Review into use of Whānau Ora Commissioning funding set to conclude this week
Photo:
RNZ / Mihingarangi Forbes
Te Puni Kōkiri has confirmed the review into the use of Whānau Ora Commissioning funding is being concluded this week, and the findings will be released next month.
The
review
, led by Doug Craig, was
set up after reports
agencies with soon-to-expire contracts had
paid for an ad campaign
urging people to switch to the Māori roll, and
to the Moana Pasifika rugby team
.
Concerns were also raised about contracting decisions and conflicts of interest by a Pasifika Futures senior executive.
The agencies maintained the ad campaign was part of the mission to advance Māori wellbeing, and
denied they had put any public money towards the rugby team
.
Te Puni Kōkiri launched the review and
released terms of reference
in late June, but
would not set a firm timeframe
despite earlier assurances from the prime minister it would be completed in July.
In a statement to RNZ, Te Puni Kōkiri confirmed it "will be completed this week".
"As part of the review process, it is appropriate that those covered in the report are given the opportunity to comment on its findings before any public release. Te Puni Kōkiri expects to release the findings of the report in mid-August," the statement said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
7 hours ago
- 1News
Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law
The Government is forging ahead with plans to change the law governing New Zealand's foreshore and seabed, despite a Supreme Court ruling last year that appeared to undercut the rationale for the change. The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline. The Government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling. At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans. ADVERTISEMENT On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October. "Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right." Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted. "We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100% of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve." Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell". "There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do." The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest. ADVERTISEMENT More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered. That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country. "I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand." Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs. The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership. The 2004 law, introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government, provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori. National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown. ADVERTISEMENT Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption. The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored. The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
Scoop
8 hours ago
- Scoop
Taranaki Regional Councillors Urged To Quit Election Over Treaty Principles Fiasco
Article – RNZ Councillors involved in quashing debate over the Treaty Principles Bill at the Taranaki Regional Council have received a dressing down at a fiery meeting. , Taranaki Whanganui regional correspondent Councillors involved in quashing debate over the Treaty Principles Bill at the Taranaki Regional Council have received a dressing down at a fiery meeting in Stratford. Council was considering a report which found councillors colluded not to make a submission on the bill and halt debate. New Plymouth District Councillor Dinnie Moeahu – whose deputation was shunted down the agenda in December – addressed council today in front of whanau and supporters. 'What unfolded that day was absolutely disgusting and shameful. I witnessed some elected members bully their way to getting what they wanted. 'And now your conduct has been extensively investigated, documented, reviewed and condemned and made public for the world to see.' He said what happened was not just a breach of process, but a breach of trust and the fundamental democratic and cultural responsibilities the TRC was obligated to uphold. Moeahu said a submission prepared by TRC which expressed concern about the Treaty Principles Bill was abruptly dismissed without discussion. 'Let's not mince words that was not governance, that was cowardice hiding behind collusion.' He said the offending councillors attempt to brush-off their actions as a miscommunication didn't wash with him. 'I was met with contempt, I was made to feel less.' Moeahu said the TRC had statuary obligations to take the Treaty of Waitangi into account and it had partnering with Māori explicitly enshrined as a strategic priority in its long-term plan. 'This isn't a training issue. It's an absolute failure in governance. When elected members treat Treaty matters as too political or not appropriate you betray your role.' He hoped the point of reckoning the report represented could be a turning point for the TRC. 'Leadership is a privilege you have been afforded… do better Taranaki Regional Council.' Dinnie Moeahu's father Peter – an iwi appointee to the council's Policy and Planning Committee – also made a deputation and took aim at councillors by name. 'People who spout democracy but connive behind closed doors to suppress it. 'People like councillor (Tom) Cloke, councillor Donald McIntrye and councillor (Neil) Walker who used their privilege position to bully the regional council chair and chief executive into submission at the December 10 meeting.' Peter Moeahu said whether the councillors adopted the report or not he would not trust them or forgive them for how they treated his son. He called on them to withdraw from the local government elections. 'Our community deserves better, our community deserves people who are open-minded, environmentally focussed … and willing to have a meaningful and open relationship with hapū, iwi and manuwhenua. 'My recommendation? Withdraw from the ballot.' At the closing of his deputation, the Moeahu whānau performed an impassioned haka. Council chief executive Steve Ruru then spoke briefly to the report which he authored. He reminded the council of its findings that the Treaty Principles Bill was relevant to TRC business and to make a submission and debate it appropriately. 'One of the big learnings coming out of this is that process issue again which is highlighted in there and obviously there are a range of recommendations made.' Taranaki Māori Constituency councillor Bonita Bingham believed council had underestimated 'the impact of the trampling of our mana' events of December had for Māori. 'I really thank Peter and Dinnie for their kōrero today because their words expressed what many of us are feeling. 'I would like all councillors to deeply reflect on the actions and collusion and predetermination that lead to the decision on December 10. 'This was no miscommunication this was a deliberate attempt to squash our voice.' After sitting in stoney silence Donald McIntyre was the only one of the three councillors directly under fire to speak during the meeting. 'Obviously I've upset some people with my actions and I'm sorry they feel aggrieved.' McIntyre acknowledge that it was correct the Treaty Principles Bill submission was on the December agenda. But he said if Dinnie Moeahu being shunted down the agenda was a problem someone should have raised it at the time. 'I have yet to see any reference of standing orders being breached and like I say if they were they weren't highlighted at the time.' McIntyre believed the procedures used on the day were appropriate and democratic because they were all voted on in an open meeting. 'Morally we may have been better to have discussed the item that is probably something we can reflect on in the future, but I still stand by the decision we made at the time.' McIntyre said iwi council relations had not been set back significantly 'there hasn't been a good relationship in the first instance'. That fired up councillor Susan Hughes. 'I find it extraordinary that you are sitting here today trying to justify what wasn't in fact and never could be justified. 'You set out to exclude myself and councillor Bingham from being involved in any of this. That was the plan and that was the plan that was executed. 'You undermined the integrity of this organisation by behaving as you did.' Council voted to adopt the report and all its recommendations with McIntyre voting against the motion. Following the meeting, Walker said he would not be withdrawing from the local government elections in October. 'I think we're done with this. We've done our thing and we'd like to draw a conclusion over it and put it aside.' He denied any collusion had ever occurred. 'As far as I'm concerned there was no meetings or any of those things. There was discussion at meetings like today but not meetings.' Walker was not inclined to apologise. 'What for?' Cloke declined to comment on whether he would pull out of the election race. McIntyre was not standing for re-election. He accepted councillors had colluded ahead of the December meeting. 'What's new about that? Of course we did, like I say, when we elect a chairman we collude before the meeting, is there something wrong with that.' McIntyre made an apology of sorts.
RNZ News
8 hours ago
- RNZ News
Labelling rules ease for genetically-modified food made without new DNA added, amid reform
Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard. (File photo) Photo: RNZ / Angus Dreaver The appetite for food made with the use of gene technologies will be tested in New Zealand, amid ongoing regulatory reform and an easing of food labelling requirements. Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) approved updated definitions for genetically-modified (GM) food in the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code in June for review, following public consultation. In late July, Food Safety Minister Andrew Hoggard and his Australian counterparts decided to adopt them. Food produced using new breeding techniques, including gene editing, will not need to be labelled as "GM" on the food label, if novel or new DNA was not introduced in the process. Simultaneously, the government was considering a new regulatory regime for gene technologies used outside the laboratory, after it attracted 15,000 submissions during select committee earlier this year. Minister Andrew Hoggard told RNZ last week, there was some vocal opposition to FSANZ's P1055 proposal during public consultation from those who "don't believe in [genetic engineering]." "There was still some vocal opposition, so that was taken onboard. Obviously, there was support from a lot of industry and scientific groups," he said. Andrew Hoggard said producers could still choose to disclose gene technologies to label it as such. (File photo) Photo: 123RF Hoggard said in removing the requirement, producers could still choose to disclose gene technologies used throughout production on the label. "There's nothing stopping anyone who is producing food that doesn't have any new breeding technologies to label it as such. We're not outlawing that people don't have to put these labels on." He said it came down to consumer's choice. "So if the organic sector, for example, doesn't want to allow these new breeding techniques in their production, then people who also think they don't want to consume food that's had new breeding techniques used in them, then they can just buy organic and know that 'okay, that hasn't been used'. "If this is something you're not worried about, then just go ahead shopping as normal," he said. "If it is something you are concerned about, producers who will be using the old methodologies will still be able to highlight on the packaging that, 'hey, we don't use the X, Y and Z' or 'we don't do this or that'. And you just need to go and look for that food." Hoggard said to the best of his knowledge, no health issues had been raised from the consumption of GMO products, like soya bean for example. Meanwhile, GE-Free New Zealand spokesperson Jon Carapiet said the eased labelling requirements took informed choices away from the consumer. GE-Free New Zealand spokesperson Jon Carapiet. Photo: RNZ "It's really fundamentally unethical to take away the ordinary consumer's choice in the supermarkets," Carapiet said. "It's all about trust, and to say 'we're not gonna even trust you to make your own decisions anymore'... is really wrong." He said the assertion that shoppers concerned about GM food would simply buy organic food instead was "disingenuous". "The average consumer certainly can't afford to go and buy organics on everyday basis. I wish they could, but they can't," he said. "So to say all the ordinary people of New Zealand don't deserve the right to choose, I think that's very wrong." Carapiet said supermarkets could ask their suppliers to disclose the use of gene technologies throughout production to ensure transparency and to inform shoppers about the product they were buying. "I think that in the coming months, if this does go ahead, companies will have to go above and beyond the food authority standards. "If the food authority FSANZ says 'no you can have GM crops and GE foods unlabelled in the supermarket', then it's going to be for the supermarkets to voluntarily label it." In a written statement, a Foodstuffs spokesperson said it took food safety "very seriously" and complied fully with the Australia and New Zealand Food Standards Code, including all labelling requirements. "Customers have the right to know what's in the food they're buying," they said. "As part of our supplier agreements, we require partners to disclose country of origin information, and any environmental or social claims must be accurate and substantiated." They said the same approach applied to food made using gene technologies, including GM ingredients. "Any changes to regulation in this space will be carefully reviewed, and we'll continue to ensure our labelling provides customers with accurate and transparent information, so they can make informed choices." A Woolworths New Zealand spokesperson said it will make sure its retail items complied with labelling rules. "If the labelling rules in New Zealand change then we would ensure all products comply with labelling requirements," they said. A government report on the Gene Technology Bill was expected on August 22. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
