Category: Te Ao Māori

Source: Radio New Zealand

Documents filed with the Waitangi Tribunal have revealed the proposed changes which would set government obligations to the Treaty to no higher standard than to simply “take into account” across nine Acts.

Senior Lecturer in Law at Te Herenga Waka Victoria University Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown (Te Aupōuri) told RNZ the impact of the draft Bill could be as big as the Treaty Principles Bill.

“The effect of what’s being done in limiting all these Treaty clauses to ‘take into account’ could have just as damaging effect on the legal weight of Te Tiriti as the Treaty Principles Bill would have. It’s more technical and so it’s kind of harder, I think, to see through some of the smoke screen of that.”

Practically “take into account”, as opposed to stronger wording such as “give effect to”, would mean Treaty obligations would only be one of a number of considerations for decision makers, he said.

“The other option, which Paul Goldsmith seems to be ignoring, is to say, actually, in all contexts, it should have a higher weight. It should have a higher consideration, like ‘give effect to Te Tiriti.’ So the effect would be to limit, to put a ceiling on the weight that Te Tiriti can be given in any given context, and put a very low ceiling on that.”

The draft Bill stems from the coalition agreement between National and New Zealand First which agreed to conduct a comprehensive review of all legislation that includes ‘The Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi’, and replace all such references with specific words relating to the relevance and application of the Treaty, or repeal the references.

Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith said over the last 20 years, Parliament had passed a range of laws with all manner of references, sometimes being very vague about what they meant.

Reviewing these would ensure Treaty references were specific and consistent with one another, in the interests of increasing certainty and supporting compliance, he said.

“Some Acts are being reviewed through other processes, and all existing full and final Treaty settlements are being excluded.

“The Advisory Group has completed its review and provided the Government with a variety of recommendations.

“As a first step, the Government has agreed to amend two references to be more specific, and repeal a number of references elsewhere.

“The Government has also agreed a reference to both the Treaty of Waitangi and te Tiriti o Waitangi is preferable and should be used in all relevant provisions going forward.

“We are now consulting with Iwi leaders before introducing legislation. It will also go through a full select committee process where all New Zealanders can have their say, including Māori.”

The Acts in question

A letter dated 2 April, signed by ministers Paul Goldsmith and Shane Jones, to the National Iwi Chairs Forum Pou Tikanga co-chairs Professor Margaret Mutu and Aperahama Edwards set out Cabinet’s decisions on which Acts would be affected by the draft Bill.

Five Acts would have provisions referring to Treaty principles repealed:

• Education and Training Act 2020
• Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act 2000
• Land Transport Management Act 2003
• Organic Products and Production Act 2023
• Smokefree Environments and Regulated Products Act 1990

Two Acts would have provisions consolidated and redundant aspects repealed:

• Crown Pastoral Land Act 1998
• Plant Variety Rights Act 2022

Two Acts would be amended to make Treaty Provisions “more specific”:

• Data and Statistics Act 2022
• Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996

The letter was one of a number of documents released to the Waitangi Tribunal as part of an urgent inquiry into government changes in education, including the proposed removal of Treaty clauses in the Education and Training Act.

The difference between Treaty principles and clauses

Fitzmaurice-Brown said there was a long history of New Zealand courts saying that Te Tiriti was not in and of itself legally binding on government, going as far back as the famous Wi Parata v The Bishop of Wellington decision in 1887 where Chief Justice James Prendergast declared the Treaty to be a “simple nullity”.

That attitude changed slightly in 1941 in a case brought by Ngāti Tūwharetoa Ariki Hoani Te Heuheu Tūkino VI to the Privy Council in London which found the Treaty had some legal effect but only if it was written into legislation, he said.

“It overruled the old law, which completely diminished Te Tiriti, but it still placed this limitation on needing to put references to Te Tiriti in other legislation to give it any teeth and that kind of still stands. And so we still have this rule that for Te Tiriti to have any legal teeth, it needs to be referenced in other legislation first, rather than what we could do and just say Te Tiriti itself is directly enforceable.”

Fitzmaurice-Brown said Treaty clauses were all those provisions in law that tolf decision makers exercising any sort of statutory authority how to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

Those provisions and the different ways they were worded were how much weight the Treaty was given in any given situation, but the Treaty principles, which the Treaty Principles Bill would have changed, had been developed in laws and in the courts over many years and included rangatiratanga, partnership and active protection among others, he said.

“All of those things are the substantive content of what the Treaty relationship entails and these Treaty clauses are slightly different. They take those substantive things and they say, here’s how much weight you have to give those in any given decision. So, do you have to just kind of have it as one of many considerations, or do you have to really prioritise those, or do those have to be the bottom line?”

Fitzmaurice-Brown said there was a bigger question underlying the debate over this draft Bill, that was the place of Te Tiriti in New Zealand’s constitutional arrangements.

“I’m not sure we need to keep upholding this idea that Te Tiriti itself is not directly enforceable anymore. I think we’ve taken this compromise approach for the last 50 years, really, where actually it’s far more obvious to many people now that Te Tiriti or Waitangi itself is our founding document, should have that constitutional weight, and should be able to be directly enforced by our courts, as constitutional documents are in any other country.”

The draft legislation is not expected to be introduced to the House before early August 2026.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The National Iwi Chairs Forum (NICF) says the government has breached its Waitangi Treaty obligations to consult with Māori in proceeding with legislation that would weaken treaty clauses across a range of laws.

In a joint letter to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith and Regional Development Minister Shane Jones, the forum said it opposed “in the strongest possible terms, both the proposed legislative amendments and the process which has been followed to date”.

“The failure to engage with iwi and hapū is a direct breach of the crown’s Te Tiriti obligations, the very matter this process is supposedly seeking to clarify,” the letter read.

Goldsmith wrote to the forum’s Pou Tikanga co-chairs, Professor Margaret Mutu and Aperahama Edwards, on 2 April, providing an update on cabinet’s decision to proceed with a draft bill, setting out that no higher standard than “take into account” should be used to indicate the strength of the crown’s treaty obligations.

The letter invited the NICF to provide written feedback by 24 April and noted that the “select committee process will otherwise provide a sufficient opportunity for those with interests to have their say”.

The forum responded with the joint letter on 22 April, calling on the government to immediately withdraw the proposals, and meet with the NICF to “discuss and agree on a Te Tiriti compliant process by which improvements to relevant statutes are progressed”.

Both letters were released to the Waitangi Tribunal as part of its urgent inquiry into the removal of school boards’ legal obligation to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, although the tribunal expanded the scope of the inquiry to include the proposed removal of other treaty references in the Education and Training Act.

Professor Mutu told RNZ before the release of the joint letter that the NICF had been asking since November 2023 to be included.

“We have struggled to get information out of the government as to what it is actually doing and we are a treaty partner, and yet they’re doing all of this change unilaterally,” she said.

Mutu said “take into account” is the “weakest possible form” of obligation to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

“Take into account simply means, well, you can have a look at what the principles might be and then you can ignore them.

“It’s effectively a mandate for those who are implementing the various pieces of legislation to ignore the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, so it is a huge shift.”

Luxon confirmed that he had seen the forum’s letter, but said the government would push forward with the legislation.

“The intent of this legislation is to make sure that we have very specific treaty clauses in there that pertains to legislation, so we’re actually clear on our obligations to each other.”

The government would continue to uphold treaty settlements, but the proposed legislation would address a “lack of clarity” in current law, he said.

Goldsmith didn’t agree that the government had breached any treaty obligations.

The proposed legislation was part of an ongoing conversation and consultation, he said.

“There are many points along the way that cabinet decides these things, we’ve made some initial decisions and now we’re going to draft legislation, that will go off to the parliament and select committee. There’s many opportunities for a discussion.”

Goldsmith said he planned to meet with the NICF soon.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The mother of a detained New Zealander is calling for the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), Winston Peters to help her daughter.

Everlee Wihongi was entering her third week in US detention after being detained in an ICE processing centre in California. The Wihongi family, who had lived in the US for three decades, were returning to the United States following a family holiday in Aotearoa.

Betty Wihongi said they didn’t even consider they may have an issue at the border as most of the family were naturalised American citizens and Everlee Wihongi holds a Green Card.

Betty Wihongi said she was separated from Everlee Wihongi at the airport and waited for seven hours before receiving a call from her distraught daughter. Everlee explained there was an issue with a historic charge and she was being sent to an ICE processing centre.

Everlee had a historic conviction for possession of marijuana that had been dealt with more than 10 years ago.

Inside an ICE facility

Betty Wihongi told RNZ’s Mata she was terrified for her 37-year-old daughter, who was sharing a room with 46 others.

They were confined to the room for 22 hours a day, one side of the room was bunks and the other side was tables. She said they ate and slept in the same room.

Everlee Wihongi believed she was the only person there with a Green Card.

Betty Wihongi said there had been a lack of support from MFAT, and she wanted Winston Peters to intervene.

“Step up and do more,” she said.

“One, do something about Everlee, there has to be something the New Zealand government can do, and two train your people… because the help we are getting is not the best”.

NZ government responds

When contacted by Mata, the office of Peters, said “this is a consular matter, and the ministry is dealing with it. The minister is being kept updated on those efforts.”

When asked if Peters would respond directly to Betty Wihongi’s appeal, the office said “the message had been relayed” but said it must go through consular channels.

A spokesperson said “the minister is being kept informed and trusts the professionalism and effort that our Embassy/consular staff are providing”.

But Betty Wihongi said there was little support. No one had visited Everlee Wihongi in detention, they had not received any support in finding a lawyer and when her daughter finally got through on the phone, she claimed the staffer asked her “what do you want me to do about this?”.

The spokesperson for Peter’s office said there were aspects of the case that could not be shared for privacy reasons.

Betty Wihongi and her daughter, want to know what the aspects of the case are and believed they had been open about any past transgressions.

The Ministry for Foreign Affairs responded to Mata, in a statement, it said:

“While the New Zealand government is unable to influence the immigration decisions of other governments, MFAT continues to provide consular assistance to the family of a New Zealander detained in Los Angeles.

“The type of support available in these situations includes ensuring that New Zealanders have access to legal representation, advising family, and engaging with detention facilities where that is needed. For further information on how consular cases are supported please visit Safe Travel: You have been arrested or jailed.

“For privacy reasons, we are unable to comment on the details of any individual case.”

The move to the US

Three decades ago when Everlee Wiohngi was six-years-old, the Wihongi family moved to Wisconsin, her father who works in rail was recruited by US-based Wisconsin Central Transportation Corporation after NZ Rail Limited was sold for $328 million in 1993.

They had traveled back to Aotearoa numerous times and had a strong connection here and to the Cook Islands where Betty Wihongi had ties.

She said they were continuing to pay Everlee Wihongi’s rent and bills but had no idea what the future held.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Proposed legislation reducing decision-makers obligations to no more than “take into account” Treaty obligations won’t be introduced before August.

Closing submissions took place on Tuesday in the Waitangi Tribunal’s urgent inquiry into the removal of school boards’ legal obligation to give effect to Te Tiriti o Waitangi, although the tribunal expanded the scope of the inquiry to include the proposed removal of other Treaty references in the Education and Training Act.

Evidence submitted to the tribunal showed that, on current timeframes, proposed legislation that would require decision-makers to “take into account” Te Tiriti, rather than “give effect” to it would not be introduced to the House before early-August 2026.

Legislation is expected to be introduced before this year’s general election.

The Crown memorandum also identified nine provisions of the Education and Training Act 2020 that were in scope for the proposed Bill.

It follows a review of all legislation, with the exception of Treaty settlements, that includes ‘the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi’ which was part of the coalition agreement between NZ First and National.

The [urgent inquiry, which was brought by Ngāti Hine, Te Kapotai and the country’s largest education union NZEI Te Riu Roa, heard evidence over three days on the removal of school boards’ legal obligations and a planned reset of the national curriculum.

NZEI Te Riu Roa President Ripeka Lessels said the disclosure in the Crown memorandum confirms the government is attempting to erase Te Tiriti from education despite unprecedented opposition from more than 1840 school boards and education sector leaders.

“By removing Te Tiriti obligations from the Act, the government is marginalising ākonga Māori and leaving teachers without the essential framework needed to address longstanding inequities.

“This is a clear breach of Te Tiriti principle of partnership that should define our schools, undermining the hard-won progress made by educators.”

By lowering the legal threshold to ‘take into account’ Te Tiriti, the government is effectively telling ākonga Māori and their whānau that their rights are secondary considerations rather than a high priority, she said.

“To push this change through despite the Ministry of Justice’s warnings proves this is a purely ideological move. It will roll back decades of progress in dismantling the systemic disadvantage faced by ākonga Māori. We will not stand by while the rights of our ākonga are stripped away as part of a coalition agreement.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

New research is looking to examples from the past to inform how marae might relocate and rebuild in the face of sea level rise and other natural hazards brought on by climate change.

University of Waikato PhD graduate Dr Akuhata Bailey-Winiata (Tūhourangi, Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Tutetawha) told RNZ many existing adaptation options, processes and frameworks don’t consistently account for the cultural significance of marae.

Drawing on the whakataukī “Kia whakatōmuri te haere whakamua – I walk backwards into the future with my eyes fixed on my past,” he looked back through history for examples of marae or communities being relocated.

“So we found 51 examples of where hapū and iwi had either discussed relocation or had actually done relocation of the communities, marae structures in response to natural hazards. But I want to preface is that 51 examples just came from the written record and I know that that is just the tip of the iceberg. There’ll be so many more examples through pūrākau, oral histories.”

History clearly shows that for Māori communities adapting to natural hazards isn’t a new thing, he said.

“We know this, but sometimes we kind of forget that we have adaptation in our whakapapa. So I guess bringing it to the forefront was like, okay, yep, we’ve done this before, we can do it again if it’s the right choice for us.”

One of the examples highlighted a personal connection in Bailey-Winiata’s whakapapa, the relocation of Tūhourangi iwi following the 1886 Tarawera eruption.

“Tūhourangi is one of my iwi I whakapapa too and I got to interview some of my kaumātua, some of my whānau, just to understand, you know, what did that process look like? What were the enablers of their specific process? Some enablers were land gifting, perspectives of land and infrastructure… and autonomy in decision making. So really the decision making power was with that hapū level. And again, that’s just one example there’ll be many more.”

The PhD research also involved working with hapū groups on adaptation planning. Bailey-Winiata worked with the Maketu Iwi Collective to develop their climate change strategy and with Tauranga hapū Ngāi Tamawhariua, with both groups sharing insight on how the went about adaptation planning.

Inisghts from wānanga with Māori who are currently assessing climate risks to marae informed the creation of framework to decision-making for marae facing sea level rise and other climate risks.

The first part of the framework is based on partnership and uses a waka hourua (double-hulled waka) model to illustrate the concept. Bailey-Winiata explains that each hull of the waka represents tangata tiriti and tangata whenua, it has two sails: one for Western knowledge and one for Mātauranga Māori.

But the waka is heading one direction, reflecting how climate change affects everyone, he said.

The waka hourua model is now in use by the recently launched Aotearoa Society of Adaptation Professionals (ASAP) and Bailey-Winiata is part of a project that has received funding from Earth Sciences New Zealand to further develop the concept.

Seeing ASAP take a piece of his mahi and roll with it has been a privilege to see, he said.

Major protects to relocate marae are underway across Tairāwhiti after flooding from Cyclone Gabrielle, including two marae in Te Karaka inland of Gisborne, three marae in Ūawa Tolaga Bay, and two more north of Napier in Hawkes Bay.

Bailey-Winiata said these rebuild projects will offer some insight into the intricacies of contemporary relocation.

“The marae that are having to undergo it currently, I think there’s a great opportunity there to explore, you know, what did their process look like? What were the considerations that they were thinking about when they were making the decision to move? And what were the intricacies behind that? Because I think that’s going to shed a huge light and provide examples of how others can go about it.”

Bailey-Winiata was awarded his PhD at Waikato University’s Tauranga campus earlier this month, he also received the University’s 2026 Koko Kairangi Prize for Best Doctoral Thesis, in recognition of the impact of his research.

It’s been a humbling experience to receive the award and a good chance to go back and reflect a bit on the whole journey, he said

“I think this is common for many PhD students at the end, I think they’re a little bit traumatised by the whole thing, so they don’t want to think about it. But now being able to reflect it’s quite cool.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Conservation and outdoor recreation groups say the fight to save a pristine back country river is not over as they consider legal action and warn of seismic risk.

The controversial Waitaha hydro scheme received Fast Track Approval on Friday, becoming the 18th fast track project to be approved since the system began in February last year.

The $200 million scheme, located on the remote Waitaha River on conservation land between Hokitika and Franz Josef Glacier, will divert water through a tunnel generating 23 megawatts of hydroelectric power, enough to power the equivalent of about 12,000 homes, according to Westpower.

But a cluster of conservation and outdoor recreation groups say they are considering legal action, while an engineering geologist and health and safety specialist have written to Westpower’s board, warning it of the risk from the massive fault line just kilometres away.

Westpower first applied for concessions for the scheme in 2014, but investigations began even earlier, in 2004.

Former environment minister David Parker declined the application in 2019, vetoing it under the Conservation Act on the basis of the natural character and intrinsic value of the near-pristine area and people’s experience of it.

At the time the National Party vowed to “get the Waitaha power scheme on” if re-elected.

Westpower applied to have the minister’s decision reconsidered in 2022, a process it suspended when it obtained a spot in the Fast Track Approvals Act as one of 149 priority projects.

The project had the longstanding support of local rūnanga, Ngāti Makaawhio and Ngāti Waewae.

Known collectively as Poutini Ngāi Tahu, the rūnanga wrote to the government in 2024 urging the project’s fast-tracking, and entered into a partnership agreement with Westpower.

Federated Mountain Club (FMC) president Megan Dimozantos said the group was “gutted” by the approval.

The potential benefits of the project did not stack up, she said.

“It’s not even a big scheme – if you look at something like what Mercury recently built up near Taupō, the geothermal scheme up there, that’s a quarter of a billion dollars and that’s going to service 158,000 households once it’s at full capacity.

“The Waitaha scheme is going to cost nearly the same to build and it’s only going to service 12,000 households.”

The organisation supported renewable energy, but “it needs to be built in the right place”, Dimozantos said.

“And the Waitaha at the top of Morgan Gorge is not the right place – it’s not an appropriate place for a hydro scheme.

“We’re considering our options at the moment. We’ve got the decision with our legal counsel, we’ll wait to hear from them and take it from there.”

She said there were inaccuracies in the application that the group reported to Westpower, and later to the Fast Track panel, but were not granted the opportunity to remedy the errors or comment on the proposal, underscoring flaws in the process.

Westpower’s own application noted the effects of construction, while temporary, would be very high even after efforts to mitigate them, and operational effects on recreation values in Morgan Gorge and Kiwi Flat would remain high post mitigation.

According to the panel, the scheme involved a weir and intake structure at the top of Morgan Gorge which would divert up to 23 cubic metres a second of Waitaha River water into a 1.5-kilometre-long pressurised water tunnel down to a power station and back into the river.

Concern over Alpine Fault impact

In an open letter to Westpower’s board of directors, engineering geologist Kevin England and health and safety specialist Matthew Bennett – both past presidents of Whitewater NZ – calculated the risk to workers tasked with building the tunnel, reminding the board they could be held personally responsible for health and safety breaches.

The pair said Westpower was proposing building the weir 3 kilometres from the Alpine Fault, one of the most active faultlines in the world.

Research showed there was a 75 percent probability of an Alpine Fault earthquake in the next 50 years, and a four out of five chance it would be a magnitude 8 or higher.

“This will cause severe ground shaking at the tunnel site, inevitably causing widespread rockfall and tunnel collapses.”

There was a 100 percent chance of workers dying if the tunnel collapsed with them inside, England and Bennett wrote.

Using details from Westpower’s application, publicly available information and industry standards, the pair concluded there was a one in 160 chance of a fatality, which doubled to one in 80 if the worker took part in the two year construction period.

Between 2010 to 2020 (which included the Pike River mine disaster) the annual individual fatality risk for the mining industry was around 1 in 1000, and around 1 in 5000 for the construction industry. Internationally, the acceptable level of fatality risk was 1 in 1,000,000, although in some high risk industries a figure of 1 in 1000 was tolerated for short periods, England said.

The Waitaha tunnelling project’s risk level was least five to ten times higher than even the highest risk industrial activities in other places, the pair wrote.

England and Bennett noted the quake hazard also posed a financial risk.

An Alpine Fault event would cause large scale landslides, rock avalanches, deposits of metres of rock and the permanent destruction of the facility, meaning a 75 percent chance of the project’s failure over its design life of 50 years.

The Department of Conservation (DOC) declined to comment while it reviewed the decision, but the Fast Track panel noted DOC wanted substantial changes to the proposal.

DOC told the panel the project represented a semi-industrial activity being introduced into a near pristine setting, and would fundamentally alter the Waitaha Valley, cause a dramatic change to Morgan Gorge and severely compromise people’s experience of the area.

It argued for larger compensation payments for the effects on peka peka or long tail bats, blue duck whio, lizards, recreational visitors and more.

In its comments, DOC described the Waitaha Valley as having “ecological, landscape and recreational values of local, regional, national and international significance”.

“It is DOC’s view that the proposal will result in the fundamental loss of natural character, solitude and remoteness that underpin the Waitaha Valley characteristics of a back country-remote zone.”

The New Zealand Conservation Authority told the panel the project breached conservation policies and strategies and stated it “strongly believed that this meant the project should not be proceed”.

But Westpower general manager generation and technology Rodger Griffiths said the project had a small footprint and a low environmental impact.

He said there was “still a lot of water to go under the bridge” but that the company would now begin detailed investigations.

The plant would improve energy resilience and security of supply for the coast, Griffiths said.

“It’ll provide about 120 to 140 gigawatt hours per year, that’s about half the electricity demand for the West Coast.”

Griffiths did not directly address FMC’s concerns around consultation, errors in a report on the recreational erects of the scheme and other claims, but said some of the group’s issues were raised through the New Zealand Conservation Authority’s submission.

“Even if they were found to be true – and they didn’t find that – but even if they were found to be completely true, [the panel found] it wouldn’t have had any impact on the outcome.

“The decision would have been the same, so we’re comfortable the decision is sound.”

Safety was the company’s “number one priority”, and Westpower was employing tunnelling experts that knew exactly what the risks were and how to mitigate them, Griffiths said.

The project would not go ahead unless Westpower was comfortable it could be done safely, he said.

Critics including Green Party environment spokesperson Lan Pham have referred to the proposal as a zombie project, resurrected via Fast Track after being declined via other processes.

The $200m cost to provide power to 12,000 homes worked out at almost $20,000 per household, money better spent on expanding solar technologies or other solutions which did not rely on destroying wild places, she said.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

A Hawke’s Bay post-settlement iwi trust has written to the Prime Minister calling for the removal of Paul Goldsmith as the Minister of Treaty Negotiations.

Iwi trust chairperson Pieri Munro told RNZ that Goldsmith should not have oversight of negotiations affecting Wairoa iwi, after his decision to transfer six Department of Conservation reserves to a neighbouring iwi.

Under the Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana settlement bill six reserves around Lake Waikaremoana, Mangaone, Panekirikiri, Tutaemaro, Waihi South, Waikareiti and Ruakituri Scenic Reserve, would be transferred to the Te Urewera Board which Tātau Tātau o Te Wairoa (TToTW) says would alienate them from Ngāti Kahungunu.

Munro (Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairoa, Ngāti Maniapoto, Ngāruahinerangi, Ngāti Ruanui, Ngā Rauru, Ngāti Irakēhu) said the trust supports the Ngāti Ruapani settlement, but it wants the reserves removed from the bill.

Munro wrote to Prime Minister Christopher Luxon on 2 April seeking the removal of Goldsmith. He’s still waiting for a response.

“This bill, if it passes through, will alienate Te Rohe o Te Wairoa, Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairoa, from any future decision-making surrounding those [reserves].

“It will pass under Te Uruwera Board, we have no seat there, Ruapani does, the majority is held by Ngāi Tūhoe.”

Munro said through history and whakapapa there was shared interest in the land among Ngāiti Kahungunu ki Wairoa, Ngāti Ruapani and Ngāi Tūhoe.

The six reserves in question were also identified in the Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairoa settlement, he said.

“The Minister sees fit to actually put them exclusively in the Te Uruwera Board, and that just doesn’t make sense and that’s really our objection. We support Ruapani in terms of its settlement and its redress, but we do object to these six DOC reserves passing away and alienating us from our rights and interests in those six blocks,” he said.

The alienation risks litigation and future treaty grievances, he said.

“[Goldsmith] preferred to try and find a way of balance. Well, this has created imbalance if it passes through in the bill process.”

In a statement chairperson of Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana Kara Puketapu-Dentice said Wairoa iwi are long-settled iwi who had their own dedicated opportunity through the Treaty settlement process to pursue any rightful claim to these areas.

“As required by the settlement process, Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana engaged directly with Tātau Tātau o Te Wairoa and all neighbouring iwi, including hui in Pōneke, Wairoa, and at our marae in Waikaremoana. We acknowledged whakapapa connections to our rohe and welcomed whānau from Wairoa to participate in caring for this whenua as members of our hapū, in accordance with our tikanga and under the guidance of ahi kā.

“We are disappointed that engagement undertaken in good faith is now being misrepresented in an attempt to achieve through our settlement what was not achieved through their own. The hapū of Waikaremoana has maintained ahi kā on this whenua for generations, that will not be undermined by those who had their own path and chose not to walk it.”

As for TToTW’s options should the Bill become law Munro said litigation was one avenue but the Trust was cautious of taking that approach.

“But what we’re seeking in the bill process is that those six identified reserves be removed so that we continue to work with Ruapani, with Ngāi Tūhoe, and also with the Department of Conservation. We expect that non-exclusive redress operates in substance, not merely in form.”

Munro said TToTW have been in dialogue with Tūhoe post-settlement trust Te Uru Taumatua as well as Ngāti Ruapani mai Wakaremoana over the future of the reserves.

Carefully balanced views – Goldsmith

In a statement Goldsmith said he wrote to both Tātau Tātau o Te Wairoa and Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana in August 2025 advising of his final decisions on the overlapping interests.

“The two groups had been in negotiations with each other since 2022, however, could not reach an agreement.

“My decision sought to carefully balance the views of both groups. Ultimately, I decided to follow the advice from my officials to retain the proposal to add land into Te Urewera. This is a core settlement aspiration for Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana and I consider it appropriate to recognise their interests in this way.

“I was also reassured that the proposal to add land into Te Urewera means that the land will continue to be able to be enjoyed by all New Zealanders.”

Goldsmith said he had nothing further to add at this stage.

Submissions on the Ngāti Ruapani mai Waikaremoana Claims Settlement Bill closed on 10 April. The Bill will now be considered by the Māori Affairs Select Committee.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Te reo and haka exponent Kingi Kiriona says government “divestment away from kaupapa Māori” initiatives is behind his decision to step into politics and contest the Hauraki-Waikato electorate for Labour.

Kiriona (Ngāti Ruanui, Ngā Rauru, Ngāti Apa, Ngāti Kahungunu) is the founder of Māori education provider, TupuOra, a former journalist and the tutor of Waikato-based kapa haka, Te Iti Kahurangi.

Te Iti Kahurangi are performing at the Tainui Waka Kapa Haka Festival on Saturday, where Kiriona will make the formal announcement to the crowd in what he says will be his first chance to stand face-to-face with the region after becoming a candidate.

He told RNZ if elected his first priority would be re-establishing a focus on Te Tiriti, particularly in education where the government has removed school boards’ legal obligation to give effect to Te Tiriti and cut funding for te reo Māori teacher training.

“It’s policies like that that really hit hard at the spirit of Māori. And as someone that’s always fought for mātauranga Māori and for the place of mātauranga Māori, particularly within education, alongside my partner, Te Waipounamu, our whānau, our colleagues, actually, in TupuOra, it would be remiss of me not to stand up in the way that I’m standing up right now to say enough is enough. It’s time for change.”

He’s seen the effect shifting government investment away from Māori initiatives has on Māori families first hand.

“My wife and I, we run a Māori education business, TupuOra Education and Development Limited. At our peak three to four years ago under the previous regime, we had a complement of 30 staff, as of January this year, we’re now down to five staff.

“So we’ve seen the direct impact of the divestment away from kaupapa Māori, in this instance, kaupapa Māori education. We’ve seen the direct impact on us, but also on the whānau that we employ.”

As for why he went with Labour, Kiriona said it comes down to one word – “friends.”

“People that know me know that I’m fiercely Māori. Everything that I’ve done has been done and achieved and predicated on Māori values and on what’s best for te ao Māori and certainly in the interests of mana motuhake. But we all know in this game that we call politics, you need friends, you need friends to advance, to make policy gains, funding shifts and so I see an opportunity here with the Labour Party.”

Kiriona said he made it clear his candidacy would always be contingent on receiving the blessing of Te Arikinui Kuini Nga wai hono i te po, which he did earlier this year.

“Her words were, ‘Mō te oranga o te iwi me pēwhea e kore ai au e whakaae.’ So for the betterment of the people, how can I not support or agree? So to receive that blessing is huge.”

Kiriona was born and raised in Dannevirke, but has been living in Waikato for close to 30 where he said he has been blessed to be taken under the wing of key people in the rohe, so it means a lot to stand in the region especially with the blessing of Te Arikinui.

Although Te Arikinui was clear she didn’t want to see an adversarial election campaign against incumbent MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke, he said.

Kiriona has an existing relationship with Maipi-Clarke having worked with her father during his time as a journalist, that whakapapa drew him to contact Maipi-Clarke ahead of the public announcement of his candidacy.

“Sure we come from different parties, we may represent different policies on behalf of our different parties. But we are Māori, we’re grounded in tikanga, we’re grounded in kaupapa Māori, we are a part of the Kiingitanga, and the Kiingitanga is predicated on te kotahitanga,” he said.

Kiriona is currently the Deputy Chair of Te Māngai Pāho, following three terms as Board Director of Whakaata Māori. He’s also a sitting member of the Waitangi Tribunal and before its disestablishment was the deputy chief-executive of Te Aka Whai Ora.

In the other Māori electorates Labour has selected the former chair of Te Rūnanga o Koukourarata Mananui Ramsden in Te Tai Tonga, former Auckland Councillor Kerrin Leoni in Tāmaki Makaurau and current List MP Willow-Jean Prime in Te Tai Tokerau.

Incumbent MP Cushla Tangaere-Manuel will also be trying to hold on to Ikaroa-Rāwhiti for Labour.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand