Ngati Porou Deed Of Agreement

I would like to commend the work of the Committee on Maori Affairs, chaired by Mr Rino Tirikatene, which has advanced this bill in a timely and professional manner. The bill was referred to committee in May. A total of 215 applications were considered by interested groups and individuals. The Commission heard oral evidence from 18 applicants at hearings in Gisborne and Wellington. That is why the committee has recommended amendments to the bill that will do three things: first, the introduction of a deadline for hapa to give advice on applications for authorisation of resources; second, to ensure consistency between the usual facts and fishing rules; And third, the situation of Eastland Port Ltd property inside ng` gross moana. So, if you look at it, the bill gives effect to the agreement between 47 Hapa de Ng`ti Porou and the Crown with respect to certain common seas and coastal areas or raw moana. Absolutely, there are 10 that are not really included in this particular legislation, but the door is not closed; it remains open, so that these 10 can still be introduced into this legislation. But I recognize that there are 47 Hapa in this legislation in its current form. An agreement was challenged in August 2008.

This was ratified by the 47 hapa of the 57. Bill 1 was introduced in Parliament in September 2008 and we are here today. The time line is much larger than that. I would like to pay tribute to all those who gathered today. Kia ora. Fisheries Administration Committees plan to propose statutes for each normal marine title area covered by a fisheries management plan, and for the Minister of Fisheries to review and present the statutes (after the Minister has met the relevant requirements of the agreement); And then the clause says, “but section 28 (1) … [the Ng`ti Porou] moans – a) as if she also said nothing in this law … prevented the exercise of the relevant rights; Then, in point 1)b, “the bottom 5 of part 2 of this act” – and then there are those words in parentheses – ” (which refers to the usual fishing practices) or a provision of that law that refers to a w`hi tapu or w`hi tapu domain.” I am sorry if this sounds a little tendentious, but I wanted to refer specifically to the words that are in parentheses or in parentheses, because those words have been sertemps by clarifications, and yet some people say that they weaken the protection of commercial fishermen within ng`brut moana, which is not correct.