Editorial: It's not speed but closure that's crucial

Opinion

John Key has been swift to stress the importance he places on speeding up the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process. In early January, he reinstated and took the chair of a Cabinet committee dedicated to the settlements, the first time such a committee has existed since Jim Bolger was Prime Minister. On Wednesday, he went a step further, hosting a national hui for iwi negotiating Treaty claims with the Crown. There, he said that more Government money, perhaps $5 million, would be spent on making settlements happen more quickly. It was a bold pledge, given the economic conditions and the fact that many critics of the process are irked not so much by the principle of compensation for past wrongs or the time it is taking as the "gravy train" funding.

The Prime Minister is obviously prepared to wear any criticism if the money helps to achieve the Government's target of settling all historical claims by 2014. The bigger picture, as the Minister of Treaty Negotiations noted this week, is that many people want simply to "move on" as a country. Nonetheless, the goal is highly unlikely to be met. Sixty claims remain to be settled, albeit that half of these are being negotiated. Until the process was accelerated in the last term of the previous Government, a deal was being struck every six months, on average, by the Office of Treaty Settlements.

At Wednesday's hui, Mr Key listed seven proposals to speed up matters, and asked iwi to put their ideas to a follow-up meeting in June. The Government's plans include more use of mediation at an early stage, providing more support and information to iwi, greater use of Crown-funded facilitators, and more transparency around who the Crown intends negotiating with. There is also a proposal to encourage neighbouring groups to enter negotiations together. All are worthwhile ambitions but the last one, in particular, may fall foul of the intricacy of some of the claims.

Overlapping claims are a legacy of the fluid nature of this country's pre-colonial history. They are best settled by the claimants before negotiations with the Crown begin. This may involve a time-consuming inquiry by the Waitangi Tribunal. It makes no sense to try to accelerate that process. Indeed, pressuring iwi to settle without such recourse can lead to them selling themselves short. The upshot will be an enduring grievance and a wish to revisit the matter.

The Government put forward one extra carrot to encourage a quicker settlement of claims. That is the relative cheapness of assets in the present economic climate and the likelihood that they will grow quickly in value in a year or two. Settlement dollars would, therefore, go further. To this can be added the possibility that the Government's wish to speed up matters could lead to a greater readiness to admit Treaty breaches, thereby increasing its liability.

These factors, more than anything, may galvanise the settlement process. If so, the Prime Minister's satisfaction will be widely shared. But, wisely, the Government is not pressing too hard. It has not, for example, imposed a deadline and seems relaxed over the probability that its 2014 target will not be met. The process has proved immune, at worst, and resistant, at best, to most previous efforts to prod it forward. At one time, the National Party wanted to settle all outstanding grievances by 2000. The previous Government, for its part, finally settled on a timetable that took aim at a seemingly realistic 2020.

Whatever the delays, they should be accepted, given that settlements involve matters of recognition, pride and reconciliation as much as money. By all means, the Government should seek greater flexibility and speed. But the bottom line must always be the fullness and finality of the settlements.