NEW ZEALAND GAZETTE, No. 99 — 27 SEPTEMBER 2017

Hiku o Te Ika. We had a robust discussion but the iwi representatives could not agree. Te Aupōuri maintained that the taiapure was the best tool available to address the fishery at Waka Te Haua. The other iwi maintained that a collective approach was required and suggested that a new solution could be negotiated with the Crown as part of the Treaty settlement negotiations.

[86] We concluded the meeting on the basis that the parties would file final statements of their positions, which they later did. Their fundamental differences remained.

C. ISSUES

Inter-iwi issues

Introduction

[87] The taiapure proposal has arisen at a time when the five iwi of Te Hiku o Te Ika are in the throes of the Treaty settlement process. This has obviously been an arduous process and has resulted in significant tensions between some, if not all, of the iwi. These tensions arise from their respective views on history, whakapapa and traditional interests; their respective experiences since 1840; and their respective aspirations and strategies for the future wellbeing of their people.

[88] The tensions have certainly made my task of assessing the taiapure proposal more challenging. It was suggested that a judge of the Māori Land Court should not decide a matter of such significance to iwi and that my decision will have a significant impact on the future relationships of the iwi. I agree it is preferable for iwi to agree on such matters. But that is not always possible. The iwi have had sufficient time to agree and are clearly unable to do so. I must therefore perform my role. As for the impact of this report on iwi relationships, that is a matter that I cannot control or forecast.

[89] The inquiry gives rise to four inter-iwi issues. First, the challenge to Te Aupōuri’s mana-whenua. Second, the role of kaitiaki in relation to Waka Te Haua. Third – and this speaks to the overarching issue identified at the outset of the report – whether the recognition of Te Aupōuri as kaitiaki of Waka Te Haua would contravene Ngāti Kuri and Ngāi Takoto’s mana-whenua. Fourth, is it preferable that I recommend that the taiapure not be implemented so that the iwi can pursue a unified approach to fisheries management through the Forum, the Statutory Board or negotiations with the Crown?

Mana-whenua

[90] Ngāti Kahu and some within Ngāti Kuri argue that Te Aupōuri has no mana-whenua in relation to Waka Te Haua, Te Oneroa a Tohe and Te Hiku o Te Ika, and that the iwi is therefore, not tāngata whenua. Ngāi Takoto did not take that extreme position at the hearing, though its position hardened in its final statement. Te Aupōuri says it has mana-whenua but that the real issue for the Tribunal is Te Aupōuri’s role as kaitiaki.

[91] Like most courts or tribunals, I tread warily into the realm of mana, mana-whenua or mana-moana. These are certainly issues that are better resolved by iwi themselves. But where iwi have not been able to resolve such issues – as is clearly the case here – I must address them to the extent that they are relevant to the taiapure proposal.

[92] As noted, the Act does not use the term “mana” but speaks of “rangatiratanga”. Given the relationship between mana and rangatiratanga – as discussed earlier in the context of the Muriwhenua Fishing Report – it is necessary that I address the claim that Te Aupōuri has no mana-whenua as, if Te Aupōuri has no mana-whenua, it cannot be said to have the “rangatiratanga” that the taiapure regime seeks to promote. But I only address mana-whenua as it relates to the taiapure proposal and not for any other purposes.

[93] Interestingly, Professor Hirini Moko Mead avoided concepts of mana-whenua and mana-moana in his text on Tikanga Māori because they are political ideas which are used especially in laying claims to resources."

Nevertheless, the terms are used in the Muriwhenua Fishing Report and may be defined in simple terms (though their application to specific circumstances may be more difficult): “mana” equates to authority; “mana-whenua” is traditional or customary authority over land; and, similarly, “mana-moana” is traditional or customary authority over the sea or fisheries.

[94] In my assessment of the evidence, Te Aupōuri’s mana-whenua (and mana-moana) in relation to Te Oneroa a Tohe and Te Hiku o Te Ika in general, and Waka Te Haua in particular, is well established. That evidence includes the traditions of Te Ikanui’s occupation of the land and unions with Tihe and Kohine in the early to mid 18th Century – anywhere between 70 and 120 years before the Treaty; Tihe and Kohine’s own land interests through their mother, Te Amongaariki; Te Aupōuri’s occupation of the land since that time; the Native Land Court and Native Appellate Court title determinations of the Parengarenga block in the 1890s; the subsequent partition of the Parengarenga No. 5 block (including Waka Te Haua) in favour of Te Aupōuri owners; setting aside Waka Te Haua as a Māori reservation for “the people of Te Kao”; and the 1957 investigation of title of Te Oneroa a Tohe by Chief Judge Morison.