SECTION 42A REPORT PART 1 - TANGATA WHENUA
1 Executive Summary ...... 2
2 Introduction ...... 3 2.1 Author and qualifications ...... 3 2.2 Code of Conduct ...... 3
3 Scope / Purpose of Report ...... 3
4 Statutory Requirements ...... 4 4.1 Statutory documents ...... 4 4.1.1 National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2020 ...... 5 4.1.2 National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 ...... 5 4.1.3 Resource Management Review ...... 6 4.1.4 Treaty Settlements – update ...... 7 4.1.5 Other Statutory Documents ...... 7 4.1.6 Iwi Management Plans – update ...... 7 4.1.7 National Planning Standards ...... 9 4.1.8 Statutory Acknowledgement Areas ...... 9 4.2 Procedural matters ...... 9
5 Consideration of submissions received ...... 9 5.1 Overview of submissions received...... 9 5.2 Section 32AA evaluation ...... 10 5.3 Officer Recommendations ...... 11 5.3.1 Key Issue 1: Engage tangata whenua as cultural experts in resource management processes ...... 11 5.3.2 Key Issue 2 – Strengthen and clarify wording in relation to resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements ...... 14 5.3.3 Key Issue 3: Spelling and information relating to iwi and hapū ...... 16 5.3.4 Key Issue 4: Information relating to other Treaty and Council arrangements with tangata whenua ...... 20
6 Conclusion ...... 23
Appendix 1: Recommended amendments to Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter (ECM XXX)
Appendix 2: Recommended decisions on submissions to Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter (ECM XXX)
1 Executive Summary 1. The Proposed New Plymouth District Plan (“PDP”) was publicly notified in September 2019. The Part 1 -Tangata Whenua Chapter is a stand-alone chapter required by the National Planning Standards (“the Planning Standards”), which requires district plans to include a ‘Tangata Whenua/Mana Whenua’ chapter in Part 1 (Introduction and General Provisions) of the PDP. The provisions in the Tangata Whenua/Mana Whenua chapter must only include context and process-related provisions – not objectives, policies or rules.
2. Thirteen original submissions and 10 further submissions, some covering more than one submission point, were received on the chapter. Only two of the original submissions, from Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga and Kāinga Ora, were not from iwi or hapū submitters.
3. The key issues identified in submissions on the chapter were:
a) Engage Tangata Whenua as cultural experts in resource management processes.
b) Strengthen and clarify wording in relation to resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements.
c) Correct spelling and information relating to iwi and hapū.
d) Correct the information relating to other Treaty and Council arrangements with Tangata Whenua.
4. Since the notification of the PDP, there have been a number of changes to the relevant regulatory framework, including the Resource Management Act ("RMA"), National Policy Statements ("NPSs"), and other legislation. In addition, Ngāti Maru have settled their historical Treaty claims with the Crown, and two additional Iwi Environmental Management Plans have been finalised (Te Atiawa and Ngāti Mutunga).
5. This report has been prepared in accordance with section 42A of the RMA and outlines recommendations in response to the issues that have emerged from submissions on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter. The report is intended to assist the Hearings Panel to make their decisions on the submissions and further submissions on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter. It also provides submitters with an opportunity to see how their submissions have been evaluated, and the recommendations being made by officers, prior to the hearing.
6. The key changes recommended in this report relate to reflecting tangata whenua engagement as cultural experts in resource management processes; strengthening and clarifying wording in relation to the resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements; and addressing spelling and information errors in relation to iwi and hapū and other Treaty and Council arrangements with tangata whenua.
2 2 Introduction 2.1 Author and qualifications 7. My full name is Joanne Ritchie, and I am a Planning Adviser in the District Plan Team at New Plymouth District Council (“NPDC” or “the Council”).
8. I hold the qualification of Bachelor of Arts in English Literature and Sociology from Victoria University in Wellington, New Zealand.
9. Prior to working for the NPDC I worked for five years at the Taranaki Regional Council as a Policy Analyst/Planner and assisted in the preparation and review of regional biosecurity, CDEM and air quality plans. Previously I worked for the Office of Treaty Settlements as a Policy Analyst, Negotiations and Settlements and before that, I worked as a Historical Researcher for the Treaty Issues and International Law Team at the Crown Law Office1. In my Historical Researcher role I presented a brief of factual evidence to the Waitangi Tribunal.
10. I am an Associate member of the New Zealand Planning Institute.
11. I have seven years of experience in planning and resource management including policy development, formation of plan changes and associated cost benefit analyses and assessments; and over 20 years’ experience in the preparation of reports and associated evidence and the preparation of submissions, with particular reference to Tangata Whenua matters.
2.2 Code of Conduct 12. I confirm that I have read the Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses in the Environment Court Practice Note 2014 and that I have complied with it when preparing this report. Other than when I state that I am relying on the evidence or advice of another person, this evidence is within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from the opinions that I express.
13. I am authorised to give this evidence on the Council's behalf to the PDP hearings commissioners (“Hearings Panel”).
3 Scope / Purpose of Report 14. This report has been prepared in accordance with Section 42A of the Resource Management Act to:
• assist the Hearings Panel in making their decisions on the submissions and further submissions on the PDP; and
• provide submitters with an opportunity to see how their submissions have been evaluated and the recommendations being made by officers, prior to the hearing.
1 Working under my maiden name of Galvin
3 15. The Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter was developed in 2019, as a result of the promulgation of the Planning Standards. The Government released the Planning Standards in April 2019.
16. The Planning Standards require district plans to include a ‘Tangata Whenua/Mana Whenua’ chapter in Part 1 (Introduction and General Provisions) of the PDP. The provisions in the Tangata Whenua/Mana Whenua chapter must only include context and process-related provisions on matters set out under Direction 28 as follows:
• Recognition of hapū and iwi.
• Tangata whenua/mana whenua – local authority relationships.
• Hapū and iwi planning documents.
• Involvement and participation with tangata whenua/mana whenua.
17. It is not mandatory to include all provisions in Direction 28 and decisions on what should be included must be made after engaging with tangata whenua/mana whenua. Links to material outside the PDP may also be included.
18. Officers discussed matters that could be included in the chapter with Ngā Kaitiaki between March and June 2019 and the chapter was finalised for notification in September 2019. Sections addressed in the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter are as follows:
• Recognition of iwi and hapū.
• Kaupapa Māori Framework – iwi and hapū values.
• Treaty Settlement Interests.
• Council and Tangata Whenua Relationships.
• Hapū and iwi planning documents.
• Engagement and Consultation with tangata whenua.
19. This report responds to submissions on Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter. It addresses contextual matters in respect of Tangata Whenua in the district, errors in iwi/hapū names and associated activities, and submissions seeking amendments to wording or additional information. Wherever possible, I have provided a recommendation to assist the Hearings Panel in respect of accepting or rejecting submissions made, and on alternative wording for the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter.
4 Statutory Requirements 4.1 Statutory documents 20. No specific section 32 report was prepared for the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter however the matters discussed in this report were
4 generally covered by the ‘Overview and Strategic Objectives’ section 32 report, the Strategic Direction – Tangata Whenua section 42A report, and the Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori and Māori Purpose Zone section 32 reports. Section 3 (Statutory and Policy Context) of the section 32 reports sets out the relationship between sections of the RMA with “higher order documents” such as regional plans and policy statements, and relevant iwi management plans.
21. It is not necessary to repeat the detail of the relevant RMA sections and full suite of higher order documents here. However, I do note that several documents have been subject to change since notification of the PDP, which are relevant to the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter and submissions received. Key regulatory changes and indications from the government around significant resource management reform are outlined below.
4.1.1 National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2020
22. The National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2020 (“NPS-FM 2020”) came into effect in September 2020, replacing the 2014 and 2017 NPSs on Freshwater. The NPS-FM 2020 introduces the concept of Te Mana o te Wai and seeks to manage natural and physical resources in a way that prioritises the health and well-being of waterbodies and freshwater ecosystems. The NPS-FM 2020 requires councils to manage freshwater in a way that gives effect to Te Mana o te Wai (Policy 1) and that tangata whenua are actively involved in freshwater management (including in decision-making processes (Policy 2)). Every regional council is required to enable the application of mātauranga Māori, among other values and knowledge systems, to freshwater management (3.2(2)(d)). Other important changes include the addition of two compulsory values - threatened species and mahinga kai – which join ecosystem health and human health for recreation.
23. While the majority of requirements of the NPS-FM 2020 sit with regional councils, Section 3.4 provides that “Every local authority must actively involve tangata whenua (to the extent they wish to be involved) in freshwater management (including decision-making processes) and including identifying the local approach to giving effect to Te Mana o Te Wai) …”.
24. National guidance around Te Mana o te Wai and climate change is considered in detail in the Strategic Direction – Natural Environment report and readers are referred to that report for a discussion on the other key issues.
4.1.2 National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020
25. The National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2020 (NPS-UD) came into effect August 2020 replacing the National Policy Statement on Urban Development Capacity 2016 (NPS-UDC). Objective 5 of the NPS-UD provides for planning decisions to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi). Policy 1(a)(ii) provides that urban
5 environments must, as a minimum, enable a variety of homes that enable Māori to express their cultural traditions and norms.
26. Policy 9 of the NPS-UD provides for the implementation of Objective 5 and requires local authorities to involve hapū and iwi in the preparation of RMA planning documents by undertaking effective consultation in accordance with tikanga Māori and taking into account their values and aspirations for urban development.
27. Policy 9 also requires local authorities to “(c) provide opportunities in appropriate circumstances for Māori involvement in decision-making on resource consents, … including in relation to sites of significance to Māori and issues of cultural significance; and (d) operate in a way that is consistent with iwi participation legislation.” (i.e. settlement legislation or Mana Whakahono ā Rohe).
28. The NPS-UD is addressed in the Strategic Direction – Urban Form and Development report and readers are referred to that report for a more detailed discussion.
4.1.3 Resource Management Review
29. The government has indicated it will be replacing the RMA will three new Acts, namely the:
• Natural and Built Environments Act (NBEA) to provide for land use and environmental regulation (this would be the primary replacement for the RMA);
• Strategic Planning Act (SPA) to integrate with other legislation relevant to development, and require long-term regional spatial strategies; and
• Managed Retreat and Climate Change Adaptation Act (CCAA) to address the issues associated with managed retreat and funding and financing adaptation.
30. Although drafts of these Acts have not yet been introduced into Parliament, District Plan Team officers are mindful of the key recommendations in the June 2020 “Report of the Resource Management Review Panel”2. The Panel has recommended that the concept of ‘Te Mana o te Taiao’ be introduced and that specific outcomes should be provided for ‘tikanga Māori’. The Panel has also recommended decision-makers be required to ‘give effect to’ the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and implementation of that higher requirement be guided by a national policy statement and monitored by a National Māori Advisory Board.
2 The RMA Review Panel (June 2020) key recommendations are set out here - https://environment.govt.nz/assets/Publications/Files/rm-panel-review-report-summary.pdf
6 31. The Panel also recommended that the NBEA provide for representation of mana whenua3 on regional spatial planning and joint planning committees; that the current Mana Whakahono ā Rohe provisions be enhanced; and that local authorities have a positive obligation to investigate opportunities for transfer of power provisions and joint management agreements.
32. Where Māori are undertaking resource management duties and functions in the public interest, the Panel recommended payment of reasonable costs along with other funding and support options.
33. It is acknowledged that there is no obligation on the Council or the Hearings Panel to comply with these recommendations and that the recommendations may not be adopted by Parliament or may be subject to change.
4.1.4 Treaty Settlements – update
34. The Ngāti Maru (Taranaki) Deed of Settlement had not been signed at the time of public notification of the PDP in 2019. Ngāti Maru settled their historic Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown on 27 February 2021. The Ngati Maru (Taranaki) Claims Settlement Bill 2021 was introduced into Parliament on 19 May 2021. It has yet to receive royal assent. Clause 32 of the Bill requires the Council, as a ‘relevant consent authority’, to have regard to the statutory acknowledgements listed in the Bill if a resource consent application is made for an activity within, adjacent to, or directly affecting a statutory area. The Council must also have regard to the statutory acknowledgement in relation to that area when deciding whether the trustees are affected persons in relation to the application4.
4.1.5 Other Statutory Documents
35. Please refer to the Strategic Direction – Natural Environments section 42A report for updates relating to the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019; the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management 2020; the proposed National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity and the requirements for territorial authorities in respect of Climate Change.
4.1.6 Iwi Management Plans – update
36. Te Kotahitanga O Te Atiawa Taranaki Trust’s Iwi Environmental Management Plan: Tai Whenua Tai Tangata, Tai Ao Te Atiawa was in draft form at the time of public notification of the PDP. This was finalised in December 2019 and has now been formally lodged with the Council.
37. The issues, objectives and policies of the plan sit within eight sections, which are titled: Te Tai Hauora (Guardianship); Te Tai Awhi–Nuku (Inland and Coastal Whenua); Te Tai o Maru (Freshwater); Te Tai o Tangaroa
3 It is recommended that the current definitions of the terms ‘iwi authority’ and ‘tangata whenua’ should be replaced with a new definition for ‘mana whenua’. 4 Section 95E of the RMA.
7 (Coastal and Marine Environment); Te Tai Awhi–Rangi (Air and Atmosphere); Te Tai o Tānetokorangi (Flora and Fauna); Te Tai Hekenui (Heritage); and Te Tai o Rua Taranaki (Taranaki Maunga). In respect of strategic direction, Tai Whenua Tai Tangata, Tai Ao Te Atiawa contains provisions relating to Te Atiawa involvement in resource management processes, their role as kaitiaki of ancestral lands, waters, taonga species, wāhi tapu/wāhi taonga, urupā and sites of significance to Māori as well as provisions ensuring they are able to use and develop Māori land. Other provisions seek to protect sites of significance and cultural landscapes from inappropriate use, development, and destruction, as well as allowing Te Atiawa better connection and access to these sites.
38. Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Mutunga’s Iwi Environmental Management Plan was in draft form at the time of public notification of the PDP. This was also finalised in 2019 and was formally lodged with the Council in March 2021.
39. The plan comprises seven sections (Air and Atmosphere; Whenua Ngàhere/Bushland; Te Puna Waiora/Freshwater; Whenua Mānia/Plains; Takutai/Coast; Cultural Landscapes and Wāhi Tapu; and Implementation). Ngāti Mutunga’s plan seeks to provide for sustainable management of the environment, for the social, cultural, economic, and environmental well- being of the iwi and the wider community, now and into the future. The Plan notes the iwi may have different perspectives on what this means and how it should be achieved, recognising the value of relationships and shared goals being best achieved through partnership.
40. The Implementation section of the plan is particularly relevant. The plan seeks to influence environmental management in the Ngāti Mutunga rohe and help agencies to identify ways to work more closely and effectively with Ngāti Mutunga. The plan also includes provision for Ngāti Mutunga to develop land in their rohe.
41. A draft version of the Ngāruahine Iwi Environmental Management Plan was received in January 2021 and comments provided in March 2021. While much of Ngāruahine's rohe is out of the NPDC's district, one of their statutory acknowledgement areas - the Waipuku Stream - does lie within our district. The Waipuku Stream is included in Schedule 9 (the Schedule of Significant Waterbodies) of the PDP as a tributary of the Manganui River. This is particularly relevant for the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter, as there are submissions on wording in relation to processes for statutory acknowledgment areas. Ngāruahine seek improved access for their Uri (descendants) to Statutory Acknowledgement Areas.
42. The Ngāruahine plan states that the building of environmental capacity and capability is its primary outcome and focus, together with the practice of kaitiakitanga. To enable this practice to occur, it is essential that Ngāruahine be meaningfully and continuously engaged in decision-making in all areas of environmental resource management, including co- development in relation to resource consent and subdivision applications; project development; national, regional and local policy statements, strategies, plans and policies; and monitoring and management activities. We note that Ngāruahine wants to work with local government agencies
8 to ensure that the principles of the Treaty are given effect to, rather than just taken into account.
43. The Council has not yet been provided with an iwi management plan (or draft) from Ngāti Maru.
44. The Maniapoto Iwi Environmental Management Plan (Ko Tā Maniapoto Mahere Taiao, 2016) remains under revision and is not yet lodged with the Council.
45. No other iwi plans have been finalised or revised that I am aware of.
4.1.7 National Planning Standards
46. Noting that a hearing specifically focused on plan integration, mapping and definitions will be held at the end of the hearing schedule, this report also includes reference to and reliance on matters regarding the National Planning Standard Definitions, as well as NPDC-specific definitions relevant to tangata whenua matters.
47. The National Planning Standards determine the sections that should be included in a District Plan, including the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter, and how the District Plan should be ordered.
4.1.8 Statutory Acknowledgement Areas
48. Statutory acknowledgements are a formal acknowledgement by the Crown recognising the particular cultural, spiritual, historical and traditional associations of iwi or hapū with a site of significance or resource identified as a statutory acknowledgement area. Many of the statutory acknowledgement areas in the New Plymouth District settlements relate to waterbodies.
49. Several iwi with rohe in the New Plymouth District have settled their Treaty of Waitangi claims with Deeds of Settlement signed by Ngāti Mutunga (2005), Ngāti Tama (2007), Te Atiawa (2016), Taranaki Iwi (2015), Ngā Ruahine (2016) and Ngāti Maru (2021). The statutory acknowledgements are included in the PDP as links to the settlement legislation through the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter and also in the General Approach chapter.
4.2 Procedural matters 50. No further consultation with any parties regarding Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter has been undertaken since notification of the provisions.
5 Consideration of submissions received 5.1 Overview of submissions received 51. A total of 13 original submissions and 10 further submissions were received on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter. Only two of the original submissions, from Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga (Heritage NZ) and Kāinga Ora, were not from iwi or hapū submitters. Six of the original submissions were from Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust (TKOTAT / 459).
9 52. Six of the further submissions are from Ngāti Rahiri Hapū o Te Atiawa (Taranaki) Society Inc (Ngāti Rahiri/ 126) and two are from Federated Farmers of New Zealand/ 128. All of the Ngāti Rahiri further submissions support the submissions of TKOTAT.
53. Three submissions out of the 13 submissions made on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter support the Tangata Whenua chapter being retained as notified, and support references to their hapū (516.1; 522.11; and 563.142). One further submission from Kāinga Ora (201.1544) provides additional support for the submission of Heritage NZ.
54. Section 5.3 considers and provides recommendations on the decisions requested in submissions. Similar submission points on key issues have been grouped together. This thematic response assists in providing a concise response to, and recommended decisions on, all the submission points. A full list of submissions and further submissions on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter is contained in Appendix 1 to this report (Recommended decisions on submissions).
55. The key issues identified in this report are set out below:
• Issue 1 - Engage tangata whenua as cultural experts in resource management processes.
• Issue 2 - Strengthen and clarify wording in relation to resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements.
• Issue 3 - Spelling and information relating to iwi and hapū.
• Issue 4 - Information relating to other Treaty and Council arrangements with tangata whenua.
5.2 Section 32AA evaluation 56. This report used ‘key issues’ to group, consider and provide reasons for the recommended decisions on similar matters raised in submissions. Where applicable, the recommended decisions have been evaluated using section 32AA of the RMA.
57. The s32AA further evaluation for each key issue considers:
• Whether the amended objectives are the best way to achieve the purpose of the RMA.
• The reasonably practicable options for achieving those objectives.
• The environmental, social, economic and cultural benefits and costs of the amended provisions.
• The efficiency and effectiveness of the provisions for achieving the objectives.
• The risk of acting or not acting where there is uncertain or insufficient information about the provisions.
10 58. The s32AA further evaluation contains a level of detail that corresponds to the scale and significance of the anticipated effects of the changes that have been made. Recommendations on editorial, minor and consequential changes that improve the effectiveness of provisions without changing the policy approach are not re-evaluated.
5.3 Officer Recommendations 59. A full list of submissions and further submissions on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter is contained in Appendix 2 – Recommended Decisions on Submissions to this report. Appendix 1 contains Recommended amendments. Additional information can also be obtained from the Summary of Submissions (by Chapter or by Submitter) and the ePlan.
5.3.1 Key Issue 1: Engage tangata whenua as cultural experts in resource management processes
Overview
Provision(s) Officer Recommendation(s) Part 1 - Tangata Whenua Amend the wording in the Tangata Whenua chapter, ‘Engagement and chapter to reflect the positive impact of iwi and Consultation with Tangata hapū being engaged as cultural experts in Whenua’ section resource management processes and make consequential amendments throughout the PDP to reflect these amendments.
Analysis of Submissions on Key Issue 1
60. As discussed in more detail in the Strategic Direction – Tangata Whenua Matters Section 42A report, during the process to review and prepare the PDP, Council officers were assisted by a working group made up of mandated iwi and hapū representatives, called the Ngā Kaitiaki group. The Ngā Kaitiaki group has been a forum for the Council to understand and address various iwi and hapū concerns at both district-wide and site- specific levels and to create enduring relationships.
61. The key theme from the Ngā Kaitiaki discussions was that the group was frustrated regarding the lack of opportunities in the Operative District Plan to provide opportunities for Tangata Whenua to actively participate in resource management processes.
62. In addition, in the Operative District Plan, most provisions pertaining to Tangata Whenua were bundled into one chapter (Chapter 19). Ngā Kaitiaki advised that they would like to see provisions incorporated throughout the PDP as opposed to isolated in one section, to ensure that a kaupapa Māori framework was embedded through all chapters. Consequently, officers developed directive strategic objectives in relation to Tangata Whenua, contextual and process-related material for the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter (this chapter), provisions for sites and areas of significance to Māori and Māori Purpose zoning, and have worked to incorporate other provisions throughout the PDP.
11 63. There is one submission point and three further submission points addressed under Issue 1.
64. Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust (TKOTAT) (459.11) seeks amendments to the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ section of the Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter, and consequential amendments throughout the Plan to reflect the statutory requirement to engage Tangata Whenua as cultural experts “to inform any development and decision- making processes”.
65. In different forms, similar issues are identified in a large number of iwi and hapū submissions across the whole of the PDP. This relates to the wish of iwi/hapū to be engaged and consulted on resource management functions and related decision-making processes to reflect their spiritual, cultural, and historical relationships with the environment in their rohe. This overall framework for engagement is expressed in several Iwi Environmental Management Plans, which must be taken into account by the Council in their planning and resource management work.
66. Implementation of this requirement to be engaged as cultural experts has, in the past, most commonly occurred through consent processes. Although there is no statutory obligation to consult with iwi/hapū in this process, there is an obligation on applicants to provide full and complete applications and this includes evidence of impacts on cultural values. The amendments sought by TKOTAT largely reflect the implementation and engagement of iwi/hapū which already occurs in practice.
67. A further submission from Ngāti Rahiri (126.6) supports the submission by TKOTAT. Todd Energy’s further submission (199.162) supports it in part, noting that while they recognise the cultural expertise held by Tangata Whenua, “… not every development or decision that occurs under this Plan will affect identified cultural values.” Federated Farmers of NZ (128.246) oppose the submission by TKOTAT because they consider it is more about co-governance opportunities for the Council rather than matters which can be addressed through the PDP.
68. I support the relief sought by TKOTAT, and recommend that the introductory wording for the sub-section entitled “Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua” be amended as noted in the Summary of Recommendations below.
69. I do not recommend that Todd Energy’s further submission be accepted as the point they are making is implicit and does not require further elaboration. I do not recommend that the further submission of Federated Farmers is accepted because it is inconsistent with the amendments recommended above. Further, engaging and consulting with tangata whenua as cultural experts does not necessarily constitute co-governance opportunities per se, but is part of the overall process of resource management engagement.
12 Summary of Recommendations on Key Issue 1
70. In response to submissions on Key Issue 1, I recommend that the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ sub-section of the Tangata Whenua chapter be amended as follows:
• Requiring both parties to act reasonably and make informed decisions, Council also acknowledges engaging and consulting with tangata whenua as cultural experts often leads to a better understanding of the issues and opportunities. In many instances, this shared responsibility will result in improved social, cultural and environmental outcomes, trusting relationships, and positive outcomes of mutual benefit.”
Section 32AA evaluation on Key Issue 1 Recommendations
Effectiveness and efficiency
• The recommended amendments to the text of the Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter recognise the importance of section 6(e) and section 8 of the RMA, which requires the Council to take the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) – partnership, participation and active protection - into account.
• They also align with the requirements of the National Planning Standards for this chapter to include context and process-related provisions that relate to involvement and participation of tangata whenua in RMA processes.
Benefits and costs (environmental, cultural, economic and social)
• It is beneficial to present a partnership approach, which requires that tangata whenua are engaged as cultural experts in resource management matters.
• The changes update the information in this chapter and therefore provide clarity to plan users.
Risk of acting or not acting
• There is no risk in accepting the amendments to this provision as there is sufficient information to act on the submission.
Decision about most appropriate option
• The changes are therefore considered more appropriate in achieving the purpose of the RMA than the notified version of the PDP.
13 5.3.2 Key Issue 2 – Strengthen and clarify wording in relation to resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements
Overview
Provision(s) Officer Recommendation(s) Part 1 - Tangata Amend the Tangata Whenua chapter to strengthen and Whenua chapter – clarify the wording in relation to the resource consent ‘Treaty Settlement notification process for statutory acknowledgements. Interests’ section.
Analysis of Submissions on Key Issue 2
71. This issue was raised by one submission point and two further submissions.
72. The Tangata Whenua chapter includes a sub-section entitled ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’, which includes reference to the procedures used by the Council to take statutory acknowledgement areas into account during a resource consent process. In the PDP the term ‘statutory acknowledgement area’ is defined to mean the “statutory areas subject to statutory acknowledgements pursuant to an Act listed in Schedule 11 to the RMA”. The Acts listed under Schedule 11 refer to Treaty Settlement Acts and clicking on the hyperlinks to these Acts in this section will take the reader directly to the lists of statutory acknowledgement areas for each iwi.
73. Submitter Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust (TKOTAT /459.7) submitted that the Council’s Geographic Information System does not capture all the statutory acknowledgement interests and the wording of the Tangata Whenua chapter should be amended to “correctly reflect the process for notification of resource consent applications to iwi/hapū within, adjacent to, or directly affecting a statutory area” and the engagement of iwi/hapū in that process. The submission also noted that pre-application discussions are beneficial. Ngāti Rahiri (126.17) and Federated Farmers (128.247) support TKOTAT’s submission. Federated Farmers state that the relief sought would help to improve certainty for plan users.
74. I acknowledge that the GIS system in respect of the ePlan does not map the statutory acknowledgement areas but note that the areas are mapped in the Council’s internal system. I refer also to the comment above stating that hyperlinks in the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ section go directly to the lists of statutory acknowledgement areas for each iwi.
75. I agree that the current wording in this section around the process for notification in relation to statutory areas could be strengthened and clarified, so that the process is clear for tangata whenua and applicants alike. I therefore recommend that TKOTAT’s submission (459.7) be accepted in part and that the Treaty Settlement Interests sub-section of the Tangata Whenua chapter be amended. These changes do not entail changes to the notification process per se but set out in a clear way how it is implemented.
14 Summary of Recommendations on Key Issue 2
76. In response to submissions on Key Issue 2, I recommend that the Treaty Settlement Interests sub-section of the Tangata Whenua chapter be amended as follows:
77. Statutory Acknowledgement interests are identified through Treaty Settlement legislation as described in the Statutory Context chapter of this Plan. The Council holds this information on its internal Geographical Information System, which is sourced from data provided by the Crown. Once identified, the relevant hapū/iwi are contacted, and advised of the proposed activity. Their feedback is sought, and where appropriate, engagement is undertaken, then the information is factored into Council decisions around any proposed activity. A large number of statutory acknowledgement areas are natural or historic features such as waterbodies, sites and areas of significance to Māori, or are located in the Coastal Environment Area. The importance of these features to tangata whenua are reflected in the relevant provisions in the Plan, which require the Council to make an assessment, and consider the impact on the statutory acknowledgement area.
78. If undertaking an activity in areas subject to statutory acknowledgements Council encourages and supports engagement with iwi/hapū before lodging a resource consent. Early discussions provide opportunities to identify and discuss possible cultural effects and proposed management measures (i.e mātauranga Māori methods), which can be used to avoid, remedy, or mitigate any adverse effects of the activities on the statutory acknowledgement area.
79. Council must provide summaries of resource consent applications or copies of notices to iwi/hapū for each resource consent application it receives for an activity within, adjacent to, or directly affecting a statutory acknowledgement area. This provides iwi/hapū with the opportunity to directly identify any cultural matters relating to the statutory acknowledgement area. This information is then factored into the Council’s assessment and decisions around the proposed activity.
Section 32AA evaluation on Key Issue 2
Effectiveness and efficiency
• The recommended amendments to the text of the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ sub-section of Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter recognise the importance of sections 5, 6(b), 6(e), 7(a), 7(d), and 8 of the RMA.
• Statutory acknowledgement areas are natural and physical resources that must be sustainably managed, they include areas that are matters of national importance and are therefore of particular regard, and they enable the Council to take into account the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.
15 Benefits and costs (environmental, cultural, economic and social)
• Providing additional text in relation to the resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements provides additional clarity for the Plan user, including tangata whenua and resource consent applicants.
Risk of acting or not acting
• There is no risk in accepting the amendments to this provision as there is sufficient information to act on the submission.
Decision about most appropriate option
• The changes are therefore considered more appropriate in achieving the purpose of the RMA than the notified version of the PDP.
5.3.3 Key Issue 3: Spelling and information relating to iwi and hapū
Overview
Provision(s) Officer Recommendation(s) Part 1 - Tangata Whenua Amend the Tangata Whenua chapter to correct chapter: ‘Recognition of Iwi spelling of an iwi name and other information and Hapū', ‘Treaty Settlement relating to iwi and hapū and make Interests’, ‘Engagement and consequential amendments in respect of the Consultation with Tangata iwi name spelling throughout the District Plan. Whenua’ and other sections as appropriate.
Analysis of Submissions on Key Issue 3
80. Key Issue 3 is raised in six submission points and two further submissions.
81. Three submission points were received from Submitter 512 (Mana Whenua Te Atiawa Iwi, Puketapu Hapū, - Grant Knuckey) opposing the Tangata Whenua chapter because it lacks certain information. Mr Knuckey submitted that the chapter lacks a narrative description of the historic iwi and hapū and their current population; the roll of registered voters in each iwi or hapū district; reference to Ngāti Tama and their people; information in respect of the appointment and authority of iwi authorities; and evidence of mandated meetings or elections held to appoint representatives.
82. I do not accept the submission point that the Ngāti Tama iwi is excluded. They are named in the list of iwi and are referred to above the list of hapū groupings. However, for the sake of clarity and completeness I recommend that introductory text prior to the table of hapū groupings be amended as follows: “With the exception of Ngāti Tama, the other iwi, Tthrough their respective iwi authorities, iwi recognise the following hapū groupings:” I also recommend that the Ngāti Tama iwi name is included in the table of hapū groupings, along with the words “No recognised hapū groupings.”
16 83. I acknowledge that the chapter lacks a narrative description of the historic iwi and hapū and their current population. However, during Ngā Kaitiaki discussions tangata whenua stated that they are responsible for sharing their histories and stories with others. In addition, I note that historic narrative is contained in the Historic Accounts contained in the Deeds of Settlement. Population statistics are available elsewhere in the public domain, including in the Council’s latest Long Term Plan, in statistical information held by Statistics New Zealand (https://www.stats.govt.nz) and Te Kahui Mangai (http://www.tkm.govt.nz/). Consequently it was not considered necessary or appropriate to include this kind of narrative in the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter and I do not recommend any changes in this regard.
84. I also do not recommend that Mr Knuckey’s submissions to include information in relation to the roll of registered voters in each iwi or hapū district, the appointment and authority of iwi authorities; or evidence of mandated meetings or elections held to appoint representatives be accepted. Information of this kind is not listed in the National Planning Standards directions for matters to be considered for this chapter and therefore I do not consider them appropriate. Accordingly I do not recommend any changes. I note that no further submissions were received in support of Mr Knuckey’s submissions.
85. TKOTAT (459.6) and Ngāti Rahiri (503.3) sought the correction of the spelling of the iwi name from ‘Te Āti Awa’ to ‘Te Atiawa’ and consistency of spelling of the iwi name in this chapter and throughout the PDP. Further submission 126.16 from Ngāti Rahiri supports the TKOTAT submission.
86. I acknowledge that the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter includes two different spellings of the iwi name and this is inconsistent and provides uncertainty for Plan users. I am guided by iwi and hapū in the required spelling of the iwi name, and support the submissions of TKOTAT and Ngāti Rahiri in this regard. I recommend that the spelling be amended to ‘Te Atiawa’ in this chapter and elsewhere throughout the PDP.
87. Both TKOTAT (459.20) and Ngāti Rahiri (503.3) sought the correction of the table detailing the names of the Te Atiawa hapū and the insertion of their hapū name into the table. The submission by TKOTAT is supported by a further submission of Ngāti Rahiri (126.8).
88. I agree with these submissions and acknowledge that the hapū name was missing in error. I also recommend that the Ngāti Rahiri name and activities be added to the tables of hapū groupings and activities in the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ table, as submitted.
89. In addition, having reviewed the ‘Recognition of Iwi and Hapū’ table in the sub-section at the beginning of the chapter, and compared it with the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ table, I note that the Ngāti Tuparikino and Pukerangiora hapū have inadvertently been omitted from the table along with Ngāti Rahiri.
17 90. I therefore recommend that the Ngāti Tuparikino and Pukerangiora hapū names and activities be added as minor corrections and consequential amendments to the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ table, as their names were inadvertently omitted.
91. I note that Ngāti Maru settled their historic Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown in 2021 and this should become settlement #5 in the list provided in the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ section. In addition, consequential amendments must be made, further on in the section, to remove their name in respect of claims not yet settled and amend the wording to state that, once Ngāti Maniapoto have settled, all iwi in Taranaki will have settled.
92. In addition, Te Atiawa and Ngāti Mutunga have formally lodged their Iwi Environmental Management Plans with Council since notification, and I have amended the information in the table in the ‘Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents’ section accordingly. This minor and consequential amendment aligns with two submissions (459.27 and 503.2) received in relation to Part 1 – How the Plan Works / Statutory Context section of the PDP, seeking to integrate updated information on the status of Iwi Environmental Management Plans throughout the PDP.
Summary of Recommendations on Key Issue 3
93. In response to submissions on Key Issue 3, I recommend that the ‘Recognition of Iwi and Hapū', ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’, ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ sub-sections of the Tangata Whenua chapter be amended as follows and as shown in Appendix 1:
• Recognition of Iwi and Hapū
With the exception of Ngāti Tama, the other iwi, tThrough their respective iwi authorities, iwi recognise the following hapū groupings:
Ngāti Tama Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Tama No recognised hapū groupings
Te Āti Awa Te Atiawa
Te AtiawaĀtiawa Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Ngāti Rahiri
18 • Treaty Settlement Interests
Five our Iwi have settled their historic Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown, with certain provisions of their respective Deeds of Settlement enacted by legislation:
1. Ngati Tama Claims Settlement Act 2003 2. Ngāti Mutunga Claims Settlement Act 2006 3. Te Atiawa Claims Settlement Act 20126 4. Taranaki Iwi Claims Settlement Act 2016 5. Ngāti Maru Claims Settlement Act 2021
When the Ngāti Maru claim is completed, all eight iwi in Taranaki will have settled their respective historic claims with the Crown.
Ngāti Maru and Ngāti Maniapoto (Tainui) are is progressing towards a final settlements in relation to their respective historic Treaty of Waitangi claims against the Crown. When the Ngāti Maniapoto claim is settled, the extent of their Treaty interests into the north-western extent of the New Plymouth District boundary will be confirmed, and all eight iwi in Taranaki will have settled their respective historic claims with the Crown.
• Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents
Iwi Documents Date Type Status Te Atiawa Āti Tai Whenua, 2020 Iwi Environmental Lodged with Awa Tai Tangata, Management Plan Council in Tai Ao 2020. Draft received
Ngāti Mutunga Ngāti Mutunga 20162 Iwi Environmental Not lLodged Environmental 1 Management Plan with Council Management in 2021. Plan Under revision.
• Engagement and Consultation with tangata whenua
Iwi Hapū Activities Te Atiawa Āti Ngāti • Resource management consents Awa Tuparikino • Infrastructure projects • Wāhi Taonga and Archaeological Sites review Pukerangiora • Resource management consents • Infrastructure projects • Wāhi Taonga and Archaeological Sites review
19 Section 32AA evaluation Key Issue 3
Effectiveness and efficiency
• The recommended amendments to the text of Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter recognise the importance of section 6(e) and 8 of the RMA, and corrects spelling and other omissions of information, such as settlements. This improves certainty for all plan users.
Benefits and costs (environmental, cultural, economic and social)
• Given the length of time since notification of the PDP, the changes update the information in this chapter to accord with changes that have occurred and therefore provides clarity to plan users.
Risk of acting or not acting
• There is no risk in accepting the amendments to this provision as there is sufficient information to act on the submission.
Decision about most appropriate option
• They are therefore considered more appropriate in achieving the purpose of the RMA than the notified version of the PDP.
5.3.4 Key Issue 4: Information relating to other Treaty and Council arrangements with tangata whenua
Overview
Provision(s) Officer Recommendation(s) Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter – Amend the Tangata Whenua chapter to ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ ‘Hapū correct the information relating to other and Iwi Planning Documents’ and Treaty and Council arrangements with ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua Tangata Whenua’ sections.
Analysis of Submissions on Key Issue 4
94. Key Issue 4 is raised in three submission points and two further submission points.
95. Two submissions by Te Kotahitanga o Te Atiawa Trust (TKOTAT) sought amendments to certain information included in the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter in the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ and ‘Council and Tangata Whenua Relationships’ sections.
96. First, TKOTAT (459.8) submitted that the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ section should include wording to reflect the current negotiations for a cultural redress arrangement over Taranaki Mounga between the Crown and Ngā Iwi o Taranaki, and that consequential amendments be made accordingly throughout the PDP.
20 97. The agreement being negotiated in respect of Taranaki Mounga will have the same status as the Treaty settlements completed for the iwi of the district and region, and the arrangements agreed to must be taken into account by Council in the same way.
98. For that reason, I accept this submission and recommend that the following wording is included at the end of the section: “In addition to the above Treaty settlements, Ngā Iwi o Taranaki are progressing towards cultural redress arrangements with the Crown in respect of Taranaki Mounga.”
99. TKOTAT (459.9) also supports in part the reference to Mana Whakahono ā Rohe or Iwi Participation Arrangement which is contained in the sub- section entitled ‘Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents’, but submitted that the wording be amended to reflect the fact that each iwi will have their own Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreement with each territorial authority, including NPDC.
100. A recent (2017) amendment to the Act gave iwi authorities the option to invite a regional or district council to form Mana Whakahono ā Rohe or Iwi Participation arrangements. A Mana Whakahono ā Rohe provides a mechanism for councils and iwi to agree on the ways tangata whenua can participate in RMA decision-making and assist councils with their statutory obligations to tangata whenua under the RMA. It is intended that these arrangements specify what timely, effective and meaningful engagement in the resource management process, including in the development of plans and policies, looks like, and are a formal method to achieve the engagement framework set out under Key Issue 1 above.
101. Initially Taranaki Regional Council proposed a region-wide approach, however, iwi have not agreed to a pan-iwi agreement. The four local territorial authorities in the Taranaki region are now working with iwi authorities on a draft agreement that can be adjusted to provide separate arrangements between each iwi and the Council, noting that implementation of the engagement objective will be different for different iwi.
102. I therefore agree with the submission by TKOTAT that the current wording is not reflective of the discussions taking place in respect of Mana Whakahono ā Rohe between local authorities and Ngā Iwi o Taranaki. I therefore recommend that the wording in the penultimate paragraph of the ‘Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents’ section is amended as follows: “… Ngāruahine and Ngā Rauru towards on a common Mana Whakahono ā Rohe arrangements.” I also recommend further consequential amendments be made to clarify the type of matters that may be addressed in these arrangements. This could be achieved by adding the following sentence: “The Mana Whakahono ā Rohe arrangements may address matters in relation to affected party status, involvement in plan and policy making, monitoring and enforcement, and process and system change.
103. Both submissions made by TKOTAT (459.8 and 459.9) are supported by Ngāti Rahiri through further submissions 126.18 and 126.19.
21 104. Ngāti Rahiri (503.3) submitted that the summary in relation to the Wāhi Taonga and Archaeological Sites Review, at the end of the ‘Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ section, is incorrect and should be amended. They stated that the position of their sites were not inaccurate due to transfer from imperial to metric measurements but that the Council had not used information supplied by the hapū.
105. I note that the Wāhi Taonga sites of Ngāti Rahiri were considered, and many approved, in an independent hearing (Plan Change hearing 40). The approved sites were included in the Operative District Plan and are now included in the PDP.
106. I acknowledge the point made by Ngāti Rahiri but note that some of their sites, as for all Wāhi Taonga sites, will initially have been incorrect due to differences in measurement methods used over time. I therefore accept their submission point in part and recommend that amendments be made to the first sentence of the section on the ‘Wāhi Taonga and Archaeological Sites Review’ to allow for other causes of inaccuracy in respect of these sites, as follows: “After the release of the previous New Plymouth District Plan in 2005, Council became aware that the locations of some listed wāhi tapu were inaccurate due in part to the transfer from imperial to metric measurements …”.
Summary of Recommendations on Key Issue 4
107. In response to submissions on Key Issue 4, I recommend that the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’ and ‘Council and Tangata Whenua Relationships’ and ‘Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents’ sub-sections of the Tangata Whenua chapter be amended as follows:
• Treaty Settlement Interests
In addition to the above Treaty settlements, Ngā Iwi o Taranaki are progressing towards cultural redress arrangements with the Crown in respect of Taranaki Mounga.
• Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents
The Council, with the Stratford District Council, South Taranaki District Council, and Taranaki Regional Council are working with Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Mutunga, Te Atiawa Āti Awa, Taranaki Iwi, Ngāruahine and Ngā Rauru towards on a common Mana Whakahono ā Rohe arrangements. The Mana Whakahono ā Rohe arrangements may address matters in relation to affected party status, involvement in plan and policy making, monitoring and enforcement, and process and system change.
• Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua
“After the release of the previous New Plymouth District Plan in 2005, Council became aware that the locations of some listed wāhi tapu were inaccurate due in part to the transfer from imperial to metric measurements …”
22 Section 32AA evaluation on Key Issue 4
Effectiveness and efficiency
• The recommended amendments to the text of the ‘Treaty Settlement Interests’, ‘Hapū and Iwi Planning Documents’ and Engagement and Consultation with Tangata Whenua’ sections in the Part 1 - Tangata Whenua chapter recognise the importance of sections 6(e) and (f), 7(a) and 8, and section 58 of the RMA (in respect of Mana Whakahono ā Rohe).
• The amendments support the social and cultural benefits of greater engagement of iwi and hapū in relation to activities taking place within their respective rohe.
Benefits and costs (environmental, cultural, economic and social)
• The changes provide more information or correct the notified information in the chapter and consequently provide additional clarification to assist with the understanding of the provisions in this chapter and in other parts of the PDP.
Risk of acting or not acting
• There is no risk in accepting the amendments to this provision as there is sufficient information to act on the submission.
Decision about most appropriate option
• The changes are therefore considered more appropriate in achieving the purpose of the RMA than the notified version of the PDP.
6 Conclusion 108. This report has provided an assessment of submissions received in relation to Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter. The primary amendments that I have recommended relate to:
• Inclusion of wording to reflect Tangata Whenua engagement as cultural experts in resource management processes.
• Amendments to strengthen and clarify wording in relation to resource consent notification process for statutory acknowledgements.
• Correction of spelling and information in relation to Iwi and Hapū and other Treaty and Council arrangements with Tangata Whenua.
109. Section 5.3 considers and provides recommendations on the decisions requested in submissions. I consider that the submissions on the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter should be accepted, accepted in part, rejected or rejected in part, as set out in my recommendations for this report.
110. I recommend that the Part 1 – Tangata Whenua chapter be amended as set out in Appendix 2 - Officer Recommendations below, for the reasons set out in this report.
23 111. I consider that the amended provisions will be efficient and effective in achieving the purpose of the RMA (especially for changes to objectives), the relevant objectives of this plan and other relevant statutory documents, for the reasons set out in the Section 32AA evaluations undertaken.
24