Treaty of Waitangi settlements and resource management

2. Treaty of Waitangi settlements and resource management

3. Structure • Treaty of Waitangi settlements in Hawke’s Bay • Treaty Principles & what they mean for Regional Governance • Benefit /cost/risk issues • Roles • Crown’s role • Iwi role • Regional Council’s role • Steps from here

4. Treaty Settlement groupings in Hawke’s Bay • Wairoa – in mandating process • Ruapani/ (Tuhoe??) • mandated • Ngati Pahauwera – • Agreement in principle – Deed of Settlement by December 09 • Ngati Hineuru/ Maungaharuru Tangitu – in mandating process • Ahuriri – mandated • Heretaunga Tamatea – in mandating process

5. Whose process? • The Crown & Iwi • HBRC can help influence and shape aspects of the settlement that impact on its functions • Public can submit to Maori Affairs Select Committee on specific Treaty legislation

6. Treaty elements • Economic redress • Redress targeted at legitimate iwi grievances with respect to land confiscation, land transfers etc • Cultural redress • Redress associated with legitimate claims • Customary rights • Partnership in natural resource management and involvement in resource management decision making

7. Treaty Principles • A partnership, exercised with utmost good faith • An agreement that can be adapted to meet new circumstances • Needs of both Maori and wider community met • Maori interest proactively protected by Crown • Crown legally obliged to recognize tinorangatiratanga • Right of iwi to self-management of their resources

8. Crown’s Proposal for HB • Joint Regional Plan Committee – equal numbers of elected councilors and Treaty claimant groups • role to develop and review regional plans and policy statement: • Coast • Freshwater • Land • Air • The committee would prepare the plans or plan changes to point of public notification, after which submission process under RMA is triggered • Committee established under treaty legislation to deal with RMA plan development, but not decision making on resource consents

9. Implications for regional governance and natural resource management • Iwi seeking self-management of natural resources • Government has previously adopted models which sideline regional government and wider regional community (river boards) • Opportunity for Council to be proactive in its approach and support a workable Crown proposal

10. Steps to-date & imminent • Chair, CE and others have met with Crown Negotiator to explore options and have met with some but not all claimant groups • Minister of Treaty Settlements has met with Councillors and staff • Minister has written to Council outlining the Crown’s intent to arrive at an enduring solution and outlining timeframes for the Pahauwera settlement • Council formalised its consultation process on Oct 28 • Council to consider its response to Crown proposal on 25 November • Council can influence shape of resource management decision making • Ultimate decision on future structure of resource management decision making with Crown and Treaty claimants

11. Benefits of Co-governance • Benefits Strategic • Iwi values alignment to sustainable use of natural resources • Increasing iwi wealth, scale and alignment to regional economy and its development • Post Treaty Settlements approx 70% of NZ’s production forest land will be owned by iwi • and estimates of up to 30% of NZ agri-business will have an Iwi dimension) • Influence and (leverage) with Central Govt. in areas including governance & mgt of water • Water remains as a public common • Iwi as partners in the region’s water strategy • Consolidates regional resource management functions vs Govt centralisation agenda

12. Benefits of Co-governance Benefits Specific to a joint Committee Model • Economically efficient – as opposed to individual River Boards and retains catchment mgt model of regions • Non operational i.e., not making individual decisions e.g., consents • No iwi right of veto • Plans plan, changes etc subject to all normal processes of submission appeal including to Environment Court • Served by the current institutional capacity of the Regional Council • Iwi in process as opposed to appealing it

13. Costs of Co-governance • Decision making by majority consensus - slower? • Capacity of iwi (currently??) • Additional training load for staff • Payments to committee reps • Committee size

14. Risks of doing • Hawke’s Bay community reaction • Iwi splintering – i.e., some in some out – all or nothing • Crown (OTS) doesn’t implement cleanly

15. Risks of not doing • “Solution” imposed and variable from settlement to settlement and may drag out • Crown has talked to some Treaty Claimants – expectations growing • Water strategy opposed by Iwi e.g., storage/irrigation, plan changes, consents • Minister for Environment’s aspiration to change water governance in NZ – July 2010 Land & Water forum, Water Boards/EPA

16. Crown and National Led Government role • Treaty Partner • Seeking a solution for Treaty Settlements that is replicable across all settlements • Has set the aspirational goal settling claims by 2014 • Is seeking inclusive solution for Iwi in mainstream society and acknowledges the need to dovetail Iwi partnerships alongside democratic governance • Is politically driven to find “wins’ for its coalition partner who has identified water as one of its top 3 issues • Is seeking to avoid legal risk • Needs to lead the communication through the media but preferably in partnership with Iwi & HBRC

17. Iwi’s role • Mana Whenua • Are seeking to move beyond “grievance” • Are seeking empowerment • Are driven by both traditional Kaitiaki values but also to lift their peoples prosperity • Have considerable leverage on Crown to settle • Are open to and want partnership with HBRC • Approx 80% of iwi are dependent on the primary sector for their livelihood

18. HBRC role • Shaping the model so that it is practically workable, deals with risk, protects the community and its interests e.g. property rights • Positively working with claimant groups and crown to achieve the above • Consult with the affected community to ensure if at all possible an acceptable and sustainable solution is developed