Waitangi Tribunal asked to halt Taranaki seabed mine fast-track
Trans-Tasman Resources has applied under the new Fast-track Approvals Act to mine in the South Taranaki Bight for 20 years.
The mining and processing ship would churn through 50 million tonnes of the seabed annually, discharging most of it back into the ocean in shallow water just outside the 12-nautical-mile territorial limit.
Hapū and iwi are seeking a tribunal injunction to block processing of Trans-Tasman Resources' fast track application.
The claimants want an urgent hearing into alleged Crown breaches and are seeking to summon Crown officials they say are responsible.
ADVERTISEMENT
They say the Crown failed to consult tangata whenua, breaching Te Tiriti o Waitangi, and ignored a Supreme Court ruling against the seabed mine.
Rachel Arnott - seen here with kaumatua Ngāpari Nui at the NPDC committee now accused of bias - says unlike the miners Ngāti Ruanui will never leave South Taranaki, and will never give up. (Source: Local Democracy Reporting)
To get an urgent Waitangi Tribunal hearing, applicants must be suffering, or likely to suffer, significant and irreversible prejudice as a result of current or pending Crown actions.
Lead claimant Puawai Hudson of Ngāruahine hapū Ngāti Tū said their moana was rich in taonga species.
'If seabed mining goes ahead, we lose more than biodiversity, we lose the mauri that binds us as Taranaki Mā Tongatonga (people of south Taranaki),' Hudson said.
The area was also subject to applications under the Marine and Coastal Area Act – the law that replaced the Foreshore and Seabed Act.
'This is not consultation – this is colonisation through fast-track.'
ADVERTISEMENT
The applicants' legal team, who were also of Ngāruahine, said the Wai 3475 claim broke new ground.
Legal tautoko Alison Anitawaru Cole and Te Wehi Wright said the Court of Appeal proved the Tribunal's powers to require Crown action, in urgent and prejudicial cases, when it summonsed Oranga Tamariki's minister Karen Chour.
They argued the tribunal ought also be able to halt other urgent and prejudicial Crown actions – such as processing Trans-Tasman Resources' application under the Fast-track Approval Act.
The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including a push to lift our superannuation age, rising Middle East tensions, and Auckland's amateur footballers face off against global giants. (Source: 1News)
Taranaki claimants
• All hapū of Ngāruahine iwi
• Their school Te Kura o Ngā Ruahine Rangi
ADVERTISEMENT
• Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Ruanui
• Ruanui hapū including Ngāti Tupaea
• Parihaka Papakainga Trust.
Groups outside Taranaki facing Fast-track Approval Act applications have also joined, including Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Porou ki Hauraki.
As opponents pressed their claim, Trans-Tasman Resources was due to argue its case this week at New Plymouth District Council.
Trans-Tasman has said opposition to seabed mining lacked scientific credibility and the waste sediment it discharged would be insignificant given the load already carried by the turbid Tasman Sea.
Trans-Tasman Resources managing director Alan Eggers was expected to lay out his wares to councillors at a public workshop on Wednesday morning.
ADVERTISEMENT
The company promised an economic boost in Taranaki and Whanganui, creating more than 1350 New Zealand jobs and becoming one of the country's top exporters.
The only known local shareholder, millionaire Phillip Brown, last week was reported to be lodging a complaint to New Plymouth District Council, alleging bias by its iwi committee Te Huinga Taumatua.
The Taranaki Daily News reported that Brown thought tribal representatives and councillors on the committee talked for too long during a deputation opposed to Trans-Tasman Resources' mining bid.
Te Huinga Taumatua co-chair Gordon Brown noted after the hour-and-a-quarter discussion that it was was a record extension of the officially-allotted 15 minutes.
The committee, including Mayor Neil Holdom, voted that the full council should consider declaring opposition to Trans-Tasman Resources' mine when it was due to meet on Tuesday, June 24.
Phillip Brown was reported to believe the meeting was procedurally flawed and predetermined.
Iwi liaison committees in north and south Taranaki typically relaxed debate rules to allow fuller kōrero.
ADVERTISEMENT
Taranaki Regional Council's policy and planning committee recently reached a rare accord on dealing with freshwater pollution when its new chair – Māori constituency councillor Bonita Bigham – suspended standing orders in favour of flowing discussion.
Ngāti Ruanui has stood against Trans-Tasman for over a decade, including defeating its application in the Supreme Court.
Rūnanga kaiwhakahaere Rachel Arnott said the Crown should know mana whenua would never give up.
'We are still here because our ancestors never gave up fighting for what is right.
"Tangaroa is not yours to sell: we will never leave, we will be here way beyond Trans-Tasman Resources, they have no future here.'
LDR is local body reporting co-funded by RNZ and NZ on Air
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Iwi anger at law change which would strip customary rights in harbour
Coastal iwi could soon be stripped of their customary rights over Aotea Harbour, west of Hamilton, as the Government presses ahead with its plan to amend the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. The legislative move would overturn recent decisions in the High Court to award customary marine title to iwi. In November 2024, the court recognised Ngāti Te Wehi and Ngāti Whakamarurangi's customary marine title over the harbour and protected its customary rights. But the Government wants to toughen up the test for customary marine title and its proposed law change would overturn the court's decision. Aotea Harbour (Source: 1News) ADVERTISEMENT Negotiated by New Zealand First as part of the coalition agreement, the party's deputy leader Shane Jones said the courts have made the test too easy. "The law from time to time needs to be refined when it falls into the hands of adventurous jurists," said Jones. However, Ngāti Te Wehi has vowed to fight on. 'We'll keep fighting, mō ake, ake, ake tonu (for as long as it takes),' said iwi claimant Miki Apiti. He said iwi members 'were up in arms in joy' at the court ruling at the time, but now it could all be for nothing. And fellow claimant lawyer Harry Clatworthy said a significant amount of time and effort has gone into their case. 'To make all these kaumātua who have spent hundreds of hours of time and effort, and three weeks in court, to possibly go back, and at a base level to tell them their customary rights don't exist after living here for 800 years, it's shocking.' ADVERTISEMENT 'Important to get this right' Treaty Negotiations Minister Paul Goldsmith said he understands the frustration. 'But we believe it's very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand and everybody has an interest on what goes on in the coastline,' he said. Māori currently need to prove they have exclusively 'used and occupied' an area of coastline from 1840 to the present day without substantial interruption. 'What the new test does,' said Clatworthy, 'it makes it easier for the Attorney-General or Crown to say there was substantial interruption to the use and occupation of the harbour.' Goldsmith argued that everybody in the country has an interest in the coastline and that they are working on getting the 'balance right'. Under existing law there are already protections in place for the general public allowing for public access and recreational fishing and Apiti said the iwi has 'never, ever' stopped anyone from entering the harbour. ADVERTISEMENT Claimant Miki Apiti and lawyer Harry Clatworthy (Source: 1News) Clatworthy added: 'For the Crown to tell them their rights don't exist because people have fished the area, because boats have driven through the area – something they have no ability to stop – is wrong.' 'Every inlet is a wāhi tapu' - Aotea Harbour steeped in significance Apiti said the area is of particular importance to Ngāti Te Wehi. 'This is where our tūpuna lived… this used to be an old pā site, pā tuwatawata, around this particular area, until the, I would say, the late 1800s. Then they shifted from here,' he said. He pointed out other areas where there were pā sites, as well as the place where the korotangi bird artefact – a sacred taonga that is said to have been brought over on Tainui waka – was found. He added the ancestral waka Aotea, which the harbour is named for, is buried in the sand dunes of Oioroa at the northern entrance to the harbour. ADVERTISEMENT 'You might as well say every inlet is a wāhi tapu to us,' Apiti said. Today, Aotea Harbour is surrounded by a substantial amount of Māori freehold land and has four marae on its shores. The Government intends to pass the legislation by the end of October.
NZ Herald
8 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Highest-paid public sector chairs – how they compare with the private sector
The company's 2025 survey of directors, which covered 342 organisations across both sectors and 342 chairs, found that private sector chairpersons earn more than double the fees of their public sector counterparts, across an overall median for all entity sizes. Strategic Pay's sample puts median pay for private sector non-executive chairs at $132,815, while the public sector median is just $62,000. Strategic Pay managing director Cathy Hendry. Hendry noted that there is 'always a public sector discount … it's a long-term trend'. She said the lower pay in the public sector is driven by affordability and the source of the funding, which typically comes with much higher public scrutiny. Indeed, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon felt the heat of that public scrutiny last month, when news broke that new guidance would allow public boards to award hefty pay hikes. Labour finance spokeswoman Barbara Edmonds emphasised that the National coalition has found 'no money to help families with rising costs, but when it comes to … pay rises for Crown board members, then suddenly their pockets are full'. For his part, Luxon suggested that low board pay might damage the Government's ability to recruit the right people: 'This is just acknowledging that we need to make sure that we can attract good people … [it's] important that we actually are able to attract really good governance, of the Health NZ board for example.' Systematic fee increases began 7 months ago The Treasury has its own framework for board fee calculation, the Crown Companies Fees Methodology, and this applies to a limited subset of Crown-owned companies, including the state-owned enterprises. Last year, it advised ministers, based on benchmarking it commissioned from Strategic Pay, that 83% of all Treasury-managed Crown boards have fees below 70% of comparative market rates (both the Treasury and Strategic Pay declined to release the benchmarking work; Hendry said it is commercially sensitive). Last August, the Cabinet agreed on a two-step fee increase for these entities (excluding several, such as Southern Response Earthquake Services, which was within the target rate, and NZ Green Investment Finance, whose chair Cecilia Tarrant is on $98,000, which already enjoyed fees above the target rate). Ministers agreed on a January 1 change that increased board fees for 17 entities to 85% of the level Strategic Pay calculated the Crown rate should be – the Crown rate was set 10% below the market rate. A second increase, to bring fees up to the Crown rate, is scheduled for January 1 2026. Across both the public and the private sector, a rough rule of thumb holds that board chairs do twice as much work as regular board members. The Treasury's framework pays board chairs twice the fee of ordinary members; however, shareholding ministers approve a total annual director fee budget, and it's possible, though uncommon, for boards to allocate the chair fees that are below the figure calculated under the Treasury formula. The pay hikes are not related to good performance – the likes of Landcorp and NZ Post, where chair fees are rising 41% and 84% respectively, have been laggards – but the related Cabinet Paper makes it clear that the Government hopes the higher fees will help to attract better candidates. Both Landcorp and NZ Post have new chairs, appointed in the past year. The biggest annual fee increase accrues to Mark Binns, chair of Crown Infrastructure Partners, the remit of which has expanded considerably over his tenure. His pay will more than double. Before the rise, Binns' fee stood at $63,000. That rose to $109,620 at the beginning of the year, and will reach $128,960 in 2026. KiwiRail disclosed chair David McLean's fee was $89,000 in fiscal 23/24. On the Treasury's figures, that fee rose to $142,260 at the beginning of 2025 and will reach $167,360 at the beginning of next year (an 88% increase). The new chair is Sue Tindall. Fees for Crown Infrastructure Partners chair Mark Binns are set to more than double. Photo / Mark Mitchell Among those with smaller but still significant increases is Jim Mather, chairman of RNZ. His fees rose to $71,280 at the beginning of the year, and are set to increase to $83,860 at the beginning of 2026 -- a total increase of 41%. In contrast, Alistair Carruthers, the chairman of TVNZ, stands out as an anomaly. Despite the revisions to the fees framework and the Treasury's calculation that he is underpaid, Carruthers received no fee increase this year. The state-owned broadcaster has been struggling through cost-cutting efforts, including job losses, though it is not unique in this. Carruthers and his board opted not to take up the first round of fee increases offered by Media and Communications Minister Paul Goldsmith, who is responsible for signing off on TVNZ board pay. The big exception: Lester Levy, Health NZ Lester Levy, chairman of the re-established board of behemoth Crown entity Health NZ, is the major public sector exception. His headline pay is extraordinary across all sectors, and so is the work required of him. Levy will earn a maximum of $450,000 a year, which breaks down into an expected maximum of $325,000, with a further $125,000 held in contingency, a Ministry of Health spokeswoman confirmed. The figures are predicated on a daily fee of $2500, for up to 130 days' work (the contingency represents an additional 50 days' work). The headline pay of Health NZ board chairman Lester Levy is extraordinary across all sectors, and so is the work required of him. Photo / Mark Mitchell By comparison, the recently updated Cabinet Fees Framework sets a maximum chair fee of $162,200 per annum for the largest and most complex public sector entities; this fee level is predicated on a workload of 50 days' work. The previous chair of HNZ, Dame Karen Poutasi, drew an annualised fee of $219,000 in fiscal 23/24. The spokeswoman said the daily fee rates for the current HNZ board, including the chair, are unchanged from 23/24. In fiscal 24/25, the board was replaced by Levy as commissioner and three deputy commissioners. The spokeswoman said the current HNZ board is in its 'establishment phase' and the current arrangement will last for the next 18 months, at which point it will be reviewed and the ministry anticipates a move to a 'more business-as-usual way of working'. HNZ is the country's single largest health care provider, its largest employer, and the Government's largest Crown entity. It received $27.2 billion in funding in fiscal 23/24, its last disclosed financial year, which fell $722 million short of spending; it is a notable financial mess. Increases for most public board chairs In July, the Public Service Commission issued new guidance providing for sizable fee increases for the vast majority of public boards, their chairs, and other government appointees such as advisory committee members and commissioners. For the largest and most complex public bodies, board chair fees can now reach up to $162,000 (the previous cap was $90,000) – an 80% increase over previous guidance. The matrix of factors that determine which chairs and boards should be best paid includes the operating budget, asset value, and business complexity of the relevant entity. The framework is not prescriptive, and the new levels set don't compel Crown entities to review their fees; the ministers responsible can review fees at any time, and by convention, this typically happens every two to three years. The Minister for the Public Service, Judith Collins, told the Herald that it's common for monitoring departments to conduct reviews across multiple entities within their portfolio, to ensure consistency. Kate MacNamara is a South Island-based journalist with a focus on policy, public spending and investigations. She spent a decade at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation before moving to New Zealand. She joined the Herald in 2020.
Newsroom
19 hours ago
- Newsroom
Crown and council to take voting edge over Māori on Waitakeres body
Joint oversight of the Waitakere Ranges by Māori, Auckland Council and the Crown will not now be through a committee with equal representation after feedback from west Aucklanders, some opposed to 'co-governance'. From initial proposals of an equal five seats for tangata whenua and five representing public bodies, the latest deed to establish the oversight committee has moved to six to five in favour of the council and Crown entities. The change leaves west Auckland-based iwi Te Kawerau ā Maki feeling 'a little bruised, and beaten up' after years of waiting, but accepting it 'could live with' the council's change of representation and wanting to get on and protect the ranges. Iwi chief executive Edward Ashby told Newsroom: 'It was pretty clear there was a fear – and I do think it is an irrational fear because it's an advisory body and we are not the boogie man. But we are really focused on the outcome. We are not too worried by the numbers.' The deed for the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Forum, a body to be set up under a 2008 law but only now being finalised, goes before Auckland Council's policy and planning committee on Thursday. The Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act recognised the 27,700 hectares of publicly owned land in the ranges as nationally significant, needing protection. It specified the Crown, council and nominated iwi to develop the deed and oversight body, a non-statutory body to identify areas of cooperation and develop a strategic plan for the area. It aims to identify areas tangata whenua can contribute to the management of public land and to acknowledge their traditional relationship with the ranges. The five seats for Māori are initially to be taken up by Te Kawerau ā Maki, as another iwi listed in the Act, Ngāti Whātua, has declined. Under the deed, there will be no change of ownership of land under the deed or forum structure, and the forum would not be able to direct spending of council or Crown funds, other than its own delegated budget. In April, the New Zealand First party complained the forum would be an example of 'co-governance' with Māori able to set strategy and veto council or government measures related to the ranges. MP Shane Jones said his party would never agree to an iwi having '50 percent sovereignty over the Waitakere forest'. Ashby dismissed the criticisms in April as scaremongering and said the forum as proposed was not co-governance. If it had been, there would have been a different structure and entity established. The deed simply acknowledged tangata whenua's special relationship with the ranges area. Around 2250 people and organisations made public submissions on the heritage forum deed, with 51 percent in favour, 39 percent against and 10 percent recorded as 'other'. Analysis of the submissions by research firm Ipsos said there was concern among those opposed to the deed at the prospect of 50-50 representation on the joint committee giving tangata whenua 'disproportionate influence' over management of the public land. Those in favour of the deed and shared oversight acknowledged the iwi role of kaitiaki or guardian and the importance of tangata whenua having a strong voice and seat at the table. It appears that public feedback, rather than the political claims by NZ First and the Act Party, has now seen the forum membership weighting changed to favour the public bodies. Council staff recommend three seats for the Waitakere Local Board, two for the council governing body and one for the Department of Conservation – and five seats to be occupied by Te Kawerau ā Maki, to be shared with Ngāti Whātua should that iwi choose at a later date to participate. The role of chair would come from the iwi side and deputy chair from the public bodies. Waitakere ward councillor Shane Henderson says the composition of the forum changed 'in response to feedback, not to scaremongering from central government politicians but the voices of West Aucklanders that fed back into the process'. He said the new balance allowed half of the six-member Waitakere local board to join the forum, with two ward councillors. DoC's strong interests in the heritage area also needed representation. 'So the new numbers work a little better on that basis too.' Te Kawerau ā Maki chief executive Edward Ashby. Photo: Supplied Ashby says the change in representation came after the consultation and was put to Te Kawerau ā Maki by the council. 'It's a place the council came to that we could live with at the end of the day. It's about giving these people some certainty that there would not be a super majority of Māori on the committee. There's been a lot of misunderstanding of the original proposal. 'It's good the deed is out there and people can read it; it clearly says it's advisory, about public land, it does not have power to make any decisions about budgets. That's all in there.' He said the political claims from Jones and Act's David Seymour, among others, led to fears among some members of the public. 'I do understand that if you are reading scaremongering headlines on Facebook you might react. It's unfortunate. 'It's just the political reality of the time. The original proposal was for 50-50, not out of any power grab but simply that the Crown and council was on one side of the equation and on the other side was Te Kawerau ā Maki and Ngāti Whātua. It was as simple as that.' He noted much of the feedback against the proposed deed had come from beyond Waitakere and Auckland. 'But, there's this beautiful area. It's our heartland and I'm biased. It really needs to be looked after. We really need to get together on how we make it work.' The six-five composition of the forum was 'at least an outcome that takes some of the edge out of some people's concerns, even though I think they were not well-founded concerns'. He hoped the compromise result did not turn the clock back in other areas of the country. 'I like to think most New Zealanders are fair minded … and I would hope that progress made is not lost. There's been some really good progressive stories.' The council's policy and planning committee considers the proposed deed on Thursday, with the full Governing Body having the final say before the forum is appointed. Ashby says: 'We just want to get on with it.'
