Untitled Document
Untitled Document
 
  Menu
  Lake Trustee Scam 2020
  Te Keepa Background
  Horowhenua Block
  Tribal conflicts latest 2020 Lake trustees
  Government Injustices
  Maori Land Court Rules
  Bad Investments
  Te Puni Kokiri
  Lake Accord
 2023 LAKE UPDATE
  ROLD ACT
  Domain Bylaw change
2018 Court update
Lake Trustee voting
 
 
 
Custom Search
 

WAITANGI TUKU IHO PROCESS SUBMISSIONS AS AT JULY 2013

 

 

MUAUPOKO TRIBAL AUTHORITY does not respond to the Tuku Iho process yet Te Hono for Ngati Raukawa see many of the problems genuine Wai Claimants now face.

NGATI RAUKAWA ARE LEADING THE WAY FOR CLAIMANTS IN OUR ROHE

IN THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL
WAI 2200 (Porirua ki Manawalia District Inquiry) WAI 651 (Reureu Claim) WAI 1461 (Kauwhata Claim) WAI 437, 1580 (Raukawa Claims)
IN THE MATTER OF                Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975
AND
IN THE MATTER OF               The Porirua ki Manawalia District Inquiry


MEMORANDUM FOR TE HONO KI RAUKAWA IN RELATION TO
KORERO TUKU IHO PROJECT

Dated: 31 July 2013
Woodward Law Offices Barristers and Solicitors PO Box 30411
Lower Hutt
Telephone: (04) 560 3680Fax No:     (04) 560 3681
Solicitors:Donna Hall / Susan Arcus

MAY IT PLEASE THE TRIBUNAL Approach

  • This memorandum responds to the Tribunal's directions of 1 July at #2.5.64.
    The Tribunal seeks submissions on the Tribunal's proposed project to record the oral history of Ngati Raukawa (including Reureu and Kauwhata) to 1880. The project is referred to as Nga Korero Tuku Iho. The transcript of the oral testimonies would provide a base for the research work to be commissioned later.
  • Te Hono understands that to record the oral testimonies, the Tribunal has
    proposed six hui, one each for Ngati Awa/Te Atiawa and Muaupoko and four for Ngati Raukawa, each to be at one marae over 2-3 days.
  • The Tribunal has also found that "provided it does not delay the research
    programme", there is "widespread support" for the project. Dealing first with the proviso, Te Hono has had regard to the intention of the Crown Forestry Rental Trust (CFRT), as conveyed to the High Court in March, to refer a number of issues to that Court. Te Hono understands from the Maori Council, a party to the proceeding, that the issues are likely to include a question around who may commission research, the Trustees themselves or the approved claimants. Te Hono therefore submits that the Korero Tuku Iho project is unlikely to delay the research programme as the research programme is itself likely to be delayed by the court proceedings.
  • That leaves the finding of the Tribunal of "widespread support" for the
    project. That is a finding on which Te Hono must place much weight and therefore, Te Hono now makes submissions on how the project may be advanced having regard to the issues which the Tribunal has raised.

5. Te Hono notes that the Tribunal now seeks submissions on:

  • the four Raukawa venues to be appointed and the Co-ordinating Committees for each; and
  • the difficulties facing Te Atiawa and Muaupoko.

We address each in turn and then, a further observation of the Tribunal that the Korero Tuku Iho project is subject to the provision of CFRT funding.


Raukawa venues and committees
6. While the peoples' preferences will be made known in the submissions to follow, Te Hono must start with the present intelligence from local discussions beginning, as the Tribunal has suggested, with Reureu. These are understood to be:

  • Te Tikanga marae for Reureu.1
  • Kauwhata marae for Ngati Kauwhata including Ngati Tukorehe and Ngati Wehiwehi and also for their neighbours, Nga Hapu o Himatangi — Ngati Te Au, Ngati Turanga and Ngati Rakau-Paewai.2
  • A venue, probably near Levin, focusing on Ngati Huia from Ngati Kikopiri to Ngati Parewahawaha.
  • A venue, probably at Otaki, focusing on Ngati Raukawa.
  • Te Hono is not wedded to a particular view. However, the above provides a starting point. It has the advantage of an even distribution of venues between the northern Manawatu and the southern Horowhenua. However, it has the disadvantage of leaving some uncertainty around who would constitute the co-ordinating committees.
  • To deal with the latter point, Te Hono proposes that once the venues are settled, with two for the North and two for the South, each hapu should make its own decision as to the venue at which it will attend, and advises the

1 This has now been confirmed in the Joint Memorandum of Wackrow Williams and Davies Limited and Te Haa Legal Limited filed 31 July 2013.
2 See now the memorandum for Nga Kaitiaki o Ngati Kauwhata filed 31 July 2013

Tribunal. The co-ordinating committee would then comprise one or two representatives from each hapa attending at each venue.


Te Atiawa/Ngati Awa

  • The difficulty facing Te Atiawa/Ngati Awa appears to be that for lack of access to a Crown licensed forest Te Atiawa/Ngati Awa do not qualify for CFRT funding to assist them in the Korero Tuku Iho project. Te Hono believes that to complete a settlement in the customary boundaries of Manawatu-and Horowhenua, the claims of all concerned must be included. Te Hono therefore repeats the invitation made to Te Atiawa/Ngati Awa in 2011, to join with Te Hono on terms which will respect their independent mana, but provide access to funding.

Muaupoko

  • Muaupoko faces a problem that it is contrary to CFRT policy to fund groups in hearings while negotiations are in train. Te Hono supports the proposition put forward by the New Zealand Maori Council to Paparahi claimants in North Auckland, that the policy is inconsistent with the Trust Deed, which places no such restriction on people seeking funding.

Funding

  • As earlier noted, the Tribunal has advised that the Korero Tuku Iho project is subject to funding from the Crown Forestry Rental Trust. Te Hono has noted the recent advice from the Trust (#6.2.19 of 26 July 2013 para 4, 5) that in terms of the High Court proceedings, Trustees are not able to consider funding applications where a conflict of interest situation exists.
  • Te Hono submits that the present proceedings do not necessarily present an impediment to proceeding with the project. In the first instance, it has transpired from disputes in the current North Auckland Inquiry, on Paparahi o to Raki, that the Trust is unable to fund anything, including projects likethat of Korero Tuku Iho, except through an approved claimant group.
    Currently, Te Hono is the only approved claimant group for this district.
  • In the second instance, it appears that funding for the Korero Tuku Iho project in this District is not part of the funding issues proposed for resolution in the High Court and may proceed by the consent of the parties to a variation of the High Court order. Subject to the Tribunal's determinations on the current issues Te Hono will submit a proposal to the plaintiff and respondent trustees of CFRT to consent to an amendment to the Court Order to enable the funding to be released.

  •

Addendum on Claimant representation

  • We refer to the Tribunal's direction of 31 May 2013 at 2.5.63. At paras 10 and 11 the Tribunal noted that the memorandum from this office for that hearing, on behalf of Te Hono ki Raukawa, had been intituled with a reference to Wai 651. In that context the Tribunal then recorded the comments of Mr Turoa Karatea that Wai 651 is represented by Wackrow Williams and Davies. That position is correct. We explain that the representatives for Wai 651, Wai 1461 and the combination of Wai 437 and 1580, as intituled, are the founding claimants of the Te Hono ki Raukawa coalition from Reureu, Kauwhata and Raukawa respectively. There are now many others. Within the Te Hono coalition, each group is autonomous and has its own lawyers. Te Hono represents only the collective interest.

DATED at Lower Hutt this 31st day of July 2013

Executed and filed for and on behalf of Te Hono ki Raukawa Council
by Donna Hall/Susan Arcus
For Woodward Law Offices

BEFORE THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL WAI 2200


IN THE MATTER OF AND
IN THE MATTER OF

THE TREATY OF WAITANGI ACT 1975
THE PORIRUA KI MANAWATU DISTRICT INQUIRY

CROWN MEMORANDUM
31 July 2013

CROWN LAW TE TARI TURE 0 TE KARAUNA
PO Box 2858 WELLINGTON 6140 Tel: 04 472 1719 Fax: 04 473 3482
Counsel Acting: Damen Ward
damen.ward crownlaw.govt.nz


MAY IT PLEASE THE TRIBUNAL:
  1. This memorandum responds to the Tribunal's memorandum of 1 July 2013 (Wai 2200, #2.5.64), and particularly the request at paragraph 31 for submissions clarifying the Crown's position on the participation of the Muaupoko Tribal Authority (MTA) in the Nga Karen) Tuku Iho process for the Porirua ki Manawatti district inquiry.
  2. Crown policy is that if a claimant group enters into negotiations they must cease actively pursuing their claims before the Tribunal. The Crown needs to consider the impact of making an exception to Crown policy to allow Muaupoko participation in the Nga Korero Tuku Iho and negotiations processes in parallel. Such is being actively considering at present.
  3. The Crown does not currently fund iwi participation in Tribunal processes. The Crown is in the process of considering whether some funding might be made available to the Muaupoko groups for participation in the proposed Nga Korero Tuku Iho process. The Crown will update the Tribunal in due course.
  4. We note the recent advice from CFRT (letter dated 26 July 2013, Wai 1040, #6.2.19) that resolution of the Trustee conflicts has not progressed as expected and funding decisions are not yet possible. As noted at the judicial conference of 28 May 2012, the Crown would prefer to delay any final funding decisions until after CFRT have been able to properly consider matters of funding. The Crown would prefer to make its decisions in light of any CFRT funding decisions, given that it is the body established to provide funding for claimant participation in the Tribunal.
  5. Counsel wishes to stress that the Crown can make no guarantee that it will be able to provide funding for the Nga Korero Tuku Iho process. The matter is however under consideration.
  6. 31 July 2013Counsel for the Crown

TO:             The Registrar, Waitangi Tribunal
AND TO: Claimant Counsel

In the meantime funding by CFRT has been stopped due to High Court decisions on the conflict of interest with CFRT and below are the latest directions from the Waitangi Tribunal

 

26 July 2013

Deputy Chief Judge Caren Fox Presiding Officer
Porirua ki Manawatu Inquiry Waitangi Tribunal
WELLINGTON
DX SP22525


Tënä koe e te Rangatira
Re: CFRT Update on funding for the Porirua ki Manawatū Inquiry
1. This memorandum is provided in response to the Tribunal’s Memorandum-Directions (Wai 2200, #2.5.64) of 1 July 2013, which requests that Trust staff provide:

  • an update on funding for the Porirua ki Manawatu Research Programme;
  • an update on whether the Trust will provide financial support for the Ngä KOrero Tuku Iho hui; and
  • clarification of the Trust’s position on Muaupoko Tribal Authority (MTA) participating in Ngä KOrero Tuku Iho hui.

Trustee consideration of Porirua ki Manawatū research funding

  • As outlined in our update of 24 May 2013 (Wai 2200, #6.2.18), CFRT Trustee consideration of Porirua ki Manawatu funding applications have been deferred until issues around the appointment of Mäori Appointer-appointed Alternate Trustees are resolved. On 22 June 2013, the Chairperson of the Trust advised that significant progress had been made and that it was expected that all applications that had been on hold since March 2013 would be placed on the agenda for a Trustees’ meeting within the next month.
  • However, and as the CFRT Chairperson advised on 23 July 2013, these papers were not considered at the Trustees’ meeting on 16 July 2013 as Mäori Appointer-appointed Trustee conflicts of interest remain unresolved. The matter has now been referred back to the High Court.
  • Trust staff advise that because the Maori Appointer-appointed Trustee conflict of interest situation has not been resolved, Trustees are not able to consider any applications for Approved Client status or funding where a Mäori Appointer-appointed Trustee conflict of interest exists.


Funding for Ngā Kōrero Tuku Iho process
  • Trust staff will shortly be consulting with our approved client in the Porirua ki Manawatu inquiry about the possibility of seeking Trustee approval to contribute to the Nga KOrero Tuku Iho process. Any such funding application could not be considered by Trustees until the conflict of interest situation is resolved.

Muaūpoko Tribal Authority (MTA) participation in Ngā Kōrero Tuku Iho

  • Trust staff have provided the MTA with a copy of the Tribunal’s memorandum-direction (Wai 2200, #2.5.64), which sets out the Tribunal’s position with respect to MTA participation in a Muaupoko Nga KOrero Tuku Iho hui. In our view it is for MTA to decide whether to participate. We note here that the Trust is not able to provide funding to support a negotiations client in the Waitangi Tribunal process.

Na maua noa, na

Daniel Phillips
Service Delivery Manager Crown Forestry Rental Trust

Kathryn Rose
Research Facilitator
Crown Forestry Rental Trust

 

 

Major Kemp

 

Have your say :

MUAUPOKO [ MTA Waitangi Tuku Iho July 2013 ]

Major Kemp and Tanguru Chiefs of Muaupoko Tribe NZ
 

[ History ] [ Wai 108 claim ] [ Office of Treaty Settlements ]

[ Lake Blame 2023 ] [ Lake news 2018 ] [ WECA Water & Environment group 2018 ] [ Drains,inlets and streams feeding the Lake 2018 ]

[ Arawhata flooding June 20th 2015 ] [ Listener Karl du Fresne Report Lake Aug 2014 ] [ Lake Trustees vote to remove Lake buildings? ] [ Sir Wira Gardiners shock report about MTA Nov 2013 ] [ Horowhenua Council Rating June 2014 ]

[ CFRT Crown Forestry Rental Trust] [ The money grab ] [ MCC- Muaupoko Cluster Group ] [ Horowhenua Lake 2013 ] [ ROLD Act ] [ Horowhenua Lake Trust ] [ OTS selling our Landbanked hospital & kimberley ] [ Lake Accord 2013 to NOT clean our Lake ] [ Lake Lobby Group 2013 to clean our Lake ] [ Horowhenua Council Polluters ] [ Lake Accord 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Cleaning the Lake area 2024 [ Livin in Levin decide to clean the domain ]

Please note some pages on this website are unlisted for public viewing. Info has been collated from oral conversations from kuia & kaumatua & text material we have accumulated over years. [ Info Indemnity ]