DOCSLIB.ORG

Attachment 3: Explanation to Go with Hard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Appendix N: Kaitiaki Plan The Kaitiaki Plan with Ngati Te Ata dated 1 March 2011 is appended to this Agreement in accordance with Designation condition 123. Its attachment to this Agreement does not impose contractual obligations on either party and is not intended to alter either party’s rights or obligations under this Agreement. DOC REF 14063992_8 Kaitiaki Plan 16 Kaitiaki Plan Whatungarongaro te tangata, toitu te whenua People come and go, the land remains For the Purpose of the PPP Prison Project at Wiri Ngāti Te Ata 1 March 2011 1 Contents 1. Purpose of the Kaitiaki Plan .............................................................................................................. 4 1.1 Mana whenua and the Wiri site .............................................................................................. 4 1.2 Why a Kaitiaki Plan? ............................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Relationship between this Kaitiaki Plan and the Land Designation (RMA) process ................... 5 2. What's important to us ..................................................................................................................... 6 2.1 Meaningful relationships ......................................................................................................... 6 2.2 Kaitiakitanga outcomes ........................................................................................................... 6 3. Protocols and assumptions guiding engagement .............................................................................. 7 3.1 Guiding principles.................................................................................................................... 7 3.2 Assumptions ........................................................................................................................... 7 3.3 Mana whenua engagement in the process .............................................................................. 7 4. Whakapapa – genealogy and association to the land ....................................................................... 9 4.1 Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai’s common ties to Matukutureia ..................................................... 9 4.2 Pepeha .................................................................................................................................. 10 4.3 Te Kaitiakitanga o Matukutureia ............................................................................................ 10 5. Te Ao Māori (Māori worldview) ...................................................................................................... 11 5.1 Mana whenua ....................................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Kaitiakitanga ......................................................................................................................... 11 5.3 The evolution of kaitiakitanga ............................................................................................... 11 6. Relationship expectations ............................................................................................................... 12 6.1 Ngāti Te Ata / Te Ākitai and the Department ......................................................................... 12 6.2 Ngāti Te Ata / Te Ākitai and the Contracted Firm ................................................................... 12 6.3 The Contracted Firm and sub-contractors.............................................................................. 12 2 7. Expressing kaitiakitanga at Wiri ...................................................................................................... 13 7.1 Our approach to kaitiakitanga suggestions ............................................................................ 13 7.2 Ideas are the starting points for future discussions ................................................................ 13 7.3 Incorporating tikanga ............................................................................................................. 13 7.4 Rehabilitation and reintegration for prisoners ....................................................................... 15 7.5 Contribution to community capacity building and partnerships ............................................. 16 8. Glossary of Māori terms used ......................................................................................................... 18 APPENDIX ONE – Recognition of mana whenua................................................................................... 19 APPENDIX TWO – Mandate from Ngāti Te Ata..................................................................................... 20 3 1. Purpose of the Kaitiaki Plan 1.1 Mana whenua and the Wiri site Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai are the recognised mana whenua iwi of the Wiri prison site1 and surrounding land including Matukutureia, the maunga (mountain) directly adjacent to the site. As we understand it during the procurement process for the Public Private Partnership (PPP) of the men’s prison at Wiri (PPP Prison Project), there is an expectation that the Department of Corrections (the Department) and the firms bidding for the prison contract (Bidders) will engage with us as mana whenua iwi in order to establish the nature of relationships if the proposed prison goes ahead. The recognition of our mana whenua status acknowledges the special ancestral, cultural and spiritual association that we have to the Wiri site and the surrounding land. Our relationships with the Department and Bidders should observe our role as mana whenua or 'Kaitiaki', guardians over the land. The Kaitiaki role carries certain obligations regarding kaitiakitanga and manaakitanga – guardianship and protection of the land and certain hosting and welfare responsibilities for the people that occupy the land (our manuwhiri or visitors). From Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai’s perspective, an ongoing relationship with both the Department and the firm contracted to design, build and operate the prison (Contracted Firm), will go some way towards upholding the Crown’s responsibility to Māori under the Treaty of Waitangi. Of course, the nature of these relationships, and therefore how well the Crown is discharging its Treaty of Waitangi obligations with regards to the activity at Wiri, is yet to be determined. 1.2 Why a Kaitiaki Plan? This Kaitiaki Plan is a result of the joint efforts of individuals affiliated to both Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai. We have drafted this Kaitiaki Plan to ensure that our views as mana whenua iwi are clearly expressed and well understood by the Department and the Bidders with regard to the PPP Prison Project. We believe that this Kaitiaki Plan should be used as a starting point to inform further discussions on the nature of any relationships established going forward. This is important given that there is a Request for Proposal (RFP) requiring the Contracted Firm to establish and maintain a relationship with us. At a practical level the Kaitiaki Plan can: 1. Be used by Bidders to inform further discussions with us on the nature of any relationship we may have with the Contracted firm and the prison; 2. Enable Bidders to build kaitiakitanga suggestions included in the plan into their proposals where appropriate; 3. Allow visibility around what is important to us as the mana whenua iwi participating in New Zealand's first PPP; and 4. Enable the Department to ensure a level playing field for the Bidders by distributing this plan to all Bidders. 1 See Appendix One for reasons for recognising Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai as mana whenua for the purpose of the PPP Prison Project. 4 1.3 Relationship between this Kaitiaki Plan and the Land Designation (RMA) process The proposed prison site is located on land that is currently designated under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) for the current Auckland Region Women’s Correctional Facility (ARWCF). To enable the proposed men’s prison to be constructed and operated, an amendment to the existing RMA designation is required. This involves a publicly notified process under the RMA, and a hearing will be held in May 2011. As part of that process, consultation on various mana whenua and cultural issues has occurred, resulting in a Cultural Impact Assessment Report being submitted with the Department's RMA application in October 2010. Since that time, evidence has been prepared in January 2011 to provide an update on this process and a further draft cultural impact report has been prepared in consultation with members of Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai. While this Kaitiaki Plan has been informed by that RMA consultation process, and is consistent with it, the predominant focus of this plan is to address the perpetual Kaitiaki practices at the site, and the relationships arising with the Contracted Firm. 5 2. What's important to us “The prison should be an asset to the community”. 2.1 Meaningful relationships The Department has specified in the RFP that the Contracted Firm must have a meaningful relationship with mana whenua iwi. In our view any relationship established requires discussion and understanding about what is important to both parties. We set out below what is important to us in having a relationship with the Contracted Firm: 1. The Contracted Firm ought to acknowledge Ngāti Te Ata and Te Ākitai as the iwi who have mana whenua status of the Wiri site for the purpose of the prison development and operation; and 2. Any relationship
Recommended publications
  • Treaty Rights in the Waitangi Tribunal

    Treaty Rights in the Waitangi Tribunal

    © New Zealand Centre for Public Law and contributors Faculty of Law Victoria University of Wellington PO Box 600 Wellington New Zealand December 2010 The mode of citation of this journal is: (2010) 8 NZJPIL (page) The previous issue of this journal is volume 8 number 1, June 2010 ISSN 1176-3930 Printed by Geon, Brebner Print, Palmerston North Cover photo: Robert Cross, VUW ITS Image Services CONTENTS Judicial Review of the Executive – Principled Exasperation David Mullan .......................................................................................................................... 145 Uncharted Waters: Has the Cook Islands Become Eligible for Membership in the United Nations? Stephen Smith .......................................................................................................................... 169 Legal Recognition of Rights Derived from the Treaty of Waitangi Edward Willis.......................................................................................................................... 217 The Citizen and Administrative Justice: Reforming Complaint Management in New Zealand Mihiata Pirini.......................................................................................................................... 239 Locke's Democracy v Hobbes' Leviathan: Reflecting on New Zealand Constitutional Debate from an American Perspective Kerry Hunter ........................................................................................................................... 267 The Demise of Ultra Vires in New Zealand:
  • NZCA 680 BETWEEN NGĀTI TE ATA Appellant

    NZCA 680 BETWEEN NGĀTI TE ATA Appellant

    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF NEW ZEALAND I TE KŌTI PĪRA O AOTEAROA CA547/2017 [2019] NZCA 680 BETWEEN NGĀTI TE ATA Appellant AND MINISTER FOR TREATY OF WAITANGI NEGOTIATIONS First Respondent HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Second Respondent NGĀTI TAMAOHO SETTLEMENT TRUST Third Respondent REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF LAND Fourth Respondent Hearing: 27 August 2019 (further submissions received 22 October 2019) Court: Clifford, Courtney and Wild JJ Counsel: J P Kahukiwa for Appellant S M Kinsler and T R Simpson for First and Second Respondents T T Kapea for Third Respondent No appearance for Fourth Respondent Judgment: 19 December 2019 at 4 pm JUDGMENT OF THE COURT A The appeal is dismissed. B The appellant is to pay one set of costs to the first and second respondents for a standard appeal on a band A basis and usual disbursements. ____________________________________________________________________ NGĀTI TE ATA v MINISTER FOR TREATY OF WAITANGI NEGOTIATIONS [2019] NZCA 680 [19 December 2019] REASONS OF THE COURT (Given by Clifford J) Introduction [1] For some years now, the Crown has been in the process of endeavouring to settle the historical Treaty claims of the iwi of Tāmaki Makaurau. That process has been controversial. In particular, a 2006 agreement in principle between the Crown and Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei was seen by other iwi as inimical to their interests and contrary to the Crown’s Treaty obligations to them. As part of resolving that controversy the Crown entered into a settlement deed with the group of iwi known as the Ngā Mana Whenua o Tāmaki Makaurau collective (the Collective).
  • Submission on Water Issues in Aotearoa New Zealand

    Submission on Water Issues in Aotearoa New Zealand

    Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights United Nations Office CH 1211 Geneva 10 Switzerland Submission on Water Issues in Aotearoa New Zealand By Dr Maria Bargh 1 This submission is provided in two Parts: Part One: Overview of the significance of water to Māori and current national legislation relating to water. Part Two: Overview of the potential impacts of the New Zealand government’s proposals on Māori, including with regard to private sector provisions of related services. Introduction In 2003 the New Zealand government established a Sustainable Water Programme of Action to consider how to maintain the quality of New Zealand’s water and its sustainable use. One of the models being proposed for the more efficient management of water is the market mechanism. Dominant theories internationally put forward the market as the best mechanism by which to manage resources efficiently. Given that all life on the planet needs water for survival its appropriate management, use and sustainability is of vital concern. However many communities, including Indigenous peoples, have widely critiqued the market, and the neoliberal policies which promote it, highlighting the responsiveness of the market to money rather than need. In the case of Aotearoa, moves to further utilise the market mechanism in the governance of water raises questions, not simply around the efficiency of the market in this role but also around the Crown i approach which is one of dividing the issues of marketisation, ownership and sustainability in the same manner in which they assume the river/lake beds, banks and water can be divided.
  • Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki Catchment

    Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki Catchment

    Te Manaaki Taiao; Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki Catchment Final Report May 2012 Prepared for the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council 5/16/2012 Cultural Values and Uses of the Tukituki River Catchment by Heretaunga Marae/Hapu; Cultural Impact Assessment of the Ruataniwha Water Storage and Makaroro Dam Site Projects on Heretaunga Marae/Hapu Cultural Values and Uses. INDEX MIHI 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................... Page 3 2 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................... Page 5 2.1 LOWER TUKITUKI RIVER: HERETAUNGA MARAE/ HAPŪ What, Why, Who, When 3 METHODOLOGY .................................................................... Page 6 3.1 CONSULTATION GUIDELINES Consultation Parameters Participants Report Constraints Report Scope Report Timeframe Results Format Context 4 RESULTS .................................................................................... Page 9 4.1 HERETAUNGA ARARAU ......................................................... Page 9 4.1.1 WHAKAPAPA 4.1.2 MARAE/ HAPŪ FEEDBACK – WHAKAPAPA 4.2 HERETAUNGA HAUKUNUI ..................................................... Page16 4.2.1 WAI-AWA 4.2.2 MARAE/ HAPŪ FEEDBACK - WAI-AWA 4.2.3 MAURI ............................................................................ Page 21 4.2.4 MARAE/ HAPŪ FEEDBACK – MAURI 4.2.5 WĀHI TAPU ............................................................................ Page 25 4.2.6 MARAE/ HAPŪ FEEDBACK - WĀHI TAPU 4.3 TE HAARO O TE KAAHU ...................................................................
  • Rekohu Report (2016 Newc).Vp

    Rekohu Report (2016 Newc).Vp

    Rekohu REKOHU AReporton MorioriandNgatiMutungaClaims in the Chatham Islands Wa i 6 4 WaitangiTribunalReport2001 The cover design by Cliff Whiting invokes the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi and the consequent interwoven development of Maori and Pakeha history in New Zealand as it continuously unfoldsinapatternnotyetcompletelyknown AWaitangiTribunalreport isbn 978-1-86956-260-1 © Waitangi Tribunal 2001 Reprinted with corrections 2016 www.waitangi-tribunal.govt.nz Produced by the Waitangi Tribunal Published by Legislation Direct, Wellington, New Zealand Printed by Printlink, Lower Hutt, New Zealand Set in Adobe Minion and Cronos multiple master typefaces e nga mana,e nga reo,e nga karangaranga maha tae noa ki nga Minita o te Karauna. ko tenei te honore,hei tuku atu nga moemoea o ratou i kawea te kaupapa nei. huri noa ki a ratou kua wheturangitia ratou te hunga tautoko i kokiri,i mau ki te kaupapa,mai te timatanga,tae noa ki te puawaitanga o tenei ripoata. ahakoa kaore ano ki a kite ka tangi,ka mihi,ka poroporoakitia ki a ratou. ki era o nga totara o Te-Wao-nui-a-Tane,ki a Te Makarini,ki a Horomona ma ki a koutou kua huri ki tua o te arai haere,haere,haere haere i runga i te aroha,me nga roimata o matou kua mahue nei. e kore koutou e warewaretia. ma te Atua koutou e manaaki,e tiaki ka huri Contents Letter of Transmittal _____________________________________________________xiii 1. Summary 1.1 Background ________________________________________________________1 1.2 Historical Claims ____________________________________________________4 1.3 Contemporary Claims ________________________________________________9 1.4 Preliminary Claims __________________________________________________11 1.5 Rekohu, the Chatham Islands, or Wharekauri? _____________________________12 1.6 Concluding Remarks ________________________________________________13 2.
  • The Waikato-Tainui Settlement Act: a New High-Water Mark for Natural Resources Co-Management

    The Waikato-Tainui Settlement Act: a New High-Water Mark for Natural Resources Co-Management

    Notes & Comments The Waikato-Tainui Settlement Act: A New High-Water Mark for Natural Resources Co-management Jeremy Baker “[I]f we care for the River, the River will continue to sustain the people.” —The Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Act 2010 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 165 II. THE EMERGENCE OF ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT ......................... 166 A. Co-management .................................................................... 166 B. Adaptive Management .......................................................... 168 C. Fusion: Adaptive Co-management ....................................... 169 D. Some Criticisms and Challenges Associated with Adaptive Co-management .................................................... 170 III. NEW ZEALAND’S WAIKATO-TAINUI SETTLEMENT ACT 2010—HISTORY AND BACKGROUND ...................................... 174 A. Maori Worldview and Environmental Ethics ....................... 175 B. British Colonization of Aotearoa New Zealand and Maori Interests in Natural Resources ............................ 176 C. The Waikato River and Its People ........................................ 182 D. The Waikato River Settlement Act 2010 .............................. 185 Jeremy Baker is a 2013 J.D. candidate at the University of Colorado Law School. 164 Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y [Vol. 24:1 IV. THE WAIKATO-TAINUI SETTLEMENT ACT AS ADAPTIVE CO-MANAGEMENT ..........................................................................
  • Download Supplementary

    Download Supplementary

    1 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS FOR: 2 3 CASCADING IMPACTS OF ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGE ON 4 INDIGENOUS CULTURE 5 6 Yletyinen, J., Tylianakis, J.M., Stone, C., Lyver, P.O.B. 7 8 9 10 SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIALS TABLE OF CONTENTS: 11 12 Table S1: Description of values 13 Table S2: Most frequent values and ecosystem elements in the interview coding 14 Table S3: Node degrees in the comprehensive social-ecological value system 15 Table S4: Sensitivity of values and biophysical elements to link weight thresholds 16 17 Figure S1: Ego networks for ecosystem elements with path length two 18 Figure S2: Mean path length distribution of 1000 randomized two-mode networks 19 20 1 21 Table S1. Value descriptions. Key primary and secondary values with descriptions applied to transcripts of interviews with Ngātiwai kaumātua 22 (elders), kaitiaki (environmental guardians) and representatives, Northland, New Zealand. This study examines the secondary values, which have 23 a finer resolution. Primary value set revised from 1 and 2. 24 1° values Abbreviations 2° Values Value descriptions for 2° Values 1. Connection PTA PEOPLE TO ANCESTORS • Whakapapa (genealogy) integral to relationship with ancestors and identity • Whakapapa connects individuals with their ancestors and defines their obligations and relationships to the wider family group and their localized species and environment • Waahi tapu (sacred) sites such as burial grounds known and protected by Ngātiwai • Occupation on the land and sea links the individual with ancestors PTP PEOPLE TO PEOPLE • Whakapapa and strengthening of relationships between whānau (family) and whānaunga (extended family) • Relationships and connections between whānau, hapū (sub- tribe) and Iwi (tribe) • Building community spirit and sense of togetherness • Islands facilitate the whānaungatanga (inter-relatedness) of whānau and community • Open and respectful communications • Ngātiwai networking with other Iwi • Ngātiwai networking with the Crown (NZ government) • Ngātiwai networking with non-government organisations (e.g.
  • The Waitangi Tribunal's WAI 2575 Report

    The Waitangi Tribunal's WAI 2575 Report

    HHr Health and Human Rights Journal The Waitangi Tribunal’s WAI 2575 Report: ImplicationsHHR_final_logo_alone.indd 1 10/19/15 10:53 AM for Decolonizing Health Systems heather came, dominic o’sullivan, jacquie kidd, and timothy mccreanor Abstract Te Tiriti o Waitangi, a treaty negotiated between Māori (the Indigenous peoples of Aotearoa) and the British Crown, affirmed Māori sovereignty and guaranteed the protection of hauora (health). The Waitangi Tribunal, established in 1975 to investigate alleged breaches of the agreement, released a major report in 2019 (registered as WAI 2575) about breaches of te Tiriti within the health sector in relation to primary care, legislation, and health policy. This article explores the implications of this report for the New Zealand health sector and the decolonial transformation of health systems. The tribunal found that the Crown has systematically contravened obligations under te Tiriti across the health sector. We complement the tribunal’s findings, through critical analysis, to make five substantive recommendations: (1) the adoption of Tiriti-compliant legislation and policy; (2) recognition of extant Māori political authority (tino rangatiratanga); (3) strengthening of accountability mechanisms; (4) investment in Māori health; and (5) embedding equity and anti-racism within the health sector. These recommendations are critical for upholding te Tiriti obligations. We see these requirements as making significant contributions to decolonizing health systems and policy in Aotearoa and thereby contributing to aspirations for health equity as a transformative concept. Heather Came is Senior Lecturer at the Faculty of Health and Environment Sciences, Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand. Dominic O’Sullivan is Associate Professor at the School of Humanities and Social Sciences, Charles Sturt University, Canberra, Australia.
  • Appendix 13 Shelly Bay Cultural Impact Statement

    Appendix 13 Shelly Bay Cultural Impact Statement

    CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT WHĀTAITAI, MARUKAIKURU, SHELLY BAY Taikuru Prepared by Kura Moeahu, Peter Adds and Lee Rauhina-August on behalf of Taranaki Whānui Ki Te Upoko o Te Ika and The Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust, September 2016 STATUS: FINAL 1 Executive Summary This is a Cultural Impact Assessment Report for Shelly Bay/Marukaikuru commissioned by the Wellington Company Limited. It assesses the Māori cultural values of Marukaikuru Bay from the perspective of the tangata whenua, namely the iwi of Taranaki Whānui represented by the PNBST. The main findings of this cultural impact assessment are: • Marukaikuru Bay has high cultural significance to the iwi of Taranaki whanui • Taranaki Whānui people actually lived in the Bay until 1835 • We have found no evidence of other iwi connections to Marukaikuru Bay • Taranaki Whānui mana whenua status in relation to Marukaikuru and the Wellington Harbour is strongly supported in the literature, including the Waitangi Tribunal report (2003) • The purchase of Shelly Bay by PNBST from the Crown was a highly significant Treaty settlement transaction specifically for the purpose of future development • Any development of Marukaikuru must adequately take account of and reflect Taranaki Whānui cultural links, history and tangata whenua status in Wellington. • Taranaki Whānui have kaitiakitanga (guardianship) responsibilities to ensure the protection of the natural, historical and cultural dimensions of Marukaikuru. • The resource consent application submitted by the Wellington Company Limited is supported by the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust. 2 WHĀTAITAI, MARUKAIKURU, SHELLY BAY Taikuru Kapakapa kau ana te manu muramura ki te tai whakarunga Māwewe tonu ana te motu whāriki o te tai whakararo Makuru tini e hua ki whakatupua-nuku Matuatua rahi e hua ki whakatupua-ruheruhe Pukahu mano e hua ki whakatupua-rangi Inā te tai hekenga ki runga o Tai Kuru e..
  • 'Be(Com)Ing' Ngāti Kahungunu in the Diaspora: Iwi Identity and Social

    'Be(Com)Ing' Ngāti Kahungunu in the Diaspora: Iwi Identity and Social

    ‘Be(com)ing’ Ngāti Kahungunu in the Diaspora: Iwi Identity and Social Organisation in Wellington Christina M. González A thesis submitted in fulfilment of a Master of Arts (MA) in Māori Studies Victoria University of Wellington Te Whare Wānanga o te Upoko o te Ika a Māui 2010 Abstract Ngāti Kahungunu is an ideal example to investigate the processes of identity management and socio-political representation within and outside of their traditional tribal territory. It is the third most populous iwi in Aotearoa/New Zealand, with approximately 60,000 members, and boundaries that span from the Wairoa district down to the Wairarapa region. Kahungunu’s complexity and dynamism are not restricted to its territorial boundaries. A large portion of Kahungunu members form expatriate tribal communities located beyond their tribal district. The Wellington region hosts the largest number of Kahungunu members dwelling outside of their tribal territory, as well as the Ngāti Kahungunu Embassy. The Embassy is an organisation which, like many other expatriate Māori tribal bodies, faces the challenges of locating and reaching its tribal members to connect them to their Kahungunu home and heritage, while simultaneously representing their particular, Wellington-specific voices. This thesis explores the ways that Ngāti Kahungunu identities are articulated, maintained and transformed by individuals and institutions in Wellington today, by analysing qualitative interviews with ten Kahungunu men and women, and a case study on the Kahungunu Embassy. Three chapters on iwi identity, home and social organisation illustrate how Kahungunu voices in Wellington can more adequately be heard, and their experiences included, in the tribe, despite their apparent geographic and cultural distance.
  • Bthe Waipukurau Purchase and The

    Bthe Waipukurau Purchase and The

    Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author. I Mārama te Rironga ko a te Kuīni The Waipukurau Purchase and the Subsequent Consequences on Central Hawke’s Bay Māori to 1900. A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in History at Massey University Manawatū, New Zealand Michael Allan Hunter 2019 i Abstract In 1820s and 1830s Māori from Central Hawke’s Bay came into contact with Pākehā for the first time and they began to trade. From this contact they began to see the benefits of Pākehā. So they requested the government to establish a Pākehā settlement and offered land for sale. Land was purchased at Waipukurau on 4 November 1851. Donald McLean made sweeping promises of benefits and riches when the deed was signed however these benefits and riches would never come to the Māori of Central Hawke’s Bay. The Waipukurau purchase opened the door for more purchases. The Māori of Central Hawke’s Bay began alienating their land. First through direct purchasing with Donald McLean then through the Native Land Court. Māori would soon find themselves in debt which would lead to the Hawke’s Bay Native Lands Alienation Commission 1873. Central Hawke’s Bay Māori emerged as leaders of the Repudiation Movement of the 1870s and then the Kotahitanga Māori Parliament of the 1890s in order to fight for their lost lands.
  • Wai 1679 Closing Submissions As at 16.08.18

    Wai 1679 Closing Submissions As at 16.08.18

    IN THE WAITANGI TRIBUNAL WAI 1040 WAI 1679 IN THE MATTER of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 AND IN THE MATTER of Te Paparahi o Te Raki Inquiry AND IN THE MATTER OF of a claim brought by Wayne Graham Stokes and Maurice Edward Penney for and on behalf of themselves and the people of Te Urikapana and Ngare Hauata hapū, the beneficiaries of the Kiwikiwi Whanau Charitable Trust and Remana and Arihi Kiwikiwi Whanau Trust CLAIMANT CLOSING SUBMISSIONS FOR NGARE HAUATA AND TE URI KAPANA Dated this 16th day of August 2018 ______________________________________________________________________ Counsel Acting: Moana Tuwhare PO Box 177 Kerikeri Northland (09) 407 9534 [email protected] 1.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 4 2.0 The Claimants ..................................................................................................... 5 3.0 Ngare Hauata and Te Urikapana hapū ................................................................ 5 4.0 Duties of the Crown ............................................................................................ 7 5.0 The Claims / Summary of Key Issues .................................................................. 7 6.0 Te Ngare Hauata and Te Urikapana Rohe ........................................................... 9 7.0 The Claimant Evidence ....................................................................................... 9 8.0 Te Paparahi o Te Raki Stage 1 ..........................................................................