Skip to main content.

Taupo hui

4 March 2005

1. Karakia Mihimihi (Lennie Johns)

Ko te wai Māori he taonga tuku iho, kaaore he take tua atu i tēnei: ki te kore te wai, matemate katoa tatou. Nō hea tēnei kupu? 'Mā ori' - 'mā ori ori': i heke mai te wai i te rangi, i a Ranginui, ki runga i a Papatūānuku.

(Freshwater is a treasure that has been passed down to us, there is no more important issue: if there is no water, we all die. Where does this word "Ma ori" come from? It encapsulates the continual descent of water from Ranginui, the Sky Father, to Papatūānuku, the Earth Mother.)

2. Introductions

Sue Powell; Riki Ellison, Livia Hollins (Ministry for the Environment); Gerard Horgan (Ministry of Agriculture & Forestry); Suzanne Doig (Te Puni Kōkiri); Willie and Linda Te Aho (Facilitator and minute secretary - Indigenous Corporate Solutions Limited).

3. Introductions of those in attendance

During the introductions, the following points were made:

3.1 Tina Ngatai (Māori Trustee)

Tina is concerned about being prudent trustees, and about land use that does not negatively impact on lakes. Tina would like to swim again in the lakes as she did growing up in the Koutu area of Rotorua. Her children have never swum in Lake Rotorua. It would be nice to achieve for our mokopuna.

3.2 Topia Rameka

Forest Trusts, landholder within the catchment. He is interested in hearing how issues affect hapū lands.

3.3 John Hepi

We own a forest and a farm. Our lake is a taonga not an asset, we must preserve it not develop it. If we are polluters of our lake, then we want to do something about it, so we are in the process of developing a plant that soaks up nitrate.

3.4 Dean Stebbing

First there needs to be a discussion between the Crown and Māori on issues about ownership. This is the principal issue for us. The discussion document doesn't deal with that issue. It seems to be a 'touchy, feely' document that talks about swimming and having barbecues on the foreshore of the lake. My key message is that the regions of this great country are quite different. Our community is quite different, specifically with regard to tangata whenua. Solutions must align with local values. The ownership construct is different here. Any regime of water allocation and discussion about values needs to align with our unique position. I am sure our whanaunga in Te Arawa will think similarly.

3.5 Lennie Johns

Lennie supports Dean's kōrero - we are interested in ownership of all our resources in our rohe. He also supports the idea of being able to drink our water.

Willie Te Aho explained the process for the hui, and the closing date for submissions - March 18 th.

4. Presentation (Sue Powell - Ministry for the Environment)

Acknowledged the point made by Dean, his kōrero on ownership will be taken back to the Ministers, having said that, the 'riding' instructions for these hui were that ownership was 'not on the agenda'.

Sue acknowledged the work of and the subsequent passing of Mahlon Nepia.

4.1 Background

  • This programme has involved a cross Government team, several diverse government departments have come together and this is quite a new approach
  • Some of the preliminary ideas were tested with
    • a general stakeholders group (eg fish and game, forest and bird federated farmers, FOMA, energy companies); and
    • a Māori Reference Group - : Heitia Hiha, Waaka Vercoe, Paul Morgan, Jane West, Gail Tipa - their contribution has been valuable
  • We needed to create some boundaries for our work. This programme focuses on water in its natural state, it does not address water in pipes, so it does not include the urban water supply, nor does it address marine issues but we acknowledge the importance of those issues.
  • The aim of this programme is to improve water management, how to look after streams and rivers and how to protect them
  • This hui is for us to come and listen to you - this is the beginning of the consultation process - the intent is to harvest what people in the community know
  • Following all consultation hui and public meetings, several reports will go back to government, and one of them will be the report from the various hui
  • If there are other problems or other ideas, we value your feedback.

4.2 The two main issues are:

  • Water quality is declining -
    • Examples of high profile cases eg Rotorua, Taupo
  • Allocation - involves taking of water, as well as issues around how much water should remain in rivers.

There is also another issue that we will be addressing: Water bodies of National Importance. To date, the Government has been reactive to major problems, what are other nationally significant water bodies that the government can step in and provide assistance with - as it has in Waitaki, Taupo, Rotorua, What is the role of Central role in this issue?

4.3 Possible Solutions - Ideas for a new approach?

(a) Providing National Direction

Some ideas are:

  • To make use of RMA provisions for national policy statements (eg coastal policy) and national environmental standards (eg around air quality standards for health) - this would allow priorities for water management and environmental bottom lines to be set up front - eg how much water should stay in a lake or river; should more be done with water conservation orders?
  • How to identify priorities - Government targeting where it gets more directly involved in water management -identifying the 'nationally important' water bodies - eg water quality in Rotorua Lakes - maybe government should be involved earlier.

(b) Central Government could become more involved

Such as in getting together to make submissions on regional plans, in developing best practice information and sharing around that information, funding for councils, use more pilot programmes (eg local projects and solutions that are already established)

(c) Working together

  • How can all different sectors come together to address some of the problems
  • Raising awareness - education about the issues that we are dealing with
  • Building relationships with Māori

Suzanne Doig - One action identified in the discussion booklet is 'Enhancing Māori participation', we are looking to clarify issues around Māori participation in Local Government - One possible solution is for Central Government to make it clearer what Local Government has to do in terms of consultation with Māori; more widely, Central Govt is looking to provide guidance for better engagement on a much wider range of issues (ie not just about water).

Some of the themes that have emerged from hui so far is the poor performance of some councils and also capacity and capability issues for both iwi and for councils - should there be resourcing and or help with training to enable Māori to participate better, and to develop iwi management plans? Are there other ideas? We are interested on hearing your views.

  • Pilot programmes eg Lake Taupo (cooperative approach working together in a partnership), sharing information

(d) Providing more tools for regional councils

  • We are asking a number of questions around whether we have enough tools to deal with some of the problems we have identified.
  • Should there be a system of comparing and prioritising consents (rather than looking at applications in isolation) should there be some kind of auctioning and tendering of water where there are competing applications?
  • Should it be easier to transfer water permits and consents - if some users have more water than they need?
  • Local Government prepares plans - local authorities could be required to prepare a plan concerning 'big' issues relating to water.
  • Should there be more tools to allow councils to reduce the taking to address issues of over allocation and water quality - is it something we need to look at?

5. Discussion

5.1 Dean Stebbing

How will you come back to us on the issue of ownership? This is a key issue for the Trust Board.

Cabinet is currently hearing Lake Taupo issues re 1992 Deed.

This could be fixed quite easily by way of a separate issue. Understands that you don't have a mandate to discuss ownership, but we are 'miffed' that it has been taken off the agenda.

Sue: we can report back faithfully your kōrero.

Dean Stebbing continues - This framework - is useful as a discussion tool, but this is supposed to be consultation with 'tangata whenua'. Yet we are only one of a key group of audiences. I am sure that you will make very good notes, but there are other interests in the community, and too often our values are watered down when combined with others.

Māori values associated with taonga don't get watered down by community values which are different (eg 2 nd generation water skiers) our tribe are kaitiaki. Our water has looked after our people for generations and will do so for generations to come.

'Engagement' needs to be more than frilly words like those in the LGA eg 'capacity building to take place', but it does not say 'here is your guidance'. So you need to be quite clear how you seek that engagement. How you resource that engagement is important also.

The framework as proposed still doesn't meet some of those high values that Māori will have. Unfortunately because you want to divorce the issue ownership, that is an intrinsic part of that relationship. You cannot separate those intrinsic values. On a Māori view, ownership is about looking after something, there is a distinction in the values around ownership between Māori and European values. Each tribe has its own values. Inside tribes, many different hapū have their own themes.

There is a hugely complex Resource Consent system operating at both ends of the Lake. The Lake is seen as convenient source of water for hydro. Big companies have huge teams and huge resources and teams of lawyers. The tools you say you might provide must include tools and mechanisms that would enable kaumatua to discuss the importance of streams for iwi, hapū and that has the same weight as the interests of the likes of Mighty River Power.

Framework must also identify that there are going to be huge users who will need to be monitored. The 35 year consent regime doesn't give comfort. Any legislative review should cover this issue.

5.2 Kia Paranihi

More and more of our people are returning to our ahi kā, our papakāinga (place where we are truly from), to retire and so forth. We want our resources to be restored to the state they were in when our tīpuna cared for them. These taonga shape our identity.

When you say that 'ownership is outside the parameters' for discussion - this is an abuse. You cannot possibly separate these issues.

I appreciate all of the comments Dean has made (even though I have not yet read the discussion document fully).

In terms of the key value issues that he has raised: I know my hapū would agree with those.

This lake has been used primarily by outsiders as their playground. These users get a huge advantage - more so than us. There needs to be some balance between general use and the rights of those for whom it is our back yard and for whom there is a longstanding relationship and for whose identity is attached directly to it.

In terms of the discussion on nitrate levels and the impact on quality - there is a proposal that undeveloped land may need to stay undeveloped. This raises a huge question about the rights of people who have owned that land for a long time to do anything with it (when they eventually retire or return back to the rohe). It is like confiscation to have a policy preventing you from developing your land.

My primary concern, and that of my hapū, is for lake water quality to be preserved as much as possible, but there are other issues to be considered.

Maybe outside users can be responsible for restoring water quality.

Dean Stebbing - This could take the form of a tourist tax similar to what occurs in Japan.

No one really understood in the 50s-70s the impact of these issues. The eco-system around the lake is very sensitive. The local economy is lumbered with the cost of high quality sewerage and reticulation systems. Just like Queenstown the demand for houses in this area is growing.

5.3 Topia Rameka

Adds to Kia's point regarding undeveloped land, this includes the issue of landowners not having the right to develop forests on their land.

5.4 Gayle Leaf

Papakāinga living - there is a huge development going on in Taupo which has been given the go ahead by Environment Waikato and Council. This will mean a large increase in numbers of houses going up and we are being penalised.

Gayle shared a story regarding working with council - it took a while to get it through to council that they needed to go and talk to tangata whenua. There was a lack of understanding of who does what. After having talked to tangata whenua, there was, for the first time, some understanding of the different roles of councils, and a good process was worked through. We (employees of councils) need resources in to enable us to go out to marae and talk to those whanau.

Consultation ought to take place on marae, not in the Wairākei Resort. The marae is the place of the people.

Programmes - we need resources for councils to conduct education programmes with tangata whenua. We have come a long way since the RMA. We have the right to be educated on all these policies. We don't really care about the 'national good'. Our whenua has been taken for the dams for the 'national good'. So much of our culture has been destroyed in the name of the national good. Consultation should involve talking to the proper people in the proper places. It takes time to gain trust, because so many government departments have come and gone and because of the inconsistency between regional and district councils.

Submission process - resources are needed to teach people how to do submissions (not just Māori but for the whole community). These are basic needs. If these are not covered, then these processes are a waste of energy.

Suzanne: on these issues of education and resources - the focus has been on resourcing councils to understand Māori. This needs to be refocussed.

Gayle: one planner took the time to explain discretionary and non-discretionary processes, in simple terms and this was valuable.

Dean: There is an issue regarding scale: this is a really important topic and there are very few people here. If it wasn't for the TPK email, there'd be less people here. Our people are hui fatigued. There are other major Treaty issues being dealt with (and this is a high priority), there are tangihanga. It is difficult to engage on this important issue.

5.5 Kia Paranihi

I used to attend the Lakes and Waterways meetings, but Māori tend to steer away from 'community' groups and hui, and our views are not properly represented. This has resulted in Tuwharetoa interests being ignored (eg in discussion on the Water Conservation Order process). People will not be properly informed.

It is good that Ministry for the Environment is involved. It is difficult to know who to go to in order to deal with certain issues.

Gayle Leaf: There are some instances where Māori and the community have worked well together, knowing that at certain times, we have to go our separate ways.

Kia Paranihi: How is it that the RMA process does not deal with comparing interests in terms of allocation? Perhaps there can be a system whereby councils can reserve to avoid a tenders and auctions system would be ghastly.

Sue Powell: Case law has established the 'first in first served' system. One of the questions we raise is, is this the smartest way of dealing with it. Some councils are now reserving and are only giving short term consents (10 rather than 35 years) and this is heartening. But it doesn't happen much. Once people have their allocation, they tend to want to hang on to it.

5.6 Karen Walmsley (Tūhourangi)

Our iwi/hapū sought to have input into the variation of District Plan - water quality was a major issue - Lake Tarawera. One of the biggest issues was the council acknowledging the special relationship with our water, we still have not achieved this understanding or the respect after a 4 year journey which has taken tribal resources - a lot of money in the Environment Court and legal fees. But we have been very clear on how we wanted to be treated, not just on ownership issue but on management - in informing policy and legislation around the use of our taonga. Because our relationship has not been acknowledged, we cannot even get into a conversation until this issue is sorted out.

Now that we have resolved ownership issues for the Rotorua lakes, we have inherited paru water, and as owners of lakebed we have to be more involved in cleaning up.

This particular process is too far ahead. I commend you for your efforts, but it is not enough. We are not at the table yet. How you come back to us and how we sit in that forum, we need to be proactive, we will get less tired. You are applying pressure on us to come up with answers and solutions. But a fundamental flaw in the process is that we have not yet been recognised.

5.7 Tina Ngatai

I may have mandate to speak on behalf of my iwi/hapū, but this is not consultation and my comments cannot be taken as consultation with my iwi, who do not know about this hui, and who are not here. I have not read this document.

The MfE is taking the wrong tack at this stage. Your job is to look at what should the national standards, be and monitoring that. We have enough regulations, we don't want more. You need to look at our communities individually. We are different and we are unique. Ownership must be acknowledged first. Then we can grant resource consents to water which we consider that we own.

The threats from EBOP and various councils to extract water from our streams is enormous. A big hui is to be held regarding Rotoiti - and on the agenda is the idea of pumping paru into the Kaituna. Yet the Kaituna claim was heard years ago. The MfE should step back and come up with another solution.

There is much good work being done on the ground locally eg in the filtering of Nitrates, why aren't those wonderful ideas being shared?

One of our streams, Waiari, our people granted consent to extract for Te Puke township, but because Te Puke is not using all, they have done a deal with Tauranga for the 'surplus.' Who is regulating that?

The imbalance regarding the Waihāhā housing issue: a 45 house development has been approved, yet tangata whenua are trying to develop 5 houses on their papakāinga, and this was declined.

The value of submissions, my kuia and koroua are being asked to do submissions and they don't know what they are doing. I can't take the time to do it for them. Where is your assistance?

Undeveloped land - previously we were unable to develop, but now we are better resourced and more innovative and we are being penalised by not being allowed to develop for the good of the environment. We are being told to plant trees - we can't farm. What are the pakeha doing? When are they going to be asked to do as much as Māori? We have given up so much and we continue to give our land for sewerage schemes.

5.8 Kia Paranihi

Much of that kōrero supports that cg agencies being involved, because they can stand back more than local councillors and there will be more balanced outcomes.

5.9 Dean Stebbing

A tool that the Crown can give us is money. Every area will have its own unique circumstances. Water quality will affect us all in unique ways and will require different solutions. Give us the dollars and we can develop our partnership. I would hate to see a national statement that gives Central Government certain roles or more roles, and establishing another layer of bureaucracy, where the money that pays for that bureaucracy could be coming into the community.

5.10 Karen Walmsley

I note the minutes being taken and ask about why should we have to embark on a separate process of making submissions.

Sue: There will be several reports back. One of those reports will be just on these hui. This will have equal weighting. These hui aim to capture the kōrero and that kōrero will be put before the Ministers.

Karen: I ask for the emphasis to be on the kōrero rather than us having to transform the same information into submission format.

(Sue agrees)

Dean: seeing how the minutes of the hui are being captured gives me confidence that this hui will be reflected fairly.

Willie Te Aho explained that the kōrero throughout the various hui have been similar, but shared different examples of kōrero that has come from hui. We do not intend to 'average out' the kōrero, but to outline what was said in each area.

5.11 Sue Powell

My people have sweated blood to get money into the Lake Taupo project, and I am hurting. And I acknowledge that you are hurting too.

5.12 Gayle Leaf

Lake Taupo: we have a major development going on that is going to destroy our cultural sites (not the nation's cultural sites). All these new households will be discharging their rubbish into our lake. I take on board what you are saying, but everything seems to be upside down. The voices of those of us who live here need to be heard. I reiterate the need for educational programmes.

5.13 Kia Paranihi

There should not have been the situation where you did have to sweat blood. Proper planning, resourcing and balancing would have avoided this.

5.14 Dean Stebbing

I am not a member of the infamous nitrates committee. The work of the MfE and the TPK has been great. I am embarrassed though that we have been able to pick up the Lake Taupo issue with the speed that we have, but our people at the other end of the waka (Pikiao) are suffering. I am thankful that we may have caught Lake Taupo in time. I say again that no one ever understood the delicate balance of the ecosystem around the lake.

5.15 Tina Ngatai

I don't apologise for my comments at all. My people have been hurting for a long time. Join the whanau!

The proposed solutions for Lake Rotoiti just amaze me - given the Kaituna Report which includes scientific evidence and also recognises the importance of that water to tangata whenua.

Willie Te Aho referred to the concept of 'Māori Science' heard around the motu: eg the Kotuku, Parore these are environmental indicators; and water standards proposed - not technical - but Māori - we want to drink the water, swim in the water right next to us - that is our test tube.

5.16 Tina Ngatai

A key role could be for the Ministries to gather the natural filters, instead of stopping me from developing, tell me how to do it and look after our whenua and our water.

Sue: referred to "Bathing water quality" work being conducted, and from this work it has become clear that our water is in trouble.

5.17 Riki Ellison

Part of the Ngai Tahu settlement was the development of Cultural Health Indexes and they are working on two projects at the moment, including one at Taieri.

5.18 Lennie Johns

Quite simply it comes down to three elements: ownership, control, management of waterways or water bodies.

Our people did not see these elements as separate. In 1926 when the deal when down over the bed of Lake Taupo our people opposed it outright, for the same reasons that we are discussing today. This is de ja vu.

My grandfather did not see these elements as separate. The separation has come about for political reasons, it hasn't come from us. So sitting here today, we are hearing about only one part of the story, even though it may be disguised.

Ownership - our view hasn't changed - but it is so politically hot, it isn't even worth going there.

Control - each community/hapū around the lake, exercises particular control over their water body, some of our people have tried to prevent access, to try to overcome hurdle of ownership - let's talk about access.

Why can't Waipahīhī have the say over the Nekeneke Stream, no resource consents unless they say so? We don't want a national approach. We need to be creative in the way in which we look at control.

Management: it amazes me that I am still hearing about people knocking holes in septic tanks to sink them into the aquifer so that when the inspector comes around, there is a 'signed off' consent to discharge into the aquifer. Let us apply the rules we have currently got and be consistent.

5.19 John Hepi

For years we have looked after our water, it is 96% pure (we know that because we drink it). As time goes by and water becomes a real issue - what will be imposed upon us for the 'national good'?

I am concerned about the future policies that will be written that will impose upon our usage. When we go hunting we know where our streams are, and we know we can drink the water from them. We see the deer we are stalking drinking from the streams too. But when we want to connect our marae to that water, we have to spend money on putting a purification process in place that actually makes the water worse.

5.20 Dominic Otimi

The emotional descriptions that non-Māori give are always a concern.

Dominic shared a story about a kuia that drank water at the taihauauru end of Lake District, near Taumarunui, for 90 odd years. Council sent someone to test the water, who said the water was not fit to drink. The quality of the water had changed over the years. The water quality in Taumarunui is bad.

I agree with what everyone has said, but as long as emotional concerns of non-Māori aren't going to have the most weight, we have to have.

5.21 Ross Himona

If you come to Mangakino the Lake is paru, and Carter Holt Harvey pours all their paru in there.

5.22 Bill Sutton

In any discussion of natural resources, Māori are always going to raise the issue of ownership and the Treaty. At the end of the day it doesn't matter who controls or manages the water. They will be faced with the same issues and conflicts. The effect on water of run-off will be the same. If you deny drinking water in townships, what about your cousins living in those towns? Those issues are very difficult and we are all trying to deal with them. There isn't a silver bullet. I am impressed with the quality of the kōrero today. These are serious issues.

Willie Te Aho, the key difference lies in the values that drive the decision-making - eg the life within the river should take priority over the life that was shipped in.

5.23 Topia Rameka

As a landowner of a large portion of the catchment, I am nervous about the concept of national interest, national standards which will lead to national policies which may not necessarily align with local interests. All rules and policies should be in line with specific catchments, the ownership of the catchment and what the catchment wants. One mould (eg what is happening in Lake Taupo) may not sit nicely elsewhere. Waikato River - conversion of low nitrate forestry into dairy - this hasn't been discussed.

5.24 Kia Paranihi

How useful have the national standards been to Local authorities?

Sue: Until Sept last year there were no national standards, there were national guidelines (eg air quality). People's health and people's needs for fresh air to breathe are consistent throughout the country.

5.25 Kia Paranihi

A policy group funded by Central Government (that includes scientists and expert advisers) could be formed to go around each of the Territorial Authorities to help formulate policies. This would allow councils to address local issues in a specific way. This same group could also work with Māori authorities.

5.26 Topia Rameka

Some of the smaller councils don't have Māori input, "tools" section could look at nitrogen trading in more detail

5.27 Dean Stebbing

Raised a question about the process - who sits down now and looks at the kōrero? There would be some value in Māori experts analysing the information and that could include the Māori Reference Group.

Willie Te Aho explained the process of collation and dissemination of minutes of all hui.

Sue Powell - all reports (from hui, from public meetings and regional councils, and an interdepartmental report) will be posted to a website, and be submitted to Marian Hobbs and a report back to cabinet in May. Then the question will rise: What might we do? The intention is to go around again to let people know what is happening, but this is an election year and there is associated uncertainty.

6. Summary and Conclusion

6.1 Sue Powell's reflection on key issues

  • Ownership, control and management cannot be separated out ( Lake Taupo is a classic example)
  • Relationship of Māori with water and all taonga needs to be respected
  • Engagement needs to be meaningful
  • Concerns about the framework
  • Weighting of differing views and values (eg of users and tangata whenua) and the unique issues here
  • Can assign economic numbers to values
  • Equity - rights of people to be able to develop and use their land
  • Process of consultation - to go to Marae, the need to approach this differently
  • The need for helping people to participate - to bring Māori to the table - and make submission and to help councils to do this
  • What Government should be doing - a closer review function of local government
  • Support local solutions to local issues, rather than imposing national solutions - Catchment specific - one size does not fit all
  • Particulars eg Mangakino
  • Resourcing to assist iwi to participate, and to assist Councils
  • Look at issues such as nitrogen trading
  • Beware of over regulation

6.2 Riki Ellison

  • Acknowledged Mahlon Nepia's work on the Māori Reference Group
  • He compares this rohe with Ngāi Tahu, mountains and lakes
  • Thanked Dean for putting the issue of ownership on the table immediately. Kaitiakitanga is a beautiful word. Ownership and control are the same thing. Māori cannot look after something they don't control. So, wearing a Ngāi Tahu hat, ownership is the issue.
  • Section 6(e) RMA is one of many values to be balanced. The Whanganui decision is a watershed decision and we will have to wait and see what happens, but usually Māori values are pushed to the bottom of what is weighed up.
  • Acknowledges that Māori are suffering from hui fatigue in terms of having to attend the many and various consultation hui, and that Māori are not resourced to attend hui such as this. This needs to be looked at. An associated issue is the balance of power - the likes of Mighty River and Genesis have huge resource bases.
  • Individuality of catchments is a key point and this needs to be provided for. So it is important for this team to listen to your kōrero and hear your thoughts.
  • Often Māori do not have enough understanding of the processes involved, what has been done during the time of the RMA to bring Māori up to speed? We want to address this front.
  • Referred to (and acknowledged) a point made in Christchurch - that what is in the river should take first priority - allocation comes second.
  • Māori always paying for development - this is something he knows too well, and cites examples in the South Island.
  • Reflection on Hui Taumata and the reminder for Māori for us to take charge ourselves, the government might support us, but we shouldn't rely on them.

Closing kōrero (Lennie Johns)

'Na te iti te rahi' Ko te werowero, ehara i te wero tangata, he wero take.

 

Closing karakia 1.10pm

Last updated: 25 November 2008