Komiti Māori
Mary-Anne Macleod Chief Executive
5 December 2017
NOTICE IS GIVEN
that the next meeting of the Komiti Māori will be held in Omaio Marae, Omaio Pa Road (off State Highway 35), Omaio on:
Tuesday, 12 December 2017 commencing at 10.30 am.
Please note: a pohiri will take place at 10.00 am. prior to commencement of the hui.
BOPRC ID: A2460603
Komiti Māori Terms of Reference The Komiti Māori has the core function of implementing and monitoring Council’s legislative obligations to Māori.
Delegated Function To set operational direction for Council’s legislative obligations to Māori and monitor how these obligations are implemented. This will be achieved through the development of specific operational decisions which translate legislative obligations to Māori into action.
Membership Three Māori constituency councillors and three general constituency councillors (the membership of the general constituency councillors to be rotated every two years), and the Chairman as ex-officio.
Quorum In accordance with Council standing order 10.2, the quorum at a meeting of the committee is not fewer than three members of the committee.
Co-Chairs to preside at meetings Notwithstanding the Komiti Māori has an appointed Chairperson, Māori Constituency Councillors may host-Chair committee meetings that are held in the rohe of their respective constituency.
Term of the Committee For the period of the 2016-2019 Triennium unless discharged earlier by the Regional Council.
Meeting frequency Two-monthly.
Specific Responsibilities and Delegated Authority The Komiti Māori is delegated the power of authority to:
• Monitor Council’s compliance with its obligations to Māori under the Local Government Act 2002 and the Resource Management Act 1991;
• Approve actions to enhance Māori capacity to contribute to Council’s decision-making processes for inclusion in the development of the Long Term Plan;
• Recommend to Council effective Maori consultation mechanisms and processes;
• Identify any relevant emerging issues for the region relating to the principles of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi, legislative obligations to Māori under different statutes and programmes to build the capability of Māori;
• Facilitate tangata whenua input into community outcomes, Council policy development and implementation work;
Page 3 of 170
BOPRC ID: A2460603
• Formally receive iwi/hapū management plans;
• Make submissions on Māori related matters, except where the submissions may have a wide impact on Council’s activities, in which case they might be handled by the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee or Council;
• Establish subcommittees and delegate to them any authorities that have been delegated by Council to the Komiti Māori and to appoint members (not limited to members of the Komiti Māori);
• Approve its subcommittee’s recommendations for matters outside the subcommittee delegated authority;
• Recommend to Council the establishment of advisory groups to represent sub-region or constituency areas and to consider specific issues.
Note:
The Komiti Māori reports directly to the Regional Council.
Page 4 of 170
Membership
Chairperson: A Tahana
Deputy Chairperson: T Marr
Councillors: W Clark, D Love, M McDonald, L Thurston
Ex Officio: Chairman D Leeder
Committee Advisor: M Stensness
Recommendations in reports are not to be construed as Council policy until adopted by Council.
Agenda
1 Opening Karakia
2 Apologies
3 General Business and Tabled Items
Items not on the agenda for the meeting require a resolution under section 46A of the Local
Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 stating the reasons why the item was not
on the agenda and why it cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.
4 Declarations of Conflicts of Interests
5 Previous Minutes
5.1 Komiti Maori minutes - 10 October 2017 9
6 Presentations
6.1 Ōmaio Tangata whenua – Hapū Development and Projects awareness and updates
7 Reports
7.1 Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017 21
7.2 Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey 29
APPENDIX 1 - Boffa Miskell Method 44 Mauri Model Report, August 2017 37
Page 5 of 170
APPENDIX 2 - Iwi Perceptions Survey Questions, December 2017 81
7.3 Update on Te Mana o Te Wai 95
7.4 Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty 101
APPENDIX 1 - LGNZ - Treaty Settlement Costs Report 107
7.5 General Manager Strategy and Science Update 151
APPENDIX 1 - Komiti Maori Actions for 12 December 2017 161
APPENDIX 2 - He Toka Tumoana scholarship poster 167
8 Consideration of General Business
9 Open forum
A short period of time will be set aside at the conclusion of the meeting to enable tangāta whenua
and members of the public to raise matters. Any matters raised and the time allowed for each
speaker will be at the discretion of the Chair.
No decisions can be made from matters raised in the Open Forum.
10 Closing Karakia
Page 6 of 170
1
Minutes of the Komiti Māori Meeting held at Waiteti Marae, 30 Waiteti Road, Ngōngōtaha, Rotorua on Tuesday, 10 October 2017 commencing at 9.30 a.m.
Click here to enter text.
Chairman: A Tahana
Deputy Chairman: T Marr
Councillors: L Thurston, M McDonald, D Love, W Clark
Ex Officio: Chairman D Leeder
In Attendance: Toi Moana-BOPRC: F McTavish (General Manager Strategy and
Science) K O’Brien (Strategic Engagement Manager), A Vercoe (Māori Policy Team Leader) K Heitia (Strategic Engagement Coordinator), S Hohepa, K Pihera-Ridge (Māori Policy Advisors), N Capper (Pou Ngaio Technical/Cultural), N Heitia (Assistant Mātauranga Māori Framework), E Sykes (Community Engagement EEF Coordinator) L Tauroa (Internal Services Officer), S Grayling (Biosecurity Team Leader), A Bruere (Lakes Operation Manager), S Kusabs (Land Management Officer), J Mackle (Regulatory Compliance Officer), H Ngatai (Marketing & Communications Advisor), N Ridler (Community Engagement), M Stensness (Committee Advisor)
Tangata Whenua: E George, G Ngatai, T Conwell, M Ngatai, T
Palmer, WH Colbert, L Bidois, U Fairhall, S Tana, J Tahana, R Clarke, TP Newton, M Tapsell, W TeMoni, R Hona
Te Arawa Lakes Trust: N Douglas (Manager Environment), R
Meha (Te Tatau o Te Arawa, Te Puni Kokiri) Rotorua Lakes Council: J Riini, D Bly, R Hiha-Agnew
Apologies: Chairman D Leeder (late arrival), W Haumaha (Chairman of Te
Waiteti Marae), G Mohi, K Biddle
1 Pōhiri/Welcome
A pōhiri took place at 9.30 am prior to commencement of the meeting at 10:30 am.
2 Karakia
Mr Eru George opened with a karakia.
3 Chairman’s Mihi
Councillor Tahana acknowledged Mr G Ngatai of Ngāti Ngāraranui, Ngāti Rangiwewehi and te hau kainga for hosting the Komiti Māori hui. Councillor Tahana emphasised the importance of the wai-water for Te Arawa whānui – he taonga nui tenei mea te wai,
Page 9 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 2
ehara ma Ranginui raua ko Papatūanuku te raru, ma tatou katoa e whakatika i te wai. He korero whakatauaki - Ko wai koe, ko te wai koe - Ko Au te Wai, Ko te Wai ko Au.
4 Apologies
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori: Accepts the apologies of Chairman Leeder (late arrival), W Haumaha 1
(Chairman of Te Waiteti Marae), G Mohi and K Biddle tendered at the meeting.
Tahana/Thurston CARRIED
5 General Business and Tabled Items
It was noted that Toi Moana-BOPRC Lakes Operation Manager A Bruere requested to update members and tangāta whenua on phosphorous locking and resource consents consultation.
6 Declaration of conflicts of interest
Nil
7 Previous Minutes
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori: Confirms the Komiti Māori minutes of 23 August 2017 as a true and correct 1
record.
Clarke/McDonald CARRIED
8 Presentations
8.1 Ngāti Ngāraranui – Hapu development on the Waiteti Stream Refer Power Point Presentation Objective ID A2723945 Mr G Ngatai provided insight into the whakapapa-genealogy interconnect between Ngāti Ngāraranui, the whenua-land, awa-river and traditional taonga; i.e localised streams, waahi tapū-sacred pā sites and waahi tūpuna-ancestral cultural site within their rohe-area. Mr Ngatai highlighted the following concerns:
environmental and cultural degradation of the Waiteti and Waimihia streams due to discharge of phosphorus and nutrient run off;
consequential 100 metre radius of thick sediment build up at the mouth of Waitetī stream;
Page 10 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 3
restricted access to waahi tapu-sacred areas (i.e six sacred pā), waahi tūpuna-ancestral areas (i.e Wai oro toki) and waahi puna wai-spring water areas;
negative impact of biodiversity of the awa-river including loss of customary fishing grounds and kai - tau koura-freshwater crayfish, tau kupenga, tau hohorō and tau inanga (juvenile fish);
loss of flora and fauna within four (4) key wetlands (Okuraroa, Te Kopua, Te Akaaka, Te Pohue);
requested proactive monitoring, more data collection and access to scientific evidence to identify the source of paru-pollution/degradation; and
lack of putea-money/funding.
Mr Ngatai recognised the mahi-work undertaken by Toi Moana-BOPRC but expressed a desire for direct and meaningful consultation with regard to co-management solutions around conservation and protection of taonga, the taiao-environment and the wai-water. It was noted that other hapū in attendance agreed with Ngāti Ngāraranui’s position.
Councillor Tahana and members acknowledged Ngāti Ngāraranui for the “on the ground” korero filtered through to Komiti Māori. Members re-iterated their commitment to empower hapū and iwi to protect the wai and taonga but that it could take between 60 and 100 years to restore. It was noted that Councillor Tahana be notified of the next hui to be held by Ngāti Ngāraranui and that General Manager Strategy and Science Ms F McTavish would provide an updated report of the above matters for the next Komiti Māori hui.
8.2 Te Kōmiro o te Ūtuhina – A collective approach to restore Te Ūtuhina Stream Refer Power Point Presentation Objective ID A2723942
Ms L Kereopa and Mr G Allen of Te Kōmiro o te Ūtuhina Kaitiaki Roopu provided members with some historical background of life growing up in Ōhinemutu, Te Tokaparua, Te Puaringa and Te Ūtuhina streams in comparison with life now. Ms Kereopa and Mr Allen summarised the issues as:
Sediment build up and paru-pollution of the awa-river in 2016 (blockage from kuirau park, released into Te Ūtuhina)
Two summers tangāta whenua had been unable to swim in the awa-river - Te aukati ki te kaukau kurupae – cautionary/no swimming signs;
Degradation of customary fishing and gathering grounds - kāpata kai-food source non-existent in Te Ūtuhina stream (i.e koura);
Kai-food had disappeared over two generations - our children have never been able to feed themselves from our awa-river;
Oil slicks coming from the industrial area and queried what monitoring was in place;
Management and monitoring practices of water quality and eradication of weeds by Toi Moana-BOPRC;
Removal of taonga-fishing rocks without consultation;
Lack of fresh water flowing into Te Ūtuhina stream.
G Allen expressed a desire to work together to find solutions for monitoring water quality, the regeneration of kai moana (i.e koura), the eradication and control of harmful weeds and the restoration of the stop banks along the awa-river.
Councillor Tahana – Tēnei ra te mihi nui kia kōrua mō to kōrua whakāturanga, kei te tika kōrua, karawhiua mai ngā pātai me ngā wero hoki kia mātou, otirā kia tātou, ngā
Page 11 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 4
mihi kia korua mo tera – acknowledged presenters and that Komiti Māori was the right forum to raise those concerns.
The Komiti was informed that Toi Moana-BOPRC regularly monitored Te Ūtuhina stream for ecoli and that swimming was cautionary in that area. Members and tangata whenua were advised that Toi Moana-BOPRC had upcoming environmental projects that included the church and improving biodiversity work, geothermal activity and exploring economic opportunities within Ōhinemutu. It was noted that Mr Allen and Te Kōmiro o Te Ūtuhina be notified of further meetings to be held between Toi Moana-BOPRC and the church.
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori:
1 Commission Toi Moana-BOPRC staff to write an urgent status report on all the local urban streams flowing into Lake Rotorua area to be tabled at the next Regional Council Delivery and Direction Committee meeting.
Thurston/Tahana CARRIED
8.3 Ngāti Rangiwewehi – Ko Te Awahou mātou, ko mātou te awahou Ms L Bidois from Ngāti Rangiwewehi acknowledged Ngāti Ngāraranui and advised members that:
whakapapa-genealogy interconnected Te Arawa and hapū to all the local streams and waterways;
Ngāti Rangiwewehi were working with GNS organisation on the Ka Tu Te Taniwha project – 2nd stage;
wānanga were held to define kaitiaki - created a model of kaitiakitanga around the protection of the wai-water;
the Iwi Management Plan (‘IMP’) included soil quality, water quality expectations and kaitiakitanga - define your own Tino Rangātiratanga;
Ngāti Rangiwewehi needed more tautoko-support to look after their champions;
our tamariki-children were instrumental - teaching our tamariki stories of our awa normalised caring for and looking after the taiao-environment and the importance of the wai; and
A wero-challenge was issued to Toi Moana-BOPRC to start delivering objectives from the IMPs.
Councillor Tahana - ngā mihi atu kia koe Leanne otira kia Gina hoki, mohio nei ana ahau koia tetahi o ngā poutokomanawa mo tenei take te tiaki i to tatou taiao, no reira tēnā koe e Leanne – acknowledged and thanked both presenters in caring for the environment.
8.4 Te Arawa Lakes Trust – Te Tuāpapa o ngā wai o Te Arawa Refer Power Point Presentation Objective ID A2723944
Te Arawa Lakes Trust (‘TALT’) trustee Ms R Meha and Manager for Environment Ms N Douglas advised members that they were focussed on achieving a statutory working relationship with Toi Moana-BOPRC. TALT had aspirations to restore Te Arawa kaitiakitanga over the lakes and that the implementation of a co-designed strategic
Page 12 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 5
framework was the way forward for TALT in the leadership space. Ms Douglas identified some of the primary objectives as follows:
embedding of Te Arawa values, matauranga maori and Te Tuāpapa o Te Wai – into spatial plans, long term plans, consultation;
proactive role within the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) - Te Mana Whakahono;
grow capability in freshwater management;
TALT as the gateway/conduit for some of the hui regarding plan changes, long term plans and consultations,
meaningful consultation to discuss delivery of Maori outcomes alignment, LTP allocations and iwi and hapu leadership opportunities;
three kaitiaki wananga to be held.
Members acknowledged TALT were moving in a strategic direction and owning that role. It was noted that iwi and hapu needed to work collectively and strategically to utilise the resources available wisely. TALT acknowledged assistance from Toi Moana to finalise their Iwi Management Plan and how it was successfully used as a guide to establish and implement a sewage reticulation system.
9 Reports
9.1 Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe – Iwi Participation Agreements Resource Management Act 1991 Amendments Maori Policy Team Leader A Vercoe advised members that the government had introduced several amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991 (‘RMA’) intended to enhance Māori participation in decision making through the Te Mana Whakahono ā Rohe (‘TMWR’) provisions. To assist members further Mr Vercoe provided an analysis of the provisions and highlighted the following key points:
The TMWR provided a mechanism for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree and record ways in which tangata whenua may participate in resource management and decision making processes under the RMA;
Iwi authorities that initiated a TMWR invitation would legally compel Toi Moana-BOPRC to enter into iwi participation arrangements;
Mandatory components of a TMWR must be incorporated into an agreement;
Invitations could be initiated at any time (with some exceptions) and carried an 18 month statutory timeframe for completion;
The TMWR provisions allowed for multi-party agreements;
Implementation of the TMWR required principles and negotiations cognisant of the provisions of the legislation;
Presented TMWR and the new subpart under the RMA to RDD committee;
Other requirements included - notification, provision of draft agreement prior to notification, appointment of iwi commissioners on to hearing panels, demonstrated consultation with iwi/hapū;
Toi Moana-BOPRC had received an invitation from Tapuika on 6 June 2017. Mr Vercoe re-iterated that Toi Moana-BOPRC were focussed on the initial planning stages and kōrerorero-discussions about how to progress forward noting that it was
Page 13 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 6
critical in the initial stages to understand where each party was placed and that tangata whenua were provided a suitable environment that fostered open discussions. Councillor Tahana - Ka honohono ngā wai tetehi ki tētehi – the water connects people with each other, noting that the new provisions potentially allowed iwi and hapū to pen their IMP plans suited to those provisions that essentially allowed for iwi and hapū to sit at the table. Resolved
That the Komiti Māori:
1 Confirms the report, Te Mana Whakahono ā Rohe – Iwi Participation Agreements Resource Management Act Amendments
Tahana/Thurston CARRIED
9.2 Enhancing Resource Management Act 1991 awareness for Māori - RMA Training Workshops Refer Power Point Presentation Objective ID A2723937
Toi Moana-BOPRC Pou Ngāio Mr N Capper provided members with an update report on the RMA training workshops held specifically for Māori. Mr Capper explained that the workshops were framed as wānanga which sought to complement a transition to the Making Good Decisions training programme while extending RMA knowledge in general for attendees. Key components of the training included:
RMA 101 and 102 wānanga themed – provided tools and techniques for the kete-knowledge basket to empower participation, grow knowledge base, share knowledge and manaaki whanau,
Four workshops trialled to improve confidence and understanding and respond in the RMA kaupapa and kōrero, improved planning policy, regulatory framework and documents, improved understanding of legislative context, treaty obligations.
Treaty settlements the RMA and local government impact;
RMA 103 would focus on resource consenting applications and questions that come from the wānanga to feed back to whānau.
Members and tangāta whenua were advised that the 2018 workshop/wānanga plan proposed to include two more per year specifically to strengthen whānau participation, encourage attendees to complete commissioner training and to recognise further training sessions across the region. It was noted that tangata whenua should contact the Māori Policy Officer of their rohe to have a kōrero-discussion about upcoming workshops and to be added to the email mailing list.
Cr Macdonald who participated in all the workshops remarked that the content and delivery of the information was excellent and that the continued roll out of these wananga were necessary to assist our whānau in understanding the RMA process.
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori:
1 Confirms the report, Enhancing Resource Management Act 1991 awareness for Māori - RMA Training Workshops
Page 14 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 7
Tahana/Macdonald CARRIED
9.3 Brown bullhead catfish incursion progress report Refer Power Point Presentation Objective ID A2723941
Toi Moana-BOPRC Biosecurity Team Leader Mr S Grayling briefed members and tangata whenua on the incursion of the Brown bullhead catfish initially discovered in March 2016. Mr Grayling highlighted the following key information:
catfish were tough, a predator scavenger that prey on other fish and threatened taonga species including koura-crayfish;
over 34 nights, 770 nets were set on Rotoiti, Rotorua, Rotoehu and Tarawera – 391 catfish were caught, 381 from Te Weta Bay;
as water temperatures cool more catfish are caught but tuna and brown trout were known to be natural raiders of catfish.
Toi Moana-BOPRC held meetings with stakeholders and community for engagement and feedback on the programme;
Mr Grayling emphasised that further meetings and consultation was needed to discuss and research suitable eradication methods; i.e permanent traps, pest tagging programme, pheromone baits and electricity as options. Mr Grayling extended an invitation to tangata whenua to attend scheduled meetings.
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori:
1 Confirms the report, Brown bullhead catfish incursion progress report
Tahana/Macdonald CARRIED
9.4 General Manager Strategy and Science Update
General Manager Strategy and Science Ms F McTavish informed members and tangata whenua that:
Two new staff members, Katerina Pihera-Ridge and Reuben Gardiner had joined the Maori Policy team; and
Similarly to last month’s report from the Matakana Island hui, an appendix would be attached to next month’s report highlighting updates on issues raised from the hui today including the water monitoring data;
Ms McTavish advised attendees and members that many submissions and further submissions had been received in relation to Plan Change 9 (water quantity) and that the plan change would set the stage in terms of water limits in the region, metering, who was using the water and how. It was important to note that the plan change set out new criteria for municipals regarding re-consenting water takes and that meetings had
Page 15 of 170
Komiti Māori Tuesday, 10 October 2017
A2716909 8
progressed with 66 submitters and 33 further submitters, pre-hearing meetings are likely to be extended to February 2018.
Councillor Tahana mentioned he had received good feedback about Toi Moana-BOPRC staff co-governance korero presented to a forum at Gisborne District Council last month and encouraged iwi and hapu to read Te Kawa o Te Urewera.
Resolved
That the Komiti Māori:
1 Confirms the report, General Manager Strategy and Science report
Tahana/Thurston CARRIED
10 Consideration of General Business
Toi Moana-BOPRC Rotorua Lakes Manager A Bruere advised members that:
Phosphorous locking plants programme – commenced consultation with community and iwi around their views of the lakes;
Alum dosing plant methods were used to improve lake water quality ensuring the activity in the catchments are sustainable and that those activities are not contaminating the water;
Plan Change 10 – included rules in place that would manage land use around Lake Rotorua and promote the reduction of nitrogen and phosphorus;
There was a need to supplement the phosphorus locking programme because of constant changed activities on land;
Recognised people were concerned regarding the long term effects of dosing -Toi Moana-BOPRC encouraged dialogue and participation in consultation meetings;
Invitations to attend the first meeting in two weeks had been sent out with plant site visits planned;
Toi Moana-BOPRC team were reinvigorating the Koura and Kakāhi – best catches of koura were found in Lake Rotorua;
Mr Bruere acknowledged more work was required and that alum dosing was an interim solution not a long term management plan. It was noted that a hapū member of Ngāti Ngāraranui disagreed with Mr Bruere’s response regarding algae bloom and closure of areas to swimming.
11 Closing Karakia
Mr Eru George closed with a karakia.
The meeting closed at 1.05pm
Page 16 of 170
Receives Only – No Decisions
Report To: Komiti Māori
Meeting Date: 12 December 2017
Report From: Kataraina O'Brien, Strategic Engagement Manager
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
Executive Summary
The Toi Moana (Bay of Plenty Regional Council) Komiti Māori (Māori Committee) was constituted in 2006.
It is nationally unique in that it is the only full standing Māori decision-making committee of a Regional Council in New Zealand that has three Māori Constituent Councillors presiding (alongside general Councillors).
Komiti Māori provides tangata whenua with direct access and input into Council processes and decisions. The Komiti has a delegated function to set operational direction for Council’s legislative obligations to māori and monitor how these obligations are implemented.
Another unique aspect of the Komiti is that it holds its meetings on marae further enhancing the opportunity for māori to directly interact with Councillors on issues they are passionate about.
This report provides highlights of the hui held by Komiti Māori over 2017.
Recommendations
That the Komiti Māori under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017;
1 Background
The Komiti Māori (formerly the Māori Committee) was established in 2006 and is constituted as a standing committee of Council. Its primary function is to implement and monitor Council's legislative obligations to māori.
Komiti members include three Māori Constituency Councillors, two general Councillors and the Council Chairman (ex-officio).
Page 21 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
2
Komiti Māori aims to strengthen iwi/hapū relationships with Council by holding its meetings on marae throughout the region. In this manner, the Komiti is exposed to the dynamic of iwi, hapū and whanau, experiencing the variations in tikanga, kawa and reo.
The issues raised before the Komiti are specific to a location. Komiti Māori is supported by the Chief Executive, Strategy & Science General Manager and Māori Policy.
2 Komiti Māori Hui 2017
In 2017 Komiti Māori attendance by tangata whenua has been high. There is a growing interest in all parts of the region from tangata whenua who wish to participate and get involved in the business of Council. This year over fifty members of the community attended Komiti Māori.
This year six hui were held throughout the region:
Date Venue
3 March 2017 Te Whetū o Te Rangi Marae, Welcome Bay, Tauranga
27 April 2017 Te Papaiouru Marae, Ōhinemutu, Rotorua
20 June 2017 Te Mānuka Tutahi Mārae, Whakatane
23 August 2017 Opureora Marae, Matakana, Tauranga
10 October 2017
Waitetī Marae, Ngongotahā, Rotorua
12 December 2017
Omaio Marae, Omaio
Page 22 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
3
Komiti Māori Photos
Te Manuka Tutahi Marae Left: Waiteti Marae Right: Te Papaiouru Left: Te Papaiouru Marae Right: Te Whetu O Te Rangi Marae Left: Te Papaiouru Marae Right: Opureroa marae
Page 23 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
4
3 Key achievements
There have been some memorable highlights for the Komiti in 2017 all of which denote the importance of the Komiti’s role and function:
3.1 Submission in Support of Māori Seats for Whakatāne District Council
The Chair of Komiti Māori (Cr Arapeta Tahana) led and presented a submission to the Whakatāne District Council (WDC) in support of a proposal to establish Māori seats of Council. Cr Tahana was able to draw on the experience of Toi Moana who have held Māori seats for several years. Approximately 45 written submission were received, and 11 submitters presented at the meeting.
Following deliberations, a vote of six to five in favour was passed. In terms of next steps, WDC must now publically notify that the Local Electoral Act 2001 allows a poll of 5% of electors to demand a binding poll on the introduction of Māori wards.
3.2 Civil Defence Regional Plan Submission
In response to the flood event in April 2017, tangata whenua and local marae provided local communities with food, shelter and support. Many marae acted without government assistance and proceeded to support those in need. Other marae acted as welfare centres for government agencies and local support agencies to provide further support.
At Te Manuka Tutahi marae Te Runanga O Ngati Awa (TRONA) and Ngati Awa Social Health services (NASH) provided feedback on the role of local marae and tangata whenua. The Komiti heard all issues and concerns presented and advised Komiti Māori would submit to the Civil Defence Regional Plan. Through Māori Policy, Komiti Māori outlined the pivotal role of marae and tangata whenua providing suggestions on how better to support marae in response to another environmental event.
Komiti Māori also led a submission on Civil Defence Act Review to request consideration for legislation to provide for Iwi input and participation into disasters and civil defence emergency response efforts.
3.3 Komiti Māori E-Panui
Komiti Māori distributes electronic panui (newsletter) to tangata whenua on a regular basis to promote and encourage attendance at Komiti Māori hui, to share important information about Council work and to generally keep in touch with the Māori Community.
The e-panui is available bi-monthly. It currently has an ‘open rate’ (acknowledgement that the email has been opened) of 49% which is well above the open rate for other government agencies. Over four hundred contacts receive the Komiti Māori e-panui.
3.4 Presentations by Tangata Whenua
At each Komiti Māori hui, tangata whenua are invited to present on issues of importance to them. Many individuals and groups take this opportunity to engage directly with Councillors, thereby informing council and staff about key matters for consideration.
Page 24 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
5
A number of tangata whenua groups presented to Komiti Māori in 2017 including (but not limited to):
Ngāti Awa Social Health Services (NASH) and Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Awa: Response to Edgecumbe Flood Event.
Matakana Island tangata whenua: Lodgement of the Matakana/Rangiwāea Hapū Management Plan 2017 and discussion on contaminated land.
Ngāti Ngāraranui Hapū: Aspirations for water quality enhancement of the Waitetī Stream.
Ngāti Rangiwewehi: Environmental initiatives, plans and aspirations.
3.5 Iwi/Hapū Management Plans (IHMPS)
Iwi/Hapū Management Plans are lodged with Council through Komiti Māori.
The following plans were lodged this year:
Pirirakau Hapū Management Plan 2017
Matakana/Rangiwāea Hapū Management Plan 2017
Te Whānau a Harawaka Hapū Plan 2017 (at this meeting)
3.6 Treaty Symposium for Councillors
This year, through the support of Komiti Māori, the Bay of Plenty Regional Council hosted a Treaty Symposium in Tauranga. The purpose of the event was to lead discussions on the value of Treaty settlements and build awareness of the Treaty landscape. Elected members and senior staff from Councils in the region were invited. Approximately 144 people attended.
Ngā Potiki kaumatua opened the hui and spoke about their Treaty experience. Keynote speakers included Justice Joe Williams, Colin reader (Ngā Potiki), Rahera Ohia (Ngāi Te Rangi), Te Pio Kawe, Charlie Tawhio (Ngāi Te Rangi), Dame Susan Devoy (Race relations Commissioner) and Treaty Lawyer Paul Beverly.
3.7 Pou Ngaio Role : RMA Technical/Cultural Specialist
Komiti Māori recognised the need to provide more resource management support for staff and Māori and approved two Pou Ngaio (RMA Technical/Cultural Specialist) roles. One role was established in 2016 and the other role has just been filled.
As well as providing specialist support for staff on RMA Māori provisions, the Pou Ngaio will co-ordinate training opportunities for tangata whenua to build RMA capability.
3.8 Resource Management Act (RMA) Training for Iwi/Hapū
Staff, in collaboration with tangata whenua, ran four RMA training workshops in Tauranga and Whakatāne. Two were aimed at an elementary level (RMA101) and two at an intermediate level (RMA 102). The Pou Ngaio lead this initiative.
The feedback from participants has been overwhelmingly positive as there is a genuine desire from Māori to improve and enhance their RMA knowledge.
Page 25 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
6
Picture above: From left Hayden Henry, Reon Tuanau and Hemi Paki receiving their RMA 101/102 Certificates.
Komiti Māori are fully supportive of this initiative and formally endorsed further training opportunities.
3.9 Māori Language Week (MLW) 2017
Komiti Māori supported the annual activities led by Māori Policy to encourage the use of Te Reo Māori and Māori practice through Māori Language Week 2017. The theme for MLW 2017 was “Kia ora Te Reo Māori”.
Activities this year included cultural guided tours, karakia/waiata workshops, weaving (raranga) classes, Te Reo bingo and hearing from guest speakers. Activities were facilitated by staff and iwi members.
Komiti Māori promotes the use of Te Reo Māori in the workplace and have embraced Te Ture mō Te Reo Māori 2016 which affirms the status of reo Māori as the indigenous language of Aotearoa.
Page 26 of 170
Toi Moana Komiti Maori 2017
7
4 Remembering the late Te Awanuiarangi Black: Former Māori Constituent Councillor for Mauao
On 11 November 2016, the highly respected Regional Councillor, Tauranga iwi leader and educator, Te Awanuiārangi Black (affectionately known as Awa) passed away at the age of 48. His contribution as a councillor was exceptional.
His positive influence, humility and ability to be articulate in both English and Māori, contributed to many decisions to improve Council’s responsiveness to Māori in the region.
In 2013, Awa was elected onto the Bay of Plenty Regional Council as the Member for the Mauao constituency. He retained his seat for the 2016-2019 triennium, and was the Chair of Komiti Māori. Awa was an astute politician and thinker. He was influential in the Regional Council’s integration of tikanga māori and was behind the Council’s adoption of its Māori name, Toi Moana.
To commemorate Awanui, Council and Komiti Māori approved the introduction of an education scholarship/fund (He Toka Tumoana), consisting of two $5,000 scholarships to be administered through the existing Regional Community Outcomes Fund (RCOF).
This scholarship was launched on 30th November 2017 open to all students/researchers in the Bay of Plenty.
This fund will assist with environmental education, financial support and encourage mātauranga Māori research and education.
5 Year ahead
Komiti Māori will continue to hold meeting on marae across the region in 2018. The importance of engaging with Māori on marae is invaluable.
Komiti Māori will look to review the current Terms of Reference and develop a work programme for 2018. Members will contribute to Councils Long Term Plan consultation and deliberations and will continue to be a conduit to enable Māori participation in decision-making processes.
Nikora Heitia Office Assistant (Matauranga Maori Framework) for Strategic Engagement Manager
29 November 2017 Click here to enter text.
Page 27 of 170
Report To: Komiti Māori
Meeting Date: 12 December 2017
Report From: David Phizacklea, Regional Integrated Planning Manager
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
Executive Summary
Implementation of the operative Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement is ongoing. This report sets out a process for undertaking Council’s second iwi perceptions survey, and presents findings from the ‘Method 44 Developing Mauri Models’ project.
Iwi Perceptions Survey
Findings from the first iwi perceptions survey were reported to Komiti Māori in June 2016. The survey contributes to monitoring and evaluating the operative Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement iwi resource management objectives. It also provides information on iwi/hapū and whānau experiences with Council resource consent processes.
Approval is sought to undertake the second iwi perception survey for three months commencing from 1 February 2018. Understanding the perceptions of the region’s kaitiaki, iwi and marae based resource management practitioners assists in evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of iwi resource management provisions in the Regional Policy Statement.
Mauri Model Report
Boffa Miskell has completed a project for Council on implementing Method 44 of the Regional Policy Statement ‘Developing Mauri Models’. The Boffa Miskell report findings include a number of recommendations for Council to consider. They identify key elements or principles a mauri model framework should entail, and what matters or actions need to be considered to further develop a Mauri framework. These include developing a pool of iwi technical advisors and developing at least three mauri pilot projects to test and assess the mauri framework.
The report recommends the initial basis for developing a framework to use for assessing mauri in relation to applications for resource consents, monitoring consented activities and monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions where they are of significance to iwi. Staff propose developing a mauri model toolkit whereby examples of mauri assessment in resource management processes can be shared with iwi and hapū who can then determine whether to adapt them to suite their own circumstances. This approach recognises different iwi will have their own preferences for assessing mauri but that there are fundamental concepts that many share (e.g, tapu, noa, rāhui, ngā tangata).
Page 29 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
2
Recommendations
That the Komiti Māori under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey;
2 Approves staff deploying the second Iwi Perceptions Survey for three months from 1 February 2018;
3 Approves making the Boffa Miskell ‘Method 44 Developing Mauri Models’ project report and literature review available on Council’s website and notifying project participants of its availability;
4 Directs staff to develop and report back a toolbox of examples of existing models and frameworks used to assess the mauri of natural resources to be made available on Council’s website;
5 Acknowledges separate iwi and hapū will have their own preferences for assessing mauri of natural resources within their rohe;
6 Notes feedback on the Boffa Miskell project report and Mauri Model Toolbox proposal will be part of the next iwi perceptions survey in February 2018; and
7 Confirms that the decision has a low level of significance.
1 Purpose
This report presents work undertaken by Boffa Miskell to implement Method 44 - Developing Mauri Models of the operative Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS). The report seeks approval for staff to develop a toolbox of examples of existing models and frameworks used to assess the mauri of natural resources to be made available on Council website.
Komiti Maori approval is also sought to undertake the second iwi perceptions survey for three months from Thursday 1 February 2018 until Thursday 3 May 2018. The second survey will build on advice received from participants and Komiti Māori in response to results of the first survey in 2016.
2 RPS Implementation Strategy
The second generation RPS became operative on 1 October 2014. It provides a framework for sustainably managing the region's natural and physical resources. It highlights regionally significant issues including issues of resource management significance to iwi. It is a directive policy document setting out what needs to be achieved (objectives) and how it will be achieved (policies and methods). Regional and district plans must actively implement its policies and where directed policies shall be considered in resource consents decision making processes.
At its 17 November 2015 meeting the Regional Direction and Delivery Committee approved an RPS Implementation Strategy (RPSIS). For the operative Regional Policy Statement to be effective, it requires consistent implementation and monitoring of its policy and method requirements. That process is outlined in the RPSIS. The
Page 30 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
3
RPSIS purpose is to ensure the systematic implementation of all operative Regional Policy Statement policies and methods.
The Regional Policy Statement contains 103 policies and 72 methods of implementation across 11 resource topics addressing the significant resource management issues for the region (e.g. air and water quality). It sets out the need to prepare detailed implementation work streams for each resource topic setting out how implementation will occur and be monitored over time. It will identify key actions, timeframes, responsibilities and any resourcing gaps.
An initial assessment identified specific methods that were projects in their own right and needed to be prioritised for implementation. This included Method 44: Developing Mauri Models which states:
“Work with tangata whenua in the development of ways to assess the mauri of natural resources with the intent that such methods are implemented in regional plans for monitoring consented activities, the state of the environment and the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions, where these involve matters of significance to Māori”.
3 Mauri Model Project
The Te Hirihiri team at Boffa Miskell Ltd were engaged to develop a robust methodology for assessing Method 44 of the RPS in relation to natural resources in future regional plan changes and regulatory frameworks (i.e policy, methods and rules) where these involve matters of significance to Maori.
An initial literature review was undertaken which collated a range of existing mauri assessment models used throughout the country to assess the mauri of natural resources in relation to matters of significance to iwi.
Tangata whenua across the region were contacted via the iwi contacts database, inviting them to notify staff if they wanted to be consulted as part of this project to develop ways of assessing the Mauri of natural resources. Of those contacted 26 responses were received from tangata whenua (i.e. iwi, hapū and Māori land trust representatives) who agreed to participate.
The respondents were provided with the Boffa Miskell Literature review (as contained as a supporting document to this agenda) along with a list of interview questions. Regional Council staff liaised with the respondents to organise meeting times, dates and venues. Members from Boffa Miskell’s Te Hihiri team subsequently attended and facilitated the hui.
A total of 14 hui were held with 23 iwi, hapū and trusts, these being: Ngāti Mākino, Ngāti Pikao, Ngāti Whakahemo, Tapuika, Ngāti Whakaue ki Rotorua, Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu, Whakatōhea, Ruaktoki Lands Trust, Ngāi Tūhoe, Ngāti Rangitihi, Ngāti Kea, Ngāti Tuara, Ngāti Manawa, Ngāti Awa, Ngāti Tāwhaki, Ngāti Hokopu, Te Patuwai, Tapuika, Ngāti Manawa, Motiti Rohe Moana Trust, Ngāti Ranginui, Ngāi Te Rangi and Ngāti Te Wai. Boffa Miskell subsequently prepared a report summarising general findings of the meetings and have proposed a potential framework Council could use for assessing mauri. That report is attached in Appendix 1.
Overall the report indicates a number of common themes when assessing mauri.
Page 31 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
4
The first principles being that kaitiaki who are the mana whenua or ahi kā of the area were the first point of engagement for the assessment of mauri of any natural resources. Any mauri framework should be developed with the support assistance and guidance from mana whenua.
Mauri is a key cultural value for all tangata whenua, and the traditional association of mauri was linked to the understanding that we are all connected through whakapapa from Papatuanuku and Ranginui. The RPS defines Mauri as:
“The essential life force, energy or principle that tangata whenua believe exists in all things in the natural world, including people. Tangata whenua believe it is the vital essence or life force by which all things cohere in nature. When Mauri is absent there is no life. When Mauri is degraded, or absent, tangata whenua believe this can mean that they have been remiss in their kaitiakitanga responsibilities and this affects their relationship with the atua (Māori gods). Mauri can also be imbued within manmade or physical objects”.
Each of the tangata whenua respondents had a different view on what mauri is and how it could be assessed. There were differing views on the need for establishing a mauri model framework with some groups supportive, others thought it needed further discussion and some were sceptical about whether a framework would assist.
Ngati Mākino and Whakatōhea were the only two iwi groups to provide the basis for a potential framework to assess mauri.
Based on the feedback from the consultation meetings and the support to develop a mauri assessment tool, respondents considered the role for Bay of Plenty Regional Council was to;
Build positive relationships with iwi
Communicate with iwi
Resource further engagement with iwi.
4 Next Steps
The Boffa Miskell report makes a number of recommendations based on the consultation undertaken during the project. The recommendations identify key elements or principles a mauri model framework should entail, and what matters or actions need to be considered to further develop a Mauri framework. For example these include developing a pool of iwi technical advisors and developing at least three mauri pilot projects to test and assess the mauri framework.
The report recommends the initial basis for developing a framework to use for assessing mauri in relation to applications for resource consent, monitoring consented activities and monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions where they are of significance to iwi. However, the report identifies more time and energy is required to further develop a framework. In particular for Toi Moana to work with Ngāti Mākino collective and the Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board to develop their respective Mauri frameworks further. A key recommendation is for Toi Moana to ensure that work on Method 44 is in alignment with those related components under the proposed Matauranga Māori Framework. As noted earlier, staff have considered how the Matauranga Māori project
Page 32 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
5
has developed and believe there are potential synergies and learnings between the two projects. Notwithstanding the reports’ recommendations, staff propose developing a toolbox of examples of existing models and frameworks used to assess the mauri of natural resources to be made available on Council’s website. The toolbox can be refined over time as further examples are developed that can be shared with interested iwi and hapū. This is considered the most pragmatic means of implementing the intent of Method 44 whilst acknowledging the findings of the research and consultation undertaken by Te Hihirihi. Staff would then report back to the Committee on a Mauri Model toolkit in the new year. In the interim staff recommend making the Boffa Miskell report and associated literature review available on Council’s website and notifying tangata whenua across the region of its availability.
5 Iwi Perception Survey
The iwi perception survey forms part of the monitoring requirements for the iwi resource management objectives in the Regional Policy Statement. The survey identifies the level of awareness iwi/hapū and whānau have of the RPS and should assist in raising awareness of these iwi resource management tools. The results of the first RPS Iwi Perceptions Survey were reported to the Komiti Māori hui on 29 June 2016 and are available on Council’s website at www.boprc.govt.nz/operative regional policy statement/iwi perceptions.
For consistency purposes the survey replicates the first iwi perceptions survey and continues to include questions regarding iwi/hapū and whanu experiences with Council’s resource consents processes. The survey does however build in additional questions relating to iwi affiliation and whether the respondent has any particular views on the Mauri Model research undertaken by Boffa Miskell and reported as a separate item in this meeting agenda.
The Iwi Perceptions Survey questions are provided in Appendix 2. Part 4 of the RPS requires Council to monitor the efficiency and effectiveness of all RPS policies and methods, and measure the extent to which objectives are being achieved.
The RPS contains iwi resource management provisions that are linked to monitoring indicators. These monitoring indicators require Council to undertake regular iwi perception surveys. Understanding the perceptions of the region’s kaitiaki, iwi and marae based resource management practitioners will assist evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of these provisions. The primary purpose of the survey is to contribute to the RPS monitoring and evaluation. This is a requirement of the RPS and sections 35 and 79 the Resource Management Act 1991. The survey results will also contribute to review of iwi/hapū and whānau experiences with Regional Council’s resource consents processes. The next formal RPS review is due in October 2024. RPS iwi resource management provisions to be monitored include objectives, policies and methods relating to:
Page 33 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
6
Consultation
Kaitiakitanga
Development of multiple owned Māori land
Partnership and co-management agreements
Iwi and hapū resource management plans
Maintaining and enhancing the mauri of water, land, air and geothermal
resources; and
Recognition and provision for the relationships of Māori and their ancestral
taonga.
6 Timeframe and Process
Subject to gaining Komiti Māori approval, the process for the second survey involves:
1. Deploying the survey on Survey Monkey for three months from Thursday 1 February 2018 until Thursday 3 May 2018
2. Conduct more in-depth interviews (4-6 persons) with survey respondents
3. Analyse and report survey results to Komiti Māori and Consents
4. Email copy of survey results to survey respondents; and
5. Include survey results on Council’s website.
An objective for the second survey is to increase participation beyond the 20 who participated in the original survey. As part of the follow up interviews for the first survey respondents were asked for their ideas on how we could improve survey participation. In response to those suggestions the Iwi Perceptions Survey will be:
emailed to people on Council’s Māori Contacts Directory, encouraging the survey be sent onto marae and Māori land trust contacts
promoted the survey through Council’s various co-governance and co-management forums, through the region’s tertiary education institutions (e.g. Whare Wānanga o Aotearoa and Toi Oho Mai)
promoted through Council’s ‘Have your say’ and Kaupapa Māori web pages.
The results will also be shared with the region’s city and district councils as part of the RPS Implementation Strategy project. This reflects that many survey participants’ perceptions were relevant to their experiences dealing with city and district councils in the region.
7 Implications for Māori
Resource management issues of significance to iwi authorities in the region are required by section 62(1)(b)(i) of the Act to be identified and included in the RPS. Virtually all iwi and hapū resource management plans identify the degradation of mauri of natural resources as an issue of resource management significance with respective rohe. Consequently the RPS identifies the degradation of the mauri of water, land, air and geothermal resources as an issue of resource management significance to iwi in the region. Method 44 was inserted into the RPS in order to resolve an appeal by
Page 34 of 170
Regional Policy Statement Implementation - Mauri Model and Iwi Perceptions Survey
7
Ngāti Mākino in relation to the iwi resource management topic in 2013. By agreeing to including this method in the RPS Regional Council is committed to ensuring its implementation.
Some iwi consulted as part of this project see real value in the mauri model framework for iwi, hapū and whānau to apply in resource management decisions making processes. There has been wide interest in such a framework and balancing western science with matauranga Māori in decision making processes. The project findings will make a contribution to this body of knowledge.
A key challenge is ensuring a mauri model framework is suitable for refinement and application by a range of iwi and hapū across the region. Only tangata whenua are capable of assessing the mauri of their taonga and they will likely have differences in how they view and prefer assessing mauri. The iwi perceptions survey will assist Council monitoring iwi and hapū perceptions of its performance implementing the various iwi resource management objectives and gauge iwi perceptions of Regional Council’s resource consents process.
8 Council’s Accountability Framework
8.1 Long Term Plan Alignment
The cost of implementing the Regional Policy Statement is budgeted for in the Long Term Plan (2015-2025) in the Regional Planning activity. The 2017/18 budget for implementation of the RPS is $42,091. Costs for setting up, analysing and reporting on the survey are staff time only.
Current Budget Implications
Costs in setting up, analysing and reporting on the survey are staff time only. These costs are met within the wider Regional Policy Statement implementation budget for 2017/18.
Future Budget Implications
The biennial iwi perceptions survey costs are provided for under the Long Term Plan 2015-2025 within the RPS Monitoring and Implementation budget under the Regional Planning activity.
Nassah Steed Programme Leader (Statutory Policy) for Regional Integrated Planning Manager
4 December 2017 Click here to enter text.
Page 35 of 170
Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report
Prepared for Toi Moana (Bay of Plenty Regional Council)
10 August 2017
Page 39 of 170
Document Quality Assurance
Bibliographic reference for citation: Boffa Miskell Limited 2017. Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited for Toi Moana (Bay of Plenty Regional Council).
Final Report Prepared and Reviewed by:
Te Pio Kawe Associate Principal / Kaiarataki Te Hīhiri - Strategic Advisor Māori
Nicole Hodgson Graduate Advisor Māori / Graduate Ecologist, Boffa Miskell Limited
Sean Grace Associate Principal / Senior Planner, Member NZPI, Boffa Miskell Limited
Literature Review Report Prepared by:
Mapihi Martin-Paul Kaiaho Te Hīhiri / Graduate Advisor Māori Boffa Miskell Limited
Jade Wikaira Kaiarataki Te Hīhiri / Strategic Advisor Māori, Boffa Miskell Limited
Nicole Hodgson Graduate Advisor Māori / Graduate Ecologist, Boffa Miskell Limited
Literature Review Report Reviewed by:
Craig Pauling Principal / Kaiarataki Te Hīhiri / Strategic Advisor Māori, Boffa Miskell Limited
Te Hīhiri Consultation Team: Eynon Delamere, Te Pio Kawe, Nicole Hodgson and Sean Grace.
Status: Final Revision / version: 01 Issue date: 10 August 2017
Use and Reliance This report has been prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited on the specific instructions of our Client. It is solely for our Client’s use for the purpose for which it is intended in accordance with the agreed scope of work. Boffa Miskell does not accept any liability or responsibility in relation to the use of this report contrary to the above, or to any person other than the Client. Any use or reliance by a third party is at that party's own risk. Where information has been supplied by the Client or obtained from other external sources, it has been assumed that it is accurate, without independent verification, unless otherwise indicated. No liability or responsibility is accepted by Boffa Miskell Limited for any errors or omissions to the extent that they arise from inaccurate information provided by the Client or any external source.
Cover photograph: Active waterfall in Auckland City, © Tim Church, 2016
Page 41 of 170
RĀRANGI ŪPOKO / CONTENTS 1.0 HE KUPU WHAKATAKI / Introduction 1
1.1 Ngā whakaaro rangatira / Acknowledgments 1 1.2 Tāhuhu Kōrero / Background 2 1.3 Tangata whenua engagement 6
2.0 KUPU WHAKAHOKI / Response 7
2.1 Mana whenua, ahi kā / ahikāroa 7 2.2 Mauri 8 2.3 Fresh Regional Water 9 2.4 Mauri Framework 10 2.5 The Role of Toi Moana 17
3.0 MATAPAKI / Discussion 18
3.1 Regional Policy Statement 18 3.2 Mauri Frameworks 20
4.0 TE WHAKAMUTUNGA / Conclusion 24
5.0 TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendations 25
6.0 KŌHINGA KŌRERO / References 27
APITIHANGA / Appendices
Appendix A: Glossary
Appendix B: Interview questionnaire
Appendix C: RPS Iwi Resource Management Policies, Objectives and Methods
Appendix D: The Aashukan Declaration
Appendix E: RPS Appendix F, Set 4 Māori culture and traditions criteria
Appendix F: Suggestion for a Mauri Model Toolkit
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 2
Page 42 of 170
1.0 HE KUPU WHAKATAKI / Introduction Toi Moana (the Bay of Plenty Regional Council) engaged Boffa Miskell Ltd (BML) to undertake an assessment of Method 44 of the Regional Policy Statement: “Developing Mauri Models”. This assessment was undertaken in consultation with tangata whenua, in terms of investigating the mauri of natural resources in the spectrum of environmental management, within the regional regulatory framework. This report collates and summarises the responses from 13 hui held with representatives from Iwi, hapū, land trusts or collective entities to discuss the opportunity to implement Method 44 across the Bay of Plenty Region. The tangata whenua groups all shared a common understanding of mauri.
The intention of the project was to interview tangata whenua to seek their response to the concept of developing a framework or model to assess the effects on the mauri of their natural resources that will contribute to the local and regional management decisions of these resources.
The development of a mauri framework / model within the Regional Policy Statement (RPS) provides a platform for engagement with other RPS methods and Iwi resource management policy issues and objectives. This includes resource consent activities, the monitoring of consented activities, state of the environment reports and the opportunity to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions on matters of significance to Māori / tangata whenua.
The other considerations for developing an assessment tool revolve around the particular focus on the level of tangata whenua leadership and expertise required to develop the mauri framework or model. Would this option be taken up by local iwi or practitioners themselves working in the environment space or other Māori consultancies?
The other option is to utilise an existing tool, adapting/refining that tool and/or creating an entirely new tool. In all cases, the involvement of mana whenua, and their ownership of the process is fundamental and will require a structured approach to achieve. This can include developing clear relationship agreements and/or agreed work programmes, along with appropriate resourcing.
This project focuses on understanding the views of mana whenua in relation to mauri and undertaking assessments, including preferences for particular methods as well as how assessments should be undertaken and managed.
To reiterate, discussions during the consultations are in regards to mauri of natural resources and not of mauri of anything else.
1.1 Ngā whakaaro rangatira / Acknowledgments Tēnā koutou katoa e ngā rangatira, e ngā kuia, e ngā kaumātua, e ngā kaiwhakahaere, e ngā pūkenga me ngā kaitiaki o ngā taonga tuku iho o a tātou mātua tūpuna. Tēnei te mihi ki a koutou katoa Te Komiti Nui o Ngāti Whakaue; Ngāti Makino Iwi Authority; Ngāti Whakahemo; Te Mana o Ngāti Rangitihi Trust; Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Pikiao; Motiti Rohe Moana Trust; Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu; Tapuika Iwi Authority; Whakatōhea Māori Trust Board; Ngāti Ranginui Inc Society; Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Te Rangi; Ngāti Te Wai; Ngā Kaitiaki o Ngāti Whakaue; Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Manawa; A collective of Rūātoki Lands Trust Including: Tawa Kaiti Lands Trust, Te Manawa o Tūhoe A Trust and Te Pae o Tūhoe; Ngāti Tawhaki; Ngāti Kea Ngāti Tuarā; Te Patuwai ki Motiti; Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Awa; Ngāti Pukeko; Te Pahipoto; Ngāti
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 1
Page 43 of 170
Hokopu ki te Whare o Toroa; Ngāi Tamawera rātou ko Ngāti Maumoana, i huihui ai tātou ki te whakawhiti kōrero e pā ana ki te aromatawai mō te mauri o te taiao, me ōnā tikanga kei roto ki tēnā whānau, ki tēnā hapū arā me ngā tini iwi o te motu. Kei roto i a tāua ringa ngā whakanekeneke o te kaupapa nei me ngā korero kei roto i ngā mahere o te Kaunihera o te Toi Moana. Nō reirā, ki a koutou katoa, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou, tēnā koutou katoa.
The Te Hīhiri team acknowledges the time, effort, energy and hospitality extended by all of the iwi, hapū, whanau and land trusts entities we met with from May in Rotorua through to June 2017 in Maketu. The interviews and discussions were held at various venues and locations that were practical and suitable to the tangata whenua participants.
As many of you expressed during the interviews that this is but the starting point for a greater discussion to occur with Toi Moana on the collective management of the regions physical and natural resources, where the assessment of mauri is but one of those conversations.
We also acknowledge the assistance and support given to by the Toi Moana policy and consents staff with background material and operational experiences in working with tangata whenua groups. In particular, Nassah Steed and Esta Farquhar for contacting and organising the consultation meetings dates and times with the tangata whenua participants. We also thank the Maketu Voluntary Fire Brigade for the use of their facilities for three consultation meetings.
Ka mutu, “e kore te kūmara e kōrero mō tōna ake reka” engari, me mihi ka tika ki ōku tuahine, ki ōku tuakana o Te Hīhiri i tautoko i tēnei kaupapa whakahirahira mō tātou te iwi Māori.
1.2 Tāhuhu Kōrero / Background
1.2.1 Regional Policy Statement
The Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement (RPS) promotes sustainable management of the natural and physical resources within the Bay of Plenty. The policies and methods within the RPS are set to achieve the integrated sustainable management of these resources. The RPS is the leading document for the management of natural and physical resources throughout the Bay of Plenty Region, and identifies the significant issues we are facing in the environment. Tangata Whenua as the constituent iwi, hapū, marae and land trusts are taking a more visible and proactive role in the environmental management spectrum at a local and regional level.
The RPS is implicitly aligned with the key provisions of the Resource Management Act (RMA) 1991 and National Policy Statements. Part 2 of the RMA requires all persons exercising functions and powers under the Act to recognise and provide for various matters; this includes:
• Section 6(e) requires persons to recognise and provide for the relationships that Māori and their culture and traditions have with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.
• Subsection 6(g) also requires the “protection of protect customary rights” under the marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011.
• Section 7(a) kaitiakitanga and (aa) the ethic of stewardship requires that where the effects on kaitiakitanga exercised by tangata whenua are relevant, they should be considered and evaluated in the decision making process.
• Section 8 further requires council to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 2
Page 44 of 170
Māori / tangata whenua can also relate to all of the other matters identified in sections 6 and 7. However, the above matters relate specifically with the effects on Māori relationships with the environment, taonga, protected customary rights and the exercise of stewardship / kaitiakitanga.
These RMA provisions have been incorporated into Part two of the RPS and are reflected in specific sections. Section 2.6, Iwi resource management, outlines the issues of significance to Iwi authorities within the Region regarding Iwi resource management. From this, a number of objectives are set to address these issues with corresponding methods to achieve such objectives.
Method 44 is one of core Iwi guidance methods developed to implement the relevant policies, and address the objectives and issues which effect Iwi in the management of natural resources (Figure 1). The purpose of Method 44 is to develop robust methodology for assessing the mauri of natural resources for inclusion in future regional plan changes and regulatory frameworks (i.e. policy, methods and rules).
Figure 1 provides the context for Method 44 and the other Iwi resource management methods.
Notes relating to Figure 1 above: 1. Resource Management Act 1991, is New Zealand's principal legislation platform which sets
out how we should sustainably manage our environment based on an effects approach. 2. National Policy Statements provide crown objectives and policies on matters of national
significance to be implemented by regional and local authorities’. 3. BOP RPS provides direction to the development of regional and district plans, resource
consents and other regulations in the RMA and NPS. 4. The Operative RPS identified 10 regionally significant iwi resource management issues,
with an additional 8 specific matters relating to Iwi authorities. 5. Objectives 13 to 17 in Table 6, seek to address the significant iwi resource management
issues through all policies including 8 specific Iwi resource management policies and 8 methods / actions.
6. Monitoring provisions to ensure that the methods are achieving the objectives.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 3
Page 45 of 170
The implementation of Method 44 aims to help achieve the following objectives shown in the flowchart below in Figure 2.
• Objective 10: Cumulative effects of existing and new activities are appropriately managed.
• Objective 12: The timely exchange, consideration of and response to relevant information by all parties with an interest in the resolution of a resource management issue.
• Objective 17: The mauri of water, land, air and geothermal resources is safeguarded and where it is degraded, where appropriate, it is enhanced over time.
• Objective 21: Recognition of, and provision for, the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga.
• Objective 30: The quantity of available water: (a) provides for a range of uses and values; (b) is allocated and used efficiently; (c) safeguards the mauri and life supporting capacity of water bodies; and (d) meets the reasonably foreseeable needs of future
generations.
At a regional planning level, the objectives, policies and methods included in the RPS are given effect by the corresponding provisions within the Bay of Plenty Regional Plans. Consideration of effects on mauri is required in the provisions of the Regional Plans, most notably the On-site Effluent Treatment Regional Plan, the Regional Air Plan, the Operative and Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plans, the Regional River Gravel Management Plan, the Regional Water and Land Plan, the Rotorua Geothermal Regional Plan and the Tarawera River Catchment Plan. Generally speaking, the assessment of mauri is not dealt with in a consistent manner across these planning documents.
Figure 2 Shows the RPS objectives, policies that Method 44 was created to achieve (see Appendix C for further descriptions of policies and objectives).
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 4
Page 46 of 170
1.2.2 Mauri and kaitiaki / kaitiakitanga
From a Māori world view, ancestral knowledge, or mātauranga Māori, advocates that all living creatures and natural resources are infused with their own mauri and co-exist in a collaborative state.
The maintenance of mauri is a traditional practice of ensuring that the relationship between all parts within the environment, including between people and the environment, is preserved. This practice forms a fundamental role of kaitiaki (guardian) and kaitiakitanga (guardianship). These practices are based on a natural order and inter-dependency of the cosmology traditions of Ranginui, Papatūānuku and their children as the guardians / gods of their respective domains.
The personification of Atua and natural resources (maunga, awa etc.) reinforces the relationships and connections between people and the environment through the use of whakapapa (genealogy) as human relationships. Through transferring these human characteristics and values, indigenous cultures like Māori have developed a nurturing, caring and often territorial relationship with their maunga, awa and lands. Tangata whenua have seen these as ancestral relationships with their environment because Māori are connected to the land. “Ko au te awa, ko te awa au” - I am the river and the river is me.
Kaitiaki, refers to the people who hold the mana whenua (territorial authority over that area) as rangatiratanga. Mana whenua / ahi ka must exercise its authority and leadership in accordance with the values of kaitiakitanga, to act unselfishly, with right mind and heart, and with proper procedure.
Kaitiakitanga is a concept of collective obligations and responsibilities on the hapū to maintain and preserve the mauri of the environment or resource to sustain life.
In addition to this, the definition of mauri and how it is perceived varies throughout Te Ao Māori (The Māori World) and can vary from Iwi to Iwi and internally between hapū and whanau; yet all definitions are true and correct for each kin group.
This variation between hapū requires a series of individual assessments to be conducted between a range of Iwi and hapū representatives - with the intention of these assessments/interviews being to understand the individual’s definition of mauri and allow them to provide an authentic representation of the state of mauri in their rohe (territory).
The ability to understand the traditional perspectives, values, customary practices, associations and principles that underpin the essence and energy that manifests itself within the concept of mauri is an empowering and enlightening journey for all.
The RPS describes mauri as a key element required to sustain life in all living things in nature which must co-exist together:
“the essential life force, energy or principle that tangata whenua believe exists in all things in the natural world, including people. Tangata whenua believe it is the vital essence or life force by which all things cohere in nature.”
The second part of the definition prescribes to the belief and notion that mauri ebbs and flows and can be restored or lost over time by the actions of kaitiaki and is a reflection of maintaining the cohesion and balance on the environment. Kaitiakitanga is a divine relationship from the Atua that can be transferred to inanimate objects.
“When Mauri is absent there is no life. When Mauri is degraded, or absent, tangata whenua believe this can mean that they have been remiss in their kaitiakitanga
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 5
Page 47 of 170
responsibilities and this affects their relationship with the Atua (Māori gods). Mauri can also be imbued within manmade or physical objects.”
The Waitangi Tribunal in Wai 262 claims described mauri as the:
“life principle or living essence contained in all things, animate and inanimate. All things are infused with mauri (a living essence or sprit) that we are all related through a common whakapapa.”
The Tribunal discusses the principle values of mauri in the context of mātauranga Māori, whakapapa, whanaungatanga (kinship relationships) kaitiaki in a physical form with kaitiakitanga providing a system of law. Kaitiakitanga is seen as an obligation, arising from the kinship (whakapapa), to nurture and care for the physical well-being of people and the spiritual essence of the natural resources and feature.
Mātauranga Māori is an essential element in assessing mauri. Traditional knowledge and observations of changes in the seasons, tides and weather patterns, maramataka or local planting or fishing calendars are examples of mātauranga Māori. This knowledge has been handed down through generations to those that reside in the area (ahi kā, haukāinga, kaitiaki).
1.3 Tangata whenua engagement Toi Moana canvassed those Iwi, hapū and other Māori entities on their Iwi Authorities Contact List from the Māori Contacts Database about the opportunity to participate in the development of the Method 44 Mauri model project. A total of 26 tangata whenua groups (Iwi, hapū and trusts) agreed to participate in the project and be interviewed by BML.
Engagement with tangata whenua was undertaken by BML with hui held without Toi Moana staff to allow for focused discussion. Consultation hui generally ranged from one-and-a-half to three hours and where requested, were held with multiple groups resulting in a total of 14 interviews.
Prior to the interviews BML provided participants with a literature review that summarised current mauri models and other indigenous monitoring tools and examples relative to the implementation of Method 44 across a range of environments and scales. The Literature Review Report also included a summary of the hapū and Iwi management plans lodged with Toi Moana and focussing on the significant issues for the participating Iwi and hapū. At the time of preparing the review, an electronic copy of the Whakatohea Māori Trust Board management plan was not available for inclusion into the report. A copy of “Tāwharau O Ngā Hapū, Whakatohea Resource Management Plan, July 1993; was presented to BML at the interview held on 15 May 2017.
Participants also thought that the literature review could have included information on the significance of mauri from the Waitangi Tribunal Report WAI 262 “Ko Aotearoa Tēnei - A Report into Claims Concerning New Zealand Law and Policy Affecting Māori Culture and Identity; Te Taumata Tuarua Volume 1 and 2” and Environment Court 2015 NZEnvC 90 Sustainable Matata v Bay of Plenty Regional Council & Whakatane District Council.
The review of existing assessment tools highlights a diversity of approaches. These approaches either focus on questionnaire/site assessment based systems, or process/decision support
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 6
Page 48 of 170
systems, as well as tools that are either focussed on a single environment (e.g. freshwater) or that can be applied across the range of environments, scales and issues.
BML also provided a questionnaire which was developed to guide the interviews (Appendix B).
2.0 KUPU WHAKAHOKI / Response The discussion in the consultation sessions with each tangata whenua group were different in content and their experiences that reflected the physical nature of the rohe and the locations for each hui. However, during the discussions the same core values of mana whenua, haukāinga, hapū, mātauranga Māori, kaitiaki, kaitiakitanga, whakapapa and the historical accounts (korero) were raised that linked the people from these places to the mauri of the resources that have sustained them for generations. Mauri is a key element that is important to Māori environmental management.
The other matter that has influenced the responses and opinions of tangata whenua were their past experiences in working with local and or regional councils on resource consent applications.
The following sections are the main themes from our consultation interviews with the 13 groups with specific quotes from the interviews to emphasise each theme.
2.1 Mana whenua, ahi kā / ahikāroa The first principle that all tangata whenua groups agreed on was, that the first point of engagement for the assessment of mauri of any natural resource must be with the kaitiaki who are the mana whenua or ahi kā of that area. These are the people that have the mātauranga Māori (traditional knowledge), observations, experience and relationships with specific sites and the wider cultural landscape. It is the kaumātua, kuia and kaitiaki of the mana whenua that will be able to provide a historical account of their sites and areas of significance (e.g. marae, papakāinga, pa, urupā, waahi tapu), mahinga areas, an indication of previous land use activities, predominant physical features, local events and the people that occupied the area. This is all useful information in determining the effects of proposed activities on the cultural relationships tangata whenua have with their lands, waters and other natural resources.
The development of a mauri assessment framework or tool must be developed with the support, assistance and guidance of mana whenua.
A framework around mauri will provide a structured approach that will assist some kaitiaki and other whanau members on the ground. In gaining an appreciation of the customary relationships that a specific site has in the context of that area with the wider catchment and district we are empowering our people through the transfer of traditional knowledge that builds a foundation of respect, understanding and responsibility. This reinforces the collective responsibility of whanau and hapū with the exercise of kaitiakitanga.
“Mauri is intergenerational and looks at all aspects of life and the environment.” - Ngāti Kea and Ngāti Tuarā.
“Tangata whenua need to be the ones that measure any environmental elements. Need to be living within the environment to feel Mauri. Ngāti Manawa are an integral part of their environment and have significant roles and responsibilities as kaitiaki over their rohe” - Ngāti Manawa.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 7
Page 49 of 170
2.2 Mauri Mauri was immediately identified by all tangata whenua participants as a key cultural value for their respective entities and their roles and responsibilities as mana whenua, kaitiaki, trustee, hunter and harvester. The interviews produced a broad range of responses to the questions of ‘what is your Iwi / hapū view on the mauri of your natural resources and how would you make such as assessment?’ Further comments in regards to the description of mauri included;
“Spiritual and historical connection to the land and water.” – Rūātoki.
“Mauri is embedded in everything and it’s the glue that binds us all together” - Makino Cluster Interview.
“Mauri is interconnected not isolated.” - Ngāti Manawa.
“Mauri is alive in all places and is exciting.” - Whakatohea.
“you are a living descendent of your tupuna carrying out the traditional and customary activities of your tupuna to ensure the mauri of the land, moana or river is enhanced and not degraded.” - Ngāi Te Rangi.
“Geographical features could also encompass mauri” - Rūātoki.
“Mauri is about our historical references what we know have seen” - Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu.
The high level of confirmation of the importance of mauri by the respondents aligns with the results from the 2016 Iwi perceptions survey that the primary role of kaitiaki is to protect the mauri of natural resources in their rohe. 89% of the respondents considered that the mauri of the natural resources in their rohe had degraded in the past 5 years.
2.2.1 Te Mātāpuna o Mauri
All of the tangata whenua participants acknowledged and recognised that their traditional association with the principle of mauri in the environment is based on the common traditions and understanding that we are all connected through whakapapa from Papatūānuku and Ranginui and their children.
“Mauri has a whakapapa” - Tapūika.
“Mauri and wairua are all linked by whakapapa. Traditional relationship of whakapapa is based on the holistic approach of our Iwi Management plan.” - Whakatohea.
“Ko te whakapapa te mea i hono mātou ki te mauri. This can be interpreted to describe our traditional expressions of our genealogy that shows our ancestral descent from our Atua and the creation legends of Ranginui and Papatūānuku. Hence, our Atua transferred and gave mauri (the essence of life) to mankind, animals, plants and all natural resources.” - Rūātoki.
“Although mauri directly translates to ‘life essence’ it still means so much more to our people. This was expressed by the chairman in terms of a traditional values, principle and relationship with Papatūānuku, Ranginui and their children.” – Patuwai.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 8
Page 50 of 170
“The whakapapa behind mauri highlights the depth of relationship and responsibility tangata whenua have with mauri… although mauri directly translates to ‘life essence’ it still means so much more to our people.” - Ngāti Awa.
2.2.2 Diversity of views
There was a diverse range of Iwi groups (settled, mandated, in negotiations and Deed of settlement); hapū / marae entities and land trusts with ranging levels of experience in the environment management matters and processes.
Throughout the interviews the definition of mauri varied between each group and in some hui between individuals within the same group. While these differences of opinion were noted they were also accepted as being correct.
Ngāti Whakaue recognise and believe that the people within their rohe have their own specific definition of mauri, which in some cases it is believed that mauri “can’t be defined in words because it is infinite”. Mauri also ranged from being defined as purely the physical aspect of a resource, to a broader definition of including everything; that mauri is the life force and everything has a life force.
2.2.3 Holistic approach
Mauri includes physical sensory attributes and well-being of the environment (i.e. what it looks like, what are the associated sounds and smells / odours in the area and tastes) but also includes our cultural traditions and knowledge with our individual and collective spiritual welfare. This is a reflection of our holistic Māori world view.
“Mauri is not viewed as an individual attribute/value, but needs to be taken into account with other Māori values” – Makino.
“Kaitiakitanga, mauri, mana, mahinga kai and māra kai are viewed as being connected. Mauri is one component of mātauranga Māori.” - Tapūika
The Ngāi Te Rangi representative divided “mauri ora” into three parts to demonstrate the relationship principles of kaitiaki and mauri:
• “Ma” represents the spiritual relationship / connection with the environment / place; • “Uri” represents your whakapapa that you are a descendent of your tupuna; and • “Ora” represents that you are the living and physical connection with the
environment.
Tangata whenua also recognise that the actions of other people in the community, as well as commercial and industrial land and water users, all impact on the mauri of the same environment. Therefore, they must acknowledge and manage their effects on the environment in order to protect the mauri of that environment/natural resource.
2.3 Regional Fresh Water All tangata whenua groups raised the significance of water (in particular freshwater) to their people from a critical existence perspective, customary use, historical observations in catchments, current and future practices in their respective rohe. The nature of water is to flow
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 9
Page 51 of 170
or transpire through different environments. The values, properties and uses of water are different when it comes from the sky, flows through the land, river, lake or sea.
Water is essential to sustain life, if there is no water, there is no life. This is the same defining characteristic of mauri itself. This was expressed at the Rūātoki hui as “water is the most significant natural resource to all living things i.e. te mauri o te wai; he mauri te wai, kāre, ko te mauri i roto te wai i.e. water is the mauri, the life force that exists within all living things.”
Once again these interviews confirm the results from the 2016 Iwi Perceptions Survey that tangata whenua seek tangible opportunities to discuss their involvement in the regional decision making processes on water rights and interests with Toi Moana.
2.4 Mauri Framework The prospect of developing a mauri assessment framework was seen as a positive opportunity by four participants we interviewed with the majority of six participants requiring more discussion (hui) and information to make a considered response and three seeking further internal discussions with kaitiaki and kaumatua.
Some tangata whenua felt that measuring mauri in a precise quantitative way is not the nature of mauri and therefore, attempting to measure and express mauri using a model can only provide an indication to the state or effects on mauri and not a true reflection.
“An important component of mauri is the spiritual well-being, feeling and the effects on the wairua of people. This is difficult to describe in words so it is hard to understand how it can be captured in a framework or model” - Ngāti Awa.
Although, with this in mind, no paticipants considered the project was futile, several participants were sceptical about the outcomes of the framework assisting Iwi or not. The assessment of mauri is only one issue Iwi / hapū need to be considering along side other aspects of their cultural impact assessment report as well as other local subregional environmental and or economic issues.
However, the consultation process did identify two tangata whenua assessment frameworks which could be developed into a regional method with further discussion with other Iwi and hapū groups.
The other suggestion from Iwi participants was to develop a toolbox of options that mana whenua, hapū and Iwi could use to assist with an assessment of mauri as part of an existing cultural impact assessment report or a separate framework.
2.4.1 Tikanga Whakahaere framework
Ngāti Makino decided to meet collectively with repreresentatives from Ngāti Whakahemo, Ngāti Rangitihi, Ngāti Pikiao and the Motiti Rohe Moana Trust on 11 May in Maketu. This meeting was attend by 10 representatives.
The meeting participants were clear that the development of Method 44 and the essence of mauri had been raised in previous submissions to Toi Moana and evidence presented by tangata whenua during the appeals against the decision to grant consent to dump remains of the MV Rena, equipment, cargo and debris field on Otaiti Astrolabe Reef. Iwi noted that Method 44 needed to be seen in the context of the other Iwi Methods (i.e. Methods 41, 42, 43, 45, 46, 47 & 48) and Iwi Resource Management Policies (IW 2B, 4B, 5B & 6B) in the RPS. They are a
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 10
Page 52 of 170
collective suit of tools for Iwi / hapū and Toi Moana to address Māori resource management issues. Toi Moana need to understand how these methods and rules can be applied to work together to recognise and provide for the environmental values and principles of whanau, hapū and Iwi.
The hui strongly expressed that “only whanau, hapū and Iwi with the relationships with the natural resources can assess the effects of any proposed consent activity on the mauri of that resource.” This recognises Policy IW 2B: Recognising matters of significance to Māori; Proposals which may affect the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions must: (b) Recognise that only tangata whenua can identify and evidentially substantiate their relationship and that of their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga.
“BOPRC cannot assess the mauri of the environment without the engagement with the appropriate tangata whenua / mana whenua group(s).”
“Mauri is not viewed as an individual attribute or value but needs to be taken into account with other Māori values. Mauri is the glue, the binding of many things to create existence.”
The meeting proposed the following recommendations:
1. “This collaboration of Ngāti Makino, Ngāti Pikiao, Ngāti Whakahemo, Ngāti Rangitihi and Motiti Rohe Moana Trust is continued and resources by BOPRC and the Boffa Miskell team to complete a Mauri Tikanga Whakahaere framework model.
2. The next stages of the framework are planned together in a group workshop.
3. BOPRC be invited to participate in the workshop.”
These recommendations were accepted by Toi Moana as a one off for the project and a tikanga whakahaere workshop was held on 14 June 2017 in Maketu.
Dr Kepa Morgan the General Manager of the Ngāti Makino Iwi Authority and Carlton Bidios of Ngāti Ranginui Inc. Society attended the workshop as well as three staff from Toi Moana; Nassah Steed, Esta Farquhar and Clarke Koopu.
The purpose of the workshop was to develop the concept of a tikanga whakahaere framework for mauri as a best practise model as a Māori kaupapa framework. The meeting discussed the difference between a mauri framework and a mauri model. The meeting concluded that a “framework” sets out the process, considerations and how tangata whenua, mana whenua, ahi ka or haukāinga are empowered to carry out their “tikanga” (the principles and values of mauri) “whakahaere” (in an agreed process). The framework ensures that the findings from the mauri assessment are binding on parties involved in the resource consent process and that the mauri assessment can’t be avoided or disregarded in making the final decision. Other points included:
• The integrity of the frame work is maintained through transparent decisions about what the priorities are for the mauri of that site and its environment.
• The framework should recognise the Treaty of Waitangi, best practice models, international conventions and other RPS methods and Iwi policy provisions.
• The framework is used by all users Māori and non-Māori.
• The framework needs to be defendable in hearings and the environment court and a tool that is supported and promoted by Iwi, hapū and whanau in Te Moana o Toi. Being
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 11
Page 53 of 170
inclusive and addressing the matters that non Māori would consider important i.e. what are the economic, social, environmental and cultural benefits of assessing mauri.
A “mauri model” is a tool that simulates environmental conditions prior to the effects of the activity. This takes into account the environmental conditions that are being assessed at the time and then considering the effects on the site from new activities. The model is subjective and measures what is happening in the simulation and the effects on mauri indicators.
Dr Kepa Morgan introduced the Aashukan Declaration from an indigenous conference he attended in March 2017 as an international framework the workshop could review. The framework includes the following 4 components:
1. ‘Indigenous Peoples’ Rights are the foundation upon which all discussions must be initiated. Following international best practices, this includes territorial Rights, the Right to self-determination and the Indigenous Right to say YES or NO.
2. Relationships must have integrity and be based on humility, respect, reciprocity, community empowerment, sharing, mutual learning, and sustained and long-term engagement. Our timelines are based on our values, processes and social organization, and should be respected.
3. Processes must achieve clear communication, transparent decision making, be inclusive and be founded on the worldview of the Indigenous Peoples that are impacted.
4. Outcomes must be multi-faceted and oriented towards mutual benefits, a commitment towards the prevention of harm, and the enhancement of the well-being of Indigenous Peoples based on their own definitions and criteria.”
These principles were discussed and compared with Iwi and hapū co-governance / co-management framework used by Carlton Bidois and the Department of Conservation to produce the following “tikanga whakahaere framework” in the table below: Table 1 Four principles of the “tikanga whakahaere framework” suggested by the Ngāti Makino cluster with relevant actions and comments.
Mana Tuku Iho – (Indigenous Values
and Rights)
Mana Whakahono (Relationships)
Mana Whakahaere (Engagement
Process)
Mana Motuhake (Assessment Outcomes)
Empowers the mana whenua or ahikāroa to undertake the assessment of mauri.
Whanaungatanga, Iwi working with Iwi, hapū and local and Toi Moana.
Collaboration, mutually beneficial for all parties.
Mana Motuhake / Rangatiratanga (self-determination).
Māori world view of Te Taiao. Physical, observations.
Manaakitanga (the process of respect, generosity and care for others)
Kanohi ki te kanohi engagement at the marae.
Active protection and restoration of the mauri of natural resources.
Pūkenga, kaumātua and kuia are involved.
Tau utuutu (reciprocal relationships)
Transparent, accountable and robust.
Enhancement of mauri of natural resources.
Mātauranga Māori (traditional Māori knowledge).
Hapū wānanga on proposal, issues and response.
Responses to process to mana whenua issues
Training and development for Iwi / hapū and Toi Moana.
Taonga tūturu, sites of significance and other resources.
Rangatiratanga for Iwi and hapū
Genuine engagement with Iwi and hapū.
Sustainability of natural resources.
Whakapapa and Mutual sharing of Iwi / Clear communication Reinforces those
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 12
Page 54 of 170
Mana Tuku Iho – (Indigenous Values
and Rights)
Mana Whakahono (Relationships)
Mana Whakahaere (Engagement
Process)
Mana Motuhake (Assessment Outcomes)
whakawhanaunga-tanga.
Māori learnings and knowledge with Toi Moana and others.
between parties. principles and values expressed in the in mana tuku iho column. Kaitiaki roles and
kaitiakitanga responsibilities.
Founded on the. world view of indigenous peoples.
If it needs to be monitored, it needs to be assessed.
Strengthens the relationship between Iwi / hapū & Toi Moana.
Holistic / uses all information available.
Prevention of harm.
Tapu and noa principles.
Takoha (gift, pledge, or donation).
Responsive and respectful.
GIS compatible and kaitiaki apps?
Opportunity to meet on site as well as the marae.
Mutual respect. Inclusive and binding on all parties. Accurately reflects different understandings.
Monitoring against previous forecasts and cumulative effects.
The proposed framework can also be represented in the flow chart below.
Figure 3 Describes the relationships between the four components of the mauri assessment framework.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 13
Page 55 of 170
The Makino Collective developed an initial tikanga whakahaere framework based on their collective understanding of mauri as iwi and hapū practitioners. The proposed framework comprises four core components that follow a sequence of stages as detailed in the table and summarised in the flowchart above.
The framework seeks to empower and resource mana whenua in the assessment process by providing the applicant and the Toi Moana with a detailed overview of the traditional information and relationships mana whenua use in the assessment process.
“Mana tuku iho” describes the foundation of indigenious knownledge (mātauranga Māori) and cultural expertise that is inherent with the mana whenua tikanga and kawa (traditions, customs and protocols) associated with their observations and practices of kaitiaikitanga over the land and other natural resources in the area. Mana whenua can be represented by land owners, / trusts, marae, hapū and or Iwi entities.
The relationship principles of whanaungatanga, manakitanga, tau utuutu and rangatiratanga occur under “mana whakahono” at three primary levels. The first level are those relationships between mana whenua and those natural resources in the rohe. Secondly relationships are with overlapping interests with neighbouring kin groups in the area. The third tier of relationships with the wider community including applicants and Toi Moana. These relationship principles are intergrated across the other three components of the framework.
The mana tuku iho and mana whakahono components both contribute to the “mana whakahaere” engagement process. Mana whenua meet collaboratively with applicants and or Toi Moana to reach agreement on the mauri assessment process.
The outcomes from the mauri assessment framework will be recognised and incorporated into the outcomes of the mana motuhake process. The mana whenua groups or groups that will be incoroporated into outcomes phase outlined as “mana motuhake.”
However, the key trigger for the framework is the ability of Regional, District and City Council’s to identify the hapū and Iwi group or groups who have the mana whenua interests in the area to participate in the process. Without this direction from Toi Moana in identiftying the most appropriate tangata whenua groups with these relationships to meet with applicants the mauri framework is unlike to suceed. Hence, Toi Moana have a significant responsibility in implementing the current Iwi resource menagement provisions in the Regional Policy Statement to give effect to this mauri engagement framework.
Section 35A in RMA requires all territorial authorities to maintain their respective Iwi and hapū contact information data base to ensure they can identify the appropriate mana whenua entities.
Further development of this framework is required with the members of the Makino collective workshop to confirm the discussion and consider how this approach could be further refined and discussed across the region with the Komiti Māori.
The Makino Collective were also considering the option to develop the mauri framework independently of the Toi Moana and not go through the RMA Schedule 1 notification process as a separate plan change.
2.4.2 Whakatohea kaitiakitanga framework
Whakatohea Māori Trust Board use their original Iwi Management Plan “Tāwharau o ngā Hapū o Whakatohea” from 1993 and are currently updating the plan with Toi Moana. The kaitiakitanga principles and values recognised in the 1993 Tāwharau Plan are still applicable today. The principles of kaitiakitanga that are practised by Whakatohea are based on a system of
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 14
Page 56 of 170
traditional tikanga values undertaken by kaitiaki to care and manage their taonga (natural resources) in a holistic approach. These traditions, philosophies, concepts and values of the natural world originate from the origins of Ranginui and Papatūānuku to create:
• Te taha tinana (the physical reality – i.e. body) • Te taha hinengaro (the intellectual plane – i.e. mind) • Te taha wairua (the spiritual realm – i.e. spirit)
Figure 4 The three guiding principles of Whakatohea; Te taha tinana (the physical reality), Te taha
hinengaro (the intellectual plane), Te taha wairua (the spiritual realm).
The children of Ranginui and Papatūānuku created, settled and maintained different domains from the sky, to the mountains, rivers lakes and the sea; passing the mana to their children and breathing the mauri or life force which emanates from Io to each Atua. These traditions recount and recognise how all things in the natural world are interrelated and interconnected through whakapapa (genealogy). The transfer of mauri (the essence of life) and mana (authority) from Io Matua to Ranginui and Papatūānuku and on to their children, the Atua; Tangaroa, Tāwhirimātea Tāne-mahuta, and eventually down to people through Hineahuone.
Ngā Taonga o Whakatohea refers to all tangible or intangible taonga (property, resources, people, tribal treasures etc.) that contributes to the tribes intellectual, physical and spiritual wellbeing.
With the passing of mana are also the responsibilities of kaitiakitanga to one creators, Whakatohea as Tangata Whenua with mana whenua belong to the land and have kaitiaki responsibilities to it and maintaining the balance between the three elements of tinana, hinengaro and wairua.”
“Mauri generates, regenerates and upholds creation, binding physical and spiritual elements of all things together. When something dies, the mauri is no longer able to bind those elements together and thereby giving life. Without mauri nothing can survive.”
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 15
Page 57 of 170
This framework has stood the test of time from their 1993 Iwi management plan as these three elements are is still being assessed by the Whakatohea Board in 2017.
2.4.3 Effectiveness of Method 44
Concerns were raised that the ‘weight’ behind these assessments would not be sufficient to make an impact on decision making. Tangata whenua feel that often it is the economic aspect that takes precedence over any other (i.e. environmental and cultural).
Another concern raised is whether the acceptable quality and standards of the environment are lower than the expectations of tangata whenua. If so, the issue then arises if the scientific standards override the cultural/mauri standards.
Ngāti Whakaue ki Maketu commented that the development of a mauri assessment framework is a good opportunity for Māori but the implementation success is a concern. Ngāti Makino also mentioned that they hope that the process doesn’t stop at producing a report and that this project continues to develop into something meaningful.
2.4.4 Lack of capacity
A few tangata whenua groups mentioned that the increased growth and development is increasing direct, indirect and cumulative effects on the environment, and with the increasing activity hapū are finding it harder to engage effectively due to their level of capacity.
As well as this, tangata whenua are being asked to engage on a number of small projects whilst they are attending to other priorities of higher levels (e.g. national policy and NPS submissions) further exceeding their level of capacity.
Furthermore, the lack of capacity and resources that the tangata whenua groups hold have often left them providing a reactive approach to the initiatives of council and consent applications which stretch their capability. Tangata whenua strive to develop a proactive approach by developing up to date and well informed hapū management plans to avoid repetition and unnecessary work.
2.4.5 Request for further discussion
The request for further discussions with Iwi regarding this project was one of the most common issues raised. This was twofold;
1. Iwi considered that restricting the number of meetings to one per iwi for the development of a new framework was unrealistic and not a good process that builds trust and understanding between Iwi and Toi Moana. Some Iwi also thought that the discussion of mauri would have been time in the context of the mātauranga Māori strategy and Te Mana o Te Wai.
2. Participants also agreed that this discussion and any framework must be progressed with the wider Iwi, hapū and kaitiaki across the whole region i.e. Komiti Māori.
“The Rūātoki Lands Trust thought it was a good approach however, it was recognised as only the beginning and would require further workshops with hapū or collective wānanga to confirm the framework.”
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 16
Page 58 of 170
2.5 The Role of Toi Moana As outlined above, tangata whenua and mana whenua support the opportunity to develop, implement and monitor a mauri assessment tool. An iwi developed assessment tool will provide structure for tangata whenua to engage with council at a regional and local level.
The role for Toi Moana is to implement the effective use of the RPS objectives, policies and methods that will give effect to the environmental issues raised by tangata whenua, including Method 44. Key themes regarding the role of Toi Moana revolved around strengthening tangata whenua relationships and where appropriate providing adequate resources for engagement.
2.5.1 Relationships with Iwi
Working together is key to efficient and constructive progress. Tapūika highlighted that it is essential to build positive working relationships with Toi Moana to progress a mauri model. Tangata whenua considered their relationships with Toi Moana in the past have not always met their requirements and expectations to address current and future matters of significance to tangata whenua i.e. water allocation, mātauranga Māori and mauri.
Toi Moana have a wide spectrum of relationships with Iwi including Treaty Settlements arrangements (i.e. co-governance and co-management agreements) in managing natural resources. The recently announced Mana Whakahono a Rohe agreements will provide opportunities for Iwi and hapū to develop formal relationships with Toi Moana.
Iwi raised the issue of staff turnover at Toi Moana has contributed to some of the relationships issues with Toi Moana. Often the relationship is with the person within the council role and once they leave the relationship is lost and has to be rebuilt with a new staff member. This takes a lot of time and can become repetitive, tiring and inefficient to respective parties.
2.5.2 Communication with Iwi Communication is expected to be made with the right people with the relationships, in a clear way which they understand and with a sufficient time to be able to develop an effective response. Communication is seen as a key to maintaining effective working relationship, with most of the participants agreeing the that current standard of communication could be improved to address a lack of information and late notification.
The resource consents process was identified as one of those areas of concern for tangata whenua where they have insufficient amount of time to provide an effective input into the process. The ability to require consultation with affected tangata whenua in the pre application phase of the process would assist with this situation.
Given the importance of the kaupapa some participants felt that Toi Moana staff should have been present at the meetings and a few were unclear on what was required of participants at the meeting.
“Ngāi Te Rangi has a kaitiaki forum and they mentioned that it would have been more effective to have been informed about the hui and the project earlier to be able to notify the forum of this project. They suggest that BOPRC could ensure that their point of contact is up to date and that enough time and information is providing to adequately disperse information.”
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 17
Page 59 of 170
2.5.3 Resourcing engagement with Iwi
The engagement for kaitiaki to prepare an assessment on mauri on a natural resource should be prescribed in the assessment framework. This assessment on the effect of Mauri can be incorporated into the preparation of a cultural impact assessment report that provides the holistic context. Kaitiaki will also be involved in the monitoring and reporting for any mauri conditions for the consent.
“In addition to funding and supporting Iwi and hapū to undertake mauri assessments etc. is to create roles for Iwi at the same level of authority as the CEO to deal with various matters at an Iwi executive level. Māori staff need to be throughout whole structure and process to avoid the conflict and Environment Court processes.”
3.0 MATAPAKI / Discussion
3.1 Regional Policy Statement The RPS manages a series of multiple layers of actions, responses and policies to balance the community growth and development aspirations with the social and cultural environmental imperatives that challenge conservative financial business models. This is a complex relationship matrix that tangata whenua must navigate and understand to participate effectively in the management of all natural resources and in particular those taonga within their rohe.
The RPS provides for Iwi resource management policies where 6 are specific directive policies for resource consents, regional and district plans, and notices of requirement and a noted with “B” after the policy number. These 6 Iwi policies (i.e. IW 1B; IW 2B: IW 3B; IW 4B; IW 5B AND IW 6B):
• must be given effect by regional or district plans;
• consent authorities must have regard to where relevant and considering consent and any submissions received; and
• territorial authorities must have particular regard to, where relevant, when considering requirements for designations or heritage orders and any submissions received.
Iwi policy 7D and 8D are identified as guiding policies that outline actions to help achieve the policy objectives.
While a lot of good work has gone into the Iwi resource management issues, objectives, policies and methods in the operative RPS. The implementation of the methods such as Method 44 need to support the aspirations of Iwi and hapū to be involved in local and regional decisions without challenges in the Environment Court.
The RPS provides directive and guidance methods / actions to implement the policies and objectives. The four directive methods associated with the Iwi resource management policies include:
• “Method 8, to identify areas or sites in the coastal environment of significance or special value to Māori;
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 18
Page 60 of 170
• Method 11, recognise statutory acknowledgement areas (e.g. within Treaty settlements, added for this report)
• Method 12 Take into account Iwi and hapū management plans in the assessment of environmental effects and,
• Matakana Island plan.”
These methods must be given effect by regional and district plans.
The majority of the methods associated with the Iwi resource management policies are guidance in nature and seek to advance, enhance and promote the implementation of those policies. For some of the tangata whenua participants we spoke with, the directive of method 3 falls short in practice on the ground on the methods identified in this report.
For example, elevating Methods 41 and 42 as directives to promote consultation with potentially affected tangata whenua reinforces the requirement of early engagement based on tikanga Māori with mana whenua groups at the pre application phase.
Method 45 provides for the engagement of tangata whenua in the development of regional plans, provides the opportunity for tangata whenua involvement at a strategic regional development level of planning across the region. Iwi and hapū practitioners know that relying on the resource consent process to protect their cultural resources and relationships is not a solution it is merely business as usual and facilitates the continued loss of these relationships.
It is noted that Method 3 gives effect to a range of policies including the Iwi resource management polices with respect to “resource consents, notices of requirement and when changing, varying, reviewing or replacing plans” are important to tangata whenua. However, Method 44 also refers to additional RMA processes of:
• state of the environment monitoring, and
• monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions
To achieve the successful implementation of Method 44, it must be in the context of other methods and not addressed in isolation. All iwi resource management methods and policies should be applied to work together to recognise and provide for the environmental values and principles of whanau, hapū and Iwi needs to be understood by all councils.
3.1.1 Mātauranga Māori
Tangata whenua are clear that mauri plays a significant role and is a core principle in the Māori management of natural resource. As many of the participants articulated the essence of mauri from its divine original from the Atua to their children and then on all living things including people.
Some participants were concerned around how mātauranga Māori and intellectual property associated with mauri provided by kaitiaki / mana whenua would be used by Toi Moana. Iwi wanted to ensure that mātauranga remains with the original sources and not Toi Moana.
It would seem that these valid concern and queries raised by participants may have been addressed through the outcomes and direction from the mātauranga Māori project due for completion in December 2017. It is important that the implementation of Method 44 Developing Mauri Models aligns and is progressed with the Mātauranga Māori project.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 19
Page 61 of 170
The Waitangi Tribunal Report “Ko Aotearoa Tēnei” Wai 262 Volume 1 and 2 (2011) provides public access to detailed explanations on the origins of mauri in the natural environment and inanimate taonga, art forms and building. This report would have been part of the literature review for the Mātauranga Māori project.
Tangata whenua raised the concern that they may need to provide evidence to justify outcomes of assessments which may require tangata whenua to provide more information than they are comfortable providing. There were concerns that a framework may not be effective for tangata whenua and therefore it may not be worth investing time into the project.
3.2 Mauri Frameworks
3.2.1 Recognition of Mana Whenua
The strongest points raised by tangata whenua in respect to the development of any framework was that it must be initiated and developed with mana whenua group or groups who are associated with the site, area and or resource.
The frame work must also resource and empower mana whenua to be engaged and work with applicants and or Toi Moana. This gives effect to Policy IW 2B: Recognising matters of significance to Māori; Proposals which may affect the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions must:
(a) “Recognise and provide for:
(i) Traditional Māori uses and practices relating to natural and physical resources such as mahinga, mātaitai, waahi tapu, papakāinga and taonga raranga;
(ii) The role of tangata whenua as kaitiaki of the mauri of their resources;
(iii) The mana whenua relationship of tangata whenua with, and their role as kaitiaki of, the mauri of natural resources;
(iv) Sites of cultural significance identified in iwi and hapū resource management plans; and
(b) Recognise that only tangata whenua can identify and evidentially substantiate their relationship and that of their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga.”
The ownership of the mātauranga Māori associated with the project will always remain with the mana whenua.
3.2.2 Whakatohea Framework
The kaitiakitanga framework developed by Whakatohea provides a concise approach that allows their kaitiaki to describe the essential components of tinana, hinengaro and wairua that form the mauri of their natural resources in a traditional context. The framework is easily understood by all age groups and levels of engagement including whanau, hapū, Iwi and land trusts. The framework can be easily applied to all natural resources types from the mountains to the sea and is owned and controlled by Whakatohea kaitiaki.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 20
Page 62 of 170
The engagement with local authorities, Toi Moana and wider Whakatohea community will be initiated by Iwi or in response to resource consent applications or other RMA requests.
3.2.3 Ngāti Makino Cluster
The Ngāti Makino Collective framework includes the 3 core values identified in the Whakatohea model and incorporates strengthen relationships with engagement protocols and outcomes process. The initial details of each of the four principles have been raised for discussion and debate with the original architects and the wider the tangata whenua participants across the Bay of Plenty region. The framework seeks to break new ground by going beyond the boundaries of just an assessment tool for mauri but seeking the opportunity to address the gaps in the existing resource consent process and the participation in the decisions making process.
There are challenges for both Iwi and Toi Moana in this framework. The process will rationalise the working relationships between Iwi, hapū, mana whenua and land trusts in the engagement, administration and communications roles and functions for the framework. While the Toi Moana will have its own challenges on giving effect to the RPS provisions to resource and engage tangata whenua in implementation of the Iwi resource management policies and methods.
Further refinement of this framework between Toi Moana and Iwi is required before it is circulated to a wider Iwi / hapū forum for consideration.
3.2.4 Benefits to Tangata Whenua
Tangata whenua agree that mauri is continually being degraded over time by the cumulative impacts of population growth and the rate development required to keep pace with the rate of growth. It is clear that the greatest opportunities to effect change on the environment are at the high strategic level of growth and development. A mauri assessment framework that is applied at this strategic level will have greater environmental effects and benefits for Iwi/hapū, and the whole Toi Moana region.
The implementation of Method 44 framework will require the support of other methods and policies identified in figure 3 as well as an effective Iwi engagement, capacity building and communication framework will also assist the resource consent and monitoring process for tangata whenua. The resource consent process is shown in the chart below (Figure 5) including the RPS provisions in the pre-application phase, consultation triggers, mauri assessment toolbox and monitoring options in the council decision.
Equally, the same framework could be incorporated into state of the environment reports. This application can be used to determine the potential adverse effects from a proposed activity on the mauri of the environment and identify ways to avoid, remedy, or mitigate these effects.
Some Iwi have also suggested the development of a regional toolkit of existing assessment frameworks and models that could assist tangata whenua with their assessments of effects on the mauri of natural resources. A mauri assessment toolkit with current frameworks and models would provide tangata whenua with a repository of current tangata whenua practise tools as working examples. Key aspects of a toolkit are:
• Repository of mātauranga Māori practise models from around the Country will encourage others to participate in the process.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 21
Page 63 of 170
• Iwi and hapū don’t have to “reinvent assessment models/frameworks” for similar environmental scenarios or consents that have already been develop by other Iwi groups from around the country.
• A toolkit would assist in providing a timely and costs effective response. • Hapū/iwi can lead the development of new of assessments models and frameworks. • Encourages/promotes Iwi/hapū diversification. • Toolkits will assist hapū/iwi and council staff.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 22
Page 64 of 170
Figure 5 Flow chart of where a mauri assessment will sit within the resource consent application.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 23
Page 65 of 170
4.0 TE WHAKAMUTUNGA / Conclusion The purpose of this report was to inform Toi Moana on the possible frameworks, tools or models Iwi and hapū use to measure the effects on the mauri of their natural resources. The report is based on the outcomes from consultation meetings or interviews organised by the Toi Moana between Iwi representatives and Boffa Miskell Ltd. It was envisaged that Iwi would be prepared to share this type of information and their preferred methods.
All of the participants agreed that mauri was an important value and principle to tangata whenua in the management of the whole environment and natural resources. Kaitiakitanga revolves around the maintenance and management of the mauri of individual and collective environments and natural resources.
Two mauri frameworks have been suggested from the consultation interviews and are promoted by BML in this report. The proposed frameworks have not been discussed with the other tangata whenua participants or exchanged between Whakatohea and the Ngāti Makino collective group.
The Whakatohea kaitiakitanga framework focussed on the three core values of mauri being te taha tinana, te taha hinengaro and te taha wairua that exists within all of their taonga and the natural resources. The framework is controlled by Iwi, is easily applied and determined by hapū and mana whenua to any natural resource.
The Ngāti Makino tikanga whakahaere framework was developed from a specific workshop during the interviews and is based on their collective understanding of mauri as iwi and hapū practitioners. The framework seeks to empower and resource mana whenua in the assessment process through the implementation of the provisions in the RPS to ensure tangata whenua are engaged and in particular Policy IW 2B: Recognising matters of significance to Māori, and IW 5B adverse effects on matters of significance to Māori.
Some Iwi participants also expressed the idea of developing a regional toolkit or toolbox of assessment frameworks and models that tangata whenua could utilise as part of the assessment process. This would assist Iwi in identifying the key components for an assessment framework or model and learning from their experiences.
The majority of tangata whenua interviewed could see the positive opportunities of developing a framework that was supported by Toi Moana regional policies tools and resources. At the same time some tangata whenua were sceptical of the framework being supported by large land developers and the private business sector and would require further consultation.
Some tangata whenua interviews revealed that Iwi were not prepared to share their processes and were unable to develop a specific assessment framework from a single consultation meeting. Tangata whenua have requested further meetings with additional mana whenua representatives at marae to collate a wider view on a framework.
In conclusion, the interviews have for the most part indicated a positive interest in developing ways to assess mauri. It’s believed that by addressing the issues outlined by tangata whenua in this report that the initial scepticism and relationship issues raised against the project can be alleviated to provide positive progress towards developing ways to measure mauri. We believe that methods for assessing mauri can be achieved and would be better developed through investing more time and integration with the Mātauranga Māori project.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 24
Page 66 of 170
5.0 TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendations Based on the consultations undertaken with tangata whenua and our assessment, we make the following recommendations:
The following recommendations have been developed by the BML team based on the initial consultation undertaken with tangata whenua and our experience and expertise in working with Iwi and hapū practitioners and territorial authorities’ on the environmental management processes. We did not have the opportunity to workshop the proposed mauri assessment framework with the original tangata whenua participants.
The following represents an option for continued discussion between Iwi / hapū and Toi Moana.
Mauri Assessment Framework
A mauri assessment framework could be used for assessing applications for resource consent, monitoring consented activities, monitoring the state of the environment, and monitoring the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions, where these involve matters of significance to Māori.
Important notes that support and enhance the framework:
• Recognition that the people who have the traditional cultural relationships with an area, site or natural resources, and maintain the mana whenua (recognised local authority), are the first point of contact for the assessment of mauri under the mauri assessment framework.
• To facilitate the identification of the mana whenua groups, Toi Moana and other local councils must maintain and provide access to accurate information on the rohe (boundary/areas) for each Iwi across the Bay of Plenty region for the general public/potential applicants to identify who they need to consult with to carry out the assessment. Not all local authorities provide this information to the applicants. However, this information can be obtained from various sources including Te Puni Kokiri, Te Kahui Māngai website, Treaty of Waitangi Settlement legislation deeds and also Iwi/hapū environmental management plans
• The mauri assessment framework requires the collaboration between mana whenua, applicants in the consent process and Toi Moana with the state of the environment reports and the efficiency and effectiveness of plan provisions on matters of significance to Māori.
• Once the applicants has identify who the mana whenua groups are to engage; they can request a meeting to introduce the proposed activity/project with the appropriate entity or entities and to determine their initial information and process requirements.
1) An assessment framework could include the following stages:
a) Mana Tuku Iho (indigenous values and rights) and Mana Whakahono Relationships Principles
Mana whenua review their traditional repository of cultural information and knowledge to identify what information is required to undertake an investigation of effects on the
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 25
Page 67 of 170
mauri of the natural resources within their rohe based upon the receipt of an invitation to meet and discuss a proposal affecting their rohe.
The following information be provided to mana whenua including: site and location maps, archaeological survey and report; ecological report, location of any cultural sites of significance recorded in the regional and district plans, an indication of proposed earthworks, and effects on any waterways.
b) Mana Whakahaere
Mana whenua meet the applicant and/or Toi Moana to discuss the initial assessment of effects based on the initial information provided on the proposed activity. Both parties will determine the assessment process, timeframes, costs, required to undertake the final mauri assessment report.
c) Mana Motuhake
Mana whenua present the final report to the applicant and/or Toi Moana and agree on how the recommendations will be implemented.
Toi Moana should provide a series of information, awareness and guidance workshops and handouts on the final mauri assessment framework, internally with the consents team and presented at an appropriate the Komiti Māori meeting.
2) Mauri framework development
a) Toi Moana work with the Makino Collective and the Whakatohea Māori Trust Board to progress the development of their respective frameworks.
b) Develop a toolbox of cultural environmental assessment tools for use by kaitiaki across the region (Appendix F provides a suggested toolbox approach).
c) A review and alignment of the mauri assessment framework and the internal Mātauranga Māori Framework will be undertaken by the Māori Policy Team.
3) Toi Moana to consider:
a) As part of the 5 yearly monitoring of the effectiveness of the RPS the extent to which the iwi resource management provisions are achieving collaborate and involved engagement of iwi, hapū and kaitiaki in the resource management decision making process and how this aligns with the IAP2 levels of public engagement.
b) Consider developing a pool of Iwi technical advisors to assist Toi Moana in developing responses to the significant resource management issues facing tangata whenua across the region including for example: mauri, freshwater, climate change.
i) The Māori Policy staff to develop the scope and terms of reference for Iwi technical advisory group to assist Council on matters of significance to tangata whenua such as mauri of natural resources, how to incorporate “te mana o te wai” in the water management and allocation processes, and strengthening Council and Iwi relationships.
c) Invest time and resources into developing at least three mauri pilot projects to test and assess the mauri framework.
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 26
Page 68 of 170
d) Staff to actively promote the inclusion of mauri assessment framework when hapū/iwi are in developing or revising their environmental management plans under the RMA.
6.0 KŌHINGA KŌRERO / References Boffa Miskell Limited (2017). Method 44 Developing Mauri Models: Literature Review Report prepared by Boffa Miskell Limited for Toi Moana.
An electronic version of the Whakatohea Māori Trust Board Iwi management plan: Tāwharau o ngā Hapū o Whakatohea (1993) is not available on the Toi Moana website link below:
https://www.boprc.govt.nz/council/kaupapa-maori/hapūIwi-resource-management-plans/
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review | 10 August 2017 27
Page 69 of 170
Appendix A: Glossary
Ahi kā / ahikāroa: burning fires of occupation, continuous occupation - title to land through occupation by a group, generally over a long period of time (Māori Dictionary).
Atua: A god or gods (Māori) (RPS).
haukāinga home, true home, local people of a marae, home people (Māori Dictionary).
hinengaro mind, thought, intellect, consciousness, awareness (Māori Dictionary).
kaitiaki trustee, minder, guard, custodian, guardian, caregiver, keeper, steward (Māori Dictionary).
kanohi ki te kanohi face to face, in person, in the flesh (Māori Dictionary).
karakia: prayer (RPS).
kaumātua: Elder (RPS).
kaupapa Māori: Māori way or method (RPS).
kōrero: Narrative (RPS).
mana motuhake: separate identity, autonomy, self-government, self-determination, independence, sovereignty, authority - mana through self-determination and control over one's own destiny (Māori Dictionary).
mana tuku iho: inherited authority (Māori Dictionary).
mana whakahaere: governance, authority, jurisdiction, management, mandate, power (Māori Dictionary).
mana whakahono – agreement
mana whenua: territorial rights, power from the land, authority over land or territory, jurisdiction over land or territory - power associated with possession and occupation of tribal land. The tribe's history and legends are based in the lands they have occupied over generations and the land provides the sustenance for the people and to provide hospitality for guests. (Māori Dictionary)
manaakitanga: hospitality, kindness, generosity, support - the process of showing respect, generosity and care for others (Māori Dictionary).
mana whakahono a rohe: a legal agreement between Iwi and/or hapū and councils under the Section 58O of the RMA.
mātauranga: knowledge, wisdom, understanding, skill (Māori Dictionary).
mauri: The essential life force, energy or principle that tangata whenua believe exists in all things in the natural world, including people. Tangata whenua believe it is the vital essence or life force by which all things cohere in nature. When Mauri is absent there is no life. When Mauri is degraded, or absent, tangata whenua believe this can mean that they have been remiss in their kaitiakitanga responsibilities and this affects their relationship with the Atua (Māori gods). Mauri can also be imbued within manmade or physical objects (RPS).
Appendix A: Glossary
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review Page 71 of 170
noa: to be free from the extensions of tapu, ordinary (Māori Dictionary).
pūkenga: Tangata whenua persons acknowledged by their Iwi, hapū or whānau as having the appropriate knowledge, expertise and genealogical linkages to allow them to assist kaitiaki to determine and express the group’s relationships and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, wāhi tapu, special sites and other taonga (RPS).
rangatiratanga/Tino rangatiratanga: Chiefly authority, chieftainship, full tribal authority to tribal self-management. In the context of resource management this means the right of Iwi and hapū to manage and control their resources in accord with their customary preference (RPS).
Rauemi: resource, material (Māori Dictionary).
koha: to gift, present, offering, donation, contribution (Māori Dictionary).
tangata whenua: local people, hosts, indigenous people - people born of the whenua, i.e. of the placenta and of the land where the people's ancestors have lived and where their placenta are buried (Māori Dictionary).
taonga: Treasure, property; taonga are prized and protected as sacred possessions of the tribe. The term carries a deep spiritual meaning and taonga may be things that cannot be seen or touched. Included for example are te reo Māori (Māori language), Waahi Tapu, waterways, fishing grounds and mountains (RPS).
tapu: Sacredness or beyond common usage (RPS).
tau utuutu: speaking procedure where local and visiting speakers alternate (Māori Dictionary).
taiao: world, Earth, natural world, environment, nature, country (Māori Dictionary).
tikanga Māori: Māori customary values and practices (RPS).
tikanga whakahaere: management practices (Māori Dictionary).
Tinana: body (Māori Dictionary).
waahi tapu: A place sacred to Māori in the traditional, spiritual, religious, ritual or mythological sense. (Section 2, Historic Places Act 1993.) (RPS).
wairua: Spirit (RPS).
wānanga: to meet and discuss, deliberate, consider (Māori Dictionary).
whakapapa: genealogy, genealogical table, lineage, descent (Māori Dictionary).
whakawhanaungatanga: process of establishing relationships, relating well to others (Māori Dictionary).
whānau: The extended family, i.e. grandparents, parents, and children, sharing a mutual existence (RPS).
whenua: Land, placenta (RPS).
Appendix A: Glossary
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review Page 72 of 170
Appendix B: Interview questionnaire
1. What is your Iwi / hapū view on the mauri of your natural resources?
2. How and when do Iwi make these assessments / observations?
3. Who assess the mauri in your Iwi, hapū and or whanau? a. Individual or collective assessments? b. When do Iwi hapū assessments occur? c. Kaitiaki, kaumātua / kuia, pākeke, pūkenga?
4. What are that values and attributes that define Mauri for your Iwi / hapū? Examples of these
are identified in the literature review report. 5. Is mauri constantly changing or moving each day and constant over time?
a. What determines the changes in the mauri? 6. Is the mauri difference for a river, lake, coastline and land?
a. For example, the different sounds, smells, look and flow associated with each area / place?
b. What kai was harvested from each area and traditional quantities? What kai and quantities are collected today?
c. What traditions and practises were used to enter each domain / area to harvest kai and other resources?
d. What conditions or signs were seen to be favourable to harvest kai or resources from the area i.e. maramataka, seasons, tides etc.?
e. Are these customs and traditions continued today? f. What is the state of mahinga kai resources today?
7. How can Iwi and hapū assist BOPRC in understanding the use and significance of mauri as
an environmental measurement tool for Te Moana o Toi? 8. What role should BOPRC play in the assessment of mauri?
9. What information from BOPRC would assist Iwi and hapū in the assessment process? 10. How should mauri be recognised and provided for in the regional plan?
Appendix B: Interview questionnaire
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review Page 73 of 170
Appendix C: RPS Iwi Resource Management Policies, Objectives and Methods
Issues / Topic Objective: Policy: Method: Responsible: Monitoring:
Water Quantity
10 - Cumulative effects of existing and new activities are appropriately managed
• Policy WQ 3B: Allocating water
44 Toi Moana Objective 10; AER, P220.
Integrated Resource
Management
12 The timely exchange, consideration of and response to, relevant information by all parties with an interest in the resolution of a resource management issue
• Policy IR 4B: Using consultation in the identification and resolution of resource management issues.
• Policy IR 5B: Assessing cumulative effects – (b) Incremental degradation of matters of significance to Māori including cultural effects (in accordance IW5B)
44
44
Toi Moana Objective 12; AER, P221.
Iwi Resource Management Objectives:
17 - The mauri of water, land, air and geothermal resources is safeguarded and where it is degraded, where appropriate, it is enhanced over time
• Policy IW 2B: Recognising matters of significance to Māori.
• Policy IW 5B: Adverse effects on matters of significance to Māori.
• Policy IW 6B: Encouraging tangata whenua to identify measures to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse cultural effects
• Policy WQ 3B: Allocating
44 Toi Moana Objective 17; AER, P223.
Appendix C: RPS Iwi Resource Management Policies, Objectives and Methods
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review Page 75 of 170
Issues / Topic Objective: Policy: Method: Responsible: Monitoring: water
Water Quantity
21 - Recognition of and provision for the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga
• Policy WQ 3B: Allocating water
44 Toi Moana Objective 21; AER, P224.
Water Quantity Table 10
30 - The quantity of available water: (a) Provides for a range of uses and
values; (b) is allocated and used efficiently; (c) safeguards the mauri and life supporting
capacity of water bodies; and (d) meets the reasonably foreseeable
needs of future generations.
• Policy WQ 3B: Allocating water
44 Toi Moana Objective 30; AER, P228.
Appendix C: RPS Iwi Resource Management Policies, Objectives and Methods
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Final Draft Report for Review Page 76 of 170
Integrated Resource Management Objective 10 • AER - Cumulative and precedent effects are assessed in resource management decision making
processes. • AER - Resource use and allocation is within their design parameters or natural and physical carrying
capacity. Monitoring Indicators include: > High compliance levels with consent conditions and reduction of incidence of illegal activities
requiring enforcement action. > State of the environment reports show a positive trend towards environmental improvement for
the region’s natural resources. Integrated Resource Management Objective 12 • Stakeholders and iwi authorities are satisfied with their involvement in resource management decision
making. Monitoring Indicators include: > Regular iwi and stakeholder perceptions surveys show high levels of satisfaction with the
provision of opportunities for their involvement in resource management decision making processes.
Iwi Resource Management Objective 17
• Improvement in the state of the region’s water, air, land and geothermal resources where their mauri has been degraded.
Monitoring Indicators include: > Regular perception surveys show iwi authorities agree the mauri of water, land, air and
geothermal resources within their rohe has been sustained or improved. Water Quantity Objective’s 21 • Resource management decisions consistently recognise and provide for the relationship of Māori and
their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga. Monitoring Indicators include:
> The region’s iwi and hapū agree that local authorities promote a range of means by which relationships with tangata whenua are formalised and implemented.
> Regular iwi perception surveys > Five yearly section 35 monitoring reports identify extent to which the use of criteria consistent
with those in Regional Policy Statement Appendix F Set 4 (Māori culture and traditions) are used in relevant resource consents and plan change processes.
> Positive trend shown from undertaking a regional baseline survey and regular reviews to compare state of regions’ cultural historic heritage resources, including those identified in district plans, regional plans, iwi and hapū resource management planning documents.
Water Quantity Objective’s 30 • The ecological, cultural, recreational and amenity values of water bodies are maintained. • The health of aquatic ecosystems is safeguarded. • The quantity of available water meets the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations. Monitoring Indicators include:
> Positive trend shown from undertaking a regional baseline survey and regular reviews to compare state of regions’ cultural historic heritage resources, including those identified in district plans, regional plans, iwi and hapū resource management planning documents.
Appendix C: RPS Iwi Resource Management Policies, Objectives and Methods
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Literature Review
Page 77 of 170
Appendix D: The Aashukan Declaration The Aashukan Declaration
We, the participants of Aashukan, have gathered over four days in Waskaganish, Eeyou Istchee, the traditional territory of the James Bay (Qc) Crees, in March 2017. Our experiences and the guidance passed on from our respected elders, past and present, have taught us to be responsible for our ecosystems of origin; our peoples have flourished based on these principles for hundreds of generations. The geographic specificity of Indigenous Knowledge is the fundamental way of knowing our ecosystems of origin. We wish to continue to engage in all efforts to live more harmoniously with the Earth for the benefit of all of humanity.
In Waskaganish, we have shared story with regards to our origins and identities, and our experiences in protecting and enhancing our land and culture, which are intimately intertwined. Development has affected and altered all our lives in profound and lasting ways. As such, we address the following message to the Impact Assessment community. Impact Assessment must meet the following principles regarding
Indigenous Peoples’ rights, relationships, processes, and outcomes.
• Indigenous Peoples’ Rights are the foundation upon which all discussions must be initiated. Following international best practices, this includes territorial Rights, the Right to self-determination and the Indigenous Right to say YES or NO.
• Relationships must have integrity and be based on humility, respect, reciprocity, community empowerment, sharing, mutual learning, and sustained and long-term engagement. Our timelines are based on our values, processes and social organization, and should be respected.
• Processes must achieve clear communication, transparent decision making, be inclusive and be founded on the worldview of the Indigenous Peoples that are impacted.
• Outcomes must be multi-faceted and oriented towards mutual benefits, a commitment towards the prevention of harm, and the enhancement of the well-being of Indigenous Peoples based on their own definitions and criteria.
We believe that Impact Assessment is a pedagogical process that involves mutual learning and can be tremendously rewarding for all parties involved. We invite the Impact Assessment community to apply these principles in their work with Indigenous communities to achieve the unrealised potential of fully participatory processes.
We may support development, but not at any price!
We welcome Impact Assessment, but not of any kind!
We represent the Eeyou, Anishinaabe, Saulteaux, Secwepemc (North America), Aymara (North Chile), Ainu (Hokkaido), Karipuna and Tiryió Kaxuyana (Amazonia, Brasil), Masahua (Sierra Norte de Puebla, Mexico), Saami (Swedish part of Sápmi), Nuudelch Malchid (Mongolia), Tangata Whenua (Aotearoa New Zealand), Kalinago Carib (Trinidad Tobago and Dominica), Nganguruku (First Peoples of the River Murray Mallee) and Ikwerre (Niger Delta) Nations.
The declaration was signed at the International Association for Impact Assessment Annual Conference following the Opening Plenary in Drummond West, Le Centre Sheraton, Montreal, Canada on April 4, 2017.
Key learnings from the IAIA17 conference are that Indigenous Peoples and their knowledge systems have a yet to be realised contribution to make to Global Efforts to Address Climate Change. The
Appendix D: The Aashukan Declaration
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Literature Review
Page 78 of 170
Aashukan Declaration is a best practice guide to more effectively realising this contribution. The Aashukan Declaration communicates the expectations of Indigenous Peoples with regard to best practice in Impact Assessment.
Appendix E: RPS Appendix F, Set 4 Māori culture and traditions criteria
Set 4 Māori culture and traditions
Policies EI 5B, IW 2B, IW 5B, MN 1B, MN 3B, MN 7B and MN 8B
Methods 1, 2, 3, 11, 12 and 70
Mauri
4.1 Ko te mauri me te mana o te waahi, te taonga rānei, e ngākaunuitia ana e te Māori.
The mauri (for example life force and life supporting capacity) and mana (for example integrity) of the place or resource holds special significance to Māori.
Waahi Tapu
4.2 Ko tērā waahi, taonga rānei he waahi tapu, arā, he tino whakahirahira ki ngā tikanga Māori, ki ngā puri mahara, me ngā wairua ā te Māori.
The place or resource is a waahi tapu of special, cultural, historic and or spiritual importance to Māori.
Kōrero Tūturu/Historical
4.3 Ko tērā waahi e ngākaunuitia ana e te Māori ki roto i ōnā kōrero tūturu.
The place has special historical and cultural significance to Māori.
Rawa Tūturu/Customary resources
4.4 He waahi tērā e kawea ai ngā rawa tūturu ā te Māori.
The place provides important customary resources for Māori.
Hiahiatanga Tūturu/Customary needs
4.5 He waahi tērā e eke ai ngā hiahia hinengaro tūturu a te Māori.
The place or resource is a venue or repository for Māori cultural and spiritual values.
Whakaaronui o te Wā/Contemporary Esteem
4.6 He waahi rongonui tērā ki ngā Māori, arā, he whakāhuru, he whakawaihanga, me te tuku mātauranga.
The place has special amenity, architectural or educational significance to Māori.
Appendix E: RPS Appendix F, Set 4 Māori culture and traditions criteria
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Literature Review
Page 79 of 170
Appendix F: Suggestion for a Mauri Model Toolkit The purpose of the mauri model tool kit is to provide mana whenua with options, guidance and ideas to assist in assessing mauri. The tool kit contains models which have been developed and used to assess mauri of various environments.
The tool kit will sit outside of the RPS as a resource for mana whenua and applicants and will be flexible for change to include any future developed models or improvements to existing models. It is suggested that the tool kit remains in a repository under the Māori Policy team.
It is up to mana whenua whether they decide to use models/tools within the tool kit.
The tool kit is provided in two parts;
1. Summarised within the literature review by Boffa Miskell Limited (2017) and,
2. As an index of tools along with key references/links provided below;
1) Freshwater
a) Cultural Health Index (CHI) Key Reference/Link: http://www.mfe.govt.nz/publications /fresh-water/using-cultural-health-index-how-assess-health-streams-and-waterways/why-0
b) Mauri Compass Key Reference/Link: http://www.mauricompass.com/
2) Wetlands
a) Māori Environmental Performance Indicators for Wetland Condition and Trend Key Reference/Link: http://www.landcareresearch.co.nz/publications/researchpubs/harmsworth_monitoring_wetlands.pdf
3) Coastal
a) Tauranga Moana, Tauranga Tāngata: Coastal Cultural Health Index for Te Awanui, Tauranga Harbour Key Reference/Link: http://www.mtm.ac.nz/cchi/
4) All environments
a) State of the Takiwā (SoT) Key Reference/Link: https://www.takiwa.org.nz/
b) Mauri Model Decision Making Framework Key Reference/Link: http://www.mauriometer.com/
c) COMAR (Cultural Opportunity Mapping, Assessment and Response) Key Reference/Link: http://comar.co.nz/
Appendix F: Suggestion for a Mauri Model Toolkit
Boffa Miskell Ltd | Method 44 Developing Mauri Models Report | Literature Review
Page 80 of 170
The aim of this survey is to gain your feedback on:
- The usefulness of iwi resource management tools in the Bay of Plenty Regional Policy Statement(RPS)- Any experience you or your iwi/hapū or whānau have had with Regional resource consentsprocesses.
IWI RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TOOLS IN THE REGIONAL POLICY STATEMENT
The RPS includes tools relevant to kaitiakitanga, development of multiple owned Māori land,partnership and co-management agreements, iwi and hapū resource management plans, maurienhancement of natural resources and recognition and provision for the relationships of Māori andtheir ancestral taonga. Your views will be used to assess iwi perceptions on the extent to whichthese iwi resource management provisions are being implemented by regional, district and citycouncils in the Bay of Plenty region. REGIONAL COUNCIL AND DISTRICT COUNCIL RESOURCE CONSENTS PROCESSES Your experience with Regional Council resource consents processes and district councils resourceconsents processes are also important to us. We ask that you identify the name of the district orcity council that your comments relate to on page 2 of the survey.
Thank you for taking time to complete this survey.
E nga kaitiaki o Te Moana o Toi te Huatahi, tena koutou, tena koutou, tena tatou katoa!
Page 83 of 170
Each question in this part is optional, but we'd really like to know about you! If you provide yourdetails we can send results of this survey directly to you.
Background Info about You
1. Name:
2. Title/Position
3. Organisation/Iwi/Hapu
Telephone
Address
4. Contact details
5. Please indicate whether you would be interested in participating in a follow up interview?
Yes
No
6. Which district or city council do you or your organisation engage with most?
Other
7. In which part of the Bay of Plenty is your rohe located?
Western (Mauao) Eastern (Koohi)
Rotorua (Okurei)
Page 84 of 170
Tools in the RPS
If yes, have you used them and how?
9. Are you aware the Regional Policy Statement includes a range of iwi resource management provisions(policies and methods)?
Yes
No
If yes, have you used them and how?
10. Are you aware Statutory Acknowledgements for settled iwi appear in a ‘compendium’ (companiondocument) to the Regional Policy Statement?
Yes
No
Page 86 of 170
Please rate how you feel about the following statements:('Council' means the Regional Council or your local District or City Council)
Kaitiaki Related 'Integrated Resource Management Tools' in the RPS
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
11. Council provides opportunities for iwi/hapū/kaitiaki involvement in resource management decisionmaking processes
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
12. Council provides for the timely exchange of information
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
13. Council considers and responds to iwi/hapū/kaitiaki advice
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
14. Council is informed and shares information with appropriate parties
Page 87 of 170
Iwi Resource Management Tools in the RPS
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
15. Please rate how you feel about the following statements:
Council recognises our kaitiakitanga advice and activities in its practice of resource management decisionmaking
Please add comments on the form of engagement you prefer and why?
16. Which form of engagement do you prefer?
On any specific resource management issue, process or proposal Council will:
review relevant iwi/hapu resource management plans, undertake research, distil issues and engage iwi/hapu with options basedon detailed research
undertake some research and engage iwi/hapu with a broad set of options in response to a particular issue or proposal
undertake some research and engage iwi/hapu in open dialogue about a particular issue or proposal
If yes, was your advice accurately reflected in the plan(s)?
17. Do you feel advice you or your organisation contributed to regional or district planning was reflected inCouncil's decisions?
Yes
No
StronglyAgree Agree
SomewhatAgree Neutral
SomewhatDisagree Disagree
StronglyDisagree
Regional Council
District or City Council
18. Please rate how you feel about the following statements:
There is a positive trend in representation of tangata whenua on Councils Committees
Page 88 of 170
Almost Always Sometimes Once and a while Rarely Never
Regional Council
District or City Council
19. Does the Council appoint a Maori Hearing Commissioner when significant issues of concern to Maoriare involved in a decision it is making?
Almost Always Sometimes Once and a while Rarely Never
Regional Council
District or City Council
20. Does Council take any other steps to ensure its decisions are informed by a suitably informed Maoriperson?
Almost Always Sometimes Once and a while Rarely Never
Regional Council
District or City Council
21. Do you feel Councils ‘promote a range of opportunities to formalise resource management partnerships’with iwi?
Almost Always Sometimes Once and a while Rarely Never
Regional Council
District or City Council
22. Does your organisation experience consistent, positive engagement with Councils?
Almost Always Sometimes Once and a awhile Rarely Never
Regional Council
District or City Council
23. Do you feel Council’s resource management decisions take account of iwi or hapū resourcemanagement plans relevant to your organisation, iwi or hapu?
Very much Somewhat Neutral Not really Not at all
Regional Council
District or City Council
24. In the last five years have you noticed any change in how Councils provide for the development ofmultiply owned Maori land?
Page 89 of 170
Very much Somewhat Neutral Not really Not at all
Regional Council
District or City Council
25. Has there been any Papakainga housing development on multiple owned Maori lands in your rohe inthe last 10 years?
26. Do you feel regional, city and district councils are 'reducing barriers to developing on multiply ownedMaori land' in the Bay of Plenty region?
Very much
Somewhat
Neutral
Not really
Not at all
If so, in what way?
27. Do you think the mauri of water, land, air and geothermal resources within your rohe has changed inthe last 5 years?
Very much
Somewhat
Neutral
Not really
Not at all
28. In 2017 research was undertaken to explore the development of a mauri assessment framework. Theproject included a literature review and report which is now available on Council’s website atwww.boprc.govt.nz/plans-policies-and-resources/policies/operative-regional-policy-statement/RPSImplementation Strategy. Council has decided to develop a tool box and pull together different examplesof approaches taken to assess the mauri of natural resources.
Have you had experience in any projects involving the assessment of mauri?
Yes
No
Page 90 of 170
29. If yes, are you willing to share this work with others and include it in a mauri assessment toolkit thatother kaitiaki/hapu and iwi might consider using?
Staff will make contact if you indicate you are willing to share examples of mauri assessment work youhave undertaken in order to help other tangata whenua who want to do the same.
Yes
No
Page 91 of 170
This part of the survey is about Regional Councils consents processes only. Please share yourfeedback about your experience with our regional resource consent process so we can improve ourservice. Please feel welcome to comment about district council consents processes in Question 31
Regional Council Consents Processes - Community Satisfaction
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
The timeliness that wecontact you aboutconsent applications
How we keep youinformed about consentapplications relating toyour rohe
How your concerns wereaddressed by and duringthe consents process
How your iwi is involvedin the Cultural ImpactAssessments for yourrohe
How your Iwi / HapūManagement Plan wasconsidered during theconsents process
The Consents Team’scultural awareness
Your overall satisfactionwith our consentprocess?
30. Please rate your experience: (1 = Poor, 5 = Okay, and 10 = Excellent)
31. Any suggestions you have for improving our Regional Council consents process:
32. Is there any other advice you wish to contribute to Regional Council? If so, in what way?
Page 92 of 170
Thank you for completing the Iwi Perceptions Survey! Results will be made available on the Bay ofPlenty Regional Council website following consideration by Te Komiti Maori. Any enquiries aboutthis survey, the Regional Policy Statement and Iwi Resource Management tools it contains can bereferred to Nassah Steed at 0800 884 881 extension 9329 or by [email protected]
Thank You
Page 93 of 170
Receives Only – No Decisions
Report To: Komiti Māori
Meeting Date: 12 December 2017
Report From: Kataraina O'Brien, Strategic Engagement Manager
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
Executive Summary
Te Mana o Te Wai is interpreted and used across a range of kaupapa relating to water. This report focuses on the meaning of Te Mana o Te Wai as presented in the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM).
Te Mana o Te Wai incorporates and recognises Te Ao Maori, and reflects the holistic or integrated approach that councils must consider when implementing the NPS-FM. In this regard, Te Mana o Te Wai is not a statement solely representing Maori interests; neither should it be considered commensurate with mātauranga Maori. The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) has acknowledged this and emphasised that the concept of integration is expressed in Te Reo Maori, but applies to freshwater management for and on behalf of the whole community. MfE recently amended the definition of Te Mana o Te Wai to ensure better understanding and implementation. Updated policies support the incorporation of Tangata Whenua values, these are summarised in this report.
Recommendations
That the Komiti Māori under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Update on Te Mana o Te Wai.
1 Background
Te Mana o Te Wai is the underpinning philosophy of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014 (NPS-FM). In August 2017 the Government announced a set of changes setting out the objectives and policies for freshwater management under the Resource Management Act 1991.
The National Policy Statement sets out objectives and policies that direct local government to manage water in an integrated and sustainable way, while providing for economic growth within set water quantity and quality limits. The national policy statement is a first step toward improving freshwater management at a national level.
Page 95 of 170
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
2
Te Mana o Te Wai reflects an integrated holistic approach to the management of freshwater. It encompasses the environmental, social, cultural and economic values held by iwi and the community. The recent amendments to the NPS-FM reflected areas of concern that, councils, Iwi/Hapū, and wider community had on its meaning and application. For councils, more clarity on the purpose and intent of Te Mana o Te Wai would assist them in the implementation of the policy.
2 National Update
2.1 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management
MfE considered changes to the NPS-FM 2014 which included, clarifying the meaning of Te Mana o Te Wai, fine tuning swim-ability targets, additional science criteria and monitoring requirements (including Mātauranga Māori) and emphasis on economic wellbeing.
Many of the changes reflect the Land and Water Forum’s (LAWF) earlier recommendations. The purpose of LAWF is to develop a shared vision and a common direction for freshwater management in New Zealand, and provide advice to the Government through a stakeholder-led collaboration process. LAWF continues to work on further populating the National Objectives Framework and commenting on the NPS-FM’s overall implementation.
2.2 Te Mana o Te Wai
The concept of Te Mana o Te Wai recognises freshwater as a natural resource that is integral to the social, cultural, economic and environmental well-being of communities. The Freshwater NPS has been updated to clarify the meaning of Te Mana o Te Wai in freshwater management and is now included in the body of the NPS-FM.
Te Mana o Te Wai incorporates the values of Tangata Whenua and the wider community. This means that Tangata Whenua values are considered alongside the wider community values and interests. In upholding Te Mana o Te Wai, these discussions should explore all values the community holds for fresh water, with the goal of ensuring that our communities including Tangata Whenua have access to a resource that is in a healthy state. The three pillars of Te Mana o Te Wai are:
Te Hauora o Te Wai – the health and well-being of the water.
Te Hauora o Te Tangata – the health and well-being of people.
Te Hauora o Te Taiao – the health and well-being of the environment.
3 Māori Specific Policies in the NPS-FM
A new feature of the NPS-FM is the requirement of councils to include mātauranga Maori in the preparation of plans and monitoring methods. Monitoring plans are intended to be practical and affordable, based on the limits, values and objectives identified by the community and Tangata Whenua.
More generally, the Māori specific policies, which are integral to the philosophy of Te Mana o Te Wai includes:
Page 96 of 170
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
3
Māori Specific Policies in the NPS-FM
AA. Te Mana o Te Wai
AA1 Objective To consider and recognise Te Mana o Te Wai in the management of fresh water.
AA1(b) Policy Values identified through engagement and discussion with the community, including Tangata Whenua, must inform the setting of freshwater objectives and limits.
C. Integrated Management
C1 Objective To improve integrated management of fresh water and the use and development of land in whole catchments, including the interactions between fresh water, land, associated ecosystems and the coastal environment.
C1 Policy By every Regional Council:
a) recognising the interactions, ki uta ki tai (from mountains to the sea) between fresh water, land associated ecosystem and the coastal environment; and
b) managing fresh water, land use, and development in catchments in an integrated and sustainable way to avoid, remedy or mitigate adverse effects including cumulative effects.
CA. National Objectives Framework
CA1 Objective To provide an approach to establish freshwater objectives for national values, and any other values, that:
a) is nationally consistent; and
b) recognises regional and local circumstances.
CA2 Policy The Regional Council, through discussion with communities, including Tangata Whenua, applying the following processes in developing freshwater objectives for all freshwater management units:
a) considering all national values and how they apply to local and regional councils; and
b) identifying the values for each freshwater management unit.
CB. Monitoring Plans
Page 97 of 170
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
4
CB1 Objective To provide for an approach to the monitoring of progress towards, and the achievement of, freshwater objectives and the values identified under Policy CA2(b).
CB1 Policy The Regional Council developing a monitoring plan that:
a) establishes methods for monitoring progress towards, and the achievement of, freshwater objectives established under Policies CA1-CA4. These methods must include matauranga Māori.
b) Identifies a site or sites monitoring will be undertaken that are representative for each freshwater management unit; and
c) recognise the importance of long-term trends in monitoring results and the relationship between the results and the overall state of fresh water in a freshwater management unit.
D. Tangata Whenua Roles and Interests
D1 Objective To provide for the involvement of Iwi/Hapū, and to ensure that Tangata Whenua values and interests are identified and reflected in the management of fresh water including associated ecosystems, and decision-making regarding freshwater planning, including on how all other objectives of this national policy statement are given effect to.
D1 Policy Local authorities shall take reasonable steps to:
a) involve Iwi/Hapū in the management of fresh water and freshwater ecosystems in the region;
b) work with Iwi/Hapū to identify Tangata Whenua values and interests in fresh water and freshwater ecosystems in the region; and
c) reflect Tangata Whenua values and interests in the management of, and decision-making regarding, fresh water and freshwater ecosystems in the region.
4 Freshwater Futures programme update
4.1 Freshwater Futures
The Freshwater Futures programme was established to support Regional Council in delivering, maintaining and improving quality and quantity of the region’s water resources. Previous reports concerning Freshwater Futures have included a diagram of how committees, panels and groups work together to implement the NPS-FM (Figure1). Community Groups and Tangata Whenua provide their views, ideas and feedback on how council is proposing to implement the key components of the NPS-
Page 98 of 170
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
5
FM. Council also receives advice from the Co-governance forums and regional advisory groups.
Figure 1: Freshwater Futures programme engagement approach.
The ideals promoted by Te Mana o Te Wai will help the community, including Tangata Whenua, and Regional Councils to develop tailored responses to freshwater management that would apply within their region.
4.2 Regional Water Advisory Panel
Membership of the Panel will reflect a cross section of water interests within the Bay of Plenty Region. Chris Karamea Insley is a member on the Regional Water Advisory Panel. The main focus and purpose of the panel is to provide advice and recommendations to Bay of Plenty Regional Council on regional issues associated with the implementation of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. They will try and meet up at least four times annually with additional meetings and workshops as extra. Some of their specific functions are to:
provide advice on region-wide frameworks, methodologies or plan changes relating to freshwater; and
assist the Regional Council in communicating on the actions being taken to implement the NPS.
Mr Insley has a term of two years as a board member which will give him a great opportunity to be the voice and a conduit for his Iwi/hapū and Māori.
5 Implications for Māori
Te Mana o Te Wai envisages and clarifies the role that Māori have in freshwater management in particular those policies that provide guidance to councils on what is required particularly in regard to the implementation of the National Policy Statement.
Page 99 of 170
Update on Te Mana o Te Wai
6
There is the potential to enhance iwi participation in decision making with respect to planning and policy processes through Te Mana Whakahono a Rohe agreements. In this regard those policies under the NPS-FM that are specific to Tangata Whenua are like to intertwine with any future arrangements with iwi.
One of the key changes to the NPS-FM is the requirement on councils to ensure that monitoring methodologies must now include matauranga Māori. This specific change, along with a new policy on Te Mana o Te Wai, potentially has the effect of promoting greater collaboration between Tangata Whenua and councils.
6 Council’s Accountability Framework
6.1 Community Outcomes
This project/proposal directly contributes to the Development of Māori Capacity to Contribute to Decision-making Processes Community Outcomes in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.
6.2 Long Term Plan Alignment
This work is planned under the Regional Collaboration & Leadership Activity in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.
Current Budget Implications
This work is being undertaken within the current budget for the Kotahitanga Strategic Engagement Activity in the Annual Plan 2017/18.
Sandy Hohepa Maori Policy Advisor
for Strategic Engagement Manager
19 November 2017 Click here to enter text.
Page 100 of 170
Receives Only – No Decisions
Report To: Komiti Māori
Meeting Date: 12 December 2017
Report From: Kataraina O'Brien, Strategic Engagement Manager
Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty
Executive Summary
This report is part of a regular reporting regime to Komiti Māori and provides a brief update on the status of Treaty settlements and claims within the Bay of Plenty region. There has been progress to several Treaty claims since the last full report to Komiti Māori (23 August 2017).
Snapshot of Treaty Settlements status:
No Status Comments
19 Comprehensive Treaty Claims settled (legislation enacted)
16 individual iwi 3 iwi collectives
5 Deeds of Settlement (DoS initialled / awaiting legislation)
Ngāi Te Rangi Ngāti Ranginui Ngāti Tūwharetoa (Taupō) Ngāti Tara Tokanui Hauraki Collective
2 Agreement in Principle Whakatōhea Ngāti Hinerangi
2 Negotiations (mandate recognised / actively negotiating)
Ngāti Rangitihi Te Whanau a Apanui
0 Mandate
(seeking iwi mandate to begin negotiations)
3 On-hold Tauranga Moana(Harbour interests) Pare Hauraki (Tauranga Harbour interests) Ngāti Whakaue
2 Not currently active Ngāti Whakahemo Ngai Tai
There are no Waitangi Tribunal district-wide inquiries actively underway within the Bay of Plenty. However, the Tribunal recently convened an urgent hearing into elements of the Whakatōhea settlement negotiation. Several iwi from both the Hauraki and Tauranga collectives have advanced individual settlements, excluding interests in the Tauranga Harbour. Those interests and overlapping claims issues between both collectives are subject to ongoing negotiations with the Crown. As a third party, Council has no negotiating privileges and the relationship with the Crown is based only on the exchange of information.
Page 101 of 170
Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty
2
Recommendations
That Komiti Māori under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty.
1 Background
The Bay of Plenty’s Māori and Treaty landscape is culturally rich and dynamic. There are approximately 37 iwi (and 260 hapū) within the Bay of Plenty.
19 comprehensive Treaty settlements have been completed with several more being progressed. Within the next 1-5 years as many as 30 Treaty settlements will have been completed within the Bay of Plenty region.
Many settlements involve implementation responsibility for Council particularly around co-governance of natural resources. Currently we are responsible for three statutory co-governance fora in respect of the Rotorua Lakes, Rangitaiki River, Kaituna River with others expected in the near future.
Additionally the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 provides a separate regime for the recognition of rights and interests in the marine and coastal area. There are approximately 114 applications within the Bay of Plenty region.
2 Status of Treaty Settlements
The Bay of Plenty has a number of iwi with active Treaty claims at various stages of the settlement process. The most recent developments are highlighted below.
Ngāti Pukenga - Claim Settlement Act
The Ngāti Pukenga Claims Settlement Act 2017 was enacted on 14 August 2017, giving effect to the deed of settlement signed on 7 April 2013. Remaining elements of Ngāti Pūkenga claims will be settled at a future point, as part of the Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective.
The current settlement includes statutory acknowledgements over a number of areas of cultural and historical significance to Ngāti Pūkenga. Council must have regard to those interests, in the exercise of its role and functions in areas subject to a statutory acknowledgement. A compendium of statutory acknowledgments throughout the region is maintained by Council for this purpose.
Te Whānau a Apanui – Terms of Negotiation
The Crown has recognised the mandate of Te Whānau a Apanui negotiators and signed Terms of Negotiation on 7 September 2017. The Crown and Te Whānau a Apanui are now working towards an agreement in principle (or similar).Timeframes for this have not been specified, however, previous settlements have taken a minimum of 12 months to complete this stage of the negotiation process.
Page 102 of 170
Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty
3
Whakatōhea - Agreement in Principle (and Urgency Hearing)
The Crown and Whakatōhea signed an Agreement in Principle on 18 August 2017.
As part of the settlement offer, the Crown proposes to explore options for enhancing the existing Ōhiwa Harbour Implementation Forum.
In addition to ongoing settlement negotiations, an urgent application to the Waitangi Tribunal has been lodged on behalf of several claimants and hapū, challenging the mandate of the Whakatohea negotiators to represent their interests. A Tribunal hearing was held from 6 – 10 November, with a decision expected before the years end.
Council staff maintain a watching brief and will notify any particular implications for Council as they arise.
3 Post settlement implementation
As we move further into the post-Treaty settlement environment, outcomes of several settlements have recently taken form.
Ngāti Whare – Whirinaki Te Pua a Tane Conservation Management Plan
The significance of the Whirinaki Te Pua-a-Tane Conservation Park for Ngāti Whare is acknowledged by the Ngāti Whare Claims Settlement Act 2012, through the provision of an ongoing co-governance partnership with the Crown. As part of that arrangement, Ngāti Whare, together with the Department of Conservation and Bay of Plenty Conservation Board have produced a new conservation management plan to guide the future management of the Park.
The management plan was officially launched on 21 October 2017 and can be viewed on the Department of Conservation website.
Tuhoe - Te Kawa o Te Urewera
Te Kawa o Te Urewera (‘Te Kawa’) was officially launched on 14 September 2017, following an earlier draft release and public submission process in May 2017. The launch was attended by Chair Leeder and staff, on behalf of Council.
Te Urewera Act 2014 establishes Te Urewera as an independent legal identity. Te Urewera Board (consisting of four Crown and four Tūhoe representatives) holds primary responsibility for Te Urewera and its management. Te Kawa sets out the principles that will guide the setting of annual priorities statements and operational management plans under Te Urewera Act, as well as decisions by the Board about activities within Te Urewera.
Council staff and Te Urewera Board are working together on the interface between Te Kawa and the local government environmental framework.
4 Marine and Coastal (Takutai Moana) Act 2011
The Marine and Coastal (Takutai Moana) Act 2011 (MACA) enables iwi, hapū and whānau to seek formal recognition of their customary rights and interests in the common marine and coastal area.
Page 103 of 170
Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty
4
In areas where a customary marine title (CMT) exists or protected customary rights (PCR) are upheld, corresponding MACA restrictions and obligation must be applied by Council, where a subsequent resource consent activity is proposed.
A MACA application may be advanced through either the High Court or direct engagement with the Crown. A close off date of 3 April 2017 was set by the legislation for any new applications. There are approximately 114 existing MACA applications within the Bay of Plenty region: 44 applications via the High Court and 70 seeking direct Crown engagement. The High Court has given priority to those applications transitioned across from the former foreshore and seabed legislation. No estimate has been provided by the Crown as to expected timeframes for those applications before it. As yet no MACA applications within the Bay of Plenty region have been successfully determined.
5 LGNZ – Crown funding case
Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has prepared a case to the Crown for an increase to financial contributions to local government, for implementing Treaty settlement arrangements.
Current Crown policy is to provide one-off financial contributions to local government for the implementation of Treaty settlement outcomes. Experience to date across local government has identified a series of shortcomings with this approach. The report evidences current Crown contributions to be inadequate, and that greater financial contributions are required for a longer period.
Council contributed to the report having regard to our experience and obligations under both current and forthcoming settlements. The report (attached as Appendix 1) was recently lodged with the newly appointed Minister for Treaty Negotiations. Staff will advise of any decision and outcomes once known.
6 New Crown Ministers
Following the 2017 General Election in October, several new appointments have been made to key portfolios pertaining to Treaty settlements and local government.
Minister in Charge of Treaty of Waitangi Negotiations – Hon Andrew Little.
Minister of Local Government – Hon Nanaia Mahuta. (Assoc. Minister – Hon Meka Whaitiri)
Minister for Crown/Maori Relations – Hon Kelvin Davis. (Assoc. Minister – Hon Meka Whaitiri)
Minister for Māori Development – Hon Nanaia Mahuta. (Assoc. Minister – Hon Willie Jackson)
No formal policy announcements have been made as to key priorities or any changes within these portfolios.
7 Implications for Māori
The completion of each Treaty settlement marks a significant milestone for the iwi concerned, and more broadly, the wider region as well. Treaty settlements have
Page 104 of 170
Update on Treaty claims and settlements in the Bay of Plenty
5
produced a number of new arrangements to bolster the role of Maori in local leadership, as drivers of strategic plans, iwi-lead initiatives and economic development opportunities across the region. As we move further into the post-Treaty settlement era, it is expected this trend will continue to flourish.
8 Community Outcomes and Long Term Plan
As outlined in paragraph 6, the outcome of the Treaty settlement process, directly aligns with the Regional Collaboration and Leadership Community Outcome in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.
A Crown contribution of $250,000 was provided to Te Maru o Kaituna to assist with its administration and implementation cost. Otherwise, Councils implementation costs for Treaty settlements are absorbed within existing budgets.
Future Budget Implications
A Crown contribution of $575,000 has been ear-marked for the forthcoming Tauranga Moana Governance Group.
Further Crown contributions to Councils implementation costs may also attach to individual settlements and/or as part of any outcome to the LGNZ report discussed at paragraph 5.
Herewini Simpson Senior Advisor (Treaty) for Strategic Engagement Manager
19 November 2017 Click here to enter text.
Page 105 of 170
THE CASE FOR INCREASED FINANCIAL
CONTRIBUTION TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
FOR IMPLEMENTING TREATY SETTLEMENT
ARRANGEMENTS
TREATY SETTLEMENTS
WHAKATAUNGA TIRITI
Page 109 of 170
1
PROPOSAL TĀ MĀTOU E WHAKATAKOTO NEIThat the Crown consider the evidence in this report
and make a greater financial contribution (both
one-off and ongoing) to local government for the
implementation of Treaty of Waitangi settlement
arrangements.
1 The terms “local authorities”, “councils” and “local government” are used interchangeably in this report to mean the same thing: regional councils, territorial
authorities and unitary authorities.
2 TThe term Crown policy refers to the documents provided in Appendix 4.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY KŌRERO WHAKARĀPOPOTOThe Crown is committed to settling historic claims for
breaches of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi
(the Treaty) through Treaty settlement. An outcome of
Treaty settlements is the provision of co-governance
and co-management arrangements over significant
natural resources and reserve lands. Local authorities
are critical to the successful implementation of these
arrangements, both as the regulatory authority for the
natural resource or land, and as the co-governance
and co-management partner with Treaty settling
groups.1
Treaty settlement arrangements provide valuable
connectivity between iwi and local government,
and opportunities to deliver mutually beneficial
environmental and resource management outcomes.
At the same time however, they impose costs on local
authorities that are over and above councils’ business
as usual costs.
Crown policy is to provide one-off financial
contributions to local government for the
implementation of Treaty settlement outcomes.2 This
report, while recognising the short and long term
benefits of Treaty settlements to iwi, communities
and councils, provides evidence that current Crown
contributions are inadequate, that greater financial
contributions are required and for a longer period.
Evidence of the Crown’s inconsistent approach to
funding for similar arrangements is also provided.
This report provides a costs framework (the
Framework) to record costs associated with the
functions and activities of Treaty settlement
arrangements. The Framework allows a greater level
of accuracy, visibility and consistency in tracking the
cost of establishing, implementing and maintaining
Treaty settlement arrangements. The Framework is
attached as a separate document.
Page 110 of 170
2
CONTENTSNGĀ IHIRANGIPROPOSAL ..........................................................................................................................................1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .....................................................................................................................1
RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................................................................3
INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................4Local government in Treaty settlements ............................................................................................................... 5
PARTICIPATING COUNCILS ...............................................................................................................6
REPORT SCOPE ..................................................................................................................................6Methodology ............................................................................................................................................................... 7
TYPES OF TREATY SETTLEMENT COSTS .........................................................................................8Additional costs .......................................................................................................................................................... 8Business as usual costs ............................................................................................................................................. 8Issues with Treaty settlement costs ........................................................................................................................ 9
TREATY SETTLEMENT ARRANGEMENTS AND COSTS............................................................... 10Types of Treaty settlement arrangements ...........................................................................................................10Treaty settlement costs ...........................................................................................................................................10Treaty settlement activities ....................................................................................................................................11Crown policy .............................................................................................................................................................11
THE FRAMEWORK ........................................................................................................................... 12Purpose of the Framework ......................................................................................................................................12Design of the Framework ........................................................................................................................................12Benefits of the Framework .....................................................................................................................................13Alignment with Crown policy ................................................................................................................................13
REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 14Legislation ..................................................................................................................................................................14Deeds of settlement .................................................................................................................................................14Agreements ................................................................................................................................................................15Reports and plans .....................................................................................................................................................15
APPENDIX 1: SETTLEMENT ARRANGEMENTS ........................................................................... 16Settlement arrangements for participating councils .........................................................................................16
APPENDIX 2: TREATY SETTLEMENT COSTS ................................................................................ 24Treaty settlement costs (Crown and council) for participating councils. ......................................................24
APPENDIX 3: TREATY SETTLEMENT FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIES ....................................... 28Functions and activities undertaken for Treaty settlement arrangments. .....................................................28
APPENDIX 4: CROWN POLICY ...................................................................................................... 30Comparison of the Crown’s and the participating councils’ factors for consideration for financial contribution by the Crown .....................................................................................................................................35
APPENDIX 5: DISCOUNT TABLE ................................................................................................... 38Discount table showing how the discount is applied under the Framework ................................................38
Page 111 of 170
3
RECOMMENDATIONS WHAIKUPUThat the Crown:
1. Consider this report and the Framework to assess the actual costs of implementing Treaty settlement
arrangements by local authorities.
2. Increase the financial investment provided to local authorities for the functions and activities of Treaty
settlement outcomes.
3. Introduce the provision of staged financial contributions in addition to one-off financial contributions.
4. Update Crown policy to cover all forms of Treaty settlement arrangements currently being negotiated.
5. Address inequities in the provision of financial support to local authorities and consider how financial
support can be retrospectively provided.
6. Provide financial assistance to iwi for capacity and capability building to ensure iwi can participate
and contribute equally in co-governance and co-management arrangements to assist in reducing local
government costs.
Maungawhau/Mount Eden - Photo: Alan CollinsPage 112 of 170
4
INTRODUCTIONHE KUPU WHAKATAKITREATY SETTLEMENTS ARE AN IMPORTANT ASPECT OF NEW ZEALAND’S NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
LANDSCAPE. WHILE THEY ARE AN EXPRESSION OF THE CROWN-IWI RELATIONSHIP THEY ALSO PROVIDE
AN AREA WHERE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CAN BUILD ROBUST RELATIONSHIPS WITH IWI. COUNCILS HAVE A
STRONG INTEREST IN ENSURING THE NEW ARRANGEMENTS ESTABLISHED THROUGH TREATY SETTLEMENTS
ARE SUCCESSFUL, AND THAT THE SETTLEMENTS ARE DURABLE, FAIR AND FINAL.
3 It should be noted too that not all iwi authorities/entities rely on, or ask for council support.
Treaty settlement arrangements involving local
government do, however, come with costs. With
the significant number of Treaty settlements over
recent years involving co-governance entities and
co-management arrangements (including authorities,
committees, joint management agreements and
various descriptions of natural resource plans), the
issue of cost needs to be recognised and discussed.
Treaty settlements provide opportunities to
develop relationships with iwi that benefit not only
environmental and resource management outcomes,
but the many other outcomes for central and local
government. Whilst local government has non-Treaty
settlement requirements to engage with iwi under
the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) and the
Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), it is the post-
settlement landscape that attracts additional costs.
The requirements that are placed on councils can
be challenging in terms of resourcing and planning
community priorities. Councils operate within
financial constraints, and expenditure in one area can
mean less expenditure in another.
Funding provided to local government by the Crown
as a contribution to costs has been welcomed.
However, analysis shows that both establishment and
ongoing costs of co-governance and co-management
arrangements are far greater than anticipated, and
that Crown contributions have been underestimated.
There are significant risks associated with the
current levels of Crown funding. The first risk is that
an undue financial burden is placed on councils to
implement Treaty settlement redress that the Crown
has determined is required to settle long-standing
grievances of Māori. That outcome means costs of
settlements are carried by ratepayers, rather than
by central government. It is the Crown, not councils,
that settles the historical grievances of iwi, and it
is inequitable that ratepayers of today are being
expected to pay for the settlement of grievances by
the Crown. Vote Conservation, for example, is not
expected to cover the costs of Treaty settlement
redress from its baseline funding. Rather, the
Department of Conservation is funded via detailed
costing estimates (and despite having the strongest
statutory Treaty weighting to give effect to the
principles of the Treaty). In the same way, local
authorities should not incur the costs for settlement
redress that is over and above its business as usual
activities and statutory commitments to iwi.
The second risk is that fiscal pressures will, over time,
undermine the ability of local government to support
co-governance and co-management arrangements,
meaning they will not produce the outcomes sought.
Non-delivery of Treaty settlement arrangements could
ultimately undermine the durability of settlements,
create new injustices for iwi, and potentially trigger
contemporary Treaty claims against the Crown.
Evidence suggests individual councils are operating
on a continuum that ranges from meeting the
minimum requirements to complying with Treaty
settlement legislation, to full engagement with
iwi under co-governance and co-management
arrangements. Although the latter is the outcome
sought from settlements, it is not always achievable.
A key reason for Treaty settlement outcomes not
being fully achieved is that there are significant costs
associated with engagement for both local authorities
and iwi entities. It is also common for iwi authorities
to rely on council staff for support as they participate
in Treaty settlement arrangements.3
Page 113 of 170
5
The Crown practice of making limited one-off
financial contributions does not adequately recognise
the ongoing commitment required by councils to
ensure Treaty settlement arrangements are enduring
and sustainable. Furthermore, there needs to be
greater clarity, visibility, certainty and consistency
across councils as to how financial contributions are
determined by the Crown in each region.
REPORT STRUCTURE
This report sets out the need for increased funding
from the Crown and provides a Framework that can
be used when negotiating financial investment with
the Crown. The following section describes the scope
of this exercise and the methodology underlying the
report. The Treaty settlement arrangements, and those
likely to be established in the foreseeable future,
are then set out with their key functions described.
The estimated cost to respective councils for the
establishment and implementation of each entity,
plan and/or agreement is then provided.
Importantly, the report details the numerous
activities performed by councils to support the
implementation of the arrangements. For example,
organising meetings and assisting with the drafting
of statutory plans and governance documents. By
documenting these activities the extent of required
council staff time is revealed. Often that time and
associated costs is not immediately visible or was not
contemplated when Treaty settlement arrangements
were established. The Crown’s factors for considering
financial contribution towards arrangements are
compared with that of local government’s factors to
provide a complete list for the Crown to consider.
Lastly, the Framework’s purpose, benefits and
practical application are explained.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN TREATY SETTLEMENTS Treaty settlements are increasingly providing
mechanisms for local government to work with
iwi authorities to govern nationally and regionally
significant natural resources: important rivers or other
water bodies, reserves and parks, etc. Iwi, councils
and the Crown share an interest with the public
to ensure these resources are well governed and
protected for future generations.
A crucial role for councils is the implementation of
Treaty settlement arrangements. A council’s role
includes establishing and maintaining co-governance
entities, providing technical advice for the entities,
and plan development. This includes legal, scientific,
policy, planning and resource consenting advice, to
name a few. In addition, councils provide physical
resources and time to assist with the upskilling of iwi
entities on council functions, plans and processes.
Although local authorities are not a party to the
deeds of settlement they are nonetheless bound
by the resulting legislation, which gives councils
responsibilities and duties to carry out. These
obligations can be perceived by local government as
being undertaken on the Crown’s behalf. Appropriate
Crown financial investment for local government is
therefore critical to conduct this role.
Page 114 of 170
6
PARTICIPATING COUNCILSTE TŌPŪ KAUNIHERAOver several years, councils – both collectively and separately – have raised concerns over sustainable post-
Treaty settlement funding with Ministers and Crown officials. In late October 2016 councils agreed a nationally
coordinated approach was required to identify options to resolve this collective issue. Local Government New
Zealand (LGNZ) provided their support for this report, as did seven North Island councils (the participating
councils).4
REPORT SCOPE ARONGA PŪRONGO
4 A proposal was tabled at the Regional Council Chief Executive Officers meeting in February 2017 entitled “Establishing a Methodology to Assess Costs
(over and above business as usual costs) to Local Authorities for Implementing Treaty of Waitangi Settlement Arrangements”. The participating councils are
acknowledged on the back of this report.
5 Participating in Treaty settlement negotiations also incurs significant costs for councils. For example, councils are often asked to provide technical advice and
information, Light Detection and Ranging (LiDAR) data, and feedback and support for the development of the settlement options the Crown proposes.
6 Bay of Plenty Regional Council and Waikato Regional Council, “Supporting Information: Impact of Treaty Settlements on Bay of Plenty and Waikato Regional
Council”, November 2012.
This report focuses on Treaty settlement
arrangements, the costs incurred and the estimated
costs for undertaking arrangements by the
participating councils. It is assumed these costs
are common to all councils across New Zealand.
It reviews financial and other information for the
participating councils and provides a rationale for
the best approach to obtain fair and accurate funding
from the Crown for such arrangements.
The following matters are not captured by this report.
• Costs for local authorities to engage with
the Crown and iwi through Treaty settlement
negotiations on an as and when required basis.5
• Costs associated with Treaty settlement
arrangements that are not directly provided for
by settlement legislation.
• Costs to local government of engaging with iwi/
Māori under non-Treaty settlement legislation
(i.e. (LGA, RMA and the Reserves Act 1977).
• Mana Whakahono a Rohe Agreements (iwi
participation agreements) provided through
recent amendments to the RMA.
• RMA or voluntary arrangements between
councils and iwi authorities.
• Notification obligations for statutory
acknowledgements.
• Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act
2011 (MACA) applications.
Costs to local authorities who have not contributed
to this report are not included. For example, city and
district councils contribute as members on a range of
co-governance and co-management arrangements.
These councils however, will have similar costs
when undertaking Treaty settlement functions and
activities, to varying degrees.
This is the second report prepared specifically for the
Crown on the financial impact of Treaty settlements
on local authorities. The first study was conducted by
Bay of Plenty Regional Council and Waikato Regional
Council in 2012.6 This report expands on the types of
settlement costs identified in the 2012 study. It also
provides a methodology or tool for calculating local
government costs, while providing for a discount
method to ensure a phase out time for business as
usual costs commences.
Page 115 of 170
7
METHODOLOGY Participating councils provided information on
the costs they have incurred implementing Treaty
settlement arrangements. Information was also
provided on the wide range of tasks, processes
and activities councils undertook to deliver these
arrangements.
Every effort has been made to record activities
required to establish and operate new arrangements
and where possible the actual costs of these
arrangements. In most instances councils have been
able to call upon financial records to provide accurate
numbers. In other instances, cost estimates have
been provided. One limitation of the data is that the
practice of recording costs after settlement has not
been undertaken by councils until more recently.
Work by the Post-Settlement Commitments Unit
within the Ministry for Justice, and by Te Puni Kōkiri,
has been reviewed to inform the development of the
Framework. A register was developed of councils’
obligations under the various Treaty settlements
by the Post-Settlement Commitments Unit and a
stocktake of council-iwi participation agreements was
developed by Te Puni Kōkiri.7 Financial and supporting
information provided by the participating councils,
and primary documents such as the settlement
legislation and deeds of settlement, were also
reviewed.
7 “Te Puni Kōkiri Draft Stocktake of Council Iwi Participation Agreements
(November 2015)” was developed based on publicly available
information and it includes voluntary arrangements as well as those
required under Treaty settlements. Te Puni Kōkiri with the support of
the Ministry for the Environment developed a spreadsheet. The Post-
Settlement Commitments Unit developed a Master List of Commitments
for all councils based on Treaty settlement deeds and legislation.
Waikato River
Page 116 of 170
8
TYPES OF TREATY SETTLEMENT COSTSNGĀ MOMO UTU WHAKATAUNGA TIRITILocal authorities incur two types of costs when implementing Treaty settlement arrangements:
1. Additional costs, which are imposed on councils due to settlement legislation.
2. Business as usual costs, which occur as a result of engaging with iwi irrespective of settlement legislation.
ADDITIONAL COSTS Additional costs, as defined here, are costs that local
authorities incur as a direct result of Treaty settlement
arrangements. Notably, additional costs are associated
with the establishment and ongoing costs of co-
governance entities, and the development and
implementation of plans, documents or agreements.
Additional costs vary from region to region depending
on the type of settlement arrangement negotiated
between iwi and the Crown. Examples of additional
costs are listed in Appendix 3 and are classified as
functions and activities that need to be undertaken
when implementing Treaty settlement arrangements.
For example:
• Administrative support, democratic services
and other council staff services required for
the provision of the exercise of powers and
functions for the co-governance entities, boards
or committees.
• RMA policy development activities that are not
planned or anticipated but are required by a
Treaty settlement within a specified timeframe.
• Specialist technical staff time on the development
and implementation of co-governance entity
plans, documents and joint management
agreements or other such agreements as
required.
• Assistance with building iwi capacity
to participate in the Treaty settlement
arrangements. For example, councils contracting
independent advisors for the tangata whenua
representatives who sit on the Hawke’s
Bay Regional Planning Committee and the
establishment of two senior Treaty advisors to
support the Rangitāiki River Forum, Kaituna River
Authority Te Maru o Kaituna and the forthcoming
Tauranga Harbour Governance Group in the Bay
of Plenty.
BUSINESS AS USUAL COSTS Business as usual (BAU) costs are associated with
the normal conduct of business, regardless of
current circumstances, such as administering iwi
arrangements under the RMA. Treaty settlement costs
may be considered BAU if they overlay or can be
accommodated within current processes. For example,
if a regional or district plan is due to be reviewed
or changed at or around the same time as a co-
governance entity is developing or has developed its
own plan for consideration by council, coordination
of the two projects should negate any extra Treaty
settlement cost. This needs to be qualified by the
amount and type of additional work involving council
staff, which will vary between councils.
Relationship management with iwi is also considered
a BAU cost. For example, councils can act in an
intermediary capacity for iwi with the Crown or other
entities both within and outside Treaty settlement
arrangements. Council staff are regularly asked to
interpret maps or legislation, or to assist with the
resolution of other relevant issues or concerns that
may arise from arrangements.
Page 117 of 170
9
ISSUES WITH TREATY SETTLEMENT COSTS 1. Not all arrangements are put into place immediately following Treaty settlement legislation being
enacted. Some are delayed for several reasons. One example includes a Joint Management Agreement
with Tūwharetoa Māori Trust Board. The Waikato River section of this Joint Management Agreement
was developed in August 2016, with the Taupo Waters section currently being developed. However, the
legislation came into force in October 2010.8 Similarly, one arrangement was put into place prior to Treaty
settlement legislation being enacted. For example, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee.9
2. Costs vary for councils in each region. Whilst the arrangements may be similar in nature the scale and
functions may vary for each. In addition, staff time, expertise and experience with the arrangements is key.
8 Ngati Tuwharetoa, Raukawa, and Te Arawa River Iwi Waikato River Act 2010.
9 Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Act 2015.
Confluence of Taruheru, Waimata and Turanganui Rivers
Page 118 of 170
10
TREATY SETTLEMENT ARRANGEMENTS AND COSTSNGĀ RITENGA/UTU WHAKATAUNGA TIRITIThe Treaty settlement arrangements for the participating councils are set out in the Appendices. Appendix 1
highlights the types of settlement arrangements for the participating councils and Appendix 2 highlights the
costs associated with each arrangement.12
arrangement.10
TYPES OF TREATY SETTLEMENT ARRANGEMENTS Participating councils are all involved in the
implementation of Treaty settlement arrangements
for co-governance and co-management within their
respective regions. Each arrangement has different
levels of responsibilities and obligations that trigger
activities and thereby attract additional costs.
Appendix 1 outlines 25 arrangements that are either
in place through statute or are at the Bill or deed of
settlement stage and are thus imminent. In all cases,
the participating councils are required to establish
and maintain some form of permanent co-governance
entity, committee or board. These entities must
prepare and approve a plan or document of some
description, which has varying legal weight and
status, for consideration by councils under the RMA
and the LGA.
Obligations arise for councils when preparing,
reviewing or amending RMA planning documents,
considering resource consent applications and making
decisions. These functions require a significant
amount of council time, money and resource in the
development and implementation stages.
10 Some costs are estimated or forecasted.
11 The Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee established itself pre-Treaty legislation.
TREATY SETTLEMENT COSTS Appendix 2 compares Crown contributions to the
actual costs (where available) or estimated costs
for councils when implementing Treaty settlement
arrangements. The table also shows what councils
have sought from the Crown for future settlement
arrangements where this has occurred. These
amounts have been forecasted by councils and are
significantly more than past Crown contributions.
In some instances the Crown has directed where
Crown funding is spent. In other instances councils
can determine how funding is apportioned across
arrangements or the co-governance entity can
determine.
The evidence is clear that council costs of
implementing Treaty settlement arrangements far
exceed Crown contributions. The evidence is also
clear that ongoing costs for councils are significant.
A strong argument can be made, therefore, for the
Crown to also contribute to ongoing costs for a
defined period.
For example, the Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning
Committee received $100,000 as a one-off Crown
contribution on its establishment. Actual costs to
run the committee for the period 2010 to 2016
were $787,627 (or an average of $131,271 per
annum). The annual costs of running the now
formally established body is estimated at $753,480.
This greater cost is due mainly to an increase in the
number of meetings (two per month), the type of
work undertaken by the committee and the addition
of two contracted independent iwi advisors for the
tangata whenua representatives who sit on the
committee.11
Page 119 of 170
11
The Crown’s approach to funding has been
inconsistent with different amounts provided to
councils for similar arrangements. For example, within
the Bay of Plenty region there are two mandated co-
governance entities: the Rangitāiki River Forum and
the Te Maru o Kaituna Kaituna River Authority. Both
require the development of statutory river planning
documents (which are not required by any other
legislation). The Crown did not provide any funding
for the establishment of the Rangitāiki River Forum
co-governance entity or plan. Bay of Plenty Regional
Council has provided a conservative estimate that
the development of the Rangitāiki River Document
(plan) has cost around $164,000 and believes the
ongoing costs of implementation will be significant.12
In contrast the Crown provided a contribution of
$250,000 to establish the Kaituna River Authority.
The Kaituna Statutory River Planning Document
is currently out for public consultation thereby
potentially attracting further costs for Bay of Plenty
Regional Council.
Treaty settlement legislation can also require reviews
and amendments of statutory plans earlier than when
required by the council. This can lead to additional
costs for councils. For example, under the Waikato
and Waipā rivers settlement legislation Waikato
Regional Council is required to assess whether the
Regional Policy Statement gives effect to the Vision
and Strategy for the Waikato River, and to initiate
an amendment to the Regional Policy Statement if
it does not do so. In 2012 a review was carried out
which determined the regional plan needed to be
reviewed to give effect to the Vision and Strategy. No
funding was provided by the Crown for this work. In
contrast, the RMA only requires Waikato Regional
Council to commence a review of sections of the
regional plan every 10 years.13
The cost to Waikato Regional Council to develop
the Healthy Rivers/Wai Ora: Proposed Waikato
Regional Plan Change 1 to the notification stage is
conservatively estimated at $13 million. Due to both
the co-governance arrangements and the highly
collaborative nature of the Healthy Rivers Wai Ora
process, the $13 million spend to date is higher than
any other policy process implemented by this regional
12 This amount does not factor in staff and management time, engagement and public notices, meeting and venue costs, technical expertise, the Tuna Plan or
Regional Policy Statement Change 3. These are variables that will increase this cost estimate. The plan was developed in 2014/2015.
13 Section 79(1)(b) of the RMA.
14 The five Waikato and Waipa river iwi are Waikato-Tainui, Maniapoto, Raukawa, Te Arawa and Ngāti Tuwharetoa.
15 Appendix 3 is not an exhaustive list. Further activities are listed in the Framework.
council. Costs incurred by Waikato Regional Council
to support participation in the process by the five
Waikato and Waipa river iwi have been estimated at
$5,860,000.14
TREATY SETTLEMENT ACTIVITIES The research undertaken for this report reveals a
significant amount of council staff time is spent on
drafting documentation, processes and policies for
the various arrangements. This includes undertaking
activities and tasks for a co-governance authority,
a joint management agreement, or for plan
development and implementation. Rarely is this time
recorded in an accurate or consistent fashion. Often
there are reactive or unplanned tasks associated
with activities which are not immediately obvious
from the deeds of settlement and empowering
legislation. The importance of staff time should not be
underestimated as this is the key area where councils
carry additional costs. It is these functions and
activities that underpin council costs and form the
basis of the Framework set out in the next section.
Appendix 3 shows a breakdown of the functions and
activities including tasks required for each Treaty
settlement arrangement.15
CROWN POLICY Under Crown policy the level of Crown contribution
to local government is at the discretion of Cabinet
and is assessed on its own merits taking into account
a range of factors. These factors have been assessed
and updated by the participating councils to show
what should be considered when determining
the financial investment needed to establish and
implement arrangements. These factors are outlined
in Appendix 4 alongside the Crown policy.
Page 120 of 170
12
THE FRAMEWORKTE ANGAANGAAs set out in this report Crown contributions for costs are discretionary and have been inconsistently applied
across the many Treaty settlement arrangements. To make clear the higher than assumed costs for councils
to implement Treaty settlement arrangements, and to ensure consistency in the provision of future funding
arrangements, a comprehensive planning framework has been developed.
PURPOSE OF THE FRAMEWORKThe Framework is designed to assist the Crown and
councils to assess accurate costs of establishing,
implementing, maintaining, monitoring and reviewing
Treaty settlement arrangements. It is recommended
as a tool during the negotiation stages to provide
consistency, certainty, accountability and transparency
for Crown funding.
KEY PURPOSES OF THE FRAMEWORK INCLUDE:• Provide a tool to calculate actual costs of
Treaty settlement arrangements and associated
functions and activities.
• Show accountability and transparency to Treaty
partners, ratepayers, interest groups, industries,
communities and stakeholders when entering
legislated arrangements.
• Provide certainty and clarity to local government
on how Crown financial contributions are
determined and applied nationally.
• Demonstrate that the Crown has a strong interest
in ensuring that Treaty settlement arrangements
are successful and enduring.
• Highlight the importance of local government’s
acceptance of responsibilities for the Crown
(as Treaty partner) in ensuring beneficial social,
economic, cultural and environmental outcomes
are achieved for iwi.
16 Updates are being made to the Framework to recognise the dynamic nature of the arrangements and to allow for council variation. This will be an ongoing process.
DESIGN OF THE FRAMEWORKThe Framework is based on actual commitments
or obligations arising from each Treaty settlement
arrangement. These commitments have been
transferred into activities and tasks typically
undertaken by groups within council responsible for
the regulatory, integrated catchment management
and policy functions.
The activities have been identified through the
research undertaken with each participating council
and have been merged to form a complete set. Not
all activities are required by each council and not all
are required for each Treaty settlement arrangement.
This is an outcome of variation between different
settlement arrangements and the practices of
individual councils.16
The Framework provides a selection tool to assess
what each council is required to undertake when
discussing with the Crown the type of arrangement
being considered. It is flexible in that additional
arrangements, functions, activities and tasks can be
added to the Framework. Rates for staff, management
and councillors have been provided as an example
and can be substituted for each council’s own rates.
Once activities and costs have been entered a
discount method is applied automatically to the costs.
The discount method can discount BAU costs from
additional costs. This is done in the following way.
• If there is a new activity under the arrangement
or an activity that has been brought forward
by five years or more due to Treaty settlement
legislation, then 100 per cent of the costs are
applied.
Page 121 of 170
13
• If a council has planned to undertake an
activity within a five-year period, but due to
Treaty settlement requirements the activity is
bought forward, then 20 per cent of the total
implementation costs per annum are applied for
each year that the activity is implemented earlier.
This is represented in the Framework as a 20
per cent discount for the Crown off the full cost
of implementation of the activity for each year
within the five-year period that the activity is
bought forward. The discount method is shown in
appendix 5.
• The discount rate and the five-year time period
are based on the established principle that every
three years the long term plan is reviewed and
every five years catchment or other council plans
are reviewed, amended or developed including
consideration of RMA planning documents for
review.17 In this situation BAU costs under the
Crown policy could commence from five years
as opposed to three years. This would provide
the Crown with a phase out or transition period
for arrangements to become ‘normalised’ within
councils.
BENEFITS OF THE FRAMEWORK
THE FRAMEWORK:• Contains a comprehensive spectrum of costs.
• Has been developed to enable each council to
actively negotiate a financial contribution for
costs with the Crown.
• Can be used to highlight the costs of all
arrangements to the Crown retrospectively.
• Caters for delayed or staged arrangements, so
that planning for a Joint Management Agreement
or other such arrangement two or more years
after the commencement date can be accounted
for.
• Details functions and activities to enable
councils to undertake better planning, financial
management and project management, and avoid
duplication of work.
17 These plans are not all on the same cycle but at any given point over the five year period a plan of some description will need reviewing, amending or
developing.
ALIGNMENT WITH CROWN POLICY
THE FRAMEWORK ALIGNS WITH CROWN POLICY: • It is a transparent tool capturing all activities and
can be adapted to include more, recognising the
varied nature of Treaty settlement arrangements.
• It deals with additional costs in a consistent
manner as opposed to an-hoc approach across
councils.
• Each contribution can be assessed on its
own merits based on activities that must be
undertaken.
• It allows the Crown to retain a phasing-out policy
for BAU costs so that longer term arrangements
are ‘normalised’.
• It allows the Crown to contribute to new
arrangements that are not part of a council’s LTP
or annual plans (i.e., that are not BAU costs).
• It provides a clear framework to consider true
costs, but also allows flexibility to respond to
different circumstances and the nature of a
particular arrangement.
• The complexity of arrangements are broken down
into manageable components so that the scale
and nature of costs can be assessed more easily.
• It has the ability to be updated and amended
in line with changes to Crown policy or council
specific arrangements.
Page 122 of 170
14
REFERENCES KOHIKOHINGA RAUEMI
LEGISLATION• Hawke’s Bay Regional Planning Committee Act 2015
• Nga Wai o Maniapoto (Waipa River) Act 2012
• Nga Mana Whenua o Tamaki Makaurau Collective
Redress Act 2014
• Ngāi Takoto Claims Settlement Act 2015
• Ngāi Tāmanuhiri Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Ngāti Manawa Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Ngati Tuwharetoa, Raukawa and Te Arawa River
Iwi Waikato River Act 2010
• Ngāti Whare Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Ngati Whatua o Kaipara Claims Settlement Act 2013
• Ngati Whatua Orakei Claims Settlement Act 2012
• Orakei Act 1991
• Rangitane o Manawatu Claims Settlement Act 2016
• Pare Hauraki Collective Redress Deed 2017
• Raukawa Claims Settlement Act 2014
• Reserves Act 1977
• Tapuika Claims Settlement Act 2014
• Te Arawa Lakes Settlement Act 2006
• Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims
Settlement) Act 2017
• Te Aupouri Claims Settlement Act 2015
• Te Hiku Claims Settlement Act 2015
• Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Act 2015
• Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River)
Settlement Act 2010
DEEDS OF SETTLEMENT• Ahuriri Hapū and the Trustees of the Mana
Ahuriri Trust and the Crown Deed of Settlement
of Historical Claims 2 November 2016
• Deed of Settlement of Historical claims - Ngāti
Tūwharetoa
• Nga Mana Whenua o Tamaki Makaurau Collective
Redress Deed
• Ngāti Rangi and the Trustees of Te Tōtarahoe o
Paerangi Trust and the Crown Deed of Settlement
of Historical Claims 17 August 2017
• Pare Hauraki Collective Redress Deed
• Tauranga Moana Iwi Collective Deed
Page 123 of 170
15
AGREEMENTS• Co-Management Agreement for Waikato River
Related Lands – Waikato Raupatu River Trust and
Waikato Regional Council (2012)
• Joint Management Agreement – Raukawa
Settlement Trust and Waikato Regional Council
(10 May 2012)
• Joint Management Agreement – Tuwharetoa
Maori Trust Board and Waikato Regional Council
(August 2016)
• Joint Management Agreement – Te Arawa River
Iwi Trust and Waikato Regional Council (August
2012)
• Joint Management Agreement – Maniapoto
Maori Trust Board and Waikato Regional Council,
Otorohanga District Council, Waikato District
Council, Waipa District Council and Waitomo
District Council (April 2013)
• Joint Management Agreement – Te Runganganui
o Ngati Porou Trustee Limited and Gisborne
District Council (October 2015)
• Joint Management Agreement – Waikato Raupatu
River Trust and Waikato Regional Council (18
June 2013)
• Ngāti Whātua Iwi and the Crown Kaipara Moana
Framework Agreement (18 August 2014)
REPORTS AND PLANS• “Establishing a Methodology to Assess Costs
(over and above business as usual costs) to Local
Authorities for Implementing Treaty of Waitangi
Settlement Arrangements (the Proposal)
• Local Government New Zealand [LGNZ]
“Frequently Asked Questions on Council − Maori
Engagement: A Resource to Support Councils”,
October 2007
• Office of Auditor-General “Principles for
Effectively Co-Governing Natural Resources”
February 2016
• Te Oneroa-a-Tohe “Board Request for Proposal
Māori Focus Treaty Settlement Implementation:
Beach Management Plan”
• Waikato Regional Council “Joint Management
Agreement Review Waikato Raupatu Settlement
Trust Case Study” 2014
• Te Puni Kōkiri Draft Stocktake of Council Iwi
Participation Agreements (November 2015)
• Waikato Regional Council and Bay of Plenty
Regional Council, “Supporting Information:
Impact of Treaty Settlements on Bay of Plenty and
Waikato Regional Councils” November 2012
Page 124 of 170
16
AP
PEN
DIX
1: S
ETTL
EMEN
T A
RR
AN
GEM
ENTS
SETT
LEM
ENT
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
TS F
OR
PA
RTI
CIPA
TIN
G C
OU
NCI
LS
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2006
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Te A
raw
a La
kes
Sett
lem
ent
Act
20
06
RO
TOR
UA
-TE
AR
AW
A L
AK
ES S
TRA
TEG
Y G
RO
UP
Form
erly
Rot
orua
Lak
es S
trat
egy
Gro
up
Perm
anen
t Joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Catc
hmen
t inc
lude
s th
e 12
larg
e Ro
toru
a la
kes
and
thei
r as
soci
ated
cat
chm
ents
.18
Six
mem
bers
• Tw
o ap
poin
ted
by iw
i
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
• O
ne M
fE m
embe
r at
tend
s m
eeti
ngs
Mem
bers
mus
t com
ply
wit
h th
e te
rms
of th
e St
rate
gy G
roup
A
gree
men
t.
Dev
elop
Vis
ion
and
Stra
tegy
for
the
Lake
s of
the
Roto
rua
dist
rict
.
Ove
rarc
hing
pol
icy
docu
men
t.
2010
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Wai
kato
-Tai
nui R
aupa
tu C
laim
s (W
aika
to R
iver
) Se
ttle
men
t A
ct
2010
WA
IKA
TO R
IVER
AU
THO
RIT
Y
Inde
pend
ent s
tatu
tory
bod
yCo
vers
a c
atch
men
t com
pris
ing
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er fr
om H
uka
Falls
to T
e Pu
aha
o W
aika
to, t
he W
aipā
Riv
er fr
om it
s so
urce
to
its
conn
ecti
on w
ith
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er, a
nd th
eir
catc
hmen
ts.
Ten
mem
bers
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
the
Crow
n
Dev
elop
Vis
ion
and
Stra
tegy
for
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er19
(Te
Tur
e W
haim
ana
o Te
Aw
a o
Wai
kato
).
The
Visi
on a
nd S
trat
egy
form
s pa
rt o
f the
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Pol
icy
Stat
emen
t. It
is b
indi
ng o
n al
l nat
iona
l, re
gion
al, a
nd d
istr
ict p
olic
y st
atem
ents
and
dec
isio
ns fo
r th
e m
anag
emen
t of t
he W
aika
to a
nd
Wai
pā r
iver
s.
2012
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti W
hātu
a Ō
rāke
i Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
2
NG
ĀTI
WH
ATU
A Ō
RĀ
KEI
RES
ERV
ES B
OA
RD
Form
erly
Ngā
ti W
hatu
a o
Ōrā
kei R
eser
ves
Boar
d un
der
the
Ōrā
kei A
ct 1
991
Stat
utor
y bo
dy
Cont
rol a
nd m
anag
e th
e W
henu
a R
anga
tira
(Bas
tion
Poi
nt).20
Six
mem
bers
• Th
ree
appo
inte
d by
iwi
• Th
ree
appo
inte
d by
Auc
klan
d Co
unci
l
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
a m
anag
emen
t pla
n (u
nder
s41
of t
he
Rese
rves
Act
197
7).
Gov
erna
nce
and
man
agem
ent w
ork
unde
r th
e Re
serv
es A
ct 1
977.
2012
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti W
hare
Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent
Act
20
12 a
nd N
gāti
Man
awa
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
2
RA
NG
ITA
IKI R
IVER
FO
RU
M
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Ran
gita
iki R
iver
and
its
catc
hmen
t inc
ludi
ng th
e W
hiri
naki
, W
heao
and
Hor
oman
ga r
iver
s.
Twel
ve m
embe
rs
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by iw
i
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by r
elev
ant l
ocal
aut
hori
ties
• N
gāi T
ūhoe
and
Ngā
ti H
ineu
ru w
ere
subs
eque
ntly
add
ed
to th
e Fo
rum
aft
er it
s es
tabl
ishm
ent i
n 20
1221
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
Ran
gita
iki R
iver
Doc
umen
t.
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust r
ecog
nise
and
pro
vide
for
the
visi
on,
obje
ctiv
es a
nd d
esir
ed o
utco
mes
con
tain
ed in
the
Ran
gita
iki
Riv
er D
ocum
ent.
Prio
r to
pla
n ch
ange
loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust h
ave
part
icul
ar r
egar
d to
the
Riv
er d
ocum
ent.
18
Roto
rua
lake
s m
eans
Lak
es Ō
kare
ka, Ō
karo
, Ōka
tain
a, R
erew
haka
aitu
, Rot
oehu
, Rot
oiti,
Rot
okak
ahi,
Roto
mā,
Rot
omah
ana,
Rot
orua
, Tar
awer
a, a
nd T
ikita
pu.
19
The
Gua
rdia
ns E
stab
lishm
ent C
omm
ittee
firs
t dev
elop
ed th
e Vi
sion
and
Str
ateg
y fo
r the
Wai
kato
Riv
er in
200
8. L
egis
latio
n w
as e
nact
ed in
201
0 cr
eatin
g th
e W
aika
to R
iver
Aut
horit
y. S
ee W
aika
to-T
ainu
i Rau
patu
Cla
ims
(Wai
kato
Riv
er) S
ettle
men
t Act
201
0.
20
As
desc
ribed
in S
ched
ule
3 of
the
Ōrā
kei A
ct 1
991.
21
Hin
euru
and
Tuh
oe a
ll ha
ve a
sea
t on
the
Rang
itaik
i Riv
er F
orum
thro
ugh
thei
r cla
im s
ettle
men
t Act
s. N
gāti
Awa
and
Ngā
ti Tū
wha
reto
a ha
ve m
embe
rshi
p vi
a th
e se
ttle
men
t act
s of
Ngā
ti W
hare
and
Ngā
ti M
anaw
a. W
haka
tane
Dis
tric
t Cou
ncil,
Tau
po D
istr
ict C
ounc
il an
d
BoPR
C m
akeu
p th
e re
mai
ning
sea
ts. O
ther
iwi a
nd lo
cal a
utho
ritie
s m
ay jo
in th
e fo
rum
thro
ugh
cons
ensu
s.
Page 125 of 170
17
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2012
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti T
uwha
reto
a, R
auka
wa,
and
Te
Ara
wa
Riv
er Iw
i Wai
kato
Riv
er
Act
201
0
JOIN
T CO
MM
ITTE
E U
ND
ER J
OIN
T M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
Rau
kaw
a Se
ttle
men
t Tru
st a
nd W
aika
to R
egio
nal
Coun
cil
Stat
utor
y co
mm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd a
ctiv
itie
s w
ithi
n it
s ca
tchm
ent a
ffec
ting
th
e W
aika
to R
iver
and
mat
ters
rel
atin
g to
act
ivit
ies
in th
e ca
tchm
ent o
f the
Wai
pā R
iver
from
its
sour
ce to
its
junc
tion
w
ith
the
Puni
u R
iver
Eigh
t m
embe
rs -
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t jo
int
com
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
Dev
elop
men
t of J
oint
Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of c
o-go
vern
ance
com
mit
tee.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of p
roce
sses
for
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts, r
esou
rce
cons
ents
, mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent a
nd c
usto
mar
y ac
tivi
ties
.
Upp
er W
aika
to R
iver
Inte
grat
ed M
anag
emen
t Pla
n (t
o be
de
velo
ped)
.
2012
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti T
uwha
reto
a, R
auka
wa,
and
Te
Ara
wa
Riv
er Iw
i Wai
kato
Riv
er
Act
201
0
JOIN
T CO
MM
ITTE
E U
ND
ER J
OIN
T M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
Te A
raw
a R
iver
Iwi T
rust
and
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Co
unci
l
Stat
utor
y co
mm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd a
ctiv
itie
s w
ithi
n it
s ca
tchm
ent a
ffec
ting
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs –
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t jo
int
com
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
Dev
elop
men
t of J
oint
Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of c
o-go
vern
ance
com
mit
tee.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of p
roce
sses
for
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts, r
esou
rce
cons
ents
, mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent a
nd c
usto
mar
y ac
tivi
ties
.
Upp
er W
aika
to R
iver
Inte
grat
ed M
anag
emen
t Pla
n (t
o be
de
velo
ped)
.
2012
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Wai
kato
Tai
nui R
aupa
tu (
Wai
kato
R
iver
) Se
ttle
men
t A
ct 2
010
CO-M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
FOR
WA
IKA
TO R
IVER
REL
ATE
D L
AN
DS
Wai
kato
Rau
patu
Riv
er T
rust
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Co
unci
lFo
r W
aika
to R
iver
rel
ated
land
s in
clud
ing
fee
sim
ple
site
s,
man
aged
pro
pert
ies
and
rese
rve
site
s.D
evel
opm
ent o
f Co-
man
aged
Lan
ds A
gree
men
t.
2013
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti W
hātu
a o
Kai
para
Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
3
TE P
OA
RI O
KA
IPĀ
TIK
I KI K
AIP
AR
A B
OA
RD
Form
erly
Par
akai
Rec
reat
ion
Rese
rve
Boar
d
The
Boar
d is
a p
ublic
ent
ity
wit
hin
the
mea
ning
of
s4 o
f the
Pub
lic A
udit
Act
200
1
Kaip
ātik
i (fo
rmer
ly P
arak
ai R
ecre
atio
n Re
serv
e).
Six
(or
eigh
t, if
agr
eed)
mem
bers
• Th
ree
appo
inte
d by
iwi
• Th
ree
appo
inte
d by
Auc
klan
d Co
unci
l
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
Rese
rve
Man
agem
ent P
lan.
Gov
erna
nce
and
man
agem
ent w
ork
unde
r th
e Re
serv
es A
ct 1
977.
Page 126 of 170
18
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2013
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
Wai
o M
ania
poto
(W
aipā
Riv
er)
Act
201
2
JOIN
T CO
MM
ITTE
E U
ND
ER J
OIN
T M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil,
Wai
tom
o D
istr
ict
Coun
cil,
Wai
kato
Dis
tric
t Cou
ncil,
Wai
pa D
istr
ict
Coun
cil a
nd M
ania
poto
Māo
ri T
rust
Boa
rd
Stat
utor
y co
mm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Wai
pā R
iver
and
act
ivit
ies
wit
hin
its
catc
hmen
t aff
ecti
ng th
e W
aipā
Riv
er.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs –
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t jo
int
com
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
Dev
elop
men
t of J
oint
Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of c
o-go
vern
ance
com
mit
tee.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of p
roce
sses
for
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts, r
esou
rce
cons
ents
, mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent a
nd c
usto
mar
y ac
tivi
ties
.
Upp
er W
aipā
Riv
er In
tegr
ated
Man
agem
ent P
lan
(to
be d
evel
oped
).
2013
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Wai
kato
Tai
nui R
aupa
tu (
Wai
kato
R
iver
) Se
ttle
men
t A
ct 2
010
JOIN
T CO
MM
ITTE
E U
ND
ER J
OIN
T M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
Wai
kato
Rau
patu
Riv
er T
rust
and
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Co
unci
l
Stat
utor
y co
mm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd a
ctiv
itie
s w
ithi
n it
s ca
tchm
ent a
ffec
ting
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs –
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t jo
int
com
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
Dev
elop
men
t of J
oint
Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of c
o-go
vern
ance
com
mit
tee.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of p
roce
sses
for
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts, r
esou
rce
cons
ents
, mon
itor
ing
and
enfo
rcem
ent a
nd c
usto
mar
y ac
tivi
ties
.
Inte
grat
ed R
iver
Man
agem
ent P
lan
(to
be d
evel
oped
).
2014
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
NCI
L
Tapu
ika
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
4
TE M
AR
U O
KA
ITU
NA
Kait
una
Riv
er A
utho
rity
22
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Kait
una
Riv
er in
clud
ing
its
trib
utar
ies.
Ten
mem
bers
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
• N
gāti
Wha
kaue
was
app
oint
ed o
nto
the
Foru
m th
roug
h a
cons
ensu
s de
cisi
on o
f the
foru
m in
June
201
7
Kait
una
Riv
er D
ocum
ent.
RM
A P
lann
ing
Doc
umen
ts
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust r
ecog
nise
and
pro
vide
for
the
visi
on,
obje
ctiv
es a
nd d
esir
ed o
utco
mes
of t
he K
aitu
na R
iver
Doc
umen
t.
Prio
r to
pla
n ch
ange
loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust h
ave
rega
rd to
the
Kait
una
Riv
er D
ocum
ent.
LGA
Coun
cils
mus
t tak
e in
to a
ccou
nt th
e pr
ovis
ions
of t
he K
aitu
na R
iver
D
ocum
ent w
hen
mak
ing
deci
sion
s un
der
the
LGA
.
2014
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
Man
a W
henu
a o
Tām
aki
Mak
aura
u Co
llect
ive
Red
ress
Act
20
14
TŪP
UN
A M
AU
NG
A O
TĀ
MA
KI M
AK
AU
RA
U A
UTH
OR
ITY
Stat
utor
y au
thor
ity
Cove
rs th
e 14
Tūp
una
Mau
nga
(anc
estr
al m
ount
ains
) tr
ansf
erre
d co
llect
ivel
y to
Ngā
Man
a W
henu
a o
Tām
aki
Mak
aura
u.23
Thir
teen
mem
bers
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by iw
i
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by A
uckl
and
Coun
cil
• O
ne n
on-v
otin
g m
embe
r ap
poin
ted
by th
e M
inis
ter
for
Art
s, C
ultu
re a
nd H
erit
age
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
the
Inte
grat
ed M
anag
emen
t Pla
n (I
MP)
- s4
1 of
the
Rese
rves
Act
app
lies
to th
e IM
P.
Hol
d an
nual
hui
bet
wee
n N
gā M
ana
Whe
nua
o Tā
mak
i Mak
aura
u an
d A
uckl
and
Coun
cil.
Each
yea
r th
e Tū
puna
Mau
nga
Aut
hori
ty a
nd A
uckl
and
Coun
cil
mus
t agr
ee a
nd a
dopt
an
annu
al o
pera
tion
al p
lan.
Oth
er g
over
nanc
e an
d m
anag
emen
t wor
k un
der
the
Rese
rves
Act
19
77.
22
Ngā
ti Ra
ngiw
eweh
i, W
aita
ha a
nd a
ffilia
te T
e A
raw
a al
l hav
e a
seat
on
the
Kaitu
na R
iver
Aut
horit
y vi
a th
e Ta
puik
a Se
ttle
men
t Act
. Oth
er iw
i and
loca
l aut
horit
ies
can
join
the
Kaitu
na R
iver
Aut
horit
y th
roug
h co
nsen
sus
of th
e Au
thor
ity o
r thr
ough
Tre
aty
legi
slat
ion.
23
The
colle
ctiv
e gr
oup
of iw
i of A
uckl
and.
Page 127 of 170
19
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2015
NO
RTH
LAN
D R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Te H
iku
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
5
Colle
ctiv
e re
dres
s fo
r N
inet
y M
ile
Bea
ch24
TE O
NER
OA
A T
ŌH
Ē B
OA
RD
Nin
ety
Mile
Bea
ch
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Te O
nero
a a
Tōhē
man
agem
ent a
rea
whi
ch in
clud
es th
e m
arin
e an
d co
asta
l are
a, m
argi
nal s
trip
s ad
jace
nt to
the
beac
h,
Beac
h si
tes
A to
D (M
ai I
Wai
kana
e ki
Wai
koro
pūpū
noa,
Mai
i H
ukat
ere
ki W
aim
ahur
u, M
ai I
Ngā
pae
ki W
aim
oho
and
Mai
I W
aim
imih
a ki
Ngā
pae)
and
may
incl
ude
any
adja
cent
land
su
bjec
t to
Boar
d an
d la
nd o
wne
r ag
reem
ent
Eigh
t m
embe
rs
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Te H
iku
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
Dev
elop
men
t and
app
rova
l of B
each
Man
agem
ent P
lan.
Incl
udes
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f fou
r Re
serv
e m
anag
emen
t pla
ns
(und
er s
41 o
f the
Res
erve
s A
ct 1
977)
.
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust r
ecog
nise
and
pro
vide
for
the
visi
on,
obje
ctiv
es a
nd d
esir
ed o
utco
mes
iden
tifie
d in
the
Beac
h M
anag
emen
t Pla
n. C
ounc
il m
ust h
ave
rega
rd to
the
Beac
h M
anag
emen
t Pla
n un
til th
e ob
ligat
ion
abov
e ha
s be
en c
ompl
ied
with
.
LGA
Coun
cils
mus
t tak
e in
to a
ccou
nt th
e Be
ach
Man
agem
ent P
lan
whe
n m
akin
g de
cisi
ons
unde
r th
e LG
A.
2015
HA
WK
E’S
BA
Y R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Haw
kes
Bay
Reg
iona
l Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e A
ct 2
015
HA
WK
E’S
BA
Y R
EGIO
NA
L P
LAN
NIN
G C
OM
MIT
TEE
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
To o
vers
ee th
e de
velo
pmen
t and
rev
iew
of R
MA
doc
umen
ts.
Twen
ty m
embe
rs
• Te
n ap
poin
ted
by iw
i
• Te
n ap
poin
ted
by H
awke
’s B
ay R
egio
nal C
ounc
il
The
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e m
ay r
ecom
men
d to
th
e co
unci
l for
pub
lic n
otifi
cati
on th
e co
nten
t of a
ny d
raft
cha
nge
to th
e re
gion
al p
olic
y st
atem
ent o
r re
gion
al p
lan,
or
prop
osed
pl
an a
nd to
mon
itor
the
effici
ency
and
eff
ecti
vene
ss o
f the
RM
A
docu
men
ts in
acc
orda
nce
wit
h s3
5 of
the
RM
A a
nd im
plem
ent a
w
ork
prog
ram
me
for
thei
r re
view
.
Voti
ng b
y co
mm
itte
e re
quir
es a
t lea
st a
sup
er m
ajor
ity
(80
per
cent
of
mem
bers
pre
sent
).
Coun
cil c
anno
t sim
ply
reje
ct a
rec
omm
enda
tion
mad
e by
the
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e.
Coun
cil i
s re
quir
ed to
ref
er b
ack
for
furt
her
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e co
nsid
erat
ion
if co
unci
l is
min
ded
not t
o ac
cept
a H
awke
s Ba
y Re
gion
al P
lann
ing
Com
mit
tee
reco
mm
enda
tion
.
2016
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Nga
āti T
uwha
reto
a, R
auka
wa,
and
Te
Ara
wa
Riv
er Iw
i Wai
kato
Riv
er
Act
201
0
JOIN
T CO
MM
ITTE
E U
ND
ER J
OIN
T M
AN
AG
EMEN
T A
GR
EEM
ENT
Tūw
hare
toa
Māo
ri T
rust
Boa
rd a
nd W
aika
to
Regi
onal
Cou
ncil
(sig
ned
2016
)
Stat
utor
y co
mm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Mat
ters
rel
atin
g to
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd a
ctiv
itie
s w
ithi
n it
s ca
tchm
ent a
ffec
ting
the
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd m
atte
rs r
elat
ing
to
the
wat
erw
ays
wit
hin
Taup
o W
ater
s.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs -
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t jo
int
com
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
Dev
elop
men
t of J
oint
Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t.
Esta
blis
hmen
t of c
o-go
vern
ance
com
mit
tee.
Esta
blis
hed
proc
esse
s fo
r R
MA
pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
, res
ourc
e co
nsen
ts, m
onit
orin
g an
d en
forc
emen
t and
cus
tom
ary
acti
viti
es.
Upp
er W
aika
to R
iver
Inte
grat
ed M
anag
emen
t Pla
n (t
o be
de
velo
ped)
.
24
Te H
iku
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent A
ct 2
015
cont
ains
the
colle
ctiv
e re
dres
s fo
r Nin
ety
Mile
Bea
ch. I
t inc
lude
s th
e fo
llow
ing
iwi:
Te A
upou
ri, N
gāiT
akot
o, T
e Ra
raw
a an
d N
gāti
Kuri.
Ngā
ti Ka
hu is
at t
he d
eed
of s
ettle
men
t sta
ge b
ut h
as d
ecid
ed n
ot to
join
the
Te O
nero
a a
Tōhē
Boa
rd.
Page 128 of 170
20
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2016
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ran
gitā
ne o
Man
awat
u Cl
aim
s Se
ttle
men
t A
ct 2
016
MA
NA
WA
TU R
IVER
CA
TCH
MEN
T A
DV
ISO
RY
BO
AR
D
Stat
utor
y bo
ard
Boar
d ca
n be
dis
esta
blis
hed
by m
ajor
ity
vote
Man
awat
u R
iver
cat
chm
ent t
hat i
s w
ithi
n H
oriz
ons
Regi
onal
Co
unci
l jur
isdi
ctio
n.
Mem
bers
hip
• H
oriz
ons
Regi
onal
Cou
ncil
and
iwi t
o dr
aft t
erm
s of
re
fere
nce
for
the
appo
intm
ent o
f mem
bers
, ope
rati
on a
nd
adm
inis
trat
ion
of th
e Bo
ard
The
Boar
d m
ay p
rovi
de w
ritt
en a
dvic
e to
Hor
izon
s Re
gion
al C
ounc
il in
rel
atio
n to
fres
hwat
er m
anag
emen
t iss
ues.
Hor
izon
s Re
gion
al C
ounc
il m
ust h
ave
rega
rd to
adv
ice
of th
e Bo
ard
and
repo
rt b
ack
to th
e Bo
ard
as to
how
the
coun
cil c
onsi
dere
d th
at
advi
ce.
2017
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Te A
wa
Tupu
a (W
hang
anui
Riv
er
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent)
Act
201
725
TE K
ŌP
UK
A N
Ā T
E A
WA
TU
PU
A (
STR
ATE
GY
GR
OU
P)
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Wha
ngan
ui R
iver
cat
chm
ent f
rom
the
mou
ntai
ns to
the
sea.
Up
to s
even
teen
mem
bers
• O
ne a
ppoi
nted
by
Ngā
Tān
gata
Tia
ki o
Wha
ngan
ui
• U
p to
five
app
oint
ed b
y iw
i wit
h in
tere
sts
in th
e W
hang
anui
Riv
er
• U
p to
four
app
oint
ed b
y th
e re
leva
nt lo
cal a
utho
riti
es
• O
ne a
ppoi
nted
by
Fish
and
Gam
e N
ew Z
eala
nd
• O
ne a
ppoi
nted
by
the
Dir
ecto
r-G
ener
al o
f Con
serv
atio
n
• O
ne a
ppoi
nted
by
Gen
esis
Ene
rgy
Lim
ited
• Fo
ur m
embe
rs a
ppoi
nted
by
Hor
izon
s Re
gion
al C
ounc
il to
re
pres
ent t
he fo
llow
ing
inte
rest
s:
• en
viro
nmen
tal a
nd c
onse
rvat
ion
• to
uris
m
• re
crea
tion
al
• pr
imar
y se
ctor
.
Te K
eke
Nga
huru
(Man
agem
ent S
trat
egy
Doc
umen
t).
Pers
ons
exer
cisi
ng p
ower
s un
der
a nu
mbe
r of
sta
tute
s m
ust h
ave
part
icul
ar r
egar
d to
Te
Hek
e N
gahu
ru.
Stat
utor
y de
cisi
on m
aker
s un
der
a ra
nge
of s
tatu
tes
mus
t rec
ogni
se
and
prov
ide
for
the
stat
us o
f Te
Aw
a Tu
pua
and
Tupu
a Te
Kaw
a.
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
Mus
t con
side
r R
MA
pla
nnin
g do
cum
ents
in li
ght o
f Te
Hek
e N
gahu
ru.
25
Te A
wa
Tupu
a is
the
Wha
ngan
ui R
iver
’s le
gal i
dent
ity.
Page 129 of 170
21
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
2017
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent
of H
isto
rica
l cl
aim
s –
Ngā
ti T
ūwha
reto
a
(si
gned
8 Ju
ly 2
017)
TE K
OP
UA
KĀ
NA
PAN
APA
(Tau
po C
atch
men
t Ent
ity)
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Juri
sdic
tion
acr
oss
the
who
le L
ake
Taup
ō ca
tchm
ent.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
Ngā
ti T
ūwha
reto
a
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
Te K
aupa
pa K
aiti
aki (
Taup
ō Ca
tchm
ent P
lan)
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust r
ecog
nise
and
pro
vide
for
the
visi
on,
obje
ctiv
es a
nd d
esir
ed o
utco
mes
in T
e Ka
upap
a Ka
itia
ki.
Res
ourc
e co
nsen
t
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust h
ave
part
icul
ar r
egar
d to
Te
Kaup
apa
Kait
iaki
.
LGA
A lo
cal a
utho
rity
mus
t hav
e pa
rtic
ular
reg
ard
to T
e Ka
upap
a Ka
itia
ki
in p
repa
ring
or
appr
ovin
g lo
ng te
rm p
lans
or
annu
al p
lans
und
er
the
LGA
.
2017
GIS
BO
RN
E D
ISTR
ICT
COU
NCI
L
Nga
i Tām
anuh
iri C
laim
s Se
ttle
men
t A
ct 2
012
LOCA
L LE
AD
ERSH
IP B
OD
Y
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Purp
ose
of th
e Lo
cal L
eade
rshi
p Bo
dy is
to c
ontr
ibut
e to
the
sust
aina
ble
man
agem
ent o
f the
nat
ural
and
phy
sica
l res
ourc
es
in th
e Lo
cal L
eade
rshi
p Bo
dy A
rea.
26
Twel
ve m
embe
rs
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by iw
i
• Si
x ap
poin
ted
by G
isbo
rne
Dis
tric
t Cou
ncil
Prim
ary
func
tion
is to
ach
ieve
the
purp
ose.
Gat
her
and
diss
emin
ate
info
rmat
ion
and
hold
mee
ting
s to
iden
tify
ex
isti
ng a
nd n
ew is
sues
.
Dev
elop
pol
icy
and
stra
tegi
es a
nd m
onit
or th
e sa
me.
Prom
ote
inte
grat
ed a
nd c
oord
inat
e m
anag
emen
t of t
he n
atur
al a
nd
phys
ical
res
ourc
es o
f the
Loc
al L
eade
rshi
p Bo
dy a
rea.
Prov
ide
info
rmat
ion
to a
ssis
t wit
h th
e pr
epar
atio
n of
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
ts.
FUTU
RE
NO
RTH
LAN
D R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
AN
D A
UCK
LAN
D C
OU
NCI
L
Ngā
ti W
hatu
a Iw
i
Kai
para
Moa
na F
ram
ewor
k A
gree
men
t
(sig
ned
2014
)
KA
IPA
RA
MO
AN
A B
OD
Y
Com
mit
tee
stat
us to
be
dete
rmin
edTh
e co
asta
l mar
ine
area
of t
he K
aipa
ra H
arbo
ur (K
aipa
ra
Moa
na) a
nd a
ny a
gree
d pa
rts
of th
e ri
vers
flow
ing
into
the
Kaip
ara
Moa
na a
nd th
e co
asta
l env
iron
men
t of K
aipa
ra M
oana
(t
o be
det
erm
ined
).
Mem
bers
hip
to b
e de
term
ined
but
equ
al iw
i and
cou
ncil
mem
bers
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
the
Kaip
ara
Moa
na S
trat
egic
doc
umen
t.
Leve
l of l
egal
wei
ghti
ng to
be
dete
rmin
ed.
26
The
Loca
l Lea
ders
hip
Body
are
a is
out
lined
in th
e O
TS D
eed
plan
OTS
-005
-044
und
er th
e N
gai T
āman
uhiri
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent.
Page 130 of 170
22
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
FUTU
RE
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Taur
anga
Moa
na Iw
i Col
lect
ive
Dee
d27
(sig
ned
2015
)
TAU
RA
NG
A M
OA
NA
GO
VER
NA
NCE
GR
OU
P
Com
mit
tee
stat
us to
be
dete
rmin
edTh
e w
ater
s (i
nclu
ding
inte
rnal
wat
ers
and
tida
l lag
oons
) and
ot
her
natu
ral r
esou
rces
and
oth
er g
eogr
aphi
cal f
eatu
res
(inc
ludi
ng T
aura
nga
Har
bour
) com
pris
ing
the
coas
tal m
arin
e ar
ea; a
nd th
e ri
vers
, str
eam
s, c
reek
s an
d na
tura
l wat
erco
urse
s w
ithi
n th
e ca
tchm
ent i
n Ta
uran
ga H
arbo
ur o
r th
e se
a at
an
y po
ints
; and
wet
land
s, s
wam
ps, a
nd la
goon
s w
ithi
n th
e ca
tchm
ent a
nd th
e be
ds a
nd a
quat
ic m
argi
ns o
f the
wat
er
bodi
es; a
nd th
e ec
osys
tem
s as
soci
ated
wit
h th
e w
ater
s an
d na
tura
l fea
ture
s.
Mem
bers
hip
to b
e de
term
ined
but
equ
al iw
i and
cou
ncil
num
bers
.
Prep
are
and
adop
t Nga
Tai
ki M
auao
(Ta
uran
ga M
oana
Fra
mew
ork
docu
men
t).
Leve
l of l
egal
wei
ghti
ng to
be
dete
rmin
ed.
FUTU
RE
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Pare
Hau
raki
Col
lect
ive
Red
ress
D
eed
of S
ettl
emen
t
(in
itia
lled
Dec
embe
r 20
16)
WA
IHO
U, P
IAK
O, C
OR
OM
AN
DEL
CA
TCH
MEN
T A
UTH
OR
ITY
Stat
utor
y au
thor
ity
The
wat
erw
ays
of th
e Co
rom
ande
l, W
aiho
u an
d Pi
ako
catc
hmen
ts.
Four
teen
mem
bers
• Se
ven
appo
inte
d by
iwi
• Tw
o ap
poin
ted
by W
aika
to R
egio
nal C
ounc
il
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
terr
itor
ial a
utho
riti
es
Subc
omm
itte
e
Te M
ātāp
una
o ng
ā W
aiho
u Pi
ako
is to
be
esta
blis
hed
as a
co
mm
itte
e of
the
co-g
over
nanc
e au
thor
ity
and
will
focu
s on
th
e up
per
Wai
hou
and
Piak
o ri
vers
.
Eigh
t m
embe
rs o
n su
bcom
mit
tee
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fo
ur a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
Hau
raki
Aut
hori
ty R
esou
rce
Plan
(HA
RP)
Effec
t of
HA
RP
on t
he R
PS a
nd r
esou
rce
cons
ents
Two
met
hods
for
inco
rpor
atio
n of
the
plan
into
the
RPS
. Thr
ough
di
rect
inco
rpor
atio
n or
thro
ugh
the
oblig
atio
n to
“re
cogn
ise
and
prov
ide
for”
the
plan
thro
ugh
the
RM
A p
roce
ss. C
ounc
il m
ust h
ave
rega
rd to
pla
n un
til t
he o
blig
atio
n ab
ove
has
been
com
plie
d w
ith.
If d
irec
t inc
orpo
rati
on th
en th
e co
mpo
nent
of t
he R
PS c
onta
inin
g H
AR
P m
ay n
ot b
e am
ende
d ev
en w
hen
the
RPS
is u
nder
rev
iew
. Sc
hedu
le 1
of t
he R
MA
doe
s no
t app
ly to
dir
ect i
ncor
pora
tion
.
LGA
A lo
cal a
utho
rity
mus
t hav
e pa
rtic
ular
reg
ard
to th
e ca
tchm
ent p
lan
whe
n m
akin
g de
cisi
ons
unde
r th
e LG
A.
FUTU
RE
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Man
gata
ngi a
nd M
anga
taw
hiri
W
ater
way
s
(sep
arat
e bu
t pa
rt o
f H
aura
ki
Colle
ctiv
e)
UP
PER
MA
NG
ATA
NG
I AN
D M
AN
GA
TAW
HIR
I CA
TCH
MEN
T A
UTH
OR
ITY
Stat
us o
f com
mit
tee
to b
e de
term
ined
The
wat
erw
ays
of th
e U
pper
Man
gata
ngi a
nd M
anga
taw
hiri
ca
tchm
ents
.
Com
mit
tee
mem
bers
hip
to b
e fin
alis
ed.
Upp
er M
anga
tang
i and
Man
gata
whi
ri C
atch
men
ts P
lan.
Effec
t on
RM
A a
nd L
GA
doc
umen
ts to
be
final
ised
.
27
Taur
anga
Moa
na Iw
i Col
lect
ive
Dee
d in
clud
es N
gai T
e Ra
ngi,
Ngā
ti Pu
keng
a an
d N
gāti
Rang
inui
.
Page 131 of 170
23
SETT
LEM
ENT
TYP
E O
F EN
TITY
OR
AR
RA
NG
EMEN
T SC
OP
E A
ND
MEM
BER
SHIP
DO
CUM
ENT
AN
D L
EGA
L W
EIG
HTI
NG
FUTU
RE
HA
WK
E’S
BA
Y R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ahu
riri
Hap
u D
eed
of S
ettl
emen
t
(sig
ned
2016
)
TE K
OM
ITI M
UR
IWA
I O T
E W
HA
NG
A
Stat
utor
y au
thor
ity
Ahu
riri
Est
uary
and
cat
chm
ent a
reas
.28
Eigh
t m
embe
rs
Four
app
oint
ed b
y iw
i
Thre
e ap
poin
ted
by r
elev
ant l
ocal
aut
hori
ties
One
app
oint
ed b
y th
e D
epar
tmen
t of C
onse
rvat
ion
Prep
are
and
appr
ove
Te M
uriw
ai o
Te
Wha
nga
Plan
.
Loca
l aut
hori
ty m
ust h
ave
rega
rd to
the
Te M
uriw
ai o
Te
Wha
nga
Plan
whe
n pr
epar
ing
or a
men
ding
a R
MA
pla
nnin
g do
cum
ent o
r re
sour
ce c
onse
nt a
pplic
atio
n.
LGA
A lo
cal a
utho
rity
mus
t hav
e re
gard
to T
e M
uriw
ai o
Te
Wha
nga
Plan
w
hen
mak
ing
a de
cisi
on u
nder
the
LGA
200
2.
FUTU
RE
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti R
angi
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent
(ini
tial
led
Aug
ust
2017
)
TE W
AIŪ
-O-T
E-IK
A (
WH
AN
GA
EHU
RIV
ER)
CATC
HM
ENT
ENTI
TY (E
ntit
y na
me
to b
e de
term
ined
)
Perm
anen
t joi
nt c
omm
itte
e of
cou
ncil
Te W
aiū-
o-te
-Ika
(W
hang
aehu
Riv
er) C
atch
men
t.
Ten
mem
bers
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
iwi
• Fi
ve a
ppoi
nted
by
rele
vant
loca
l aut
hori
ties
Prep
are
Te W
aiū-
o-te
-Ika
cat
chm
ent d
ocum
ent.
Whe
n m
akin
g de
cisi
ons
on r
esou
rce
cons
ents
, a c
onse
nt a
utho
rity
m
ust h
ave
part
icul
ar r
egar
d to
the
Te W
aiū-
o-te
-Ika
cat
chm
ent
docu
men
t.
LGA
A lo
cal a
utho
rity
mus
t hav
e pa
rtic
ular
reg
ard
to th
e Te
Wai
ū-o-
te-
Ika
catc
hmen
t doc
umen
t.
28
Te M
uriw
ai o
Te
Wha
nga
or T
e W
hang
a m
eans
the
Ahu
riri E
stua
ry a
nd c
atch
men
t are
as s
how
n on
SO
486
367
unde
r the
Ahu
riri H
apu
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent.
Lake
Tau
pō
Page 132 of 170
24
AP
PEN
DIX
2: T
REA
TY S
ETTL
EMEN
T CO
STS
The
esti
mat
ed c
osts
in th
e ta
ble
belo
w a
re in
dica
tive
for
all c
ounc
ils.
Part
icip
atin
g co
unci
ls h
ave
asse
ssed
cos
ts b
y ei
ther
usi
ng th
e Fr
amew
ork
or b
y an
othe
r m
eans
. O
nce
an u
pdat
ed a
nd
enha
nced
ver
sion
of t
he F
ram
ewor
k is
ava
ilabl
e al
l cou
ncils
will
be
able
to u
se it
to p
redi
ct th
e co
sts
asso
ciat
ed w
ith
Trea
ty s
ettle
men
ts.
TREA
TY S
ETTL
EMEN
T CO
STS
(CR
OW
N A
ND
CO
UN
CIL)
FO
R P
AR
TICI
PATI
NG
CO
UN
CILS
. CO
UN
CIL
SETT
LEM
ENT
CRO
WN
CO
NTR
IBU
TIO
NA
CTU
AL
OR
EST
IMA
TED
CO
STS
TO C
OU
NCI
LS
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Wai
kato
-Tai
nui R
aupa
tu C
laim
s (W
aika
to R
iver
) Set
tlem
ent A
ct 2
010
and
Nga
ti T
uwha
reto
a, R
auka
wa
and
Te
Ara
wa
Riv
er Iw
i Wai
kato
Riv
er A
ct
2010
Nil
RM
A p
lann
ing
docu
men
t ch
ange
s (H
ealt
hy R
iver
s)29
Trea
ty le
gisl
atio
n re
late
d pl
an c
hang
e pr
oces
s co
st $
5,86
0,00
0.30
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Wai
kato
-Tai
nui R
aupa
tu C
laim
s (W
aika
to R
iver
) Set
tlem
ent A
ct 2
010
$41,
104.
5931
For
deve
lopm
ent o
f the
Join
t Man
agem
ent
Agr
eem
ent w
ith
Wai
kato
Rau
patu
Set
tlem
ent
Trus
t
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t (a
nd c
omm
itte
e co
sts)
32
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e Jo
int M
anag
emen
t Agr
eem
ent w
ere
$664
,754
.
Ong
oing
cos
ts a
re u
nkno
wn.
GIS
BO
RN
E D
ISTR
ICT
COU
NCI
LN
gai T
āman
uhir
i Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent
Act
201
2 N
ilB
oard
Esta
blis
hing
the
Loca
l Lea
ders
hip
Boar
d ha
s be
en e
stim
ated
at $
50,0
00.
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $50
,000
per
ann
um.33
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti W
hare
Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent A
ct
2012
and
Ngā
ti M
anaw
a Cl
aim
s Se
ttle
men
t Act
201
2
Nil
Ran
gitā
iki R
iver
Doc
umen
t
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e D
ocum
ent h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $16
4,00
0.
Ong
oing
cos
ts a
re u
nkno
wn.
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Nga
ti W
hatu
a O
rake
i Cla
ims
Sett
lem
ent A
ct 2
012
No
one-
off C
row
n co
ntri
buti
on. H
owev
er,
annu
al g
rant
from
TPK
cov
ers
mem
ber
fees
and
m
eeti
ng c
osts
Res
erve
s B
oard
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $17
5,00
0 pe
r an
num
(exc
ludi
ng C
row
n co
ntri
buti
on).34
Man
agem
ent
plan
Exte
rnal
ass
ista
nce
for
the
prep
arat
ion
of th
e do
cum
ent e
stim
ated
one
-off
cos
t of $
100,
000.
29
This
pla
n ch
ange
invo
lved
the
five
Wai
kato
Riv
er a
nd W
aipa
Riv
er iw
i sus
pend
ing
thei
r joi
nt w
orki
ng p
arty
mee
tings
und
er th
eir r
espe
ctiv
ce Jo
int M
anag
emen
t Agr
eem
ents
with
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
to m
eet a
s pa
rt o
f the
Hea
lthy
Rive
rs p
lan
chan
ge.
At th
e tim
e N
gāti
Tuw
hare
toa
did
not h
ave
a si
gned
Join
t Man
agem
ent A
gree
men
t with
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil.
30
This
is fo
r the
per
iod
2012
to 2
016.
31
This
am
ount
was
pai
d re
tros
pect
ivel
y by
the
Crow
n.
32
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
“Joi
nt M
anag
emen
t Agr
eem
ent R
evie
w W
aika
to R
aupa
tu S
ettle
men
t Tru
st C
ase
Stud
y” 2
014.
33
This
is a
n on
goin
g co
st w
ith n
o en
d pe
riod.
34
This
sum
incl
udes
$10
,000
per
ann
um a
s an
app
ortio
ned
estim
atio
n of
the
cost
of t
he D
ocum
ent (
i.e.,
$100
,000
exp
ende
d ov
er 1
0 ye
ars)
.
Page 133 of 170
25
COU
NCI
LSE
TTLE
MEN
TCR
OW
N C
ON
TRIB
UTI
ON
ACT
UA
L O
R E
STIM
ATE
D C
OST
S TO
CO
UN
CILS
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti W
hātu
a o
Kaip
ara
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent A
ct 2
013
Nil
Ngā
ti W
hātu
a o
Kaip
ara
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent A
ct
requ
ires
iwi p
arti
cipa
nts
to c
over
thei
r ow
n co
sts
Res
erve
s B
oard
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $17
9,00
0 pe
r an
num
(exc
ludi
ng C
row
n co
ntri
buti
on).35
Man
agem
ent
plan
Exte
rnal
ass
ista
nce
for
the
prep
arat
ion
of th
e do
cum
ent e
stim
ated
one
-off
cos
t of $
100,
000.
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Tapu
ika
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent A
ct 2
014
$250
,000
For
esta
blis
hing
Te
Mar
u o
Kait
una
(Kai
tuna
R
iver
Aut
hori
ty
Aut
hori
ty
Esta
blis
hing
the
Aut
hori
ty is
est
imat
ed a
t $20
,000
per
ann
um.
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed b
etw
een
$50,
000
to $
100,
000
per
annu
m.
Kai
tuna
Riv
er D
ocum
ent
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e do
cum
ent h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $20
0,00
0.
Ong
oing
cos
ts a
re u
nkno
wn.
AU
CKLA
ND
CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
Man
a W
henu
a o
Tām
aki
Mak
aura
u Co
llect
ive
Redr
ess
Act
20
14
$400
,000
36
For
esta
blis
hing
Mau
nga
Aut
hori
ty
Aut
hori
ty
The
Crow
n co
ntri
buti
on o
f $40
0,00
0 w
as e
xpen
ded
duri
ng e
stab
lishm
ent p
hase
of t
he A
utho
rity
.37
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $63
4,00
0 pe
r an
num
.38
Inte
grat
ed M
anag
emen
t Pl
an
Exte
rnal
ass
ista
nce
cont
ract
ed fo
r th
e pr
epar
atio
n of
the
docu
men
t car
ried
a o
ne-o
ff c
ost o
f $2
50,0
00.39
HA
WK
E’S
BA
Y R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Haw
ke’s
Bay
Reg
iona
l Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e A
ct 2
015
$100
,000
Haw
ke’s
Bay
Reg
iona
l Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
itte
e
Esta
blis
hing
and
mai
ntai
ning
the
com
mit
tee
has
cost
$78
7,62
7.40
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $75
3,48
0 pe
r an
num
.41
NO
RTH
LAN
D R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Te H
iku
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent A
ct 2
015
$400
,000
to th
e Bo
ard
$150
,000
to s
uppo
rt th
e in
itia
l ope
rati
on o
f the
Te
One
roa
a Tō
hē B
oard
$250
,000
for
deve
lopi
ng th
e fir
st B
each
M
anag
emen
t Pla
n .
Boa
rd
Esta
blis
hing
the
Boar
d ha
s co
st $
62,6
50.
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $62
,650
per
ann
um.42
Bea
ch M
anag
emen
t Pl
an
Cost
s ar
e un
know
n.
35
This
sum
incl
udes
$10
,000
per
ann
um a
s an
app
ortio
ned
estim
atio
n of
the
cost
of t
he D
ocum
ent (
i.e.,
$100
,000
exp
ende
d ov
er 1
0 ye
ars)
.
36
This
am
ount
was
pro
vide
d fo
r in
an e
xcha
nge
of le
tter
s be
twee
n Au
ckla
nd C
ounc
il an
d th
e Cr
own.
37
Sett
ing
up th
e M
aung
a Au
thor
ity c
ost m
ore
than
the
Crow
n co
ntrib
utio
n. H
owev
er, t
hese
cos
ts w
ere
not a
ccou
nted
for s
epar
atel
y an
d a
full
estim
ate
has
not b
een
poss
ible
.
38
This
sum
incl
udes
$25
,000
per
ann
um a
s an
app
ortio
ned
cost
of t
he D
ocum
ent (
i.e.,
$250
,000
exp
ende
d ov
er 1
0 ye
ars)
.
39
The
plan
will
like
ly b
e re
view
ed in
10
year
s.
40
Thes
e ar
e th
e ac
tual
cos
ts s
pent
for t
he p
erio
d 20
10 to
201
6.
41
The
incr
ease
in c
osts
is d
ue to
ext
ra m
eetin
gs, t
wo
mee
tings
per
mon
th a
nd th
e co
sts
of in
depe
nden
t adv
isor
s to
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
ittee
’s ta
ngat
a w
henu
a re
pres
enta
tives
.
42
Esta
blis
hing
the
Boar
d ha
s co
st N
orth
land
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
$62,
650.
Thi
s am
ount
has
bee
n fo
re c
aste
d an
nual
ly to
mai
ntai
n it.
Thi
s is
a c
onse
rvat
ive
annu
al e
stim
ate.
It s
houl
d be
not
ed th
at N
orth
land
Reg
iona
l Cou
ncil
has
incu
rred
thes
e co
sts
and
do n
ot fo
rm p
art o
f
the
$400
,000
und
er th
e se
ttle
men
t arr
ange
men
ts.
Page 134 of 170
26
COU
NCI
LSE
TTLE
MEN
TCR
OW
N C
ON
TRIB
UTI
ON
ACT
UA
L O
R E
STIM
ATE
D C
OST
S TO
CO
UN
CILS
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ran
gitā
ne o
Man
awat
u Cl
aim
s Se
ttle
men
t Act
201
6N
il B
oard
Esta
blis
hing
the
Man
awat
u R
iver
Cat
chm
ent A
dvis
ory
Boar
d ha
s an
est
imat
ed c
ost o
f $24
0,00
0.
Ong
oing
adm
inis
trat
ion
cost
s ha
ve b
een
esti
mat
ed a
t $37
,000
per
ann
um.43
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent o
f His
tori
cal
clai
ms
- Ngā
ti T
ūwha
reto
a 20
16$4
00,0
00
For
adm
inis
trat
ive
supp
ort t
o Te
Kop
ua
Kāna
pana
pa
Com
mit
tee
Esta
blis
hing
the
com
mit
tee
has
been
est
imat
ed a
t $36
0,00
0.44
Ong
oing
adm
inis
trat
ion
cost
s ha
ve b
een
esti
mat
ed a
t $17
0,00
0 pe
r an
num
.45
Plan
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e pl
an h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $35
0,00
0.46
Ong
oing
impl
emen
tati
on c
osts
hav
e be
en e
stim
ated
at $
62,5
00 p
er a
nnum
.47
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Te A
wa
Tupu
a (W
hang
anui
Riv
er
Clai
ms
Sett
lem
ent)
Act
201
7$4
30,0
00
For
esta
blis
hing
Te
Kōpu
ka n
a Te
Aw
a Tu
pua
(Str
ateg
y G
roup
) and
dev
elop
ing
Te H
eke
Nga
huru
(Man
agem
ent S
trat
egy
Doc
umen
t)
Man
agem
ent
Stra
tegy
Doc
umen
t
Dev
elop
men
t and
impl
emen
tati
on c
osts
for
the
stra
tegy
hav
e be
en e
stim
ated
at $
850,
000.
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $62
,500
per
ann
um.48
BA
Y O
F P
LEN
TY R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Taur
anga
Moa
na Iw
i Col
lect
ive
Dee
d$5
75,0
00
For
adm
inis
trat
ive
and
tech
nica
l sup
port
to th
e Ta
uran
ga M
oana
Gov
erna
nce
Gro
up
Gov
erna
nce
grou
p
Esta
blis
hing
the
gove
rnan
ce g
roup
has
bee
n es
tim
ated
at $
20,0
00.
Dev
elop
ing
the
Trea
ty d
ocum
ent N
gā T
ai k
i Mau
ao is
est
imat
ed a
t $25
0,00
0.
Ong
oing
cos
ts a
re u
nkno
wn.
HA
WK
E’S
BA
Y R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ahu
riri
Hap
u D
eed
of S
ettle
men
t$1
00,0
00
(to
Nap
ier
City
Cou
ncil)
Init
ial o
pera
tion
of T
e Ko
mit
i Mur
iwai
o T
e W
hang
a an
d pr
epar
atio
n an
d ap
prov
al o
f the
fir
st p
lan
Kom
iti
Esta
blis
hing
the
kom
iti i
s es
tim
ated
at $
10,0
00 fo
r H
awke
’s B
ay R
egio
nal C
ounc
il (e
xclu
ding
te
rrit
oria
l aut
hori
ties
).
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $50
,000
per
ann
um fo
r H
awke
’s B
ay R
egio
nal C
ounc
il (e
xclu
ding
terr
itor
ial a
utho
riti
es).49
Te M
uriw
ai o
Te
Wha
nga
Plan
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e pl
an h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $10
0,00
0 fo
r H
awke
’s B
ay R
egio
nal
Coun
cil.
Ong
oing
cos
ts o
f the
pla
ns h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $25
,000
per
ann
um fo
r H
awke
’s B
ay R
egio
nal
Coun
cil.
43
This
am
ount
is fo
r the
firs
t thr
ee y
ears
pos
t boa
rd in
itiat
ion.
The
impl
emen
tatio
n an
d on
goin
g co
stin
gs w
ere
prod
uced
usi
ng th
e Fr
amew
ork.
44
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
ove
r a 1
2 to
24-
mon
th ti
me
perio
d.
45
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
with
a th
ree
year
pha
se o
ut p
erio
d to
BAU
cos
ts.
46
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
with
a 1
2 to
24
mon
th p
hase
out
to B
AU.
47
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
with
a th
ree
year
pha
se o
ut p
erio
d to
BAU
cos
ts.
48
This
is fo
r the
firs
t thr
ee y
ears
pos
t im
plem
enta
tion
of T
e H
eke
Nga
huru
(man
agem
ent s
trat
egy)
. The
dev
elop
men
t and
impl
emen
tatio
n co
st w
as p
rovi
ded
prio
r to
the
deve
lopm
ent o
f the
Fra
mew
ork.
The
ong
oing
cos
ting
was
pro
duce
d us
ing
the
Fram
ewor
k.
49
This
figu
re a
ssum
es q
uart
erly
mee
tings
with
pre
para
tion
and
atte
ndan
ce b
y 1
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Cou
ncil
coun
cillo
r and
up
to 2
rele
vant
sen
ior s
taff,
plu
s 0.
2FTE
Haw
kes
Bay
Regi
onal
Cou
ncil
advi
sory
ser
vice
s. In
itial
ly fo
r pla
n pr
epar
atio
n, th
en c
ontin
uing
as
over
seei
ng
inte
r-ag
ency
impl
emen
tatio
n of
pla
n.
Page 135 of 170
27
COU
NCI
LSE
TTLE
MEN
TCR
OW
N C
ON
TRIB
UTI
ON
ACT
UA
L O
R E
STIM
ATE
D C
OST
S TO
CO
UN
CILS
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Pare
Hau
raki
Col
lect
ive
Redr
ess
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent
$500
,000
For
esta
blis
hing
the
Wai
hou,
Pia
ko, C
orom
ande
l Ca
tchm
ent A
utho
rity
and
its
acti
viti
es
Com
mit
tee
Esta
blis
hing
the
com
mit
tee
has
been
est
imat
ed a
t $1,
000,
000.
50
Ong
oing
impl
emen
tati
on/a
dmin
istr
atio
n co
sts
have
bee
n es
tim
ated
at $
500,
000
per
annu
m.51
Plan
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts fo
r th
e pl
an h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $3,
500,
000.
52
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $32
0,00
0 pe
r an
num
.53
WA
IKA
TO R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Pare
Hau
raki
Col
lect
ive
Redr
ess
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent
- Man
gata
ngi S
trea
m, M
anga
taw
hiri
R
iver
and
Wha
ngam
arin
o w
etla
nds
$395
,000
– s
ubm
itte
d to
Cro
wn
for
deve
lopm
ent c
osts
for
the
Join
t Man
agem
ent
Agr
eem
ent
Join
t M
anag
emen
t A
gree
men
t
Dev
elop
men
t of t
he Jo
int M
anag
emen
t Agr
eem
ent h
as b
een
esti
mat
ed a
t $39
5,00
0.
Ong
oing
cos
ts o
f Joi
nt M
anag
emen
t Agr
eem
ent a
re u
nkno
wn.
HO
RIZ
ON
S R
EGIO
NA
L CO
UN
CIL
Ngā
ti R
angi
Dee
d of
Set
tlem
ent
(ini
tial
led
Aug
ust 2
017)
$400
,000
– fo
r es
tabl
ishm
ent c
osts
and
de
velo
pmen
t of t
he c
atch
men
t doc
umen
t Co
-man
agem
ent
arra
ngem
ents
Dev
elop
men
t cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $79
0,00
0.54
Ong
oing
cos
ts h
ave
been
est
imat
ed a
t $62
,500
per
ann
um.55
50
This
est
imat
e in
clud
es th
e co
-gov
erna
nce
auth
ority
and
the
stat
utor
y su
bcom
mitt
ee e
stab
lishm
ent c
osts
ove
r a 1
2 to
24-
mon
th p
erio
d. It
pro
vide
s fo
r tw
o W
aika
to R
egio
nal C
ounc
il an
d fiv
e te
rrito
rial a
utho
ritie
s’ m
embe
rs c
osts
on
the
auth
ority
and
one
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l
Coun
cil a
nd th
ree
terr
itoria
l aut
horit
ies’
mem
bers
cos
ts o
n th
e su
bcom
mitt
ee. T
he F
ram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
.
51
This
est
imat
e in
clud
es th
e co
-gov
erna
nce
auth
ority
and
the
stat
utor
y su
bcom
mitt
ee im
plem
enta
tion
cost
s ov
er a
thre
e ye
ar p
hase
out
per
iod
to B
AU c
osts
. Th
e Fr
amew
ork
has
been
use
d to
pro
vide
thes
e es
timat
es.
52
This
est
imat
e in
clud
es th
e co
-gov
erna
nce
auth
ority
and
the
stat
utor
y su
bcom
mitt
ee c
osts
for d
evel
opin
g th
e na
tura
l res
ourc
es p
lan
over
a 1
2-24
mon
th p
erio
d. T
he e
stim
ate
also
incl
udes
the
inco
rpor
atio
n pr
oces
s of
the
plan
into
the
Wai
kato
Reg
iona
l Pol
icy
Stat
emen
t.
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
.
53
The
Fram
ewor
k ha
s be
en u
sed
to p
rovi
de th
ese
estim
ates
with
a th
ree-
year
pha
se o
ut to
BAU
cos
ts.
54
This
is to
be
a th
ree-
year
pla
n th
at w
ill b
e im
plem
ente
d si
mul
tane
ousl
y w
ith o
ther
agr
eem
ents
; Te
Awa
Tupu
a an
d M
anaw
atu
Rive
r Cat
chm
ent A
dvis
ory
Boar
d.
55
This
est
imat
e is
for t
he fi
rst t
hree
yea
rs p
ost i
mpl
emen
tatio
n of
the
catc
hmen
t doc
umen
t. Th
e Fr
amew
ork
has
been
use
d to
pro
vide
thes
e es
timat
es.
Rang
itaik
i Riv
er -
Phot
o: R
afta
bout
Page 136 of 170
28
APPENDIX 3: TREATY SETTLEMENT FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIESThe table below is an example of functions and activities undertaken when implementing Treaty settlement
arrangements. It should be noted this is not an exhaustive list of functions and activities.
FUNCTIONS AND ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN FOR TREATY SETTLEMENT ARRANGMENTS.FUNCTIONS ACTIVITIES
ESTABLISHING AND IMPLEMENTING CO-GOVERNANCE AUTHORITIES
INTERNAL COUNCIL SUPPORT - ADMINISTRATIVE AND DEMOCRACY SERVICES
Pre-meetings
• Draft and prepare agenda (and previous minutes).
• Draft and prepare procedures and standing orders and related processes (conflict of interest, fees, schedule of meetings, etc).
• Draft and prepare democracy reports (for standing orders and related processes).
• Negotiate, amend and review procedures and standing orders, processes and reports (editing).
• Oversight of technical and other reports (planning, monitoring, etc).
• Negotiate, amend and review of all reports (with staff and/or iwi) (editing).
• Print, distribute and upload documents to website (or postage)
• Councillor/members’ support.
• Organising and management of councillors/members’ diaries.
• Legal services advice/support.
• Policy guidance/support.
• Draft and prepare Health and Safety plans and registers.
Meetings
• Organise venue (council offices, iwi offices, marae).
• Organise travel for members and catering.
• Organise public notices/communications for meeting.
• Meeting structure and minute taking.
• Undertake miscellaneous tasks for members.
• Legal services in attendance (if applicable).
• Policy in attendance (if applicable).
• Technical support in attendance (if applicable).
• External consultants in attendance (if applicable).
Post meetings
• Draft minutes and finalise.
• Payment of transport and member fees.
• Collate a hearing commissioners register.
• Change and update standing orders and related process documents.
• Set up and implement processes.
• Councillor/members’ support and education of processes, requirements and obligations.
• Miscellaneous tasks from councillors/members.
• Technical support (if applicable).
Page 137 of 170
29
FUNCTIONS ACTIVITIES
DEVELOPMENT OF PLANS INTERNAL COUNCIL SUPPORT
• Administrative and democratic services.
• Relationship building/fostering.
• Attending meetings/travel.
• Technical support (plan and report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Management support (plan and report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Governance support (plan and report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Consultation with iwi and/or public/industry/partners/stakeholders.
Specialist services
• Scientific contributions – plan advice and support.
• Legal contributions - oversight and drafting.
• Iwi/Māori – advice, support and education.
• Policy contributions – plan advice and drafting.
• Resource use contributions – plan advice and drafting.
• Maps/GIS – advice and data production and supply.
• Finance – budget support.
• Governance/councillor support.
• Communications – communications protocol and media releases.
EXTERNAL SUPPORT
Specialist services
• Planning, policy, legal, resource management and cultural advice.
• Legal advice – process for incorporation (if applicable).
IMPLEMENTATION OF PLANS INTERNAL COUNCIL SUPPORT
• Administrative and democratic support.
• Relationship enhancing/maintaining.
• Attending meetings/travel.
• Technical support (report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Management support (report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Governance support (report writing, presenting at meetings, ongoing support and advice).
• Consultation with iwi and/or public/industry/partners/stakeholders.
• Incorporation of plan – new policies and processes.
Specialist services
• Scientific contributions – co-management and co-governance meetings, and provision of specific advice on sites and projects, ongoing advice and support.
• Legal contributions – review changes to documents, provide assistance to council and governance members, report writing and ongoing advice and support.
• Iwi/Māori – supporting implementation of the co-governance plan, including reporting, meetings, and follow up actions, presentations, reviews, advice and education.
• Policy contributions – ongoing policy advice, assistance and support for the co-governance plan and RMA planning documents.
• Resource use contributions – staff training, development of guidance/training materials, updating consent procedures, preparation for meetings and transactional costs arising from increased iwi engagement advice and drafting.
• Maps/GIS – advice and data production and supply.
• Finance – budget support.
• Governance/councillor support.
• Communications and human resources – ongoing training and updating staff on new arrangements and processes.
• Planning, policy, legal, resource management and cultural – iwi/Māori.
EXTERNAL SUPPORT
Specialist services
Planning, policy, legal, resource management and cultural advice.
Page 138 of 170
30 Te Oneroa-a-Tōhē / Ninety Mile Beach.
APPENDIX 4: CROWN POLICYThe Crown policy refers to the following three documents:
• “Crown contributions to costs of local authorities and iwi arising from Treaty settlements” 2013.
• “Crown contribution to costs for local government and iwi arising from new natural resource
arrangements” – October 2011.
• “Involving Iwi in Natural Resource Management through Historical Treaty of Waitangi Settlements” –
October 2010.
Page 139 of 170
31
CROWN CONTRIBUTIONS TO COSTS OF LOCAL AUTHORITIES AND IWI ARISING FROM TREATY SETTLEMENTS April 2013
Note; this sheet supplements information in the sheet titled Crown contribution to costs for Local Government and Iwi arising from new natural resource arrangements dated October 2011.
How are Crown contributions worked out?
The level of contribution is at the discretion of Cabinet and is assessed on its own merits, taking into account a range of factors.
What factors are taken into account?
Some of the factors likely to be taken into account include:
a. the complexity of arrangements included in the settlement
b. the capacity of the local authority to implement the arrangement
c. the capacity of the iwi to implement the arrangement
d. the extent of current Crown assistance to the local authority
e. the level of existing commitments by the local authority for involving iwi in natural resource management
f. the potential for efficiencies arising from the arrangement
What input can local authorities or iwi have in the process?
In order to provide good advice to Cabinet, officials need to have information about the scale and nature of costs likely to be incurred by local authorities and iwi arising from the arrangement. Officials will discuss with local authorities and iwi their estimates of costs before decisions by Cabinet about the Crown contribution.
When will this information be sought?
Negotiation teams will involve affected local authorities from an early stage in the development of natural resource management arrangements. The Crown is committed to minimising costs for the affected parties. Once the final form of an arrangement has been agreed by the Crown and iwi, officials will seek input from local authorities and iwi about their likely costs. This is likely to occur towards the end of negotiations.
What costs might be considered for a contribution?
These include;
a. one-off set up costs for new arrangements (e.g. staff costs for setting up a new joint committee or joint management agreement, development of standing orders)
b. the costs of preparing a new plan (not identified in long-term plan) and consequential changes to other plans (the expected timing of consequential changes will be specified and taken into account when assessing costs)
c. ongoing costs for a transitional period up to a maximum of three years (e.g. for administration, technical support etc)
Do councils and iwi have to make applications for contributions?
No. Cabinet will consider the scale of Crown contributions as a matter of course.
Page 140 of 170
32
Crown contribution to costs for Local Government and Iwi arising from new natural resource arrangements – October 2011
NB: to be read together with the handout Involving Iwi in Natural Resource Management Through Historical Treaty of Waitangi Settlements (October 2010).
Background
In 2010 Cabinet agreed to guidelines for involving iwi in natural resource management in the settlement of historical Treaty of Waitangi claims. The guidelines identify two standard arrangements (a Māori advisory board or a joint committee). Cabinet recognises these new arrangements may present some added costs for iwi and local government1 and has agreed to an approach for determining what contribution the Crown will make, if any, to such costs.
Main elements of Cabinet decisions
The Crown contribution, if any, for each case will be assessed on its own merits.
The intention is to provide a modest, one-off Crown contribution towards set up costs to local government and iwi and ongoing costs up to a maximum of three years. The contribution will help set up new arrangements, the costs of preparing new plans (including the costs of any consequential amendments to other plans) that are not provided for in a council‟s long-term plan and not part of requirements at the national level.
Negotiations, and the resulting arrangements, including compliance and transaction costs, should aim to minimise costs to local government, iwi and the Crown.
The decisions only apply to new arrangements developed as part of an historical Treaty settlement, or in parallel to one, which are not part of a council‟s long-term plan and not a requirement at the national level. Situations where this might apply include arrangements dealing with specific natural resource management issues.
A Crown contribution is not appropriate over the longer-term as arrangements should be „normalised‟ by the council and embedded into budget and planning processes to become part of business as usual. A Crown contribution recognises the added costs incurred during the transitional period as new arrangements are developed and implemented.
Local government is expected to meet its own costs of: participating in negotiations; the ongoing administrative costs of the new arrangements; and attendance fees for advisory boards or joint committees in a manner consistent with a council‟s policy on payment of such fees. Similarly, iwi are expected to meet their own costs of participating, and in developing iwi management plans, if no other funding is provided.
This approach provides a clear framework to consider costs but also allows for some flexibility to respond to different circumstances and the nature of particular arrangements. In applying this approach, an expectation is that any Crown contribution should not unduly “reward” those local authorities with the weakest past arrangements for involving iwi.
1. Local government refers to a regional council, territorial authority (city and district councils), or a unitary authority.
Page 141 of 170
33
Crown contribution to costs for Local Government and Iwi arising from new natural resource arrangements – October 2011
NB: to be read together with the handout Involving Iwi in Natural Resource Management Through Historical Treaty of Waitangi Settlements (October 2010).
Background
In 2010 Cabinet agreed to guidelines for involving iwi in natural resource management in the settlement of historical Treaty of Waitangi claims. The guidelines identify two standard arrangements (a Māori advisory board or a joint committee). Cabinet recognises these new arrangements may present some added costs for iwi and local government1 and has agreed to an approach for determining what contribution the Crown will make, if any, to such costs.
Main elements of Cabinet decisions
The Crown contribution, if any, for each case will be assessed on its own merits.
The intention is to provide a modest, one-off Crown contribution towards set up costs to local government and iwi and ongoing costs up to a maximum of three years. The contribution will help set up new arrangements, the costs of preparing new plans (including the costs of any consequential amendments to other plans) that are not provided for in a council‟s long-term plan and not part of requirements at the national level.
Negotiations, and the resulting arrangements, including compliance and transaction costs, should aim to minimise costs to local government, iwi and the Crown.
The decisions only apply to new arrangements developed as part of an historical Treaty settlement, or in parallel to one, which are not part of a council‟s long-term plan and not a requirement at the national level. Situations where this might apply include arrangements dealing with specific natural resource management issues.
A Crown contribution is not appropriate over the longer-term as arrangements should be „normalised‟ by the council and embedded into budget and planning processes to become part of business as usual. A Crown contribution recognises the added costs incurred during the transitional period as new arrangements are developed and implemented.
Local government is expected to meet its own costs of: participating in negotiations; the ongoing administrative costs of the new arrangements; and attendance fees for advisory boards or joint committees in a manner consistent with a council‟s policy on payment of such fees. Similarly, iwi are expected to meet their own costs of participating, and in developing iwi management plans, if no other funding is provided.
This approach provides a clear framework to consider costs but also allows for some flexibility to respond to different circumstances and the nature of particular arrangements. In applying this approach, an expectation is that any Crown contribution should not unduly “reward” those local authorities with the weakest past arrangements for involving iwi.
1. Local government refers to a regional council, territorial authority (city and district councils), or a unitary authority.
INVOLVING IWI IN NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT THROUGH HISTORICAL TREATY OF WAITANGI SETTLEMENTS
October 2010
Cabinet proposals
The Government has been working on an approach for fairly and consistently looking at the claims of iwi in historical Treaty negotiations for more effective involvement in natural resource management.
Background
The Government recognises the profound cultural relationships iwi have with awa, maunga and whenua from which they hail.
The Government recognises many iwi wish to have greater participation in natural resource management, given the historical associations of iwi with natural resources.
Local government has been devolved responsibility for natural resource management under the Resource Management Act 1991 and for making decisions on how iwi will be involved in such management under the Local Government Act 2002. Often iwi have not been satisfied with how this has been implemented. Therefore, there has been a greater desire for iwi to seek stronger decision-making roles through historical Treaty of Waitangi settlements.
Cabinet has recently made decisions to provide more certainty about what redress might be available in historical Treaty of Waitangi negotiations to involve iwi in natural resource management. The Government’s approach balances needs to achieve enduring settlements, protect local democracy and ensure effective natural resource management.
Main elements of Cabinet decisions
1 Matters to be considered when developing an arrangement to involve iwi in natural resource management
A number of matters will be considered in all negotiations when natural resource matters are raised to guide consideration of how best to involve iwi in natural resource management. These include:
strength and nature of association of iwi to resource nature of grievance in relation to resource how many iwi are involved or have interests in the resource nature and state of the resource nature and extent of public and private interests in the resource aspirations of Crown and iwi in relation to the resource the need for a well-designed institution durability of any arrangement
Page 142 of 170
34
Any arrangement for involving iwi should:
provide an effective role for iwi in natural resource management lead to good environmental, economic, social and cultural outcomes for iwi
and other New Zealanders address issues giving rise to the claim but not create new injustices be well-designed, simple, transparent and affordable; and result in durable settlement of the claim
2 Two standard arrangements
Two standard arrangements can be negotiated (if shown to be appropriate after consideration of the matters above and agreed by Cabinet):
- an advisory board where the council must have regard to the advice
- a joint committee with direct input into the development of regional policy statements and regional plans under the RMA. (The recommendations of the joint committee will be subject to usual council planning processes.}
3 Non-standard arrangements
An arrangement outside the standard models can be considered if an assessment of the matters above show this is appropriate but this must be agreed by Cabinet before being offered as part of a settlement.
4 Final decision making
Local authorities should retain final decision making rights over natural resource management to maintain local democracy.
5 Involvement of local authorities in negotiations
Local authorities must be engaged from an early stage. Preferably, councils should agree to proposed arrangements before they are finalised.
6 Arrangements can be made permanent (but flexible to change over time by mutual agreement)
Settlement legislation may provide for the involvement of iwi in natural resource management. But arrangements should be able to change over time by mutual agreement.
Implementing the Cabinet decisions
The new approach reflects the sorts of considerations that have been applied in recent negotiations (and considered by Cabinet). These will continue to underpin negotiations. The new approach will make these matters more transparent and identify some bottom lines in the design of arrangements.
The Government encourages claimant groups to continue to raise any relevant issues in their negotiations with the Crown when redress concerning natural resource management is being discussed.
Page 143 of 170
35
Any arrangement for involving iwi should:
provide an effective role for iwi in natural resource management lead to good environmental, economic, social and cultural outcomes for iwi
and other New Zealanders address issues giving rise to the claim but not create new injustices be well-designed, simple, transparent and affordable; and result in durable settlement of the claim
2 Two standard arrangements
Two standard arrangements can be negotiated (if shown to be appropriate after consideration of the matters above and agreed by Cabinet):
- an advisory board where the council must have regard to the advice
- a joint committee with direct input into the development of regional policy statements and regional plans under the RMA. (The recommendations of the joint committee will be subject to usual council planning processes.}
3 Non-standard arrangements
An arrangement outside the standard models can be considered if an assessment of the matters above show this is appropriate but this must be agreed by Cabinet before being offered as part of a settlement.
4 Final decision making
Local authorities should retain final decision making rights over natural resource management to maintain local democracy.
5 Involvement of local authorities in negotiations
Local authorities must be engaged from an early stage. Preferably, councils should agree to proposed arrangements before they are finalised.
6 Arrangements can be made permanent (but flexible to change over time by mutual agreement)
Settlement legislation may provide for the involvement of iwi in natural resource management. But arrangements should be able to change over time by mutual agreement.
Implementing the Cabinet decisions
The new approach reflects the sorts of considerations that have been applied in recent negotiations (and considered by Cabinet). These will continue to underpin negotiations. The new approach will make these matters more transparent and identify some bottom lines in the design of arrangements.
The Government encourages claimant groups to continue to raise any relevant issues in their negotiations with the Crown when redress concerning natural resource management is being discussed.
COMPARISON OF THE CROWN’S AND THE PARTICIPATING COUNCILS’ FACTORS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION BY THE CROWN The table below provides a breakdown of the elements and key factors outlined in the Crown Policy dated April
2013 with consideration of the 2011 and 2010 policies.
CURRENT FACTORSTAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY CROWN
NEW/ADDITIONAL FACTORS WHEN DETERMINING FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS
1. THE COMPLEXITY OF ARRANGEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE SETTLEMENT
• Strength and nature of association of iwi to resource.
• Nature of grievance in relation to resource.
• How many iwi are involved or have interests in the resource.
• Nature and state of the resource.
• Nature and extent of public and private interests in the resource.
• Aspirations of Crown and iwi in relation to the resource.
• The need for a well-designed institution.
• Durability of any arrangement.
• Is there one or are multiple iwi involved in this settlement and arrangement?
• How original is this arrangement?
• How big are the catchments or areas concerned?
• Are there contentious issues related to this arrangement?
• Is a co-governance entity being established, and how independent from council is the entity?
• Is a subcommittee/s being established under the co-governance entity?
• What level of involvement will council staff have in establishing and maintaining these entities?
• Will new members be added over time?
• What form of co-management is required?
• What type of plan(s) will be developed? (Large vs small scale).
• What weighting or status will this plan have for local authorities?
• How will the plan be incorporated into council’s current plans? (Discretionary vs mandatory inclusion of a co-governance authority’s plan into a RMA planning document).
• What process will this plan need to go through? Is public consultation by iwi and/or council required?
- Is a plan change or plan review required to be undertaken by council?
- If no plan change or plan review required, when will the co-governance’s plan take effect and how?
• What level of involvement (technical – policy, legal and administrative) is required from councils to assist in drafting the plan?
• Integration of tikanga, te reo and mātauranga Māori requires adjustment to normal council ways of running meetings. Will councils require cultural upskilling?
• Is a joint management agreement being considered?
• Are hearing commissioners required?
• Will iwi require capacity building around RMA and natural resource management? If so is council expected to undertake this role in training/upskilling iwi, including payment of it?
• What is the current relationship between council and iwi like (collaborative vs non-existent)?
2. THE CAPACITY OF LOCAL AUTHORITY TO IMPLEMENT THE ARRANGEMENT
• Is the new arrangement included in the current long term plan or annual plan?
• If not, when is the next long term plan or annual plan due date?
• RMA planning documents: What is the council’s planning round and how far away is a review or plan change for this catchment or area?
• What competing priorities are present for council?
• Do council staff have capability and capacity to undertake the roles within the arrangement?
- If not, is additional resource or expertise required to undertake the roles within the arrangements (technical, legal, policy, administrative)?
- If not, what external assistance is required by councils to ensure the arrangements become operational (legal, policy and/or other technical work)?
• What availability/capacity do current councillors have to participate in new co-governance entity commitments?
• What expertise do current councillors have to participate in new co-governance entity commitments?
• Will iwi require capacity building around RMA and natural resource management? If so is council expected to undertake this role in training/upskilling iwi, including payment of it?Page 144 of 170
36
CURRENT FACTORSTAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY CROWN
NEW/ADDITIONAL FACTORS WHEN DETERMINING FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS
3. THE CAPACITY OF IWI TO PARTICIPATE AND CONTRIBUTE EQUALLY TO IMPLEMENTING TREATY MECHANISMS
• Will iwi require capacity and capability building around RMA and natural resource management? If so is council expected to undertake this role in training/upskilling iwi, and/or including payment of it?
• What assistance is required from councils to ensure the arrangements become operational (legal, policy and/or other technical work)?
• Iwi planning documents - what plans are currently in place for this iwi/hapu?
• What competing priorities are present for iwi?
• What availability/capacity do current iwi/board members have to participate in new co-governance entity commitments?
• What expertise do current iwi/board members have to participate in new co-governance entity commitments?
4. THE EXTENT OF CURRENT CROWN ASSISTANCE TO THE LOCAL AUTHORITY
• What has the Crown contributed to so far for this settlement?
• Have reviews been made available to councils of existing treaty settlement arrangements?
• Does the Post Settlement Commitments Unit provide any guidance or assistance currently? If not, could it in the future?
• What past financial contributions have been paid for arrangements involving this iwi?
• Will the Office of Treaty Settlements and Ministry for the Environment (and other agencies) be providing ongoing support?
5. THE LEVEL OF EXISTING COMMITMENTS BY THE LOCAL AUTHORITY FOR INVOLVING IWI IN NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
• What existing Treaty settlement arrangements are in place for this catchment?
• How many council entities currently exist in the area/catchment that include iwi (with Department of Conservation, Department of Internal Affairs, Ministry for the Environment, etc.)?
• What existing joint management agreements, memorandum of understandings, partnership agreements or other such arrangements are in place between council and iwi in this area (separate to Treaty settlement, i.e., RMA, LGA based)?
• o If there are such entities - what are their purposes, roles and functions?
• What catchment plans or other plans does the council have in place for this area/natural resource (including existing priorities)?
• Are amalgamations of any committees being considered under the new settlement legislation (whether known at the time of settlement or not)?
• Does the council have relationships with the iwi authorities currently?
6. THE POTENTIAL FOR EFFICIENCIES ARISING FROM THE ARRANGEMENT
• Can one or more iwi work together?
• Can one or more councils work together?
• Can sharing of information and processes be utilised?
• Can some existing entities merge or close down (if purpose achieved)?
• Will peer reviews and/or other reviews of arrangements be undertaken?
7. OFFICIALS NEED TO HAVE INFORMATION ABOUT THE SCALE AND NATURE OF COSTS LIKELY TO BE INCURRED BY LOCAL AUTHORITIES (AND IWI) THEIR ESTIMATES OF COSTS BEFORE DECISIONS BY CABINET ARE MADE
• See row 9 below for a breakdown of costs for local authorities.
• Iwi costs are not considered in this report.
8. WHEN WILL THIS INFORMATION BE SOUGHT?
• Crown - as early as possible from all councils.
• Councils to be provided with all information - including overlaps with councils to obtain the full extent of new arrangements.
Page 145 of 170
37
CURRENT FACTORSTAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BY CROWN
NEW/ADDITIONAL FACTORS WHEN DETERMINING FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS
9. TYPE OF COSTS CONSIDERED
• One-off set up costs for new arrangements
• The costs of preparing a new plan (not identified in long term plan and consequential changes to other plans (expected timing of consequential changes will be specified and taken into account when assessing costs)
• Ongoing costs for a transitional period up to a maximum of three years (e.g. for administration, technical support, etc.)
See Appendix 3
An example of some functions and activities undertaken when implementing Treaty settlement arrangements.
See the Framework for where costs are incurred.
10. THE CROWN CONSIDER SCALE OF COSTS
• Discussion with local authorities to obtain their estimates of costs before decisions by Cabinet on the contribution is made
• Utilise the new Framework to capture costs.
• Earlier input by local authorities to the Crown.
• Councils being privy to entire settlement deal for holistic management of catchment or catchments.
Page 146 of 170
38
APPENDIX 5: DISCOUNT TABLEDISCOUNT TABLE SHOWING HOW THE DISCOUNT IS APPLIED UNDER THE FRAMEWORK
DISCOUNT TABLE
YEARS DISCOUNT
NEW 0%
Earlier by 1 year 80%
Earlier by 2 years 60%
Earlier by 3 years 40%
Earlier by 4 years 20%
BAU 100%
Whanganui River
Page 147 of 170
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This report has been prepared by the following seven councils in conjunction with Local Government New Zealand.
NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL
AUCKLAND COUNCIL
WAIKATO REGIONAL COUNCIL
HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL
BAY OF PLENTY REGIONAL COUNCIL
GISBORNE DISTRICT COUNCIL
HORIZONS REGIONAL COUNCILPage 150 of 170
Report To: Komiti Māori
Meeting Date: 12 December 2017
Report From: Fiona McTavish, General Manager, Strategy & Science
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
Executive Summary
The purpose of this report is to update the Komiti on matters of interest. The report includes the following:
Post meeting actions
Tangata whenua presentations
Regional Growth Strategy Actions
Formal Lodgement of Te Whānau a Harawaka Hapū Management Plan
Toi Moana funding updates
Submission on Whakatāne District Council Māori Seats
Toi Moana Summer Student Interns
Community Engagement update
Recommendations
That the Komiti Māori under its delegated authority:
1 Receives the report, General Manager Strategy and Science Update;
2 Receives the presentation and report, Formal Lodgement of Te Harawaka Hapū Management Plan 2017;
3 Formally receives Te Harawaka Hapū Management Plan 2017.
1 Post Meeting Actions from previous Komiti Māori hui held on 10 October 2017 at Waiteti Marae, Ngongotahā, Rotorua
Attached in the appendix is a table outlining actions from the last Komiti Māori hui. There were several key actions which have been addressed by relevant staff.
Page 151 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
2
2 Ōmaio Marae
Ōmaio Marae is the home to Te Whānau a Nuku, a hapū of Te Whānau a Apanui. The Marae is located at Ōmaio on Ōmaio Pa Road (off SH 35). The wharenui is called Rongomaihuatahi. The Marae connects ancestrally to Mataatua waka and the maunga Rangipoua and also associated to the Haparapara River and Rerepa Stream.
This is the second meeting we have had the opportunity to bring to Ōmaio, the last meeting was October 2015. This will be the third Komiti Māori hui held up the East Coast with the first one held at Whangaparoa at Kauaetangohia Marae in August 2012.
2.1 Presentations
Omaio 43 SecNo5 Broadband and Strategic Plan - Marcia and Pudd (Wikaire Trust);
Omaio 5 Year Training Strategy - Ana Morrison and Amanda Torr;
Omaio Governance and Leadership Development – Chris Karamea Insley;
Omaio Hispeed Broadband Strategy - Mark Simpson (Evolution Networks);
Omaio Land Development Project - Chris Karamea Insley (Te Rah Aroha Trust).
2.2 Presentations - Mr Chris Karamea Insley
Mr Insley was born and raised in the eastern Bay of Plenty community of Omaio with whakapapa connections into Te Whanau a Apanui, Te Whakatohea and Ngati Porou iwi.
A commerce graduate from Massey and Lincoln Universities, the University of Waikato’s MBA program and, is a graduate of Harvard Business School’s Executive development program. He is also doing a doctorate on leadership in sustainable development and is an Independent Environment Commissioner.
He is a seasoned board director with experience on a range of public, private, Maori and not for profit boards and Trusts with years of experience in management and leadership roles in plantation forestry, farming, fishing, renewable energy sectors, and Maori economic development.
Finally, he has intimate knowledge and understanding of international and domestic climate change policy development where he has been advisor to Iwi on policy development for a number of years now. Climate-change and water are inextricable connected and so too must any policy response be connected to effectively address these tectonic challenges facing our community, regional and national economies.
Page 152 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
3
3 Regional Growth Strategy Actions
As part of the Regional Growth Study a new project has been identified to progress a strategic water study. The purpose was to identify opportunities and barriers to economic growth – leveraging our water resources, with the following deliverables:
1. Biophysical characteristics for BOP (current land use, suitability for different crops/land uses based on climate, soil type, etc. and projected change due to climate change, current irrigated land).
2. Current demand and future demand (land and water):
a. Review of existing growth projections (e.g. SmartGrowth, Regional Growth Study, industry projections, etc.)
b. Carry out constraint mapping/identification and identify areas where additional production could occur. (Reference Northland and Pukekohe work). This will involve workshops with local growers / farmers to ensure ‘buy-in’.
c. A key area of opportunity identified for Bay of Plenty was Māori land utilisation. Need to work with Te Tumu Paeroa, Te Puni Kokiri and RGS Workstream lead (Māori Land Utilisation) to identify best way to gather constraints information and future demand.
d. Industry agreed to help identify local representatives and facilitate local discussion.
e. Can we map major land owner initiatives (e.g. CNI Iwi Land Mgmt initiatives)?
3. Opportunities and barriers:
a. including water user groups, reliability of allocation, efficiency of allocation, setting of limits, priority of allocation;
b. reviewed other existing schemes to capture lessons learnt.
4. Initial high level scan on the commercial opportunities and constraints
a. To land use expansion and change.
b. To financing potential infrastructure projects.
The Irrigation acceleration fund (administered by MPI) agreed to provide $50,000 funding, with BOPRC funding $50,000. The funding will enable a consultant to produce this strategic water study. In line with our procurement process, an open Request for Proposal (RFP) process was run and six submissions received. We scored submissions based on the RFP responses and chose Aqualinc as the preferred vendor. Contractual documents are in the process of being finalised.
This work will be aligned to the NPSFM limit-setting process, by using the outputs of this project to feed into management option scenario work (PC12: Rangitāiki and Kaituna WMA’s).
Page 153 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
4
4 Formal Lodgement of Te Whānau a Harawaka Hapū Management Plan
Komiti Māori under its delegated authority has the mandate to formally receive hapū/iwi resource management plans. These plans are developed and approved by hapū/iwi and identify tangata whenua interests in resource management which can inform Council decision-making. The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) require Councils to take into account any relevant planning document lodged and recognised by an iwi authority.
Hapū/iwi resource management plans provide a mechanism in which tangata whenua interests can be considered in Council decision-making. Certain provisions of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) require Councils to take into account any relevant planning document lodged and recognised by an iwi authority. The development of hapū/iwi management plans is supported in Councils Long Term Plan.
At this meeting, the Te Whānau a Harāwaka Hapū Management Plan 2017 will be formally lodged and received by Komiti Māori. This plan will provide clarity of the values and interest of the hapū and will be very useful for Council to have guidance around resource management in the Hāwai area. The Regional Council provided funding for the development of this plan.
5 Toi Moana funding updates
5.1 Iwi Management Plans
The development of hapū and iwi resource management plans (HIRMP) are supported in the Ten Year Plan to help build the capacity of Māori within the Bay of Plenty. An annual fund of $70,000 is allocated for HIRMPs. Funding is fully utilised through the financial years. The plans inform Council decision-making and assist our work. Primary users within Council include staff in Māori Policy, Consents and Planning to identify tangata whenua areas of interest, resource management issues and preferred methods of engagement. Under the Resource Management Act (2001), staff must take into account the content of iwi resource management plans.
In brief the status of HIRMPs are:
Completed plans Under
development On Hold
Expressions of Interest
29 3 3 2
Formal Lodgement of Edition 2: Matakana and Rangiwāea Hapū Management Plan March 2017 was presented to Komiti Māori in Whakatāne on Tuesday, 20 June 2017.
Formal Lodgement of Pirirakau Hapu Management Plan 2017 was presented at Opureora Marae, Opureora Road, Matakana Island on Wednesday, 23 August 2017.
Page 154 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
5
5.2 He Toka Tumoana
Following the passing of Councillor Awanuiarangi Black in December 2016, staff were asked to consider options to commemorate his legacy. Council approved $10,000 to enable the introduction of two $5,000 environmental scholarships, referred to as He Toka Tumoana to promote, develop and provide for the education and advancement of tertiary students.
The main purpose of the Fund is to assist students by providing financial support for education, activities, research and/or projects.
5.2.1 Assessment Criteria
He Toka Tumoana would focus on study, training or research of an environmental nature that aligns with the regions’ community outcomes, particularly environmental protection, water quality and quantity or regional collaboration and leadership.
Kaupapa/topics that focus on improving or maintaining environmental integrity or research that enhances environmental knowledge (including Mātauranga Māori) within the Bay of Plenty region will be eligible.
5.2.2 Key dates
30 November 2017 – Fund Opens
1 March 2018 – Submit the application form
March-April 2018 – 2 successful candidates selected and announced at Komiti Maori hui
May-June 2108 – Financial invoicing processed
July-September 2018 – Attendance of successful applicants to Komiti Maori
*Funding may be applied for Semester 2 study, depending on applications.
More information and the application form can be found on Bay of Plenty Regional Council website at www.boprc.govt.nz and attached in the appendix.
5.3 Te Hāpai Ora – Regional Community Outcomes Fund
Te Hāpai Ora – Regional Community Outcomes Fund (formerly Corporate Sponsorship Fund) has an annual Sponsorship Fund of $31,000 which is administered by the Group Manager Strategy. This fund is a positive way for Council to contribute to community initiatives that contribute to our regional community outcomes. Details of the fund for the 2016/17 year are as follows:
23 applications received since 1 July 2016
21 applications approved
2 applications declined
100% of the fund allocated for 2016/17
Page 155 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
6
Current 205/2016 Financial Year 2016/2017 Financial Year
Regional Community Outcomes
19%
43%
24%
9%
5%
Environmental Protection
Ecomonic Development
Regional Collaboration &Leadership
Water Quality and Quantity
Resilience and Safety
Distribution of successful application’s community outcomes alignment across the region
Distribution of funding across the region
Mauao 42%
Okurei 11%
Kohi 47%
Mauao 33%
Okurei 24%
Kohi 43%
Page 156 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
7
6 Submission on Whakatāne District Council Māori Seats
Whakatāne District Council is considering the introduction of Māori wards for the 2019 local election. Submissions were invited from iwi, hapū and community members as part of a preliminary review. Those submissions are currently being considered by Whakatāne District Council, the outcome of which (expected by 23 November), will determine whether it proceeds to a comprehensive representation review. A further opportunity for submission is also expected as part of any comprehensive review. Further information is available via the Whakatāne District Council website.
6.1 Kotahitanga Summer Internship Programme
Aroha Leighton Harry Carlson Arthur Flintoff Rangipare Ngaropo
Through the Long Term Plan, the Kotahitanga summer student programme was retained. Student interns are studying or plan to commence studying towards Maori policy, planning or Community Engagement/event qualifications.
An additional student was added to the Māori Policy unit, boosting the support of summer students from three to four for the 2017/2018 year. The four students for Community Engagement - Aroha Leighton (Kohi); Māori Policy - Rangipare Ngaropo (Kōhī), Harry Carlson (Ōkurei) and Arthur Flintoff (Mauao).
The Community Engagement student will be involved with various youth and community workshops, events, projects and engagements.
Each Māori Policy student will assist with work across the region. Some of the opportunities for knowledge and experience will include:
Maori communications and engagement
Policy and planning
Iwi resource management plans
Treaty of Waitangi
Fresh water management
Page 157 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
8
6.2 Community Engagement Update
Many of the Community Engagement team’s projects support kaupapa Māori. Some recent highlights include:
6.2.1 Hands on Water Expo
The Hands on Water Expo (8-9 November) brought together students from 22 schools to learn practical skills to care for their waterways as part of the wider Water Programme. This event is delivered in partnership with other local authorities and community organisations. Two activities were delivered in Te Reo Māori to the kura kaupapa that attended including Te Kura Toitu O Te Whaiti Nui a Toi, Te Mahoe and Murupara Area School. Last year we recognised a gap in terms of matauranga Māori and added a korero based activity that explores Maori perspectives and values on water in either Māori or English.
6.2.2 Environmental Enhancement Fund
Four Environmental Enhancement Fund applications have already been approved for 2017/18. This includes two marae based projects focused on improving water quality, reducing erosion and removal of weeds and regeneration of native plantings. The other two projects focus on innovative sustainability actions and pest control. There are a further two pending applications which are both kaupapa Māori based projects focusing on inanga habitat as well as native planting.
6.2.3 Green Gold Enviroschools
We currently have one school (Te Ranga) and two early learning centres (Tiaki and Katikati Kindergarten) across the region preparing to reflect at Green Gold level as Enviroschools. This is the highest recognition in the programme for sustainability in their teaching and learning, organisational practices and community outreach. Māori Perspectives is an integral component of the programme and is woven through all he resources. They are leading their communities in the sustainability space and demonstrating fantastic commitment to papatuanuku and the concepts of kaitiakitanga.
6.2.4 Tauranga Harbour Community Event
Plans are underway for an event to celebrate the Tauranga Harbour with the community on Saturday 3 March 2018. This event supports the Tauranga Moana Programme Community Outcome: Local communities have easy access to information about the harbour and catchment values and issues, and are actively supported to care for values that are important to them. We aim to involve new audiences (Families within the catchment) in hands-on investigations of Tauranga Harbour health (focusing on coastal environment) and to highlight work underway in the Tauranga Harbour to address key issues identified by the community (sea lettuce, sediment and pollution) plus coastal hazards, biodiversity and biosecurity. Once a venue is confirmed we will seek to involve Tangata Whenua, and already have relationships with a partner organisation to deliver a cultural health focused activity. We welcome suggestions from Komiti Māori to enhance this event.
Page 158 of 170
General Manager Strategy and Science Update
9
7 Council’s Accountability Framework
7.1 Community Outcomes
This project/proposal directly contributes to the Regional Community Outcome/s in the council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025.
7.2 Long Term Plan Alignment
This work is planned under Environmental Protection in the Long Term Plan 2015-2025.
Current budget
Māori Policy activities noted in this report are provided for through the Māori Policy budget. Funding for iwi/hapu management plans are within the Māori Policy activity budget.
Future Budget Implications
Future sponsorship is provided for in Council’s Long Term Plan 2015-2025. Kataraina O'Brien Strategic Engagement Manager for General Manager, Strategy & Science
28 November 2017 Click here to enter text.
Page 159 of 170
Komiti Māori Action Table Bay of Plenty Regional Council
Bay of Plenty Regional Council Komiti Māori – Post Meeting Actions for 10 October 2017 ACTIONS FROM KOMITI MĀORI HELD ON 10 October 2017
No Issue or report item Raised by Action Referred to Date referred and due by Progress/Comments
1. Concerns of current state of environmental issues to the Waitetī Streams and surrounding areas
Guy Ngatai ‐Ngāti Ngararanui
BOPRC support Ngāti Ngararanui in the development of a Ngāti Ngararanui Hapū Management Plan.
Māori Policy ASAP In progress.
2. Te Komiro o Te Utuhina Cr Thurston Commission Toi Moana‐BOPRC staff to write an urgent status report on all the local urban streams flowing into Lake Rotorua
Monitoring/Science Regional Council Delivery and Direction Committee meeting ‐ 30 November 2017
In progress
3. Te Komiro o Te Utuhina Fiona McTavish
Work with Te Komiro o Te Utuhina on an Environmental Enhancement Fund planting project.
Community Engagement
12 December 2017 In progress
4. Concerns around water quality of Ngongotahā Stream
Henry Colbert (Ngāti Tura Ngāti Te Ngākau)
Provide an update report to address issues and concerns
Consents/Science 12 December 2017 In progress.
Page 163 of 170
Komiti Māori Action Table Bay of Plenty Regional Council
ACTIONS FROM KOMITI MĀORI HELD ON 23 August 2017No Issue or report item Raised by Action Referred to Date referred and due by Progress/
Comments
1.
Convene a hui/kōrero with relevant hapū/iwi to consider options to pull or combine RMA technical/cultural expertise in Tauranga Moana.
Cr McDonald Māori Policy staff to discuss specifics with Cr McDonald prior to meeting with hapū/iwi. Cr McDonald be invited to hui with hapū/iwi.
Clarke Koopu, Nathan Capper, supported by Reuben Gardiner.
Provide a progress report on discussions with hapū/iwi an potential options to report to the December 2017 Komiti Māori hui.
In progress. There have been early discussions with Tauranga Hapū and Iwi through the RMA training sessions. There are challenges and opportunities that have been raised. These are yet to be further discussed and socialised.
2.
Liaise/advise Pirirakau (Julie and Rawiri) about matters to be included in a submission to the LTP for the acquisition of Tahataharoa.
Cr McDonald Staff to meet with Pirirakau and provide any relevant research or background information or reports to support their submission. Prepare a report for a future Komiti Māori hui.
Clarke Koopu, Nathan Capper and Reuben Gardiner supported by Sara Omundsen and Pim deMonchy.
MP to convene hui with relevant staff and arrange to meeting with Pirirakau. MP staff to prepare a report for Komiti Māori.
In Progress. Informal discussion have been made with Pirirakau reps. The Tauranga Catchments Manager is fully aware of the intent. The BOPRC staff have raised this in the past. Further discussion to be had with TCC and what they could contribute. There are some challenges in this as this has been submitted in the LTP with out success. However there is continued strong support by staff for the purchase of Tahataharoa.
Page 164 of 170
Komiti Māori Action Table Bay of Plenty Regional Council
3. Monitoring of Ecological, cultural and social effects on Hunters Creek
Cr Marr Ensure focused monitoring is undertaken and that the conditions noted from the Navigation Safety Bylaws hearing decision, are implemented.
Maritime team. ASAP Progress report to the February‐March 2018 Komiti Māori hui.
Bay of Plenty Regional Council Komiti Māori – Post Meeting Actions for 20 June 2017 ACTIONS FROM KOMITI MĀORI HELD ON 20 JUNE
No Issue or report item Raised by Action Referred to Date referred and due by
Progress/ Comments
1 Māori Participation in Council planning processes
Komiti Māori
Requests staff develop tailored engagement/consultation plans to encourage effective Māori participation.
Māori Policy ASAP In progress.
Requests that staff include a Māori implications section when drafting reports for Council committees.
Māori Policy ASAP In progress.
Endorses the development of Regional Council Engagement Strategy or Statement based on high level principles of engagement/consultation with Māori.
Māori Policy ASAP In progress.
Page 165 of 170
The scholarship is available to students who:
• live or have whakapapa within the Bay of Plenty; and
• are enrolled in a course related to environmentalor water management, planning and/ormātauranga Māori.
Toi Moana Bay of Plenty Regional Council has created He Toka Tūmoana Scholarship in memory of the late Councillor Awanuiarangi Black, an avid supporter of environment and restoration projects, research and education.
Applications close 1 March 2018
For more information visit www.boprc.govt.nz/he-toka-tumoana
HE TOKA TŪMOANA SCHOLARSHIP
2 × $5000 Scholarships
available
Page 169 of 170
Top Related