Council Rejects Wish Of Rūnanga To Obtain Land
Article – Matthew Rosenberg – Local Democracy Reporter
This land is not fit for purpose for the council, so theres an opportunity here to actually put it where its best needed and I think where its best needed is to go back to the people, says Mana whenua representative Pania Coote.
A piece of land with special significance to Māori will not be returned after Invercargill councillors voted to retain the status quo.
Mokomoko Reserve in Omaui — 25 minutes from Invercargill — was identified for potential disposal in August 2023.
The triangular-shaped section covers almost 5000 square metres and is grazed by way of an informal relationship with a neighbouring farmer.
Te Rūnanga o Awarua submitted to the council in October 2023 highlighting the significance of Omaui and desire to have a place for reconnecting with the land.
The area was known as a place of burial, and caution needed to be taken in changing land use due to the possibility of desecrating unknown urupā, former rūnanga kaiwhakahaere Dean Whaanga wrote at the time.
Whaanga also presented on Tuesday, reiterating it was a great opportunity for the council to offer the land as a place to camp or gather kai.
But the council's consultation also saw a number of residents object to revocation, with retention of the view a key concern.
Council mana whenua representative Evelyn Cook supported disposing of the land and said the issue was being left for a future council, even though there had been an indication it was trying to reduce its number of non-useful reserves.
'And this is one that some people would like to have . . . as a low-key, low impact use, and I'm a little sad that we're not actually looking at that potential,' she said.
Mana whenua representative Pania Coote agreed, saying the council was not thinking ahead.
'This land is not fit for purpose for the council, so there's an opportunity here to actually put it where it's best needed and I think where it's best needed is to go back to the people.'
Ultimately, Cook and Coote were the only members to vote against revoking reserve status and disposing of the land.
Whaanga — who is now a trustee of the rūnanga — told Local Democracy Reporting he was disappointed by the outcome.
But he looked forward to working with the council on projects important to iwi and the community, as well as understanding how the council would make sure reserve land was managed well for future generations.
Other options available to the council following potential revocation were to sell the land on the open market or to a neighbour.
The land in question is landlocked with no accessway.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
Cartoonist's view — YeoToday's cartoon from Shaun Yeo.
Now that the Treaty Principles Bill has been consigned to the bin some who want to keep up the conversation about sovereignty and rangatiratanga (Māori self-determination), are refocusing on the...
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
Growth and the environment
As if we needed reminding. The government reinforced its emphasis on growth by releasing three discussion documents, which cover 12 national policy statements and national environmental standards. The aim is to have 16 new or updated statements and standards in place by the end of this year, well ahead of legislation to replace the Resource Management Act. They would underpin both the RMA and its replacement. The consultation covers infrastructure and development, the primary sector and freshwater. It opened at the end of last week and runs until July 27. The scope is vast, leaving much to digest and react to. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop described the changes as both complex and technical, but also essential. The government claims its balanced approach represents the biggest change in national policy statement direction. The present regime was a "direct contributor to infrastructure deficits, driving up costs and slowing down projects". The measures would help "unclog the arteries of the economy". However, others see these changes as an assault on the environment and a win for the wish lists of lobbyists, such as farmers and miners. Freshwater will be a fierce battleground, and the government is consulting on options. After feedback, specific proposals will be released for further submissions. The government plans to "rebalance" Te Mana o te Wai, while Act New Zealand would like it scrapped altogether. Te Mana o te Wai placed the health of waterways as the priority, followed by drinking water, with economics and social matters secondary. New objectives propose that councils should "safeguard the life-supporting capacity of freshwater and the health of people and communities, while enabling communities to provide for their social, cultural and economic well-being, including productive economic opportunities". In other words, neither priority is ranked above the other. Councils would also be required "to consider the pace and cost of change, and who bears the cost". The government, occasionally correctly, claims that practical realities were sometimes ignored when previous standards were applied. Yet, strong action is vital to reverse the degradation of wetlands, lakes, rivers and aquifers. There are also loosened provisions for vegetable growers and water storage. The definition of wetlands is "clarified". It is claimed that the costs were disproportionate to the benefits, with fencing requirements for non-intensive grazing a notable example. In some cases, dilution is the solution. Consenting for quarrying and mining and clean energy projects would be streamlined, described as "cutting red tape and not corners". Commercial forestry changes may lead to slash mobilisation plan assessments, although questions have been raised about their enforcement. Granny flats of up to 70sq m would be allowed without consent in specific zones, and rules for housing on Māori land would be made more consistent and accessible. Consultation on housing direction as a whole is expected soon. Of course, the government claims environmental protections are important and will be retained. Rightly, there is scepticism. The devil lurks within a hell of a lot of detail across the standards. They will each need to be carefully and fairly scrutinised, although the results will inevitably fall short of satisfying competing views and interests. It has become clear that the narrow majority of Otago Regional councillors were quixotic when they fought on for their land and water plan. The government was always going to change the rules, and they should have accepted that sooner. National regional council representatives this week expressed frustration at policy swings. They are on the front line of RMA (and any replacements). They seek greater certainty and bipartisan agreement, as substantial changes bring upheaval and expense. The RMA itself was a bipartisan measure, once a pioneering piece of legislation internationally. However, it became more complex and criticised from all quarters. National promptly discarded Labour's 2023 RMA replacement. Lasting and consistent laws and standards built on practical environmental protection would necessitate major compromises. Yet, such a consensus is increasingly unlikely as National and Labour move further apart.
Otago Daily Times
9 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Te Pāti Māori stand down confirmed
Parliament has confirmed the unprecedented punishments proposed for Te Pāti Māori MPs who performed a haka in protest against the Treaty Principles Bill. Te Pāti Māori co-leaders Debbie Ngarewa-Packer and Rawiri Waititi will be suspended for 21 days, and MP Hana-Rawhiti Maipi-Clarke suspended for seven days, taking effect immediately. Opposition parties tried to reject the recommendation, but did not have the numbers to vote it down. The heated debate to consider the proposed punishment came to an end just before Parliament was due to rise. Waititi moved to close the debate and no party disagreed, ending the possibility of it carrying on in the next sitting week. Leader of the House Chris Bishop - the only National MP who spoke - kicked off the debate earlier in the afternoon saying it was "regrettable" some MPs did not vote on the Budget two weeks ago. Bishop had called a vote ahead of Budget Day to suspend the privileges report debate to ensure the Te Pāti Māori MPs could take part in the Budget, but not all of them turned up. The debate was robust and rowdy with both the deputy speaker Barbara Kuriger and temporary speaker Tangi Utikare repeatedly having to ask MPs to quieten down. Tākuta Ferris spoke first for Te Pāti Māori saying the haka was a "signal of humanity" and a "raw human connection". He said Māori had faced acts of violence for too long and would not be silenced by "ignorance or bigotry". "Is this really us in 2025, Aotearoa New Zealand?" he asked the House. "Everyone can see the racism." He said the Privileges Committee's recommendations were not without precedent, noting the fact Labour MP Peeni Henare, who also participated in the haka, didn't face suspension. Henare attended the committee and apologised, which contributed to his lesser sanction. MP Parmjeet Parmar - a member of the Committee - was first to speak on behalf of ACT, and referenced the hand gesture - or "finger gun" - that Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer made in the direction of ACT MPs during the haka. Parmar told the House debate could be used to disagree on ideas and issues, and there wasn't a place for intimidating physical gestures. Greens co-leader Marama Davidson said New Zealand's Parliament could lead the world in terms of involving the indigenous people. She said the Green Party strongly rejected the committee's recommendations and proposed their amendment of removing suspensions, and asked the Te Pāti Māori MPs be censured instead. Davidson said The House had evolved in the past - such as the inclusion of sign language and breast-feeding in The House. She said the Greens were challenging the rules, and did not need an apology from Te Pāti Māori. NZ First leader Winston Peters said Te Pāti Māori and the Green Party speeches so far showed "no sincerity, saying countless haka had taken place in Parliament but only after first consulting the Speaker. "They told the media they were going to do it, but they didn't tell the Speaker did they? "The Māori party are a bunch of extremists," Peters said, "New Zealand has had enough of them". Peters was made to apologise after taking aim at Waititi, calling him "the one in the cowboy hat" with "scribbles on his face". He continued afterward, describing Waititi as possessing "anti western values". Labour's Willie Jackson congratulated Te Pāti Māori for the "greatest exhibition of our culture in The House in my lifetime". Jackson said the Treaty bill was a great threat, and was met by a great haka performance. He was glad the ACT Party was intimidated, saying that was the whole point of doing the haka. He also called for a bit of compromise from Te Pāti Māori - encouraging them to say sorry - but reiterated Labour's view the sanctions were out of proportion with past indiscretions in the House. Greens co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick said the debate "would be a joke if it wasn't so serious". "Get an absolute grip", she said to the House, arguing the prime minister "is personally responsible" if The House proceeds with the committee's proposed sanctions. She accused National's James Meager of "pointing a finger gun" at her - the same gesture coalition MPs had criticised Ngarewa-Packer for during her haka - the Speaker accepted he had not intended to, Swarbrick said it was an example where the interpretation can be in the eye of the beholder. She said if the government could "pick a punishment out of thin air" that was "not a democracy", putting New Zealand in very dangerous territory. An emotional Maipi-Clarke said she had been silent on the issue for a long time, the party's voices in haka having sent shockwaves around the world. She questioned whether that was why the MPs were being punished. "Since when did being proud of your culture make you racist?" "We will never be silenced, and we will never be lost," she said, calling the Treaty Principles bill was a "dishonourable vote". She had apologised to the Speaker and accepted the consequence laid down on the day, but refused to apologise. She listed other incidents in Parliament that resulted in no punishment. Maipi-Clarke called for the Treaty of Waitangi to be recognised in the Constitution Act, and for MPs to be required to honour it by law. "The pathway forward has never been so clear," she said. ACT's Nicole McKee said there were excuses being made for "bad behaviour", that The House was for making laws and having discussions, and "this is not about the haka, this is about process". She told The House she had heard no good ideas from the Te Pāti Māori, who she said resorted to intimidation when they did not get their way, but the MPs needed to "grow up" and learn to debate issues. She hoped 21 days would give them plenty of time to think about their behaviour. Labour MP and former Speaker Adrian Rurawhe started by saying there are "no winners in this debate", and it was clear to him it was the government, not the Parliament, handing out the punishments. He said the proposed sanctions set a precedent for future penalties, and governments may use it as a way to punish opposition, imploring National to think twice. He also said an apology from Te Pāti Māori would "go a long way", saying they had a "huge opportunity" to have a legacy in The House, but it was their choice - and while many would agree with the party there were rules and "you can't have it both ways". Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said there had been many instances of misinterpretations of the haka in The House and said it was unclear why they were being punished, "is it about the haka... is about the gun gestures?" "Not one committee member has explained to us where 21 days came from," he said. Waititi took aim at Peters over his comments targeting his hat and "scribbles" on his face. He said the haka was an elevation of indigenous voice and the proposed punishment was a "warning shot from the colonial state that cannot stomach" defiance. Waititi said that throughout history when Māori did not play ball, the "coloniser government" reached for extreme sanctions, ending with a plea to voters: "make this a one-term government, enrol, vote". He brought out a noose to represent Māori wrongfully put to death in the past, saying "interpretation is a feeling, it is not a fact ... you've traded a noose for legislation".
