusts that we now have operating out of New Zealand—and they do not even want to look at that.

It has set up a sham review, rather than the full public inquiry that we need, because New Zealanders need the multinationals that operate here in New Zealand to pay their tax. We know that there are multinationals that are avoiding that. We are out there on the world stage saying that we want that so that New Zealand working people only have to pay their fair share. But our credibility in going out to the world and saying that we want multinationals to pay their fair share is undermined when we have a Government that will not respond to the huge loopholes in our tax system. The Government was told in 2013 by the Inland Revenue Department that our foreign trust rules continue to attract criticism, including claims that New Zealand is now a tax haven in respect of trusts, and that to protect our international reputation, it may be necessary to strengthen our regulatory framework for disclosure and record-keeping.

If Michael Woodhouse wants to respect the officials from the IRD, he should listen to their advice. That is what they told Michael Woodhouse in 2013 and he ignored it. His Cabinet colleagues, the Prime Minister—they all ignored it. John Key is donkey deep in tax evasion—John Key - deep in tax evasion. That is who he is, that is who his friends are, and that is whom he stands up for.

Well, New Zealanders deserve much better than that when it comes to our tax system. We need a fair tax system. We need a tax system that is simple and easy to understand. Fundamentally, we need a tax system that allows New Zealand to hold its head up high on the world stage—not a morally bankrupt Government that thinks that those at the very top are those who deserve their support. We need a Government that is for all New Zealanders, not the mega-rich.

KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana): It is an absolute pleasure to speak in the finance and government administration part of this debate. [Interruption]

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I will sit the member down. I will start his time again. Mr O’Connor, I would appreciate it if your coaching of the Chair ceased. Thank you.

KRIS FAAFOI: Thank you very much, Mr Chair, and thank you for doing a great job.

There are many examples of the visible arrogance of the Government—and we have seen the arrogance of the Prime Mnister in the last couple of weeks around his inability to tackle foreign trusts—but there are some invisible signs of the Government’s arrogance that I want to talk about during this section on finance and government administration. It is the total lack of respect that the Government has around the Official Information Act. For the Official Information Act to have any integrity a Government has to abide by the letter of the law. But we have seen time and time again over the Government’s last 7 years occasions on which it completely and utterly played the Official Information Act, and in some respects completely and utterly did not abide by the Official Information Act.

The Official Information Act is very important to make sure that the decisions this Government makes are transparent, that it adheres to the rules that govern it, and that it is not pulling the swifty behind the scenes for New Zealanders. But there have been many instances where the Government has been pulling swifties and it has gone out of its way to conceal that by not obeying the letter of the law around the Official Information Act. I think that in this country of New Zealand, where we hold on to democracy and transparency of that democracy, maintaining the integrity of the Official Information Act is extremely important. I would like to put on the record my thanks to the new Chief Ombudsman, Peter Boshier, for the remarks that he has made since he has been appointed to that role. I think the Government is going to find it much, much harder with Mr Boshier at the helm of the Office of the Ombudsman to pull this swifty on New Zealand, as it has for the last 7 years.

I would like to give you an example of where the Government tried to pull the swifty on my office when I put in an Official Information Act request around the costings of its Homestart Housing New Zealand package. I wondered whether or not the Government was just using its Homestart roadshow as a bit of a publicity stunt where its MPs could use a platform to go out and talk about the apparent success of the Government. When I asked them for the costings and what was going on behind the scenes, there was quite a lot—and I think the people at home can see that on this document I am holding—that was blanked out. It was about how these Homestart roadshow meetings were being organised and what was going on behind the scenes.

On this page here you can see that Housing New Zealand Corporation has ruled this part here to fall under section 9(2)(g)(i)—which in English means it is out of the scope of the request that I have made under the Official Information Act—and it has blanked that out. Interestingly enough, the words preceding the blanking or the redacting, say “National MP Parmjeet Parmar has also expressed a strong interest in holding a roadshow”, and then it goes on to say, in the famous words of the Hon Annette King, “blankety, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank”. I wanted to know what was going on and why this says “blankety, blank, blank, blank, blank, blank”. Why would the officials say that I cannot have that information because it is out of scope? Well, thankfully, somewhere else in that document someone forgot to “blankety, blank, blank, blank” blank out the details after those words. And I have got it here on the record that it says: “Parmjeet Parmar has also expressed a strong interest in hosting a roadshow”—and here comes the blanked-out part—“because she is keen to raise local profile in Mt Roskill in the case of a by-election”. Why would the Government not want the people of New Zealand to see that? Is it because it is illegal to use taxpayer money to campaign and that it might cause the Government huge embarrassment? I would hazard a guess, yes.

I want to know why the Government is so arrogant that it thinks it can “blankety, blank, blank” its way to completely and utterly disobeying the Official Information Act. That is complete and utter arrogance and being out of touch. The Government knows that if the people of New Zealand saw this “blankety, blank, blank, blank, blank” approach that the Government is taking, they would be disappointed.

Dr DAVID CLARK (Labour—Dunedin North): What a hard act to follow. I mean, I think Mr Faafoi has put his finger on something there that warrants further consideration. It does feel like the Government has been involved in a cover-up here. I know he has put it up for debate, but just from the cheap seats it does feel a little like there might be something that is not quite above board going on there.

I want to speak about the State Services Commission a little and about the way it has investigated the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment payroll fiasco and other associated fiascos. Here is a little bit of background. We found out in the last month or so that the ministry’s payroll system has not being paying people appropriately for a number of years.

Hon David Parker: Which Minister?

Dr DAVID CLARK: That is Minister Joyce’s responsibility. He is the Minister for Economic Development who is responsible for the Ministry of Business—

Hon David Parker: Is that new—“Novo new”?

Dr DAVID CLARK: Ha, ha! My colleague asks whether it is “Novo new”. The Minister is responsible for fixing a few things around the place and appears not to have done quite as diligent a job as one might hope from a Government that has been here now for going on 8 years. What has transpired—what has come to light—is the way in which the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment has not been paying their staff correctly, despite being the very organisation in New Zealand that is responsible for making sure that everyone else pays their staff correctly. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment’s payroll system has not been working, we learn, since the ministry was set up—since a couple of ministries were taken together and a new payroll system created out of the merger of several payroll systems—and since that time, staff have not been paid correctly. Police had a similar issue, and they have now paid, we are told, over $30 million in back-pay—$30 million, because they were not paying their staff correctly. They have admitted the error; they have looked into it.

The State Services Commission said that it started looking into these and similar issues in 2014. My questions, and my concerns, are whether the State Services Commission has been doing its job correctly, whether it has been resourced correctly to do that job, and whether it is competent from here on in to deal with the fallout that has been, and is being, created on an ongoing basis, because we have seen very little action from the Minister Steven Joyce, who has now said that he understands the problem that his department has. What he has not said—6 months on from being advised that his department had set up an inquiry into this matter—is that he has no estimate, none whatsoever, of what this is going to cost the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Six months on and he has none—he has no idea. He does not know whether it is going to be $30 million like it was in Police, or less, or more. And what is worse, until his ministry gets it right, it is very hard for it to then go around waving its finger at others.

We have since learnt that Fonterra—a little outfit called Fonterra—and another one called McDonald’s in New Zealand are both investigating their payrolls in case they have similar errors. We know that New Zealand Post went through the court system to address similar errors, all the way to the Court of Appeal. The Government does not seem to have made any estimate of how widespread the problem that it is overseeing is.

The State Services Commission does not seem to be resourced sufficiently. When the State Services Commission was asked whether it had confidence that all Government departments were complying with the law, and that it had sought and received assurances from them, it was not willing to go that step further and say that it had itself examined those payrolls to see that they were complying with the law. So we have the deeply hypocritical, if I can say, situation, where the ministry responsible for overseeing the law has itself been in breach of that very same law. And this points to a Government that is in disarray. It points to a Government that, if it does not believe that is a real issue, is out of touch with ordinary and middle New Zealanders.

It has been revealed that this Government—which has not estimated that cost—has known about the problem since 2010. The Minister Michael Woodhouse admitted that in 2010 a group was set up to try to resolve this issue—to work through complications created by payroll systems that made it difficult for employers to comply with the law. But it seems that nothing has been done since 2010, and since that time the Government has been in breach of the law.

Reports noted.

Health Sector

SIMON O’CONNOR (Chairperson of the Health Committee): I am absolutely delighted to take this call. The Heath Committee has been working incredibly hard this year, including work on the annual reviews. Can I start by thanking all the members on that committee, right across the various political hue and spectrum—it is a huge array of work.

It is really in that spirit of thanks, though, that I want to focus a bit of my initial time in these 5 minutes. It is on those who are actually working hard within the health sector. Through the annual reviews, we have heard primarily from the district health boards—a representative number of them—we cannot see all of them, for obvious reasons. In meeting with the various district health boards, those from the Health Research Council and other agencies, you realise and continue to appreciate the great work that they do. So I want to take this opportunity, rather than highlighting the particulars of their activities, just to say thank you to each and every person who works in the health area. I was going to fall into the trap of talking about doctors, nurses, and hospitals—but as everyone in this House will appreciate, it is much, much wider than that. That came through in the select committee process as the various board chairs, chief executives, and others were talking to us and sharing what they do. In a sense, on the record, I want to say thank you to them and to all those working in the sector.

We heard a number of positive elements coming through at the select committees and through the annual reviews. I am going to leave much of that to other speakers, both from the Opposition and the Government to share. It is oft-repeated—and I am all for good news stories, but I am not going to use my time there, bar one example—and that is what is coming out of the Health Research Council. It got a new chair recently, Dr Lester Levy, the new chief executive in Professor Kathryn McPherson—both of them doing a tremendous job. One of the reasons I want to highlight what they do is that the work of the Health Research Council is often not well known. Often it is the researchers themselves, or other bodies, that get the thanks. But, actually, the moneys through the Crown, and invested via the Health Research Council, bring about amazing results.

We heard about one example at the select committee; in fact, those of us who were at the Royal Society last night heard about this as well. We heard about some of the research that is being done and led by the likes of the Deputy Chair of the Heath Research Council, Professor Richard Beasley. Basically, it is looking at the efficacy of saline—in other words, water and salt—with other physiological products. In other words, can you make a product with all the other compounds and elements into, well, a drip that may be more effective?

Grant Robertson: I would not use that word.

SIMON O’CONNOR: Well, we could not use it if we do not want to offend the Opposition. But the long and the short of it is that the Health Research Council found that there is no greater efficacy—or benefit, if you will—of using these new, amazing products that may replicate human blood plasmas and so forth. It found, actually, that saline in and of itself is just as effective. And saline costs, effectively, a couple of dollars, whereas these other physiological products cost hundreds of dollars. Here was a great example of the Health Research Council funding some research that is saving not only New Zealand taxpayers but also people across the world hundreds of thousands—if not millions—of dollars, because, ultimately, we do not need to invest in these more expensive products because they are not bringing out the same set of results. So I thought it was just one small example, but a relatively positive example, of what is happening in the health space.

We have heard from a number of other groups before the Health Committee that were highlighting, in small ways, the activities that are going on. One of the themes, actually, that was coming out—and I am sure my colleague from New Zealand First Barbara Stewart acknowledges it—was the importance of oral health. It was something that is always coming before us. I think it is one of the really strong announcements in recent days, by Minister Coleman in particular and, obviously, Minister Dunne, that is actually looking to change where the decisions around the fluoridation of water occur: moving it out of local government and into district health boards, which makes absolute sense, because, actually, this is a health issue. I think it is a really good example of how voices in the community are heard through the annual review process and can begin to make a change. I think it is just absolutely fantastic, and I want to thank the Minister in the chair, Jonathan Coleman, for his leadership in this role.

Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour): I am so glad that Minister Jonathan Coleman has joined us for this debate, because one of his colleagues, Minister Woodhouse, was in the chair a moment ago and he talked about how proud he was of this Government’s record in health—

Chris Hipkins: Positively puffed up.

Hon ANNETTE KING: Positively puffed up—the Hyacinth Bucket of the Parliament. I have to say that I listened to some of the things that he said, and I was questioning them—I have to say, Minister—because he said there are 50,000 more operations that have been done under this Government. I know for a fact, Minister, that you are counting 12,000 of Labour’s operations done under the 2008-09 Budget—counting it dishonestly as operations done by the National—

Hon Simon Bridges: No.

Hon ANNETTE KING: Oh yes, they are—12,000 of them.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I will just freeze that. I will just warn the member that accusing a Minister of being dishonest—

Hon ANNETTE KING: I did not say that he was dishonest, Mr Chairman; I was very careful.

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I think the member will now sit down. I will say that it has been ruled many times that accusing a Government or a ministry of doing something is the same as accusing an individual member of it, especially the member in charge of it. So I am just asking you to take more care.

Hon ANNETTE KING: Let me just rephrase: it is a very misleading claim by this Government that it has done 50,000 more operations—counting 12,000 done under the 2008-09 Budget. Will the Minister deny that? I will table it and show that is correct. I find that very misleading.

He then went on to say that we are sending no patients to Australia for cancer treatment. Well, I am glad we are not, because I had to in 2000 and 2001. Does anyone know why I had to? It was because they received a report from the National Government in 1998 and 1999 that said our cancer services were in dire straits: we did not have enough linear accelerators, we did not have enough staff, and we could not provide this service. Do you know it took me months to get that report out of that Minister? I asked for it; they did not have it. They had never heard of it and denied it. I knew it existed because I did have a copy. I was testing the Minister and his ministry about being honest about cancer treatment.

What I think is happening in this health sector is that there is $1.7 billion missing in the health budget. If you look at the budget and you look at the track that it has been on, $1.7 billion is missing because the Government has not covered costs and it has not covered all of the demographic growth. That is not coming from Labour; that was independent work done by Infometrics. The Government has denied, denied, denied, but we are now starting to see the impact of those missing dollars, and we are seeing it in research that has been provided over the last few weeks. The Minister of Health may want to deny this research, but it has been done by the University of Otago Faculty of Medicine. It is proper research, printed in the Medical Journal, and it has said something I think is very significant. I do not think the Minister has read it. It says “Patients undergoing primary elective total hip and knee replacement in Otago in 2014 are more severely disabled than between 2006-2010. Patients currently being returned to GP would have qualified for publicly-funded surgery during that period.” This paper confirms that the increasing demand is not matched by the increase in supply. “The problems we describe are likely to becoming increasingly widespread across New Zealand.”—that is proper research given to the Government, which was denied by the Associate Minister of Health last week and continues to be denied by the Minister himself.

We also now know, because of data received from the Ministry of Health, that we have eight district health boards that have been unable to provide the number of elective surgeries that they were expected to provide, going right back to 2011. Two thousand one hundred and eighty one hip and knee procedures were supposed to be provided and were not provided during that period. I have to say to the Minister, why were they not provided? Of course, we know what he thinks. He said patients only think they need surgery; they do not actually need surgery—it is all in their minds. I challenge him to go and tell Grey Power that when they are asked whether they believe they need surgery because they are in pain and they cannot walk and they cannot go out and they are now housebound, or whether it is all in their mind. Have a listen to what they may say.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN (Minister of Health): Well, there is so much to correct in that speech that I do not think we have got enough time to do it, quite frankly. There was so much fiction there. I mean, for starters, an extra 50,000 operations were provided under this Government. In Labour’s last year in Government it did 118,000 operations; we did 168,000 last year. That is a fact. But I will tell you what—you know, Mrs King talked a lot about the Southern District Health Board, and, actually, we could do better on hips and knees there. We raised the rate by 10 percent over our time there, but we have got to keep on doing more, and that is the answer to unmet need. But the really embarrassing thing for Mrs King, and the reason, actually, she asked questions about food rather than operations during question time, is that while she was Minister of Health she delivered 420 fewer operations in the Southern District Health Board. It was absolutely shameful.

Hon Simon Bridges: Oh, here was me thinking it was just because she was hungry.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes. So when you get to a situation when question No. 1 in question time is about the Southern District Health Board’s food, in reality I think that means we are covering off the big issues pretty well. But I will tell you what: there has been a signal achievement this week announced by this Government, and that is moving the decision rights on the fluoridation—

Hon Annette King: Yeah, and that was pretty gutless.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: —of water from local government through to district health boards. Mrs King says that is “gutless”. Well, I will tell you what. She had—and this was a dental nurse—

The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): OK, the member will resume his seat. I was going to let it pass, but, again, there is a long history of calling members “gutless” and that being ruled out. The member will desist from saying that word, and the Minister will not respond to it.

Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Sure, sure. I think, actually, this great achievement of announcing the movement of decision rights to the district health boards is something the whole Parliament could join together to celebrate. I would love to see Labour—especially with the Opposition spokesperson being a former dental nurse who actually had 9 years to do this herself—issuing a supportive press release saying: “Let’s put aside the petty bickering over, you know, the minor bits and pieces. Let’s actually celebrate what is a major achievement.” When you look at fluoridation of water, that is one of the 10 greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. When you look at 35,000 children having a tooth extracted last year, that makes the point that this is a really important public health move. So if you look at 40 percent of our kids having a tooth go rotten before the age of 5—up to 60 percent in our young Māori kids under the age of 5—we had to do something about that, and that was a very important move.

Another great public health achievement under this Government has been the extension of free general practice visits to children under the age of 13. Much to Mrs King’s disappointment, that was taken up by 99 percent of practices—99 percent of practices. That is going to be a huge contributor to ensuring the good health of a whole cohort of children—free general practice visits now for 750,000 New Zealand children.

Progress reported.

Report adopted.

The House adjourned at 5.55 p.m.