27th June 2014
Re Ngati Aukiwa working party
The fundamental position remains unchanged.
Paeara was the person from whom the land was taken as native customary
title.
It should be returned to the descendants of Paeara as native customary
title.
It is a structure to achieve this that is required.
Issues associated with other parties rights with respect to the land should
be addressed by the descendants of Paeara after the return of the land. This should not be addressed in front of the Crown.
There may be parties who are subject to the kaitiakitanga of the hapu with
rights who are not descendants. These may arise from exercise of various
take or customs such as whangai. These are not issues which should
involve the Crown.
The kaupapa of this hapu is self reliance, frugal economy, self
determination, and voluntary unpaid work. This is obvious from the
manner of the farm management, the way of the kaumatua group. The
budget represents a complete denial of these values.
I am concerned that these costs potentially compromise the tino
rangatiratanga and erode value of any settlement. These represent a
mechanism of en-cashing land.
It needs to reminded that the people do not accept any mandate by the
Trust, and have had that reaffirmed in a series of hui.
The role of Ms Tuwhare is as an adviser to the working party and no more.
Many consider her the Crown’s lawyer, a supporter of Tuhoronuku, and a
recipient of Crown funds.
If the working party is to create this burden to the hapu it should be
disbanded, as a Crown initiative to threaten the land.
It appears that the hui are working without historic foundation, contrary to
the known traditions and the kawa of Paeara clearly demonstrated in the
hui where all claim descent from children of Paeara.
To go to Aukiwa is a meaningless position and one that invites involvement
from those who have no connection to the land. This underscores the
unfounded nature of the proposition.
When the working party continues to endeavour to create other lineages
of ownership are morally bankrupt. To spend money to pursue this breach
of Tikanga can not be sustained, and contrary to the words of elders in
historic times who knew the traditions .
The traditions are clear and should not be subverted by Crown funded
initiatives.
I can see no logic to the working party under such an expensive structure
and one that appears to work contrary to the words of the tupuna and well
established principles.
Yours sincerely
Gerald Sharrock BSc LlB,
RightLaw
Barristers and Solicitors
The other parties you are talking about at the beginning of this letter, are the people of taimaro and Waimahana and not the people from Otangaroa who are outside our boundary areas which were then changed by Pita Pangari, and as for the Taupo and Waihapa people – they also have their own lands and they are not mentioned anywhere in the petitions made to parliament by Hemi Rua Paiara. So I suggest you go back and read the history as it was written down, by our tupuna Hemi Rua Paiara, with the support of all his hapu – who incidentally are the only people who are mentioned in the petitions made to the Crown, and then you argue from that standpoint because historically and traditionally, the other parties you mention, are not entitiled to any part of the lands that Ngati Kahu Ki Whangaroa are claiming. So please – get your mahi right and talk to the people who own it, instead of telling us what we should be doing with our land. Our hapu will speak for us, not you or Pita Pangari or his Trust board or the other three marae or for that matter, any more hangers on who seem to have leached onto our lands like a bad smell. WE are here now, we will no longer allow you to dictate the terms of our lands.