Preamble

(1)

The Treaty of Waitangi is set out, in Maori and English, in Schedule 1:

Land Claims Commission

(2)

Te Uri o Hau participated in several transactions that were claimed to have been purchases made by individual Europeans in the Kaipara area in 1839 and 1840. Te Uri o Hau participants in these transactions sought to promote settlement and trade opportunities by entering into these transactions:

(3)

The Land Claims Commission was established to investigate land transactions that occurred in New Zealand prior to 14 January 1840, in order to determine whether they were equitable. Between 1841 and 1844, the Commission heard claims relating to land in which Te Uri o Hau had interests. The Land Claims Commission inquired into whether a transaction occurred or not, and generally validated those claims where Maori supported the transaction, but did not explore possible broader Maori expectations regarding the transactions:

(4)

Four of these claims were further considered by the Bell Commission in the 1850s. Two of those claims were not pursued by the settler claimants, but the Crown provided some compensation to the settlers for previous outlay and made further payments to Maori. In respect of the 2 claims that were pursued, the Commissioner made awards of land to the European claimants. Approximately 6 000 acres of the land under claim was retained by the Crown as surplus. Of this 6 000 acres, the Crown later purchased approximately 5 400 acres of the same area from Maori:

Te Kopuru land

(5)

In 1842, the Protector of Aborigines prevailed on chiefs of Te Uri o Hau and Nga Puhi to cede an area of land as restitution for the plunder of the store of a local resident. Maori suspected that the store owner had desecrated an urupa and removed human remains. Representative chiefs selected an area of land at Te Kopuru for this purpose. The Crown made no payment for the land and retained the area as punishment for the plunder. Uncertainty surrounded the boundaries of the ceded block and the area does not appear to have been surveyed until 1857, when land to the south of Te Kopuru was purchased by the Crown. It is estimated that the block contained 6 000 to 8 000 acres:

Pre-1865 purchases

(6)

The first Crown purchases involving Te Uri o Hau land occurred in 1854. By 1865, approximately 300 000 acres in the northern Kaipara area had been alienated:

(7)

These early Crown purchases were characterised by the following features:

(a)

inter-iwi rivalry between the groups of Nga Puhi/Te Parawhau and Te Uri o Hau/Ngati Whatua with regard to the ownership of blocks that the Crown sought to purchase:

(b)

approximately 60% of land in the northern Kaipara area in which Te Uri o Hau had interests was purchased before 1865:

(c)

a small number of areas, including Paraheke (which was reserved from the purchase of the Oruawharo Block), were reserved from purchases made in the Otamatea area in which Te Uri o Hau had interests. The 2 areas reserved from purchases on the Pouto peninsula were almost entirely alienated within a few years of their exclusion from the purchases:

(8)

The Crown’s purchase in 1854 of the Mangawhai block was notable in that the Deed stated that “ten per cent of the proceeds of the sale of this block of land by the Queen is to be expended for the benefit of the Natives”. There was performance of this clause up to 1874. No further payments were made after this date:

Operations of Native land laws and purchases 1865–1900

(9)

The Native Land Court began title investigation in the Kaipara area from 1864 onwards. A number of mostly small blocks in which Te Uri o Hau had an interest were heard by the Court in the late 1860s and early 1870s in the Otamatea region. Little land was alienated during this time and revenue was generated through leasing the land:

(10)

By the late 1870s/early 1880s, use of the Court by Te Uri o Hau was restricted to blocks of land that they intended to sell. Te Uri o Hau subsequently introduced to the Court, and sold, large areas of land:

(11)

The complexity of the Native Land Laws was an issue in the sale of the Okahukura block. Te Uri o Hau non-seller Hemana Whiti agreed to the transfer of the block after reaching an agreement with the private purchaser. The witnessed and signed agreement documented that 100 acres was to be reconveyed to Hemana Whiti subsequent to the block’s sale. The Court’s inability to give legal recognition to this agreement due to a provision in the Native Land Act 1873, however, saw Hemana Whiti evicted from his land and his property destroyed. Successive Governments did not intervene in this legal dispute:

(12)

Advance payments were made by the Crown to rangatira of Te Uri o Hau prior to title investigation by the Native Land Court, in an attempt to secure the purchase of blocks following the determination of title. Such payments occurred, for example, in Crown purchases of the Tikinui block and Pouto Point:

(13)

Reserves set aside in land purchases in which Te Uri o Hau had an interest often included Wahi Tapu sites and several reserves were made inalienable but were subsequently alienated. Additionally, some of the reserves were awarded exclusively to individual Maori, thus leaving the reserves subject to partition and succession. The consequence of this was fragmentation:

(14)

The Validation Court, which was established to hear claims from those seeking to “validate” incomplete dealings in Maori land, investigated the alleged purchase of 2 200 acres of Pouto land in 1893 and 1897. The operative land legislation enabled the Validation Court to rule in favour of a provisional and disputed purchase agreement between a settler and Te Uri o Hau, and allowed it to be validated despite strong objections from Te Uri o Hau:

Desecration of urupa and other Wahi Tapu

(15)

Taonga were taken from Wahi Tapu in the Wairoa–Kaipara district and the Pouto peninsula without the permission of the tangata whenua, despite Maori concerns about the violation of Wahi Tapu:

(16)

Specific legislation to provide some protection for taonga did not exist until 1901. This legislation restricted the export of Maori antiquities:

20th century land administration

(17)

The Taitokerau District Maori Land Board was created under the Maori Land Settlement Act 1905. Some Te Uri o Hau land was compulsorily vested in the Land Board, after 1905, for lease. Later legislation allowed some land to be sold by the Board without the permission of the owners. The mandate of the owners was required in other cases:

(18)

Due to the existing private and State lending criteria, attempts to obtain development finance by some Te Uri o Hau landowners were unsuccessful. State funding was provided after 1929 to assist in the economic development of the land in Kaipara:

(19)

The operative land administration legislation gave the Minister of Maori Affairs, followed by the Board of Maori Affairs, substantial powers, leaving the landowners with few, if any, legal powers over their own land:

(20)

In 1930, all land owned by Maori within the Kaipara area was brought under the provisions of Maori land development legislation. Maori could enter into land development schemes either through station development or smaller individual “unit” schemes. From the 1940s, Maori owners were progressively distanced from the schemes’ administration, due to a number of political and economic changes:

(21)

Administrative and economic difficulties, with little immediate prospect of land being released from State control, may have encouraged some landowners to sell their interests in scheme land to the Crown. The Crown actively promoted such sales with legislation to foster “live buying” of Maori land interests. These interests were retained by the Crown in many instances and later became available for repurchase by the remaining owners:

(22)

The long-term benefits of the schemes have been variable. Some of the schemes have had positive outcomes. However, some of the individual “unit” schemes, in particular, were of limited economic benefit and failed to fulfil the owners’ expectations:

Settlement of claim

(23)

Through enactment of the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985, the Crown made it possible for Maori to bring claims before the Waitangi Tribunal in respect of historic grievances arising after 6 February 1840:

(24)

Claims were registered on behalf of Te Uri o Hau with the Waitangi Tribunal that sought redress for Te Uri o Hau historical grievances, including WAI 229 and WAI 271 lodged by Russell Kemp in August 1991 and Ross Wright in November 1991 respectively:

(25)

Most of Te Uri o Hau claims were heard before the Waitangi Tribunal from June 1997 to July 1998 as part of the Kaipara Stage One Hearings. The Tribunal has not reported on the Kaipara hearings as it has yet to hear all of the claims in the Kaipara area:

(26)

On 14 June 1999 the Crown recognised the mandate of the mandated negotiators to represent Te Uri o Hau in negotiations with the Crown for a final and comprehensive settlement of the Te Uri o Hau historical claims:

(27)

The 2 parties then entered into negotiations that resulted in the mandated negotiators for Te Uri o Hau and the Crown entering into a Heads of Agreement dated 20 November 1999. The Heads of Agreement recorded in principle that Te Uri o Hau and the Crown were willing to settle Te Uri o Hau historical claims by entering into a deed of settlement:

(28)

The Crown and Te Uri o Hau executed a deed of settlement on 13 December 2000. The deed of settlement acknowledged that Te Uri o Hau suffered injustices that impaired the economic, social and cultural development of Te Uri o Hau and recorded the matters required to give effect to a settlement of all the historical claims of Te Uri o Hau.