Enter your keyword

Treaty

Salient Māori News Items to 20 September 2019

 

  • On Thursday the Te Ture Whenua Māori (Succession, Dispute Resolution, and Related Matters) Amendment Bill was introduced in Parliament. The purpose of this bill is to simplify Māori Land Court processes including the process for Māori land succession. Refer to Pānui edition 24/2019 for background on this bill.
  • This week the Ministry for Culture and Heritage announced that the replica of Captain Cook’s ship the Endeavour will not visit the Mangonui inlet. The visit was removed from the itinerary following complaints regarding the Ministry’s failure to conduct a proper consultation process with Ngāti Kahu iwi. The replica of the Endeavour is touring ports and docks around New Zealand as part of the national commemoration marking 250 years since Captain Cook’s arrival in Aotearoa.
  • Applications are now open for the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment Te Pūnaha Hihiko – Vision Mātauranga Capability Fund 2020. The fund is open to people and organisations undertaking or planning research which supports the themes of the Vision Mātauranga Policy:
    • indigenous innovation,
    • taiao (achieving environmental sustainability),
    • hauora/oranga (improving health and social wellbeing) and,
    • mātauranga (exploring indigenous knowledge).
      The fund value is circa $4 million. Proposals close midday 14 November.
  • The Kiingitanga movement has advised mana whenua that they would like the lands at Ihumātao returned, although they consider that it falls outside of Treaty Settlement processes therefore the Government may need to negotiate with Fletchers to achieve that.
  • This week Dave Samuels commenced his appointment as Chief Executive of Te Puni Kōkiri.
  • On Thursday the first reading of the Ngāti Hinerangi Claims Settlement Bill was completed in Parliament. The bill includes a financial redress of $8.1 million, the return of 14 sites of cultural significance, a cultural revitalisation fund, and five commercial properties. https://www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/ngati-hinerangi/

E32A Māori News week ending 13 September 2019

Parliamentary Matters

  • On Tuesday the Ngāti Hinerangi Claims Settlement Bill was introduced in Parliament. This Bill provides for financial redress of $8.1 million, the return of 14 sites of cultural significance, a cultural revitalisation fund, and five commercial properties.

http://www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/ngati-hinerangi/

  • On Thursday the first reading of Te Pire kia Unuhia te Hara kai Runga i a Rua Kēnana / Rua Kēnana Pardon Bill, was completed in Parliament. This Bill recognises and addresses the crimes against the Tūhoe prophet, Rua Kēnana, and his community of Maungapōhatu. In 1916 Rua was arrested and charged with sedition, and although he was found not guilty, he was still imprisoned for over eighteen months for resisting arrest.  A statutory pardon is being considered.

Appointments and Awards

  • Antoine Coffin (Ngaiterangi, Ngāti Ranginui, Raukawa) has been appointed to the Resource Management Review Panel. The panel will advise Government on the Resource Management Act and matters concerning freshwater, urban environment, waste and hazardous substances.
  • Topia Rameka (Ngāti Tūwharetoa) has been appointed as the inaugural Deputy Chief Executive – Māori for Ara Poutama Aotearoa – Department of Corrections.
  • Hayden Wano (Te Atiawa, Taranaki, Ngāti Awa) has been appointed to and named chair of the Initial Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission.
  • Dr Julie Wharewera-Mika (Ngāti Awa, Ngāi Tuhoe, Te Whānau-a-Apanui) has been appointed a member of the Initial Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission.
  • On Wednesday the Prime Ministers’ Education Excellence Awards were held in Wellington. Award winners included Te Kōhanga Reo ki Rotokawa, Excellence in Teaching and Learning and Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi Marae, 2019 Focus Prize.

General News Items

  • This week Snap Reo, an online micro Te Reo learning programme, was launched. Snap Reo is funded by Te Māngai Pāho.
  • This week the Financial Markets Authority and Institute of Directors published ‘Ngā Mea Waiwai o te Tūranga Whakataka’ a Te Reo version of ‘The Essentials of Being a Director’. The resource is a guidebook for directors, and Traci Haupapa, Chair of the Federation of Māori Authorities (FoMA), notes it shows an increased commitment to diversity and inclusivity from the Authority. https://www.fma.govt.nz/assets/Guidance/IoD-FMA-Director-Essentials-in-Maori.pdf
  • On Tuesday the Government conjointly released ‘Every Life Matters, Suicide Prevention Strategy 2019 – 2029’ and an ‘Action Plan 2019 – 2024’. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and the Minister for Health, Dr David Clark, also announced that a designated Suicide Prevention Office will be established along with the establishment of a Māori Advisory group and Lived Experience group. This is a significant announcement as the Māori suicide rate is 28.2 per 100,000 tangata compared to the New Zealand overall rate of 13.9 per 100,000 people.
  • On Thursday Prime Minister Ardern and Minister Clark also released the draft terms of reference for the Initial Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission. The Commission will provide independent scrutiny of the Government’s progress in improving New Zealand’s mental health and wellbeing, promote collaboration between entities that contribute to mental health and wellbeing, and develop advice and a framework for the permanent Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission.
  • On Thursday Prime Minister Ardern also announced that the National School Curriculum is to be updated to make explicit the expectation of content taught within the New Zealand’s history curriculum. The changes will take effect for all schools and kura, years 1 – 10, in early 2022. Currently the National Curriculum enables schools and kura to decide how New Zealand history is covered. It is expected that the new curriculum will cover the following topics:
    • arrival of Māori to Aotearoa New Zealand;
    • first encounters and early colonial history;
    • Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi and its history;
    • colonisation of, and immigration to, Aotearoa New Zealand, including the New Zealand Wars;
    • evolving national identity of Aotearoa New Zealand in the late 19th and early 20th centuries;
    • Aotearoa New Zealand’s role in the Pacific; and
    • Aotearoa New Zealand in the late 20th century and evolution of a national identity with cultural plurality.
  • This week Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust opened a show home for the trust’s Te Puna Wai Papakāinga Housing Project, in Wainuiomata. Te Puna Wai is a mixed tenure housing development that will be completed over two stages.  The trust has received from Te Puni Kōkiri a $2.6 million investment grant to support infrastructure costs for 23 housing sites, and the construction of 11 kaumātua rental homes. The trust plans to build 80 dwellings in total.
  • This week the Ministry for the Environment commenced a series of public consultation and feedback hui on freshwater issues, productive land, urban environment, waste and hazardous substances management. Consultation for the various issues closes late September to mid-October 2019. Dates and locations for upcoming Māori specific hui are listed in the table below.
Date Location Time Venue
16 September Blenheim 10:30am – 1:30pm Scenic Hotel
17 September Tauranga 9.00am – 12.00pm Hotel Armitage
18 September Greymouth 12.00pm – 3.00pm Ashley Hotel
18 September Whakatāne 9.00am – 12.00pm Manukatutahi Marae
19 September Rotorua 12:00pm – 3:00pm Te Ao Marama
23 September Gisborne 11:30am – 2:30pm Emerald Hotel
24 September Wairoa 10:30am – 1:30pm To be confirmed
24 September Hamilton 11.00am – 2.00pm Hamilton Gardens Pavillion
25 September Napier 1.00pm – 4.00pm East Pier Hotel
25 September Auckland 12:30pm – 3:30pm Potters Park Events Centre
26 September Whangarei 10:30am – 1:30pm To be confirmed
27 September Kaitaia 10:30am – 1:30pm To be confirmed

E30 30 August 2019 Waitangi Tribunal Freshwater Report

Waitangi Tribunal Freshwater Report

Contextual summary

In regard to the Waitangi Tribunal Report on freshwater, while there are many aspects within this inquiry, its genesis comes from a simple question as to who owns water, and then subsequently who can make decisions about it use. e. does the Treaty guarantee freshwater rights to Māori, and do or should Māori have ownership over their traditional bodies of water?

By way of succinct background, these types of questions were first put to the Tribunal in 2012, in a claim lodged by the New Zealand Māori Council and five hapū groups. (This was, in part, prompted by a pre-election announcement from the National Party that if re-elected they would partially sell State energy companies via share floats).  To tackle the claims the Waitangi Tribunal divided its inquiry into two stages, with the first (urgent) stage heard in August that year, which was limited to considering whether the proposed share sales affected any Māori water rights.

During this first hearing the claimants asserted that Māori interests in freshwater existed in 1840 and had never been extinguished.  The Crown – not being able to demonstrate a fair process for the extinguishing of Māori freshwater rights had occurred – instead contended that “no-one owns water”, but that some specific and localised Māori water rights could still exist, if proven.

[By-in-by the Crown also argued that selling parts of State assets was irrelevant to any such future discussions on water ownership.   The New Zealand Māori Council continued to legally challenge that aspect as well, until March 2013, when ultimately the Supreme Court ruled against them on that, closing all legal avenues.  The Supreme Court found partial privatisation “will not impair to a material extent the Crown’s ability to remedy any Treaty breach in respect of Māori interests in water”. ]

However, the Tribunal found the overall Treaty claim itself was genuine, and that Māori “proprietary rights” over bodies of water were assured under the Treaty of Waitangi, with the closest English equivalent in 1840 being “ownership”, and the closest modern-day equivalent being “residual property rights”.   Putting this another way, in 2012 through this hearing, the claimants, the Crown and the Tribunal all agreed that there may still be some Māori proprietary rights in relation to freshwater.  We note the Iwi Leaders Group did not readily engage in the process at that time (they were instead working with the Government to negotiate policy reforms).

In addition, however, the Tribunal also noted that some Māori water rights may have been ceded in legitimate ways since 1840, or through Treaty breaches, or may still be in active existence – but such findings would not be clear until stage two of the inquiry was completed.  So it is these specifics – exactly what water rights might exist – and what breaches might have occurred, which were supposed to be the focus of stage two of the WAI 2358 inquiry.[1]

Out-of-scope Questions

We advise, however, the report released yesterday – i.e. the long-awaited stage two report – does not directly answer the question at hand around any existing Māori proprietary rights over bodies of water, or geothermal energy. Nor does it set out a framework for making such determinations.  Instead, on that central matter at the very end of the report – on page 564 – the Tribunal gives just a couple of sentences advising that determining if Māori residual property rights still exist over freshwater, i.e. native title in common law, is something other Courts should determine.

The Tribunal suggests that because their remit is only to make recommendations, a test case should be brought to another Court to decide the matter. So to that end the Waitangi Tribunal, although stating that they agree there is likely to be some Māori common law water rights, and they think the Crown should recognise some Māori water rights, ultimately decide they are not in the best position to resolve this Crown/Māori dilemma, and that others should sort it out instead.

In our view this is a real let down, as it seems to us the whole purpose of having a Waitangi Tribunal is for Māori to have a means to have grievances heard and then addressed outside of standard Court proceedings. It is because of this sidestep that we rate this report as marginal.  Rather than eight years of time, thousands of pages of submissions, and a 500 page plus report; in our view the Tribunal ought to have just declared that it considered it had no mandate to determine water ownership issues much earlier – and it probably could have done than in a paragraph.

That is, however if the Tribunal genuinely has no mandate. We are somewhat sceptical on that point, as although the rationale that “our (Waitangi Tribunal) jurisdiction is recommendations only” is correct, that outcome restriction does not constrain findings from being made – and further, we note it has not previously prohibited the Tribunal from determining taonga / ownership status.  For example, the Tribunal formed a view on radio wave status in an earlier report (finding Māori interests existed).  Because of this the Tribunal has not convinced us that it could not form more solid findings on ownership interests of freshwater, leading us to conclude that a review of the operations and legislative settings for this Tribunal may now be required.

Notwithstanding the above, our review (attached) summarises what the Tribunal has decided it can comment on at this time – essentially two items:  the Resource Management Act (RMA) as it relates to freshwater, and second Government policy reforms centred on freshwater – including the quality of engagements with Māori, between 2002 and 2017.

Also note after a submission from the Crown, in 2016 the Tribunal decided to remove geothermal energy considerations from this second stage inquiry and to deal with that later. However, no details on when or what have been released by the Tribunal to follow-up on that decision regarding geothermal resources.

[By-in-by, one of the reasons the Tribunal’s report is so long is that despite being a contemporary report it contains a bunch of historical research on past legislative settings relating to freshwater.  This is useful for those interested in the background of this matter.  In our view, the nub of it all seems to be that prior to the 1991 Resource Management Act (which the Tribunal focuses on), there was a 1967 Water and Soil Conservation Act, in which Parliament gave the Government “the sole right to dam any river or stream, or to divert or to take natural water, or to discharge natural water or waste into any natural water, or to use natural water” (underlining added).[2] Prior to that law, English common law was arguably solely in effect over New Zealand waterways.  However,  it is possible/likely neither the 1967 Water and Soil Conservation Act, nor the 1991 Resource Management Act actually extinguished any existing common law rights – rather these newer laws are said to be regulatory in nature – i.e. setting out the rules relating to water use (namely that the Government can decide usage) – but not actually extinguishing ownership rights or changing titles.

 This Tribunal report appears to suggest that understanding is a position held by claimants, but also largely accepted by the Crown as well.  If correct, this viewpoint supports the notion that seeking native title via other courts might be something worth pursuing for some hapū and iwi groups.  But we surmise all iwi/hapū groups would individually need to prove native title / ownership, and that could be hard for many, particularly given associated land alienation that has occurred.]

The Findings and Recommendations of The Tribunal

The Tribunal finds the RMA, including its development and current administration, is non-compliant with the Treaty of Waitangi in at least four ways.  This includes that the RMA:

  • has weak Treaty of Waitangi provisions;
  • does not sufficiently provide for Māori tino rangatiratanga or kaitiakitanga over bodies of water which are taonga to particular iwi and hapū;
  • was developed exclusive to Māori, meaning Māori are (wrongly) treated as ‘new entrants’ when seeking water rights for their endeavours; and
  • has allowed for serious degradation of water quality to occur, despite Māori concerns.

Regarding policy developments, the Tribunal does note some positive efforts to work with iwi/Māori from the Crown, but that outcomes have been thwarted, often by Crown slowness, and by a prevalent ideology that ‘no one owns’ water. For these types of reasons, the Tribunal is of the view that multiple Treaty of Waitangi breaches have occurred, and that these are not just limited to Māori having kaitiaki interests, but also equitable access to water for economic purposes as well.

The proposed remedy is centred on co-governance. For this report co-governance means an actual entity of some sort.  Other recommendations centre on better monitoring of local councils and the like, more funding for Māori participation in this area, and more enabling regulations to ensure Māori voice is strengthened at all stages in water management processes.

Discussion

As noted above our review finds, despite the length of this report, it is only partially effective in identifying issues and providing analysis on key matters at hand. Clearly the Waitangi Tribunal is more comfortable discussing regulatory and policy shortcomings against a list of Treaty of Waitangi principles, than discussing tougher issues such as proprietary rights.  We note this policy/regulatory approach is consistent with other recent Tribunal reports – in areas such as Corrections and Health – but we question its usefulness for a natural resource such as freshwater.[3]  In our assessment, the Tribunal has largely missed an opportunity to make clearer findings on rights and interests, and has instead taken an easier road in finding fault with policy.

This approach matters not just because it downplays the core ‘ownership’ challenge, but also because it gives limited consideration to whether regulatory matters are improving. e. in this report the Tribunal finds that current policy settings are in breach of their expectations around Treaty partnership, and therefore the Crown must provide redress.   But for policy considerations the question arises, in terms of Treaty of Waitangi compliance, whether the current water management reforms – which include a Māori/iwi developed Mana o Te Wai framework for freshwater – are better than the Resource Management Act of 1991 (which had a Treaty framework); and was that in turn better than the 1967 Water and Soil Conservation Act, which had no Māori or Treaty referencing? The issue being that if the Treaty is considered to be a living partnership, and Government policy is also continually evolving, then the possibility of the Crown breaching at least the edges of that partnership likely exists in perpetuity.  So how much gain, how much change is occurring, and at what pace, are central questions which matter in terms of Crown responsiveness to Treaty of Waitangi principles within policy frameworks.  However, this type of analysis presents as being outside of the Tribunal’s binary (Treaty compliant or not) framework.  In our view, over the long haul, it would seem to us that Māori representation in water management issues has improved since 1967, but remains largely on the fringes of management decision-making arrangements; and Māori remain entirely locked out of ‘ownership’ type decisions.  Perhaps then the Crown is improving its level of compliance with Treaty expectations but has not yet met a minimum threshold satisfactory to the Tribunal in regard to freshwater.  It would have been useful for the Tribunal to clarify such matters.

We also note the report has significant drift into historic and scientific matters. For example, in their summary chapter one finding of the Tribunal is that, “the nitrate toxicity bottom line would still allow impacts on 20 per cent of aquatic species, and the direction that had been added on nutrient enrichment was acknowledged as incomplete (with further work planned)”.  We don’t question the science, but question whether the Tribunal has lost its way a little in devolving into such areas and debates on operational policy settings of this nature.  We think the point is that the current regulatory settings have not sufficiently protected water quality in accordance with Treaty of Waitangi expectations – i.e. it’s not safe for Māori (and others) to drink from, or even sometimes swim in, their tribal rivers and lakes.  Perhaps, at best a compendium report ought to have been prepared for these more technical findings.

In regard to the key recommendation for co-governance, the Tribunal report mulls over the different views of the claimants (such as the New Zealand Māori Council), and Iwi Leaders Group (as interested parties) as to what might be best. The Māori Council maintained that a Water Commission is required, and that it be a 50:50 partnership between Māori and the Crown, setting out how allocation rights could work.  Iwi, who were silent in the 2012 first stage, now make the point there does need to be some form of allocation or royalty scheme for sure, and yes co-governance is part of that, but that any such framework should occur within the context of existing iwi authorities in relation to their respective water catchment areas (i.e. not so much a single settlement nor a pan-Māori grouping setting allocations for iwi).

Following these submissions the Tribunal recommends an independent Water Commission; but then appears to get lost trying to back the differing views of the New Zealand Māori Council and the Iwi Leaders Group; meaning although the Tribunal is clear a co-governance entity of some sort is needed, and some allocation framework is needed to give Māori water rights – beyond that just quite what functions any such Commission should have is not clear. Hence the unenlightening statement in conclusion:

“we recommend a number of paths and mechanisms for co-governance and co-management which, severally or combined, will enable iwi and hapū to arrive at the most appropriate arrangement for their particular rohe and for each of their water bodies.”

On balance, we consider this cart before horse approach is tilted more towards the requests of the Iwi Leaders Group, which may be a little disappointing for some claimants, given the lack of initial support for this claim from iwi groups.

Last, we note the recommendation that all policy should be co-designed by Māori ‘from now on’, ‘where Māori interests are concerned’. Overall, we cannot think of any policy sector where Māori interests do not exist, so in effect the Tribunal is saying ‘co-design’ with Māori across all areas of public policy is their expectation for a new normal.  That of course will be a tough challenge for governments to maintain, meaning future claims in any sector will be able to use that as a measure for Treaty compliance.  Again, this leads to the view that the future role of the Tribunal will be to undertake Treaty-compliant (or not) evaluations of Government policies, like a watch-dog commission, rather than positioning itself to adjudicate on bigger picture matters of rights and ownership.

[1] And associated claims.

[2] Some provisions for existing landowners were retained in this Act, to ensure they had water for themselves, their livestock and for firefighting.  I.e. existing usage was maintained.

[3] Refer to Pānui editions 12/2017 for Corrections and 24/2019 for Health.

 

Title: The Stage 2 Report On The National Freshwater And Geothermal Resources Claims (WAI 2358)
Publisher & Date: Waitangi Tribunal: August 2019
Type of Document: Waitangi Tribunal Report
Length, style: 565 pages, academic, technical.  Difficult reading in places.
Recommended readership: This report has implications for all, however it has low accessibility due to its length and style.  We consider it is filled with barely relevant historical and scientific research and would recommend chapter 7 (summary of findings and recommendations) and the opening Ministerial letter as initial readings.[1]
Content summary: The first chapter of this report set out the scope of the inquiry and Treaty principles to be considered.  Chapters two to six provide an analysis of current legal settings (the Resource Management Act (RMA), and Government policy work from (2002 to 2017).  The Act and the policy work are tested for Treaty of Waitangi ‘compliance’.  Chapter seven provides a summary (sic) of findings and recommendations.

Overall, the Tribunal finds that the present law is not consistent with the Treaty of Waitangi.  Regarding the RMA the Tribunal finds that:

·         the Treaty-based section (section 8) is weak, and Māori interests have not been fairly balanced or represented in decision-making processes under the Act (breaching Treaty partnership);

·         it does not provide adequately for ‘tino rangatiratanga’ and the kaitakitanga of iwi and hapū over their freshwater taonga (note implied here is that freshwater can be a Treaty taonga);

·         when the Act was developed the Crown refused to recognise Māori proprietary rights, and the Act still does not provide for such rights (meaning Māori are legally seen as ‘new entrants’ when applying for water usage rights, breaching Treaty equity);

·         the Act has allowed for the serious degradation of water quality to occur in many ‘ancestral’ water-bodies (breaching Treaty active protection).

Regarding policy settings the Tribunal notes some positive types of engagement between the Crown and Māori, but that Crown bottom lines (such as ‘no one owns water’) meant Treaty-based outcomes could not be achieved.   They also note gaps in policy frameworks, such as no compulsory Māori values or monitoring in policy frameworks.

To remedy all this the Tribunal suggests, amongst other items:

·         the Crown now recognise Māori proprietary rights over freshwater and provide redress;

·         a national co-governance body between Māori and the Crown for freshwater management; which would arrange an allocation scheme for iwi and hapū (thus allowing for economic gain to be shared with Māori);

·         the Crown provide resourcing for Māori to participate in RMA processes equally (and continue to fund initiatives such as ‘Te Mana o te Wai’;

·         the Crown institute monitoring of councils in regard to Treaty compliance;

·         the Crown ought to act faster to protect taonga water bodies;

·         the Crown look to determine whether existing Treaty settlements maintain fairness across iwi groups in relation to water management, and ensure rights gained by some iwi are ‘made available more generally’.

Quality rating:[2] Marginal
Assessment Rationale: We consider this report to be of marginal quality as it is only partially effective in identifying issues and providing analysis of matters at hand.  This comment relates in particular to the lack of engagement on the core issue of proprietary rights – with the Tribunal clearly being more comfortable discussing regulatory settings.

Further, we consider many aspects of this report drift too far into historical or scientific debate, obscuring the actual points of focus.

In our assessment the co-governance recommendation is also not sufficiently explained.[3]   That is, what is to be co-governed remains murky water.

Recommendations: a.     The Tribunal should write a summary report on the key issues, findings and recommendations made.

b.     The Tribunal should provide clear details on how and when it will address geothermal energy matters.

c.     Crown and Māori (perhaps in partnership) should review whether the Tribunal has usefully fulfilled its function in relation to freshwater claims, and whether a review of its terms of reference / legislative settings for this Tribunal is required.

Extracts of Note: “In our view, the present law in respect of fresh water is not consistent with Treaty principles.” Page xx.

“The co-design of policy and reform options was an import innovation which we think should become a standard part of Government policy making from now on”. Page xx.

“Our view is that the Crown must now recognise Māori propriety rights and provide what the New Zealand Māori Council called ‘proprietary redress’. We recommend that the Crown arrange for an allocation on a percentage basis to iwi and hapū, according to a regional catchment scheme. We also recommend an allocation for Māori land development, and that the feasibility of royalties and other forms of proprietary redress be investigated” Page xxiv

Hyperlink: https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/WT/wt_DOC_152208791/Freshwater%20W.pdf

[1] Our review notes are also based mainly on Chapter 7 and the Ministerial summary letter.

[2] Refer to the rubrics table in the endnotes for quality ratings.

[3] Further comment on our assessment of this report is provided in the Pānui summary section.

E24 Salient Māori News Week ending 19 July 2019

  • The Ministry of Health has now released provisional annual suicide figures for 2016. Their information shows there were 553 confirmed suicides.  This included 135 Māori suicides, of which two-thirds were Māori males.  The Māori suicide rate was then, in 2016, 20.3 per 100,000 tangata.  This is much higher than other ethnic groups, as the New Zealand overall suicide rate is 11.5 per 100,000 people.  However, why the Ministry of Health releases its data so late is unclear – the Ministry of Justice has already released provisional annual suicide figures for 2018.  Unfortunately, that shows a rise to 142 Māori suicides, with the rate being 23 per 100,000 tangata.  The Māori suicide rate is circa 40 percent higher than a decade ago – and shows a demand for improved mental health services and support, and in general terms supports the Tribunal’s view that the health sector is underserving Māori.
  • In June Statistics New Zealand published data tables from the 2018 New Zealand General Social Survey (NZGSS).[1]  We will provide a further analysis next week, but positively we note it shows 77 percent of Māori have high life satisfaction, and 75 percent rate their whānau wellbeing as high, despite only 50 percent stating they have enough money to meet their everyday basic needs.
  • Last weekend Te Pou Matakana hosted a hui to discuss Māori child wellbeing, and specifically Māori child ‘uplifts’ by Oranga Tamariki. Te Pou Matakana has determined to hold its own inquiry into this area – which makes it the fourth inquiry announced within a few weeks on this topic – but the first inquiry by and for Māori.    Te Pou Matakana will hold four wananga to identify key themes to inform their inquiry.  Pānui 21/2019 discusses Oranga Tamariki and child uplift matters in depth.
  • Earlier this month the Minister for Women, Julie Anne Genter, announced $6.2 million will be allocated to progress the Crown’s engagement with the Waitangi Tribunal’s Mana Wāhine Treaty of Waitangi Claim (WAI 2700). By way of background, the Mana Wāhine Inquiry derives from statements of claims made in a number of individual iwi/hapū claims, and from a specific claim lodged in 1993, (WAI 381), on behalf of the Māori Women’s Welfare League and all Māori women.  Amongst other matters the claimants allege that, “Māori women individually, as tribal members, family members and leaders have been systematically deprived of their spiritual, cultural, social and economic well-being by Crown actions and policies in breach of Articles II and III of the Treaty of Waitangi; and that The Crown has not fulfilled its obligations ‘to protect and ensure the rangatiratanga of Māori women…”
  • The Office of Māori Crown Relations –/Te Arawhiti has launched Te Haeata, an online tool for entities with Treaty settlement responsibilities such as post-settlement entities, Crown entities, local and regional government and other relevant organisations. tehaeata.govt.nz
  • The Kaingaroa Forest Village has been awarded $2.4 million from the Māori Housing Network Community Development programme for the development of housing for the Kaingaroa community.
  • Last week a group of Taranaki Whānui members, who call their grouping ‘Mau Whenua’ filed legal proceedings against the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust relating to the Trust’s selling of iwi land in Shelly Bay, Wellington. The trust proceeded with the sale despite objections from these iwi members.

[By way of background, this large parcel of land was returned to the iwi as commercial redress in its 2009 Treaty settlement (i.e. brought by the iwi).  However, as a pricey commercial asset, it made a poor financial return each year, as it only received income from low-end rentals of old buildings and the like.  This situation has undoubtedly been a significant contributing factor to the iwi losing millions of dollars since their settlement.  To address this, in 2016 trustees sought a mandate to sell some of the land for housing development – but that was voted down.  That is because many iwi members do not see the land as a commercial asset at all – rather as cultural redress and their heritage which should be retained for future generations.  (Note the vote was 51% in favour of sale, but 75% support was needed for a major commercial transaction.)  However, under the current leadership of Chair, Wayne Mulligan, the sales and property development imperative has moved forward, but this time as discrete smaller parcels of land – thus avoiding any need for further iwi voting on the matter.  So, the core issue at hand for iwi members who oppose this is whether the four smaller land transactions undertaken by the Trust have effectively circumvented the will of beneficiaries to retain the land, and resulted in unlawful sales.  Adding to this is concern about allegedly low prices received for the land – said to be circa $2 million per block – when the iwi’s purchasing price was circa $13 million.

 

[1] The NZGSS is a biennial survey which provides information on the well-being of New Zealanders aged 15 years and over. The survey covers a wide range of social and economic outcomes across different groups across the population.

 

E13 26 April 2019 Salient News Items

 

  • Briar Grace-Smith (Ngāpuhi) has been appointed to the Arts Council of New Zealand Toi Aotearoa (Creative NZ).
  • Shaun Awatere (Ngāti Porou) has been appointed to the National Climate Change Risk Assessment panel. The panel is tasked with creating the framework for New Zealand’s first National Climate Change Risk Assessment. The framework is to be completed by the end of June.
  • Acushla Dee Sciascia (Ngāruahine Rangi, Ngāti Ruanui and Te Āti Awa) has been appointed to the National Climate Change Risk Assessment panel.
  • Niwa Nuri (Te Arawa and Te Whakatohea), Matt Te Pou (Ngāi Tuhoe), and Bonita Bigham (Ngā Ruahine and Te Atiawa) have been appointed to the Lottery Oranga Marae Committee. 
  • The Ministry of Health released maternity data for 2017. The report shows 14,892 (25%) were Māori; and that Māori women continue to have the nation’s highest birth rate of 90.6 per 1,000 Māori females of reproductive age[1]https://www.health.govt.nz/publication/report-maternity-2017
  • The Government has announced increased independent monitoring of Oranga Tamariki, via the use of the Ombudsman, and the upcoming introduction of National Care Standards. These actions are to better protect children in State care, most of whom are Māori. https://www.orangatamariki.govt.nz/news/care-standards-support-tamariki-and-caregivers/#_blank
  • Te Puni Kōkiri has awarded the Taumarunui Community Kōkiri Trust $2.1 million from the Whānau and Community Development Investment programme. The funding will go towards the cost of repairing up to 20 homes, the development and implementation of home maintenance programmes and supporting whānau into home ownership across the Taumarunui and Te Kuiti rohe.
  • This week Des Ratima lodged an urgent application with the Waitangi Tribunal, (Wai 2882), concerning the proposed reform of the vocational education sector. (In brief these reforms propose merging all polytechnics and industry training organisations in one new entity, to commence from next year.) Mr Ratima is a current board member of Skills Active Aotearoa, which is one of the industry training organisations that would be disestablished if the reforms go ahead.  Mr Ratima claims that the Crown has breached the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in how it has consulted about the reforms, and that the reforms may result in poorer outcomes for Māori trainees.
  • Last week Pae Aronui, a skills and employment programme for rangatahi Māori, was launched in Hamilton. Pae Aronui aims to support and develop employment skills for rangatahi not in employment, education or training (NEET).
  • This week the Associate Minister of Education Kelvin Davis announced in 2020 Te Tai Tokerau will pilot Te Kawa Matakura an education programme which aims to develop young Māori leaders through mātauranga and te reo Māori. The pilot will target two groups 15-18 year olds attending formal education; and 15-25 year olds no longer attend formal education but display the necessary qualities and potential. All participates will be required to be endorsed by iwi and whānau.

[1] Median age for Māori women who give birth was 26 years compared to 30 years for all women.

 

Māori Media Items of Interest week ending 29 March 2019

  • On Tuesday the Minister for Māori Development, Nanaia Mahuta, announced that the Lemuel Te Urupu Whānau Trust of Raupunga will receive investment funding of $1.2 million to construct five papakāinga houses.
  • This week hearings for the Wai 2660 Marine and Coastal Area Act  Inquiry were held in Wellington. This Inquiry addresses two main questions:
    • To what extent, if at all, are the MACA Act and Crown policy and practice inconsistent with the Treaty in protecting the ability of Māori holders of customary marine and coastal area rights to assert and exercise those rights? And;
    • Do the procedural arrangements and resources provided by the Crown under the MACA Act prejudicially affect Māori holders of customary marine and coastal area rights in Treaty terms when they seek recognition of their rights?
  • Ngāi Tahu Property, Queenstown Lakes District Council and KiwiBuild have partnered to build a community of 300+ homes in Queenstown. The first homes are expected to be completed in 2022.
  • On Thursday the Hastings District Council (HDC) voted ten to four in favour of appointing non-elected members of its Māori Joint Committee to the council’s other standing committees. The appointees will have full voting rights.
  • Kristy Maria Roa, (Ngāti Maniapoto, Ngāti Apakura), Tumoanakotore-i-Whakairioratia Harrison-Boyd, (Ngati Porou) and Taane-nui-a-Rangi Rotoatara Hubbard (Ngāti Kahungunu, Ngāti Pahauwera, Tainui, Ngāti Pakapaka, Ngāi Tahu, Ngāi Tūhoe) have been named finalist for the 2019 Ahuwhenua Young Māori Farmer Award. The winner will be announced on 24 May.

Salient Māori News Items for the Week to 1 March 2019

  • Last week the biennial Te Matatini competition was held in Te Whānganui-a-Tara (Wellington). The winners were Ngā Tūmanako.  Te Pikikōtuku o Ngāti Rongomai gained second place, and Te Kapa Haka o Te Whānau a Apanui gained third place.
  • This week Te Puni Kōkiri belatedly released the Cabinet paper associated with the new Government Māori Language Strategy (Pānui 5/2019 refers). In the main the paper confirms Cabinet commitment to the strategy, and we note a couple of points of interest:
    • An implementation plan is being developed: it is linked to a Budget bid this year, with a goal being to get Cabinet support for the operational activities in August. This is good, as the strategy needs resourcing to have any real impact, as per our earlier review comments.
    • The Minister notes there was a campaign against the strategy via the online consultation: ultimately 45% of the 2,000- odd submissions were negative. In our view this reinforces our observation that online consultation alone is an inappropriate means to gather Māori (and other) input – hui should have been held.  We note the same operational error is now occurring for the Māori media review, which has no public hui scheduled. (Pānui 4/2019 refers).
  • On Monday the Wellington District Court imposed fines totalling circa $1.1 million on the Directors of Hawkes Bay Seafoods, the company itself, plus a related company and key staff. The directors were Antonino “Nino” Giovanni D’Esposito, Giancarlo “Joe” Harold D’Esposito and manager Marcus Giuseppe D’Esposito. In addition, the company must pay more than $400,000 for the return of its forfeited vessels.
    By way of background the offending was identified in 2014, and after years of defensive wrangling, the grouping finally pleaded guilty in 2018 to 131 charges for selling unreported catch.   We further advise that the key proprietor of Hawkes Bay Seafoods, Antonio D’Esposito, already had at least 98 fishing convictions – which shows a history of ongoing offending in this sector.  (In 1997, he/his company was also required to pay nearly a million dollars in fines for fishing offences.)
    This present case matters for Māori because Hawkes Bay Seafoods is the inshore fishing quota leasee for Ngāti Kahungunu – i.e. it catches the inshore settlement quota of the iwi (and for some other iwi).   That is, its business is based on a significant Crown / Māori Treaty of Waitangi settlement; and in our view its misuse tarnishes the Treaty settlement process.  Put simply, why should/would the Crown provide ongoing settlement redress via quota if fishing rights allocated to iwi are going to be misused and put fish stocks at risk?
    Further, although the proceedings against this group commenced in 2014,  there were other investigations involving Hawkes Bay Seafoods in 2015 relating to people (staff) involved in a paua and crayfish black market.  However, Ngāti Kahungunu has stoically continued its partnership with this company and never openly condemned Hawkes Bay Seafoods for its illegal fishing practices.  Rather, in 2017 Ngāti Kahungunu extended the partnership with a joint venture in purchasing an off-shore fishing boat in a 50:50 arrangement with Hawkes Bay Seafoods (again to fish the iwi Treaty settlement quota).   In our assessment, despite the seriousness of the fishing offending by Hawkes Bay Seafoods, Ngāti Kahungunu presents as having been undeterred in its business dealings with the company.
    However, following the outcome of this most recent case, Ngāti Kahungunu has now expressed a desire to purchase outright Hawkes Bay Seafoods, and is actively taking steps to achieve that.  That may be a positive outcome for the iwi – and if successful it may mean that Ngāti Kahungunu is fishing its own quota, and then also processing and selling those fish itself (plus employing iwi members along each link in the chain).  However, there is some suggestion in the media that Antonino D’Esposito desires to continue on as a consulting advisor.  If so it is difficult to see the value in that; as given the convictions it is possible further association with him would tarnish the fishing brand (‘Takitimu’) that Ngāti Kahungunu is seeking to establish to recover the situation.
    Note for absolutely clarity there is no suggestion that Ngāti Kahungunu has ever been involved in any type of illegal fishing practices.   The convicted offending discussed herein relates to a company that the iwi has a partnership relationship with.
  • The Government’s Welfare Expert Advisory Group has now reportedly submitted their advice to Government.  We note the terms of reference for this group (set last June) was somewhat vague, with its role being to ‘provide advice to the Government on options that could best give effect to its vision for the future direction of the social welfare system’.  Notwithstanding, the Minister for Social Development, Carmel Sepuloni, has referred to this work as an ‘overhaul of the welfare system’.  Accordingly, we expect the report to have significant implications for Māori, particularly for the 109,000 tangata Māori – and their whānau members – who are reliant on one of the three main benefits.[1]  Minister Sepuloni has indicated the report will be released publicly later this month, or in early April.   We will advise further at that time.
  • Statistics NZ has released its working document on how to measure child poverty; Measuring child poverty: Concepts and definitions’. By way of background, the Government’s Child Poverty Reduction Act was in introduced in 2018 to help reduce child poverty in New Zealand – Pānui 8/2018 outlines this policy shift. The new Act now requires Government to set three-year and ten-year targets on four primary measures, and for the Government Statistician to report annually on ten measures of child poverty.  The working paper sets out the technical approaches to be used.  In addition, three further supporting papers explaining the rationales for statistical and data choices have been released.  We have undertaken a summary review of these papers and found nothing untoward: i.e. the measures being used are appropriate, and present as thoughtfully designed.  Māori child poverty information is expected to be presented through this work as well – which in part is a result of submissions made by Māori for this to be included.  We will advise further once the first data sets are released.  The working documentation is available here:  https://www.stats.govt.nz/methods/measuring-child-poverty-concepts-and-definitions
  • The Labour Party has declined an application from John Tamihere to re-join the party. Mr Tamihere is a former Cabinet Minister, and amongst other portfolios was an Associate Minister of Māori Affairs (2002-2004).  Mr Tamihere advises the Party’s council gave no reason for the decline, and indicates that the process presents as unfair, because there was no discussion on why he was declined, nor is there any right of appeal.  Mr Tamihere has noted that this action is likely to be because he has announced his intention to seek the role of Auckland Mayor in upcoming elections, although previously the Labour Party endorsed the current Mayor, Phil Goff.   (Mr Goff will announce shortly whether he intends to stand for re-election.)   The Labour Party’s constitution allows the Party to only endorse one candidate for the mayoralty – meaning if Mr Tamihere had been accepted as a member he could have sought that endorsement ahead of Mr Goff.
  • Last Friday the Minister of Agriculture, Damien O´Connor, announced the 2019 Ahuwhenua Trophy finalists for Māori sheep and beef farming. The finalists are: Whangara Farms (Gisborne); Te Awahohonu Forest Trust / Gwavas Station (Hawkes Bay); and Kiriroa Station (Gisborne).  The winner will be announced on 24 May at the 2019 Ahuwhenua Awards ceremony, to be held in Gisborne.
  • Last Friday the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Andrew Little, announced the Crown’s response to the voting results for the Whakatōhea Settlement Process. In our view the response is essentially to proceed slowly with caution, and to check with officials whether any negotiations can carry on safely and or appropriately now; possibly concurrently with a Waitangi Tribunal hearing.
    By way of background, the mandate of Whakatōhea Pre-settlement Claims Trust to settle historic claims was tested via urgent Waitangi Tribunal hearing claims in 2017.  The Tribunal’s primary finding was that the Crown prioritised its objective of concluding Treaty settlements over a process that was fair to Whakatōhea. The Tribunal found the decision to recognise the Pre-settlement Trust mandate was therefore not fair, reasonable, or made in good faith, and breaches the Treaty principle of partnership.
    To resolve this, in October 2018 Whakatōhea iwi members were asked to vote on the following: 1) continuing with the Whakatōhea Pre-Settlement Claim Trust as their treaty settlement entity; 2a) stop current Treaty negotiations in order that a mandate process be re-run from the start?  And 2b) stop current Treaty negotiations in order that the Waitangi Tribunal can carry out an inquiry into the historical grievances of Whakatōhea?
    The results that came out in November 2018 show a small majority (56%) of iwi voted to continue negotiations with the Crown via the existing entity, but conversely a large majority (73%) voted to also stop negotiations until the Waitangi Tribunal can carry out an inquiry.  It is this somewhat contradictory outcome that Minister Little is seeking to address i.e. carrying on working with the current settlement entity, but not getting ahead / or out of step with Tribunal processes that iwi members have stated they desire to occur first.

 

[1] Namely, jobseeker support (i.e. unemployment), sole parent support, and supported living.

Salient Māori News Items for the Week to 22 February 2019

 

  • Last Friday the Minister for Land Information, Eugenie Sage, announced her decision that Tūranganui-a-Kiwa / Poverty Bay was now the official name for what was formally called – in legal contexts – Poverty Bay.
  • Last week the Minister of Employment, Willie Jackson, with the Minister of Conservation, Eugenie Sage, announced the launch of ‘Ka Hao te Rangatahi’. This is a new training programme based in Ruatoria, focused on developing conservation skills and erosion management for youth who are not in employment, education or training.
  • A Waitangi Tribunal hearing commenced this week concerning Wai 2573, which is ‘the Mana Ahuriri Deed of Settlement (Ngāti Pārau) claim’. Ngāti Pārau claimants are challenging the mandate of the Mana Ahuriri post settlement governance entity, on the basis that due processes were not followed in the enacting of this settlement.
  • Last Friday Ngāti Paoa negotiators signed the Hauraki Collective deed of settlement – despite opposition from within the Ngāti Paoa Iwi Trust. This means six of the twelve Hauraki iwi have now agreed to the collective deed of settlement. (The Pare Hauraki Collective redress includes a settlement worth circa $250 million in total, the return of two Maunga Moehau and Te Aroha, along with 25,000 hectares of commercial forests. The collective consists of twelve Hauraki iwi: Hako; Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki; Ngāti Hei; Ngāti Maru; Ngāti Paoa; Ngāti Porou ki Hauraki; Ngāti Pūkenga; Ngāti Rāhiri Tumutumu; Ngāti Tamaterā; Ngāti Tara Tokanui; Ngaati Whanaunga; and Te Patukirikiri.    There has been significant opposition to various aspects of this broader settlement process, including from Ngāi Te Rangi iwi members who are opposed to Hauraki iwi being represented on a Tauranga Moana governance group, and from Ngāti Whātua who opposed Ngāti Paoa being offered property in central Auckland.)

E43 7 December 2018: Maori News Items

  • Last Saturday the Otamataha Trust received an apology from the New Zealand Church Missionary Society for historical grievances against Ngāti Tapu and Ngai Tamarāwaho. By way of background, in 2014 The New Zealand Mission Trust Board (Otamataha) Empowering Act was passed. This Act transferred land in Tauranga and some other property from the New Zealand Mission Trust Board to the Otamataha Trust. The New Zealand Mission Trust Board had held parcels of land in trust since 1896, (land which had previously been acquired by the Anglican Church Mission Society from Māori owners in 1838). The beneficiaries of the Otamataha Trust are the hapū of Ngāti Tapu and Ngai Tamarāwaho, and their members (i.e. descendants of the original Māori land owners).
  • On Monday the Court of Appeal in Wellington ruled in favour of the Enterprise Miramar Peninsula Incorporated group and quashed the resource consent granted to the Wellington Company by the Wellington City Council for a major housing and commercial development at Shelly Bay. The Port Nicholson Settlement Trust has been working in partnership with the Wellington Company and part of the development was to be built on the Trust’s land. In August a group of Taranaki Whānui members, called Mau Whenua, protested the proposed development. The group were seeking a public inquiry into deals done between the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Wellington Company.  The group believe the development is not in the best interests of the iwi, and that the trustees may have breached a clause within their trust deed requiring 75% iwi consent for a major transaction.  The Court of Appeal ruling means a new resource consent process is required (and the Court advises the City Council may need to use an independent person for this).  This action will likely please those members of the iwi who are against the development.   We also note the annual accounts for this iwi are not available for public viewing this year.
  • On Tuesday the Canterbury Regional Council (Ngāi Tahu Representation) Bill was introduced in Parliament. If passed into law this bill will empower Te Rūnganga o Ngāi Tahu (TRoNT) to appoint up to 2 members to the Canterbury Regional Council, after the 2019 local body elections.
  • This week mainstream media has been reporting on the Nelson Christmas Parade (held last Sunday) which had for the first time a non-traditionally dressed Santa. Instead Santa was Māori, without a beard and dressed in a short-sleeved shirt, and red korowai. The Māori Santa also held a large hei matu (fish hook) designed sceptre. Public opinion on the Māori Santa has been mixed.
  • This week the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) held public consultation regarding a proposal to sell up to 45% of the Port of Napier (currently the port is wholly owned by the Council’s investment company). Local Hawke’s Bay iwi, Ngāti Pahauwera, has noted that given much of the land for the port was taken from Māori under the Napier Harbour Board Act, the iwi seeks access to the shares at a reduced rate from the council.   The regional council (so far) has not expressed interest in negotiating on this matter with Ngāti Pahauwera.
  • Today the report by the Tomorrow’s Schools Independent Taskforce was published. We will review this report entitled Our Schooling Futures: Stronger Together Whiria Ngā Kura Tūātinitini in our next edition of Pānui E44 14 December 2018.

Salient Māori News Items for the Week ending 30 November 2018

  • Ruakere Hond (Taranaki, Te Ātiawa), Prue Kapua (Te Arawa) and Kim Ngarimu (Ngāti Porou) have been appointed as members of the Waitangi Tribunal.
  • Te Paea Paringatai (Waikato and Ngāti Porou) has been appointed a member of the Library and Information Advisory Commission.
  • The Ngā Tohu Reo Māori 2018 (National Māori Language Awards 2018) were held last week. The winners were:
    • Iwi Award – Muriwai Jones;
    • Whānau Award – Oti te Nanekoti by Te Tāhuhu o Te Mātauranga;
    • Rangatahi Award – Māori Television Giphy Channel by Fly;
    • Takitahi Award – Mike Hollings (Ngāti Raukawa and Te Atihaunui-a-Paparangi);
    • Mātauranga Kaupapa Māori Education Award – Taringa Punua Pāoho by Te Wānanga o Aotearoa;
    • Mātauranga Whānui Education Award – Mahuru Māori – Fortnite by Te Wānanga o Aotearoa;
    • Kāwanatanga Award – Te Amorangi ki mua, Te Hāpai Ō ki muri by Rotorua Lakes Council
    • Pakihi Award – Te Mātāpuna by Fonterra;
    • Te Mahi Toi, Te Mahi Whakangahau Award – Oti te Nanekoti by Te Tāhuhu o Te Mātauranga;
    • Ngā Mahi Pāpāho Award – Sky TV, Tiki Towns;
    • Ngā Hapori Māori Award – Dr Te Taku Parai (Ngāti Toa);
    • Aotearoatanga Award – Kōrero Māori by Te Hiku Media;
    • Te Wiki o te Reo Māori Award – Kupu App by Spark & Te Aka Māori Dictionary;
    • Te Tohu Huia te Reo Award – Kupu App by Spark & Te Aka Māori Dictionary;
    • Te Tohu Oranga Angitu Award – Ahorangi Whatarangi Winiata (Ngāti Raukawa);
    • Ngā Tohu Kairangi: Special Commendations:
      • #1miriona – Te Māngai Pāho
      • Hīkoi Reo Māori Whangārei – Te Kura Taitamawāhine o Whangārei
      • Guyon Espiner – Te Reo Irirangi o Aotearoa
      • Fush Uka – Anton Matthew
      • Te Tauihu – Te Kaunihera o Pōneke.
  • On Saturday 1 December Wakatū Incorporation will hold their annual general meeting in Nelson. A highlight for Wakatū Incorporation this year has been the twenty-year anniversary of Tohu Wines. In 1998, Wakatū Incorporation, in partnership with Rarua Atiawa Iwi Trust and Wi Pere Trust, launched Tohu Wines. Tohu Wines is recognised as He mātāmua taketake – the first Māori-owned and operated wine label in the world. In 2010 Wakatū Incorporation became the sole owners of the brand. At the AGM three board appointments will also be decided.
  • This week the former Minister of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Chris Finlayson, announced his pending retirement from politics, in January 2019. Mr Finlayson oversaw the conclusion of approximately sixty Treaty of Waitangi settlements; and is therefore well known throughout iwi groups in New Zealand.  During his tenure the total dollar quantum of settlements rose from a few hundred million to circa two billion in direct redress.  Although his initial goal of settling all historic claims was not achieved while he was Minister (in particular the settlement with Ngā Puhi reads as the one that got away), Mr Finlayson hastened and streamlined the overall settlement process.  In our view he is without doubt a Parliamentary peer in regards to how much time and effort he placed in resolving outstanding Treaty of Waitangi grievances whilst a Minister of the Crown.
  • Parininihi ki Waitōtara Inc, Te Atiawa Iwi Holdings, and Taranaki Iwi Holding have formed Ngāmotu Hotels Limited Partnership for the purpose of taking ownership of the Novotel New Plymouth. The sale date is set for 1 January 2019, and the price is reportedly $23 million.
  • On Tuesday the Parliamentary Committee stage of the Child Poverty Reduction Bill was completed, and the Bill was divided into two Bills: (i) Child Poverty Reduction Bill; (ii) Children’s Amendment Bill.  This policy area is of importance to Māori, as current Ministry of Social Development research indicates circa 90,000 tamariki Māori live in poorer households / poverty.  The new measures and goals within this proposed legislation will include Māori specific poverty reduction objectives, set in consultation with Māori, based on Treaty principles (Pānui 37/2018 and Pānui 2/2018 refer).
  • On Thursday the second reading of the Misuse of Drugs (Medicinal Cannabis) Amendment Bill was completed in Parliament. This Bill proposes amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act, allowing for the use of cannabis-based products for people with a terminal illness, and to legalize and regulate medical cannabidiol (CBD) products.  A Government Supplementary Order Paper (i.e. a means to improve some parts of this Bill) has also now been put forward for consideration at the Parliamentary Committee Stage.  We advise that the Ministry of Health has commenced issuing licenses to grow specific strains of cannabis plants for medicinal purposes, and that Māori and community-owned Hikurangi Cannabis Ltd has been awarded a licence to do so.
  • On Wednesday the Minister of Health, Dr David Clark, announced that he had received the report of the Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction – He Ara Oranga: report of the Government Inquiry into Mental Health and Addiction.  The report will likely be made public before the end of 2018 and the Government’s formal response will be published during March 2019.
  • On Wednesday the Māori Television Board announced that its Chief Executive, Keith Ikin, had resigned and will leave the organisation in early 2019. Mr Ikin (Ngāti Maniapoto, Ngāti Apakura, Ngāpuhi, Whanganui) has been with the organisation for 18 months. Deputy Chief Executive Shane Taurima will step into the Acting Chief Executive role until a replacement is appointed.
  • Last week Māori Television announced that its current affairs shows will end production shortly and will be replaced by a single brand in 2019. The current affairs programmes   Kawekōrero, Native Affairs and Rereātea will end in December and the news programme Te Kāea will end in February 2019.
  • Last week the Government released the Early childhood education draft strategic plan 2019-29 “He taonga te tamaiti, Every child a taonga”. Despite the title this document places little emphasis on tamaiti Māori or Māori mediums of learning.

https://conversation.education.govt.nz/conversations/early-learning-strategic-plan/

Salient Māori News Items for the week ending E35, 5 October 2018

 

  • Professor Cindy Kiro (Ngā Puhi, Ngāti Kahu, Ngāti Hine) has been appointed Pro Vice-Chancellor, University of Auckland.
  • Ross Wilson (Ngāi Tahu) has been appointed Chair of the WorkSafe New Zealand Board.
  • Karis Knight (Ngāti Porou) has been awarded the New Zealand Psychological Society Karahipi Tumuaki Scholarship. Ms Knight (University of Auckland student) has focused her research on the effect of whakamā (shame or embarrassment) on Māori mental health.
  • Last month the Ministry of Justice published a factsheet on Adult Conviction and Sentencing for the year ending 30 June 2018. In 2017/18 circa 75,500 adults were charged with a crime, and 83% of charges resulted in a conviction. The most salient population disparity is via gender, with 78% of convictions relating to males.  There is also a significant difference between Māori and non-Māori conviction rates, with 41% of all convicted adults being Māori.

https://www.justice.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Publications/adults-convicted-and-sentenced-data-highlights-june-2018.pdf

  • On Monday Mahuru Youth Remand Service was launched in Kaikohe. The service which will be rolled out across the Taitokerau region is a collaboration between Ngāpuhi Iwi Social Services and Oranga Tamariki.
  • On Monday the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was launched. The Government’s aspiration is that the agency will help reduce homelessness and improve housing affordability. The agency brings together housing policy, funding and regulatory functions from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, the Ministry of Social Development and The Treasury.  (Housing is a significant issue for Māori with over a third of Housing NZ tenants identifying as Māori, Māori home ownership being 35% and Māori being over-represented within the grouping of families without suitable housing; refer Pānui E24/2018).
  • Last Friday the Minister for Māori Development, Nanaia Mahuta, advised she has received the report into the investigation into the affairs of the Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board, had considered the findings and recommendations, and written to the Board to implement the recommendations. What she did not do, however, is address the public interest in this matter by releasing the report, nor advising what the findings and recommendations were.   We consider that unacceptably poor judgement from this Minister, as this Board is a statutory entity established by the Parliament of New Zealand, in receipt of public funds, and supposedly monitored by Te Puni Kōkiri (i.e. it is not a private entity).  Minister Mahuta’s approach goes against the messaging of open and transparent government which we note is being espoused by the Prime Minister.    The investigation followed allegations relating to governance and management concerns, and in particular the 2017 triennial elections of the Board.    Fortunately, however, the Trust Board itself has acted with greater awareness of stewardship duties than the Minister, and has publicly released the report.  Accordingly, we will advise on it further in Pānui edition 36/2018.

[Note: we further advise that voting has opened for members of Whakatōhea iwi to choose to continue the current settlement process led by the Whakatōhea Pre-Settlement Claims Trust, or alternatively restart the mandating process. Voting ends 26 October.   Refer Pānui 13/2018 for details.]

  • On Monday the Office of the Children’s Commissioner (OCC) released a report entitled Maiea Te Tūruapō, Fulfilling the Vision. The report is based on the OCC’s independent monitoring of Oranga Tamariki policies, practices and services: in particular the current practice of placing young people in large secure residences. This report is particularly important to Māori, given 63% of the circa 5,000 children and young people in State care situations are Māori (circa 3,100).  We will provide a review of this report Pānui E36/2018.

Registrations are now open for the Federation of Māori Authorities Conference, to be held: Friday 2 – Sunday 4 November, Emerald

E31 Salient Māori News Summary for the Week Ending 14 September 2018

  • Colleen Neville (Ngāti Maniapoto) and Kauahi Ngapora (Ngāi Tahu, Waikato-Tainui) have been appointed as members of the Tourism New Zealand Board.
  • On Tuesday the second reading of the Family and Whānau Violence Legislation Bill was completed in Parliament. This bill seeks to reduce domestic violence through introducing cross agency information sharing provisions, increasing access to risk assessments services, and recording family violence offending more accurately within justice sector agencies. Māori whānau experience higher levels of domestic violence than others (Pānui 23/2014 refers).
  • Next week the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations Andrew Little will hold three public hui with members of Ngāpuhi in Australia. The purpose of the hui is to progress Treaty settlement discussions. It is estimated that circa 25,000 Ngāpuhi live in Australia.
Sydney 22 September 12:00 – 2:00pm Te Wairua Tapu Wharekarakia, Redfern, Sydney
Brisbane 22 September 6:30 – 8:30pm Pullman Brisbane Airport Hotel, Brisbane
Perth 23 September 2:30 – 4:30pm Ken Jackman Hall, Darius Wells Library, Kwinana, Perth

https://www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/ngapuhi/

  • Associate Professor Leonie Pihama (Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Māhanga, Ngā Māhanga a Tairi) has received Endeavour Research Programme funding of circa $2.16 million over 4 years for her study, He Waka Eke Noa: Maori Cultural Frameworks for Violence Prevention and Intervention Research.
  • Dr Farrar Palmer (Tainui, Ngāti Maniapoto) has received $250,000 from Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga for her research study which explores mātauranga and tikanga Māori in sporting contexts, Manawa Te Taonga Tuku Iho.
  • On Monday to celebrate Te Wiki Te Reo Māori three newspapers which are published for the Whanganui and South Taranaki communities commenced print with “h” being added to Whanganui. In November 2015 the Local Government Act 2002 was amended to reflect the spelling of the district of Whanganui. The decision recognised that ‘Wanganui’ has no meaning in Te Reo Māori.  It also ensured the district name was consistent with the official names of the river and the town.
  • On Tuesday Te Tumu Paeroa launched Taikura Nuku, a modelling service used to identify the productivity potential of Māori land.
  • On Thursday Trans-Tasman Resources Limited announced they will appeal the High Court decision quashing its consent to mine iron sand offshore from the South Taranaki seabed. Pānui E29/2018 refers.

E23 6 July 2018 – Quarterly Review for the Period 1 April to 30 June 2018

This quarterly review provides a summary of significant Māori focused social, economic and Treaty policy developments for the period 1 April to 30 June 2018.

Within the quarter we reviewed 12 data set publications, 10 research reports, 8 Government policy / legislative issues. Information summaries are provided within the following appendices.

This quarter there have been three Māori focused policy items of salient note:

  • Budget 2018/19 reduced specific Māori Development funds – the Finance Minister said this is because Te Puni Kōkiri had not used past money, and that Māori are gaining outcomes elsewhere; whereas the Minister for Māori Development denied (wrongly) that was the Budget reality;
  • Whānau Ora is to be externally reviewed – although a Te Puni Kōkiri evaluation released this month of the initiative finds no issues arising; and
  • the Government has rejected building a mega prison at Waikeria instead a 500 bed rebuild will be undertaken, linked to a 100 bed secure mental health facility, a policy decision which suggests greater awareness of the significant link between criminal offending and poor mental health.

These items are further discussed below. Further information is available within the appendices and Pānui editions as referenced.

Social Policy Matters

Overview of Socio-Economic Matters

Data released this quarter continues to show ongoing socio-economic disparities presenting between Māori and other New Zealanders, with no significant positive or negative change. Two key statistics for the quarter are that:

  • 97,400 Māori (aged 18-64 years) and their household whānau are welfare reliant – this is circa 26% of working age Māori adults; and
  • 6% of Māori in the labour force were unemployed, (33,100 people). By comparison, the New Zealand overall unemployment rate was about half of that, at 4.4%[1]

Education Sector Summary

This quarter the New Zealand Qualifications Authority released the 2017 NCEA results; which showed around 74% of Year 12 Māori learners achieved NCEA level 2. This was about the same as the previous year, and ten percentile points below non-Māori.  Research and ideas for addressing schooling disparities continued to be tabled, with a discussion on racial bias making it into the official policy papers as one rationale for reforming the school sector.

More positively, new research on literacy shows significant gains across the Māori population over the last decade – with 81% of Māori now having fair or better English language literacy (which is needed for workforce gains). Te Reo literacy is also strong, with Māori school learners found to be enjoying this subject and also out-performing others across the board.  This success perhaps links back to the racial bias / differing cultural capital discussion – i.e. if most teachers were Māori and taught subjects such as maths and science from a Māori perspective (as Te Reo is) would the results across the nation be different?  Other education items of note:

  • The Treasury contributed to the disparity discussion with research that confirmed the obvious conclusion that students who change schools a lot are at educational risk – and they noted Māori more than others are in this grouping;
  • the Ministry of Education’s tertiary research analyst released a report that confirms that greater proportions of Māori study at the lower levels in the tertiary education sector (linked to lower school qualifications). The result of the tertiary education outcome is that a qualification disadvantage presents within the workforce thereby suppressing Māori wages and employment opportunities;
  • research about the Youth Guarantee initiative was released, which shows the programme is successful in keeping students engaged in education (good), but that links to tertiary level 4 study and industry training / apprenticeships and the like, are not clearly proven (not good). e. whilst these students (many are Māori) undertake trade preparation type courses, the initiative is not actually giving them a direct pathway into employment within the trade sectors.

Health Sector Summary

In the health sector, as always, an assortment of research data was published. This quarter disparities were shown in areas such as tamariki deaths, abortion rates, children with “major social, emotional and/or behavioural problems”, elderly nutrition, colorectal cancer, and non-seat belt wearing car accident deaths.  Probably all well intended studies and data sets, but collectively all reflecting the differences in how Māori and non-Māori live so differently within the same geopolitical terra firma.

The key item within the health sector, however, was the announcement of a major review of how services work. We note, in regard to the review, Health Minister David Clark states, “we need to face up to the fact that our health system does not deliver equally well for all. We know our Māori and Pacific peoples have worse health outcomes and shorter lives. That is something we simply cannot accept.”   Given the above data, which is relentless every quarter in showing some form of health disparity, in our view the Minister could not be more veridical.

Housing Sector Summary

In the housing sector Minister Phil Twyford (re)announced $63.4 million funding for ‘Housing First Fund’, which is focusing on increasing houses available for vulnerable families. The need for this was also (re)confirmed with the Ministry of Social Development also releasing its public housing quarterly report, to 31 March 2018.   The report finds that 36% (23,600-odd) public housing tenants are Māori.  That is disproportionately high, given Māori are 15% of the total population.   In addition, there is a register of who needs a house and qualify for assistance, but do not have one – of these people we advise 44% are Māori (circa 3,500 tangata.)

Overall this type of data points towards housing being an issue of prominence for Māori – i.e. over 10% of all Māori may be living in or needing state/public housing – compared with about 1% of non-Māori. The next policy action required from this Ministry is to better link this data with sole-parent and gender information, as indicative links with household income data point towards sole-mothers, mainly Māori, being the grouping disproportionately in need.

Justice Sector Summary

There were two key items within the justice sector this quarter of relevance to Māori. First, as above, the Government announced it would not build a mega prison at Waikeria, but it would rebuild a smaller prison, and a 100-bed secure mental health facility.  While this is well short of the radical tikanga Māori prison proposal Minister Kelvin Davis broached back when he was in opposition, it is a step towards better recognising the strong link between criminal offending and poor mental health.  The Government’s Waikeria decision ties in well with the second item of note: robust research from the Office of the Prime Minister’s Chief Scientific Advisor showing that early intervention works best in preventing offending.  This is partially because young offenders often have mental health issues: for example, alcohol or drug dependencies, which can be addressed early thereby mitigating offending and other social ills.  Note also this quarter the Ministry of Health released a research report indicating perhaps 12% of Māori children, around 23,000, may have what they classified as ‘significant social, emotional and/or behavioural problems’.

In our assessment while there has been a known link between criminal offending and health previously, there does appear to be a conceptual shift away from the notion that some people are ‘criminals’ (full stop), towards an understanding that many people who commit offences do so because of a period of poor mental health, which means they do not appropriately regulate their own behaviours. This discussion is particularly important for Māori, as about half of the people incarcerated in New Zealand prisons are Māori, and Māori also have much higher rates of reported mental health issues.  Accordingly, the scientific recommendation to focus on mitigation of poor health and behaviour issues early in life does present as a sensible basis for new policies, including the proposal that Māori approaches be used to support Māori tamariki.  This in our view is ‘not rocket science’, but it is now published scientific research none the less.

Social Sector Summary

In the social wellbeing sector, as noted above, 97,000 Māori households are welfare reliant. Statistics New Zealand also released data which showed poor households such as these face greater inflation pressures.  A link to the increased price of tobacco was made, implying tobacco consumption is detrimental to household finances, not just population health.   In addition, funding to reduce family violence was also (re)announced; and The Treasury released a report indicating they are still beavering away somewhere on what wellbeing might actually be; (possibly it will mean having more money to pay the bills, having a home, being free of violence and the like, but they have not landed it just yet).  A separate Māori wellbeing framework is also being considered by The Treasury.  (We note Whānau Ora contains a solid Māori wellbeing framework, but The Treasury does not acknowledge its existence.)

The annual evaluation of Whānau Ora was released by Te Puni Kōkiri (TPK). We found it to be a weak evaluation report which identified no issues arising and continued to under-explain this initiative.  Ironically, that report was released (without a Ministerial forward) just weeks after the Government announced it would review Whānau Ora, and with terms of reference that clearly signals that transparency and accountability are items for improvement.  We interpret that as a vote of no-confidence in TPK in this work area.   However, perhaps more directly relevant to many Māori whānau (circa one-third) is that this quarter the Government confirmed that it would review the entire welfare system.  Quite what this entails is not yet clear.

Economic Matters

The Budget

The major economic item for the quarter is the Government’s Budget, released in May. Overall the Government is forecasting an operating surplus of $3.1 billion, even after taking into account its new spending.  But as advised above, for Vote: Māori Development funding is to drop, this year, and every year forecast afterwards.[2]  As previously noted Finance Minister Grant Robertson says the drop in Vote: Māori Development reflects programmes that Te Puni Kōkiri did not deliver on being removed from the Budget – so again an implicit vote of no confidence for TPK, which is presenting as somewhat under siege.  In his view, however, Māori whānau are estimated to receive $1.5 billion more in services through the Government’s wider programmes, such as the Families Package: however we can see no means for the Government to evidence that estimate.

In our assessment, funds removed from Te Puni Kōkiri will reduce its policy function from this year – effectively retarding its ability to give advice on the impact of mainstream programmes on Māori. This is despite the fact that there are service gaps – i.e. disparities being experienced by Māori in all social areas, including health, education and housing – some of which are shown in the discussion above.

We note there has been no consultation with Māori, and no explanation as to why Māori Development funds went unspent last year. The denials of funding cuts by Ministers Mahuta and Jackson do not help the situation.[3]  In short, the Labour Party holds all seven Māori electoral seats in Parliament and has the largest number of Māori members of Cabinet than at any time previously.  At both Ratana and Waitangi Day earlier this year the Government indicated it would increase Māori services, so it follows some Māori voters may feel betrayed by this Budget, and particularly by the Minister for Māori Development, Nanaia Mahuta, who so far has tabled no clear initiatives nor policy plan for Māori Development.  The pressure will be on her to deliver something in next year’s Budget; and she will also need to either express a higher level of confidence in Te Puni Kōkiri or to propose something better.

Pānui also reviewed other Vote areas in regard to Māori specific funding. Information is provided in the appendices: there were no radical changes of note.

 

Other Economic Matters

Six other economic matters of note are listed below.

  • The consultancy firm TDB Advisory released a report summarising the financial performance of eight iwi, from 2011 to 2017.  The iwi groups are Ngāi Tahu, Ngāpuhi, Ngāti Porou, Ngāti Whātua o Ōrakei, Rangitāne o Wairau, Raukawa, Ngāi Tūhoe and Waikato-Tainui. All have made money, a few have made lots of money (e.g. Waikato-Tainui had a strong financial year), with very good returns on their investments.
  • The Productivity Commission released a draft report on climate change, proposing new legislation and a new Commission to assist future Governments achieve a low emission economy. For Māori they suggest a Treaty of Waitangi clause would be useful for incoming legislation, combined with some type of Māori advisory committee.
  • The Ministry for the Environment also published work on climate change, with a report from its technical working group being released. This group has a range of recommendations to reduce emissions, and for Māori specifically they suggest the Government “commission mātauranga Māori-led measures that reflect cultural impacts of climate change and are developed and managed by iwi/hapū”.
  • The Land and Water Forum released a new report focusing on how to prevent degradation of water quality, particularly sediment and nitrogen pollutants. In relation to Māori, the Forum repeats its views that Māori interests in water (i.e. any proprietary and usage rights) are in their ‘too-hard’ basket, and thus the Crown needs to address such matters directly.   They point out the current situation is creating uncertainty which undermines long term investment decisions needed to improve water quality.  Hence their recommendation that “Central government must, as a priority, work with iwi to reach agreement on how to resolve rights and interests in fresh water.”.
  • The Government announced that the offshore block offers for oil and gas exploration permits will end (i.e. no new offers to be made). The block offer was an annual tender process established by the former National led Government that allowed for oil and gas companies to bid for permits. Many iwi groups had petitioned about oil exploration in their respective off-shore areas.
  • The Government has announced it is reviewing consumer credit regulations, of interest as Māori are identified as one grouping at risk – which is no surprise given the high percentage of welfare reliance noted above.

Treaty Matters

Waitangi Tribunal Matters
This quarter the Waitangi Tribunal released its report on its Whakatōhea Mandate Inquiry. The Tribunal found the Crown breached the Treaty of Waitangi by prioritising its objective of seeking to conclude a Treaty settlement over processes that were fair to the hapū groupings within Whakatōhea.  Thus the decision to recognise the pre-settlement Trust mandate was found not to be fair, reasonable or made in good faith.  This is consistent with the Tribunal’s view in other areas: that mandate issues, including hapū consent must be satisfactorily resolved before the Crown pushes ahead with negotiations.

Treaty Settlements
This quarter Parliament made progress with five Treaty settlements; with two of these reaching conclusion and thus becoming law. The groupings were:

  • Ngāti Rangi (legislation introduced to Parliament);
  • Ngāti Porou and Ngāti Tamaoho (both had respective second readings)[4];
  • Heretaunga Tamatea and Ngāi Tai ki Tāmaki both had their respective third readings – thereby concluding these two settlements of circa $100 million and $13 million respectively.

Government and Parliamentary Matters
In addition to the above sector issues, we note three further Parliamentary matters of note this quarter.

  • Adding to the Treaty settlement concerns of Whakatōhea, the Minister for Māori Development has advised she has asked for an independent review of the governance and management of the Whakatōhea Trust Board;
  • A Bill to entrench Māori electoral seats was introduced to Parliament.
  • Referenda were held by five local bodies in regard to the establishment of Māori wards – in all cases the notion of Māori wards was rejected by voters. This situation of predominantly non-Māori voters determining how Māori voters may be represented within local Government presents to us as manifestly unjust.  The matter is discussed within Pānui 15/2018.

[1] This data is from Statistics New Zealand and the Ministry of Social Development data sets.

[2] It will drop by $2 million in the year ahead (even after setting aside all extraordinary increases this year), and by $17 million over the next four years.

[3] Their answers to Parliamentary Questions have been provided in Pānui so that subscribers can determine for themselves the integrity of the responses given to challenging questions.

[4] The Ngāti Porou Bill relates to marine and foreshore matters.

State of the Nation and 100 Days Speeches 02 February 2018 (Edition 2/2018)

On Wednesday the Leader of the Opposition, Bill English gave his ‘State of the Nation’ speech, which was followed later by Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern’s ‘100 Day Progress’ speech; i.e. the two key opening political speeches for the year.

Overall Mr English’s speech reads as a lamentation – highlighting what he considered where all the good things his party had achieved, and bemoaning that the Labour-led Government might now risk it all, particularly in the areas of employment relations and economic growth. In that respect it was a classic right wing speech about the risks of a left wing Government.  Nothing new there.

From a Māori policy perspective two points are salient. First, when Mr English talked of their past successes, he left off progressing Treaty settlements.  This is an area where his Government experienced outstanding success, leaving its opposition in shreds, in regards to how many Treaty claims they progressed and settled.  Chris Finlayson’s work in this area will be, in our view, the stuff of legend in the future – given he oversaw perhaps 50 plus settlements, and facilitated the package of settlements to extend above $2 billion, and gained cross-party support for this work.  However, we note Bill English consistently leaves this out of his speeches: it is as if the National Party is not particularly proud of this achievement, or does not think it appeals to its core supporters.

Our second observation is that Mr English only made one mention of Māori, and it was in a negative context, saying that without the proposed Te Ture Whenua Māori reforms, the New Zealand First policy of planting forests on Māori land is unlikely to succeed.  His linkage is not well made, and we note that for generations forests (including Government forests) have been planted on Māori land – i.e. the former reforms are not required for the tree planting scheme to proceed.  Overall if this is a ‘State of the Nation’ speech, then Māori are entirely invisible to this political party at this time.

The Prime Minister’s speech followed later in the day, and focused on explaining what they had sought to put in place within their first 100 days, and why, and also what they intend to pursue next. The key focus areas were employment policies, poverty reduction (discussed below), and setting new socio-economic targets to measure the wellbeing of New Zealand, beyond just GDP. In regards to Māori, Prime Minister Ardern, noted the need for politicians to speak openly on challenging social issues of inequalities, such as the high Māori imprisonment rate.  She also stated that,

“we are a nation that has duties and responsibilities under the Treaty of Waitangi that extends to, and beyond, the negotiating table.  We must be a Government  that builds not just relationships, but partnerships with iwi.”

We advise the Prime Minister made similar (but more articulate) comments last week on the importance of the Treaty of Waitangi, but that was to a largely Māori audience who would appreciate that – this week’s speech was aimed at a broader audience. In our assessment this signalling of approach is positive for Māori/iwi, and combined with having a strong Māori caucus it will be interesting to see what this transpires into.

Treaty Settlement Updates 26 January 2018 (Edition 2/2018)

Taranaki Maunga To Have Legal Personality
In late December the Minister for Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations, Andrew Little, announced that a Record of Understanding over collective cultural redress for Taranaki Maunga had been reached between the Crown and the eight iwi with direct affiliations and guardianship responsibilities to the Mountain. Taranaki will be recognised in law as a legal personality in his own right; with joint responsibility for guardianship shared between the iwi and the Crown.  This model parallels that used in relation to the Whanganui River and Te Urewera.   It will involve repealing the Mount Egmont Vesting Act, establishing legal personality and the creation of a joint Crown-Iwi governance entity for the area within the National Park.  Funding to administer the governance arrangement has not been announced.   The record of understanding is available here: www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/taranaki-maunga/

Ngāti Maru – Agreement in Principle Reached
Ngāti Maru have signed an Agreement in Principle to settle their historic Treaty of Waitangi claims with the Crown (this is the last of the eight Taranaki iwi to reach this stage in the settlement process, and allows for the agreement above to proceed.) The agreement provides for commercial / financial redress of $30 million, the details are which are still to be finalised. www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/ngati-maru-taranaki/

Tūwharetoa Treaty Settlement – First Reading
On 20 December the first Parliamentary reading of the Tūwharetoa Treaty Settlement Bill occurred. The settlement includes $25 million of commercial redress, and $4 million of cultural redress, including the transfer of 32 sites of significance to the iwi (along with an historic account and Crown apology). A unique feature of this settlement is that there will also be the establishment of the Tongariro Trout Hatchery and Freshwater Ecology Centre Trust, which will be co-managed by Ngāti Tūwharetoa, the Minister of Conservation and the Tongariro National Trout Centre Society.[1] www.govt.nz/treaty-settlement-documents/ngati-tuwharetoa/

Te Iwi and Hapū o Wairoa – Second Reading
On 20 December the second Parliamentary reading of the The Iwi and Hapū of Te Rohe Wairoa Claims Settlement Bill occurred. This settlement for a cluster of hapū/iwi, under the collective banner of Te Tira Whakaemi o Te Wairoa, totals circa $100 million in commercial and financial redress.

Waikato Tainui and Ngai Tahu relativity clauses further enacted
The Government has confirmed that the latest round of Treaty settlements enacted the relativity clauses within the Waikato Tainui settlement (which must be 17% of all settlements), and the Ngāi Tahu settlement (which must be 16.1% of all settlements). In effect this means, as the total treaty settlements now push pass the $2 billion marker, Waikato / Tainui gained a further $190 million top-up, and Ngāi Tahu gained a further $180 million since settling.  These amounts, being more than the original settlements for both iwi, have gained some negative attention in the mainstream media – but they were actually no surprise, as relativity actually means keeping settlements relative between iwi.  We will comment further on this matter in an extended edition of Treaty settlements scheduled for June.

[1] This settlement is separate to the Crown Forestry Rental Trust settlement which Tūwharetoa is a part of.  It is also separate to arrangements concerning the bed of Lake Taupō.