Of course we recognise that the starting point must be to seek the views of the who prepared the iwi management plan and has done that, in this regard: 1. has reached out to consult with the relevant iwi identified by Council and MfE. 2. Most have responded and identified Te Kawerau a Maki (“TKM”) as the relevant iwi, others have not responded at all, i.e. the consistent feedback we have received is to engage with TKM. 3. engagement with TKM has been going well and they are supportive of the application.

That would ordinarily be sufficient and considered good practice for a resource consent process. However, it is not necessarily sufficient under the fast track consenting legislation.

Part of the pre-application feedback from MfE, we have been asked to address clause 9(1)(h) of Schedule 6 of the COVID-19 Recovery (Fast-track Consenting) Act 2020 in more detail. In particular assess the project against “a [relevant] planning document recognised by a relevant iwi authority and lodged with a local authority”. I think that can take the view that, this provision does not apply to iwi management plans where the relevant iwi has identified TKM as the lead body. The difficulty however arises in relation to iwi who have not responded at all, despite numerous emails.

Through discussions with council’s regulatory planning staff, has been put through to , Regulatory Services and have asked for copies of the iwi management plans for:

 Ngāti Tamaterā Treaty Settlement Trust;  Te Ākitai Waiohua Iwi Authority;  Te Ara Rangatu o Te Iwi o Ngāti Te Ata Waiohua;  Te Whakakitenga o Incorporated

Now while one iwi management plan seems to be available from the relevant website, for example Te Whakakitenga o Waikato Incorporated has the Waikato- Environmental Plan https://waikatotainui.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Tai-Tumu-Tai-Pari-Tai-Ao-PLAN-ENGLISH.pdf, the others do not. Also, just because the iwi management plan is on an iwi’s website, is not conclusive evidence that it has been “lodged with a local authority”.

from Civix has been in contact with to try and get a copy of these and other iwi management plans. In response received a call where stated that he did not want to reply by email, and that had two options: 1. Seek the IMP’s ourselves from iwi; or 2. Request that the Council provide the IMP’s.

As I understand it, this really amounted to the first option only as went on to reiterate the previous advice that it may not be possible to supply some or all IMP’s. Further, he added that they do not have the proper processes in place to respond to these requests under the C19FTCA for IMP’s to be provided, and that it could take a month or two to identify if the relevant IMP’s exist, including seeking the necessary approvals from the relevant iwi for the release of these. While I appreciate that will be thinking of the need to manage the Council’s relationship with iwi who have shared their iwi management plans, it seems quite strange that important planning documents which are referred to by council when processing resource consent applications as well as local boards are suddenly so hard to find. It also seems inconsistent with the Council’s obligations under s35A of the RMA. Then again, it might be that was inadvertently overstated the difficulty in locating these documents.

We are hoping to speak to the Environmental Protection Agency about this issue tomorrow ( contact point is because it can’t be the intention of the Act that scheduled Fast-Track projects are delayed by the inability to obtain source documents.

2 In the meantime, is there any assistance you can provide or is there anyone else at Auckland Council who we should engage with. Maybe I am looking at this too simplistically, but if a planning document has been officially ‘lodged’ with Auckland Council, it is intended to be used. In this regard, MfE’s 2004 review of the effectiveness of iwi management plans highlighted that they were considered useful in providing key information to councils, consent applicants and consultants to enhance their understanding before they engaged with iwi and hapū. It would seem strange that they could be kept confidential or privileged.

Obviously if such a plan was provided subject to an obligation of confidentiality or privilege then maybe it hasn’t been “lodged” with the Council for the purpose of the RMA or Fast Tracking and it can be disregarded. Even confirmation of that would be helpful. Maybe that is the key to this, i.e. the answer is that Auckland Council does not hold any relevant planning document from the identified iwi as having been officially ‘lodged’ with the Council.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Thanks

Berry Simons Environmental Law Level 1, Old South British Building, 3-13 Shortland Street, Auckland PO Box 3144, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140 T 09 969 2300 F 09 969 2304 W berrysimons.co.nz

This communication is confidential information and may also be legally privileged, intended only for the persons named above. If this communication is not addressed to you, you must not use, read, distribute or copy this document. If you have received this document by mistake, please call us immediately (collect to the person and number above) and destroy this original message. Thank you.

m V

CAUTION: This email message and any attachments contain information that may be confidential and may be LEGALLY PRIVILEGED. If you are not the intended recipient, any use, disclosure or copying of this message or attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email message in error please notify us immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments. We do not accept respons bility for any viruses or similar carried with our email, or any effects our email may have on the recipient computer system or network. Any views expressed in this email may be those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of Council.

3