Decades-long Ngāti Ranginui Treaty of Waitangi claim settled in Parliament
The redress includes an agreed historical account, Crown acknowledgements of its historical breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi and a Crown apology.
In 1990, 10 Ngāti Ranginui hapū began presenting their claims, Ngāhapū and Ngāti Ranginui Settlement Trust chairman, Te Pio Kawe, told SunLive.
The claimants were Ngāti Te Wai, Pirirākau, Ngāi Te Ahi, Ngāti Taka, Ngāti Kahu, Ngāti Hangarau, Ngāti Rangi, Ngāti Ruahine, Ngāi Tamarawaho, Ngāti Pango, along with Ngāti Ranginui, he said.
'It has been a huge journey for the 10 hapū,' Kawe said.
These groups represented about 30 individual Treaty claims, but they decided to bring all their hearings together collectively, Kawe said.
In 2012, Ngāti Ranginui signed the agreement in principle with the Crown, and it took 13 years for the bill to be settled in Parliament.
'A lot of people have participated in this process, and a lot of people haven't made it through to the end.'
Kawe said after this bill was settled, there would still be an outstanding settlement around Tauranga Moana Harbour.
That settlement was a piece of legislation that provided a framework for all hapū and iwi to contribute to the wellbeing of the harbour.
Around 200 tangata whenua gathered in Wellington to hear Goldsmith read the bill.
The reading began at 11am, and the group stayed overnight on the Pipitea Marae before being welcomed into Parliament.
Kawe said the change would occur in a tiered approach, with some properties returned to hapū for them to manage.
Some properties would be for residential, commercial and cultural redress, Kawe said.
As part of the settlement bill, the Crown acknowledged it failed to protect Ngāti Ranginui interests in lands they wished to retain.
Purchase of land blocks in Te Puna and Katikati were done in breach of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi, according to the bill.
It also acknowledged that a scorched-earth policy was inflicted by the Crown on Ngāti Ranginui during the 1867 Te Weranga (bush campaign).
The Ngāti Ranginui Claims Settlement included 15 properties in the Western Bay of Plenty and Tauranga regions, covering a total of about 890.73 hectares.
Margaret Jackson Wildlife Management Reserve near Bethlehem would share its name with Te Wharepoti.
The name of Jess Road Wildlife Management Reserve was changed to Te Wahapū o Te Hopuni Wildlife Management Reserve.
These lands were primarily designated as scenic or recreation reserves under the Reserves Act 1977.
Several sites are subject to easements, guiding and hunting permits, plant pest control trials or historic grazing arrangements.
Te Hopuni is set aside for use as a cultural centre. The properties reflected a mix of cultural, conservation and recreational purposes.
Goldsmith said the settlement acknowledged the Crown's breaches of te Tiriti o Waitangi, 'including its responsibility for war and raupatu in Tauranga in the 1860s, the purchase of Te Puna-Katikati blocks soon after, the operation and impact of the native land laws, and the compulsory acquisition of land under later Māori land legislation that left Ngāti Ranginui without sufficient land for their present and future needs'.
'I want to acknowledge the people of Ngāti Ranginui who have travelled to Parliament today to witness this auspicious occasion and those who watched the passing of this bill online from Tauranga.'
Ngāti Ranginui is an iwi based in the Tauranga region with a population of approximately 15,000 people.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Another Resource Management Act change passes in Parliament
Photo: RNZ / Dom Thomas Another Resource Management Act (RMA) change has passed in Parliament, this one focused on speeding up consenting while the government works on more a permanent replacement. The Resource Management (Consenting and Other System Changes) Amendment Bill makes a range of changes, including: In a statement, the Minister Responsible for RMA Reform Chris Bishop said the legislation brought in sweeping changes, removing handbrakes on New Zealanders' lives, helping drive economic growth, and laying the groundwork for job creation. "Our full replacement for the RMA will be introduced to Parliament this year, be passed into law next year, and be in effect by 2027- but in the meantime, through this Amendment Bill, we're making it quicker and simpler to consent renewable energy, boost housing supply, and reduce red tape for the primary sector," he said. Green MP Lan Pham in her speech on the bill said it was part of an "absolute onslaught when it comes to rushed, ill-thought out legislation" from the government, saying the bill was piecemeal and would make things more complicated for councils. She pointed to the changes around freshwater which were introduced in an amendment on Wednesday, saying it "completely and utterly failed to protect fresh water for all Kiwis". "This is so significant that for the first time in the Resource Management Act's (RMA) history-an Act that was set up to deliberately avoid, remedy, or mitigate environmental impacts-this bill now directly allows and permits significant adverse effects in our most degraded waterways." The bill is expected to come into force after receiving royal assent in the coming days. Bishop said the next phase of the Resource Management reform process would include the complete replacement of the RMA with two laws "that better reflect the importance of private property rights". It would be passed into law next year and come into effect by 2027.
RNZ News
4 hours ago
- RNZ News
Why is the King of Tonga taking control of foreign affairs and defence?
King Tupou VI Photo: 2019 Mark Tantrum The King of Tonga, Tupou VI, is being asked not to sign legislation that would end parliamentary control of two key ministries. Last week, under an urgent vote, the Tonga Legislature voted for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be remade as His Majesty's Diplomatic Services, and to be run outside of parliament, under the auspices of Crown Prince Tupouto'a 'Ulukalala. The Tongan parliament staes that the purpose of the Bill is "to modernise and strengthen the framework for the conduct and implementation of diplomatic and consular relations, while also enhancing oversight of immigration in alignment with national interests". It includes the establishment of His Majesty's Diplomatic Services, creation of the Diplomatic Services Board, administrative provisions, appointment of overseas representatives, regulatory powers and transitional matters To some in country, this is a reversal of the more democratic reforms introduced in 2010. RNZ Pacific spoke with its Tonga correspondent Kalafi Moala about the motivation for the change. (This transcript has been edited for brevity and clarity.) Kalafi Moala: Basically, it's still a Ministry of Foreign Affairs being moved from government service under the Cabinet to become a service under the King, directly under the King and his Privy Council. That's the major change that has taken place. In other words, all diplomatic services, all the foreign type of ministries, including immigration, issuance of passports, all of that have moved from the Cabinet or the Prime Minister's Office to become a part of the King's responsibility in the palace. And it's a huge one. Don Wiseman: And why? We don't know do we? KM: Well, from the previous government, there was pressure from the King expressing dissatisfaction on the Minister of Defence and Minister of Foreign Affairs, which is why then Prime Minister Sovaleni, resigned from holding those portfolios. There was an expression from the King of dissatisfaction. Now with this government, what they have done is passed law in parliament that the Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Defence will move over under the King's jurisdiction. DW: And they did that right at the end of the parliamentary term, didn't they? Was there any opposition within parliament? KM: Well, that was the thing that surprised the public, because the law was brought in as an emergency law, or urgent and it was passed without debate and no opposition. It was just passed. And then a press release came out to the public that here is a law, and those of us outside parliament were just absolutely surprised because what it looked like is just a beginning of a reverse of the reform that took place in 2010. In other words, that the parliament would choose the prime minister, and the prime minister elects his ministers and all the government services. But here we've got one of those services being handed back to the King, and who can tell what other services will in future be handed back to the King? It's a kind of a reverse of what happened with the reform of 2010. DW: In terms of the Ministry of Defence. What's happening? KM: The Ministry of Defence, of course, have always been under the King's jurisdiction, and we do have a constitutional clause that says the King can't declare war without parliament's consent. The King had always had a say with the Ministry of Defence, but the Minister was an appointment of Cabinet. In this case, it would be direct appointment of the King as well as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. DW: In terms of what's happened in Foreign Affairs, could the general public expect any difference in the nature of the services, provided? KM: The services can remain the same, there are some people that are saying that this is probably the Palace Office's response to a lot of accusations about the misuse of funds. Much of that funding comes from overseas in terms of foreign aid, and now with the Foreign Affairs and Defence moving to the Palace Office, that means that they will be managing all of the diplomatic relations and aid or any assistance that come from overseas. It will be directly under the King's supervision. DW: What about funding? Where is that going to come from? Presumably, Parliament's not going to be voting for a budget for the Diplomatic Service. KM: Definitely, one of the complaints is that it will be coming as part of the Budget. There is, of course, the Royal budget, which comes from the Budget, the King's wages and all that. But this, with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it will come in from the from the Budget, the national Budget is part of our services and it will be supervised by the King instead of the Prime Minister. DW: It's a remarkable situation, isn't it? There's not going to be a peaceful coexistence. Is there? KM: Definitely not. Because as we speak today, a public petition is being handed over to the Palace Office in opposition of this move. The petition calls for the King to please not sign into law the legislation that will come out of parliament. But what a lot of people are afraid of is it seems to be a regression, or a reverse, of what happened in the pathway to democracy that happened in 2010 and even though we've had some struggles with that, but this seems to be a direct act of reversing that. DW: Who's behind the petition? KM: The petition is really brought in by the Democrats, actually the followers of Akalisi Pohiva from the Ke'lea. But it's gathering a bit of support from the public. The interesting thing is, some of those in parliament were strong supporters of the 2010 reform, but when this law legislation came in, they all voted for it. So there's a lot of very strange things happening in this country now.
Scoop
11 hours ago
- Scoop
Carbon Forestry Rules Still Wide Open
Federated Farmers says a report back to Parliament on the so-called 'ban on carbon forestry' doesn't go far enough to stop the march of pines across New Zealand's productive farmland. "This is an incredibly disappointing result and many farmers will be feeling a total sense of betrayal," Federated Farmers forestry spokesperson Richard Dawkins says. "Despite widespread feedback during consultation, and clear cross-party support for action, massive loopholes remain in the Environment Select Committee's recommendations. "Their report sends a clear message to rural New Zealand that the march of permanent carbon farms across productive farmland won't be stopping any time soon." Dawkins says one silver lining is that the committee has listened to Federated Farmers' concerns about the need to tighten rules around the 'intent to plant' test. "We made a very strong case that simply purchasing seedlings before 4 December 2024, with no land to plant them on, should not count as a clear intent to plant. "The committee has recommended the Bill be redrafted to make it crystal clear to carbon foresters that if they had seedlings but no land, they won't be able to enter the ETS." Federated Farmers has been collecting information on those who have purchased land after December 4 with the intention of entering it into the ETS. This has been presented to the Minister. "If the select committee's recommendations are accepted, those carbon farmers who have been trying to skirt around the rules will need to make other plans." Dawkins is highly critical of other aspects of the select committee report saying recommended changes have totally missed the mark. "It's extremely disappointing that what's proposed continues to ban whole-farm conversions only on Land Use Capability (LUC) classes 1-5 land," Dawkins says. "That might sound good in a press release, but in reality only 12% of farm conversions were happening on that land anyway. Our productive hill country - the engine room of the agricultural industry - is still at risk of becoming a giant pollution-driven carbon farm." Dawkins says two-thirds of sheep and beef farms are on classes 6 and 7 land. "Those classes of land are still exempt from the 25% carbon credit restrictions, so the vast majority of our sheep and beef farms will still be at risk of full conversion to carbon forestry. "Once those farms are gone, they're gone for good." Dawkins says Federated Farmers has always supported the intent of these law changes, but what's proposed simply won't deliver any meaningful change. "Recommendations on the Bill allow a potential 'lottery' system for class 6 land, where 15,000ha of conversions each year will likely still occur on a first-come-first-served basis. "There are also no restrictions on classes 7 and 8 land - effectively making it open slather. If you're in the business of carbon forestry, business is going to be booming." Federated Farmers argue that every single farm in the country should be subject to the same 25% carbon credit limit, no matter its LUC rating. "Otherwise, the damage just shifts - it doesn't stop," Dawkins says. "Class 6 and 7 hill country is not 'marginal land' as it's often described by foresters. It's often productive breeding land that underpins New Zealand's entire red meat sector. "Sacrificing that land to carbon speculation isn't just short-sighted, it's economic self-sabotage that will rip the guts out of rural communities, not to mention the national economy." Federated Farmers will continue calling on the Government to strengthen the law, Dawkins says. He says the recommendations on the Bill are "smoke and mirrors and do little to prevent the continued undermining of our productive sector. "We support the Labour Party minority view from the select committee hearings that a thorough review of the ETS and carbon forestry should be undertaken. "This was one of our 12 key asks for rebuilding farmer confidence leading into the 2023 election."
