Tena koutou katoa. First I pay my respects to those kaumatua, kuia, whanau and hapu who have come today to celebrate the first reading of this bill. I acknowledge that in the journey to this point, there have been many hardships and sacrifices made and many histories have been told and remembered that have been very painful. However, it is now a time for some celebration as this particular resolution process is almost at an end. For those hapu who support this bill, the bill provides some recognition and redress for the crimes that were committed against them. Those crimes were serious and were committed by the Crown against hapu peacefully living out their lives own their own land. Those hapu chose not to sell their lands desired by the Crown and their right to retain their land was violently opposed by the Crown. Without lawful authority the Crown occupied the land. In breach of natural justice the land was confiscated. For 40 years the hapu staunchly defended their lands in the face of military action by the Crown. Members of the hapu were arrested, tried, imprisoned and killed because they defended their right to keep their land. Those injustices are carried by the descendents of the victims. I also acknowledge those people, kaumatua, kuia and others here today from hapu involved in this settlement who do not support this bill, and who come to bear witness to what they consider is just another breach of te Tiriti. Their concerns are serious and raise important issues about the Government policy on treaty settlements and the process by which these settlements are reached. The Greens share some of these concerns. The Greens recognise te Tiriti o Waitangi, the legitimacy of the Maori text which was signed by the hapu signatories. Te Tiriti o Waitangi is an agreement between hapu and the Crown. It is a solemn pact and the treaty settlement process is designed to provide some redress from the historical grievances which arose out of the Crowns failure to adhere to it. The Green Party acknowledges that delegated representatives of the Crown have breached, and continue to breach, the Tiriti rights of Maori, and we support the resolution of, and restitution for, all outstanding historical and current breaches. We also recognise that there are serious problems with the current model for treaty settlement and that those failings create the further grievances which will arise in the future unless the Crown accepts those problems and moves to deal with them now. I have two examples I want to highlight: •The Crowns inability to deal with hapu directly; and •The Crowns acceptance of a majority in mandate and representation with no processes for dealing with minority views. In failing to deal specifically with hapu and to have effective mechanisms of dealing with difficulties between hapu involved in the settlement the Crown is simply exacerbating those difficulties and creating further grievances. Government policy for the settlement of Treaty claims deals only with large natural groupings. This policy requires hapu to engage with the settlement process through an externally imposed structure. This satisfies the Governments needs but can fail to address the needs of all of the victims of the crimes for which redress is designed. And, crucially, it is an approach which fails to recognise the hapu authority identified in te Tiriti. The creation of large area settlement bodies through mandating processes is a process that has not been formally agreed between the Crown and Maori. While in some cases the process has worked well, in others it has led to lingering questions about whether all hapu have had their rights under te Tiriti addressed. Whatever the words on paper, a settlement cannot be "full and final" where such questions remain. Aotearoa New Zealand urgently needs a place where issues such as the legitimacy of the large area settlement model can be discussed away from the specifics of each case. The Green Party supports developing a forum for Crown — Maori dialogue about how to address te Tiriti issues in 21st Century Aotearoa New Zealand. Any such forum must complement and not supercede the hapu — Crown relationship established in te Tiriti. One crucial issue such a forum could address is how to proceed with what has become known as "mandating" in a manner consistent with te Tiriti. At present, we run the risk of perpetuating a sense of grievance if the Crown imposes settlement bodies and accepts mandating processes that are not fully supported. By accepting a majority vote approach to mandating the Crown also continues to exacerbates the harms caused by colonisation. In the settlement process, the Crown will accept representation and a mandate where there is the majority of support among the claimants. But the support of the majority is not an appropriate approach where the purpose is to restore relationships between the hapu and the Crown. By accepting the majority view and continuing with the settlement process, knowing that there remain unresolved issues, the Crown proceeds knowing full well that redress and resolution is not possible and knowing that relevant hapu are being shut out of the process because they do not wish to participate in accordance with the majority. Refusing to participate in the process determined by the Crown within a structure acceptable to the Crown and other hapu does not undermine or in any way reduce the sincereity, the validity or the seriousness of the claims made by hapu who choose not to accept these models. Hapu must not be punished for choosing not to participate in a Crown process which is ostensibly designed for their benefit but fails to recognise their needs or concerns. Is this exact approach not the whole basis of the grievances in the first place? The Crown does not send in the troops to quell "rebellion" as it once did. But because the hapu is determined to exercise their rangatiratanga as an independent hapu, they are excluded from any resolution, their lands are used in settlement without their consent and they are forced into a position of opposition to those hapu closest to them. It is a wholly destructive and negative experience. And it is not enough for the Crown to respond that offering mediation and other such processes is all that it can do to resolve the tensions. Of course it can do much much more. It could change its policy and engage with individual hapu as set out in Te Tiriti, it could engage in a resolution process which focuses more closely on the ongoing relationships and less on fiscal and time constraints. It could accept alternative models for resolution that are determined by Maori. It could take a brave and honest approach to the whole question of implementing te Tiriti o Waitangi in today's economic, social and political context. It is easy to say that on issues of disagreement in representation and mandate that it is merely a few dissatisfied individuals. Very rarely this may be the case, but mostly it is not. These people are the descendants of victims of vicious crimes of brutality, imprisonment, theft, murder and neglect. Descendants of victims who have never seen the perpetrators of those crimes held to account. And who never will. These are deeply felt injustices which the treaty settlement is supposed to resolve but simply does not. This bill gives to many hapu of Ngati Ruanui a long awaited resolution to an evil period of New Zealand history. This bill also highlights a number of the problems with the Treaty settlement process. The Greens will support its passage through the first reading. We also want to ensure that any process issues are considered by the scrutiny of the select committee. We must be clear that our exercise of kawanatanga does not impinge on the rangatiratanga of hapu who were guaranteed rights under te Tiriti. At the select committee stage I will be particularly keen to hear the submissions which identify more clearly any difficulties with this particular process and to find ways that to remedy the process. I don't imagine that we can fix all the problems, but in hearing the histories and the successes and failings of the process we may be able to highlight options for change that will avoid similar mistakes in the future. We, the legislators, must learn the lessons of our mistakes but first we must recognise that we have made some. When we have a bill such as this before us, with supporters who have travelled a long distance to celebrate the bill and others who have travelled equally as far to protest it, we cannot in good conscience say that the process has been a success. Finally in closing , let me again acknowledge those from Ngati Ruanui who are here to tautoko the bill and those from Pakakohi, Tangahoe, Hamua and Hapotiki who have come to register their protest.