Sitting date: 23 October 2024

RESTORING CITIZENSHIP REMOVED BY CITIZENSHIP (WESTERN SAMOA) ACT 1982 BILL

Second Reading

SPEAKER: Members, in accordance with a determination of the Business Committee, I call on members' order of the day No. 1.

TEANAU TUIONO (Green): I move, That the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill be now read a second time.

I want to begin by paying my respects to elders both past and present, and to those who are with us in this House this morning. I acknowledge the reverend ministers, their families, and community leaders that are present, and I note the presence of Falema'i Lesa, who took the original case to the 1982 Privy Council. I acknowledge you all today. Talofa lava. Welcome to your place.

Fa'afetai tele lava, meitaki ranuinui to the communities across the country that hosted me and other MPs to talanoa about this bill. I visited Dunedin twice, spent some time in Christchurch, in the Wellington region, and, of course, in Auckland, some of whom are here today. This bill is part of a longer journey of which my part and the part of the Green Party is just a small part that many people here today have walked for many years. I acknowledge their continued advocacy. These communities asked important and often detailed questions, some of which I'll admit I didn't have the answers to. In Christchurch, for example, I met with the Pacific Youth Leadership and Transformation Council, PYLAT, who hosted a talanoa fono, which included elders and youth, to discuss the bill, and I note that I just got a message from Josiah Tualamali'i this morning—not too sure if he made it into the gallery. At that fono, they came prepared and with lawyers! I had some of the answers, but not all of them, but I suspect I had more answers than Hamish Campbell, who joined me that night.

So having this bill go to the select committee to give us time to work through those questions is really important. I want to thank the members of the Governance and Administration Committee. I think we worked together collegially, and what I meant by that is when I tended to show up there, someone was shouting cheese scones and coffee, and I might actually owe them one. I won't subject them to my culinary skills or lack thereof, but I think I do owe them one.

When I put this bill into the biscuit tin, I thought it was going to be easy; it wasn't. So I appreciate the skills and acknowledge the skillset of Rachel Boyack, who helped to navigate the committee to a deliberation. And I note that although not all parties supported the first reading, I did appreciate the Government members on the select committee who engaged with the community and worked with their caucus to strategise a way forward that worked for them. Of course, the real heroes, as many members will know, of any select committee, are the clerks and the officials, noting that this was led by the Department of Internal Affairs; Parliamentary Counsel Office, with their very articulate drafting; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; the Ministry for Pacific Peoples; and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment.

There were around 24,581 individuals and groups that submitted on the bill, including many from Samoa and across the world. One submission represented the views of 5,951 other people. The involvement of young people, I think, is something that is important to note. It made me hopeful and confident about the future of our Pasifika communities, knowing that our future is in strong and capable hands.

To our Samoan communities, I want to say they represented you well; they represented us well. And I note that when you speak to the heart and it connects and people are open to receiving that communication, as our young people demonstrated at the select committee process, then the mind can follow. This is what our young people did. I'm not too sure whether that was the experience for the other members of the select committee, but that was certainly how it was for me.

For example, we had Fili Fepulea'i-Tapua'i, who shared that "I want to emphasise that although this is an issue for elders, it is very much an intergenerational issue. For context, it can be said my whole life has been shaped by trying to get this citizenship restored for our elders and Samoan community. When I was five months old … my father marched down the streets of Wellington … [with] the march … Mau a Sitiseni 2003." And I also remember remarking to the Hon Jenny Salesa that when her daughter Esmae Salesa addressed the select committee, there might have been a bit of dust flying around and getting into the eyes of some of the select committee members. So it was amazing and awesome to have many of our elders join with their mokopuna in that process.

The submissions presented several reasons for supporting the bill. Among them was reparation for historical injustices such as the Dawn Raids, also around fairness and upholding human rights. And, at the heart of this bill, it is about fairness, upholding human rights and equality. Noting also many submissions talked about the significant contributions that Samoans make to New Zealand, and I quote this from Losi Aniseko: "The Samoan community in New Zealand has played a vital role in enriching the country's multicultural landscape. From arts and culture to sports and business, Samoans have made significant contributions that enhance the fabric of New Zealand society." Other submissions talked about the important role of approving international relations, noting that we are part of a family of Pacific nations, and making sure that we treat that relationship with respect; we treat that relationship with alofa and aroha is so important.

One of the non-Samoan groups that reached out to me, quite a lot were Māori. They reached out to me in support of this bill. I remember stopping and talking to a Māori man who said, "I support this bill. My mokopuna is Samoan and that is why I support this bill." That came through in some of the submissions at the select committee as well. And I note a quote here from Dr Will Flavell, who noted the links to the Treaty of Waitangi: "This bill is more than a correction of a past policy; it reaffirms our commitment to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. … By supporting this bill, we are restoring citizenship and honouring the spirit of kotahitanga and whanaungatanga that defines us as New Zealanders."

Many submissions also said that the passing of the bill honours the Treaty of Friendship between Samoa and New Zealand. The Vinepa Trust put it this way: "At the heart of this bill is about doing the right thing. … It's about honouring Article 1 of the Treaty of Friendship, signed in 1962, which reads 'Relations between New Zealand and Western Samoa shall continue to be governed by a spirit of close friendship.'"

There are other submissions that talked about the need to improve the Treaty of Friendship, and I have this quote from Tailo Duffy: "the bill acknowledges the need for the New Zealand Government to consult with the Samoan Government to amend the Treaty of Friendship between the two nations. This amendment is necessary to reflect the restored citizenship rights and ensure continued strong relations between New Zealand and Samoa."

In the select committee, we all agreed that the bill should move forward and that it should be supported, and I am grateful for that, but we did have some differences of opinions, particularly around who this would apply to. Many submissions came forward about trying to widen the scope of the bill; in particular, widening the bill to include descendants born before 1962, and we noted that that could be about 19,000 people. This points to me the importance of the select Committee process because that was new information for me. The widening of the scope was supported by ourselves, in the Greens, and also the Labour Party.

We also proposed to amend rather than repeal the bill, and this includes having a name change of the bill from the original name to the Citizenship (Western Samoa Restoration) Amendment Bill. Another area that we didn't agree on was around the application of fees. And here I want to note the contribution, the significant contribution, of Lemauga Lydia Sosene, who has been a strong advocate in this process. I'm sure that select committee members and all members around the House would wish her all the best on her journey to recovery. I wouldn't be able to do it as articulately as her, but she did point to the fact that if citizenship was taken away, then people should not have to pay for it. That, of course, needs to be balanced out by the work that Government departments need to do as well. So we have come this far, and I know that the community wants us to go further, and of course we in the Greens are open to that because there are a few more stages to traverse.

I want to mihi to the community and to acknowledge their contributions, but also to note that the Greens remain committed to equality, committed to Pasifika justice, and we will continue to uphold that.

I want to close with the words of my friend Faanānā Efeso Collins, who I spoke about in the first reading, when he said: "E le tu faamauga se tagata—no one stands alone, no one succeeds alone, and no one suffers alone." And I added to that, "we succeed best when we succeed together". Faafetai tele lava. Meitaki ranuinui. [Applause]

Hon CHRIS PENK (Associate Minister of Immigration): Thank you, Mr Speaker. The member who has just resumed his seat, Mr Tuiono, has graciously acknowledged many others in relation to this, and it's appropriate that he do so. But I would like to start my contribution by acknowledging the member himself. For those who are less familiar with this place—which as Mr Tuiono points out, this is your House and it does belong to you—you may not be aware but our colleague is ordinarily in the position of presiding officer, so technically we often address many of our contributions to him in that way while speaking more generally about a bit of legislation or other matter before the House. But on this occasion, it is used specifically, sir—and I wish to acknowledge your leadership in guiding a conversation and taking this House, this nation, and indeed many in Samoa on a journey.

You are right to have acknowledged that the journey does not end here in terms of the parliamentary process apart from anything else, but it is an important step along the journey—and we thank you for walking alongside all members of this House, particularly through that select committee process, which you've acknowledged. I would be remiss if I didn't also acknowledge and endorse and echo your welcome to those who are gathered here today. Elsewhere in this building, there are many activities. One, not very far from here, is a meeting of construction lawyers and we were treated to the beautiful sounds of a song, perhaps a hymn, being sung, no doubt by you fine people, and there was surprise on the attendees' faces that Parliament always has a choir at 9 o'clock in the morning to serenade us—if only that were so. But I do want to acknowledge the colour and the energy and the passion that you have brought to this process, including by your presence today.

I also want to acknowledge the Governance and Administration Committee members and, obviously, the select committee process is the particular aspect of the law that we are acknowledging today as the bill is passing its second reading. We will talk—no doubt, all of us—about the mechanics of that process, and about some of the debate we had, the discussions, the agreements that were reached by majority or consensus. I think it's important to acknowledge, as much as the substance of what has been arrived at, the process and the method of that engagement. It seems to me, from the outside, not having been a member of that committee, that the select committee has engaged internally but also externally in good faith to try and understand the issues at play and to arrive at the most sensible way forward.

On that note, I should note before my time elapses any further, that the National Party has agreed to support the bill. We think that the changes that were able to be made during the select committee process in the name of introducing certainty where there had been a couple of areas of uncertainty, both as the substance and also in the method of engaging with the Government of Samoa, has been really helpful conversation and we think we are now in a good place, and we're grateful to the select committee. Its chair, Rachel Boyack, has been acknowledged, and rightly so. I've had good experiences with that member on that committee previously on other matters that are also, as Mr Tuiono has rightly said, a matter of speaking to the heart so that the mind will follow. "Governance and Administration" sounds very technocratic in its nature of its consideration but no less a matter than the human significance of membership of a community, membership of a nation, expressed through citizenship, can be discussed in that body, and it seems to me they have exercised the care and diligence that is appropriate for this bill, not only in terms of the importance of the work but also in a way that reflects its seriousness and its significance to all involved.

From a National Party point of view, we have reached a point where we can agree to the provisions of this bill and be very pleased to be able to do so. My colleague Cameron Brewer deserves acknowledgment. He has engaged with National Party colleagues very diligently, and I know that he, and also Tim Costley and Tom Rutherford, have entered into the spirit of that discussion with a mind to arriving at the right place in a very creditable manner.

The three themes that I wish to focus on in my remaining time go to consultation, certainty, and comity. Each of these is important in its own right, and I think that coming together and taking it as a whole represents the process by which we have wished to arrive at in being able to support this bill.

The first is consultation. Members will be aware—and those present and those watching as well will probably be aware—that there is Treaty of Friendship between the Governments of New Zealand and Samoa that imposes an obligation of consultation and discussion. And I think it's been helpful, through the select committee engagement, through various channels, to be able to interact with the Governments of Samoa and other key figures in that proud nation to understand the effect of the bill, both in its original form and as now amended, on that nation. Of course, it's right that we acknowledge the people-to-people links, the community links between New Zealand and Samoa and within New Zealand, acknowledging, of course, the special role that the Samoan community has played in New Zealand over many years in many different spheres.

But, of course, it's also the case that the Government of the nation must engage in good faith with that other nation, and New Zealand hasn't always been a good partner, a good neighbour, and a good friend, including the Pacific, and we're mindful of the need not to do a thing that we would consider maybe in some ways very helpful to the people of a nation, in a way that would perhaps cause consternation with the Government of that nation.

In the spirit and indeed the requirement of the Treaty of Friendship with the Samoan Government, from a New Zealand perspective, we can say that we have engaged with them to understand a level of comfort, from their point of view, in terms of what it might mean if more Samoan citizens were to become New Zealand citizens, and not wishing to take from them in a way that reflects an addition to this country but to reach a compromise in terms of the eligibility but also that understanding of what it might mean for both nations.

I think that consultation has taken place now in a way that's appropriate. It's unusual for a member's bill to amend the external relations of a nation, and that was a point of nervousness from the National Party's point of view. But through that select committee deliberation, including the good-faith engagement with the member himself, I think we can feel satisfied that we've made a good faith effort as the Government of New Zealand and as the Parliament of New Zealand, more generally, to reach that place.

The second point is certainty, and certainty obviously reflects the fact that we want the law to be as clear as possible. And we would not be doing the nation of New Zealand or indeed the citizens of Samoa and would-be citizens of New Zealand from Samoa a service—we would be doing them a disservice, in fact—if we were to have a law that was uncertain as to the eligibility and application of the law. And, of course, in citizenship, there are complex rules around succession, for want of a better phrase, and eligibility questions aren't always clear. Sometimes they do end up in the court, and, of course, the slightly unfortunate history of this legislation is that it responds to a court ruling that had been made in a way that was surprising and that many have said was, frankly, unfair. So we don't wish to compound the error by having a piece of legislation that's unclear as to its effect going through further generations, and I think that point's been reasonably well made. As I say, I think the point select committee arrived at and that this House appears ready to arrive at reflects the desire for that certainty.

Finally, on a similar note, another item I promised to mention is comity, which is the relationship between the Parliament and the courts. And it's sometimes the case that Parliament needs to change a law to clarify its original intent or, of course, has the ability as being the democratic arm of Government to make laws that are different from the way that courts have interpreted or applied previous other laws of this place. But certainly in this case it was helpful, I think, for us to look at the proposition of the member's bill before us as an exercise in restoring the original intent of the legislation proper, this being an amendment bill, as the member's referred to. We respect the fact that courts always have the right to make decisions on matters before them. Nevertheless, Parliament is Sovereign and it's right that we should have the ability to come together and make a law that we think reflects the right and true nature of what the people of New Zealand intend in this matter.

I have little time left, so I really just want to emphasise, again, that from a National Party point of view we're pleased to be able to support the bill. Others will speak, probably more helpfully than I would be able to, in terms of the detail about how those decisions were arrived at in the select committee process, but I do wish to acknowledge the efforts of all those involved, including in particular the member himself, but also all those who have engaged in good faith through a process that can be opaque and intimidating but nevertheless is capable at arriving at a good place, and I think we have. We commend this bill to the House.

Hon BARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Mili mili mili mili mili mili mili, pati a, pati a, lua pati, lua pati, tolu tolu fa. Hey! Hey! [Visitors in the public gallery respond] Thank you, Mr Speaker, for indulging me; I just wanted to make sure we had some Samoans in the House today! Ou te faatalofa atu ma le faaaloalo, malo le soifua maua ma le lagi e mama. You don't know where you are going unless you know where you have come from. I repeat: you don't know where you are going unless you know where you have come from.

I am proud to be able to stand in the second reading of this member's bill to lend our support to the member Teanau Tuiono for this bill. I want to acknowledge you, my 682 brother, again, for bringing this to the House.

I'm going to use my contribution to take us through the past, and my fellow members will take us through to the future. As many members know, Samoa is an archipelago of islands covering just under 3,000 square kilometres of land in the South Pacific. The population in Samoa, as at 2023, was 218,019 people. The population in New Zealand, as part of the 2023 census, is 213,069, over half of the Pacific population in New Zealand. Gagana Samoa is the third most spoken language here in Aotearoa New Zealand, behind English and te reo Māori. Us Samoans, we are very, very proud people. We're also humble, but we're very proud—whether that be in our homeland of Samoa or here in our new home of Aotearoa New Zealand.

We do have a close connection to New Zealand, to Aotearoa, both through our whakawhanaungatanga, with our tuakana-teina relationship with tangata whenua—I will let Adrian Rurawhe argue whether he is tuakana or teina; I still believe we are tuakana, but we can leave that for another day—and also with the Treaty of Friendship. However, there have been many times in the history of New Zealand and in that relationship with Samoa where that friendship has been trampled on. The Talune that landed in Apia Harbour in 1918 led to the deaths of thousands of Samoans—22 percent of the population was wiped out through the flu. The Mau movement, Mau a Pule, where, on Black Saturday, on 28 December 1929, a movement was brought together to protest and to organise around some of the atrocities that were happening with the New Zealand administration of Samoa. That movement was pushing for independence. Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III—this man here in white [Holds up photograph]—was assassinated on Black Saturday, 28 December. This man is the former MP Anae Neru Leavasa's great-grandfather, and next to him is my great-grandfather Timu Laufa. That is the connection to New Zealand and the Parliament and the history.

In the Dawn Raids in the 1970s, Pacific people, Samoan, Tongan, and Māori—basically, if you were brown—were targeted, questioned, arrested, and deported, despite the fact there was a concerted effort by the New Zealand Government calling our Pacific people to New Zealand to help with manufacturing, to help fill the labour force gaps.

The Privy Council case of Lesa v Attorney General—that is why we need to know our past in order to go to the future. I looked to the Privy Council case of Lesa v Attorney-General, which led to the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Bill, and in the third reading of that bill, moved by the Hon Jim McLay, who was the Attorney-General at the time, he said, "Equally important is the fact that for 60 years, no one believed that Western Samoans were British subjects owing allegiance to the British Crown."—no one believed that Western Samoans were British subjects owing allegiance to the British Crown. But he was wrong: Falema'i Lesa believed she had that citizenship. As many people in the House know, that went straight through to the Privy Council, and at the very first reading of that Citizenship (Western Samoa) Bill, the Hon Jim McLay, the Attorney-General, said, "The Privy Council's interpretation of the 1928 Act remains as the law of New Zealand unless and until legislation reverses it."—remains as the law of New Zealand unless and until legislation reverses it.

So that legislation, the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Bill—and now Act—reversed it. And that's how we come to today. The amendments that will be put forward from the Governance and Administration Committee right that wrong—right that wrong—that no one believed that there was allegiance to the British Crown; right that wrong that Samoans born during that period of 1924 to 1928 were not New Zealand citizens. But Falema'i Lesa proved that wrong.

Today, the lesson, really, for our New Zealand Government and for this Parliament, is that there is a crisis already happening in Samoa today. Yes, we have the Commonwealth Heads of Government there today, but we also have one of our own navy ships that has sunk in the reef off the coast of Safata and Si'umu. We need to ensure that we do not trample on the friendship again, and that we right that wrong. I acknowledge that there is work being done, but please listen to the Samoan people on the ground—please listen to those villagers who cannot fish; please listen to those villagers who cannot put food on their families' tables. Let's ensure that we don't continue to trample on this friendship.

So I really wanted to ensure that this House knew the history, that we knew where we had come from so that we know where we are going to. Our members will talk to the bill in more detail. They'll talk to the amendments which the Labour Party will, hopefully with some support—which we hope to get in the committee of the whole House process—continue to advocate for.

But I wanted to ensure that we put on the record today that Samoa is a proud people. We organised when our families were dying as a result of the influenza pandemic. Our families came together, took the dead, put them on the road, buried them—we organised then in order to save the rest of our population. Our Samoan people organised—when we were not happy with the atrocities by the New Zealand administration, we organised with the Mau movement, we organised so that we could get our independence. We organised during the Dawn Raids, through the Polynesian Panthers, here in New Zealand, with the people in the communities and the churches that met in order to protest what was happening to our people here in New Zealand, as their homes were getting raided in the early hours of the morning and as the dogs barked at their door. We organised when the Manawanui was sunk, in order to support our villagers who are currently experiencing this issue right now.

In the same way, we organised for this bill, with over 24,000 submissions. We organised in New Zealand. We organised in Australia. We organised in Samoa. We organised in the United States. Let that be a lesson to our Parliament today. Yes, I am a proud parliamentarian who represents the electorate of Mana, but I am Samoan first, and, today, we will continue to organise. The Labour Party will continue to support our Samoan community as they organise around the issues that matter to them. For the 24,000 submitters who organised to ensure that their voice was heard in this bill: we hear you, and that is why we should never underestimate a Samoan. We're very nice, we're very smiley, but we're very smart. [Applause] And we forgive. We are humble in our forgiveness, but we do not forget. So to all of our community members: fa'afetai tele lava; thank you for your organisation. It is my privilege to be able to stand in support of this bill and to carry your voice in this House, the New Zealand Parliament. [Applause]

Debate interrupted.

Debate resumed.

Dr PARMJEET PARMAR (ACT): Thank you, Mr Speaker. It's a real privilege to stand and take this call on behalf of the ACT Party, in the second reading of the Restoring Citizenship Removed by Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill. I want to again congratulate the member in charge, Teanau Tuiono, for seeing that this bill has come to the second reading, which is really good and good recommendations were made by the select committee. Good work by the select committee, the Governance and Administration Committee, all members on the committee. I want to acknowledge them for their diligent work on this bill.

I would like to note that the ACT Party doesn't have a member on this select committee, so we missed out on those cheese scones and coffee that you mentioned, the member in charge. But I have been following the progress of this bill very, very closely. And I want to acknowledge everybody who is up in the gallery as well for their effort to come to your Parliament to witness this bill going through the second reading. I'm sure that there are many, many more community members, family members, out there watching this online or on TV and I want to say hello to them as well and thank them as well.

In the first reading, I said this on behalf of the ACT Party, that the ACT Party believes in equality; the ACT Party believes in fairness, and we wanted to see that this bill goes to select committee. I'm really proud to stand here today and say that the ACT Party played a very important role in enabling this bill going to the select committee process.

At the select committee, what we noted was that people have spoken, and I said that it will be important to hear from people what people have to say. Receiving more than 24,500 submissions is a big thing. One submission included views of more than 5,900 individuals—that is something to be very proud of. I must say that for communities to have a view is one thing, but then to come to that next level of putting that view through to a select committee definitely needs a lot of courage. So, so many people showing the courage to come to the select committee—submitting and writing and appearing to be heard at the select committee—is something that I would like to acknowledge. I would like to say that this kind of strength from the community that we have seen, this kind of unity of the community that we have seen, cannot be denied. It has sent us a very strong message to us here in the House, that this is an issue that is very important to the community, the Samoan community.

The select committee has actually, by majority, agreed on some decisions that they have come to, which I believe are really good decisions, and the ACT Party supports those changes made by majority. Because it's really important for us to make sure that this bill is quite clear. There is no room left for any doubt, because this is something I know is a very important step towards a historic moment, and that historic moment will come. I know when the bill goes to the third reading, and we are hoping it will go through—but this step is also a very important step, so we want to make sure that each and every step that we take towards this historic moment is fully understood and that the expectations are managed and that all parties understand what we are committing to.

I want to talk about a few of the discussions that the select committee had. One very important thing to highlight is who is going to be covered by this bill for citizenship. It's important to note that this bill will cover people born in Western Samoa on or after 13 May 1924 and before 1 January 1949—very important to note—and the wives of those people if married before 1 January 1949.

Talking about their children, the bill covers those children who were born in this period. So if they were born before 1949 and were British subjects before that date, they are going to be covered. But other descendants born on or after 1 January 1949 are not going to be covered by this bill. Also, it's important to note that this citizenship will apply from the date it's granted. So there is going to be no retrospective nature to this citizenship, which is important for us to understand. This citizenship cannot be passed on to other descendants other than, of course, if a child is born to these citizens here in New Zealand and they adopt a child here in New Zealand. According to New Zealand laws, that person, that new individual, newborn individual, will get a New Zealand citizenship by birth under section 6 of the Citizenship Act. That has to be noted.

In this bill, we also must note that while this bill worked on this very important issue that is so close to our Samoan community, it is also important for our wider communities as well, the whole of New Zealand. We have taken into consideration what it means for Samoa. We have taken into consideration what it means for New Zealand, and it is about that fairness and equality and justice that I talked about in the first reading.

It is important that we also realise how many Samoans may be eligible for this citizenship. The numbers look just over 3,400, and this data is extrapolated from the 2021 Samoa census and mostly represents people between the ages of 76 and 100.

The internal affairs Minister will be granting these New Zealand citizenships, so how it will work is that people will have to still apply for this citizenship, but they will not have to go through the standard process of getting the residency first and then applying for citizenship. They will get New Zealand citizenship as of right upon applying once this bill has gone through.

I also want to highlight that I'm an immigrant myself, and many of our Samoan brothers and sisters sitting in the gallery are new immigrants or they are second generation immigrants, and I understand their emotion, their feelings, behind this, because this is an issue which I can relate to, because anything of this sort can become very important for the community, for the wider community as well. I want to say this, that, yes, we have come from different backgrounds, born in different parts of the world, we have different ethnic backgrounds, we may have different perspectives, but having different backgrounds, different ethnicities, different perspectives is not a division. Bringing all the perspectives together actually makes us stronger, and here what we have seen is what the perspective was of one community, and we have taken that into consideration. Obviously, this was an historic issue—very, very relevant to New Zealand as well—so we need to take that into consideration as well, and we have come to this conclusion that the ACT Party is going to support this bill, with the points that I have highlighted.

I also must highlight that the select committee also noted that it should not be a repeal of the 1982 Act; it should be an amendment. So the name of the bill is going to be changed to reflect that, and we support that as well.

The final point I want to make here is this—that all these submitters, those who submitted and those who supported this bill going through, selflessly did this. This wasn't about them; this was about those people, their older generation that is between 76 to 100. So that selfless support for the community coming together and trying to address this issue is something that I would like to acknowledge as well.

So I would like to thank everybody who came forward, showed the courage to submit on this bill, and I would like to again thank the select committee for doing a great job. The ACT Party is proud to stand and support this bill. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

ANDY FOSTER (NZ First): Thank you, Mr Speaker. I am delighted to stand on behalf of New Zealand First to support this bill as well. Talofa lava, afio mai. Welcome to your Parliament. It is lovely to have you here—to have our Samoan community so strongly represented here today, as you have been strongly represented right throughout this process. It is your passion and it is your support that has got this bill to where it is, so thank you very, very much.

I want also to place on record my thanks for my parliamentary colleagues in the Governance and Administration Committee, especially Teanau for bringing this bill to the House. I think when you started you weren't quite sure it was going to get through, but both with the support of New Zealand First and ACT it came through the first reading, and now National has said, "We're supporting it too." So I'm really looking forward to seeing this bill unanimously supported through the rest of its stages. So congratulations for the way in which you've worked with us through that. Congratulations also, Rachel, for chairing us through the process—Rachel Boyack. I think it's been a very good, collegial process.

My observation is that the select committees that I've been involved with are good, collegial processes. If any other select committees are less collegial, I'd encourage you to come and have a look at ours and just quietly watch them, and hopefully you might learn something from it.

I also want to put on record my thanks to officials from multiple agencies. There were multiple agencies involved. In fact, we had to bring in a couple of extra agencies because, when we started, this bill looked like it was quite a simple bill at face value, but as we unpeeled the onion it got more and more and more complicated. So it involved things like history, which is complex in itself, international agreements—and not just the view of the New Zealand Government but also the view of the Samoan Government, which we repeatedly tried to uncover. It included past changes to a range of citizenship laws over the last century—of course, the Privy Council ruling of 1982, various policy initiatives that have been taken. So it was a very, very complicated process.

My biggest thanks, I think, is to the submitters. More than 25,000 people expressed their view on this bill. You bought passion, you told us your stories—you told us your family stories, you told us the stories of the nation as well—and you told us that history. And there was a clear, strong feeling that an injustice was done in 1982. There were a range of views, it must be said, as to what should be done to put it right, but I would say that this is the Parliament that's going to do that. This is the Parliament that's actually going to do something concrete there, because previous Parliaments, actually, in some cases, declined to do anything about it. In other cases, have made apologies—we've had a couple of apologies—but the question is what were those apologies followed up with?

So this bill started off with the aim of giving citizenship to people born in Samoa between 1924 and 1948. Well, why that time? Well, that's all wrapped up in the history. And Teanau at the time reinforced that for us when we sought clarity about the extent of what this bill was about. The history is critical to this bill. New Zealand become the administrator of Western Samoa in 1914. We talk about colonialism sometimes in this House, but that was a really colonial approach of a Western nation taking over the administration of another country. That was formally acknowledged in 1920, following the First World War. It carried on till Samoa become independent on 1 January 1962—so a very, very long time.

We cannot look back on many aspects of New Zealand's administration with pride. Hon Barbara Edmonds has pointed out some of the terrible failings, and they come, I think, from an autocratic approach of "We know best. We know what we should be doing." And the reality was that the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand administration did not. So in 1918, as we've heard, the New Zealand Government's negligence, effectively, allowed the influenza epidemic into Samoa, causing enormous loss of life. In 1929, as she's also said, the Black Saturday: police fired on a crowd of peaceful demonstrators, resulting in 11 deaths. Those are things that we should be very, very sorry for. Of course, later this country also showed racist attitudes, and we had the trauma of the Dawn Raids. There've been apologies for both New Zealand's administration before 1962 and for the Dawn Raids.

I'm going to change tack slightly. Until 1948, all New Zealanders were British citizens, and in 1948 New Zealand citizenship was established. And then, I've got to say, we talk about the 1982 Privy Council case, because that is what this is all wrapped around. Miss Lesa contended that at the time she was born she was a British citizen, and therefore became a New Zealand citizen as of right. There was debate about that. Clearly, the New Zealand Government didn't think that was the case, but the Privy Council said "Yes"—the Privy Council said "Yes". And that might have surprised—and I think Barbara Edmonds, again, has said that nobody at that time believed that Western Samoans were British citizens and therefore New Zealand citizens and they didn't have an allegiance to the British Crown. I think maybe they genuinely thought this was the case, but I think that they were wrong. Because if not British citizens, if not New Zealand citizens, if Western Samoa as it was then was not recognised as a country, then citizens of where—citizens of where? I think that today is putting some of that right.

So the Government of that time passed in the space of two months the 1982 Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act. That said that people born in Samoa between 1924 and 1948 were never citizens, as though the Privy Council had never made its ruling. That is what this bill is about overturning.

So I want to go through some of our deliberations, because the first part of those deliberations was: do we repeal the existing bill, get rid of it all together, wipe it off the statute books; or do we amend it? And we had quite a discussion about that. The intent was still the same—the intent was still the same—but we decided in the end that we would amend it. The reason for that was that while one side of the Act essentially said, "No—never been citizens." The other side of the Act also said there's a different pathway—an easier pathway to citizenship—and we would have removed that at the same time had we repealed the Act. That's why, by majority, we decided that we would keep the Act but we would amend it to do what Teanau Tuiono wanted us to do.

I can remember, as the Mayor of Wellington at the time, one of the greatest joys was having citizenship ceremonies and welcoming people as new New Zealanders. I'd often ask people how long it was that they had been living in New Zealand, and people would say, "Five years, 10 years, 20 years, 30 years." When the Samoans came through, it might have been a year, might have been two years, because of that special pathway to citizenship. So that's a very important thing to have retained. Removing those would also have offended against the 1962 Treaty of Friendship. New Zealand only has one Treaty of Friendship, and it's with Samoa. So that's why, by majority, we decided to amend the original Act: still achieving what the bill was intended to do, but to retain those protections.

We discussed the time frame: 1924 to 1948 was very, very clear, and there were some technicalities around that, but that bit is very, very clear. We had a discussion about the period between 1949 and 31 December 1961. In other words, before Samoa became an independent country—and it is a discussion that I think is a real one there. We discussed descendants and the open-ended nature of that. I think it would be fair to say that there were concerns about New Zealand's capacity if the number were too large. There were also concerns about Samoa's capacity. I know, if you look back in history, that there were concerns about losing a very, very large number, particularly of young people from the population of Samoa.

The 1962 Treaty of Friendship requires New Zealand's Government to consult with the Samoan Government over immigration matters, and we have done so. We've reached out as a select committee on several occasions to ask for the Samoan Government's view. It was their view that this was a domestic matter for New Zealand. But I know from looking back in the history that there were concerns about depopulation at the time—so that was a real concern, and I suspect that was one that they maybe didn't want to say.

So we spent a lot of time focusing on ensuring that we had clarity over eligibility for citizenship, over the pathways to citizenship, over the process for applying for citizenship. We wanted to make sure it was as easy and clear as possible, and it is not just done in the English language but also in the Samoan language. We really, really wanted to make sure that was very, very clear. We considered how adoption would work. We considered a reduced charge for application. Now, there was an argument about whether there should be any charge at all, but the feeling was that if there wasn't—and the advice we had from officials was potentially that if there wasn't a charge, the immigration system could potentially have been overwhelmed, and that would have, of course, disadvantaged all other potential applicants.

Just to finish off with: outside the scope of this bill, we also heard a lot of submissions about it often being difficult to move from Samoa to New Zealand for family reasons just for a temporary visit—the visa issue. So we have said outside of this bill to the Government: "Please, can you have a look at the visa process. Can we make that easier? Can we make that smoother so we make it easier for people to come from Samoa for whatever purpose it might be in New Zealand for the short-term visit?" So I hope that is progressed.

So as the committee report says, this bill does not provide redress for the history of injustice, but it is a concrete response—belated, important, but real. And I thank you all for your part in making this happen. I commend this bill to the House.

DEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Pāti Māori): Tēnā koe e te Pīka. Talofa lava i te pa, ma le mamalu ua aofia. Fa'afetai mo le avanoa mo au ou te tu atu ai e lagolago le Sitiseni o Samoa.

Ka tū ahau mō te pāti tangata whenua anake, Te Pāti Māori, ki te mihi ki a koutou hei iwi mō o te moana ki tetehi iwi. E mōhio ana mātou ki te mamae o te kaikiri, e mōhio ana mātou ki te āhua o te hanga ture hei tūkino i a mātou. Heoi anō, ahakoa tēnā he kaha whakakīia ō tātou ngākau ki te aroha nā te mea he manawanui mō ō tātou mokopuna; Samoan and Māori mokopuna.

Ka mihi au ki a koutou mō āku mokopuna, arā Hawaiki. Maluapapa, Waimarino, Savai'i and Tiaki. Tēnā tātou, tēnā tātou, tēnā tātou katoa.

[I stand on behalf of the only tangata whenua party, the Māori Party, to acknowledge you as an iwi of the Pacific to another. We know the pain of racism, we know the nature of legislation for the purpose of abusing us. However, despite that, our hearts are completely full of compassion because we stand strong for our grandchildren; Samoan and Māori grandchildren.

I thank you for my grandchildren, i.e. Hawaiki, Maluapapa, Waimarino, Savai'i and Tiaki. My thanks and greetings to you all.]

Te Pāti Māori isn't like the other parties in here; we only get five minutes. So I am going to give it everything I can, from our ngākau to your ngākau. I mihi to our w'akapapa that we share: our people, one moana, multiple w'akapapa. I mihi to our mokopuna we share. And, sadly, I mihi to the colonisation and racism and racist legislation that we share that has hurt Samoa—that has hurt our kaumātua and continues to hurt our people. What Muldoon's Government did in 1982 was despicable. It was low and unjustifiable. This place should never be used for racist agendas, should never let personal agendas, discrimination, and bias come across the threshold.

The New Zealand Government at the time rushed through the Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 to stifle our growing population of Samoans migrating to Aotearoa—not "New Zealand"; "Aotearoa"—and the legislation set out to target a culture and a group of people. Legislation that is rushed hurts people. It is simply wrong, and my deepest shame for you is that this place continues to rush legislation that hurts our Pasifika and tangata whenua. E kī, e kī, eligibility for citizenship—e kī, you are descendants and w'akapapa of the Moana. You have w'akapapa that gives you eligibility. And I swear that when Te Pāti Māori—not if, but when—gets into Government, that will be restored.

This is not an argument about citizenship. W'akapapa is our tiriti, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi is what it is that restores and ensures that we as Pasifika nations can come through each other however and whenever we need to, for the wellbeing of our nations, our mokopuna, our w'akapapa. While we are here to support this bill, we must never ever forget the last time Teanau and I were in Samoa. The Prime Minister, Fiamē Naomi Mataafa, said to us that she wants to ensure that, for the wellbeing of Samoa, all of her citizens have the ability and privilege to come and tautoko their whanaunga in Aotearoa and go home at pleasure—the same way our waka comes in; tai timu, tai pari—that you can move as a moana requires you to move and be wherever you need to be.

That is what needs to be addressed, but today we are here simply to look at putting right something that was so tragically, disgustingly wrong. For us and your w'akapapa, we mihi also to those who have had to stand here with the shame and the w'akamā of our w'akapapa. I tautoko the words of our sister Barb, who says and reminds us that, while we are a humble people, we are a proud people, and the ability to mobilise, to organise—and in Te Pāti Māori we call it "activation-ise". The ability to activate is a power, a superpower, that no other peoples in Aotearoa can do as well as our Pasifika and tangata whenua nations. Tangata Moana, tangata whenua: keep rising, keep staying focused on the wellbeing of the mokopuna that we share.

I tautoko my whanaunga: whether we're tuākana or tēina, the reality is we are one people. I mihi to our brother, to Teanau, and I know that this is a massive feat to have us all supporting this. While at times I sit here and can barely stomach some of the words I'm hearing, the reality is that you have done what many can't do—while you're not in Government. So a huge mihi to you, to your whānau, and to the w'akapapa that brought you here to do this kaupapa.

Nō reira i te āhuatanga o ō tātou tūpuna, ngā mihi aroha ki a koutou katoa.

[And so with respect to our shared ancestors, loving greetings to you all.]

Waiata

SPEAKER: I'll just remind the gallery that a waiata is a privilege in the House and it is generally confined to once the vote is taken.

CHLÖE SWARBRICK (Co-Leader—Green): Tēnā koe e te Māngai. Tēnā koutou e te Whare. Talofa lava. E te whānau, nau mai, haere mai. Welcome to your House.

I wanted to mihi to everyone, as Teanau Tuiono did, who has come before us, but also to those who will come after us. It is today that we are the custodians and the kaitiaki of the fight for justice. I wanted to also mihi to Faanānā Efeso Collins for his brief but gigantic contributions to this kaupapa, also to our Pasifika Greens, to—I won't be able to name them all—Renee Dingwall, to Reverend Mua Strickson-Pua, to Louise Tu'u, to Agnes Magele, and to many, many others who have also engaged with Teanau in this kaupapa and this fight for justice.

I want to mihi to the thousands, the tens of thousands who came forward to the Governance and Administration Committee and opened your stories of trauma and of resilience and of hope and of that consistent fight for justice through the generations. I also wanted to mihi to the parliamentarians who came to that select committee with open hearts and minds. The fact that we have got here today to a place of consensus in this House is not something to be taken lightly.

Now, I also wanted to just briefly mihi to the community who has welcomed myself, alongside Teanau, into some of your hui and talanoa where I received one of my new names that I've been blessed with, Gloria. I'm not sure if it was because you got my name wrong, but ka pai. Thank you very much.

So I just wanted to speak to why it is not only as the co-leader of the Green Party that I'm speaking to this kaupapa today but also to ground this very much in our geographical relationships. I am a little white kid from central Auckland, and central Auckland looked like a radically different place in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s. At that point in time, central Auckland was estimated to have a Polynesian population of approximately 60 percent. It is the home and the origin and the founding of the Polynesian Panthers.

But as we have seen, and as my experience in politics and particularly in the debates around the electorate have shown me, we spend a heck of a lot of time talking about this notion of heritage, but what we tend to be talking about and debating in that notion of heritage is the built environment, not those who built that environment. So I wanted to acknowledge the Pacific peoples who came before me, came before us, and built central Auckland and the fabric of that community that I love so dearly today.

I also wanted to acknowledge the fact that how we've got to having this debate today is off the back of fundamental injustice, as many have acknowledged before me. We had a Government of the day back then, several decades ago now—although it may sound like a familiar story today—who intentionally passed policies in order to bring in people from the Pacific Islands to fill gaps in our economy and to grow that economy. Yet when times got tough politically, these Governments turned their backs on those very communities and scapegoated them. At a point in time where the Dawn Raids were happening, this racist policy was in action.

It is really important to note that the majority of overstayers in this country were not Samoan, were not Pasifika but were European and American, and that is why this law was demonstrably and evidentially racist. It is really, really that simple, and I've checked with the Clerks that I can indeed say that. But I think it's important to make that point about the racism which filtered through that legislation because of the fact that we actually can't say that in contemporary times when we are discussing legislation that may share the echoes of what we've seen in the past. Until we can get to a place in this institution where we can look ourselves in the mirror and truly acknowledge those injustices and that potential of racism, I don't think that we will be able to evolve until we can get to that point.

I want to acknowledge that this kaupapa has shaped so many lives throughout the generations. I also wanted to acknowledge the fact that in the Government's 2021 apology for the Dawn Raids, it said, and I quote, "in many cultures, including in Pacific cultures, words alone are not sufficient to convey an apology and it is appropriate to include tangible gestures of goodwill and reconciliation." Well, today is just one step in addressing those historical injustices, but as many have already reflected upon, those challenges and those injustices are still with us today, including in the likes of immigration policies around Recognised Seasonal Employer workers. So this kaupapa can and must continue, and the Greens are with you in that fight. Ngā mihi nui.

CAMERON BREWER (National—Upper Harbour): Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. The National Party is pleased to support this amended bill at second reading, following much consideration and key refinement at the Governance and Administration Committee over the past six months. We believe we have landed at a good place, balancing both countries' interests as well as finally addressing a long-held grievance by many since 1982. The bill will restore New Zealand citizenship to individuals born in Western Samoa between 13 May 1924 and 1 January 1949 yet who we're not in New Zealand in 1982, whose citizenship was removed with the 1982 Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act. The select committee's intention is clear and explicit in our report back to the House. We are ring-fencing this cohort of now elderly people—possibly up to 3,500 people. Only those directly affected will be eligible, as of right, for citizenship by grant, not their descendants.

Initial advice from officials indicated that if descendants were to be included, that could implicate over 100,000 people—nearly half of Samoa's population—having a huge impact on Samoa as well as New Zealand. By ring-fencing the eligible 1924-48 cohort, we have done something no New Zealand Parliament has done in 42 years, since the Privy Council decision. We are acknowledging what many lost when the 1982 Parliament unanimously voted to rule that those living in New Zealand at the time were citizens, but not those living in Samoa and elsewhere. Again, it was a unanimous decision by Parliament in 1982 to revoke their citizenship. In 1982, the legislation had cross-party support, with Bill Rowling's Labour Party and Bruce Beetham's Social Credit joining—joining—the Muldoon Government to pass it.

I want to acknowledge our Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Christopher Luxon, for being the 11th Prime Minister since Sir Robert Muldoon but the first to actually confront this issue in a practical yet meaningful way. I want to also pay tribute to the support from senior MPs; the offices of the Hon Nicola Willis, the Hon Shane Reti, the Hon Chris Bishop, the Hon Erica Stanford; our Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) spokesperson, the Hon Chris Penk, for his considered guidance; and the chief of staff in the Prime Minister's office, Cam Burrows. I also want to acknowledge Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Rt Hon Winston Peters, and Minister of Internal Affairs, Brooke van Velden.

As we all know, National opposed this bill at first reading, but some critical changes have since occurred. We are not only fine tuning the specific intent of the bill but we are now amending the 1982 legislation, not repealing it. Amending not repealing the legislation was the explicit wish of our Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade. Officials advise that repealing the bill, as continues to be advocated by the Opposition, would have serious ramifications on the 1962 Treaty of Friendship between Samoa and New Zealand, which, among other things, provides a simplified pathway to citizenship for Samoans. In short, a repeal would "particularly impact individuals outside the group directly addressed by the bill, adding more hurdles for Samoan citizens to apply for, or to automatically receive, New Zealand citizenship", wrote the DIA's departmental report to the select committee.

By amending, not repealing, the legislation, we have avoided violating the 1982 Protocol to the Treaty of Friendship and potentially straining diplomatic relations with Samoa. Any amendments by the Opposition in this House, at the next stage, to try to make it a repeal bill go against all the official advice.

Frankly, it was highly problematic having a bill with so many foreign affairs, diplomatic, economic, and immigration consequences being sent to a select committee as a member's bill. It simply couldn't benefit from the usual vigour that shapes Government bills from the outset. With that in mind, I want to acknowledge the bill's sponsor, Green MP Teanau Tuiono, his work, and his willingness to adapt it to get it over the line before we lose what could arguably be our last chance to make a real, meaningful acknowledgement to this generation.

I want to also thank National MPs Tim Costley and Tom Rutherford, and New Zealand First's Andy Foster, my Government colleagues, for their interrogation and hard work over several months to help knock this bill into workable form. Can I also acknowledge select committee chair, Rachel Boyack.

For me, this is not my first exposure to the 1982 Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act. No, my first exposure of it came in the late 1990s, when I was a young staffer in the Jenny Shipley National Government, back in the 45th Parliament. As a researcher, I was assigned National's first Pasifika MP, Anae Arthur Anae, who's here today. I helped him write caucus memos to his colleagues to consider this very matter. But it was hard, hard going—it was hard going. Arthur, however, didn't give up and continued the fight and continued his advocacy for the next two decades. I ended up on Auckland City Council as a councillor with Arthur Anae, in 2010, as his benchmate, and he was still going on about it—he was still going on about it. Luckily for me, after last year's general election, I then, effectively, became his whipping boy inside the caucus. Arthur, I know this isn't all that you wanted, but you can take pride in what is being achieved across Parliament today.

I want to also acknowledge National's Pacific Blues chair, and a member of my own electorate committee, John Loau. John presented a thoughtful submission supporting a third way, with many pragmatic suggestions to help build political consensus. John's priority was to reinstate citizenship to those who were directly affected. Doing so, he wrote, will allow those victims some dignity to this dark period of their lives. Thank you, John, for all your advocacy and for your friendship.

Today, our Prime Minister, Christopher Luxon, is flying to join the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Apia. Again, the Prime Minister can feel proud that, since 1982, after six Labour Prime Ministers and four National ones, he is the one Prime Minister who is putting his support to this.

As deputy chair of, and the Government lead on, the select committee, I want to acknowledge the support and willingness of the National caucus to reconsider this—the front bench and the backbench. Thank you to my committee colleagues from across the House for listening to the submissions and making the necessary changes to enable this day and the inevitable—dare I say, the inevitable—passing of what will soon be known as the Citizenship (Western Samoa) (Restoration) Amendment Act; 42 years in the making. I commend this bill to the House.

RACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Talofa lava, Mr Speaker, and talofa lava to the community, who are joining us here in your House, the Parliament, today. There are a few people I wish to acknowledge at the beginning of my contribution. First, and most importantly, can I acknowledge the member in charge of the bill, my brother from across the aisle on this side of the House, Teanau Tuiono. Thank you for putting this bill into the tin, for having it pulled accidentally, and then for championing it through the House to date. It has been a real pleasure working alongside you, my brother.

Can I acknowledge our elders who are with us and who are also watching from around the world—talofa lava. In particular, I want to make mention of three of your elders, who, while former parliamentarians, haven't lost their touch as parliamentarians. Anae Arthur Anae, who has been very forthright in his views with us; my former caucus colleague Aupito Su'a William Sio, who is also at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting, but has made sure his views are known to us; and also with us today, can I acknowledge Luamanuvao Dame Winnie Laban. The three of you are a reminder to all parliamentarians that even when you leave, you can still make your contribution. So thank you for your wisdom and your guidance to all of us throughout this process.

Can I pay particular attention to acknowledge Falema'i Lesa, who took the case to the Privy Council all those years ago. Having her engage in this process and submit to the Governance and Administration Committee has been a very powerful thing. I also want to acknowledge her son and my constituent in the mighty electorate of Nelson, Ian Lesa, who has also been a very useful source of advice to me as we go through this process. So I acknowledge you both.

As chair of this committee, it has been a very humbling process to hear the stories of the submitters. Throughout that process, we have been guided and assisted by a number of people, and so I want to take the time today to thank those officials.

We had a rather record number of officials giving advice, from the Department of Internal Affairs, from the Ministry for Pacific Peoples, from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, and from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, but can I pay particular thanks to the Parliamentary Counsel Office. Our committee, I'm proud to say, is a committee of pedants. We do like to dig into the detail and dig into the detail we did, and having the guidance and advice from Parliamentary Counsel Office ensured that as we were drafting the amendments to this legislation, we could have the confidence that our intent was very clear in what we have written. We wouldn't have been able to do that without the support of the Parliamentary Counsel Office.

Finally, to all of the members on the select committee, with the deputy chair, Cameron Brewer, in particular, who also chaired some of the submission hearings, and to my sister, who cannot be with us today, but we send her all of our love and support—Lemauga Lydia Sosene, who has been right by my side throughout most of this process. I'm really missing you today, sister. I wish you were here. This has been your mahi as well, and I know that I speak for all of us when I say that we wish you every good wish, every prayer, and all of our love as you go through the treatment that you are going through and come back to us, well and able to contribute again.

So now to the bill. As I said, it is very humbling to be able to talk to this bill. This bill rights a historical wrong that was done to our community by the Parliament in 1982, and today is another step in that journey of righting that wrong. Can I refer everyone, please, to what is a very detailed select committee report. Please do read it. I don't want this just to sit on people's bookshelves, not being read. Please read it: it has a lot of very useful information, and I won't be able to talk to all of it today.

We are hoping soon to be able to have this translated into Samoan. We weren't able to do that in time for our report back because we finished it the day before we reported back, but we are working with officials so that we can get this translated into Samoan.

On that, I want to acknowledge a point that my sister Lemauga Lydia Sosene made throughout this process—in a note to officials, in particular—which was how important it is that our officials communicate clearly with our Samoan community here in Aotearoa but also in Samoa and other parts of the world about the clauses in this bill, about how it will apply, and about how it will be implemented, so that it is easy for people to follow. The point she has made, I think, very, very well. We've made it in our report, and so part of that will be ensuring that this report is ultimately translated into Samoan so that people who can read and write in Samoan can read their version of the report. That was important to us.

I wanted to point out three areas where there was some disagreement at committee, and this was off the back of the wonderful contributions from submitters. The first was about whether we repeal and replace this legislation, or whether we repeal and then move those clauses into other pieces of legislation. The advice we received was that it was actually a bit of a line call. In amending the original legislation, it probably will be easier for officials to be able to interpret it in terms of eligibility, but also I want to acknowledge that there is a symbolism in being able to repeal that Act and the name of that Act and all of the hurt and the mamae that it caused. My view is still that we could repeal that bill and pick up those important clauses, like the ones that relate to the Treaty of Friendship, and put them in other legislation—we could still do that. So that is still the view that I hold.

The second was around the need for a fee when people apply for their citizenship by grant. Now, fees are ultimately determined in regulation by Cabinet. What the committee has chosen to do by majority is to have a fee set in the legislation until such time as that fee is determined. But our view—the Labour and the Green view—was that for that short period of time, we shouldn't put a fee in place. There should be a window of opportunity for people who have suffered the trauma and who have gone through the hurt to be able to apply for their citizenship without a fee.

The final point where there was disagreement was where we do extend this to in terms of descendants. The view of the Labour and Green members on the committee was that we should extend it to the next cohort, and those are the descendants of those affected who were born before 1962. That is all laid out in the select committee report in terms of our views and the reasoning around that. What I will say is that we have two more stages of this bill to go through—the committee of the whole House and the third reading—and it is likely we will consider some amendments to put forward in the committee of the whole House. Ultimately, though, that will be the position of the Parliament, but we will work through that process over the coming weeks.

I just wanted to make one final point, which was a particular concern that we heard from the community, but it is out scope. But we have made some commentary about it in our report, and that is the visa settings for people from Samoa coming to New Zealand, coming to Aotearoa. We heard very clearly that it is onerous, that it takes a lot of time, and that particularly when you have cultural and aiga contributions to make, where people need to come back to Aotearoa—it may be for a wedding or for a funeral—having to go through that visa process is onerous and it doesn't feel fair to a community that we have a deep and lasting relationship with. So the committee was unanimous in calling for the Government to look at those settings and see if we can make some improvements so that it is easier for the people of Samoa to come to New Zealand, particularly in times of a crisis.

Finally, can I just point out and just finally acknowledge that for the people of Samoa, on your minds will be the sinking of the Manawanui on the southern coast of Upolu, where I have visited twice that very area. I think all of this House wants to send our love and support to the people of Samoa and say how deeply sorry we are at what has occurred in your moana, in your waters.

On that note, it has been a real privilege to help guide this bill through to this point. Fa'afetai tele lava. I commend this bill to the House.

TIM COSTLEY (National—Ōtaki): Talofa lava, Mr Speaker. Let's set the scene and understand our Government's and this Parliament's precedent-breaking support. Samoa in the late 1800s: there are interests from Germany, the US, and the UK, and civil war breaks out between local factions backed by these three countries. Then, without consulting any Samoans—this is not something any of us should be proud of—they have a conference and decide how to split Samoa. The eastern part goes to the US—now American Samoa—and the western part—hence Western Samoa—comes under German control. Of course, 1914 was the start of World War I. Britain rings up New Zealand as it's not so keen on having Germany with a safe haven in the Pacific, and New Zealand is asked and goes in, without anyone firing a shot, and takes control of Samoa for the duration of the war.

Now, the intent at the time was actually to give it back to the Germans in 1919, but the League of Nations has a different plan and it becomes what we call a Class C mandated country, along with other German territories in the Pacific and in South Africa, the likes of South West Africa—now Namibia—Nauru, I think of New Guinea, the South Sea Islands—of course, went to Japan—Micronesia, the Marshall Islands. The mandate lasts from April 1922 until April 1946. Now the dates get a bit confusing when we look at the dates in this legislation, but we also have to read the British Nationality and Status of Aliens (in New Zealand) Acts, both the 1923 and the 1928 Acts, along with the Act with the same name, but in the UK, from 1914.

So this trusteeship: in 1921, the Samoa Act brings this into law in New Zealand, and the bill makes it very clear that Samoans would not become New Zealand citizens. That was the thinking at the time. In fact, we have the letter that the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Gordon Coates, wrote to the League of Nations in 1928, after the legislation that actually this bill gets based off. He said—and I'm quoting here—"The status of native inhabitants [from Samoa] is distinct from that of … nationals [from] the Mandatory Power,"—in this case, New Zealand. Again, quoting, it "cannot be identified there—with by any process having general application.", and he goes on to say that "The native inhabitants of the mandated territory are not invested with the nationality of the Mandatory Power." This is also agreed to, of course, by the UK, Australia, France, Japan, Belgium, and South Africa, and none of those countries have ever gone on to give citizenship to any of those trustee countries.

This is the first time in history that a trustee administrated country will be given citizenship. So this is incredibly significant. That's the start of the period and the thinking at the time and New Zealand's intent to not give citizenship.

Let's fast forward to the end. It's the first Labour Government—of course, Savage, and then Fraser—and Labour's Minister of Internal Affairs at the time, the Hon Bill Parry, again makes it clear that Samoans, in his view and that Government's view, are not New Zealand citizens when he's commenting on the law changes they're putting through in the 1948 bill. I'm quoting from the Labour Government: "The inhabitants of Western Samoa are not British subjects because trustee territories and protectorates are not in the legal sense part of His Majesty's realm." In fact, the Privy Council accept the intent of that Labour Government, and that's why the cut-off now sits at 1948 in the 1982 legislation that we are amending today.

But he goes on to say that "Although the protected persons are not British subjects, they should not be treated as aliens either. There should be an intermediate class." So they changed the rules requiring five years of residency to get to citizenship to be just one year of residency, and this, in a way, sets the path towards the 1962 Treaty of Friendship, which builds on what he called an intermediate class.

Now, of course, in 1977, Falema'i Lesa was prosecuted for being in New Zealand unlawfully, but argued that between the periods of legislation that we're talking about now, she, effectively, became a New Zealand citizen. Ultimately, the Privy Council accepted that. But we can understand the shock that there was across all parties in Government at the time because we know that the intent was, both in the 1920s and the 1940s, that they were not citizens, and hence the thinking to go and change this.

As we've heard, Jim McLay was the Minister responsible at the time. He argued that successive Governments had never anticipated this, and he used a comparison to a tax loophole. When someone finds a loophole in the law, a responsible Government would honour those that found it, but would also move to close it, which is what the 1982 legislation did. In fact, that legislation did three things: firstly, it awarded citizenship to Falema'i Lesa and her family specifically but also to any Samoans who were legally in New Zealand at that time; secondly, it created a fast-track pathway—and we love a good fast track—for all Samoans, removing that one-year residency requirement but also things like not needing to pass an English language test. In effect, if you can reside in New Zealand legally, you can become a citizen right away, and that's something we want to protect by not removing some of those details from the 1982 legislation. Finally, of course, it ruled out future citizenship to people who might not otherwise be entitled to it from that period.

Come forward to 2002-03 and Helen Clark's Labour Government, and they were presented with a petition to do exactly what we're doing here, but they denied it. Why was that? Well, part of it may be, as was explained in their thinking, that they considered that a repeal of the 1982 Act would be—I'm quoting—"Inappropriate from an international law perspective", and they noted that no other mandated country had citizenship from that time. In fact, even today, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade's advice to us was that the advice it provided to the committee 20 years ago was still valid, and, further, that they consider that before this bill passes, New Zealand's current legislative policy and administrative settings in relation to Samoa are consistent with international human rights law.

Now, add to that the Department of Internal Affairs' advice that said that if we were to repeal the 1982 bill, it could create an unintended divide between those who would gain citizenship from that period and all other Samoans and those that might be born in the future that would not be able to benefit from the fast track and the provisions that that brought in. Of course, we know from recent submissions, like we heard from the Hon William Sio, the Minister of Pacific Peoples from 2017 to 2023—we heard from him directly that even with the complete majority, this bill was not something he was able to gain support for from his Cabinet colleagues; which is, of course, a real shame.

That begs the question: why now? Why is this National Government supporting this now when, as we've heard, no previous Government was willing to? Well, I want to cover three reasons. Firstly, I have to acknowledge the member in charge of this bill, Teanau Tuiono, for bringing it in, and his clear intent of what he was wanting and the target group. I'm quoting from his intent in the bill that this "would not create new rights to citizenship for descendants of those whose citizenship rights were removed." The intent was never to go broader, it was to address this historical wrong. By bringing that focus and that clarity, it really enabled us to get a better sense of comfort and to know that this was a targeted bill and something that we could find unity in the select committee together around. That was a big piece of the puzzle.

Secondly, it is about amending, not repealing. We heard official advice that there would be huge challenges with a repeal, that it was—and, again, I quote—"It was very difficult to operationalise or could not be operationalised in its current form" that passed the first reading. It could potentially kill the Treaty of Friendship—kill the fast track for Samoan citizenship—for others. It could inadvertently do more harm than good, and I think it's a great sign of leadership, actually, that people are willing to forgo the big banner posters of repeal and go for the thing that will actually deliver the practical outcome that was desired. We could add to that things like section 32 of the Legislation Act, which are also problematic in terms of a repeal.

But finally, for me, as much as anything else, it was the submissions, the personal stories that moved me—the emotional, often at times, examples that we were given. I know that this bill is not directly just in response to things like the Dawn Raids, the 1929 massacre, or the Spanish flu, but I heard the submissions from people like Melani Anae, the Polynesian Panthers, David Lui, the Samoan Trade and Investment Council, and Hans Schwalger. They were very clear—and, again, I'm quoting—that the Ardern apology didn't cut it. It was hollow, it fell short, and this bill is an outward and visible sign of an inward and invisible bond that our two countries share. One small step, as the Greens mentioned, to show more than just words.

Secondly, it was the personal stories from people who lived in this period, or perhaps their children. I think of Akenese Taupo Pualilo and Ierome Lui Vaoliko—I apologise for my pronunciation—their parents were personally impacted; Akeripa To'Alepaiali'i, who is from this generation, has to apply for a visa to visit his grandchildren; or Mataio Lemaveve, who wanted their grandfather to be able to come and visit them; or Lealasa Tovio. She and her sister were both born in the 1940s. She has citizenship, but her older sister, who was born in 1946, doesn't, but now they both could become citizens.

There is no legal precedent for this bill, I'm convinced. There is no legal right or requirement, but let's do it anyway. This is a focus bill on one small group. It's actionable. It's amending, not repealing, and it's a bill that I look forward to a constructive committee stage with. I commend the bill to the House.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: This is a split call.

Rt Hon ADRIAN RURAWHE (Labour): Lau afioga fofoga fetalai ma sui mamalu o le palemene.

Ki a koutou ōku tuākana. Ngā mātua ngā whāea ngā rangatira katoa tae atu ki ā koutou tamariki mokopuna. Anei a au e tuku mihi atu ki a koutou, nau mae, haramai mai ki tō tātou Pāremata. Nō reira tēnā rā tātou.

[To you, my seniors, the fathers, mothers, all the leadership, and also to you, the children and grandchildren. Here I stand to acknowledge you, welcome, welcome to our Parliament. And so greetings to all of us.]

I join together with colleagues around the House and acknowledge everyone who has worked towards this day. It's good to be on the right side of history. My biggest thankyou really goes to Teanau Tuiono nō te Rōpū Kākāriki, the only party that has not been in Government from 1982 to now that could actually do something about it, and today they're the only party that has, and I acknowledge them.

While Cameron Brewer might claim that the current Prime Minister is doing something about it, I kind of think he was forced into it—forced into it by his colleagues in New Zealand First and the ACT Party. So let's not overplay that position, because this bill is not over yet and some of us think it should go a bit further. I'm going to support my colleagues who have done a lot of work on this, along with Teanau Tuiono, and let's see and test whether Cameron Brewer is right, because, if he is, then the Prime Minister will do the right thing and make sure at the committee of the whole House stage that when those amendments go up, they vote for them. No good in standing in this, at the second reading, and proclaiming how good the Prime Minister is now; let's see him after the third reading. Then, I might acknowledge that; but today, no. So far, 11 Prime Ministers have done nothing. Today, I think it's right for me to acknowledge what has been done.

I join, also, colleagues in acknowledging the work of the chair of the Governance and Administration Committee, and all of the members, including Lemauga Sosene. I send all my alofa to her.

Everything's really been said, but I really wanted to say that it's good to be on the right side of history, but this is not the only piece of legislation which is on the wrong side of history. As my whanaunga from Te Tai Hauāuru, from Taranaki, said there are other bills, as well, currently going through this House, or about to go through this House, that will end up on the wrong side of history, and people's grandchildren, in 40 years, might be back here correcting what their grandparents did. So be careful what you're passing through this House. Madam Speaker, thank you for the opportunity of speaking.

Ki a koutou anō, aku tūākana me aku teina, tēnā rā tātou katoa.

[And again to you, my seniors and my juniors, greetings to us all.]

GREG FLEMING (National—Maungakiekie): Lau susuga i le fofoga fetalai, fa'afetai mo lenei avanoa faaauro ua mauaina e mafai ai ona ou tautala ai i lenei pili matagofie i luma o Samoa ma ona tagata. Fa'afetai lava i le tou auai mai i lenei taeao ua matagofie ai lenei aso. Fa'afetai mo lo tou sao mo Aotearoa aemaise le tou loto aiga mo si o tatou atunuu. Ua manuia le atunuu nei ona o outou.

The details of the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill and its long history, the disagreements and the agreements, have been well canvassed in this morning's speeches. So instead of going over them again, I wanted to take this moment of great honour, in your presence, to acknowledge the extraordinary people of Samoa and to give thanks for all that you bring to Aotearoa. I thank you for your grace. I thank you for your patience. I thank you for your perseverance. And, most of all, I thank you for your example to us all in Aotearoa. You and your culture have never forgotten what matters most. As I, hopefully, spoke to in your most beautiful language—perhaps equalled only by te reo taketake o te whenua nei [the ancient language of this land]—it is my deepest appreciation for that example that you provide to us all.

In the brief time that I have, can I also acknowledge my colleague Teanau Tuiono. Tēnā koe e te Pīka, te nui nga o te wā ahakoa [Thank you, Mr Speaker, most of the time, though] for championing this bill, for wanting to right this injustice. Thank you so much.

To my colleagues across the House who have worked so hard on this piece of legislation at the Governance and Administration Committee, tēnā koutou. And to the good spirit of this House, the thoughtful consideration, the genuine listening—it turns out it leads to good law, or at least a better law. We should do it often.

Can I also mihi to my colleague and friend Margaret—or "Mags"—Epati. You are an absolute delight and treasure to work with, and it is awesome that you just happen to be here on this day and that I was given the opportunity to speak. My colleague, Minister Chris Penk, spoke in his remarks earlier this morning of the beautiful hymn that he heard. In my experience, that is an expression of who you are, of your commitments, and of your example. And therefore, a o le i uma lau tautalaga, ou te toe fa'afetai atu Samoa, faamalo le tautai ae, faamalo le loto atunuu, faamalo le lototele. Fa'afetai i le tou nonofo ai i lenei atunuu o Aotearoa aua se sailiga manuia mot ou aiga i Samoa. Faamanuia le Atua. [Member mispronounces word] He rerekē ki te reo taketake anō!

[This is quite different from the indigenous language!]

Faamanuia le Atua. Fa'afetai. It is my delight and pleasure and honour to commend this bill to the House—685 to the world!

TANGI UTIKERE (Labour—Palmerston North): Talofa lava. Fa'afetai tele lava, Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise as Labour's final speaker this morning to provide my support for this bill. I do so as a member of Labour's Pacific caucus, and I do so on behalf of my Samoan constituents of Te Papaioea, Palmerston North.

I want to start by acknowledging the sponsor of this bill, Teanau Tuiono. I want to congratulate him on, unfortunately, having luck play a role in this particular issue today. I want to say to everyone that it's all good that a Cook Islands brother from Palmerston North is leading the righting of this wrong for our Samoan community all around the world. I also want to say that it signifies the importance of having Pasifika representation in this place, in this House, to right wrongs, to make decisions, and I thank Teanau for leading the way in that regard.

I want to also acknowledge the Governance and Administration Committee. When I entered Parliament, I had the fantastic opportunity to be a member of that last term, and I know it's always been collegial. Actually, Madam Speaker, you were the chair while I was the deputy. It's good to see that that has continued through to the 54th Parliament. In particular, I want to acknowledge my colleague and the chair of that committee, Rachel Boyack. I know that she is fair, I know that she is thoughtful, and I know that she has worked through this process with the support of colleagues around the House, and I want to acknowledge the work that she has done.

I also want to acknowledge the members of the committee who have worked extremely hard, although there is still some work to do, as colleagues have already alluded to. In particular, I want to acknowledge Lemauga Lydia Sosene, who has been a leading light in terms of this bill and its progress through the select committee stage. I know and we all know that she unfortunately is not able to be here today, but I was in touch with her this morning, and she asked me to wear this ulafala, acknowledging that she is unable to be here today.

This was a bill that attracted so many submissions. More than 24,500 individuals and organisations took the time, gave the energy, made the effort to submit, because this is an injustice. It included many submissions from off these shores. Often, in select committee, we might think, "Well, how much weight or value do we give that?" In this particular regard, I think it's important that the weight and value is at a high level. The overwhelming level of support is in favour of this bill. The overwhelming level of support is for this bill to go further than it currently stands.

I want to acknowledge those who are in the gallery today. I want to thank you for your voices that have informed this bill on its journey. I want to acknowledge those who have passed. I want to acknowledge those who are unable to be here, those who are not able to witness this injustice being rectified in this Parliament at this time. I want to acknowledge the former parliamentarians who are here, in particular Anae Arthur Anae, for his leadership, for his support, for his call to action for this over many years.

This is a bill that does seek to right a wrong. It seeks to restore a right that was unjustly and unfairly stripped away by the New Zealand Government and the New Zealand Parliament of the early 1980s. It's a bill that returns the right of New Zealand citizenship to those who were born in Samoa on or after 13 May 1922 and before 1 January 1949, and for whom their citizenship was removed by that 1982 Act. What's pleasing to hear at this point in time is there is a level of support which sits at that unrivalled level here in the New Zealand Parliament, unanimity for this particular bill. Whilst there have been some issues raised which, sure, we will tease out when we get to the committee of the whole House stage, I do hope that all parliamentarians continue to have an open mind as we work through that particular process.

I want to touch on some of those issues. The first is the title. This is a bill that Teanau Tuiono put in the tin with the title. The proposal from the select committee process by majority is actually that we'll just change the existing Act rather than institute a new one. I think that's a shame. I think it's a shame because it doesn't give prominence to the fact that this is a Parliament that is seeking to right a wrong. I think the arguments that have been advanced as to why the select committee by majority have suggested that are rather weak. This House, this Parliament, can insert into other pieces of legislation the very issues, the very avenues to address the concerns that have been raised by majority through the select committee.

This is a bill that would allow citizenship to be given by grant, which means that people have to apply for it—it's not automatic. But not only do they have to apply, the suggestion is that they would pay a fee. It's very unusual to have a fee specified in legislation. Usually that's something that does come through regulation, and when I sit back and look and reflect on it, I think, you know, we're seeking to right a wrong, but we're asking people to reach into their pocket and to pay for it at the same time. I think that's wrong. I think that is fundamentally wrong.

Now, we hear that some of the issues might be because of cost implications. The reality is that when you are trying to right a wrong, sometimes that comes at a cost. It would have been much cheaper if the wrong was righted earlier, so let's not have that argument about cost. It has taken so long to right this wrong, and I thank the member for bringing it to Parliament. So I think having an application fee flies in the face of doing the right thing.

We've heard this morning that our colleague Lemauga Lydia Sosene has really stressed the importance of communication, and I do support that. I hope that those lead agencies in Immigration New Zealand, in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and in the Ministry for Pacific Peoples will work hard. I know they will work hard to ensure that the communications around who is eligible, how they might apply, hopefully that there will not be a fee for it, the time frames—all of those sorts of things. There is a real need for a multicultural, multi-agency approach around that.

The Labour Party does join with the Greens in progressing through the committee stage the possibility of extending eligibility for this to include descendants who were born before 1 January 1962. This is something that is in the select committee's report. It is something that will not come as any great surprise. Unfortunately, Government parties don't agree with that, but we do hope that they consider this with an open mind as we work through the next particular stages of this.

My colleague the Hon Barbara Edmonds has touched on the history, and I know that she said that her colleagues would look to the future. Members of the House know I used to teach history, so I couldn't resist a little sort of inclusion of history there. I used to teach a unit called "New Zealand's Search for Security". In it was a photo that was pretty prominent, actually, in the textbook. It's from 1 January 1962. It's a photograph of the first Prime Minister of Samoa—the current Prime Minister's father—and the New Zealand Prime Minister at the time, Keith Holyoake. They were taking down the trustee flags on that particular day to acknowledge the change.

You know, you look at this photo and you think of all the hope, the aspiration, the change, the good stuff that's about to come, and the sad reality is that there were so many things in history since that time that I think New Zealand as a country should be rather ashamed of—whether it's about the Dawn Raids, whether it's about the various protest movements, the Mau movement, and others, and the sort of notion of events that took place.

My colleague the Rt Hon Adrian Rurawhe is right. When we look at seeking to right those wrongs, it has always been led from the left of this Parliament. When I think about Helen Clark providing the formal apology, when I think about Jacinda Ardern and the process of apology for the horrific nature of the Dawn Raids experience, when I think about our colleague Teanau Tuiono from the left leading this particular bill that will make a huge difference, but, more importantly, it will go down in New Zealand's history as righting a wrong that we should all be ashamed of. It is the left that leads, but it means that everyone in this Parliament is open to join and be collaborative around ensuring that we do the right thing. I commend this bill because it is the right thing to do, and I hope that this bill will continue to go further than it currently does.

TOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty): Thank you, Madam Speaker. Well, I have a serious frog in my throat after listening to 11 superb contributions, so thank you. Talofa lava.

It gives me great pleasure to rise as the final speaker on the Restoring Citizenship Removed By Citizenship (Western Samoa) Act 1982 Bill. Today, we continue the journey to right an historical wrong and strengthen the bonds between New Zealand and Samoa. Firstly, I want to acknowledge our guests in the gallery, the community leaders and members of our Samoan community who have travelled from across New Zealand and the world to witness this legislation being debated in Parliament.

I particularly acknowledge those families who have carried the burden of the 1982 Act, the elders who have waited decades to see this wrong put right. To them, I say fa'afetai tele lava. Thank you for your patience and dignity.

To my parliamentary colleague Teanau Tuiono, who has championed this bill, I want to acknowledge you for bringing this legislation forward. I acknowledge your careful stewardship through the parliamentary process and your commitment to the Samoan community.

When I stood in this House over six months ago during the first reading, I made a commitment. I said then, "When the bill comes to the Governance and Administration Committee, I look forward to further discussions we're going to have on the bill. I look forward to understanding the perspectives that we're going to be hearing on the select committee and the real-world implications that this bill may have for people, and I appreciate the opportunity that those people will have at the select committee with the wider support that has been given across this House." At that time, while the National Party had concerns around the risk of eligibility changes and the lack of consultation with the Government of Samoa, we made it clear we would approach the select committee process ready to listen and learn and prepared to change our minds.

These initial concerns focused particularly on our obligations under the Treaty of Friendship and the potential scope of eligible individuals. On the select committee, learn we did. The testimonies we heard, the stories shared, and the profound impact of the 1982 Act on families and communities became crystal clear through the process. To those in the public gallery and watching at home who submitted and presented to the select committee and made your views clear, thank you. Your courage in sharing your stories, your determination to see justice done, and your unwavering dignity throughout this process has been instrumental in bringing us to where we are today. The journey to this point has been long. In 1982, through an Act of Parliament, countless Samoan individuals were stripped of their Samoan citizenship. Today, we begin the process of restoration.

I do want to outline the precise scope of eligibility under this legislation as amended through the select committee process. The bill specifically provides the right to citizenship for several clearly defined groups: firstly, those who were born in Western Samoa between 13 May 1924 and 1 January 1949 and who were British subjects solely by virtue of that birth; secondly, women who became New Zealand citizens on 1 January 1949 through marriage to such persons; thirdly, descendants of those born in Western Samoa during the period who were themselves born before 1 January 1949 and were British subjects; and, finally, women who became citizens through marriage to such descendants.

One of the most significant changes made through the select committee process was the decision to amend the 1982 legislation rather than repeal it entirely. This was not a decision taken lightly. The majority of select committee members concluded that a full repeal was not necessary and that there were compelling reasons to retain several of the Act's provisions, though I acknowledge that our colleagues from the Green Party and Labour had different views on this matter. This careful approach reflects our deeper understanding of the complexities involved. A complete repeal of the 1982 Act would have the established pathway to New Zealand citizenship that was agreed upon in the 1982 protocol to the Treaty of Friendship between New Zealand and Samoa. Furthermore, such a repeal would have had significant implications for New Zealand's relationship with Samoa, potentially affecting the broader framework of the Treaty of Friendship between our countries.

Instead, the amendment approach we have taken provides a clearer, more straightforward pathway to citizenship restoration while maintaining our international obligations and preserving the important diplomatic frameworks that guide our relationship with Samoa. The amendment demonstrates our commitment to both justice and diplomatic responsibility.

The bill establishes a clear and accessible process for eligible individuals to reclaim their citizenship through several key provisions. It introduces a new section 7A, creating a special category of citizenship restoration that acknowledges the unique circumstances of these individuals. It sets out a transparent application procedure through the Minister of Internal Affairs, ensuring that the process is straightforward and dignified. And it establishes a reasonable application fee of $177, with provisions for partial refunds if applications are withdrawn, making the process accessible while maintaining administrative efficiency.

The amended legislation also maintains important safeguards by applying relevant sections of the Citizenship Act 1977. These include provisions for delegations of powers, requirements for oaths of allegiance, issuance of citizenship certificates, and necessary regulatory frameworks. These safeguards ensure the integrity of our citizenship processes while facilitating restorations of rights.

Through consultation with the Samoan Government during the select committee process, we can be confident that these changes will strengthen, not compromise, our relationship with Samoa. This consultation process has been crucial in ensuring that our actions align with both countries' interests and expectations, particularly in respect to the Treaty of Friendship.

Throughout this process we have witnessed something remarkable: the power of democratic process when guided by compassion and justice. The journey of this bill from its first reading, where it rightly faced some concerns, particularly from the National Party, to today where it enjoys broad cross-party support, demonstrates the importance of genuine consultation and listening.

The select committee process revealed not just the technical aspects of citizenship law that needed addressing but the human stories behind every clause and amendment. We heard from grandchildren who spoke of their grandparents' pain, from community leaders who have worked tirelessly to keep this issue alive, and from those of you directly affected who have waited four decades for change. These testimonies help shape our understanding of what this bill means, not just as a piece of legislation but as a pathway to reconciliation. This bill also serves as a reminder of the special place that our Pacific neighbours hold in New Zealand's heart.

As we move forward with this legislation, we also reaffirm our commitment to being a responsible partner in the Pacific, one that acknowledges past wrongs and works actively to address them. To our Samoan community watching today, this legislation acknowledges your place in the fabric of our nation and reaffirms the special relationship between our two countries. Your stories, your patience, your dignity throughout this process have helped shape this legislation.

This bill represents a significant step forward in addressing historical injustice while strengthening our Pacific partnership. As we move forward together, may this bill serve as a testament to our commitment to justice and to enduring bonds between New Zealand and Samoa. May it remind future generations that it is never too late to right a wrong and that the strength of our nation lies in our willingness to acknowledge past mistakes and work towards a more just future. Fa'afetai tele lava. I commend this bill to the House.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK, so we just have a couple more formalities to take care of. We do look forward to the voices of our wonderful guests in the gallery, but we just have a couple of things to do first.

The question is, That the amendments recommended by the Governance and Administration Committee by majority be agreed to.

Amendments agreed to.

Motion agreed to.

Bill read a second time.

DEPUTY SPEAKER: This bill is set down for committee stage next sitting day. Now, we welcome your singing. Thank you.

Waiata—"Le Atua mamana e", "Ua fa'afetai", "O le fana ta'avili"

DEPUTY SPEAKER: Thank you so much. I'm now going to call the members of the House to order because I know that there's going to be further celebration that is being organised by my Assistant Speaker, Teanau Tuiono."

© Scoop Media