Search Inquiry Documents

The Ngawha Geothermal Resource Report 1993 was the first Tribunal report concerned with a geothermal resource. The claim, by the trustees of the Parahirahi C1 Maori reservation and the hapu of Ngawha, was filed in response to a joint-venture application by the Bay of Islands Electric Power Board and the Taitokerau Maori Trust Board to use the Ngawha geothermal resource for electricity generation. The claimants feared such development may harm their taonga, the hot springs and pools at Ngawha.

The Springs, indeed the entire underground geothermal resource is a taonga to us. You have heard of its miraculous healing powers and I can confirm in my long experience as Kaitiaki of that taonga that everything that these Kaumatua have told you is the truth. I believe that its healing powers, God-given, are sourced deep within in our Mother Earth. Any interference in that spiritual source is a desecration of our taonga.

Kereama Rankin

Our ancestors [knew] that the heart of Ngawha is underground. They are channels of hot water flowing underground. They knew and believed that it was one taonga, underground and up on the surface of the ground. It has been said the hot pools represent the eye of the taonga. But its heart is in, is within the depths of Mother Earth. If we abuse the very heart the pain will affect the heart, the eyes. It is all one treasure.

Ngatihaua Witehiri

The two main components of the grievance were the acquisition by the Crown of the land and hot springs and the provisions of the Geothermal Act 1953 and the Resource Management Act 1991, which were claimed to be inconsistent with the rights of the claimants under the Treaty of Waitangi.

The Tribunal constituted to hear the claim comprised Professor Gordon Orr (presiding), Sir Hugh Kawharu, Joanne Morris, and William Taylor. The first hearing of the claim took place at Kotahitanga Marae, Kaikohe, in October 1992. The second hearing was held in December, and in January 1993 the Tribunal heard final submissions.

The Tribunal found that the claimants retained ownership and rangatiratanga over the Ngawha hot springs on the one acre vested in the trustees of the Parahirahi C1 Māori reservation. They were also entitled to the return of four acres vested in the Crown as a recreation reserve, since they were an integral part of the springs and were acquired in breach of article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi.

After a full inquiry, there was no doubt in the Tribunal’s mind that the Ngawha springs had always been a highly valued taonga of the Ngapuhi people, and the Treaty guaranteed to Māori the Crown’s protection of their taonga. The Tribunal recommended that the Crown amend the Resource Management Act 1991 to provide that ‘all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to management the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources, shall act in a manner that is consistent with the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi’.

The Interim Report on Sylvia Park and Auckland Crown Asset Disposals concerns three claims lodged by the Ngāti Whātua o Orakei Maori Trust Board, Ngāti Paoa and Ngai Tai Umupuia o Tamaki, and Ngāti Whātua relating to 21 hectares at Mount Wellington. The land was known as Sylvia Park and formed part of the 1300-acre Hamlin purchase of 1838. The iwi claimed that the land should have been reserved for them but that the Crown instead kept it for itself, and they were dismayed to learn of the Government’s intention to sell the land through the Department of Survey and Land Information.

In 1992, the Tribunal of Chief Judge Eddie Durie (presiding), Professor Gordon Orr, and Joanne Morris was advised that the Sylvia Park land had been sold and that no protective arrangements had been made. The Tribunal therefore recommended that the proceeds of the sale be held in a separate trust account pending a determination of the claims and that the Government negotiate with the Ngāti Whātua of Orakei Māori Trust Board in association with representatives for Ngāti Paoa–Ngai Tai for a separate settlement and arrangement for the disposal of Crown or State enterprise assets in Auckland.

Claim Wai 273 was filed in 1992 by Paul White and related to the Tapuwae 1B and 4 Incorporation. The land under the incorporation was managed under the Maori Affairs Act 1953 and was returned to Maori shareholders, with outstanding debts, in 1982. The claim alleged negligence during the period of Crown management which resulted in the outstanding debts.

In 1993, the claimants filed a notice of discontinuance, and Crown counsel advised that the details of a confidential agreement between the parties constituted a full and final settlement of the claim. The Tribunal therefore closed its inquiry into the matter without making any findings or recommendations. Its report on the matter, signed by Chief Judge Eddie Durie, was issued on 8 March 1993.

In June 1991, Archie Taiaroa, on behalf of himself and Māori affiliated to the National Māori Congress, lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal concerning the disposal of surplus New Zealand Railways lands. The Tribunal constituted to hear the claim comprised Judge Eddie Durie (presiding), Professor Gordon Orr, and Georgina Te Heuheu, and it reported on four such cases, Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington and Waikenae.

In 1992, the Crown-Congress Joint Working Party proposed a scheme for the disposal of 3605 square metres of surplus Railways lands at Waikanae. In its Report on Railway Land at Waikanae of 21 December 1992, the Tribunal said that, having heard the party, it was satisfied that the only Māori with an interest in the land were the Ruakohatu Urupa Trustees and that the Crown would not be acting contrary to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi in treating with them.

In June 1991, Archie Taiaroa, on behalf of himself and Māori affiliated to the National Māori Congress, lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal concerning the disposal of surplus New Zealand Railways lands. The Tribunal constituted to hear the claim comprised Judge Eddie Durie (presiding), Professor Gordon Orr, and Georgina Te Heuheu, and it reported on four such cases, Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington and Waikenae.

In its Report on South Auckland Railway Lands of 18 May 1992, the Tribunal found that the Crown would not be acting contrary to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi if it disposed of railway assets in Soouth Auckland upon the terms agreed with certain named people and organisations.

In June 1991, Archie Taiaroa, on behalf of himself and Māori affiliated to the National Māori Congress, lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal concerning the disposal of surplus New Zealand Railways lands. The Tribunal constituted to hear the claim comprised Judge Eddie Durie (presiding), Professor Gordon Orr, and Georgina Te Heuheu, and it reported on four such cases, Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington and Waikenae.

In 1992, the Crown-Congress Joint Working Party proposed a scheme for the disposal of surplus railways lands on Tamaki isthmus, Auckland. In its Report on Auckland Railway Lands of 21 May 1992, the Tribunal was satisfied that Ngāti Whātua, Ngāti Paoa, Ngātitai, and Waiohua had interests in the area and it found that the sale of the lands on the basis of the agreements made would not be contrary to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.

In June 1991, Archie Taiaroa, on behalf of himself and Māori affiliated to the National Māori Congress, lodged a claim with the Waitangi Tribunal concerning the disposal of surplus New Zealand Railways lands. The Tribunal constituted to hear the claim comprised Judge Eddie Durie (presiding), Professor Gordon Orr, and Georgina Te Heuheu, and it reported on four such cases, Auckland, South Auckland, Wellington and Waikenae.

In 1992, the Crown-Congress Joint Working Party proposed a scheme for the disposal of surplus railways lands from the south coast to Pukerua Bay to Maymorn in the Upper Hutt Valley. In its Report on Wellington Railway Lands of 21 December 1992, the Tribunal found that the Crown would not be acting contrary to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi to effect an arragement for the sale of the railway lands to certain named persons and organisations.

On 2 July 2011, the Waitangi Tribunal released its report on the Wai 262 claim relating to New Zealand’s law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity.

Ko Aotearoa Tēnei (‘This is Aotearoa’ or ‘This is New Zealand’) is the Tribunal’s first whole-of-government report, addressing the work of around 20 government departments and agencies and Crown entities.

It is also the first Tribunal report to consider what the Treaty relationship might become after historical grievances are settled, and how that relationship might be shaped by changes in New Zealand’s demographic makeup over the coming decades.

The report concerns one of the most complex and far-reaching claims ever to come before the Waitangi Tribunal. The Wai 262 claim is commonly known as the indigenous flora and fauna and cultural and intellectual property claim. As the report’s preface puts it:

the Wai 262 claim is really a claim about mātauranga Māori – that is, the unique Māori way of viewing the world, encompassing both traditional knowledge and culture. The claimants, in other words, are seeking to preserve their culture and identity, and the relationships that culture and identity derive from.

The report is divided into two levels, each of which is designed to be read independently: a shorter summary layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuatahi, which aims to be accessible to a general readership, and a fuller, two-volume layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuarua. Both layers have an introduction, eight thematic chapters and a conclusion.

On 2 July 2011, the Waitangi Tribunal released its report on the Wai 262 claim relating to New Zealand’s law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity.

Ko Aotearoa Tēnei (‘This is Aotearoa’ or ‘This is New Zealand’) is the Tribunal’s first whole-of-government report, addressing the work of around 20 government departments and agencies and Crown entities.

It is also the first Tribunal report to consider what the Treaty relationship might become after historical grievances are settled, and how that relationship might be shaped by changes in New Zealand’s demographic makeup over the coming decades.

The report concerns one of the most complex and far-reaching claims ever to come before the Waitangi Tribunal. The Wai 262 claim is commonly known as the indigenous flora and fauna and cultural and intellectual property claim. As the report’s preface puts it:

the Wai 262 claim is really a claim about mātauranga Māori – that is, the unique Māori way of viewing the world, encompassing both traditional knowledge and culture. The claimants, in other words, are seeking to preserve their culture and identity, and the relationships that culture and identity derive from.

The report is divided into two levels, each of which is designed to be read independently: a shorter summary layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuatahi, which aims to be accessible to a general readership, and a fuller, two-volume layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuarua. Both layers have an introduction, eight thematic chapters and a conclusion.

The first volume of Te Taumata Tuarua introduces the report and contains its first four chapters. Chapter 1 considers the Māori interest in the works created by weavers, carvers, writers, musicians, artists, and others in the context of New Zealand’s intellectual property law, particularly copyright and trade marks.

Chapter 2 examines the genetic and biological resources of the flora and fauna with which Māori have developed intimate and long-standing relationships, and which are now of intense interest to scientists and researchers involved in bioprospecting, genetic modification, and intellectual property law, particularly patents and plant variety rights.

The next two chapters consider Māori interests in the environment more broadly, first in terms of the wide-ranging aspects of the environment controlled by the Resource Management Act (chapter 3), and then with regard to the conservation estate managed by the Department of Conservation (chapter 4).

The second volume of Te Taumata Tuarua contains the final four chapters of the report. Chapter 5 focuses on the Crown’s protection of te reo Māori (the Māori language) and its dialects, and considers in depth the current health of the language. A prepublication version of this chapter was released in October 2010.

Chapter 6 considers those agencies where the Crown owns, funds, or oversees mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge and ways of knowing) and is thus effectively in the seat of kaitiaki (cultural guardian). These agencies operate in the areas of protected objects, museums, arts funding, broadcasting, archives, libraries, education, and science.

Chapter 7 then examines the Crown’s support for rongoā Māori or traditional Māori healing. It also traverses the principal historical issue covered in the report, the passage and impact of the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.

Chapter 8 addresses the Crown’s policies on including Māori in the development of New Zealand’s position concerning international instruments such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Each chapter ends with a brief summary of the Tribunal’s recommendations for reform, and a concluding chapter brings together its overall conclusions and recommendations.

An appendix provides a brief procedural history of the inquiry, outlining the origins and development of the claim, the claimants, the scope of the claim issues and the two rounds of hearings.

On 2 July 2011, the Waitangi Tribunal released its report on the Wai 262 claim relating to New Zealand’s law and policy affecting Māori culture and identity.

Ko Aotearoa Tēnei (‘This is Aotearoa’ or ‘This is New Zealand’) is the Tribunal’s first whole-of-government report, addressing the work of around 20 government departments and agencies and Crown entities.

It is also the first Tribunal report to consider what the Treaty relationship might become after historical grievances are settled, and how that relationship might be shaped by changes in New Zealand’s demographic makeup over the coming decades.

The report concerns one of the most complex and far-reaching claims ever to come before the Waitangi Tribunal. The Wai 262 claim is commonly known as the indigenous flora and fauna and cultural and intellectual property claim. As the report’s preface puts it:

the Wai 262 claim is really a claim about mātauranga Māori – that is, the unique Māori way of viewing the world, encompassing both traditional knowledge and culture. The claimants, in other words, are seeking to preserve their culture and identity, and the relationships that culture and identity derive from.

The report is divided into two levels, each of which is designed to be read independently: a shorter summary layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuatahi, which aims to be accessible to a general readership, and a fuller, two-volume layer subtitled Te Taumata Tuarua. Both layers have an introduction, eight thematic chapters and a conclusion.

The first volume of Te Taumata Tuarua introduces the report and contains its first four chapters. Chapter 1 considers the Māori interest in the works created by weavers, carvers, writers, musicians, artists, and others in the context of New Zealand’s intellectual property law, particularly copyright and trade marks.

Chapter 2 examines the genetic and biological resources of the flora and fauna with which Māori have developed intimate and long-standing relationships, and which are now of intense interest to scientists and researchers involved in bioprospecting, genetic modification, and intellectual property law, particularly patents and plant variety rights.

The next two chapters consider Māori interests in the environment more broadly, first in terms of the wide-ranging aspects of the environment controlled by the Resource Management Act (chapter 3), and then with regard to the conservation estate managed by the Department of Conservation (chapter 4).

The second volume of Te Taumata Tuarua contains the final four chapters of the report. Chapter 5 focuses on the Crown’s protection of te reo Māori (the Māori language) and its dialects, and considers in depth the current health of the language. A prepublication version of this chapter was released in October 2010.

Chapter 6 considers those agencies where the Crown owns, funds, or oversees mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge and ways of knowing) and is thus effectively in the seat of kaitiaki (cultural guardian). These agencies operate in the areas of protected objects, museums, arts funding, broadcasting, archives, libraries, education, and science.

Chapter 7 then examines the Crown’s support for rongoā Māori or traditional Māori healing. It also traverses the principal historical issue covered in the report, the passage and impact of the Tohunga Suppression Act 1907.

Chapter 8 addresses the Crown’s policies on including Māori in the development of New Zealand’s position concerning international instruments such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

Each chapter ends with a brief summary of the Tribunal’s recommendations for reform, and a concluding chapter brings together its overall conclusions and recommendations.

An appendix provides a brief procedural history of the inquiry, outlining the origins and development of the claim, the claimants, the scope of the claim issues and the two rounds of hearings.