(Section 14 of the RPS)
The RMA requires regional and district councils to recognise and provide for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga, as a matter of national importance. Councils must also have regard to kaitiakitanga, and take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi) when making decisions.
Court of Appeal and Waitangi Tribunal decisions give legal guidance as to what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi are. Councils and Tangata Whenua must decide how that guidance is to be implemented in resource management in Northland.
This section sets out how Tangata Whenua are to be involved in the sustainable management of the natural and physical resources of Northland.
Anticipated Outcomes
Not stated for this section. This section contains policy related to resource management procedures and processes rather than policy relating to the use, development and protection of resources and therefore does not have anticipated environmental outcomes.
Policy Mix
The objective for this section is the involvement of Tangata Whenua in the management of the natural and physical resources of the region in a manner that recognises and respects Tangata Whenua and ahi kaa as kaitiaki o nga taonga tuku iho (guardians of the treasures of their ancestors, as handed down).
The policy approach for the section on general consultation (Policy 14.4 (a)) is to ensure that consultation with Tangata Whenua is undertaken regarding matters specified in the RMA that may have effect on their taonga or their use, development and protection of natural and physical resources.
The policy approach for consultation in regard to resource consent applications (Policy 14.4 (b)) is to define the appropriate circumstances when Tangata Whenua will be considered an affected party and to encourage applicants to consult the appropriate Tangata Whenua.
The policy approach for consent decisions and hearings (Policy 14.4 (c)) is to ensure the active consideration of the impacts of developments on the taonga of Tangata Whenua and to provide for Tangata Whenua involvement in hearings.
The cultural awareness (Policy 14.4 (f)) section has a policy approach of promoting the awareness and understanding of cultural issues for council staff and the awareness and understanding of council functions and obligations for Tangata Whenua.
The ‘Involvement of Tangata Whenua' section also encourages and supports the preparation of iwi resource management policies and plans and the investigation and where appropriate provision of opportunities for Tangata Whenua involvement in monitoring programmes.
The involvement of Tangata Whenua section contains 17 individual methods of implementation that flow from the policy direction discussed above.
What's the current state?
The development of iwi resource management plans has only occurred over the last few years and therefore has not been the most effective means of involving Tangata Whenua in the management of natural and physical resources. This has also resulted in a lack of other work being undertaken, for example the identification of cultural heritage sites, features or areas of significance by Tangata Whenua. Councils can only provide effective resource management for those sites and features that are identified.
Iwi/hapu groups have differing perceptions on the purpose of iwi resource management plans and it is up to iwi/hapu to decide on the purpose and content. This obviously makes it difficult for councils to develop a consistent approach to incorporating iwi resource management plans into regional planning documents
The Consents department of the NRC generally does well in regard to involving Tangata Whenua as an interested/affected party in resource consent applications. There is sometimes an overload of information but this is a better result than a lack of involvement at all. District councils do not circulate non-notified resource consent applications to Tangata Whenua.
What has worked well in this section?
The circulation of non-notified resource consent applications by NRC is appreciated and there is strong support for this process to continue.
The iwi liaison staff within each council are considered to be a good first point of contact for Tangata Whenua who may have limited knowledge of Council structure procedures and processes.
Advice, funding and support are available from some district councils for the development of iwi resource management policies and plans.
What has not worked in this section?
There is an inconsistent approach from councils to the circulation of non-notified resource consent applications. While it is one thing to circulate resource consents to Tangata Whenua, it is a completely different step to take that consultation into consideration, for example through requiring a report on cultural grounds. There appears to be a general lack of understanding and interpretation of sections 6(e) and 8 of the RMA by planning practitioners.
There is no direction in the RPS on how to determine when Tangata Whenua should be considered an affected party.
General comments on this section:
The 2005 amendments to the RMA make it clear that applicants for resource consents are not required to consult Tangata Whenua. Where an iwi authority has asked to be considered as an affected party, then it is up to the council to determine whether they are considered an affected party. Whilst the provisions on consultation may have changed, the purpose and principles of the RMA remain the same. Particularly in relation to recognising and providing for the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga as a matter of national importance.
The level of knowledge and capacity in regards to understanding council plans and policies by Tangata Whenua varies from basic grassroots to skilled iwi ‘technicians' within resource management units. Councils need to understand and accommodate this variability.
Councils should actively promote the cultural awareness initiatives and staff training that they undertake, including encouraging staff to demonstrate their skills (reo/tikanga etc) when engaging with Maori.
Is this section Efficient and Effective?
The development of iwi resource management plans has only occurred over the last few years and has therefore not been the most effective means of involving Tangata Whenua in the management of natural and physical resources. This has also resulted in a lack of other work being undertaken, for example the identification of cultural heritage sites, features or areas of significance by Tangata Whenua. Councils can only provide effective resource management for those sites and features that are identified.
Overall this section is supported, particularly by Tangata Whenua, but is suffering from a lack of implementation and/or promotion of those areas that have been implemented. Generally speaking, Tangata Whenua knowledge of this section or the outcomes produced as a result of the section is limited.
This section is heavily focused on the statutory requirements of consultation, which are generally effectively implemented. However, the section should be balanced with non-statutory consultation/interaction with Tangata Whenua, along with investigating opportunities for further involvement in resource management.
Emerging Issues for this section?
Two emerging issues for Northland are Treaty Settlements (which may include Statutory Acknowledgements) and co-management. As of late 2009, only two iwi/hapu groups in Northland have Treaty Settlements (Te Roroa and Te Uri o Hau). Treaty Settlements are an agreement between the Crown and a claimant group to settle all of that claimant group's historical claims against the Crown. Statutory Acknowledgements are an acknowledgement by the Crown of an Iwi/Hapu group's cultural, spiritual, historical and traditional association with a specified area, which include areas of land, geographical features, lakes, rivers, wetlands and coastal marine areas. Importantly, Statutory Acknowledgements are only given over Crown-owned land. The concept of co-management needs to be further explored (by both councils and Tangata Whenua) to better understand what this could mean for the management of natural and physical resources in Northland.
This section is a necessary step in supporting the needs of councils and the involvement of Tangata Whenua in plan preparation and is now more important due to the 2005 amendments to the RMA. It is suggested that councils should develop a process to show how they will be taking into account iwi/hapu environmental management plans.
The opportunities for Tangata Whenua involvement in monitoring and implementation rely on Tangata Whenua coming forward to councils. This has generally not happened. The RPS could identify and promote suitable projects for Tangata Whenua to be involved in.
Conclusions
The RPS generally satisfies legislative requirements regarding consultation obligations with Tangata Whenua. However, there is a desire by Tangata Whenua to be more actively involved in all aspects of resource management, including monitoring, decision making and implementation. Councils and Tangata Whenua should investigate these opportunities further.