Nelson Tenths and the Nelson Weekly Leaders’ Debate

Johny O’Donnell pressed Nelson’s four political candidates to reveal their position on the Nelson Tenths during the Nelson Weekly Waimea Weekly Leaders’ Debate.

 

Here’s a few of his questions and comments.

 

To New Zealand Labour Party MP Rachel Boyack MP

 

• Why hasn’t your government picked up the phone or got around the table with the customary Māori owners?

 

• Is it good enough that the Government hasn’t formally engaged with whānau the entire time you’ve been in office?

 

• You’re the local MP so it’s entirely appropriate that you have a position on this. The largest budget allocation for Te Arawhiti – The Office of Māori Crown Relations – this year was $5m to fight local tangata whenua here in their own court case; it seems bizarre that you don’t have a stronger position on it.

 

To New Zealand National Party candidate Blair Cameron for Nelson

 

• You’ve got an opportunity tonight to actually throw your support behind resolving this case. On the other side of settlement of this case are huge economic opportunities for Nelson. Will you back the whānau as the Nelson candidate for National?

To ACT MP Chris Bailie

• Let’s go to the party of property rights, because this is a property claim. It’s the longest-standing property litigation against the Crown. Why don’t the ACT party step up and commit to resolving this property rights claim?

To Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand candidate Jace Hobbs

• The Green party has quite a bold policy around the return of whenua to Māori, so does the Green party stand with the whānau of the Nelson Tenths?

 

It’s crucial that we have clarity on the position our Nelson candidates take regarding our case. Listen to the candidates’ responses from 43m30s.

https://www.facebook.com/NelsonWeekly/videos/2031904590478738

Dr Vincent O’Malley has recently given evidence on our behalf in Stafford v Attorney-General.

 

Dr O’Malley is a professional historian and a director of HistoryWorks, a public history consultancy in Wellington that specialises in the Treaty of Waitangi and related matters concerning historical Crown and Māori relationships.

 

He has a BA (Hons) in History (1st Class) from the University of Canterbury and a PhD in New Zealand Studies from Victoria University of Wellington. He is the author, co-author or co-editor of several nonfiction books addressing aspects of New Zealand history and especially the Treaty of Waitangi and Māori-Crown relations historically.

 

For the purposes of our case, Dr O’Malley was asked to address a number of instrumental questions, for example:

 

• Did the Crown reserve 15,100 acres of land for the benefit of the customary owners of the land obtained by the Crown following the 1845 Spain award? If not, how much land did the Crown actually reserve?

 

• Did the Crown exclude the pā, urupā and cultivations from the land obtained by the Crown following the 1845 Spain award?

 

• What was the impact of the loss of land on the customary owners? What evidence is there of the socioeconomic conditions in which they lived after 1845 and up to the present day?

 

He also prepared and presented meticulous reply evidence to the Crown witnesses.

 

Dr O’Malley is a pre-eminent New Zealand historian. We are thankful for his skill and knowledge in support of this kaupapa.

 

Ngā mihi Dr O’Malley.

 

In Week 5 the Crown presented its opening submissions to the Court.

 

Here’s a few of the Crown’s assertions, and the way we read them.

  “The defendant acknowledges the deeply felt grievances of the plaintiff and those he represents, and all of the stories in evidence that relate to that… But the defendant invites the Court also to view this from another angle, one that takes in the broad context of the history of this country and then considers the obligations and responsibilities of the Crown in contemporary Aotearoa

 

Our translation: Sorry, not sorry

  “The Crown continues to back its Treaty settlement process as the appropriate means of resolving the issues the subject of this case, and in order to do so in light of the private law duties found to exist, will fully test the application of the remaining steps in the private law process that were initiated by the Supreme Court decision.”

 

Our translation: We will continue to fight you every step of the way

  “The defendant will argue that not only is no land currently held on any trust (of any kind) for the plaintiff, but that the evidence is insufficient to establish breaches of the more general fiduciary the Supreme Court found to have existed… and it is now too late to do justice: the claims are time barred and barred by laches and acquiescence.”

 

Our translation: We will baulk at providing any remedies

  “The defendant denies the facts are sufficient to establish any breach of fiduciary duty across any of the relevant categories of land.”

 

Our translation: The Supreme Court thought differently

 

Madi, Ngāti Kōata, Ngāti Kuia, Rangitāne o Wairau, Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō, is an historian whose doctoral thesis, undertaken at Te Whare Wānanga o Waitaha University of Canterbury, was focused on Ngāti Kuia history.

 

She is a lecturer in Aotahi – School of Māori and Indigenous Studies at the University of Canterbury.

 

Madi has recently given evidence on our behalf in Stafford v Attorney-General. Her evidence draws on historical, customary and archaeological sources to help determine the locations of the occupation sites in question in our case.

 

“The Spain Award definitions do not accurately reflect how Māori occupied and lived on the land”.

 

My view is not simply that the definitions of the Spain Award ‘do not accord with tikanga’; it is the difference in understanding Māori had of the agreement and what the impact of that would be.

 

As discussed in my evidence, pā, wāhi tapu, and cultivations were understood quite differently by Māori as per the Deeds of Release in te reo Māori.

 

The Eurocentric nature of the Spain Award definitions did not match up to how Māori understood these, and this misalignment of understandings was well-known by Europeans at the time who acknowledged how Māori cultivated and lived on the land.”

 

Madi said that it was an honour to be involved in something of this magnitude.

 

“This is a monumental historical case that we’re working on. We are a part of history rather than simply writing about it. If you’re a Māori academic scholar, I believe it’s important to use your skills for the benefit of your people, and I feel very privileged to assist and to carry on the legacy of those who have gone before us.”

 

This week the Court has heard submissions from Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust, on behalf of their specific tūpuna and descendants.

 

Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust has submitted evidence in our case that specific tūpuna lived in Whakatū and the surrounding area at the time of the New Zealand Company’s arrival and the establishment of the Nelson Tenths Reserves Trust, between 1841 and 1845 in particular.

 

This is the time period that is relevant to our legal proceedings, which are focused on fiduciary duty and trust law.

 

Their evidence is drawn from submissions and evidence presented to the Waitangi Tribunal throughout its 22 year-long proceedings in Te Tauihu, which incorporated accounts from pūkōrero relevant to Whakatū and the 1841-1845 time period.

 

Following the hearings, the Waitangi Tribunal issued its findings in 2008, confirming that the Kurahaupō tūpuna had interests in the area that is the subject of the current legal proceedings.

 

Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust is not seeking recognition of Kurahaupō generally, but seeks the inclusion of specific tūpuna, and their descendants, for the purpose of any relief granted by the High Court.

 

Based on the evidence and the Waitangi Tribunal findings, an agreement was reached with Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust whereby their evidence was submitted by consent. This agreement was guided by the principles of whanaungatanga, recognising that the unresolved dispute relating to the Nelson Tenths Reserves Trust rests with the Crown. We have informed the Court and the Crown of this.

 

Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō Trust has also confirmed their support of kaumātua Rore Stafford’s standing as plaintiff in our case.

 

This is a positive tikanga-based outcome, which enables us to:

 

• Avoid the Crown using the case as a lever to divide us, or to draw us into protracted litigation on matters of tikanga.

 

• Focus on the Crown’s legal duties, and the breach of trust and remedies arguments, so we can successfully resolve these long-standing proceedings.

 

• Move forward together positively following the High Court judgment.

 

The evidence remains before the High Court and will be considered by the Judge when she makes her final decision.

 

This decision, and the judgment as a whole, is expected in early-mid 2024.

 

If you have any questions about this agreement, please feel free to contact us at info@makingthetenthswhole.co.nz

At its core, Stafford v Attorney-General is about reconnecting whānau and returning our people to the position we ought to have been in if the Crown had fulfilled its promise in 1845.

 

This powerful statement by Rōpata Taylor, Ngāti Rārua, Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Koata, encapsulates these aspirations.

 

With few resources it seemed unlikely we could ever break the cycle of poverty. The departure of so many [of our people] had profound consequences for our whānau, as the connection to Te Tauihu, to one other, became tenuous.

 

However, although the fires dimmed, they were never fully extinguished.

 

Whakapapa runs deep – and what had happened to our families, to us, was a burden and responsibility we carried with us across time and space.

 

Now we want to rekindle the fires for all of our people that left and bring them back home to ‘make the whānau whole’.

 

More about Rōpata Taylor

Every morning at 9.30am, whānau and supporters will be gathering outside the courtroom for karakia and waiata.

 

We extend a warm invitation to all whānau and supporters to join us.

 

Here is the Wakatū Karakia and waiata resource (PDF) to help build confidence in singing waiata at mihi whakatau or pōwhiri and to assist you in using a karakia to open or close a hui, meeting, or bless kai.

 

Whānau are welcome to bring their own karakia and waiata to share, too.

 

Thank you for your support.

Our High Court hearing will be held in Wellington from 14 August 2023 and is scheduled to run for approximately ten weeks.

Here are a few key details:

 

Date: 14 August 2023 – October 2023

 

Address: Wellington High Court, 2 Molesworth Street, Wellington

 

Parking: Parking is not available at the High Court, however there is a number of paid parking options in the area. Parking options close to the High Court.

 

Seating: The Wellington High Court has limited seating capacity. To help us understand numbers, we kindly ask whānau and supporters to let us know if you plan to be at the hearing in person, and the days you plan to attend, by emailing korero@wakatu.org.

 

Karakia: We will have karakia throughout the hearing, and the arrangements for this will be advised by our kaumātua closer to the hearing.

 

Livestream: For those who are unable to join us in person, we are in the process of arranging livestream links to watch online.

 

Staying updated: We will be providing regular pānui updates and posts on social media to ensure whānau and supporters are kept up-to-date throughout the duration of the hearing.

 

Questions about the hearing: Please get in touch with the team by email at korero@wakatu.org or phone 03 539 3413.