Reprint as at 1 January 2014

Te Roroa Claims Settlement Act 2008

Public Act2008 No 100
Date of assent29 September 2008
Commencementsee section 2


Changes authorised by subpart 2 of Part 2 of the Legislation Act 2012 have been made in this reprint.

Note 4 at the end of this reprint provides a list of the amendments incorporated.

This Act is administered by the Office of Treaty Settlements.


1 Title

2 Commencement

Part 1
Purpose of Act, acknowledgements and apology, interpretation provisions, settlement of claims, and miscellaneous matters

Subpart 1Purpose of Act and acknowledgements and apology by the Crown to Te Roroa

3 Purpose

4 Act binds the Crown

5 Outline

Acknowledgements and apology

6 Acknowledgements and apology

7 Text of acknowledgements

8 Text of apology

Subpart 2Interpretation

9 Interpretation of Act generally

10 Interpretation

11 Meaning of Te Roroa

12 Meaning of Te Roroa historical claims

Subpart 3Settlement of claims

Jurisdictions of courts, etc, removed

13 Settlement of Te Roroa historical claims final

Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 amended

14 Schedule 3 of Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 amended

Protections no longer apply

15 Certain enactments do not apply

16 Removal of memorials

Subpart 4Miscellaneous matters


17 Rule against perpetuities does not apply

Date on which actions or matters must occur

18 Timing of actions or matters

Part 2
Cultural redress

Subpart 1Protocols

General provisions

19 Authority to issue, amend, or cancel protocols

20 Protocols subject to rights, functions, and obligations

21 Enforceability of protocols

Te Roroa–DOC Protocol

22 Noting and effect of Te Roroa–DOC Protocol

Te Roroa–Fisheries Protocol

23 Noting and effect of Te Roroa–Fisheries Protocol

Te Roroa–MED Protocol

24 Noting and effect of Te Roroa–MED Protocol

Te Roroa–Taonga Tūturu Protocol

25 Effect of Te Roroa–Taonga Tūturu Protocol

Subpart 2Cultural redress properties

26 Interpretation

Cultural redress properties

27 Kaiparaheka

28 Wairau

29 Kawerua

30 Right of access across Kawerua to landlocked land

31 Haohaonui

32 Waingata

33 Te Riu

34 Muriwai

35 Papatia and Te Kopae

36 Te Taiawa

37 Puketurehu

38 Maunganui Bluff

39 Manuwhetai

40 Puketapu/Whangaiariki

41 Ureti

42 Former Works Depot, Waimamaku

General provisions relating to cultural redress properties

43 Vesting subject to encumbrances

44 Registration of ownership

45 Right of access over Kawerua must be noted on title

46 Minister of Conservation may grant easements

47 Application of other enactments to cultural redress properties

48 Application of certain amounts

Subpart 3Te Tarehu

49 Interpretation

50 Declaration of Te Tarehu

51 Crown’s acknowledgement of Te Roroa values

52 Purposes of Te Tarehu

53 Agreement on protection principles

54 New Zealand Conservation Authority and Conservation Boards to have particular regard to Te Roroa values

55 New Zealand Conservation Authority and Conservation Boards to consult with trustees of Manawhenua Trust

56 Conservation management strategy

57 Notification of Te Tarehu

58 Notification in Gazette

59 Actions by Director-General

60 Amendment to conservation documents

61 Regulations

62 Bylaws

63 Existing classification of Te Tarehu

64 Termination of status

65 Exercise of powers, duties, and functions

66 Rights not affected

67 Limitation of rights

Subpart 4Statutory acknowledgements

Statutory acknowledgements

68 Statutory acknowledgements by the Crown

69 Purposes of statutory acknowledgements

70 Relevant consent authorities to have regard to statutory acknowledgements

71 Environment Court to have regard to statutory acknowledgements

72 Historic Places Trust and Environment Court to have regard to statutory acknowledgements

73 Recording statutory acknowledgements on statutory plans

74 Distribution of resource consent applications to trustees of Manawhenua Trust

75 Use of statutory acknowledgements

Deeds of recognition

76 Authorisation to enter into and amend deeds of recognition

General provisions

77 Crown not precluded from granting other statutory acknowledgements or deeds of recognition

78 Exercise of powers and performance of duties and functions not affected

79 Rights not affected

80 Limitation of rights

Amendment to Resource Management Act 1991

81 Amendment to Resource Management Act 1991

Subpart 5Place names

82 Alteration and assignment of place names

83 Publication of new place names notice

84 Alteration of new place names

85 Date place name altered or assigned

Subpart 6Access to Deed of Settlement

86 Access to Deed of Settlement

Part 3
Commercial redress

87 Interpretation

Subpart 1Transfer of Waipoua Forest

88 Transfer of Waipoua Forest

89 Creation of computer freehold register: Waipoua Forest

90 Waipoua Forest ceases to be Crown forest land

91 Forestry rights after transfer

92 Crown may grant easements and forestry right over Waipoua Forest

93 Conservation covenants

94 Right of access across Waipoua Forest to landlocked land

95 Notation of right of access on computer freehold register

96 Notation of right of access may be removed

Subpart 2Transfer of other commercial redress properties

97 Transfer of other commercial redress properties

98 Creation of computer freehold register: other commercial redress properties (except Aranga Beach properties)

99 Creation of computer freehold register: Aranga Beach properties

100 Transfer of Shag Lake Bed

101 Transfer of Coastal strip: north of Omamari

102 Transfer of Coastal strip: south of Omamari

103 Transfer of Waipoua Forest: Former Department of Conservation Headquarters

Subpart 3General provisions

104 Minister of Conservation may grant easements

105 Application of other enactments

Schedule 1
Cultural redress properties

Schedule 2
Statutory acknowledgements

Schedule 3
Place names

Reprint notes

  • Preamble


    (1) The Treaty of Waitangi was signed in 1840. The terms of the Treaty of Waitangi in English and Maori are set out in Schedule 1 of the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975:

    (2) Recitals (3) to (61) of this Preamble present, in summary form, the background to the Te Roroa historical claims and the historical account, that are set out in the Deed of Settlement entered into by Te Roroa and the Crown:

    Association of Te Roroa with their rohe

    (3) For hundreds of years Te Roroa have occupied the rich river valleys of Waimamaku, Waipoua, and Kaihu, as well as other contiguous lands between the Hokianga and Kaipara harbours. Te Roroa are descended from local tangata whenua Ngai Tuputupuwhenua, who are traditionally said to have been resident in that district when Kupe arrived, and the migrating Ngai Tamatea ki Muriwhenua. The combined peoples adopted the name Te Roroa (the Tall Ones), in the time of Manumanu I and his brother Rangitauwawaro, probably some time in the 16th century:

    (4) References to Te Roroa or Whanau Roroa are found in ancient karakia – especially in relation to the tupuna Whakatau-potiki of whom the whakatauki is Kotahi tangata ki Hawaiki ko Whakatau anake; There was but one man in Hawaiki, Whakatau:

    (5) Inter-tribal warfare in the 1820s led to Te Roroa being concentrated on lands around Waipoua and Waimamaku. Te Roroa hapu Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa, who had ancestral lands on the Northern Wairoa river near Tunatahi (Dargaville), were living at Utakura, Hokianga, where they had moved to join their relatives Te Popoto and Ngahengahe after the battle of Te Ika-a-Ranginui in 1825. At this time Te Kuihi hapu, which included Parore Te Awha, were living at Kaihu and Northern Wairoa:

    Treaty of Waitangi

    (6) By 1840, there was a steady trade in the far north, primarily based on the extraction of timber and kauri gum. The timber trade on Te Roroa lands began in the south on their Northern Wairoa lands. Te Roroa rangatira Te Pana Ruka, Wiremu Whangaroa, Timoti Takare (of Waimamaku) and Hamiora Paekoraha (of Waipoua) signed the Treaty of Waitangi at Hokianga on 6 February 1840. A fifth Te Roroa rangatira Matiu Tauhara, signed at Kaitaia on 28 April 1840. Te Roroa supported the Crown in the Northern War (1845–1846) when some Te Roroa joined their kinsmen and the Crown against northern iwi:

    Te Kopuru cession

    (7) In 1842, the Protector of Aborigines obtained from a number of chiefs of the Northern Kaipara the cession of an area of land at Te Kopuru in restitution for the plunder of a store of a local resident. An area of between 6 000 and 8 000 acres of land was ultimately ceded to the Crown. The plunder was in response to what local Maori saw as the desecration of koiwi (human remains). While Te Kuihi were involved in the plunder, Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa, the hapu that had customary rights in the land, were away in the Hokianga and do not appear to have been consulted over the cession. Ngati Kawa later protested that those who made the cession had no right to do so:

    (8) The first documented protest over the cession of lands at Te Kopuru was in 1861 when Rapana (Tuaea) told District Commissioner Rogan that those who ceded the block had no rights to it. The District Commissioner said he would put the matter before the government. When a sawmill was built on the block it became clear that there were discrepancies in the survey over the boundaries of the ceded block. In 1866–1867, Tiopira Kinaki and Tamati Whakatara claimed the entire Te Kopuru block in the Native Land Court. The Crown paid £50 and £20 to Ngati Whiu and Ngati Kawa as the result of an agreement reached at Court. The minutes do not provide detail on why the compensation was paid:

    (9) Te Waitai Tuaea and Hone Tana Rehua petitioned the House of Representatives in 1881 praying that their land at Te Kopuru, wrongly taken owing to the fault of others, be returned to them. The Native Affairs Committee had no recommendation to make. The following year Te Roroa wrote to the Chief Judge of the Native Land Court about Te Kopuru. They also sought an application for title in 1886 and 1891. The applications were dismissed on the basis that it was now private land:

    Survey and Native Land Court title investigation

    (10) By the early 1870s, Te Roroa still held most of their lands in customary tenure. At this time the Crown sought to purchase lands between the south Hokianga harbour and the Waipoua district to meet the demands of new settlers for farmland. From this time, the Native Land Court started to make title determinations within the rohe of Te Roroa. In 1872, Crown land purchase agents began to negotiate with Te Roroa chiefs to purchase land in the vicinity of Waipoua. Te Roroa agreed to sell some of the land:

    (11) Crown land purchase officers made advances of £670 to rangatira before the ownership of the land had been determined. These payments were called tamana by Te Roroa and were an attempt by the Crown to secure the purchase of the blocks following the determination of title by the Native Land Court:

    (12) The land transactions could not be completed until the Native Land Court had investigated the ownership of the land. Te Roroa applied to the Court to have title determined for their Waimamaku and Waipoua lands that included the Waimamaku No 2, Maunganui, and Waipoua blocks:

    (13) Prior to the Native Land Court making a determination of title, Te Roroa had to have the lands surveyed. Some division within Te Roroa over the Native Land Court determination process became apparent during the surveying:

    (14) In late 1874, Crown surveyors began surveying the land that became the Waimamaku No 2 (27 200 acres), Waipoua (35 300 acres), and Maunganui (37 592 acres) blocks. These lands were central to Te Roroa sense of identity and community. Te Roroa requested that the Crown surveyors survey a number of areas within the blocks that they wished to be excluded from the eventual sale of the land. These areas were key papakainga, wahi tapu, and mahinga kai that Te Roroa sought to retain:

    (15) The Native Land Court began its investigation of these blocks in 1875. Regardless of whether or not they wished to have the title determined, Maori still had to participate in the Court hearings for their claimed interests to be recognised:

    Waimamaku Block survey and sale

    (16) The Court awarded ownership of the Wairau and Waimamaku No 1 blocks in 1870. The survey of the Waimamaku No 2 block was part of the wider Hokianga survey undertaken between December 1874 and June 1875. The Waimamaku block survey occurred at the same time as the adjacent Kahumaku block. The initial survey map was not completed in time for the Court’s hearing into ownership of the land in May 1875. To meet the deadline the Deputy Chief Surveyor of the Auckland province compiled an initial sketch plan of the external boundaries of the Kahumaku and Waimamaku No 2 blocks. These 2 blocks were combined at the request of Maori resident in the area. Within this sketch plan were 3 areas labelled reserve including areas known as Kaharau and Te Taraire. The Wairau wahi tapu and a further reserved area were identified in the adjacent Wairau block:

    (17) The sketch plan did not meet the survey standards under the Land Act 1873 but was accepted by the Court and the parties for title determination. It was acknowledged as being incomplete at the hearing. The Court awarded Waimamaku No 2 to the descendants of 4 ancestors that incorporated Te Roroa, and related groups:

    (18) The sale process was separate from the title determination. The initial survey map was ultimately rejected by the Chief Surveyor and a second map was compiled in Auckland some months later from adjoining surveys for the Crown purchase of the land. This map outlined the external boundaries of the Waimamaku No 2 and Wairau blocks. The latter included the Wairau wahi tapu reserve:

    (19) The areas that had appeared as reserves, including Kaharau and probably Te Taraire, on the initial map were not outlined on the second map. The second map was placed on the Crown’s purchase deed. The Court confirmed the Crown’s purchase on 10 January 1876 at the same time as it issued the final grants for the block. A Crown surveyor subsequently undertook a check survey of Waimamaku to confirm which areas were Maori land and which areas were Crown land. The check map included reserves similar to those in the first survey map. Nothing appears to have been done to check the anomaly:

    (20) On 31 January 1876, Waimamaku owners applied to partition the block, suggesting that they believed that they had retained some Waimamaku lands after the sale:

    Waipoua and Maunganui Blocks survey and sale

    (21) The survey of the Waipoua and Maunganui blocks was hampered by the considerable conflict between Te Roroa chiefs Parore Te Awha and Tiopira Kinaki over boundaries in the vicinity of Maunganui Bluff at Waikara. The Crown stopped the survey at Maunganui in early March 1875 before it was completed in order to avoid conflict between the surveyors and the claimants to Maunganui Bluff:

    (22) In early May 1875, a Crown surveyor returned to the area and surveyed the proposed reserves at Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki. The plan was sent to the Provincial Surveyor. However, that plan was not forwarded to the Inspector of Surveys for approval and was filed without a reference number that related to the Maunganui block. The map subsequently used in the Native Land Court title determination of the Waipoua and Maunganui blocks was compiled in the Auckland office of the Inspector of Surveys from adjoining surveys. This compiled survey showed the external boundaries of the Maunganui and Waipoua blocks and was considered sufficient to determine title. It did not indicate that any land was to be reserved in the Maunganui block:

    (23) The boundaries of the Waipoua No 2 block that Te Roroa intended to retain as papakainga were drawn on the plan of the Waipoua block used in the determination of title. A small reserve at Koutu had already been reserved in a separate title determination in 1871:

    (24) Tension between Tiopira Kinaki and Parore Te Awha over rights and boundaries in the vicinity of Maunganui Bluff resurfaced at the title determination hearing. An attempt to get the groups to reach agreement outside the Court on the Waipoua and Maunganui block boundaries failed. The Court’s initial award led to disorder. The Assessor did not support the decision and the Court adjourned to see if the groups could reach a more satisfactory arrangement. An agreement was reached where both chiefs were to be named on the titles of the Waipoua and Maunganui blocks. This agreement formed the basis of the final decision:

    (25) The group associated with Tiopira Kinaki was awarded the 12 200 acre reserve, Waipoua No 2. Parore Te Awha was also to pay Tiopira Kinaki £100, which was understood to be in recognition of the rights of Tiopira Kinaki in the Waimata block:

    (26) Tiopira Kinaki agreed to sell his interests in the Waipoua and Maunganui lands to the Crown in early February 1876. The Crown did not know at that stage whether Parore Te Awha would sell his interests in the blocks. Negotiations with Parore Te Awha took several days. Parore Te Awha negotiated the exclusion of 250 acres of land beside Lake Taharoa in the Maunganui block and payment of a further £500 as conditions of sale of the blocks:

    (27) The map used in the Crown’s purchase of the Maunganui block did not show that the owners wanted to retain any land other than Taharoa. There is no direct evidence as to why Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki were not included in the map. The survey of the Maunganui block was subsequently the source of disagreement between sellers and purchasers as to what had been intended to be reserved and sold:

    (28) Tiopira Kinaki was aggrieved by the concessions made to Parore Te Awha in the sale negotiations and protested to the Crown. Auckland Provincial Superintendent, Sir George Grey, ordered an inquiry into the claim. The short inquiry did not uphold his claims and found that Tiopira Kinaki had received his due payment:

    Nga aureretanga (Continuous crying)–Te Roroa protest

    (29) By the end of 1876, the Crown had purchased 87 638 acres of the total of slightly more than 100 000 acres in the Waimamaku, Waipoua, and Maunganui blocks. The remaining 12 625 acres were reserved. Te Roroa individuals also retained shares in other blocks within their wider rohe. The Crown had already purchased land in other blocks where Te Roroa had interests. These included Whakahara, Tokatoka, Arapohue, and Wairau South blocks:

    (30) The only reserves that were confirmed at the time of the 1876 sales were Waipoua No 2 (12 220 acres) and Koutu (4 acres) in the Waipoua block, the Wairau wahi tapu reserve (171 acres) in the Wairau South block, and the Taharoa reserve (250 acres) in the Maunganui block:

    (31) There was considerable confusion between Te Roroa and Crown officials after 1876 about the status of the lands Te Roroa had initially marked as reserves on survey maps:

    (32) Te Roroa began petitioning the Crown from the late 1870s over the failure to provide appropriate reserves. They continued to draw attention to their claims, culminating in the Treaty of Waitangi claims and settlement process:

    Waimamaku block

    (33) When the Waimamaku block was surveyed for subdivision in 1887, Te Roroa wrote letters, petitioned Parliament, and made personal representations seeking recognition of Kaharau and Te Taraire reserves as well as other smaller wahi tapu. In 1894, the Native Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives recommended a Royal Commission be appointed to examine issues associated with Kaharau and other reserves in the Waimamaku block. The government did not accept the recommendation:

    (34) In 1902, government officials were informed of the discovery of burial caves at Kohekohe on land that would have been part of the Kaharau reserve. At a meeting at Rawene called to discuss the discovery of the taonga, the local Resident Magistrate encouraged those present to let the Native Affairs Minister, James Carroll, hold upon trust the koiwi and wakakoiwi in the Auckland Museum. At the same time they requested that a portion of Kaharau which has been taken in mistake be returned to them:

    (35) Te Roroa further petitioned the Crown in 1907. The petition was referred to the government for favourable consideration by the Native Affairs Committee of the House of Representatives but no action was taken. There was another petition in 1925 and finally a fourth petition in 1930, after which the Chief Judge of the Native Land Court directed Judge Acheson of the Native Land Court to hold an inquiry:

    (36) The Acheson inquiry found in favour of the Te Roroa petition and recommended the return of the urupa and any section of Kaharau that remained in Crown ownership. The Chief Judge of the Native Land Court did not support the inquiry finding. He noted that the land in question was no longer Crown owned land and that local Maori would be averse to paying compensation to the landholder:

    (37) Te Roroa petitioned again in 1933 but the petitioners were informed that the land remained in private ownership:

    Maunganui block

    (38) Te Roroa remained on lands on the Maunganui block at Whangaiariki and Manuwhetai after 1876 and began to protest in 1899 when land development started to impact on traditional use of these places:

    (39) Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki continued to be described as reserves by Te Roroa. Some Lands and Survey maps depicted the land as retained in Maori ownership:

    (40) Between 1903 and 1912, Te Roroa approached Maori Members of Parliament Hone Heke, Te Rangi Hiroa, and Tau Henare, as well as local Member of Parliament, Gordon Coates, but had no success. Those Te Roroa who lived on the disputed land were not aware that it had been sold by the Crown in 1914 and protested when in 1928 and 1930 the landowner attempted to remove them from their homes:

    (41) In 1931, 1934, and 1936, Te Roroa made applications to the Native Land Court to have title to Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki reserves determined. The applications were dismissed because they related to private land:

    (42) In 1939, the Chief Judge of the Native Land Court directed Judge Acheson to inquire into the provision of reserves in the Maunganui block. Judge Acheson strongly recommended the return to Te Roroa of those areas surveyed out of the original block that were alienated to the Crown in the 1876 deed. The Chief Judge did not support the inquiry finding when he referred it to the Minister, but suggested that it might be possible to conclude an arrangement where any burial place might be reserved and perhaps permit Maori to exhume and re-inter any human remains:

    (43) During the 1940s, Te Roroa protested at the creation of the beach settlement within Manuwhetai and there was a further unsuccessful attempt to seek a Native Land Court determination of Maori freehold title to Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki. A kaitiaki (guardians) group for Manuwhetai and Whangaiariki was established in 1954 to maintain the protest. Intensified protest in the 1970s coincided with the wider Maori cultural revival when Te Roroa kaumatua made a call for the issues surrounding the failure to provide reserves to be reopened. In 1978, a Maunganui Reserves Trust Committee was established to progress these claims. This committee sought and gained the support of prominent Maori and repeatedly approached the Crown. Finally, after extensive unsuccessful petitioning and lobbying in the mid-1980s, Te Roroa laid a claim for the reserves before the Waitangi Tribunal in 1988:

    Waipoua No 2 block

    (44) The cost of surveying Waipoua No 2 block in 1876 was £62 13s 4d. It is unclear whether the owners were aware of this charge or that a lien had been placed over the block. The lien was not paid and over the following years attracted an interest charge of 5% per annum. The Waipoua No 2 block was subsequently partitioned. The lien was called in in 1906 and the charge was divided between the blocks. One block, Waipoua 2B2, still had an outstanding lien and 95 acres of that block was taken in lieu of payment. While this was the only time that the Crown took land in lieu of payment, there is evidence that Te Roroa found it difficult to meet survey costs arising from subsequent Native Land Court partitions:

    (45) All the reserves established by Crown grant or held under a memorial of ownership were vested in named individuals with no formal trustee role. Ten such individuals were named on the title of the Waipoua No 2 block. The Court made the Waipoua No 2 land inalienable for 21 years. Owners began to sell the land to private interests just prior to the First World War after the restriction on alienation had lapsed:

    (46) A Royal Commission in 1913 recommended that the Waipoua State Forest be put under systematic management and policy was developed to acquire lands around the Waipoua Forest. In 1917, the Crown issued a proclamation (which was not lifted until 1972) prohibiting the sale of any of the Waipoua No 2 lands to anyone but the Crown. The Waipoua No 2 lands were in the shadow of the Waipoua Forest, which at that time was reserved for production forestry. Between 1921 and 1928, the Crown purchased more than half the Waipoua No 2 lands from individual owners:

    (47) In the early 1930s, Te Roroa who retained interests in Waipoua No 2 blocks where the Crown had purchased interests sought to have their lands partitioned. The Te Roroa owners could not come to any agreement with the State Forest Service that administered the Crown’s interests in the Waipoua No 2 blocks as to how this could be done. In 1936, the Crown sought partition. However, the Court did not make a partition order because the land owners from 3 blocks had petitioned Parliament. The Te Roroa petitioners claimed that the valuation process used during the partition of 2 blocks was unfair and that the Crown had ignored a gift of land from a mother to her daughters when purchasing owner interests. An inquiry was established to investigate the claims but did not proceed following an agreement between the parties. That agreement was given effect by proclamation in early 1946. The terms of the agreement were the subject of claims to the Waitangi Tribunal inquiry:

    (48) By the end of the Second World War the Crown had purchased a further 4 734 acres and by 1973 only 691 acres of Waipoua No 2 remained as Maori freehold land. Te Roroa also retained as Maori freehold land the 4 acres of the Koutu Reserve, and the Wairau wahi tapu (171 acres) in the Waipoua, Wairau, Waimamaku No 2, and Maunganui blocks:

    (49) There is no evidence that the Crown investigated the wider circumstances surrounding the reservation of Waipoua No 2 or the overall land holding of Te Roroa at any time during the purchase of the Waipoua No 2 land:

    Alienation of wahi tapu and taonga

    (50) As a consequence of the early Maori settlement of the area there are a vast number of wahi tapu sites in the rohe of Te Roroa. Many of their tapu sites passed out of Te Roroa control in the land alienation process starting in 1875. Sacred burial sites were desecrated and looted while koiwi (human remains) as well as taonga (artifacts) were sold or added to museum collections. Particular examples of desecration occurred at Aratapu (Te Kopuru) in the late 1860s and Kohekohe in 1902. Taonga were also likely to have been taken from the Piwakawaka caves around the turn of the twentieth century. These desecrations caused ongoing distress to Te Roroa. Te Roroa have attempted to protect remaining sites and have had to rebury koiwi. Te Roroa remain protective over wahi tapu on land throughout the rohe. While legislation passed in 1901 restricted the export of Maori moveable taonga this did not provide protection for wahi tapu and taonga within New Zealand. It was not until the passing of the Historic Places Amendment Act 1975 that there was any formal protection for archaeological sites:

    (51) In 1988, some of the taonga sacred to the people of Waimamaku – the koiwi taken from their lands early in the 20th century – were returned to them from the Auckland Institute and Museum for reburial:

    (52) The taonga collected from the Kohekohe caves in 1902 continued to be held by the museum. At a ceremony in 1987, the Minister of Maori Affairs offered to hand back to local Maori the trust that his predecessor had accepted in 1902 in relation to the taonga, including what he described as his right as donor to discuss the taonga with the Auckland Museum. To date no formal steps have been effected:

    Waitangi Tribunal claim

    (53) In 1987, following an amendment to the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, Te Roroa lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal to investigate their Treaty grievances:

    (54) Between 1987 and 1990 several Te Roroa claims were lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal, including those by Turoro Raniera (Lovey) Te Rore Taoho and E D Nathan on behalf of Te Roroa at Kaihu; Alex Nathan and Manos Nathan on behalf of Te Roroa at Waipoua; Ropata Parore Te Awha on behalf of Te Roroa at Kaihu and Emily Paniora on behalf of Te Roroa at Waimamaku:

    (55) The Waitangi Tribunal heard the main Te Roroa claims at 9 hearings held at Kaihu, Waipoua, Waimamaku and Dargaville between June 1989 and May 1991. The Waitangi Tribunal visited significant Te Roroa sites and the Auckland Institute and Museum to view taonga held there. The Te Roroa Report was presented to the claimants and the Minister of Maori Affairs on 3 April 1992 at Waikaraka marae at Kaihu. Some Te Roroa claims were heard in other Waitangi Tribunal inquiries:

    (56) The Waitangi Tribunal, in its Te Roroa Report, found that the Crown—

    • (a) used unfair methods to purchase Te Roroa lands and failed to make proper provision for native reserves; and

    • (b) adopted unprincipled land purchase methods in acquiring interests in Waipoua No 2 lands; and

    • (c) through its land purchases and land administration, destroyed the sense of community of Te Roroa at Waipoua; and

    • (d) through its land purchases and economic policies, denied Te Roroa the benefits of borrowing for development enjoyed by other New Zealanders; and

    • (e) failed to protect Te Roroa wahi tapu and allowed Te Roroa taonga to be violated; and

    • (f) failed to listen to Te Roroa grievances or act on recommendations for redress:

    (57) Te Roroa claims to Te Kopuru, Tokatoka, and Whakahara were heard by the Kaipara Regional Inquiry in Whangarei and Auckland in 2000 and 2001:

    Settlement negotiations with Te Roroa

    (58) Te Roroa and the Crown were engaged in periodic negotiations from 1992 until 2005. In 1993, Te Roroa and the Crown entered into a Framework Agreement governing the conduct of the negotiations. In 1996, the Crown formally recognised the mandated negotiators of Te Roroa and signed Terms of Negotiation which specified the scope, objectives, and general procedures for the negotiations:

    (59) On 20 December 2004, the parties signed an Agreement in Principle that recorded that Te Roroa and the Crown were, in principle, willing to enter into a Deed of Settlement on the basis of the Crown’s proposal recorded in the Agreement in Principle:

    (60) Te Roroa ratified the Crown’s initial settlement offer and entered into a Deed of Settlement on 17 December 2005. The Deed records the agreement between Te Roroa and the Crown to settle the historical claims of Te Roroa:

    Te Roroa Manawhenua Trust and Te Roroa Whatu Ora Trust

    (61) In December 2005, Te Roroa ratified a governance structure comprising 2 private trusts known as the Te Roroa Manawhenua Trust and the Te Roroa Whatu Ora Trust. The Trusts were established by separate trust deeds on 15 August 2006:

The Parliament of New Zealand therefore enacts as follows: