Protect Ihumātao

Written By: - Date published: 12:45 pm, July 24th, 2019 - 235 comments
Categories: Maori Issues, treaty settlements, uncategorized - Tags: , , ,

From the Save Our Unique Landscape – SOUL Facebook page:

STAND WITH IHUMATAO! This is a call out to all our supporters. Come stand with us as we take back the whenua! Oruarangi Rd, Mangere.
❤Bring a friend
❤Maintain a peaceful presence
❤Spread the word on social media

Action Station donation page is here.

We want a liveable city. We need places to breathe, to dream, to connect to our ancestors, and engage with our history. At Ihumaatao we can do this.

Protect Ihumātao website for in depth explanations of the history and issues.

Our kaitiaki are brave, strong, and steadfast.

Reading the MSM reports on Ihumātao yesterday, I was left with the impression that a few people had been arrested and a few others were ‘hiding on the reserve’, basically that it was all over. Meanwhile Māori on twitter were telling a different story. Follow Protect Ihumātao on Twitter and SOUL on Facebook. Twitter hashtags #protectihumato and #ihumatao

Image from Noted.

235 comments on “Protect Ihumātao ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. weka 1
    24 July 2019 at 12:54 pm

    There’s a concurrent action happening in Wellington:

    “.@MaramaDavidson speaking to the hīkoi at Parliament. “Green Party strongly supports the right to peacefully protect whenua at Ihumātao.””

    https://twitter.com/tautokai/status/1153828204190154758

    Video:

    https://twitter.com/tautokai/status/1153824560917049344

    • marty mars 1.1
      24 July 2019 at 1:14 pm

      I like the Green support for this – I wonder how other parts of the Greens will react to this vocal support – I hope they fall in behind this and support the Green support.

  2. weka 2
    24 July 2019 at 1:01 pm

    "The Government can end the Ihumatao situation right now by ordering a Public Works Act 1981 requirement (needing new parks for a growing population) The land can then be given back after it was confiscated in the 1860s (The land is shit to build houses on but perfect for parks)"

    https://twitter.com/BenRoss_AKL/status/1153779263272652800

    • Dukeofurl 2.1
      24 July 2019 at 1:27 pm

      The Te Kawarau iwi , whos marae is nearby dont support the protest and they have an agreement with Fletchers and they are the recognised iwi for the area in question.

      https://www.waipareira.com/our-resources/maori-business-directory/iwi-marae/

      • michelle 2.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 3:47 pm

        did they get money for this divide and conquer tactics

        • Molly 2.1.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 4:16 pm

          Yes, from what I am told they did. But it is a replica of past tactics – having recognised iwi members to consult and barter with, irrespective of whether they are actually reflective of the whole iwi community.

          Auckland Council has failed to recognise a previous commitment from Manukau District Council in regards to development, that was ignored as a legacy promise, when resource consent was undertaken with Auckland Airport.

          This failure was further compounded with the design and implementation of SHA legislation, that bypassed the existing checks and balances for land-use change.

          • Molly 2.1.1.1.1
            24 July 2019 at 4:39 pm

            BTW, was delighted to see your name on the post, weka.

            Welcome back, for however long it may be.

            • weka 2.1.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2019 at 6:17 pm

              Thanks Molly 🙂

              • Sabine …
                25 July 2019 at 11:18 am

                yes, very happy to see you name on that post.

                thanks for writing this post, it is an important issue not just for AKL but for all of us.

                • weka …
                  25 July 2019 at 7:22 pm

                  cheers Sabine. I think so, and I suspect many people are still under-estimating what is going down.

          • Dukeofurl 2.1.1.1.2
            25 July 2019 at 10:39 am

            Do you have links for any of this

            The iwi has been working for this land for decades and yet you come and say "irrespective of whether they are actually reflective of the whole iwi community."

            "Auckland Council has failed to recognise a previous commitment from Manukau District Council in regards to development, that was ignored as a legacy promise, when resource consent was undertaken with Auckland Airport."

            Auckland Airport has different land and what legacy promises when the stonefields and mountain were acquired by the Manukau Council for a park?

            SHAs have lapsed once the Unitary Plan was implemented.

        • michelle 2.1.1.2
          25 July 2019 at 11:37 am

          how many blankets did they get for this land? in the meantime our government is going to bail out building owners in Wellington for earthquake repairs now is this fair that our taxes is paying for private buildings to be fixed no its just another example of the unfairness in our country

      • Etain McDonnell 2.1.2
        1 August 2019 at 9:58 am

        Just FYI the iwi which has mana whenua is Te Ahiwaru and Te Waiohua, not Te Kawerau, which is from the other side of the harbour, West Auckland, Henderson and up. The Marae is Makaurau Marae, opposite the stonefields (not in Henderson). The tangata whenua who are buried in the urupa behind Makaurau Marae are not from Te Kawerau a Maki. Mr Warren Taua is Te Kawerau a Maki rep, his office is in Henderson. Warren Taua was a whangai to an old Kuia who lived in Ihumatao, so he does know the area but he does not represent a majority in the Papakainga, or Makaurau Marae, nor does the iwi whose hat he is wearing have mana whenua.

    • Dukeofurl 2.2
      24 July 2019 at 5:23 pm

      Are you sure ? If the land is taken under public works act and later NOT used for say a public park , it MUST be offered back to Fletchers first.

      • michelle 2.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 11:45 am

        Actually any land taken under the public works act has to be returned to the first owner it was taken from if it is not used for the purpose it was intended i would like to know how much land was taken for state housing back in 1935 as state housing hasn't served out people well they allocated then sold all the best houses to pakeha in the best areas and they put our people in the bronxs areas by factories etc now being knocked down and we cant afford to live there many state areas are now fill with chinese and other foreigners now is this fair and is this right and is this adhering to the TOW I don't think so. I can see why our people are on the war path.

        • greywarshark 2.2.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 12:24 pm

          Cripes Michelle I hope you list all your complaints and dissatisfactions, it would be a shame to forget any of them. Everything that has gone wrong since even prior to the Treaty could be written on wallpaper and a whole Room of Grievances could become a feature for any Maori or sympathiser to get fired up about. As Dr Walker said it will go on for ever, and there will never be happiness because as one thing is partially fixed another crops up, and then the past fixes come undone, and….

          You are commenting on state houses going back to 1935 and whether Maori have been fairly treated over the land and housing. This will be a lifetime task for you as no recompense can ever cover the past and every bad thing can be blamed on colonisation. Maori have never done anybody harm have they? Not killed other tribes, been brutal? Both white and brown can be at fault. Can we try to move on positively? I can't see it being possible from reading your comments.

  3. marty mars 3
    24 July 2019 at 1:06 pm

    Good one – this is going to be a big decisive one I think – a line has been drawn.

    Thanks for putting it up weka – nice to read your post thanks

    • Wayne 3.1
      24 July 2019 at 4:03 pm

      This long drawn out issue seems to be finally coming to head. It seems to me that the protestors will lose. The government is clearly not going to "take" the land for a public park. That would cut right across the authority of the Te Kawerau a Maki governing body.

      It seems to be one of those cases where the minority of the iwi will not accept the decisions of the majority of the iwi. The minority have tried every legal avenue and lost each time. Naturally the Green Party, or at least Marama Davidson, will support the minority. She has never seen a "left wing" protest that she doesn't support. Though in this case I don't think a left/right analysis applies. More that Marama inherently distrusts the "establishment". However I would be surprised if the Green Party ministers will say anything about the issue.

      • weka 3.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 4:45 pm

        At least 3 Green MPs were at the Wellington action today (Davidson, Swarbrick, Ghahraman). The Green co-leaders wrote to the PM about the issue in March. Eugenie Sage had previously written to Ardern about this. Sounds like a unified caucus and Ministers speaking up.

        https://twitter.com/_chloeswarbrick/status/1153784215860731904

        • Dukeofurl 3.1.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 5:21 pm

          The iwi asked for the Protestors to leave. Has Chloe asked the local Iwi or is she supporting the female lawyer from Ngapuhi

          "When the eviction notices were served yesterday, well-respected kaumātua of Te Kawerau a Maki and Te Akitai accompanied police and asked for the occupation to end and for them to leave Ihumātao peacefully. They even performed a karakia.

          https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/te-manu-korihi/395121/explainer-why-ihumatao-is-being-occupied-by-protectors

          • Wayne 3.1.1.1.1
            24 July 2019 at 6:10 pm

            Watching TV tonight, makes me revise my view. The protestors may have a critical mass to change things. Though I suspect the great majority of them have no actual connection to the iwi. Nevertheless they may change the minds of the iwi governors. We shall see.

            • Sam 3.1.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2019 at 6:28 pm

              Well I don't think the Treaty Partnership is ultimately stable. Māori bank accounts are so depleted it will ultimately fail (we've kind of failed to create a Māori middle class), institutions are so incorrect they will ultimately fail.

              Even I could be far to hopeful about how truth can prevail but I would still advise Māori keep accurate records and wait it out for a break through latter on.

              Iv been talking about the stagnation problem for the better part of a decade now when it was still a fringe view and very fringe even around here and I think even with in the standard community there's a lot of people who've come around to it.

              Y'know there's a sense that social democracy has a bad conscience in hooking up with business and technology and innovation and there are huge problems in the year of this governments delivery programme and people like Don Brash are running propaganda campaigns about Māori, and now Māori are now seen in a different light with its $40 billion economic price tag. But these things are further away than expected so I think there is this sense that there could be break throughs in the next few years and not get to hung up on failing now rather than keeping your powder dry.

              • Wayne …
                24 July 2019 at 8:33 pm

                Actually there is substantial Maori middle class, particularly with government employment. Also now a significant number employed by the larger iwi organisations. From my experience many of them, irrespective of their employment or business ownership are very active in iwi issues. Many, if not most, will want the government to buy the land.

                • Sam …
                  24 July 2019 at 8:45 pm

                  Well I think what we are seeing is a general rejection of colonisation. IMO it's a kind of back to the future thing, Y'know yearning for past glory and power.

                  Whether it's water rights or managing treaty settlements over all the macro indicators are very anaemic. I don't think there's a lack of leadership per se, I think education and academia are struggling. Most engineers that I know would agree with me that the only field to get into would be software engineering and computers and even that might get taken over by machines so there's a softness there.

                  But I do think there are lots of opportunities for innovators to break out in the next few years.

                • michelle …
                  25 July 2019 at 11:49 am

                  yes Wayne we want them to buy our land back they are helping others with earthquake damage 25 million allocated for this then they can help get some of our land back they are helping owners who own building now is this fair no it isn't

            • marty mars 3.1.1.1.1.2
              24 July 2019 at 6:33 pm

              Good that reality has arrived lol

            • Wayne 3.1.1.1.1.3
              24 July 2019 at 8:29 pm

              Talking to someone today who has detailed knowledge of the background has made me think the protestors will succeed. Although Te Kawerau a Maki has an agreement with Fletchers, they are not actually invested in the land. So it is easier for them to change their minds if they think it is appropriate. The pressure from the protestors will make them think it appropriate to shift position.

              What would that mean?

              Effectively Te Kawerau a Maki would ask the government to buy the land from Fletchers, and also ensure they also get the forty houses that Fletchers has promised. The government would then negotiate with Fletchers to buy the land, who have previously said they will sell at a fair price. I understand Fletchers paid $40 million in 2015, and since then will have spent millions more on development plans, etc. So probably the land would have a value of $60 million plus. Because the land has a general title (as opposed to te ture whenua title) and is in private ownership, full compensation has to be paid. The government certainly won't be expropriating private title. It will be a negotiated sale for full value.

              In addition the government would need to spend at least $20 million on the forty houses promised to Te Kawerau a Maki. So it is a total package that will cost the government at least $80 million.

              The land would then become a public reserve, or a iwi reserve. With the forty houses on a relatively nearby piece of land.

              Will the government be willing to commit to a payment of $80 million plus to settle the concerns of the protestors? To buy a park of some significant cultural heritage and build forty houses.

              In my view, probably yes. As soon as Te Kawerau a Maki shifts position, the government will also shift, since at that point all the Labour Maori MP's will say that is the solution the iwi wants. I can't see the PM wanting to do anything else in that situation.

              • marty mars …
                24 July 2019 at 8:36 pm

                Yep – the momentum for change is too big now – whatever mana is against it won't hold up.

                The details of how it gets changed will be interesting – it might set a precedent 🙂

              • Ad …
                24 July 2019 at 9:58 pm

                If Te Warena extracts that he will have done his people proud, but through unnecessary brinkmanship.

                The precedent would be massive. Even if negotiated rather than Required, the signal would be for more Maori to move against developers in particular Fletcher Residential by negotiating price through the media.

                It would be a major social license to protesters to get what they want from the Crown.

                The least expensive way to get outcomes for Te Kawerau is to proceed with the deal and get spades in the ground as fast as possible.

                • SPC …
                  25 July 2019 at 12:18 am

                  Protesters are not in it to leverage more money (they do not get any) – and the Crown when intervening is only liable for market value of land at most.

                  If there is any iwi housing provided, well whether state housing or otherwise – we need more of it.

                  The idea that protesters should not be allowed to realise their goals lest it encourage them is anti-democratic (and anti-union) and an apologetic for establishment power.

                  • Sam …
                    25 July 2019 at 1:47 am

                    The insanity of the land wars can never come back. Generationally all that psychology is over and yet in 2005 Māori give Helen Clark her third term and she's straight into the foreshore and seabed and accusing Māori of terrorism. Y'know I always think about land deals large or small as lying about how you got the land in the first place and hoping no one finds out. So in the 2000's there's a lie about saving for a raining day, in the 2010's there's the lie about the brighter future. In the 2020's there's the lie about doing it. Y'know each time it's hiding the truth of how the land was acquired. And then the stagnation through out the Māori Economy means they should be getting out of property and into manufacturing of some other investment vehicle but the narrative is you must get into land deals because of some sort of PTSD like symptoms that try's to cover up all these lies from the past.

                    The economy is very healthy in terms of cash reserves. So there's a lot of intervention and a lot of deals that can be done instead of this all out push for houses. Y'know we are missing out on tens of billions in scientific and engineering innovations while we are just concentrating so hard on property speculating. There will be this crazy push for 3 times more EVs than combustion engines so there's this tail wind of innovation and knowledge that is some how being mismanaged by who ever you want to blame the lies on.

                    So I think that's what is actually going on and we are trying to manage these financials much more precisely, EVEN though the tail winds are not there at all.

                    • Dukeofurl …
                      25 July 2019 at 10:43 am

                      The Maori party wasnt part of the 2005 Clark coalition/confidence government – remember last cab off the rank.

                      Do you ever get anything right.

                    • Sam …
                      25 July 2019 at 1:17 pm

                      Oh I see now. You're claiming expert knowledge and skills around Māori land titles. What I was on about probably wouldn't be to good for your PTSD like symptoms.

              • SPC …
                25 July 2019 at 12:07 am

                It apppears that way, the government has been consistent in supporting the position of the local iwi, if they asked the government to intervene to ensure a public park and some iwi housing it would probably go that way.

                • Dukeofurl …
                  25 July 2019 at 10:53 am

                  There is a public park . I have been there a couple times and walked around all of it including the moutain well before this situation. More 'parkland' hardly helps Kawerau a maki

                  Try and get more information before talking about what should be

                  • SPC …
                    25 July 2019 at 8:38 pm

                    Have you shares in Fletchers, or is it you just want to buy private property in the area beside the existing park?

                    1. The historic land being covered by privately owned houses does not help the iwi.

                    2. The expansion of the (existing) public park to include the historic site, and also provide iwi housing (as much as, or more than the private development does) is what the government should do if and when the local iwi asks for this.

              • greywarshark …
                25 July 2019 at 12:35 pm

                That is an interesting hypothesis so thanks for that Wayne. It is an objective look and it would be a good outcome I think.

                I think it would be money well spent. But to fit my viewpoint, it would be even better if the houses were to be built using Maori apprentices under the close supervision of good builders so they were getting good training, and finishing with solid houses. The youth who were ready to settle into apprenticeships would be taken on. Other responsible Maori youth or adults could be labour helping in the project. At the finish, those with a good work record would go into apprenticeships also. It would be a boost for the youth, as a Maori project on their own land, and also for the government doing something positive instead of negative, punitive stuff – building more prisons etc. It wouldn't be roses all the way, but carefully managed, it would come up smelling fine.

                Fletcher has had some black marks against its brand. They would be wise to put their backs into making this sort of program work. They would get some mana back. And perhaps the overseas owners would understand that; having bought an esteemed brand, it would bring some lustre back.

              • Gina Walters …
                31 July 2019 at 1:48 am

                In 2011 a $500 million taxpayer bailout of AMI came about amid revelations that the bill for failed South Canterbury Finance had jumped $300m, from $900m to $1.2 billion.

                It also came hard on the heels of the collapse of another South Island insurer, Western Pacific, a Queenstown-based company with an estimated $30m exposure to the two Christchurch earthquakes.

                Taxpayers were forced to pick up the tab for South Canterbury after it collapsed into receivership in 2010.
                South Canterbury was by far the biggest bailout, though taxpayers have also footed the bill for Allied Nationwide (about $130m) and Equitable Mortgage ($188m).

                Before that, the last big taxpayer bailouts were Air New Zealand ($885m in January 2002) and a $1b bailout of the BNZ in the early 1990s.

  4. bwaghorn 4
    24 July 2019 at 1:09 pm

    Giday weka.

    Any chance of pointing readers to a full history of the area . Vaguely aware of the place but most probably haven't got a clue what the history is of the place or who's doing and done what to who.

    • weka 4.1
      24 July 2019 at 1:26 pm

      Hi B, there's some good stuff on the Protect Ihumātao website. Also NZ Geographic did an article that people are recommending today.

      • Dukeofurl 4.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 1:30 pm

        Your photo from Noted shows the public park stonefields not the housing area , Ive been there so know this

  5. Patricia Bremner 5
    24 July 2019 at 1:10 pm

    Hello Weka, yes we need to be vocal on this issue.

  6. tc 6
    24 July 2019 at 1:17 pm

    Crucial given all the market gardens are now suburbs, watercare do as they please and akl airport are a law unto themselves.

  7. Dukeofurl 7
    24 July 2019 at 1:20 pm

    The image of the Stonefields is part of the Public Park not the Residential area which the local iwi support

    Im been to the public park and the Mountain Ihumātao as part of my journey over almost all of Aucklands Mauanga

    • Molly 7.1
      24 July 2019 at 4:44 pm

      AFAIK, the archaeological site, extends past the designated council reserve. It has been held privately since confiscation.

      This site also links one of Auckland's very few papakaianga designated landuse sites, to the existing reserve, and if developed upon, without that in mind, will sever the link of one of the oldest Maaori continuous settlements in New Zealand, with its historic whenua.

      Given the failure of Manukau District Council to follow through on promises made to the community before amalgamation, it is understandable that many are not convinced of the supposed benefits, which for them do not outweigh their own values regarding this land.

      The occupiers have had a lot of their views and information available on site for a couple of years now. It is worthwhile going to have a look and a korero to find out the hows and whys. The SHA legislation is a planning disaster, it was always so.

  8. Dukeofurl 8
    24 July 2019 at 1:34 pm

    Pania Newton , the protest leader at Ihumātao doesnt seem to be able to give a whakapapa connecting her to Kawerau a Maki the recognised iwi whos marae is just around the corner

    Instead shes claims Ngapuhi and Waikato

    https://www.appointbetterboards.co.nz/profile/Pania-Newton

    • marty mars 8.1
      24 July 2019 at 6:34 pm

      you seem embedded in this somehow – running smear lines – why is that?

      • Dukeofurl 8.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 7:59 am

        The local kaumata are saying the same thing- using the maori word for outsider.

        Why would they say that, as Im sure they know their iwi.

        Pania Newton , Im pretty sure doesnt come from Ihumatao, and looking at her own affiliations doesnt claim that either. The content of the link seems to be her own, looking for 'appoitments'

        • marty mars 8.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 8:05 am

          I've put at least 2 links that prove you wrong – maybe a better songsheet?

        • mauī 8.1.1.2
          25 July 2019 at 11:15 am

          Previous land protestors like the King brothers in Pureora Forest and Michael Tavares in Titirangi were clearly outsiders getting involved.

          The SOUL group appears to have much stronger ties to the land than those examples.

        • SPC 8.1.1.3
          25 July 2019 at 11:25 pm

          Pania Newton is the neice of Te Warena Taua head of the local iwi (just one of many Maori in Auckland with ancestry in more than one iwi). She was raised in the area.

          It seems he is upset his younger female relative is leading an uprising within the local iwi against her elders deal with Fletchers and is embarrassed about her gaining support for the cause from other Maori.

          But as long ago as 2016 Labour supported SOUL (Pania Newton) on this, the question is why the iwi has not approached the government to get a better deal from them.

          https://www.vice.com/en_nz/article/59mn75/taking-the-fight-for-ihumatao-all-the-way-to-the-united-nations

    • weka 8.2
      24 July 2019 at 8:46 pm

      One of the leaders. I understand she grew up at Ihumātao and her people are from the area. I'm not sure what I think of this thread, but it provides a counterpoint to your argument Duke

      https://twitter.com/SikotiHamiltonR/status/1153935299770109954

      • marty mars 8.2.1
        24 July 2019 at 9:20 pm

        Pretty hard to argue with Scott – he's a smart and respected researcher and writer. But there is a danger in extrapolating too much.

        • mickysavage 8.2.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 9:25 pm

          Te Warena is not conservative. He is the elder that called for a rahui on the Waitakere Ranges because of kauri dieback and Council's failure to come to terms with it.

          • marty mars 8.2.1.1.1
            24 July 2019 at 9:36 pm

            You know him, I don't. I don't have anything to say about him – I think scott extrapolated too much. These issues are complicated and family – never easy and sometimes people get it wrong. I hope that now that the police and pepper spray and pushing has started that people will band together AGAINST the real enemy – the loss of the whenua. They fought against the development and lost and now the fight is hot again – be good if they can win this time imo.

            • mickysavage 8.2.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2019 at 9:54 pm

              If this was Bastion Point and I was retired I would be getting ready to be arrested. The treatment of Ngati Whatua was appalling.

              My local board has a strong relationship with TKAM. They have plans to rebuild a Marae at Te Henga and we have been happy cheerleaders of this.

              Te Warena and TKAM have been great champions and protectors of the great forest of Tiriwa also known as the Waitakere forest.

              I can’t accept they are the bad guys here.

              At the same time I agree that Ihumatao, close to where I grew up, is a special place and should be preserved and protected.

              Maybe Council needs to step in.

              • marty mars …
                24 July 2019 at 10:05 pm

                No it will be sorted. They can be both – not good or bad – but judged on their decisions and what they say.

                The truth is they are trying to save so many things from the greedy and they only have so much resource, so much time and so much energy. They will need to listen and be humble and I think they will be because their mana is manifest – things can change and the leaders must listen to the people – ALL the people and not say they are outsiders – that is not good imo, that will cause blood to boil and mana to be truly tested. If they have the mana it will be shown.

              • weka …
                24 July 2019 at 11:30 pm

                I also don't believe that TKAM are the bad guys, that's successive Governments (including local) and Fletchers. I'm reluctant to see this as a Māori/Māori dispute.

                I don't know enough about the history, but Scott probably went too far. Probably shouldn't have linked it but feel the rhetoric around the Protectors not being valid Māori needed some pushback.

                • weka …
                  24 July 2019 at 11:37 pm

                  what I got so far is that the Iwi tried to stop the development and couldn't, so then negotiated with Fletchers to save the tapu wahi and secure some of the housing for their people. The Iwi were put in a really shitty position.

        • Ad 8.2.1.2
          24 July 2019 at 9:36 pm

          Te Warena has led Te Kawerau A Maki up from almost nothing for three decades, being a people almost totally dispossessed and deprived of lands, through a process over decades of restoring that mana, going through the whole struggle with Waitakere Council to build and gain the special local legislation that protects the Waitakere Ranges from exploitation. He is the key Maori figure in the protection of the Waitakeres.

          He can recount the stories of his people being hunted down by others from the north in the Musket Wars, smoked out of caves, then cast off Karekare's Watchman Rock to their deaths or enslaved. It is simply astonishing to see him in full rhetorical flight.

          He can also recount stories well into living memory of his parents and grandparents being forced off lands.

          He is one of the very, very few left who can recount all these stories.

          Te Warena is also a person who has fought well to get little bits of land back when they were down town almost nothing.

          He knows how to play the guilt economy and extract everything he can for the betterment of his people, because in most ways that is the only tool available to him.

          Amazing to see stickers go up around town calling him kupapa, when what he is doing is forming partnerships which last.

          He's tactically smart enough to aim for the goal of land restoration, AND housing, AND a strong marae. And he will get it.

          • marty mars 8.2.1.2.1
            24 July 2019 at 9:38 pm

            You know him, I don't. I don't have anything to say about him – I think scott extrapolated too much. These issues are complicated and family – never easy and sometimes people get it wrong. I hope that now that the police and pepper spray and pushing has started that people will band together AGAINST the real enemy – the loss of the whenua. They fought against the development and lost and now the fight is hot again – be good if they can win this time imo.

          • Sam 8.2.1.2.2
            24 July 2019 at 9:51 pm

            Realestate developments are a really inefficient way of getting the money to where you want it. Pania has a point. Warena is locking the Iwi into a really really long trade that the younger ones who will inherit it anyway don't want.

            • Ad 8.2.1.2.2.1
              24 July 2019 at 10:01 pm

              A whole bunch more efficient than the Public Works Act.

              Te Warena will be using the media noise from the young ones to up the price his people get out of this.

              He is one of the smartest at generating leverage from a position of extreme weakness.

              • marty mars …
                24 July 2019 at 10:06 pm

                [deleted] – it isn't all about the money [deleted]

                [your point works without the abuse marty. – weka]

              • Sam …
                24 July 2019 at 10:17 pm

                First of all Fletchers aquir d the land fair and square. Second is the land should never have been sold in the first place.

                This is just typical of the crown retroactively okaying it's bullshit land acquisition programmes so don't try and bad buzz me with some financial balanincing act.

                You know I support Pania. I'v donated money to them and my brother and sister is with them now. So I think that the crown should take every opportunity to present a deal.

              • marty mars …
                25 July 2019 at 7:37 am

                "Te Warena will be using the media noise from the young ones to up the price his people get out of this."

                That is why we have so many problems in this country – people like you who think it is all about YOUR values of money. You disrespect all involved by saying that. Disgusting comment imo

          • mauī 8.2.1.2.3
            24 July 2019 at 10:40 pm

            I see what you're getting at, basically a great, great man, who through no fault of his own got caught up in one of the biggest land disputes in modern New Zealand.

      • marty mars 8.2.2
        24 July 2019 at 9:29 pm

        Pania Newton is fighting for her whenua and her whānau. At 28, the Auckland University law graduate is the youngest of six cousins from Ihumātao village, Auckland, leading an effort to protect the whenua they grew up on.

        https://e-tangata.co.nz/video/conversations-pania-newton/

  9. veutoviper 9
    24 July 2019 at 1:37 pm

    My small contribution –

    Here is a link to the NZ Geographic feature about Ihumatao mentioned by weka with good background:

    https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/when-worlds-collide-2/

    [Cannot currently reply to individual comments – possibly because I now realise I am using Chrome Incognito …. ]

    • bwaghorn 9.1
      24 July 2019 at 5:19 pm

      Sounds like nimdyism to me.

      And maybe a touch of not wanting a heap of non Maori as neighbors.

      We need houses there will be green spaces provided and waihi taupo sites are being protected.

      • weka 9.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 5:33 pm

        I think there are other places to build housing, and I wonder if this is more about Te Kawerau A Maki kaumatua doing the best of a bad situation to try and find a way for their people to stay connected with that land. If the land had gone through a treaty settlement there might have been better solutions.

        • Dukeofurl 9.1.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 8:19 pm

          Its been privately owned for 150 years , how would going through a Treaty Settlement in this specific instance work then ?

          You should read the 1988 Manukau Treaty of Waitangi report and its options for the local settlement

          https://forms.justice.govt.nz/search/Documents/WT/wt_DOC_68495207/The%20Manukau%20Report%201985.pdf

          The hearing was at the Marae just around the corner home of e Kawaerau a Maki which I think the Green party has trampled on the mana of for political purposes.

          • weka 9.1.1.1.1
            24 July 2019 at 8:49 pm

            If the Crown purchased the land, the situation would be very different (assuming the Crown then did the right thing with it). At the moment a big driver in this is Fletcher's need to pay their shareholders. Take that out of the equation and things can change.

            Feel free to post a tl;dr of your link and how it relates to Ihumātao.

            • Ad 9.1.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2019 at 9:47 pm

              The driver is an internal conflict between the united elders of the two Trusts who have made a clear set of housing and development outcomes with Fletcher Building, and those who oppose it. Not the Crown.

              The Crown and the Council have made their positions clear that this land should be for housing. They won't be stepping in under any circumstance.

              As Minister Davis said this afternoon, it's not for the Crown to get involved in this; they will have to sort this out by themselves.

            • bwaghorn 9.1.1.1.1.2
              25 July 2019 at 12:23 pm

              Has the government ever bought land off private owners to settle a treaty claim?

    • Rosemary McDonald 9.2
      24 July 2019 at 9:01 pm

      That was an engrossing read vv, thanks for the link.

      Tells pretty much the same story as this… https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12161330 from Simon Wilson at the Herald from last year. Re-posted by the Herald today.

      Looks to me as if the tired old warrior is a little pissed that the young wahine toa have got more traction than he did.

  10. Ad 10
    24 July 2019 at 2:21 pm

    The Greens are barking up the wrong tree here.

    This development has Te Kawerau A Maki as one of its commercial partners. They hold the mana whenua there.

    It was Te Kawerau A Maki kaumatua and kuia who called out the protesters to leave the site last night.

    It will be Te Kawerau A Maki people who get houses and land out of this – that's how it's designed.

    Their marae is right next door.

    So those people getting arrested for obstruction are obstructing poor local Maori with mana whenua from getting into a fresh house.

    • mickysavage 10.1
      24 July 2019 at 3:24 pm

      Yep I would defer to Te Kawerau A Maki on this and respect their view.

    • mauī 10.2
      24 July 2019 at 4:03 pm

      Not surprised you hold that view, just a repeat of the colonist mindset. Basically what we have here is an active treaty claim and you've taken the side of the current land holders.

      • Ad 10.2.1
        24 July 2019 at 4:36 pm

        Treaty Claims won't be affecting private title.

        The elders have the project well in hand, and have achieved good for the land and for the mana whenua.

        You can ask Te Warena if he has a colonial mindset yourself.

        You might even learn something.

        • mickysavage 10.2.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 6:03 pm

          I have the greatest of respect for TKAM. They are mana whenua for the Waitakere Ranges and my dealings with them have always been positive. Te Warena was the person who called for the rahui on the ranges until Council did something about Kauri dieback.

        • mauī 10.2.1.2
          24 July 2019 at 6:44 pm

          A Fletcher development is good for the land?? I think I will defer to folks who have lived in that community for generations, some who even identify with 800 years of NZ human history there. They might be the first people to ask what's good…

    • Brigid 10.3
      24 July 2019 at 5:23 pm

      Poor Maori who will be able to afford a $640,000 "affordable home"

      Yeah right.

      • Dukeofurl 10.3.1
        24 July 2019 at 5:26 pm

        Do you know the deal Kawerau a Maki have with Fletchers or are you …short on facts like a lot of others here

        • weka 10.3.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 5:34 pm

          how about you share with us what the deal is?

          • Dukeofurl 10.3.1.1.1
            24 July 2019 at 8:24 pm

            How about the Green party doesnt trample on the Mana of the local Iwi for its own political purposes.

            The kaumatua joined with the police in asking the protestors to leave, they must of had good reasons to believe that was the way forward. Its not for me or you to question their solution to their issues.

            • weka 10.3.1.1.1.1
              24 July 2019 at 8:51 pm

              ok, so you don't know what the deal is either and are also commenting from a place of relative ignorance. That's ok, that applies to most of us. What the deal with Fletchers is is a missing piece for me, I was hoping someone would explain.

              • joe90 …
                24 July 2019 at 9:16 pm

                the deal with Fletchers

                Any deal between Te Kawarau iwi and Fletcher Building will probably be trussed up with a commercial sensitivity ribbon but the 2016 resource hearing offers a few clues.

                8.12 Mr Taua referred to the Environment Court cases which had considered the extent of the metropolitan urban limit and an attempt to re-zone 545-561 Oruarangi Road as Public Open Space. Mr Taua was involved in these cases and clearly disappointed by the outcome. He explained that since that time his focus had shifted from opposing growth to negotiating with Fletchers to achieve better outcomes for tangata whenua through the provision of affordable housing for those who return to the area, creating an ongoing relationship with the developer, and ensuring that the future housing would be set back from the papakainga and urupa.

                […]

                8.14 He said “there are at least 200 families who could come back and live in the village. We’ve had children who could not be brought up here because there’s no room.That’s nothing to do with Fletchers but there are many who want to come back and they have a right to do so. It’s up to us. If our people are able to return to these houses then we have done something”. He added that those who were opposed to the development had not taken any account of the people who are not there and who want to return. He acknowledged there could be no guarantee that descendants of the original settlers will actually own all of the new houses although that aspect was also being negotiated.

                https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/our-plans-strategies/unitary-plan/history-unitary-plan/modifications/OruarangiSHAandQDdecisions.pdf

                btw, nice to see you back.

                • weka …
                  24 July 2019 at 11:43 pm

                  cheers Joe.

                  I think the Iwi get a % of the houses? I'm not sure if they have to buy them at market value or what.

            • marty mars 10.3.1.1.1.2
              24 July 2019 at 9:47 pm

              Boom

              Haki Wilson says as a founding member of SOUL he's upset Te Kawerau chair Te Warena Taua is saying the occupation was driven by outsiders.

              "I am born and bred in Ihumātao. I still live here. My whakapapa is here. My pēpeha is here, and I am not a rāwaho. I heard the words come out of his mouth that we are rāwaho and we are not from here. We are from here. We are mana whenua. He should know that because he lived across the road from me," Mr Wilson says.

              https://www.waateanews.com/waateanews/x_news/MjIyNjM/Ihum%C4%81tao-protesters-reject-r%C4%81waho-tag?

              • Dukeofurl …
                25 July 2019 at 7:53 am

                Hes talking about Pania Newton. The iwi have established kaumatua and decision making, you find ONE person who doesnt agree

                • marty mars …
                  25 July 2019 at 8:08 am

                  I don't think you know much about iwi politics mate

                  • Dennis Frank …
                    25 July 2019 at 1:22 pm

                    But do any pakeha? I'm reluctant to comment from a position of ignorance, but there does seem to be an evident lack of consensus in the local Maori (emerging from this thread).

                    So do the protestors have any real moral authority? Is it appropriate to defy the mana of the guy who did the deal with Fletcher's? If traditional iwi decision-making cannot be enforced, how can the rest of us identify a principled political resolution??

                    And I'm inclined to agree with the duke. The Greens have a relevant charter principle on collective decision-making: "decisions will be made directly at the appropriate level by those affected."

                    So was the local Maori decision imposed by the elders rather than reached by consensus of all stakeholders? If so, the Green MPs ought to focus on that instead of grandstanding. Resolution requires following the appropriate process. Protesting is mere political theatre.

                    • weka …
                      25 July 2019 at 1:27 pm

                      In this case the occupation is happening because there was no way to get the issues dealt with fairly by other processes. Political theatre has legitimate use.

                      There are multiple Iwi connected with this land. It's taking time for the full story to become clear, but to my mind it's ok for there to be disagreement, and this isn't primarily a Māori vs Māori issue. It's about the government's inability to resolve serious issues with its treaty partners. If we look at the underlying injustice it becomes clearer where the points of conflict are. I don't think any Iwi wanted the land developed.

                    • New view []
                      25 July 2019 at 8:07 pm

                      Ok Weka. You’ve mentioned the crown several times in these threads. Few others have brought the subject up because it’s a bit awkward to criticise the government. once again Jacinda Ardern is putting her political situation before a no win attempt to mediation. It’s not politically expedient so we will excuse ourselves. She has the right to say this is not our argument but if she was a great leader she would take on some political risk to try and help sort it out. I’m sure many here will remind me why this isn’t possible.

                    • marty mars …
                      25 July 2019 at 8:03 pm

                      imo the tensions between stability and growth, outward and inward create polarities which eventually lead to resolution. The problem (from anyone looking from the outside) is that the mana moves as the argument flows – it's dynamic. Decisive moves can lead to movement in the centre of gravity of the consensus. It happens with every grouping just emphasis on different aspects within this worldview imo.

                    • Sam …
                      25 July 2019 at 8:21 pm

                      Well, no. You either have the mana, or you don't. And it's gender neutral. It's like if a professional or an electrician speaks then the people he's talking gives him the authority to speak and they listen and act and so on. And now Pania has a bit of mana so she gets a say.

                      The thing that can't be ignored is Fletchers has an iron clad deal and there's cops there to enforce it. So the deal has to be hounored or renegotiated. And all parties satisfied.

  11. Ad 11
    24 July 2019 at 3:17 pm

    Pretty sure Te Warena Taua – the key Te Kawerau elder there – will be asking the protesters to point to which of his families won't get a house because of their actions.

    With excellent Tainui affiliation and relationships, he can call down the lineage of the Maori King on this as well.

    • Dukeofurl 11.1
      24 July 2019 at 3:31 pm

      Its a wonderful site and when you see Auckland sprawl everywhere else, I would like to see the 'housing/Fletchers' land added to the large park.

      But that doesnt put roofs over peoples heads when Im content in my own house elsewhere.

  12. Gosman 12
    24 July 2019 at 3:27 pm

    Where are all the houses that need to be built to fix the housing crisis going to be built?

    • Sam 12.1
      24 July 2019 at 4:04 pm

      Well, Y'know. You want market rates, have it. Lmfao

      • Dukeofurl 12.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 11:13 am

        Another 50,000 people in Auckland can sleep in cars instead. Instead of laughing think of solutions…thats right you have none, zero, zilich

        • Sam 12.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 1:11 pm

          What are you on about? Modern Living Environments are apart of The National Party of Aotearoa New Zealand's policy prescription for a "Brighter Future" (in inverted commas) where have you been for the last 10 years? Lmfao

    • Rapunzel 12.2
      24 July 2019 at 4:05 pm

      Maybe like this, or similar to it or even another idea.

      Seems to me that slowly but surely more people are having these ideas.

      Including some "businesses" which, it is often stated, apparently are in the main "negative" about NZ and its future and have been since the start of the term of the current NZ govt but turns out they are not negative at all about their business future in NZ.

      This type of proposal by "Sleepyhead" to expand and to include the living conditions and options of its staff will be done by the "doers". Much more will be achieved by the "doers' be it private or with govt involvement than will be "done" by a lot of negative talk, that is old school but the way most things were once achieved.

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12252196
      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=12252369

    • vto 12.3
      24 July 2019 at 4:12 pm

      We're jamming them into Remmers dontcha know … ha ha

  13. vto 13
    24 July 2019 at 4:11 pm

    Good to see this post up – was just about to post in support in Open Mike.

    Leave the people alone I say. This is an ancient aotearoan site, with history that links most all of us to this land. Most are not aware of this history though, which is a shame.

    Leave them alone and link with our history – we are all stronger for it

  14. marty mars 14
    24 July 2019 at 5:13 pm

    Te Warena Taua said "They talked about peaceful protest but it's been quite the opposite, right to the point where the other day at our marae kaumātua were abused, attacked in the meeting hourse, and it seems a number of people from our marae have gone on side of SOUL so it's a sad day for us but they need to go, they need to go and they need not come back," Mr Taua says.

    The Marae fought the declaration of the Fletchers' land as a special housing area, but having lost that battle it has negotiated a relationship with the developer that means at least 40 whānau with connections to the village will be able to get houses there for the first time in generations.

    Link

    A lot said and not said in those statements.

    • weka 14.1
      24 July 2019 at 5:29 pm

      Really complex situation. I feel for the people that have done the fighting and then in the end negotiating with Fletchers, all that work. It makes sense tensions are running high within the Iwi.

      • marty mars 14.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 5:35 pm

        yep this is where friends become enemies and brothers and sisters fall out

      • Sam 14.1.2
        24 July 2019 at 5:38 pm

        Well I don't think it's complicated at all, I think the individual incentives are stronger than the collective responsibility. Y'know the 50,000 or so migrants who move to Auckland every year so they can be property speculators. You could say that is terrible for Māori as all the doors close for them or you could say it's been wonderful for property speculators. The second one is more fictional but that's the kinds of thing you're supposed to say if you're succeeding. This is the same way we talk about globalization where it's rather glib but it works for me. I'd actually like to have more talented people come to New Zealand because I'm not scared of competing with them. So I think there is this individual incentive where if you pretend the system is working then you can simultaneously signal that you are one of the few people who should succeed in it.

      • Rosemary McDonald 14.1.3
        24 July 2019 at 9:10 pm

        Really complex situation. Heh! You disappear for simply ages and ages and pop up again out of the blue and make understatements. cheeky

        Good to see you back, and on such an important and relevant issue. Makes a delightful change from the POTUS/Brexit commentary and a breath of fresh air compared to those embarrassing 'lets slag off at National again' posts that I'm pretty sure are supposed to distract us from noticing that the gloss has faded on the Coalition.

    • marty mars 14.2
      24 July 2019 at 5:34 pm

      I'll just highlight the bit for those pushing certain lines

      "and it seems a number of people from our marae have gone on side of SOUL so it's a sad day for us but they need to go, they need to go and they need not come back," Mr Taua says."

      what do you think that means? They are mana whenua too. Mana is GIVEN by the people NOT by the government – stand in the mana and let's sort it.

      • Dukeofurl 14.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 11:11 am

        A dreary recitation of buzz words doesnt mean anything.

        A friend who is connected to a number of marae says at one, disputes are common and individuals are working for their own interest ( occupying their own marae) and nothing is achieved while another is focussed on completing what they start and their marae is the scene of many reunions celebrations

    • Molly 14.3
      25 July 2019 at 4:54 pm

      "…it has negotiated a relationship with the developer that means at least 40 whānau with connections to the village will be able to get houses there for the first time in generations."

      This is an important detail.

      How will it be determined who gets houses there? Ballot – such as Kiwibuild? Or have particular whanau already been identified? How will that individual benefits for certain iwi members be shared with the rest of the community?

      • weka 14.3.1
        25 July 2019 at 5:02 pm

        I've been trying to find details on the deal. How much will the houses cost? What is the 'pathway to ownership'? Will the houses be in individual title and can then be sold on to whoever on the property market?

        I'm also thinking about the other houses, which are the greater majority, and who will be able to afford them. Bringing in large numbers of people from all over who are wealthy will change the values of the area rapidly. It also looks like there will need to be further development outside of this subdivision, increased infrastructure as the door to more housing is my guess.

        • Molly 14.3.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 5:18 pm

          The fact that there is land zoned in the existing residential village as papakaianga is notable. This designation – if it hasn't been changed recently – allows for multiple dwellings on one title. If housing iwi is a priority then it would be good to see any land given to the community fall under the same designation, and have a co-housing model used that follows the Maori world view. TBH, that could happen at any time, and provide options for locals that don't currently exist.

          This SHA development has the potential to generate great capital gains for Fletchers, especially if the proposed light rail station at Ihumaatao goes ahead. There is a lot of other stakeholder investment in this proposal going ahead, including those who are using the proposed development as further impetus for this transport option.

          This may result in the gentrification you have considered. Most likely happening over years, rather than in the short term.

          • weka 14.3.1.1.1
            26 July 2019 at 1:48 pm

            does papakainga zoned land take land out if individual title? Or does it leave it in ie it could still be sold later onto the private property market.

            • Molly 14.3.1.1.1.1
              26 July 2019 at 4:36 pm

              Hi weka,

              If you go into Auckland Council's Geomaps, and view Ihumātao, click on the second icon on the blue toolbar that looks like three boxes. It allows you to select an overlay – Choose Unitary Plan in the bottom right-hand corner.

              You will then see that the village area is zoned Māori Purpose Zone. (However, it is not all held in Maori Land Titles as you can see if you visit Māori Land online.)

              The zoning – however – would make it easier – to develop the land into Papakāinga which has guidelines written into the Auckland Design Manual, a supplementary guide to the Unitary Plan. Whether Māori Land or general title.

  15. Sanctuary 15
    24 July 2019 at 6:05 pm

    The protesters look like a bunch of confused idiots going with a vague and muddled sense of grievance.

    • Sam 15.1
      24 July 2019 at 6:15 pm

      Then I am with the protestors. I think Jacinda should use the Public Works act to Aquire the land and turn it over to local Iwi under first rights of refusal at 50% of market rates. There should be a co payment between Iwi and crown so that there won't a flood of treaty claims from way back for any old reason.

      • Dukeofurl 15.1.1
        24 July 2019 at 8:11 pm

        Thats a legal nonsense. if land is acquired under the Public Works Act it must be for 'Public Works' – onselling or even gifting to another owner is not a public work and reality means it must be offered back to the owner from whom it was taken- Fletchers.

        LMAO at your crazy notions.

        • Sam 15.1.1.1
          24 July 2019 at 8:33 pm

          I think you're misrepresenting the way the act is supposed to work. I'm saying the crown should buy the land out of public works money and offer first rights of refusal to buy to local Iwi. How ever I don't think think the crown will get involved in internal Iwi matters.

          You too remind me of employees hired for ideological reasons and then get angry when your not useful anymore. The economy is meant to be strong, stocks have never been higher, revenue has never been stronger. Yet sentiment is rather underwhelming. I think people see limited growth potential in property. Do you honestly believe property prices will double in the 10 years? 20? Does anyone really want property prices to double to an average price of $2 million. I don't think so. So there's planning issues, legitimacy issues. And I think the opportunities are wide open.

          • Dukeofurl 15.1.1.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 7:44 am

            You havent a clue on how the Public Works Act works. Since that claim was untenable you now shift to further nonsense about 'public works money'- buying land for a iwi who want the protesters 'to go back to ngapuhi' where they came from .

            • Sam 15.1.1.1.1.1
              25 July 2019 at 1:22 pm

              So I asked around if anyone from Ihumatao knew anyone in this thread and heaps of them said nah. And they'd rightly ask who the fuck are you?

  16. marty mars 16
    24 July 2019 at 9:42 pm

    yep

    In 1863, in the lead up to its illegal invasion of the Waikato, the New Zealand government illegally confiscated the land of Māori living south of Auckland. One of the areas confiscated was Ihumātao, once one of the biggest farming areas in the country. Over the years, the stolen land was pillaged, quarried, and destroyed, but some of its archaeological heritage still survives. Now, its all going to be bulldozed by a foreign-owned developer to make homes for the rich.

    http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2019/07/bastion-point-20.html

  17. Sanctuary 17
    25 July 2019 at 7:24 am

    Circle jerking with NRT is hardly much use as evidence. It seems to me you've got a bunch of befuddled and bored activists who have decided that something must be done about something, this is something, so they are doing it.

    I am at a loss to know what they protesters want, beyond an inchoate list of grievances and a desire to take on the state because they are unhappy about life in general. As has been pointed out, the government has no role in this and it seems that most of the protesters have little idea of the Maori involvement in the housing project.

    All in all, at the moment it is difficult to see these people as more than an aglomeration of permanently upset types plus assorted hangers on. Rebels looking for a cause.

    • Rosemary McDonald 17.1
      25 July 2019 at 7:46 am

      Sanctuary. You really need to read the history. A couple of links have been provided here on this page to help get your head around the complexities.

      https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/when-worlds-collide-2/

      https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12161330

      Maybe, just maybe, the time has come for those who have been waiting for justice to step up and say 'enough of this shit!'.

      • Dukeofurl 17.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 7:49 am

        Maybe you listen to local iwi instead of elbowing them out of the way because of your own feelings about 'something'

        • Rosemary McDonald 17.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 7:57 am

          Sigh. It would seem that the rangitahi are making a stand over issues their kaumatua also tried to make gains on… and failed.

          Very possibly I am oversimplifying, but it would seem to me that the elders might choose to put aside their dented egos and tap into the newly minted energy of youth.

          • Gosman 17.1.1.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 8:13 am

            Or they could decide that progress means letting go of elements of the past

          • Dukeofurl 17.1.1.1.2
            25 July 2019 at 11:02 am

            "rangitahi are making a stand over issues "

            Pleese.

            Waitangi Tribunal had its hearings at the local marae in 1988 and the recognised iwi have been working on the issues ever since.

            Outsiders like Pania Newton arent rangitahi

    • marty mars 17.2
      25 July 2019 at 7:54 am

      Good that is way above your head – you don't get it – quick hold the papers a new front page is coming lol

    • mauī 17.3
      25 July 2019 at 8:04 am

      Your white patriarchy is showing…

      I spose they should be grateful they're being offered 40 blankets…

      • Gosman 17.3.1
        25 July 2019 at 8:12 am

        Who is offering them metaphorical 40 Blankets?

        • weka 17.3.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 12:27 pm

          Fletchers, with the backing of the force of the state.

          • solkta 17.3.1.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 12:54 pm

            I don't understand what you are saying here weka. I can't see from what i know that Fletchers are at fault. They bought land that had private title and had been zoned for housing. It is not up to Fletchers to right the historical wrongs of confiscation. From what i understand they have agreed to give some land back anyway and provide some housing for local Maori, and have also said they would sell it all to the Crown if that option was offered. What do you want them to do?

            • weka 17.3.1.1.1.1
              25 July 2019 at 1:21 pm

              calling off the police this week would be a good start.

              I saw the houses Fletchers are offering the Iwi as the 40 blankets. Afaik Te Kawerau A Maki don't want the development, and agreed to it because it couldn't be stopped.

              • weka …
                25 July 2019 at 1:22 pm

                I see all non-Māori as being under the Crown, including corporations. As such we all have responsibilities under Te Tiriti. Te Tiriti is what gives Fletchers the right to do business in NZ.

                • solkta …
                  25 July 2019 at 1:32 pm

                  No, the treaty is an agreement between the Crown and Iwi. Corporations and individuals do not have responsibilities under the Treaty. It is the Crown that has the responsibility to make laws that honour the Treaty, and corporations and individuals the responsibility to comply with these laws. It is not up to Fletchers to sort this issue.

                  • Sam …
                    25 July 2019 at 1:37 pm

                    The treaty gives the crown the right to form a central government and do things Māori can't like commerce and form and airforce.

                  • weka …
                    25 July 2019 at 1:55 pm

                    The Crown governs all business in NZ. Fletchers can choose to do whatever they like within that, but that doesn't make it morally right or just. They knew there was substantial opposition to this development, they chose to go ahead against the wishes of the people. That is completely on them.

              • solkta …
                25 July 2019 at 1:35 pm

                Fletchers need to do something with the land. They have offered to sell it but the Crown will not pay and mana whenua have not the money.

                • mauī …
                  25 July 2019 at 1:58 pm

                  Fletcher didn't do proper due diligence and took the business risk of trying to develop sensitive land where it was probably never appropriate. If they can't recoup the expense they've poured into the project, that's on them.

  18. Rosemary McDonald 18
    25 July 2019 at 8:30 am

    Simon Wilson writes…

    But the iwi, Te Kawerau ā Maki, didn't want to protest forever. Their leader Te Warena Taua told me late last year they need some progress and Fletchers offered them the chance to get it. Could that be done another way? Fletchers told the Herald in February that they would sell.

    The courts have consistently been against the protesters, but that's the legal consequence of the history. The land was confiscated and never returned, but sold instead into private ownership. That meant it could not legally become part of a Treaty settlement.

    Could the council buy the land? Their line is the same as the Government's.

    Is this good enough? Who's going to step forward to resolve this?

    https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12252483

    • Dukeofurl 18.1
      25 July 2019 at 10:34 am

      Did you not read this part of his story

      ""A lot of us are not mana whenua," declared one speaker, "but we know what's right. We know what's right!"

      Liberal guilt seems to be motivation enough for some

      • Rosemary McDonald 18.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 10:59 am

        Did you not read this part of his story

        Yes. Did you?

        • Dukeofurl 18.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 11:15 am

          Anything from Simon Wilson usually drips with white Ponsonby liberal guilt… hes the anti- Hosking so the Herald thinks it has all 'bases covered"

      • SHG 18.1.2
        25 July 2019 at 6:25 pm

        "A lot of us are not mana whenua," declared one speaker, "but we know what's right. We know what's right!"

        bahahahah that's gold

    • Wayne 18.2
      25 July 2019 at 10:52 am

      I don't think the Council will buy the land. It will be too much money for them. Though they might partner with the government.

      As I noted above, I reckon it will cost north of $80 million to settle the issue. The bulk of the money will be to buy the land off Fletchers. The balance will be to build the forty houses Te Kawerau a Maki have been promised. Presumably the houses would be built on a portion of the land, with the balance being a public park.

      This arrangement will have to sit outside the conventional treaty settlement process. So I think it is unlikely the land (the part that would become a park) will go directly to iwi ownership. The government would not spend that sort of money for Te Kawerau a Maki, not without a full settlement process that would be measured against other settlements. It would seriously disturb the general relativities of other settlements. However, unlike other settlements, the purchase of the land would not give absolute authority for Te Kawerau a Maki to do as they wish for the land. It is much more likely that a co-governance regime would be developed for the land that becomes the public park.

      • Rosemary McDonald 18.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 10:58 am

        Though they might partner with the government.

        Bugger me Wayne, I think you just might be on to something there….

      • bwaghorn 18.2.2
        25 July 2019 at 12:30 pm

        Why would they still get houses plus the land bought for them ?

  19. WILD KATIPO 19
    25 July 2019 at 10:43 am

    Left wing , Right wing ,- matters not to me.

    I am concerned with the loss of archaeological importance , chiefly. Then there is the perpetuation of essentially what is , the policy's of 19th NZ govt of profit driven land grabbing . Once you destroy the site for mere short term gain , Aucklander's and the country as a whole loses forever an important and unique site of early human activity over a very long period of time. The area has already been altered in a negative sense as it is.

    I'm sure there are areas there that can be set aside for a designated heritage and archaeological site,… is this being considered? To some it may be just a grassed field with a bunch of old rocks . I dont see it that way at all. I'm sure others dont either. There are not a lot of historical archaeological sites left intact as it is , and I'm sure there is room for development as a heritage site to be valued by Aucklander's for the years to come. It is one of the oldest sites of human settlement and activity and that of a unique culture and its people . Why not preserve and develop a walkway with signage along the way explaining how this culture sustained its peoples in their day to day existence?

    I'm sure Iwi could sell certain designated areas for housing if they so wish , – but for heavens sakes preserve the main areas of historical significance.

    To simply trash it by building all over it a sea of houses seems a travesty and an opportunity lost forever.

    • Dukeofurl 19.1
      25 July 2019 at 10:57 am

      ” but for heavens sakes preserve the main areas of historical significance.”
      Done back in 2001

      "Conservationists had to fight hard even to save Ōtuataua’s 100 ha at Māngere, which was bought by the Manukau City Council with help from DOC, the Lotteries Commision and the Auckland Regional Council. On 10 February 2001, one of New Zealand’s oldest sites became its newest reserve, the Otuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve. Here you can see Polynesian house sites, storage pits, cooking shelters, terraces, mound gardens, garden plots and garden walls as well as some 19th-century European dry-stone farm walls."

      https://nzhistory.govt.nz/media/photo/otuataua-stonefields

      been many times because I knew of its historical significance . Have you bothered ?

      • WILD KATIPO 19.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 11:16 am

        Thing is , not every one has or will ever be able to visit , – but they can most certainly visit online.

        ( I assure you I have traveled all over the country for many years replete with 60 pound backpack with shanks pony and an outstretched thumb , – and ending up and living in the most extraordinary of places ) .

        There are overseas student and academics who will gain insight by reading of protected archaeological and cultural sites , down to those those interested simply in park management styles as well. Not to mention school children doing assignments who live in different parts of the country or the elderly that cannot perhaps visit personally.

        So many reasons why to preserve and protect ancient historical sites.

        * For me personally? … I am quite passionate about history , cultures and the like , moreso the historical aspects. Always have been.

        • Dukeofurl 19.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 3:55 pm

          Are you saying your are not in Auckland area or it never occurred to you ? Giving a very PC answer

  20. Gosman 20
    25 July 2019 at 11:09 am

    If the current Maori group that has signed off on this development is not reflective of the actual feelings of local Maori does that not highlight a problem with how Maori actually represent themselves in such matters? Surely they should sort out problems such as these then there would be little room for confusion over what they want.

    • marty mars 20.1
      25 July 2019 at 11:22 am

      lol maybe the ideal council or ANY group with people in it, can sort it for them

    • Molly 20.2
      25 July 2019 at 11:39 am

      No, it highlights a problem with how consultations and identified representatives are often used as a PR process rather than one with integrity.

      This is true for many New Zealanders who seek to have their view heard and acknowledged, not just Māori.

      • Rosemary McDonald 20.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 12:04 pm

        This is precisely the problem with disability issues. Very, very frustrating.

      • Gosman 20.2.2
        25 July 2019 at 1:34 pm

        What is the probelem with the process of Maori representation ?

        • Molly 20.2.2.1
          25 July 2019 at 4:34 pm

          Gosman, read the entire comment. It happens it any situation where consultation is not undertaken with integrity, or when responses are not politically comfortable to take notice of.

      • Dukeofurl 20.2.3
        25 July 2019 at 4:04 pm

        '"No, it highlights a problem with how consultations and identified representatives are often used as a PR process rather than one with integrity."

        Go ahead trample on the mana of the local iwi and its kaumatua with your notions.

        • Molly 20.2.3.1
          25 July 2019 at 4:44 pm

          That was not the intent of the comment, which was to highlight that just because consultation occurs – it does not mean that it has been conducted effectively, or that consensus has been reached that allows those that are identified as representatives to actually reflect the views of all. Not just in this case, but in many cases, particularly involving institutions or institutional processes when consultation is part of the process but not undertaken with the intention of making changes, but just ticking a box.

          I am personally acquainted with a couple of the protestors, and know that they are equally invested in the mana of the whenua, and they disagree with those who are speaking on their behalf. Their voice is equally valid, and that should be acknowledged instead of saying that because they are not the identified representative that they should remain silent.

          The findings on this particular issue – by the United Nations – can be found on the Protect Ihumaatao website. They determined in 2017, after presentations from both protestors and government – that the consultation process was not adequate:

          Special Housing Area 62 :
          18. The Committee is concerned by conflicting information regarding consultation with local Māori in connection with the designation of Special Housing Area (SHA) 62 at Ihumātao on land traditionally and currently occupied by Māori. The
          Committee notes that this land has been sold to a commercial developer who is required to actively mitigate the effects of development. While noting the State party’s position that it adequately consulted and obtained support from Māori authorities
          regarding the designation, the Committee is concerned by alternate reports that Māori have not had the opportunity to formally take part in decision-making with respect to use of the land (arts. 2, 5.)

          19. The Committee recommends that the State party review, in consultation with all affected Māori, the designation of Special Housing Area 62 to evaluate its conformity with the Treaty of Waitangi, the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant international standards, and that the State party obtain the free and informed consent of Māori before approving any project affecting the use and development of their traditional land and resources.

          • weka 20.2.3.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 4:59 pm

            thanks Molly.

            SHAs are a nightmare. They're designed to push development so that communities can't stop them.

  21. marty mars 21
    25 July 2019 at 12:06 pm

    Rnz – 300 there plus bus loads on the way. Joe Hawke there.

    Bad mistake calling people outsiders imo – it's gone burger. This will go all the way now.

    • WILD KATIPO 21.1
      25 July 2019 at 12:20 pm

      Good job.

      I hope it snowballs. Yes it may be some of the larger Iwi favour development and some dont, and a subtribe prefers to not have development,…however, … that area is of historical importance for all New Zealanders now due to its ancient , ongoing century's long occupation.

      It was no mere temporary seasonal shark fishing encampment, it was a selected and worked area simply because of the very strategic locale right on the Manukau harbour which facilitated centurys long sustenance for the community and transport / trade links to other tribes via the waterways.

      To merely trash our own historical and physical heritage sites for short term gains for a few would be a national travesty . There must be a better way forwards.

      • WILD KATIPO 21.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 12:43 pm

        Btw … who cut access to electricity, internet usage and safe water supplys to the area?

        Thats the sort of thing Police do to flush out armed offenders holed up in houses…

        Are we now doing that to legitimate protester's?

    • Dukeofurl 21.2
      25 July 2019 at 4:02 pm

      Well you could call the outsiders ' colonists' because that what they are.

      Kawerau a maki were calling them that on morning TV but used the maori word

      • mauī 21.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 7:16 pm

        How ironic you would call them that… don't you want to evict them off their land lol.

  23. weka 23
    25 July 2019 at 1:57 pm

    Remember when Labour's position was against the development at Ihumātao?

    Labour’s housing spokesperson Phil Twyford has called on the Government to rethink its controversial Special Housing Area in Māngere.

    Auckland Council is today meeting to discuss the development which borders the Otuataua Stonefield Historic Reserve. This project is to get up to 480 homes and is in a rural part of Mangere called Ihumatao.

    “Once again Housing Minister Nick Smith hasn’t done his homework. In his mad rush to roll out Special Housing Areas, Nick Smith has overlooked some serious infrastructure, social and heritage issues in this community,” Phil Twyford says.

    “Everyone knows Auckland needs more houses but that is no excuse for riding roughshod over the community.

    “Local residents believe the development is not adequately served by infrastructure. They believe the special heritage qualities of the stonefields will be threatened by the development. They also fear their village will be overwhelmed by this large medium-density development on its doorstep.

    “Pressure from the Government to roll out Special Housing Areas on the city fringe has prompted the Council to protest at the cost of laying down infrastructure to support these developments.

    “Now the stand-off at Ihumatao is more evidence the Government hasn’t properly thought through this process and is certainly not taking the community with them.

    “Nick Smith is saying his hands are tied and he can’t stop the SHA proceeding. That’s not good enough. It is his legislation. He has created this mess. He needs to find a way to clean it up.

    “The Government and the Council need to taihoa and sit down with the community to address the concerns that have been raised,” Phil Twyford says.

    August 2015.

    https://www.labour.org.nz/taihoa_at_ihumatao_says_labour

    • Ad 23.1
      25 July 2019 at 2:50 pm

      And yet here we are in 2019 and Te Kawerau A Maki are still living in a semi-rural slum, and people ready to start building houses.

      The people trying to do something about it and get houses and land for their people on this land are Te Warena Taua and his elders and kuia..

      Not the protesters egged on by the Green Party – they don't even know what solution they want, nor any process to achieve it. And even if they win it would be years and years before any Te Kawerau family got a warm, dry home out of it.

      Yet it is the Green Party has the Minister with the most power to act is in her own party: Eugenie Sage, as Minister of Land Information. Her department can set in motion all the PWA procedures for offer-back if she wants to.

      The Green Party cry the most, but they themselves are the ones with the warranted power to act.

      • weka 23.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 4:16 pm

        what's the deal with the houses for Iwi? Details would be good.

        • Ad 23.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 5:48 pm

          That is under negotiation – naturally it will be a commercial arrangement between the two Trusts and Fletcher Building so I wouldn't expect it to be disclosed to the public.

      • SPC 23.1.2
        25 July 2019 at 8:28 pm

        They cannot act without the grant of financiaL resources by Cabinet.

        The government has the capacity to build houses as fast as a private company such as Fletchers, anytime it chooses to.

        • Ad 23.1.2.1
          25 July 2019 at 9:43 pm

          Of course they can, and they want to.

          It's not Crown land, and Fletchers and the local iwi want to build houses right now.

          Only the protesters are stopping them.

          • SPC 23.1.2.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 10:29 pm

            It could be Crown land very quickly if they government wanted it to be.

            Back in 2016 the Labour Party was very opposed to the developments taking place, yet in government claims the deal local iwi made under those developments is fait acompli – but only because the government has given the iwi no alternative once in government.

    • Dukeofurl 23.2
      25 July 2019 at 3:53 pm

      Imagine if the Greens were in Government and what they could achieve on this issue .

      It was an issue they mentioned back in 2015

      https://www.greens.org.nz/news/press-releases/ihumatao-should-be-protected

      Too bad they arent in a position now to do something , you know like being a minister of Conservation or Land Informations ( Crown Lands) or something

      • weka 23.2.1
        25 July 2019 at 4:17 pm

        What do you think Sage could do that she hasn't already?

        • Ad 23.2.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 9:42 pm

          She's in charge of all offer-back procedures under the PWA. She holds the instruments to solve this, if the Greens really wanted to step in here rather than just protest.

          Crown Law would give advice as well.

          • SPC 23.2.1.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 11:15 pm

            Name a precedent for a Minister acting in such a way without the money being authorised by Cabinet first?

          • weka 23.2.1.1.2
            25 July 2019 at 11:44 pm

            Tell me what she could do. How would she act and what instruments would she use?

            • Sam 23.2.1.1.2.1
              26 July 2019 at 2:58 am

              [deleted]

              [Sam, whoever wrote this is plagiarising somebody else’s work as shown in the link provided by SPC @ 8: 13 AM. You need to come clean regardless of whether you or somebody else wrote it. As this is blatant dishonesty and in fact intellectual theft, I will stomp it out, one way or another – Incognito]

              [too messy to sort out. Sam, take note of the feedback here from Incognito and others and please don’t do this again (whatever it was) – weka]

              • Incognito …
                26 July 2019 at 7:59 am

                Looks to me like a direct quote without quotation marks, attribution, or link. Sam, if this is the case, you need to provide these.

                • Andre …
                  26 July 2019 at 8:16 am

                  I can't believe I'm doing this, but … I think that might actually be Sam's own work. While the coherence of thought and writing is out of character, the writing style is somewhat Sam-ish. I did a search on several short excerpts and came up empty, so … knock me down with a feather, but there might actually be more to Sam than appearances til now have suggested.

                  Or not.

                  edit: or maybe SPC is onto it.

                  • Dennis Frank …
                    26 July 2019 at 8:45 am

                    Sam was doing big-picture thinking in the wee small hours. Inertial consequences of institutions producing stasis, Machiavelli's advice re fresh-thinking making better governance, decolonising as essential culture-shift. All relevant factors.

                    Peter Williams told Duncan Garner a few minutes ago that only the govt can solve the problem, and buying the land off Fletchers isn't expensive, so the PM ought not to bail out. Fair enough.

                    Hone Harawira makes the analogy with Bastion Point: "Joe Hawke ran foul of his own kaumatua and kuia when he occupied Bastion Point to stop government from flickin’ it off to the developers. But he kept going, and the people kept coming, and helped Joe and the Orakei Action Committee win Bastion Point back for Ngati Whatua ki Orakei."

                    "Don’t be scared. Our kaumatua and kuia will forever hold a special place in our hearts for their connection to the world of our tupuna. But the people we follow into battle will be those with the courage, the smarts, the passion and the determination to win back our rights and our lands. BE BOLD. This is your world, your chance to stand with the ones who are fighting the developers. Make IHUMATAO your Dakota Access Pipeline, your Mauna Kea." https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2019/07/26/guest-blog-hone-harawira-ihumatao/

                    Seems to me he's making the same point Marty made yesterday in response to my comment re mana. Ebb & flow being part of how generational shifts play out in communities, so leadership at odds is best not regarded as a zero-sum polarity…

                  • Incognito …
                    26 July 2019 at 1:20 pm

                    Yeah, nah! Definitely not Sam. As SPC’s link clearly shows, it is mostly verbatim from a different and completely unrelated (!) source with large parts in which a few key words have been changed to change the context. In other words, it is a clear example of plagiarism.

                    • Andre …
                      26 July 2019 at 1:27 pm

                      Yeah. The way I was searching came up empty because of those few keyword changes. It never occurred to me someone would pull that kind of dim-student grade plagiarism here.

                    • Incognito []
                      26 July 2019 at 1:39 pm

                      I just left a moderation note for Sam but intended for everyone to read. This is completely unacceptable.

                      You are right that it reads like a student piece but Turnitin would have picked them up for plagiarism. Very stupid to try to pull it here on TS.

                      If Sam doesn’t come clean, he will spend a very long time in the wilderness because he’s been warned before for similar ‘stunts’ and ‘oversights’. In fact, he even mocked these warnings yesterday!

                    • lprent []
                      26 July 2019 at 2:36 pm

                      Just zap him if it is required.

                      I’m kind of stuck in mode-s and ads-b parsing at present and bit level work makes me a trifle tetchy, so I don’t trust myself to moderate well.

                    • Sam …
                      26 July 2019 at 2:57 pm

                      In my opinion my previous comment was tactically competent and with in the terms of use. If you get permission and it's for educational purposes then it's good to use. I had intended for the conversation I had with Adam and McFlock in last nights daily review to be my last and still intend to.

                    • Incognito []
                      26 July 2019 at 3:59 pm

                      You still need to provide the source and make clear where the material came from or I will have to take it down. TS did not get permission to reproduce material for educational use; TS is a blog site and not an academic institution.

                      Edit: the downside of reading in reverse order; I see that others have already dealt with it.

                    • Muttonbird …
                      26 July 2019 at 6:33 pm

                      Let me get this straight.

                      At 2:58am, Sam has copied an article, changed a few words to make it suit a completely different subject, and pasted it here as his own work.

                      That is beyond pathetic.

                    • Incognito []
                      26 July 2019 at 6:55 pm

                      That’s what it looks like although I cannot be sure it was Sam and in fact I doubt it. I think Sam copied & pasted it. Not good.

              • Incognito …
                26 July 2019 at 1:31 pm

                See my Moderation note @ 2:58 AM.

  24. Tiger Mountain 24
    25 July 2019 at 2:56 pm

    Labour urgently needs some better political management re Ihumātao. And the original land grab needs to be properly addressed regardless, as that is the back story to all this. Joe Hawke and Jane Kelsey have been there today and word is spreading in the ranks. Jacinda can belatedly get on top of the situation or just be swept along and make decisions that will further split support for her.

    The Govt. is already involved, unless someone else is paying for all those Cops!

    • Dukeofurl 24.1
      25 July 2019 at 4:07 pm

      Stop the Presses, the bandwagon is in town and before the media move onto another issue.

      The Cops are there at the request of local iwi and owners, Police are told when to turn up by politicians

  25. Dennis Frank 25
    25 July 2019 at 7:05 pm

    The history link informs us of the international perspective, via "presentations to the United Nations in May 2017 (at the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York and in a separate one hour meeting with the PFII Special Rappatour) and in August 2017 (at the Committee on the Elimination of Racism and Discrimination (CERD) in Geneva)."

    "On 25 August 2017 CERD, after deliberation over the SOUL report and presentations as well as representations from the New Zealand Government delegation, delivered two recommendations on the issue as follows:

    Special Housing Area 62 :
    18. The Committee is concerned by conflicting information regarding consultation with local Māori in connection with the designation of Special Housing Area (SHA) 62 at Ihumātao on land traditionally and currently occupied by Māori. The
    Committee notes that this land has been sold to a commercial developer who is required to actively mitigate the effects of development. While noting the State party’s position that it adequately consulted and obtained support from Māori authorities
    regarding the designation, the Committee is concerned by alternate reports that Māori have not had the opportunity to formally take part in decision-making with respect to use of the land (arts. 2, 5.)

    19. The Committee recommends that the State party review, in consultation with all affected Māori, the designation of Special Housing Area 62 to evaluate its conformity with the Treaty of Waitangi, the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and other relevant international standards, and that the State party obtain the free and informed consent of Māori before approving any project affecting the use and development of their traditional land and resources.

    The SOUL (Save Our Unique Landscape) Campaign correctly deduces this: "Our country’s reputation is at stake; we cannot afford to be seen internationally to override the basic human rights of our indigenous peoples." Yet it fails to specify which rights have been over-ridden. The obvious one is right of occupancy by the hapu or iwi using it at the time of confiscation in 1863. So how come there's been no mention here of a land claim under the Treaty process? Isn't that the logical thing to do??
    ​
    ​"SOUL is urgently seeking Government and Auckland Council intervention, to either buy the land from Fletcher Building Limited (the current owner) or mandate a process that will enable all affected parties to come up with an outcome everyone can live with. Thousands of New Zealanders want this land protected for future generations – join us by signing this petition."

    Why does the campaign seek action from govt & council as an alternative to returning the land to the rightful owners? Could it be that those were Tainui, and chose not to include that land in their Treaty settlement (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Zealand_land_confiscations)? In which case, where's the moral case for re-litigation? Are the protestors trying to con the kiwi public by ignoring history??

    "The Ihumaatao landscape (of which the land in question, Special Housing Area 62, is a part) is recorded on the United Nations International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS) at risk register. This rare cultural heritage landscape (including SHA 62) matters because its stories, relationships, built heritage, ecological values and archaeological sites are critical to our understanding of the histories and futures of our city and country. For mana whenua (local Māori), this place embodies sources of identity and wellbeing as well as family, community and tribal relationships."

    Well okay, I get all that. So why didn't the Tainui use this reasoning to include the land in their claim? The smokescreen being blown by the protestors seems designed to distract everyone. Honesty would be a better policy.

    • solkta 25.1
      25 July 2019 at 7:20 pm

      and chose not to include that land in their Treaty settlement

      They could not have included that land in their treaty settlement as it was not owned by the Crown.

      • Dennis Frank 25.1.1
        25 July 2019 at 9:12 pm

        Well I never accepted the doctrine that English private property rights ought to prevail over everything else. Everyone knows they originated in conquest in England, so any attempt to fake their sanctity has always been bullshit.

        So, from the perspective of natural justice, to right the historical wrongs of settler govt confiscations, the land ought to be returned to the original occupants. If I understand the concept of tangata whenua properly, that seems appropriate.

        However that's just my natural instinctive moral perspective, and if it is warping my grasp of the situation, I must acknowledge that. Perhaps the protestors framing of it as a cultural heritage issue (rather than rights) is a better way to go. I can see why the rock wall elimination could be a gut issue for them.

        • bwaghorn 25.1.1.1
          25 July 2019 at 9:43 pm

          If the government starts taking land to give to aggrieved Maori it will go on and on . A slippery slope to igniting race hatred and all out violence.

          If you cant see that you are thick.

          • marty mars 25.1.1.1.1
            25 July 2019 at 10:56 pm

            Why would people go to all out violence and race hatred – what the fuck is wrong with them? Are they living on disputed land? nah, they aren't, are they. So it is just learnt ignorance and idiocy. Selfishness and lookaftermeism – all of the traits that have added so much negativity to our society.

            • bwaghorn 25.1.1.1.1.1
              26 July 2019 at 10:02 am

              Early every dairy farm in waikato and taranki are in similar situations to this place ihimatao.

              It's not right that the land was taken but for the good of future generations the government can not and must not purchase this land to give back.

              Humans unfortunately are humans with all the fucked flaws that come with it.

          • SPC 25.1.1.1.2
            25 July 2019 at 11:13 pm

            And keeping all the land taken will guarantee permanent and total victory to the haves. And using government power to suppress protest keeps people underfoot and cowered.

    • Ad 25.2
      25 July 2019 at 9:39 pm

      If Tainui wanted to support their own sub tribe on the shores of the Manukau, then they could simply make an offer to Fletchers and buy it for them. Like any other citizen.

      They have well enough money to do it if they wanted.

      Tainui's property development expertise could turn a profit out of a large housing development in the Auckland market.

      It would be a lot simpler and faster than trying to guilt the government to do it for them as the protesters are.

      • mauī 25.2.1
        26 July 2019 at 8:54 am

        Māori bailing out Māori and the Gov somehow I don't think is gonna fly. Nice try though.

  26. Muttonbird 26
    25 July 2019 at 10:22 pm

    The map gives clear context to what is going on in the area.

    Industry has marched almost to the doorstep of the Otuataua Stonefields. There is a Sistema factory not 500m from it already. The SHA and associated infrastructure would take the final step and enclose the site on three sides.

    To me, the stand people are taking is to stop the inevitable squeezing of this very important historical area – something which would make it unrecognisable and impotent.

    • Ad 26.1
      26 July 2019 at 6:51 am

      It was intensive industry as agriculture by Maori for a millennia before that. They worked, it, made deals, and got paid. Let's not go all romance on this bit of land.

      None of the archeological sites will be affected by the current development.

      All of this evidence has been presented multiple times, across the court hearings, and Council hearings.

      • Dennis Frank 26.1.1
        26 July 2019 at 7:31 am

        Yes, I've just been reviewing that background. There's a useful summary here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%8Ctuataua

        "The papakāinga (village) of Ihumātao is considered the oldest settlement in Auckland. Tribal land was cleared in 1863, and then confiscated by Governor Grey in 1865". "The land known as Oruarangi Block was farmed in private ownership for 150 years, before being sold to Fletcher Building for a planned subdivision."

        "The Oruarangi Block has been designated as a Special Housing Area under the district plan, allowing development of 480 houses. The Manukau City Council attempted to preserve the land as part of the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve in 2009, however this was later overruled on appeal by the Environment Court."

        "Fletcher's spokesman Steve Evans said the Environment Court's decision re-affirmed it was entirely justified in going ahead with the project. He pointed out the court found the company was actually providing a higher level of protection for the area than was required. He called yesterday's decision "the last legal hurdle" and hoped construction would begin next year." "Mr Evans said Fletcher's had now been through the Waitangi Tribunal, the Māori Land Court and now the Environment Court – as well as the normal consenting process." https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/375483/decision-allows-development-near-sacred-maori-site

        So now it seems there's no threat to the old stone walls, as the land in question is adjacent to that part. The protestors seem to be skating on thin ice with their reasoning that residences ought not to be built there either, suggesting it's an old burial ground. You may or may not be able to find a skeleton underground, if you dig anywhere in Aotearoa. Governance ought not to be based on hypotheticals when evidence-based policy is the current convention.

      • mauī 26.1.2
        26 July 2019 at 8:49 am

        It's Maori land bud, why are you not listening to them? and why are you so keen on railroading your pet project through?

      • Muttonbird 26.1.3
        26 July 2019 at 11:28 am

        Bizarre logic. Britain might as well build a crematorium next to Stonehenge. Perhaps a new town hall on the Acropolis?

  27. David Mac 27
    26 July 2019 at 12:03 pm

    This is a historic site for all New Zealanders.

    Calls for a creative one off solution. Govt could purchase an urban adjacent farm in South Auckland, say 5 million. Fast-track the inevitable rezoning change and trade blocks with Fletchers.

    Fletchers must be anticipating ongoing hassles during the development process, people chained to excavators etc.

  28. David Mac 28
    26 July 2019 at 12:26 pm

    In Google Maps, the site appears jolly close to the ever increasing jet traffic at the Aux Airport.

    A close up view of jets landing and taking off from public park space is cool. Unable to hold a conversation on my deck when the wind blows from the South sucks.

    • David Mac 28.1
      26 July 2019 at 12:43 pm

      Selling the houses will be a juggling exercise for the marketing agents. They can time open home showings for when the mudflats are covered but predicting the wind direction is trickier.

  29. Herodotus 29
    28 July 2019 at 4:36 pm

    From someone who some here could label a RWNJ

    i ask if a historic site 700-1000. Years old is not considered a heritage site then what is ?

    I have my closest friends who have and will support the Key years, yet here their families have joined to support their Maori bros and sisters.(and they are whakapapa.

    after the sad Christchurch event, we have another opportunity to define who we are. What a great opportunity our govt has to have an everlasting legacy.