Iwi leader rebuts claims of consent power grab
The regional council has reworded more than 20 clauses in its Mana Whakahono a Rohe partnership document with Poutini Ngai Tahu, mainly to clarify how it will work in practice.
Former chair Allan Birchfield, who signed the original document in 2020, has strongly criticised the new version, saying it puts iwi on the same governance level as the council.
'I am voting against (the amendments) because they will give iwi full control of the Council's consenting and compliance role under the RMA,' he told yesterday's council meeting.
Mr Tumahai, one of two iwi reps on the council, says Mr Birchfield is deluded.
'He's had it explained to him, but he won't listen. Every other councillor has supported the changes but he has his world view, and he won't change it,' the Ngāti Waewae chair told Local Democracy Reporting.
The agreement spells out how staff will involve manawhenua in resource consenting - a requirement under the Resource Management Act (RMA).
'The council will treat Poutini Ngāi Tahu as an affected party for all applications … where there is potential for adverse cultural effects, unless it is demonstrated otherwise,' an expanded clause says.
Council staff would decide if adverse effects were likely by talking to the environmental agencies of the region's two Rūnanga, Poutini Ngai Tahu partnership manager Ashley Stuart said.
A new clause in the agreement says the council will also 'strongly encourage' people applying for resource consents to talk to manawhenua themselves early on, through the iwi's environmental consultancies.
Without a letter of approval from the iwi, the council will treat the consent as 'limited notified', adding potential costs and delays.
Ngāti Waewae's environmental agency was already issuing at least one letter of approval a week to people checking in over resource consents, Mr Tumahai said.
The council held back three of the amendments for further clarification, but endorsed the majority.
Cr Birchfield was the sole objector, saying independent legal advice should been provided before these were put to council.
"These are major changes … they should be deferred and the community should also be consulted,' he said.
The former chair said he had signed the Mana Whakahono agreement in 2020 on the understanding it was a consultation document that would help to speed up and lower the cost of consenting, but this had turned out not to be the case.
'I did receive considerable criticism at the time and those critics have proven to be correct. This agreement is part of the reason why the council's compliance and consent function is so costly and delayed.'
Mr Tumahai told LDR there were multiple factors causing the delays.
'It's convenient to blame Māori - we're kind of used to it - but I think with the changes the council is making we should see an improvement within a couple of months.'
Part of the problem was overly-complex consent forms, and the council's use of North Island consultants who did not understand the West Coast context, Mr Tumahai conceded.
The council had been swamped with applications for resource consents as the price of gold soared, and had to hire external planners to cope, he said.
'We had a workshop today on creating new templates with standard conditions for alluvial mining, and a schedule that walks you through how to apply - that should simplify it for everyone and speed things up.'
Cr Birchfield - a veteran miner - did not attend the workshop, telling LDR later he needed to be at work to smelt some gold.
Mr Tumahai said the clamour over consent delays was coming from a handful of miners who had not been successful with their applications.
"They're not coming to grips with modern requirements and they are the ones making the noise.'
The revamped Mana Whakahono agreement also sets out priority areas for improvement in which the council and iwi will collaborate as Treaty partners.
They include planning for new sewerage infrastructure, and coastal retreat where buildings are at risk from erosion, flooding or sea level rise.
District council and industry discharges into rivers or the sea are also seen as priorities for change, but over time.
'The discharge of wastewater into freshwater and coastal waters is an outdated solution from the last century which is culturally abhorrent to Poutini Ngai Tahu and is becoming unacceptable to others within communities,' the agreement declares.
- By Lois Williams, Local Democracy Reporter
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NZ Herald
4 hours ago
- NZ Herald
Greg Dixon's Another Kind of Politics: Labour Party declared 'legally dead' by coroner
Missing in action? Labour leader Chris Hipkins. Photo / Getty Images Greg Dixon is an award-winning news reporter, TV reviewer, feature writer and former magazine editor who has written for the NZ Listener since 2017. Online only Greg Dixon's Another Kind of Politics is a weekly satirical column on politics that appears on A memorial is to be held on the West Coast to mark the passing of New Zealand Labour after the 109-year-old party went missing without a trace some 20 months ago. Although no body has been located, the Wellington coroner this week declared the missing party deceased. 'Despite alleged encounters with members of the parliamentary media, the Labour Party has not been provably sighted by any member of the voting public since late 2023,' the coroner said in a statement. 'Extensive hunts by army search teams, police sniffer dogs and global spy satellites have failed to find signs of life, such as effective opposition to the government's increasingly anti-worker, anti-environment and anti-Māori policies. As such, I have no option but to declare the New Zealand Labour Party legally dead.' In further comments, the coroner said that it was her belief that following the loss of Labour matriarch Dame Jacinda Ardern at the beginning of 2023, the party went into a steep political decline. It was last seen looking dazed and confused in late 2023 under its stop-gap leader, the sausage roll aficionado Chris Hipkins. Labour had had no further contact with the voting public from around that time and had not issued a single new policy about anything since, the coroner said. It is believed the party had likely gone into a 'deep mental funk' after its catastrophic showing at the 2023 election. 'A coroner has the power to declare a person dead in cases where there has been a major disaster and a body can't be found,' the coroner said. 'Obviously, Labour's near-record 2023 election defeat by National was just such a disaster and no one has been able to find the body of the Labour Party since. I believe that after more than 20 months without a public sighting, it is safe to conclude the party has died somewhere in the political wilderness.' Former members and supporters of the party will mark the passing at a gathering on Monday afternoon at New Zealand Labour's birthplace at Blackball on the West Coast. In a tribute to the late party, a ceremonial vote will be held to decide whether a capital gains tax policy could have saved Labour from oblivion. 'It is a sad day for New Zealand,' one former party member said. 'A mighty tōtara has fallen. And it did it without making a sound.' Chris Bishop calls new Lorde album 'a load of crap' Another Kind of Politics' Music Reviewer of the Year Chris Bishop says he is 'not very bloody impressed' by the latest release from best-selling Kiwi pop singer Lorde. In his first major music review since the Aotearoa Music Awards in late May, Bishop has labelled Lorde's new album Virgin 'a load of crap', and says he wouldn't recommend it to anyone who liked 'good' music like Cold Chisel and Men at Work. 'Call me a dickhead, but I don't believe for a moment Lorde has got her V-plates intact, so it's false advertising for a start,' Bishop told Another Kind of Politics by phone. 'The first single What Was That was rubbish and made me think 'what the bloody hell was that?', which was kind of ironic, ha, ha, ha. As for the new single Hammer, I'd rather listen to Chisel. The rest of the album reminded me of being stuck in a disco while some woman moans on to me about her life.' Virgin, released last Friday, has received almost universal praise internationally, with Rolling Stone calling it 'nearly 40 minutes of undeniable pop bangers', while The Guardian called it 'powerful, moving, personal but universal – and packed with bangers'. Bishop said he had found 'no bangers' on the album only 'a bunch of fizzers', and would not be listening to Virgin again. 'But I'm really hanging out for 10CC's gig in Wellington next week. That'll be rockin'. Do you want a review of that?' The prestigious Golden Nitpicker Award for music review of the year was awarded to Bishop after his thoughtful critiques at the AMA ceremony where he labelled Stan Walker's performance 'a load of crap', and claimed the singer had received 'performative acclaim'. Renowned Kiwi musician and former Mutton Bird Don McGlashan confronted Bishop at the time, telling him to 'shut up, you dickhead'. Poll to ask what Judith Collins should lose next on her watch? Minister For Losing Our Stuff Judith Collins is seeking public input on which vital, multimillion dollar, taxpayer-funded equipment should be lost next from her portfolios. This week it was revealed that under Collins' tenure as the country's first Minister for Space, the MethaneSAT satellite, which the government put $29 million towards, was lost in space after going off course. This followed the sinking of the $103 million HMNZS Manawanui after it hit a reef in Samoa last October under her watch as Minister of Defence. Collins' office said the minister would now poll New Zealanders on what expensive piece of equipment should vanish or be misplaced next under her ministerships. A spokesperson said the minister was 'ultra-keen to complete a 'lost property hat trick' by the next election'. Political quiz of the week Photo / Facebook What is Deputy Prime Minister and birthday boy David Seymour about to wish for when he blows out his candles? A/ For equality, freedom and the tyranny of the minority. B/ That he can stir up enough fear and loathing to win Act two more seats in 2026. C/ For a time machine to go back to 1840 to rewrite the treaty with his 'principles'. D/ That the Prime Minister goes overseas again and never comes back.
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Less of the bombast, please
Comprehensive evaluation of how local government is organised and the role it plays may be necessary, but getting a rational debate on it will be difficult. Everyone has an opinion on the merits or otherwise of their local authority, particularly when the rates go up or money is spent on a controversial project. That concern does not often enough translate into bothering to vote in local elections, but that is another issue. The country's local government network is made up of 78 councils, the largest group being the 61 territorial local authorities with its mix of city and district councils, 11 regional councils and six unitary authorities (these combine the functions of regional and territorial councils). There has been some tinkering with local government since the major reform of local government in 1989 and some mergers of councils but no major national reorganisation since then. In several areas, ideas of amalgamating some councils arise from time to time, but getting support for such changes is never simple. Recently, we have had much noise and colourful language, as is his wont, from Regional Development Minister Shane Jones about what he sees as the need to get rid of regional councils. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon also says he wants to explore the possibility of scrapping New Zealand's regional councils as the government reforms the Resource Management Act. Mr Jones, in a Facebook post promoting his plan to take a remit to the New Zealand First conference later this year on "rationalisation of local government" with a view to next year's general election campaign, describes himself as a doubting Thomas about regional government. He goes on to say the reason for this is because Otago Regional Council is "opposed to my mining projects". He accuses the council of destroying jobs and "conveniently" discovering a moth nobody had heard of to scuttle the expansion of gold mining. Mr Jones says the country cannot have a system of regional government which refuses to rapidly allocate resource consents to drive growth and to effect better outcomes for employment. In the course of this he has also labelled the ORC the "Kremlin of the South Island" and accused it of being full of "KGB green zealots". His over-the-top rhetoric is in response to the council's assessment of environmental effects from an application to expand the Macraes' gold mine. While he portrays the council concerns as solely about a rare moth, the report recommending the application be declined in full also said the project would result in actual and potential effects on surface water quality, aquatic ecology, natural inland and ephemeral wetlands and lizard habitat. The report said these effects would be "significantly adverse" and could not be avoided, minimised, remedied, offset or compensated for. Mr Jones sounds more like a miffed pre-schooler after losing a tussle over a toy digger in a sandpit, than a government minister promoting a serious discussion about long-term change. As ORC chairwoman Gretchen Robertson diplomatically put it, "name-calling" was unhelpful. The Otago council remained focused on its responsibility to protect the environment while supporting sustainable economic development. "That balance is not ideological — it reflects the law, and we believe it reflects the values of our region: caring for both our environment and our livelihoods." She said the country's regional councils welcomed "meaningful dialogue" on how to best deliver the services they were intended to — flood protection, biosecurity, civil defence, environmental management and public transport. As we saw with the Three Waters reform proposals before the last election, it is easy for fervour to be whipped up over issues involving local control, debates to become narrowly focused, and often not based in fact. Those on either side of the argument quickly moved to talking, or shouting, past each other rather than working sensibly through the issues. Mr Jones' bombastic outbursts are setting the scene for more of that. If there is to be reform, it should not be achieved without proper meaningful input from those it will affect. The government saying "jump", and expecting those in the regions to respond "how high?" will not work.
Scoop
14 hours ago
- Scoop
Regulatory Standards Bill Could Be Barrier For Māori Housing
The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development has warned that the Regulatory Standards Bill could stymie progress in enabling papakāinga, or Māori housing, documents show. A ministry official also flagged concerns the legislation could make it harder for ministers to do their jobs, and warned the reach of the proposed law - and the minister-appointed board - seemed "disproportionate to the authority of Parliament". Regulations Minister David Seymour rejected the criticism, saying the ministry should be "leading the charge to cut through this bureaucracy so more homes can be built". The Regulatory Standards Bill is non-binding on Parliament but proposes a set of principles MPs and officials would have to consider when designing regulation. It also would set up a board, appointed by the minister, to examine current and future laws' consistency with those principles, as well as requiring regular reviews of all regulations. In its feedback, the housing ministry raised concern about the potential for individual property rights to be elevated over and above collective rights. "...the lack of provision for collective rights/rangatiratanga and the indicated shift towards Individual rights, in a way that is not currently in New Zealand's constitution, could impact the way we can develop policy and legislation with significant negative impacts on Māori housing outcomes," it said. The ministry said one of the proposed principles - dealing with taxes, fees, and levies - could hinder progress on Māori-led housing projects. "If this principle is imposed over regulation, we are concerned it could be misaligned with the current approaches to whenua Māori, lead to greater fragmentation of land/whenua Maōri, be a barrier to pooling resources for collective good and further entrench the negative housing outcomes that currently exist." The government in May announced plans to make it easier to consent papakāinga. However, funding for the Whai Kāinga, Whai Oranga housing fund has also been cut. In a statement to RNZ, a spokesperson for Seymour said if the Regulation Standards Bill had been in place years ago, it could have prevented "much of the pointless red tape" that slows down building and consenting. "New Zealand faces a serious housing crisis. Anyone who has tried to build a home knows the delays and costs caused by red tape," the spokesperson said. "I'd have thought the Ministry for Housing would be leading the charge to cut through this bureaucracy so more homes can be built." An FAQ document prepared by Seymour's office also rejected the idea that the bill would favour individual rights over collective ones, saying it preserved the status quo "that collective Parliamentary law can trump all individual rights to personal autonomy and possessions". The document did not specify, however, how individual property rights would be considered compared to collective property rights by officials operating under the new regime. The housing ministry also warned that requiring reviews of all secondary legislation in reviews - without exemption - would add to the government's workload. To that, Seymour was unapologetic: "We're aware the public service doesn't like this law. Yes, it makes more work for them, justifying laws that interfere in people's lives. Here's the thing: If the public service think being required to justify their laws is a faff, imagine what it's like for the public they have to serve who are obliged to follow them." The ministry also made the case that the Treaty of Waitangi "should be featured as a relevant consideration" among the principles. But the FAQ, from Seymour's office, said the Treaty was excluded because the bill was focused on the quality of regulations, not Treaty obligations. "As with compliance with international obligations, legal obligations under Treaty settlements are a given. A central part of the RSB is to protect existing legal rights from unprincipled appropriation," it said. The ministry also said the ability for the proposed Regulatory Standards Board - appointed by the Regulations Minister, currently Seymour - to carry out reviews of regulations ahead of agencies' own regular reviews of legislation "would not be the most effective use of the board's time". Seymour has previously defended the extra cost and workload, saying the cost was about 2 percent of the policy work currently done across the government. "If it costs $20 million just to check the regulations, imagine the cost to all the poor buggers out there who have to comply with all this crap," he said. Concerns raised by official over 'disproportionate' powers In preparation for providing feedback on the Cabinet paper in October, an MHUD official warned that giving the Regulation Minister power to set the terms of regulatory reviews could interfere with the work of other ministers. "The power of the Minister of Regulation to initiate regulatory review and set terms of reference gives considerable power and will affect the ability of a portfolio minister to advance their work," the official said. "There should be elements of mutual agreement, or consultation required, or some detail about the threshold for the Minister to initiate a review (eg requiring an Order in Council)." The official also questioned whether a board chosen by the minister should have so much influence, saying it seemed "disproportionate compared to the authority of Parliament". They pointed out there was already a process - through the Regulatory Review Committee and the Legislation Act - that allowed MPs to examine regulations if concerns were raised. In response, Seymour's spokesperson said the bureaucrats "may want to familiarise themselves" with a set of rules, known as Legislative Guidelines, which departments are already required to follow, including the principles of property rights, individual liberty, and the rule of law. "The only difference is that under the Regulatory Standards Bill, these principles would become Parliamentary law, not just Cabinet guidance that some departments clearly ignore."
