NZ First and ACT MPs Shane Jones and David Seymour need to “learn to read”, the chief executive of a West Auckland iwi says, after they criticised a proposal by Auckland Council to work more closely with the iwi as “co-governance”.
Edward Ashby said the central government MPs were up to “mischief”, spreading “misinformation” and “scaremongering”.
Jones and Seymour are concerned about the potential for iwi Te Kawerau ā Maki to be part of a committee overseeing the Waitākere Ranges, but Auckland councillor Richard Hill said the proposal simply progresses something that was agreed to 17 years ago.
In 2008, the Waitākere Ranges Heritage Area Act recognised the area as nationally significant and specified it needed to be protected.
It also said it would progress a Deed of Acknowledgement that the Auckland Council, the Crown and the nominated iwi would enter into. Now the council is moving forward to create that deed, with consultation on the proposal closing yesterday.
Auckland councillor Richard Hills explained the deed would “in practice” acknowledge the relationship and interest a range of parties have in the Waitākere Ranges.
That could be to “invest in it, do trapping, do planting, do pest control, enable more recreation and protection of the ranges into the future”.
“This was asked for unanimously by the local boards and also unanimously by the Auckland Council.”
Part of the proposal is to establish a joint committee under the Local Government Act with equal representation from Auckland Council, the Crown and tangata whenua – in this case Te Kawerau ā Maki.
NZ First MP Shane Jones has condemned the idea, saying his party will never agree to an iwi having “50% sovereignty over the Waitakere forest”.
“We campaigned, we negotiated, and we agreed, in our coalition agreement, there would be no more co-sovereignty, no more co-governance of these public service-orientated outcomes.”
He said the moment you have a “50/50 committee set up as part of the Supercity”, it will “morph in no time whatsoever into shared sovereignty over the Waitākere”.
“What about the trampers? What about the runners? What about the walkers? That is an asset that primarily must serve all the interests and all the needs of Auckland.”
Coalition partner and Epsom electorate MP David Seymour agreed, saying the Waitākere Ranges is a “very special area to many Aucklanders”.
“The idea it should be governed half by people whose ancestors arrived 800 years ago, and half by people whose ancestors arrived more recently, is an anathema to the Kiwi spirit.”
He was also concerned about decisions being made to close tracks, saying those needed to be made “according to the best science”.
“And the people with the best science are the people who have the skills, experience and qualifications to make the decision.
“Being born Māori, while a wonderful thing to be proud of, is not actually a scientific qualification.”
Chief executive of Te Kawerau ā Maki Edward Ashby suggested the MPs “learn to read” because “that’s not what the information out there says”.
Ashby pointed out it had taken 17 years to act on what the legislation had promised, “which is a deed to be progressed”. That was all the iwi was doing, he said.
He explained the deed would do two things, “acknowledges our association” and “identifies opportunities for us to contribute to the management of the public land”.
“And so one of the ways we wanted to do that was basically set up a forum or a table for us and the Crown and Council to talk.”
He said that it would be a “non-statutory” body, and would be used to coordinate a plan for the area. Ashby maintained the proposal was not co-governance and said the MPs were up to “mischief”.
“I think it’s scaremongering. I think it’s misinformation. It’s obviously on trend for some members of this Government, and politics in general, at the moment, to beat up on iwi.”
He said he thought Te Kawerau ā Maki were being used as a “political football’, and the idea that the proposal was co-governance was “misinformation”.
“If it was co-governance, there would be land in a different structure, a different entity, there’d be decision making over money and things like that. And none of those things are on the table.
“Land isn’t changing title. Money isn’t changing hands.
“Power isn’t being taken away from anyone.”
He explained the council would still make final decisions over land it manages, as would the Department of Conservation, as would Te Kawerau ā Maki.
He said the idea that there’ll be “Kawerau police” telling people what they can and can’t do on the property was an “absolute fairytale”.
Councillor Hills echoed this, saying “there’s no change of ownership or change of decision making,” and that it was simply about “doing what we’re already doing in disparate ways”, but bringing local boards, council, mana whenua together to “improve the future of the Waitākere Ranges and ensure the investment is going in the right places”.
He said this is “nothing like” the co-governance the government approved a couple of months ago for Taranaki.
Seymour acknowledged it was ultimately a decision for the local council, and said that is why ACT plans to stand candidates in the local body elections for the first time.
“The legislation in question is actually a local bill, which is quite difficult for Parliament to change without the local council asking for it to happen.
“Hence, we’re standing local candidates so precisely that can happen.”
Jones said he would be taking the issue to caucus, and he will be taking it up with the Minister of Conservation, Tama Potaka. RNZ approached the minister for comment, but he declined because it is a local government issue.
By Lillian Hanly of rnz.co.nz
