The Māori Affairs Committee has examined the Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill and recommends that it be passed with the amendments shown.
Introduction
The Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill is intended to give effect to certain provisions of the Deed of Settlement that settles the historical claims of Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika in the Port Nicholson Block.
Any other amendments we recommend to this bill are minor and technical. All of the amendments have been agreed to by all parties to the settlement.
Pipitea Marae
We recognise the historical and cultural significance of this area to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika and we acknowledge the desire of the collective to have an urban marae in the Wellington area. It is also the practice of the Crown to protect existing third-party rights when transferring land in Treaty settlements.
Pipitea Marae is currently leased from the Māori Trustee by the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association Incorporated. The thirty-year lease is perpetually renewable and a peppercorn rental is paid by the association to the Trustee.
We recommend the insertion of a new clause 45A to give effect to a new lease arrangement. The Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association have formed a new joint legal entity—the Pipitea Marae Charitable Trust. The Charitable Trust comprises equal representation of both parties (the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association). After the settlement date (and the registration of the Charitable Trust with the Charities Commission), the Pipitea Marae land and the improvements will vest in the new entity. The unregistered first renewal of the lease would be terminated at that point.
We also recommend an amendment to Schedule 2 to maintain the provision in the current lease that the lessor may change the annual rent only with the consent of the Minister of Māori Affairs. This would ensure that the position of the lessee (currently the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association Incorporated) under the current lease arrangement would not be changed while the lease remains in place.
Ngāti Tama opt-out clause
The bill would give effect to clause 8.2.3 of the Deed of Settlement to allow those members of Ngāti Tama who do not consider their claims to be settled by the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust to opt out of this settlement and begin a separate negotiation with the Crown.
We recommend amending clause 9(1)(b) to make more explicit the provision in 8.2.3 of the Deed.
We note that if some Ngāti Tama wish to negotiate a separate settlement they should form a single entity and achieve a mandate recognised by the Crown. This requirement explicitly reflects the Crown’s interest in maintaining political settlements at the highest level of iwi and hapū collectives. We are aware that there may be common whakapapa between Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o te Ika and any reconfigured Ngāti Tama group outside this settlement collective.
The opt-out clause in the Deed is an unhappy exception to the Crown’s practice of dealing with large natural groupings. We understand that this provision is due both to intractable differences between some Ngāti Tama and the body mandated to represent Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika (the Port Nicholson Block Claims Team) and to the Crown’s wish to negotiate in good faith to achieve fair and durable settlements.
We wish to note that the Crown should not be called upon to adjudicate differences within an iwi grouping. We consider the provision of an opt-out clause to be inappropriate as a model for any future settlements. We consider that these are matters for iwi to resolve.
We do not recommend the use of opt-out clauses in future.
Other issues
Ngāti Toa Rangatira: request for statement of non-challenge
Ngāti Toa Rangitira sought assurance from the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust that they would not challenge the Ngāti Toa Rangatira settlement bill. We consider that this is a matter for iwi to resolve.
Ngāti Toa Rangatira has significant customary interests in the Port Nicholson Block and is the primary overlapping claimant. Ngāti Toa Rangatira recently signed an agreement in principle pertaining to its own separate negotiations for settlement with the Crown.
Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangitira expressed concern that the bill might prejudice the interests of other claimant groups in the area, and sought assurance that the Settlement Trust will not oppose the Ngāti Toa Rangatira agreement.
As a result of Ngāti Toa Rangatira’s concerns, the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust agreed to items being removed from the redress offered to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika.
We do not recommend amendment to the bill to reflect this request, because we consider that the matter is the concern of the two iwi groups.
Waiwhetu
Some submitters sought an apology from the Crown and specific redress for the taking of land at Waiwhetu. We were advised that Waiwhetu claimants were represented at the negotiations where they agreed to and signed the settlement deed. We consider that the bill acknowledges and addresses the Waiwhetu issue.
We recommend no amendment.
Inclusion of former town belt land in the settlement package
Several submitters raised concerns relating to the inclusion of former town belt land in the bill, and the Right of First Refusal mechanism. They sought to have some properties excluded from the bill.
We understand that the bill provides for “Right of First Refusal for 100 years” and that agencies owning land which is subject to the right of first refusal may offer the land to a local authority in accordance with section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981. Upon such a transfer, the local authority, for example, the Wellington City Council would take on the right of first refusal obligation to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika.
There has been confusion about the bill’s provision of Statutory Acknowledgement and Deeds of Recognition, which are non-exclusive redress mechanisms and do not convey exclusive property rights (or the transfer of fee simple title).
We recommend no amendment.
Appendix
Committee process
The Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill was referred to the committee on 9 September 2008. The closing date for submissions was 5 February 2009. We received and considered 16 submissions from interested groups and individuals including iwi, recreational and environmental groups, local government, and property stakeholders. We heard seven submissions.
We received advice from the Office of Treaty Settlements.
Commentary
Recommendation
The Māori Affairs Committee has examined the Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill and recommends that it be passed with the amendments shown.
Introduction
The Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill is intended to give effect to certain provisions of the Deed of Settlement that settles the historical claims of Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika in the Port Nicholson Block.
Any other amendments we recommend to this bill are minor and technical. All of the amendments have been agreed to by all parties to the settlement.
Pipitea Marae
We recognise the historical and cultural significance of this area to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika and we acknowledge the desire of the collective to have an urban marae in the Wellington area. It is also the practice of the Crown to protect existing third-party rights when transferring land in Treaty settlements.
Pipitea Marae is currently leased from the Māori Trustee by the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association Incorporated. The thirty-year lease is perpetually renewable and a peppercorn rental is paid by the association to the Trustee.
We recommend the insertion of a new clause 45A to give effect to a new lease arrangement. The Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association have formed a new joint legal entity—the Pipitea Marae Charitable Trust. The Charitable Trust comprises equal representation of both parties (the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust and the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association). After the settlement date (and the registration of the Charitable Trust with the Charities Commission), the Pipitea Marae land and the improvements will vest in the new entity. The unregistered first renewal of the lease would be terminated at that point.
We also recommend an amendment to Schedule 2 to maintain the provision in the current lease that the lessor may change the annual rent only with the consent of the Minister of Māori Affairs. This would ensure that the position of the lessee (currently the Ngāti Poneke Māori Association Incorporated) under the current lease arrangement would not be changed while the lease remains in place.
Ngāti Tama opt-out clause
The bill would give effect to clause 8.2.3 of the Deed of Settlement to allow those members of Ngāti Tama who do not consider their claims to be settled by the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust to opt out of this settlement and begin a separate negotiation with the Crown.
We recommend amending clause 9(1)(b) to make more explicit the provision in 8.2.3 of the Deed.
We note that if some Ngāti Tama wish to negotiate a separate settlement they should form a single entity and achieve a mandate recognised by the Crown. This requirement explicitly reflects the Crown’s interest in maintaining political settlements at the highest level of iwi and hapū collectives. We are aware that there may be common whakapapa between Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o te Ika and any reconfigured Ngāti Tama group outside this settlement collective.
The opt-out clause in the Deed is an unhappy exception to the Crown’s practice of dealing with large natural groupings. We understand that this provision is due both to intractable differences between some Ngāti Tama and the body mandated to represent Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika (the Port Nicholson Block Claims Team) and to the Crown’s wish to negotiate in good faith to achieve fair and durable settlements.
We wish to note that the Crown should not be called upon to adjudicate differences within an iwi grouping. We consider the provision of an opt-out clause to be inappropriate as a model for any future settlements. We consider that these are matters for iwi to resolve.
We do not recommend the use of opt-out clauses in future.
Other issues
Ngāti Toa Rangatira: request for statement of non-challenge
Ngāti Toa Rangitira sought assurance from the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust that they would not challenge the Ngāti Toa Rangatira settlement bill. We consider that this is a matter for iwi to resolve.
Ngāti Toa Rangatira has significant customary interests in the Port Nicholson Block and is the primary overlapping claimant. Ngāti Toa Rangatira recently signed an agreement in principle pertaining to its own separate negotiations for settlement with the Crown.
Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangitira expressed concern that the bill might prejudice the interests of other claimant groups in the area, and sought assurance that the Settlement Trust will not oppose the Ngāti Toa Rangatira agreement.
As a result of Ngāti Toa Rangatira’s concerns, the Port Nicholson Block Settlement Trust agreed to items being removed from the redress offered to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika.
We do not recommend amendment to the bill to reflect this request, because we consider that the matter is the concern of the two iwi groups.
Waiwhetu
Some submitters sought an apology from the Crown and specific redress for the taking of land at Waiwhetu. We were advised that Waiwhetu claimants were represented at the negotiations where they agreed to and signed the settlement deed. We consider that the bill acknowledges and addresses the Waiwhetu issue.
We recommend no amendment.
Inclusion of former town belt land in the settlement package
Several submitters raised concerns relating to the inclusion of former town belt land in the bill, and the Right of First Refusal mechanism. They sought to have some properties excluded from the bill.
We understand that the bill provides for “Right of First Refusal for 100 years” and that agencies owning land which is subject to the right of first refusal may offer the land to a local authority in accordance with section 50 of the Public Works Act 1981. Upon such a transfer, the local authority, for example, the Wellington City Council would take on the right of first refusal obligation to Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika.
There has been confusion about the bill’s provision of Statutory Acknowledgement and Deeds of Recognition, which are non-exclusive redress mechanisms and do not convey exclusive property rights (or the transfer of fee simple title).
We recommend no amendment.
Appendix
Committee process
The Port Nicholson Block (Taranaki Whānui ki Te Upoko o Te Ika) Claims Settlement Bill was referred to the committee on 9 September 2008. The closing date for submissions was 5 February 2009. We received and considered 16 submissions from interested groups and individuals including iwi, recreational and environmental groups, local government, and property stakeholders. We heard seven submissions.
We received advice from the Office of Treaty Settlements.
Committee membership
Hon Tau Henare (Chairperson)
Kelvin Davis
Hone Harawira (Deputy Chairperson)
Hon Parekura Horomia
Hekia Parata
Paul Quinn
Hon Mita Ririnui