West Coast Regional Councillor Allan Birchfield has whipped up a fuss in his neck of the woods by challenging the Ngāti Waewae representative Francois Tumahai over the iwi’s role in resource consenting.
The iwi – it seems – must agree to gold-mining consents in gold-mining country, presumably after appropriate consultation or engagement fees have been paid.
Birchfield should try raising the same question about the role of iwi in resource consenting around the country. Have legislators given iwi a gold mine that requires more talking than digging.
The Auckland Council website provides guidance on how to get a resource consent, including advice on “engaging with mana whenua”. These people might not be your neighbours but they are “the indigenous people (Māori) who have historic and territorial rights over the land”.
Resource consent applicants are expected to consult with iwi authorities “when developments affect mana whenua values”.
How do you find out?
Probably by coughing up money to be given advice.
The best way to identify these values and take these into account is through consultation with the relevant iwi authorities.
Mana whenua values may be affected by developments subject to or involving:
landscape overlays
Mana whenua organisations, or their nominee, may charge a fee to:
The Auckland Council website provides guidance on how to get a resource consent, including advice on “engaging with mana whenua”. These people might not be your neighbours but they are “the indigenous people (Māori) who have historic and territorial rights over the land”.
Resource consent applicants are expected to consult with iwi authorities “when developments affect mana whenua values”.
How do you find out?
Probably by coughing up money to be given advice.
The best way to identify these values and take these into account is through consultation with the relevant iwi authorities.
Mana whenua values may be affected by developments subject to or involving:
landscape overlays
- maunga (volcanic) viewshafts
- ancestral land
- significant ecological areas
- coastal marine area
- discharges to, or may enter, the sea, rivers, streams, lakes, wetlands, aquifers and air
- sites and places of significance to mana whenua
- historic heritage overlay sites of Māori interest and significance
- statutory acknowledgements
- Māori land.
Mana whenua organisations, or their nominee, may charge a fee to:
- consider an application
- conduct a site visit
- meet with applicants and their experts
- prepare a cultural values assessment, if one is needed.
Similar advice is provided on the Wellington City Council website.
Here you are told:
When approaching mana whenua to engage over a proposal, you’ll be expected to:
- give them access to all relevant consent information
- be willing to meet face-to-face
- respect their views.
- declare their interests in an application
- make submissions on a notified application and be heard at a hearing.
After considering your proposal, tribal authorities will advise on an appropriate approach – either an “accidental discovery” consent condition, or a cultural impact assessment (CIA).
An accidental discovery protocol ensures that the correct procedures are followed if any artefacts of archaeological significance are uncovered during earthworks
A Cultural Impact Assessment report prepared by the tribal authority (or their nominee documents mana whenua cultural values, interests and associations with an area or natural resource. It may also provide recommendations on how to enhance and improve your proposal, or to avoid any effects your proposal may have on mana whenua cultural values.
A CIA is expert advice on how a proposal might impact on cultural heritage – it’s not approval for your consent. The Council will take the CIA into account when considering your application.
So what are the benefits of getting a CIA – even if you don’t need one?
Engagement will allow you and the Council to be informed about mana whenua views. Engagement doesn’t require agreement, but under the RMA you are obliged to report the outcomes of it.
And yes – tribal authorities or their delegates may request a fee to cover:
- engagement costs
- any marae costs if you meet at a marae.
Down on the West Coast, an historic deal with a strong whiff of co-governance about it is under review by iwi and the West Coast Regional Council.
According to a report from Local Democracy Reporting, something called the Whakahono a Rohe agreement – sealed at Arahura marae in 2020 – was recognised with an excellence award by the NZ Planning Institute as the first of its kind under the Resource Management Act (RMA).
Five years on, the agreement is due for reappraisal – especially with RMA changes on the horizon, the council says.
The protocol document was given a name to provide a challenge in comprehension for most citizens – Paetae Kotahitanga ki Te Tai Poutini.
It was signed by the council’s chair at the time, Allan Birchfield, and by Ngāi Tahu, Ngāti Waewae and Makaawhio rūnanga leaders.
A council staff report says the review will be a ‘light touch’ one because there’s no need for substantive changes (although giving the deal a name which people can understand would be useful).
Cr Birchfield is pushing for change.
At the time of the signing, the former chair – and Greymouth goldminer – praised the rūnanga for having positive attitudes to economic development.
But at Tuesday’s council meeting Birchfield challenged Ngāti Waewae representative Francois Tumahai over the iwi’s role in resource consenting.
Councillors were told they would be able to work through some recommended changes at a workshop later this month.
“Will we still require iwi sign-off on all our consents?” Cr Birchfield asked.
Mr Tumahai responded: “I should hope so.”
That was the intention, council staff confirmed.
“So any resource consent requires an iwi sign-off? That wasn’t really my understanding when I signed that agreement,” Cr Birchfield said.
Tumahai said the rūnanga were required to give feedback on consent conditions.
“The decision is still made by the consents team on council. We don’t make a decision on it,” he said
Cr Birchfield said his understanding was that iwi signoff was about consultation, not a statutory requirement.
Mr Tumahai said it was a statutory requirement.
“But the process is we engage together around the issues and agree on conditions … that’s always been the case. We don’t have the ability to stop it.”
Council chief executive Darryl Lew said that if iwi did not sign off on a resource consent, in some circumstances the matter would proceed to a hearing.
But that was a requirement of the RMA, “it doesn’t come from the Mana Whakahono agreement.”
Birchfield said he wanted consents for West Coast people to be processed and granted in a timely manner at a minimum cost.
He should not be surprised to hear that people around the country want much the same thing.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
11 comments:
Text book case of how CG i- and final consent/control is happening .Be warned.
Obviously any gold would have been around for a very, very long time. The tribe in question needs to prove they settled over this very piece of land continuously, without interruption, otherwise sorry, no claim. In the meantime, speak up, draw peoples attention to these matters and most importantly, advise your MP they won't be an MP next time around if this rort continues.
This kind of maori consultation (for a fee) as part of a consenting process is popping up all over the place. It’s a rort, a govt and local govt sanctioned invitation to corruption It’s a great way for maori to clip the ticket for absolutely nothing productive or useful in return. It just increases the cost of anything anyone wants to do, from a new gold mine, to ongoing access to river water for a power company (regularly reviewed so more $$$’s can be charged), to developing an inland port, right down to a new shed on a semi-rural property near the coast. It’s part of the reason why it’s become more expensive to build things in NZ than in other comparable countries. Will Bishop’s new RMA stop this? Doubt it, but guess we’ll have to wait and see.
Extortion - definition
noun
Illegal use of one's official position or powers to obtain property, funds, or patronage.
The act or an instance of extorting something, as by psychological pressure.
An excessive or exorbitant charge.
NZ definition - all of the above as used by the Maori Mafia with the collusion of woke racist officials.
Surly these criminal acts of blatant corruption and stand over tactics can be contested in our courts. What ever happened to property rights, does mana whenua have customary say over the entire land mass of New Zealand. The power held by these groups is completely out proportion. This isn't working together, its extortion not dissimilar to how the infamous Mafia operates in the Italian underworld.
How can our society see these acts as anything but criminal.
Having extracted all this money from the public under duress and intimidation, where does it go ???
Into some untaxed, not audited Maori slush fund for the Maori elite ?
Come on, someone in the government please tell us what happens to it, both officially, and in reality ?
Surely there has to be someone in the Serious Fraud Office that reads this column and is concerned ?
Or is it in a similar vein to Te Parti Maori election funds, not answerable to anyone or anybody in defiance of the law ?
So, no different to the Mafia.
Maori have two sincere cravings; mana and money.The Legislated need for consultation has been artfully established as a means of satisfying both. Giving colonists the run around is a source of considerable mana. The act of paid consultation for same itself satifies both desires. Practised in many forms. The Tupuna Maubga Authority can be seen as a less direct example. The proposed Waitakere ranges committee another.
Summed up simply and clearly there Robert (7:41pm).
Same with the protests against sand mining in Bream Bay. Maori have one hand up and one hand out.
The key to stopping this fraud is to find where the money goes. Who pockets it and how do they get away with it. Al Capone established a criminal empire seemingly impregnable but they got him for tax fraud. Take note Serious Fraud Office.
Highlighting our racial mafia who wish to be able to clip the ticket as often and as easily as possible. Time for someone with enough will to call a stop to this and that person is NOT Luxon.
Post a Comment