BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL NGATI WHATUA ORAKEI WHAI MAIA LIMITED SUBMITTER 3085 AUCKLAND COUNCIL

Transcription

1 BEFORE THE AUCKLAND UNITARY PLAN INDEPENDENT HEARINGS PANEL UNDER IN THE MATTER the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Act 2010 and the Resource Management Act 1991 of the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan AND IN THE MATTER of submissions by Ngati Whatua Orakei Whai Maia Limited on Topic 009 RPS Mana Whenua BETWEEN NGATI WHATUA ORAKEI WHAI MAIA LIMITED SUBMITTER 3085 AND AUCKLAND COUNCIL STATEMENT OF EVIDENCE OF MR NGARIMU BLAIR DATED 30 OCTOBER 2014 PO Box 3798, Auckland 1140 TELEPHONE FACSIMILE SOLICITOR ACTING: ANNEKE THEELEN anneke.theelen@minterellison.co.nz PARTNER RESPONSIBLE: DANIEL CLAY AYT Court

2 1 INTRODUCTION 1. My name is Ngarimu Alan Huiroa Blair. I am the Deputy Chair of the Ngati Whatua Orakei Trust which is an elected body that represents the collective interests of the descendants of Tuperiri who established Ngati Whatua Orakei mana and Ahi Kaaroa on the Auckland Isthmus in the mid 17th Century. SUMMARY 2. The key points of my statement of evidence are as follows; (a) (b) (c) (d) Ngati Whatua Orakei has mana whenua/ahi kaaroa for a large and significant part of the area now governed by Auckland Council, centred around the Auckland isthmus. Ngati Whatua Orakei acknowledge that other iwi or hapu can claim tangata whenua status and hold mana and ahi kaaroa for other parts of the Council s jurisdictional area. Ngati Whatua Orakei is a significant landowner in Auckland. It owns land in various parts of Auckland, both Treaty settlement and commercially purchased land. Through these interests, Ngati Whatua Orakei has experience in co-governance with statutory bodies such as Auckland Council. Ngati Whatua Orakei has not been adequately involved in planning for Auckland since 1840, and has suffered as a result. There are many examples where I consider that a different, more informed and better outcome could have been arrived at if Ngati Whatua Orakei were involved. The result of this lack of adequate and appropriate input into planning decisions is an inadequate understanding and response to the cultural issues and concerns Ngati Whatua Orakei have. Ngati Whatua Orakei should have involvement in planning processes and decisions which involve or affects Ngati Whatua Orakei interests. This involvement should in my view be more than ad hoc consultation as simply another stakeholder. We should be at the decision making table for relevant proposals, and methods such as joint management agreements would go a long way to achieving this. The proposed

3 Unitary Plan (PAUP) provisions on this matter are a good start, but should go further to actively encourage and facilitate co-governance. 2 (e) (f) (g) Ngati Whatua Orakei as a Treaty partner and ahi kaaroa with unbroken occupation and use has a particular status and expertise in resource management including as kaitiaki. There will be benefits to good decision making if Ngati Whatua Orakei were involved in planning processes. The PAUP does not have a complete list of culturally significant sites and some identified sites are limited in the area protected (e.g. certain maunga). Further, the identification of some areas are culturally sensitive so are not appropriate to include in the PAUP. Protection of culturally significant sites should not be limited to those listed in the PAUP. Okahu Bay should be included as a culturally significant site. It has cultural significance since and prior to the signing of the Treaty by Ngati Whatua Orakei tupuna in 1840, is the ancestral kainga (village) of Ngati Whatua Orakei and remains a significant site to Ngati Whatua Orakei. EXPERIENCE AND QUALIFICATIONS 3. I hold a bachelors degree in Geography and Maori from the University of Auckland and lecture is various departments there and at AUT on Maori urban planning, design and media matters. I established the Ngati Whatua Orakei Heritage and Planning unit in 1998, the predecessor to the Ngati Whatua Orakei Whai Maia Limited, Toki Taiao Unit. 4. I have read the Environment Court s Code of Conduct for Expert Witnesses contained within the Environment Court Practice Note I agree to comply with the Code. This evidence is within my area of expertise. I have not omitted to consider material facts known to me that might alter or detract from my expressed opinions.

4 3 NGATI WHATUA ORAKEI WHAI MAIA LIMITED 5. The Ngati Whatua Orakei Trust owns two subsidiary companies which each in turn have separate Boards of Directors that include independent people. Whai Maia Limited is responsible for the day to day operations that relate to the social and cultural enhancement of our people. This includes protecting our natural resources, waahi whakahirahira (sites of significance) and waahi tapu (sacred sites) through the exercise of kaitiakitanga. Our failure to adequately protect our natural and cultural heritage not only has serious negative impacts on our physical well-being but also on our cultural and spiritual essence. NGATI WHATUA ORAKEI - BRIEF RELEVANT HISTORY 6. Although there was involvement prior to that time, Ngati Whatua s occupation of the Tamaki Isthmus (i.e. the land between and bordering the Waitemata and Manukau Harbours) began in earnest in the 17th Century. This occupation is marked by some of the twenty Ngati Whatua placenames dating from this period, e.g. Te Rae o Kawharu (Arch Hill), Te Whakatakatakanga (Hobson Bay), Ipupakore (near Mount Eden Prison), Te Toi o Kawharu (the highest point in the Waitakere Ranges) and Te Rerengaoraiti (Point Britomart - now destroyed). 7. From the 18th Century and more particularly since 1740 Ngati Whatua have been tangata whenua and hold mana and Ahi Kaaroa (unbroken occupation and use) over the whole inner Waitemata Harbour, from Mission Bay (formerly Kohimaramara) in the east and all points west from there to the Tasman Sea, together with equivalent parts of North Shore, and ranging south-west to the northern part of the Manukau Harbour from Mangere to the Manukau Heads. This resulted from the campaigning of Ngati Whatua under the principal leadership of Tuperiri against the Waiohua. After the final battle at Mt. Mangere, Tuperiri built his main Pa at Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) and held undisputed possession of all the lands in the Isthmus formerly held by the Waiohua, (which latter, notwithstanding intermarriage then ceased to exist as a separate iwi). As stated in the Judgment of Chief Native Land Court Judge Fenton in his well-known 1869 Judgment on the status of the Orakei Block, Ngati Whatua had:

5 4...exterminated the tribes that occupied this Isthmus, entered into possession of the empty country and settled down permanently and here they have ever since remained as the dominant lord of the soil. The Court has found that there are no concurrent rights or titles which ought to diminish their estates or interests and it therefore decides that one or more certificates of title shall issue in favour of these tribes (i.e. Te Taou, Ngaoho, and Te Uringutu today known as 'Ngati Whatua Orakei') or in favour of such persons comprising them as shall be determined upon hearing further evidence... (2) 8. I should add that from 1740 onwards to 1840 Ngati Whatua are recorded as living and working not only at Tuperiri s main Pa at Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) but also at: Okahu, Whakatakataka (Orakei), Purewa (Meadowbank), Rangitoto (Remuera), Waipapa (Beach Road), Horotiu (Queen Street/Albert Park), Waiariki (University/Albert Park), Te To (Auckland Gas Works), Te Rehu (Shelly Point), Onewa (Kauri Point), Maunganui (Birkdale), Ouruamo (Beach Haven), Tauhinu (Greenhithe), Pitoitoi (Riverhead), Kopupaka (Henderson), Hikurangi (Manukau Heads), Karangahape (Cornwallis), Ihumatao (Manukau/Mangere), Te Whau (Blockhouse Bay), Mangere, Onehunga, Waikumete and/or Owairaka. 9. Ngati Whatua had their food production in the central Isthmus organised into gardening and fishing circuits themselves dictated by soils, fish stocks and the native calendar (maramataka). There were numerous fishing circuits around both the Waitemata and Manukau Harbours, generally commencing in early spring and using fishing stations when distant from main settlements. For instance, shark and snapper in the Waitemata were obtained off Kohimaramara, Okahu, Okaa (Herne Bay), west around the Harbour off Te Whau, north to Pitoitoi and Tauhinu, south and east to Ouruamo and Onewa. In the Manukau there were abundant pipi, kina, paua, kutai and tio all along the northern shore especially from Te Whau to Karangahape. Off Mangere/Ihumatao (Ihu-mata-oho) and Puketutu Island, there were patiki and kahawai as well as shark.

6 5 PAX BRITANNICA 10. In 1840 Te Kawau and other Ngati Whatua leaders signed the Treaty of Waitangi and then the first sale agreement that led to the establishment of Auckland as now outlined: For Ngati Whatua, Apihai Te Kawau the then principal leader, Reweti and Tinana signed the Treaty of Waitangi at Manuka (Manukau) on 20 March 1840 with W C Symonds signing on behalf of the Crown. It was a Treaty that opened with reference to Peace and Good Order and the necessary Laws and Institutions. But Te Kawau sought more than words to gain security against the Northern tribes. (3) 11. In fact he actively sought an alliance with the Crown. By such means he hoped to obtain military protection and instruction in the arts of commerce, in return for land for settlement and food and shelter for the early colonists. Accordingly he sent his nephew, Reweti, and others to the Bay of Islands to ask Governor Hobson to come to Tamaki. As the Waitangi Tribunal notes,... a few days after the signing of the Treaty, seven chiefs from Orakei came to the Bay seeking protection against their old enemies the Nga Puhi, and asking the Lieutenant-Governor to take up his residence amongst them. They offered him land if he would live at Tamaki. Hobson, anxious to find a more central location for his capital, agreed and made an inspection of the area on February (4) 12. On 20 September 1840 Governor Hobson wrote to George Clark who had the title of Protector of Aborigines and was part of the Governor s colonial administration in these terms: You are hereby authorized to treat with the Ngati Whatua tribe on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen for the purchase of the largest portions of their territory, if possible in a continuous section taking care to reserve for the natives ample quantity of land for their own support and you are further authorized to give in payment for the same money or barter to any amount you think just and equitable both for the Government and for the natives submitting to me as soon as possible an account of your proceedings. (5)

7 6 13. As a result, George Clark on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen executed a Deed of Purchase for some three thousand acres of land from Ngati Whatua. This was a block which ran along the southern part of the Waitemata Harbour from Hobson Bay (Mataharehare), in the east to the Whau Creek in the west (Opou) and inland to the summit of Mangawhau (Mount Eden). In short the land so transferred makes up the modern Auckland suburbs of Parnell, the Central Business District, Ponsonby, Grey Lynn, Herne Bay, Westmere and some of Newmarket and Mount Eden. I might add that the first forty-four acres of this land was then on-sold by the Crown within a mere nine months at an 8000% profit - a point not lost on its Ngati Whatua Treaty partner. 14. Nevertheless, according to a memorandum dated the 4th November 1840 from George Clarke after this first purchase,...the chiefs promised to sell a still larger tract of country when the Governor should finally reside among them. (6) 15. Finally, in January 1841 Governor Hobson arrived in Tamaki. He promptly repaid the Ngati Whatua delegation s visit to the Bay of Islands by greeting Apihai Te Kawau on the foreshore at Okahu Bay. It is said that over one thousand Ngati Whatua were assembled there to meet the Governor and Te Kawau spoke for them all. He said: Governor, Governor, welcome, welcome as a father to me: there is my land for you... go and pick the best part of the land and place your people, at least, our people (i.e. yours and mine ) upon it. (7) 16. So a further block, this time of some eight thousand acres, came to be transferred by Ngati Whatua to the Crown on 18 June It incorporates what are now the suburbs of Westmere, Point Chevalier, Western Springs, Waterview, Avondale, Mount Albert, Titirangi, Sandringham and Roskill, Three Kings and Balmoral, Kingsland, Mount Eden and Epsom. This, then, together with the first (3,000 acre) block, constituted the material basis for the hoped-for alliance between Crown and Ngati Whatua. The Orakei Report refers to the essence of their relationship at this time as a treaty (p.20ff) where Crown, and settlers generally,

8 7...came not as conquerors, not as interlopers, but as Te Kawau s invitees to share the land with Ngati Whatua. (p 18, emphasis added) 17. Thus when Te Kawau received a nominal amount of goods and sovereigns for his people s land it was not seen by them as a single, irreversible, commercial transaction, but as a token, a koha, of a new found union. The payment was the union. 18. I should acknowledge at this point that certain areas within the jurisdiction of Auckland Council are those where various Iwi of the Waikato-Tainui confederation and Marutuahu Confederation can claim tangata whenua status and hold mana and Ahi Kaaroa. In particular, Marutuahu and more particularly Ngati Paoa, hold that status in the Hauraki Gulf and on both sides of the Tamaki River and down the south-east coastline. They do not hold that status within the former Auckland City Council boundaries on the central isthmus. We also note Ngati Whatua o Kaipara, Te Uri o Hau, Ngati Wai, Ngati Manuhiri and Ngati Rehua north of the central isthmus. 19. The Waitangi Tribunal s recommendations covering the grievances arising out of the Orakei Claim were largely incorporated into the Orakei Act 1991 and implemented by government. Thus we have a marae and the symbol of our Ngati Whatuatanga, the meeting house Tumutumuwhenua. We administer jointly with the Auckland Council the 150 acre Takaparawhau Park (Bastion Point) and more recently the 76 acre Pourewa Reserve. Though held in Ngati Whatua title we have kept free for public enjoyment the Okahu Domain and the priceless cliffside open space linking Okahu Bay to Mission Bay, with its incomparable views of City, Harbour and Gulf. We have successfully comanaged major reserves for 23 years the blueprint of which has been used in modern Treaty settlements in wider Auckland and across the country. 20. Further recognition of Ngati Whatua s rights in the Isthmus is to be found in the sale of the railway yards in In what was really a process analogous to the Public Works Act sale-back provision to previous ownership when a public work ceases, the Crown sold the then Ngati Whatua o Orakei Maori Trust Board the Auckland Central Railyards when they became surplus, for a then fair market value established by registered valuer of forty million five hundred thousand dollars. This sale was part of the settlement of Railways claims

9 8 ratified by both the Crown Joint Congress Working Party and the Waitangi Tribunal. Ngati Whatua Orakei gave a 50% discount on the ground-lease to the then Auckland City Council to enable the development of the Arena entertainment venue. This again shows Ngati Whatua's commitment to developing a liveable city all citizens can participate in and be proud of. NGATI WHATUA ORAKEI S EXPERIENCE IN PLANNING 21. Present impressions however should not blind us to the harsh realities of events of 60 years ago and their aftermath. Some of us living today recall how the papakainga (ancestral village and marae in Okahu Bay) was taken in the face of our protests under the Public Works Act in 1949, recall too, how the authorities then later burnt down our meeting house, Te Puru o Tamaki, in front of our elders - having first calculated its value at thirteen shillings per square foot. From this time, 1951 to 1978, we were left with only our quarter acre urupa (cemetery), with a few of us living at the whim of governments in State rental houses on the hill behind the urupa. Although some redress has been found latterly for the injustices arising out of the Crown s actions over the Orakei block, none can compensate for the loss and humiliation suffered by one and a half generation s deprivation of an ancestral marae. 22. The City sewage scheme that discharged raw effluent from 1914 at Okahu Bay was the predecessor to the final eviction of families from the Okahu village. For 40 years Ngati Whatua suffered the indignity of this operation which showed more than anything what the City thought of us. Unfortunately for our close relatives at Ihumatao and Pukaki it would be their turn to endure this reality once the Mangere sewage plant opened in the 1950s. 23. Ngati Whatua Orakei had no input into any of these decisions that had the most deleterious effects on the cultural and spiritual health of our people. This despite Paora Tuhaere's impassioned pleas to influence decision making at the local level when he said at the Kohimarama Conferences of the 1860s - 'Let us be admitted to your Councils'. 24. Overall, Ngati Whatua Orakei has over the years not had anything near what I consider to be adequate and appropriate input into planning decisions, and the result is an inadequate understanding and response to the cultural issues and

10 9 concerns we have. While the sewage discharge is a stark example, there are many other cases where I consider that a different, and better, outcome could have been arrived at if Ngati Whatua Orakei were involved. This involvement should in my view be more than ad hoc consultation as another stakeholder. Ngati Whatua should be at the decision making table for proposals which involve or affect its interests on the Isthmus, and methods such as joint management agreements would go a long way to achieving this. BENEFITS OF CO-GOVERNANCE 25. As Ngati Whatua Orakei has recovered economically it is now more active in planning processes as both a submitter and an applicant. It is with regret however that to date there have still not been any co-management arrangements established as provided for in the RMA91 and through our relationship with successive Councils. We have long sought co-management arrangements for our ancestral lands at Orakei concerning our papakainga land where we would share statutory decision making once we have agreed design guidelines and a masterplan. This arrangement would not only recognise the Treaty relationship between ourselves and Council in a most practical way but also improve urban design outcomes as the process is deliberately collaborative with both sides bringing immense intellectual capital to the table. This capital includes unique specialist knowledge and expertise of Ngati Whatua Orakei and the result would be a much more informed basis on which decisions can be made. UNSCHEDULED CULTURALLY SIGNIFICANT SITES INCLUDING OKAHU BAY 26. I can advise the Panel that Ngati Whatua Orakei has not been asked by Council to provide a comprehensive list of culturally significant sites for the PAUP. Such sites include Nga Ana Peka Rau ('the bat caves' in Epsom), Ipu Pakore ('the broken calabash' in Mt Eden), Te Rae o Kawharu ('Kawharu's brow' in Arch Hill) and Tuna Mau ('catching eels', a stream in Ponsonby). In addition there are a number of burial sites we know of and monitor that are not scheduled and for obvious reasons wish to control how that information is managed.

11 I also understand that the protection mechanisms currently in the PAUP for some of the ancestral maunga of Ngati Whatua Orakei are limited in their geographical scope. For Ngati Whatua Orakei, parts of the maunga which are outside of the PAUP s cultural overlays or sites are also culturally significant and should be afforded similar protection to the overlay areas and sites. 28. For the above reasons the protection of and management of effects on culturally significant sites should not be limited to those listed in the PAUP. However we recognise that the public including ourselves needs more certainty with regards to the location, nature and scale of importance of such sites to assist with determining appropriate protection mechanisms. We continue to make ourselves and our cultural heritage information available to Council in order to find a practical and pragmatic solutions. 29. We also consider that the number of Iwi involved in decision making necessarily needs to be significantly reduced. The current practice where upwards of 15 Iwi have been termed 'mana whenua', with equal rights to participate is not only impractical and costly but does not match the historical record and the true test of unbroken occupation and use or Ahi Kaaroa. 30. Finally we wish to include Okahu Bay as a scheduled site of significance. We own and have freehold title to most of the adjoining land including the beach down to the mean high water mark. The village our grandparents were born into survived until 1951 before the sad events of the public works eviction already mentioned. For them(and for Ngati Whatua Orakei), Okahu Bay is still their home regardless of whether 40,000 cars traverse it each day. The bay provided much needed kaimoana to supplement household diets but more than that the act of customary harvest and management enabled Ngati Whatua Orakei to practice who they are. Today the present generation is as active as ever on the water with a strong and vibrant waka culture with many families participating in Waka Ama and even some at the Akarana Yacht Club. The ecological health of the Bay is of major concern to the Ngati Whatua Orakei people and in recent years we have undertaken scientific shellfish studies to understand how best to restore the mauri (health-essence) of the bay. It is our firm belief that identifying Okahu Bay (including the coastal part of the Bay) as a site of cultural significance with co-management arrangements similar to that

12 11 of the Takaparawhau (Bastion Point) Reserve will go a long way to rebuilding the health of the bay itself and the people who depend on it. Ngarimu Blair 30 October 2014

13 12 End notes: (1) Orakei Act 1991 Cl. 19 (emphasis added) (2) Fenton, F.D Judgments Native Land Court: 95 In his 1869 judgement Chief Judge Fenton referred to the value of the corroborative evidence of independent witnesses, both European and Maori. His finding has never been challenged in 130 years. (3) Orakei Report (Wai 9) 1987 Waitangi Tribunal: 16 (4) Ibid (5) Turton, H Epitome of Official Documents: 147 (emphasis added) (6) Ibid: 148 (7) Orakei Report op cit: 17