The Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board have closed their website, and have setup a new one for the Kahukuraariki Trust. This will be where you can access all relevant information pertaining to the Kahukuraariki Trust.

Submission on the NGATIKAHU KI WHANGAROA CLAIMS SETTLEMENT Bill

To the Māori Affairs Committee

Personal Details

This submission is from Graham Williams, PO Box 301347, Albany, North Shore City, Auckland. Currently, I am residing in the UK; however I can be contacted via email at graham.williams@wairuakiwi.com, if you have any questions.

Submission

I oppose this bill because:

The Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board has failed to provide up-to-date mandate affirmation reports; and as such have failed to prove their mandate to represent the people of Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa. In fact, they have not even provided one mandate affirmation report detailing voting numbers over the past 8 years.

Actions taken:

• I have requested a copy of all of the mandate reports from the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board; however my requests have been ignored
• I have complained to OTS, and have requested a copy of all of the mandate reports provided to them; however the response from OTS was that none have been provided to them
• OTS has tried to justify the continuation of the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board mandate by speculating that the roadshows, facebook page and website, somehow show that the Trust Board had affirmed its mandate. Unfortunately, the only thing OTS has demonstrated is their bias to support a Trust Board that has failed to prove its mandate
• I have complained directly to Mr Finlayson; however he has replied saying he had considered my complaint; however that he saw no issue, and provided me with an out-dated copy of the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa mandate document from 2010

I wish to make the following comments:

The Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board has failed to engage with its wider Iwi. I have tried over the past 8 years on numerous occasions to engage with the Trust Board via email and on their facebook page; however they have refused to answer any of my questions, or respond to any of my comments on their facebook page. I have requested copies of mandate reports, hui minutes, copies of the AIP, and the Deed of Settlement; however I have been denied timely access to all material.

Mr Finlayson in his First Reading of this Bill, eluded to the fact that 78% of the people that voted, had voted to accept the Deed of Settlement. What Mr Finlayson has failed to mention is that only 585 people voted to accept the Government’s offer, of a 3800+ strong Iwi. With a very low voting turnout of only 30%, the 585 who voted to accept the offer represent a mere 15% of our Iwi. I emailed Mr Finlayson pointing this fact out; however he replied saying that 24% of the eligible voters voted to accept the offer, and that that was a sufficient level of support to go forward.

Recommendations

The mandate has not been maintained by the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board, and as such the Trust Board cannot demonstrate that they represent all hapu within the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa area. The very low voting turnout and minority acceptance of the Deed of Settlement, is testament to this fact.

This bill cannot be passed until all hapu have been fully engaged and represented; to do so would be to deny natural justice. The Waitangi Tribunal follows the rules of natural justice to ensure that all parties entitled receive fair representation; this has clearly not been the case.

Failure to actively protect the ability of hapu to exercise their rangatiratanga was central to a decision by the Waitangi Tribunal to grant an urgent hearing into the crowns recognition of the Ngati Wai Trust Board mandate.

Ngati Rehua hapu claimant Huhana Lyndon says they are overjoyed at the decision and the tribunals’ acknowledgement of over five hundred families who signed a petition in support.

In her decision Judge Reeves said, “It cannot go unstated that the issues involved are very close to those considered in the Ngāpuhi Mandate Inquiry Report.”

Te Uri o Hikihiki hapu claimant Miley George said, “We’ve done everything off our own backs we’ve had no resources no putea to be able to communicate and get the information out there but we have conviction and we believe in the mana of our hapu. “

As the matter is before the tribunal the Minister of Treaty Negotiations Chris Finlayson declined our request for comment today.  Meanwhile, Haydn Edmonds Chair of the Ngati Wai Trust Board said they believe the Deed of Mandate they have established clearly provides for Kaumātua, Hapū and Marae representatives to advise the Board at a governance level.

The claimants have been given forty days to prepare for the urgent hearing.

https://www.maoritelevision.com/news/regional/urgent-hearing-over-ngati-wai-mandate

The Waitangi Tribunal has granted an urgent claim hearing to 11 groups who opposed the mandated authority for Ngāti Wai late last year.

Ngāti Wai, an iwi located on Northland’s east coast, has about 2700 registered members and was at the negotiation stage of its treaty process.

Fewer than 800 iwi members cast their votes in the Ngāti Wai mandate process, a participation rate of 28 percent.

The Crown accepted it regardless of the low rate and moved into negotiation phase with the Ngātiwai Trust Board.

But 11 claimant groups filed urgency claims with the Waitangi Tribunal claiming the Crown had not ensured the trust board carried out an open, fair and robust process.

Huhana Seve, one of the claimants from a Whangaruru hapū said the Treaty of Waitangi was signed by hapū, and grievances must be settled by an authority which adequately represented all of them.

“The Crown has recognised the mandate that doesn’t have a clear pathway for hapū to be a part of decision making but also that hapū need to consent to even be considered as part of their mandate.”

Ngāti Wai Trust Board chairman Haydn Edmonds said: “As the Waitangi Tribunal decision only came out late last night, we are still processing all the information in the report. It is necessary to take the time needed to absorb the information and to fully understand the Tribunal’s decision.

“We believe the Deed of Mandate that we have established clearly provides for Kaumātua, Hapū and marae representatives to advise the board at a governance level.”

The board will now have to show the Tribunal it represents all the hapū on its mandate list.

Both the board and the Crown will have to show no claimants or groups are being prejudicially affected by a policy, practice, act or omission of the Crown that is inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The claimants now have just 40 days to prepare and file their evidence and affidavits.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/302946/divided-iwi-trust-returns-to-tribunal

16 December 2015

Mr Edwin Emery

Tribal Member: Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa

Re: Imminent signing of the Deed of Settlement has had people being invited to ‘celebrate this historic occasion’

Among those celebrating will be three individuals who could be described as the ‘architects’ of this process:

Chris Finlayson, Politician – loyal to his party colleagues and their policies

As part of the current regime they are pushing through flawed ‘cookie-cutter’ treaty settlements, stamped ‘full & final’ so that White New Zealand can expunge it’s colonial past and ‘move on’.

Richard Hawk, Lawyer – a person who has been present from the start of the process

He has been the lawyer for the claim, for the iwi. Any legal document associated with this claim he would have had some input into or perhaps even authored.

One such document would be the Post Settlement Group Entity Trust Deed. Some 70 pages of ‘legal-speak’ designed with the express purpose of entrenching those who have control of assets ‘post-settlement’.

Hawk is a consultant with the legal firm ‘Jackson Russell’. Proudly displayed on the Jackson Russell website, as part of their history blurb is the following:

“1865 – 1890s: For the next 20 years or so the firm, like others in Auckland at the time, was much engaged in legal work connected with land speculation and gold mining.”

Land speculation in this context would have been the frenzied activity of white settlers acquiring land from Maori by whatever means. Parliament legalised it and the legal fraternity was the mechanism to affect it.

Peter Pangari, Real Estate Agent – this individual has all the traits necessary for his chosen occupation

I would suggest he views the land as a ‘commodity’ to be acquired as part of your ‘portfolio’.

He does have a propensity to enter properties without notification. On one occasion having to be evicted by my father.

Hawk and Pangari are mates, having met at night classes in Auckland in the 1980’s.

All three of these individuals have absolutely no bloodline connection to the lands in question, and yet they have had an impact on this iwi, way out of proportion to who they are as individuals. For the politician, the lawyer and the real estate agent – in the coming years that influence will diminish significantly.

Only 585 people of this tribe have voted to accept the ‘crumbs’ the Crown is ‘flicking to us’, a mere 15% of the iwi.

We will never know the true numbers of this tribe; however based on the Ngati Kahu ki Whangaroa Trust Board database there are 3,800 tribal members (refer NKKTB Treaty Information Booklet) – that would mean that 85% of the iwi do not wish this settlement to go ahead. Clearly those who are dissenting are a statistically significant majority.

Of the Trust Board tribal member database of 3,800, 1200 were deemed invalid (Election Services) – either under age or lying horizontal in our urupa. This suggests that the NKKWTB ‘stacked’ the database. If only 10 -20 names were deemed invalid that would be reasonable – not 1200.

To the ‘minority’ who accept this treaty settlement you will get the Treaty Settlement you deserve.

What say the Kaitiaki of this Whenua, be it the humble Kiore, the grandfather Kiwi or the ancient & revered Pohutukawa – nothing … but Absolute Silence !