Filter by:
Inquiry
Document Numbers
Date Range
to
Applied Filters:
Sort: Wai number (ascending)
25 May 2023
Size: 25.84MB
20 Sep 2021
Size: 32.35MB
D005(c)
Other Document

Vol III; Church Missionary Society (Archives relating to Muriwhenua)

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

27 Jun 2023
Size: 28.91MB
F020(b)
Other Document

Vol II; National Archives Wellington: Native Land Purchase: Correspondence (MA MLP)

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

28 Jul 2022
Size: 48.47MB
F020(d)
Other Document

Vol IV; Kai Tikai: Journal of the New Zealand Nurse’s Association

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

28 Jul 2022
Size: 23.38MB
F004
Other Document

Old Land Claim General Papers

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

22 May 2023
Size: 14.07MB
A021
Other Document

The Mangonui area and the Taemaro claim

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

27 Jun 2023
Size: 40.47MB
F020(a)
Other Document

Vol I; National Archives Wellington Maori Affairs Series

Wai 45 - Muriwhenua Land Claim

28 Jul 2022
Size: 95.3MB
Wai 46
Report

The Ngati Awa Raupatu Report

Wai 46 - Ngati Awa/Eastern Bay of Plenty claims

the Governor will seize a part of the lands of the Tribes who conceal these murderers, and will use them for the purpose of maintaining peace in that part of the country and of providing for the widows and relatives of the murdered people.

New Zealand Gazette

The Ngati Awa Raupatu Report is an abbreviated report, containing no formal recommendations, that was written to support a settlement of claims arising from the Ngati Awa raupatu in the Bay of Plenty, when some 245,000 acres of land were confiscated. The report urges that all historical matters between the Crown and the Ngati Awa runanga and the runanga for Tuwharetoa ki Kawerau be settled.

The Tribunal that heard the claims comprised Chief Judge Eddie T Durie (presiding), Brian Corban, Professor Gordon Orr, Professor Keith Sorrenson, and Keita Walker. There were 12 separate hearings, which spanned almost a year and a half during the course of 1994 and 1995.

The Tribunal found that the confiscation of the Ngati Awa land was contrary to the principles of the Treaty, in that the Treaty did not allow of it and the circumstances did not justify the suspension of the Treaty rights amongst the Ngati Awa people. It emphasised that the land was confiscated not for the murder of a Crown official, as is popularly thought, but for the rebellion arising from alleged resistance when an armed force attempted to effect arrests. However, the Tribunal considered that the resistance was intended not as rebellion, or as opposition to the Government, but to defend against that which appeared to be an invading force, bent on revenge.

In addition, the Tribunal found that far more land was taken than the legislation allowed for, that it was taken from 'innocent' hapu with no involvement in the matters complained of, that a major relocation was involved to place all hapu within ready reach of a military establishment, that the hapu were left with insufficient for their needs, and that social structures were destabilised when all hapu land was locked into a fragmented, personal tenure.

I have seen many of our people today fail to observe even the most simple protocols and customs. I have seen some of our people [trample] over the tikanga that is special to us and has been laid down by our ancestors before us. I have seen our people on some occasions deny that they are Ngati Awa.

Kairau Ngahau

I vividly recall how my mother was always telling me how my grandfather, Merito Hetaraka, felt the shame and worthlessness, as he could not fulfil his duties as a Ngati Hokopu leader to ensure the future well-being of his hapu and iwi, as a result of the loss of the 'control' of our confiscated lands.

Patrick Hudson

The report ends with the Tribunal outlining its views on the issues involved in negotiating a settlement and wishing the Crown and claimants a successful resolution to 'this long outstanding problem'.

In settling the claims, regard should be had to the immediate and long-term social impacts on the Ngati Awa people in taking away their proven developmental capacity. It is also pertinent to compare their lot with that of other major descent groups or iwi. In the twentieth century, tribes that retained land would have the benefit of concessionary land development funding. Many that lost large areas of land would have the benefit of preliminary compensation administered through tribal trust boards. Comparatively, assistance for Ngati Awa has been minimal. They had little land to develop and are amongst the few that received no prior compensation.

The Waitangi Tribunal

08 Oct 1999
Size: 3.3MB
1 ... 19 20 21 ... 6805