Return to submissions

 

 Prepared by: Maia Warren,
Research Analyst

Federation of Maori Authorities Inc. (FoMA)
P.O. Box 10 758, Wellington 6143

 

 

MIHI

Ka rere atu ai nga mihi mahana ki a koutou e awhi i nga take i runga i nga ahuatanga o tenei kaupapa, ara, te uru whenua.  Ki a ratou e takahi ana i te ara whanui a Tane, haere aru ra, okioki ai.  Ki a tatou nei te hunga ora, tena koutou, a, tena hoki tatou katoa.

 

FEDERATION  OF  MAORI  AUTHORITIES  INC

The Federation of Maori Authorities (FoMA) is an incorporated society representing a membership comprising Land Owning (ahuwhenua) Trusts, Maori Incorporations, Runanga and Maori Trust Boards.  There are currently 100-150 members of the Federation collectively administering approximately 800,000 hectares of land on behalf of an estimated 100,000 Maori beneficial owners.  The Federation’s membership ranges from small, single farm businesses to diversified enterprises managing interests across many primary industry sectors, processing and servicing sectors, and equity interests in the New Zealand and global stock markets.  The collective asset base of the FoMA membership is approximately $4 billion.

 

The Federation has as its principal objective Maori economic independence.  One approach the Federation takes towards achieving this objective is the collective representation of the interests of the FoMA membership in dealing with the issues that may affect the sustainability of Maori land and moana assets or impede the economic development of Maori and Maori resources.

 

The Federation does not claim that this submission represents all Maori or all Maori Authorities.  However the Federation did conduct a survey with the first submission, and that submission was distributed among our members.  This submission was also distributed among members.

 

The Federation wishes to emphasize that the views expressed in this submission are representative of a majority of the Maori land owners within the FoMA membership, and conform to views widely held in the Maori community.  This should be recognised when considering this submission.  The views of our members were expressed at consultation hui and through previous Land Access submissions.

 

Principles of submission

The Federation wishes to make it clear that we oppose land access across Maori land and general land owned by Maori including the extension of the Queens chain to the coastline and waterways on Maori land or general land owned by Maori without negotiation and agreement from the landowners concerned.

 

 

Maori Land Issues

 

Treaty Partnerships        The Crown as a treaty partner has an obligation to actively the property interests of Maori land.

 

Multiple ownership          Liability of owners in the case of multiple owners raises concerns for many of our members.

 

Unmanaged Titles           Currently there are 16,000 titles with no legal management structure. The Federation is concerned over access of these lands. Who will negotiate access? How will access (if agreed upon) be managed?

 

Without authorised management there can be no collective agreement to access.

 

Treaty Obligation

The principal parties of the Treaty are Maori and the Crown.  Maori have a special partnership relationship with the Crown that is separate from that of the general citizenship status.  Part of the Treaty relationship involves the duty of the Crown and all agents of the Crown to undertake to active protection of the property rights under article two.

 

Article two of the treaty granted tino rangatiratanga. . .o ratou whenua o kainga me o ratou taonga katoa, or the full and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates fisheries and other properties.  This article therefore guarantees Maori the right to determine access to their land.

 

Negotiated and Agreed Upon Access

Page 31, Maori opposed the idea of legislated access across Maori land but do not oppose access by negotiation, the Federation supports negotiated access.

Maori land owners do not usually deny access to the public without good cause.  These reasons include:

1. Cultural (for protection of rahui, for protection of taonga, waahi tapu, waahi tupuna, urupa, pa, marae and papa kainga)
2. Safety, non compliance with OSH requirements
3. Access is being abused by the public, this may also include a change of recreational behaviours
4. Access hinders economic and potential economic opportunities of Maori landowners.

The Federation can not guarantee access to be enduring.

 

Non-negotiated access that removes Maori land owners’ rights is considered a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi by the Federation, including the use of legislation such as the Public Works Act.

 

Negotiated access is the preferred means for public access across Maori land and general land owned by Maori.  New access and realignment should only be made through negotiation.

 

Principles

The Federation does not agree with the Principle of Quality of Access page 6, Free, Certain and Enduring. 

 

Free

Where the public is enjoying private land it is reasonable to expect the community to contribute to cover costs of maintenance and liabilities.

The Federation understands the importance of access for recreational users but do not feel that community benefit should be at the cost of Maori land owners or private land owners.

 

Enduring

As the New Zealand commercial climate changes so may the use of Maori land to sustain economical viability.  To have enduring access rights would reduce land owners ability to convert their lands.

 

The Federation objects to any public access that hinders economic development.

 

Certain

The Federation’s members land holdings are diverse and this may cause issues with certainty to access.  Page 14 acknowledges commercial pressures of land owners and recreationists there are times where it is in the best interest of landowners to restrict access.  Trusts and Incorporations with forests restrict access during the summer season (October to April) to minimise fire risks.  Land owners also restrict access due to the legal requirements under OSH.

 

The Federation can not guarantee certain access across lands, especially where there access is granted over unmanaged land.

 

Code of Responsible Conduct

The Federation agrees with the principle of a Code of Conduct as this will give a standard against which the users must adhere to, including information and understanding to Maori land (rahui, negotiated permission, waahi tapu).

The code of conduct would also be able to give a basis to revoke an agreement or deny access if the code is breached.

 

The Federation feels that the code should be legally enforceable and breaches of the code can result in the loss of access across Maori land.

 

The code of conduct should not be a barrier to Maori land holders and Maori general land holders to make decisions in regards to the management of their land.

 

Liabilities

The Federation can not support liability on Maori land owners to be liable for recreational mishaps that occur on their lands in certain situations.

Appendix 6, examples of hazards seem to create greater onus on landowners that are unreasonable in some situations, ie trees being felled on forestry lands. 

If the public believes that trees are not being felled on forestry lands or that general farm practice do not have the potential to cause injury there is a serious need for greater public education.  This education should not be at the detriment of Maori land owners and general land held by Maori.

 

The Federation would like there to be onus on recreational users to inquire into hazards.

 

Information and Maps

The Federation also supports the principle of availability of access information and maps at no or low costs to both land owners and recreational users.

 

Agent for Access

The Federation does not support the proposal for a land access agent, for the following reasons:

• The idea of a centralised agency does not seem feasible as local agencies have control and access to information at present.
• Where would funding for this agency come from, it is unlikely that the government would want to contribute to this agency.
• The Federation is also uncertain as to how representation would be established.
• More information is required before the Federation can support this concept of an Access Agency.
• If an agency is established then the Federation would expect there to be Maori represented in the agency. 

 

 

Resource Management Act

The Federation opposes amendments to the RMA that automatically establishes esplanade strips over Maori land or general land held by Maori.

 

The Federation is concerned that unmanaged strips and esplanades may increase pests and disease and therefore create extra costs for Maori land owners. 

 

Reserves should not be taken on an uncompensated basis.

The Government had made it clear that it would not legislate across privately held land; the Federation opposes any legislation across Maori land and general land held by Maori.

 

And view any legislation as a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi.

 

The Federation agrees with the discretion to waive reserve and strip requirements across Maori land and general land held by Maori.

Compensation

Maori have already lost much of their lands and do not want to see the continuation of more alienation.

 

Compensation needs to be guaranteed for the taking of landowner’s rights for public interest.

 

Therefore the Federation requires that if land is to be taken from Maori to connect the Queens Chain by the Crown or agencies working for the Crown then compensation should be guaranteed. 

 

Priorities

The Federation does not have priorities at this stage beyond the protection of its members and obligations of the Crown under the Treaty of Waitangi.

 

Funding should be provided by the government for the benefit of all New Zealanders.  Maori land owners should not be expected to contribute to means that diminish land ownership rights.

 

Conclusion

The Federation submits that land owners should be able to refuse public access for the following reasons:

1. Cultural
2. Access being abused by public
3. Access hinders economic or potential economic opportunities of Maori land owners
4. Safety/OSH requirements

       

The Federation submits that any land legislated across or amended strips should not occur across Maori land or general land owned by Maori.  If this is to occur then access needs to be compensated by the government.

 

In conclusion the Federation submits that access should be negotiated and agreed upon by owners or managers and that the access is only for recreational purposes.

 

Back to top