Te Rūnanga-ā-Iwi o Ngāti Kahu
Land Claims Report for March 2013
1. Initial comment of Minister of Treaty Negotiations on the Waitangi Tribunal’s decision on our application for binding recommendations
2. Ngāti Kahu’s involvement in the Paparahi o te Raki (Ngāpuhi) claims before the Waitangi Tribunal
3. Management of Te Oneroa-ā-Tōhē
4. Hearing for Te Ana o Taite in Court of Appeal 26-27 March
And in summary only and for noting
5. National Iwi Chairs Forum – record of the February meeting at Waitangi
6. Matike Mai Aotearoa – the Independent Constitutional Transformation Working Party.
SUMMARY
We have received a copy of a letter from Chris Finlayson to Tariana Tūria that indicates that he is searching for a way to ignore the Tribunal’s recommendations on our claims.
Matarahurahu and Pikaahu hapū are part of the Paparahi o te Raki (Ngāpuhi) claims as hapū of Ngāti Kahu. Hearings commenced on 18 March.
A decision by Far North District Council to close Te Oneroa-ā-Tōhē to allow an English film company to film a car speeding on the beach indicates the serious problems that lie ahead for the beach’s advisory board established under the Deeds of Settlement of Te Aupōuri, Te Rarawa and Ngāi Takoto.
Carrington Farms and the Far North District Council’s appeal in respect of Te Ana o Taite will be heard in the Court of Appeal in Wellington on 26 and 27 March.
A report of the February hui of National Iwi Chairs Forum and the letter sent by the Forum to the Prime Minister are available on the Ngāti Kahu website and as an electronic attachment to this report.
Matike Mai Aotearoa has noted with interest that the current consultation round of the government’s Advisory Panel on Constitutional matters has drawn on our work to present the issues.
1. Initial comment of Minister of Treaty Negotiations on the Waitangi Tribunal’s decision on our application for binding recommendations
The following letter has been provided to us by Tariana Tūria.
My comments on this letter are as follows:
The Tribunal’s recommendation is very clear. In chapter 8 of its report at page 173 it states “…we recommend that the Crown make a formal written offer to settle all of the pre-1865 well-founded claims of Ngāti Kahu.” Then, in an attempt to break the impasse between Ngāti Kahu and the Crown, it sets out in great detail exactly what that offer should be, the exact lands that are to be relinquished by the Crown to Ngāti Kahu and the amount of money to be paid over to allow us to purchase our own lands. That listing is not dissimilar to the partial settlement Ngāti Kahu designed and set out in our Deed of Partial Settlement.
The Tribunal’s recommendation covers just two pre-1865 well-founded claims, Wai 17 lodged by McCully Matiu for all Ngāti Kahu lands, seas and waterways and that part of Wai 45, also lodged by McCully Matiu, which relate to Ngāti Kahu’s lands, seas, fisheries and all other taonga. There are a large number of other Ngāti Kahu claims that also relate to pre-1865 but have not yet been heard and are therefore not yet well-founded. Several are Te Paatu claims. None of Ngāti Kahu’s post-1865 claims have been heard. So the Tribunal is recommending that the claims relating to the first 25 years of the Crown’s activities for just two claims be settled. That leaves all the other claims and the remaining 130 years of the historical aspects of both Wai 17 and Wai 45 still to be heard and recommendations made.
While the Tribunal makes no recommendations for a settlement of all Ngāti Kahu’s claims, it does note that Ngāti Kahu has the option of seeking to negotiate to do so. That would necessarily have to involve the Crown making an offer far in excess of what the Tribunal has recommended and it would have to include everything listed in our Yellow Book and sufficient cash to buy the private lands listed there. It would also have to satisfy the next generations of Ngāti Kahu, whose responsibility it will be to recover all our lands, that such an offer would be acceptable to them. Yet, as we heard in the Tribunal hearings, the Crown has steadfastly refused to date to even consider a settlement designed by Ngāti Kahu, which is no doubt why the Tribunal took our partial settlement as the basis for their recommendation. This letter from the Minister signals clearly that the Crown hopes/intends to continue with the same high-handed and arrogant disregard not only for our proven claims but also the overwhelming and irrefutable evidence of the gross atrocities that it has and continues to perpetrate against Ngāti Kahu. The letter indicates that we may or we may not receive any offer as recommended by the Tribunal. What is clear is that the Crown has decided to string us out yet again rather than say up front that it will ignore the Tribunal’s recommendation. As such we will discuss further at our next hui how hapū wish to proceed with the options still available to us.
2. Ngāti Kahu’s involvement in the Paparahi o te Raki (Ngāpuhi) claims before the Waitangi Tribunal
Matarahurahu and Pikaahu hapū are part of the Paparahi o te Raki (Ngāpuhi) claims but as hapū of Ngāti Kahu rather than of Ngāpuhi. Waitangi Tribunal hearings for the overall claims commenced on 18 March at Te Tii marae, Waitangi. There are a very large number of claims involved. The Matarahurahu and Pikaahu hapū claims will not be heard until the July sittings.
3. Management of Te Oneroa-ā-Tōhē
Earlier this month there was great consternation amongst all iwi of Te Hiku o Te Ika over a deliberate abuse and misuse of Te Oneroa-ā-Tōhē. A decision by Far North District Council to close the beach to allow an English film company to film a car speeding on the beach was strongly criticized by several hapū who are mana whenua on the beach, including Te Paatu. While Council employees did attend a hui at Ahipara and apologise for not notifying or consulting local hapū, it was very unsettling for our kaumātua to witness the ease with which some iwi rūnanga leaders were prepared to give in to the demands of the Council and foreign business interests.
This does not augur well for the statutory board that will be established to advise on the management of the beach under the Deeds of Settlement of Te Aupōuri, Te Rarawa and Ngāi Takoto. The board is to be set up as a subcommittee of the Far North District Council and the Northland Regional Council and as such comes under the authority of those Councils and has no real power to challenge them. They will be able to raise issues but it seems it will be most unlikely that they will be able to influence decisions already made by Council employees and endorsed by the Councils, as was this decision. Mana whenua responsibilities for the beach will have to be carried out by the hapū and it remains to be seen whether the board will provide any assistance or support for those hapū. It will be extremely disappointing if the board becomes yet another agent of those Councils tasked with keeping hapū interests at bay in order to ensure that the wishes of the wealthy Pākehā interests who control the Councils are carried out. Yet it will not be unexpected given what we saw over this incident.
4. Hearing for Te Ana o Taite in Court of Appeal 26-27 March
The appeal by Carrington Farms and the Far North District Council against the High Court decision which stops them desecrating and destroying Te Ana o Taite, the ancient burial cave of Te Whānau Moana of Karikari, has been set down to be heard in the Court of Appeal in Wellington on 26 and 27 March. The appeal is being run solely on legal arguments arising from the High Court’s decision and no evidence from us is required. As such Russell McVeagh has advised that we are not required to be present when the case is heard. They will keep us informed of how the case is progressing.
Professor Margaret Mutu
17 March 2013