Document Actions
Land Access Workshop
presented by R Plume, Petroleum Exploration Association of New Zealand, PO Box 5227, Wellington, D Salisbury, Ernst & Young, PO Box 490, Wellington, R Trowern, Federated Farmers of NZ (Inc), PO Box 422, New Plymouth, L MacLeod, Fletcher Challenge Energy Taranaki Limited, Private Bag 2056, New Plymouth, P Moeahu, Parininihi ki Waitotara
at the 1998 New Zealand Petroleum Conference
Abstract
Resource Management Act: Mr D Salisbury
The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) has changed significantly the way in which exploration activities can be carried out. The focus of environmental management has changed from a standards-based approach to one more concerned with the effects of activities. Furthermore, the RMA devolved much of the authority for management of the Act from central to local government. For explorers the resource consent process is the practical reality of the RMA. Explorers need to understand:
- What are the main things to understand when applying for a consent for normal exploration activities?
- Who are the main contacts? Who do I need to see for what consents?
- What are the main pitfalls?
- Where can people go to get help with the process?
- What delays can be anticipated and avoided?
Land Access Code: Mr R Trowern
In many areas in New Zealand access to land for exploration is access to farm land. Hence the development of the Land Access Code. The Code was developed to rationalise and standardise as much as possible the salient features of access transactions. Explorers need to understand:
- What are the important issues for landowners faced with a request for access to land?
- What are the timing issues (lambing, calving, cropping, milking, etc)?
- What are the main elements of the process that is expected?
- Who are the contacts in Federated Farmers?
Permitting on Maori Land: Mr L Macleod
Gaining permission to explore on land owned by the Maori community presents its own unique set of challenges. Explorers need to understand:
- Who are the people to contact initially: occupier?, trustee?, other?
- How do I find out?
- Are there issues of protocol which I will be expected to observe? What are they?
- Who can help me with this process?
PKW Land: Mr P Moeahu
The Parininihi Ki Waitotara (PKW) Trust has been at the forefront of recent successful Maori land claims in Taranaki. PKW administers land on behalf of its membership and hence explorers may find themselves in discussions with PKW. Explorers need to understand:
- What is PKW land? Where is it?
- What is PKW's position with regard to access to PKW land for petroleum exploration activities?
- What is the status of Maori Reserve land in other parts of New Zealand?
- Who administers PKW land and how can I contact them?
- What are the practical issues that I might face in entering PKW land?
The Workshop seeks to present information on these important areas in an informal meeting in which participants are encouraged to bring their questions and join in the discussion.
Resource Management Act 1991
When applying for consents for normal exploration or activities who do you see or who should you see? Who are the main contacts? What are the main pitfalls? Where can people go to get help with the process? And what delays can be anticipated and avoided. Actually I decided in retrospect that all this is a huge topic and those who know me will know I could probably talk about these topics for an hour easily, so I'll try to keep it short with a more general discussion that I think will give insight into, or I hope will give insights into, each of these. If I look at the main things to understand, I think the opening point is that when you explore in New Zealand you require a permit under the Crown Minerals Act. Now that gives you the right to explore and also the obligation to explore. You will have work obligations to the Government. But importantly it doesn't give you the ability to explore. You still need land access and you still need resource consents. And I think both of those can pose quite serious hurdles in the exploration business.
A resource consent, for those who are not familiar with the terminology, is simply a right to conduct an activity that's otherwise prohibited by the Resource Management Act. The Act itself has the purpose of promoting the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. It does require that local authorities who are given the obligation of administering the Act must take into account social, economic, cultural, health and safety factors as well as sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources, which does exclude minerals, and avoiding remedying and mitigating adverse effects of activities on the environment. That's very very broad. The Resource Management Act is not just about physical environmental effects. It's about social, economic, cultural, it's very broad. It also regulates the use of land, air and water and also specifically imposes an obligation to avoid unreasonable noise.
If you are going to conduct activities you will find that you need a range of resource consents from both regional councils and district councils that will govern whether you can extract water from a stream, whether you can put the water back into another stream, whether you can use the land for a particular purpose, whether you can discharge into the air, all manner of things. The Act itself is administered by local authorities. That's a combination of regional councils and district councils. They are in addition to what I've already mentioned. I'd like to take into account such things as the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. And I'm sure that some other members of the panel will comment on that. I would make the comment that while that's in the Act, those principles are not defined. They're not defined anywhere in New Zealand law. And that's a bit of a difficulty in trying to understand exactly what that means for a company applying for resource consent.
You are also required to take into account matters of national importance, and that includes things like protecting outstanding natural features, or preserving wetlands. And it also includes again the relationship with Maori and their culture and traditions with ancestral lands, water sites, waahi tapu and taonga. And I think that the Act there starts to raise some serious issues. It raises the expectations that the local authorities and the companies out exploring are not always able to meet. It certainly raises expectations I believe of rights to minerals and ownership of the minerals. But the Act doesn't give the companies any ability to resolve that issue. And certainly it was my experience that it came up again and again and again and unfortunately the answer was repeated again and again and again. And I do believe that that's an issue that the Crown is going to need to address. The Act devolved much of the responsibility for making it work to the local authorities, as I've already mentioned. I think they struggle. There are such a wide range of aims and they have to consider so much, which is very difficult to ascribe benefits and costs to. They're in a very difficult position trying to make the decisions, weigh up the benefits, weigh up the costs. They operate in a political environment where my view is that they tend to be swayed by local politics. If you have an interest group that is opposing an application versus one applicant who in support of the application, I think the incentive on Council would usually be to try to appease the interest group. You are a public body. You are publicly accountable. Now that may not in fact give the best outcome in terms of the economy or the environment, but it's probably going to happen. I think also they've struggled in that they were not adequately resourced at the stage at which the Resource Management Act was introduced. I know that there have been steps to increase resources. I know that the Environment Ministry has been introducing programmes to try and help the Councils. But that's been a problem for the businesses and to some extent it's a pity that that wasn't anticipated in advance and dealt with. I think also the Councils have taken a prescriptive approach to the Act. The general vision for the Act was that it would focus on the effects rather than the actual activities themselves. The experience I think is that instead it's focused on the activities and in fact it's added some even stronger regulations rather than focusing on the effects.
I think the last key points I would make about the Act is it has introduced some very difficult processes from the point of view of an exploration company. For instance anyone can object to a resource consent under the Resource Management Act. Now that has led to instances of trade competitors objecting. Now I'm not aware of that happening in the exploration industry. I'm certainly aware of it having happened downstream. It happens with petrol retailers as common practice. And that's a problem because as an applicant you nevertheless have to deal with that objection and you have to come up with an answer to it. And that can cause delays, frustration and cost. It also can encourage frivolous or vexatious objections. If you have a high profile, high cost activity that you want to pursue, people know that. They know the value of getting the resource consent and they can exploit that.
There are also a couple of other quick procedural matters. The councils can request further information. I think because they are cautious they're inclined to do that. That can lead to more information being required for resource consents. And maybe it is absolutely necessary. And that can incur cost, delays and so forth. And I think the last one is there is a requirement to consult and to publicly notify resource consents. It sounds very simple but when you go about doing it the Council will usually require that you consult directly and get permission from anyone who is likely to be affected by the activity. And again because they tend to take a cautious approach that tends to be given a very wide definition. The problem then is that when you approach people directly and you ask for their consent to a resource consent application it also raises with people an expectation that they have an opportunity to comment and that there's something in there that they might be able to get out of it. Now I must add that that's both good and bad. You know, the Act is looking for public participation. It is looking for environmental control. So you have got widespread public participation, but at a cost.
The last quick thing I was going to say is who are the main contacts? Well you will need to get to know your Planning Departments in your regional and local councils. You certainly need to liaise with local iwi. You need to have close relationships with the land owners. You need to get to know any neighbours who might be affected. Interest groups will be watching over your shoulder. And lastly, there is a whole body of consulting services and so forth that has grown up over this. So there are any number of environmental consultants, lawyers, noise specialists and so forth who can help you out.
Land Access Code
Well next I'm going to call on Reg Trowern who is the Provincial Chief Executive of Federated Farmers in Taranaki. And I'm sure a lot of people in this room know him quite well. He has been in that position for the last nine years. He's been very active in land access and property rights issues during that period. He owns a dry stock farm which he runs with his younger son. He has lived in Taranaki for the past 18 years and has worked on the Think Big projects when they were in their busy stage. And other mechanical engineering projects around New Zealand. Now Reg was one of the prime points of contact during the negotiation of the most recent version of the Land Access Code. And he knows it very well. So I'll turn it over to you now Reg.
Thank you Russell. Like David, I was asked to answer five questions. So I've written my replies for you. For the right of an explorer to gain access to private land in New Zealand it necessitates the land owner to give up some of their property rights. But it also allows the land owner to seek compensation. And this is usually carried out through an agreement made by the Petroleum Exploration Association of New Zealand and Federated Farmers representing the land owners. And we also use the three Acts of Parliament, namely the Petroleum Act 1937, the Crown Minerals Act 1991 and the Resource Management Act 1991 and any subsequent amendments to those Acts.
Private property rights are the foundation stone of our property owning society. They are the base on the market economy on which New Zealand operates. The importance of property ownership is evidenced by the fact that this concept has been adopted around the world where it serves a wide mix of societies and people. Access to private land in Taranaki for petroleum exploration has been taking place for almost 40 years. And most land owners are well versed with the procedures. But there are some difficulties occurring. In Taranaki all drilling operations are being targeted, not necessarily by farmers, but by rural residents, small lifestyle unit holders and, sadly, by greenies. The search in Taranaki for pockets of oil and gas below the surface has been on a regular and relentless basis. Some landowners have had numerous surveys on their land for the past 10 years or more. The disruption to their way of life has taken a toll. And some are saying enough is enough and are not making access easy. New owners of land have paid high prices for the right to farm and any intrusion can have effects that carry on to their bank managers' requirements. Therefore they're reluctant to give permission to enter the land. When a land owner is approached by an explorer requesting access, unless the owner has been through the process before it can be very confusing. Normally the explorer's representers provide the basic information contained in a document that they leave with the land owner. The land owner is also told that the explorer must negotiate under the terms as set out in the Resource Management Act and the land is subject to either the Petroleum Act or the Crown Minerals Act. To the landowner this is the confusing part for in their daily practice they may have come across the Resource Management Act but not the other two. It is very important that whoever is carrying out the permitting gives the accurate description of what is going to happen and all the information is supplied to the land owner, and in Taranaki this is done very well.
The Resource Management Act protects the three elements most necessary for the benefit of present and future generations, namely water, air and oil. And we've found that out through a wide range of requirements. The Resource Management Act also deals in consents which are important for any exploration process. The other two Acts are not usually known to the land owner and details of the two Acts are not always explained. For instance, the Petroleum Act was superseded in 1991 but it still exists, the reason being that the Government of the day had sold the licence to the explorers and they had the right to continue to explore to up to 40 years. Petroleum Act licence areas that form the large part of Taranaki are Kaimiro, McKee, Waihapa, Ngaere, Ngatoro and Kapuni. Under the existing licences the explorer has the exclusive right to mine for petroleum on the land comprised in the licence, together with such other requirements that are not inconsistent with the Act. Or within the terms of the conditions of the licence it may be necessary for the effective carrying out of mining operations. Under section 28 of the Petroleum Act, Right of Entry onto Land, the explorer is further assisted with the right to enter any land within the licenced area at any time, with or without vehicles, machinery, implements or equipment of any kind. The Petroleum Act is very straightforward. It gives the access the explorer requires, but in 1991 the Crown Minerals Act was introduced and section 53, Access to Land for Petroleum, restricts the explorer from carrying out activities unless there is an agreement in writing between the permit holder and the owner of the land. Section 59, Notice for Request for Grant of Right of Access, details what must be contained in the notice to be served on the land owner and determines the land affected, the purpose for which the right of access is required, the programme, the compensation and the type of permit.
To the average land owner the above is fairly heavy going, and unless they have copies of the two Acts then there is confusion. Some land owners take the word of the explorers representatives. Some consult with Federated Farmers, and those who can afford it engage their lawyers. What is not normally known is that the exploration companies will pay for legal fees if advice is given to the explorer beforehand. Once the entry arrangement is agreed upon there is the question of timing. Explorers in New Zealand are well versed in this fact and usually time their exploration to take place during the least impact time factor that will affect the land owner. This varies throughout New Zealand depending upon the type of farming carried out. In the PEANZ agreement October through to May are suggested whereas in Taranaki, which is mostly dairy farming, there are only a few months, namely January through to April, that are generally suitable for exploration because of the requirements farmers have on their land. Dry stock farming is not so affected but the difficult terrain on which these farmers farm is not usually acceptable for petroleum exploration. When the Land Access Code was written consideration was taken to ensure the land owner was no worse off than before the exploration commenced. The Land Access Code gives an indication of what the minimum rate of compensation should be, which is based on the experience of Federated Farmers and the type of farming being carried out. If the land owner feels that they have a right to claim more than this that option is available and then becomes a matter between the explorer and the land owner and Federated Farmers are no further involved. Because of this system there has been very few disputes in Taranaki. I will also point out that under the Crown Minerals Act there has to be discussion entered into in respect to compensation.
When the entry and timing factors have been agreed upon, the land owner is then faced with the impact the explorers will have on the property and how it will affect their operations. The land owner will have to decide which paddocks to graze first and how best to change the rotation to suit their property. Access to various areas need to be discussed and here use of dairy farmers stock race is of importance. Some dairy farmers have laid concrete on their races for the benefit of their stock. Usually this is not thickly laid and would not support heavy vehicles. Similarly bridges and culverts may not be strong enough either. So an alternative route through the farm has to be established. The use of the race must also be protected for the dairy farmer's use and usually the explorer does not gain access in early morning or late afternoon. On a dry stock farm access is not usually a problem as stock can be grazed for a longer rotation in other paddocks.
Before the exploration commences the land owner would expect to be informed as to how the operation will be carried out. The most important fact here is liaison with the land owner throughout the project which acts in a spirit of goodwill. Land owners are concerned with the requirement of the Occupational Health and Safety Employment Act and would need to be reassured that they will not be liable for some of the heavy penalties that could be imposed on them willingly or unwillingly if they created a hazard. The recent amendments to the Health and Safety Act should alleviate many of these concerns for both the explorer and for the land owner, and Federated Farmers have been lobbying the Government fairly hard for the last two years to have the changes put into effect. Federated Farmers has continually liaised with the exploration companies and the Petroleum Exploration Association of New Zealand over land access. However we have not always agreed. The Federation is challenged from time to time by land owners who are not happy with the level of compensation offered. The Federation's stance has been to see that everyone is treated fairly and have no difficulty. If it can be substantiated then a higher compensation level can be paid. The Land Access Code has been adopted by use for ECNZ and power companies for the construction of high and low density power lines and quite a number of district councils have used it for underground water pipes and for sewerage.
In all instances it is recognised that under the Resource Management Act negotiations must be on a winning buyer winning seller basis. Federated Farmers has recently gone through a process of restructuring. Where there were Provincial Chief Executives employed, there's now Policy Analysts. Some of these Analysts specialise in land access agreements and are accessible to the membership for consultation. Once the benefits of this restructuring is known or is finalised the expertise which was restricted to some provinces previously will be now on a much wider basis. In Taranaki we work with the land owners, whether they be members of Federated Farmers or not, and I think that's been one of the major impacting factors that we've had in representing land owners.
Questions
Have you found Reg that the PEANZ/Federated Farmers agreement has actually been seen as a positive thing which has helped your membership?
It certainly has helped the membership and the number of enquiries we get in respect to it. Virtually in some instances the people who are doing the permitting go onto the property one day and the next day we get a visit just to go through the issues with them. And we're able to alleviate any problems that they may have and help to settle their minds that they're not going to be in any difficulties.
Has it actually impacted in terms of encouraging people who aren't members to join the Federation?
I think the biggest factor in that is that they don't have enough money. But some, it does help. But we never put the pressure on in that respect. The thing is that when the Land Access Code was written, we felt we represented all farmers. And we haven't said that it became part of a requirement to be a member of Federated Farmers, and we have stuck to that.
Can you clarify the difference between land owners and occupiers because both you and David have talked about land owners, but occupiers have rights as well. And one of the issues we've had is identifying land owners. Could you just clarify what the situation is with regards land owners and occupiers?
The best example I can give there is with sharemilkers. And sharemilkers would be termed as occupiers. And basically what we recommend to the land owner is that the sharemilker is going to be the most disrupted person in respect to any exploration that may take part on the property. So that person should be the person who gains the full compensation. I know that doesn't always happen. And in some respects with a sharemilking agreement you may have a 20% sharemilker. You may get the fact that the land owner may only pay him 20%. But what we have recommended is that it's the sharemilker who basically is going to be disrupted the most. And there again you get farm leases and areas such as that. And usually the person who owns the lease is paid out personally in full. We've had issues with ECNZ where they've crossed leased land and they have paid the full cost of the compensation to the leasee.
Permitting on Maori Land
Now Lindsay McLeod, the third gentleman along the panel here, was nurtured by the Parihaka elders at an early age in the traditions, history and customs and protocol of Taranaki at Parihaka pa, the historic location of the prophet of peace, Te Whiti. Parihaka is situated at the foot of Mt Taranaki, 40 km south of New Plymouth on the coastal road. And I'll just interject with one of my own thoughts here Lindsay, if you don't mind. For those of you who have perhaps an interest in some of the history of Taranaki I would commend to you a book by Dick Scott called Ask That Mountain which deals with this whole issue of Parihaka pa. And if you have some time it's worth reading it. Lindsay was a Training Officer for Maori Affairs where, among other things, he set up a national trade training scheme for school leavers at Taranaki Polytech in New Plymouth. And in that role he had the prime responsibility for placing participants into apprenticeships. He joined Petrocorp in January of 1982, just a few months before I did, as a Public Relations Liaison Officer during the frenetic Think Big projects. He now holds the position of Public Affairs Executive with the special responsibility for consultation with tangata whenua.
Thank you Russell. Tena kotou, tena kotou, tena kotou katoa. I can tell by the body language every one of you understood every word I said. What I said was a special greeting to you which is part of our culture, to acknowledge the privilege of you coming here, tenei marae, this building, to discuss some very important issues. In looking at the four questions that Russell has set for me I'm sure you don't want me to answer like what Kupe did. He discovered New Zealand somewhere about the second century. So aptly described in Te Rangahiro's (Sir Peter Buck) book, The Vikings of the Sunrise. He got back to Hawaiki and he was asked one question. Did you see any people there? Tangata ki te reira? It goes on for something like about 7-800 to 1,000 words where he described everything he saw. Never answered the question. He saw hills, he saw bush, he saw water. I'm not going to do that. And of course it's the Maori psyche, the answer was no.
Now in looking at this I think what you have to do whether you're a corporation, whether you're a legal firm who are going to be advising maybe the issuing authorities like the regional councils, district councils, or whether you really put tangata whenua, indigenous people of the land, in the pecking order of stakeholders. That's a philosophical decision. If you're an active exploration company like ours you've actually got no choice because the moment you want to drill a well, the moment you want to do a massive, like we're doing, seismic survey or lay a pipeline you're going to impact in a huge number of ways on the things that the indigenous people regard as sacrosanct.
You're going to have to learn, because eventually you're going to have to go on the marae in their forum and discuss some of these issues. So you need to know about protocol. What's the procedure when you get there? What do you do? You're going to have to learn what is the culture of koha. In the old days when people came to meet at a hui they would bring food - fish, what they grew, kumara, kumukumu and so forth. These days we do it in the form of a monetary gift or donation with due regard to how many people are going there, what the costs of that hui might be, and some sort of contribution towards the maintenance of the buildings that they hold so dear. That's koha. You would need to have some understanding of what is their perspective of land ownership. That's the opposite to the western theory. In the western theory you, the individual, or the corporation or the company, own the land. In Maori culture the land owns you. The land is mother earth, papatuanuku, is sacred. It is only there for your utilisation as a caretakership for the ensuing generations. This may explain why so often they're sensitive about some of the pollution issues. For example water is a very sacred thing in Maori culture. And to this day the Kapuni River that's situated in South Taranaki, where the natural gas treatment plant is and you've got the Manurewa plant opposite, there's certain bathing spots on that river that the people there have used for generations, where they still immerse their children soon after birth in those waters, just like the Indians do in the Ganges. So if you want to discharge stormwater the answer may very well be no. You may see that it's having no physical effect on the river, but metaphysically it's not acceptable. And I'm sure that we would understand that we need to take care of sacred sites. We have to learn more about some of the terms they use like waahi tapu. And something that we don't come into contact very often, only once since I've been on the job, called tauranga waka. And that's the areas where they did their launching of their canoes and their fishing canoes, or the areas like at Ohaawi Beach where all the canoes used to converse before they went on to other areas from Taranaki on to Wanganui and up north and so forth. So they're sacred launching pads.
Most of all you would need to have some understanding of tribal structures. What really is iwi? What is hapu? And what is whanau? Whanau is family. Hapu has really come to the fore in probably the last three years. Hapu is a sub-tribe, and the iwi of course is the regional tribe. You need to, in how you deal with tangata whenua, have recognition of them, of their status in their own right. Now we saw a brilliant example of that when we arrived. I must commend the organisers of the Conference. When we got here you observed the protocol which gave us the entry to this land of the Ngai Tahu people by observing the protocol of the welcome. That's recognition of their status as the original people that walked this land.
One of the things that's always concerned me is there's a huge difference, and sometimes a head-on collision, between the need to make a commercial decision, I mean it's costing big dollars a day per day if you've got a rig sitting idle there and you really want to get on with it. And a decision by consensus culturally, that might take two years. That might take 30-40 meetings before all the sub-tribes get together, talk it over and take their time. So it's very important for any organisation early up-front to make initial contact and share with them what you may be planning to do in their region. All this, I believe, builds up a trust because you're just giving them the courtesy. It really is their due. But one of the things I have great concern about is there's a huge history vaccuum, particularly in New Zealand, on really what took place under colonisation. With the mass confiscation of land, where under the Rebellion Act, the ruse of the Rebellion Act, people were transgressed on, had their land confiscated and in fact were jailed without trial. And I in fact visited last Saturday the Peninsula in Dunedin and went to the commemoration stone of where my ancestors were taken from the bottom of the mountain in 1881 and brought down there by the Hinemoa, and they worked like animals, were put in caves. The caves are still there. They were used as slave labour to build the sea walls there on the roads, right alongside Anderson Bay. Now I don't believe that history really is known because unless you understand the grievance and the bitterness that has gone on from generation to generation of what happened to our people then you won't really have a full regard for the fact that across the board in Maoridom there is quite a rip-off psyche. They're tired of being ripped off for the last 150 odd years. And sure, the argument's with the Crown, but they see us as part of the establishment, or you. And I'm afraid you become the sort of meat in the sandwich when we look at issues like you mention, royalties for Crown minerals and all those issues.
So there is a dramatic change in Maori leadership out there right now. I believe that some of the traditional leadership is being eroded. That you now have the more radical element if you like, for want of a better word. We're getting into some leadership in influential positions. We've come with the confirmed edict it's now payback time, and that's creating not an easy environment for consultation and negotiation.
Now looking at the questions that you've got here specifically. I've done my Kupe bit. Who are the people to contact initially? The occupier, the trustee or other. I think in the first instance, and you might have gathered that you really need to know what the legal designation of the land is. Is it reserve land? Is it reservation? There's a difference. Is it under trusteeship? Is it incorporation? Because there is legislation that determines on the designation of the land what you are bound to do and in terms of that legislation. Now I heard talk about the problems if you have the occupier who may be a leasee and then you have owners who actually own the land. I have a view, even though I believe under the Petroleum Act (?), if you have a minor activity such as seismic you're only bound to consult with the occupier. Is that correct? I don't believe that holds water culturally. To recognise status, I know there's a problem on some of the land we've looked at because there's no actual trustee set up, trusteeship. I think where there are actual Maoris that have a beneficial interest in the land there's a Treaty partner who should be consulted. But the law doesn't say that and there's a clash with that.
Excuse me Lindsay. Is that consultation on the basis of being tangata whenua or why is it?
Well they are tangata whenua if they have a beneficiary interest in that block of land, even though they might live in Hawaii. They're tangata whenua in those terms. Usually they're spread all over the country.
Anybody who has ancestral lenience to land is tangata whenua of that area. Now how do I find out I think was the second question, who to contact. Well there's all sorts of structures available as you know. You've got Te Puni Kokiri, the Maori Ministry of Development. For example if you wanted to do something in the South Island there's a fairly obvious one. If you go to Tipene O'Regan's Ngai Tahu Trust Board I'm sure he'll soon tell you who to speak to. For example if you're around Kaiapoi you could talk to Ngai Tahu o Rere. If you go over the hills to Lyttleton it would be Rapaki. So there are Trust Boards the same as they are in Tainui and they are in Taranaki. Now of course if it's an incorporation that's alphabetically listed you just go to the incorporation that's directly affected. And there are also iwi and hapu authorities and several of them have been built up and are getting quite organised right throughout the country. Most of all, a very good resource, as a lot of you would know, is the Maori Land Court. If you're not sure about the designation of Maori land or you want to know who the beneficiaries are the Maori Land Court are a very good resource to go and do that.
Issues of protocol you're expected to observe, and I've mentioned those, the protocols for marae visits, for koha, waahi tapu, the environment, the extraction of water. And it may be of interest for you to know that there are certain mauri, these are stones in the rivers which under our cultural belief, actually activate the fish life. So if you desecrate those you have a direct effect on the environment and the fish life of the river. So you'd have to be careful where you were taking water from and where you were discharging water into. There was a case for example recognising tangata whenua status. Another example, and I mention the powhiri here, at the moment we're looking at opening a service station late next month in Taranaki. We've already contacted the local hapu, Ngati Tahuri Kora, and we've taken them for a special visit to that site before the site's completed so they can walk through and they can advise us whether there are any protocols we need to observe. That's recognising tangata whenua status in their own right and it really helps to build up a relationship.
Now the last question there, who can assist with the process? I heard you say there's a whole lot of consultants available. There are consultants and consultants. I think you have to build up your own in-house capability. So you need cultural awareness programmes. You need to have some understanding of what's the application of the Treaty in the present day. You need to know through those cultural awareness programmes how to really utilise networks. Maori culture is based on a network just like you have the Lions network and you have the local bodies network and pressure groups. Maori culture especially is based on a network. It's faster than email if you do it right. So I think I should perhaps cool it there and thank you very much for your time and it's nice to be here.
Questions
We're required to consult with Maori in the process. There is sometimes difficulty in obtaining information that would help us in our activities. How do you see or could you see a way that we could get around that?
I think I'm talking about building up that trust, building up that network. More recognition of tangata whenua status which has been sadly lacking would be a big start, step forward. And I think if you give them that sort of basic courtesy and by your track record, and let's face it Fletcher Challenge, Petrocorp too especially, have a marvellous track record. I'm not aware in the 16 years I've been on the job, and I've been quite proud to say this on the marae, we've actually done anything major to pollute the environment. That's what trust is about.
Just a reminder about McKee-13. McKee-13 in Maori terms was an act of God. When Papatuanuku blew up. Now nobody can protect earthquakes, Papatuanuku. Blew up on the outside of our pipe. Now I don't have any difficulty with McKee-13 in cultural terms when the mountain also blew up. It's hard to predict. It's the only incident that I know of that we didn't have, that wasn't directly attributed to us, that's happened in the time I've been on the job in terms of the environment.
PKW Land
Finally I'm going to ask Peter Moeahu to speak. Peter was born and bred in Taranaki. He's the Deputy Chairman of PKW, of Paraninihi Ki Waitotara. Those of you who work in Taranaki will be familiar with that. He's here wearing two hats. First as a representative of PKW. And secondly as the tangata whenua of Taranaki. He has been intimately involved in the Maori reserve land negotiations which recently resulted in the passage of the Maori Reserve Amendment Act which put the Maori reserve land on a more equitable footing. He's also been involved in the negotiations related to the land confiscation claim against the Crown. And I asked Peter to come here. We had met as it was on the steps of Parliament about six or eight months ago during the tractor demonstration that took place in Wellington. And we spoke there and thought that we probably should initiate some sort of conversation. And this is the first step in that process.
Thank you very much Russell. Kiaora no tatou. Firstly I'd like to pay my respects to Geoff Logan. Very pleased to see you again Geoff. And I'll elaborate on why I do that later. This should be a fairly short session. Lindsay stole most of my thunder. But if it works it works.
Referring to a map which is Paraninihi Ki Waitotara. Parininihi in the North, Waitotara in the South. We administer Maori reserve lands throughout the Taranaki region, the Taranaki province. On this side you'll see here the confiscations line which Lindsay alluded to earlier and within that line from here right through all land of Taranaki owned by Taranaki Maori was confiscated. However the Government saw fit to return some of that land to Maori ownership by setting aside some reservations. And those reservations were set aside under the title of Maoris who own it and those reserves were set aside as inalienable, in other words could never ever be taken. That was in about 1884. We move forward to the present day and you can see that for some reason the amount of land is not quite the same.
PKW administers the land on behalf of its 6,000 land owners and that's shown on the map there. So that's PKW in a nutshell. The reason why I paid my respects to Geoff Logan is because PKW and Fletchers, Fletcher Energy, have what I consider to be a very fitting relationship. Fletcher Energy extract oil from our land and through their good grace see fit to contribute to an education scholarship which we and our shareholders hold extremely dear. We hold the scholarship extremely dear because it is in the name of the first Chairman of our incorporation, Charles Bailey. Why I mention that is because Fletchers don't have to do that. But by them doing it they're acknowledging several things. The first thing they are doing is acknowledging respect to us as not only the land owners but the tangata whenua. And it is what Lindsay again alluded to earlier, is if you seek to do business in Taranaki and if you seek to explore for oil anywhere in Taranaki, whether it is on Maori land or not, one of the things that will assist you greatly is if you demonstrate respect to the community that you are going to be dealing with. It will assist you greatly.
PKW, as Russell said I'm wearing two hats so it may sound contradictory, but hopefully I'll be able to explain it. PKW, our position on oil exploration is that we would encourage oil exploration in Taranaki. And from a commercial perspective should any company wish to explore for oil on PKW land we invite you to approach us. And Russell has the contact details if you so wish. Our first reaction to an approach would be let's sit down and talk about it. That would be our first reaction. There would be issues we would need to work through and resolve but suffice to say you would not be ejected or rejected outright. And that's based on our experience with Geoff and his team. So we have a view that we have something to contribute as well in this whole area. That's the commercial arm of Taranaki, of Taranaki Maori. PKW is basically a commercial arm. On the other hand we have people who belong to hapu and iwi as Lindsay has said, who may take a different view, who may see things differently. And actually I was talking to some of those radicals you were talking about yesterday and they definitely have a different view. Their view is that it is more than consultation. If you think you can come to Taranaki and sit down and just discuss things with some of the locals and then perhaps go away and make decisions anyway, they don't consider that to be consultation. Their view of consultation is that you take them with you throughout the whole process, however difficult that might be, right through to them being there assisting with monitoring and so on. They see it as a partnership between them as the tangata whenua, as the land owners, despite what you might think by other people having title to the land. The Maori psyche in Taranaki is that they have never given up their rights to that land, and as Lindsay touched on earlier it is a fight between the tribes of Taranaki and the Crown and unfortunately you may get caught in the middle. It's not intentional. But it would be unfortunate if that did occur.
So early consultation, meaningful consultation, demonstrating respect for their views and demonstrating that by taking them on board I have every confidence we'll assist you, every confidence indeed. Unlike Lindsay I didn't actually read the questions that Russell had set us. So on that happy note ladies and gentlemen you are most welcome from PKWs point of view to come to Taranaki and explore for oil and if we can possibly assist you please feel free to contact us and if you have any questions I'd be very happy to answer them.
Questions
Treaty claims. What is the stage with the process in Taranaki for Treaty claims as far as this Act goes?
I'd be very happy to answer that. The Treaty claims from the tribe's point of view, there are some tribes who are progressing. There are some tribes who are not. There are some tribes who are arguing. I mean it's a very dynamic society and it's no different to going to Parliament on any given day when the House is sitting. I mean you see all the different dynamics taking place. And that's what's happening in Taranaki at the moment. We have one or two tribes who are prepared to step forward and negotiate with the Crown. Their negotiation of space on what was lost must be returned. In other words, all the land that was confiscated should be returned. But we're also realists. We accept that that probably won't happen given that most of the land that was previously owned by Taranaki Maori has since been sold off. So we're realists and what the Crown generally does is return Crown land that it owns within a region. Unfortunately for us in Taranaki there's very very little Crown land, very little. So it'll probably end up a monetary compensation, probably similar to Ngai Tahu or Tainui. And I would expect within the next five years it will be settled.
The map you showed on the wall there, the land that has diminished of PKW, was that land sold?
Some of the land from PKW was sold. The Government through its various pieces of legislation managed to change the Act so that it could be alienated. Some of it was sold. Some of it was, well there was a second tier of confiscation so to speak. And basically what we have now is about 23,000 hectares that remains under the administration of PKW. There is other Maori land in Taranaki which has Maori title to it which is not administered by PKW. But PKW does administer by far the largest portion of Maori reserve land in Taranaki.
I was quite struck by those two maps. That incredible decrease in acreage there, that was sold by whom and for whose benefit?
No sir. The decrease in acreage began with the original confiscation. The whole lot, the title for the whole lot was just zapped away. It was returned, about 1.2 million acres was confiscated. About 250,000 acres was returned and what we have left now is about 23,000 hectares. So whatever that works out, about 50,000 acres roughly.
So between those last two numbers, was much of that gradual sell-offs by the Government or was it done in major packages?
It was done by several processes between 1884 and 1996 which are the final figures up there. There were several legislative changes which allowed the Government to, firstly - I'll give you one example. If there were some Maori owners who actually wanted to sell land, they would advise the Maori trustee or the Public Trustee, whoever was administering it at the time. They would advise that they were willing to sell. The Trustee would gather in as many shares as they possibly could gather and then instead of selling the land interest that those people held, they would sell the land interest of someone else who, for example there may be a leasee on a piece of land who would like to buy the freehold title. But it may not be the piece of land that the people actually wanted to sell. But that didn't bother the Government or the Trustee of the day. They would sell the equivalent number of shares in that block of land which would allow it to be freeholded and then say "tough bikkies". That's just one example. Many others. But we shouldn't get bogged down in those things. I mean oil exploration should be fun and exciting. Taranaki is looking for more and more income-generating industry. And I don't think we should skirt around it that oil exploration could be great. It could be a great financial boost for the Taranaki region. So from our point of view, PKWs point of view, we certainly encourage you. But from the tangata whenua's point of view you may strike some difficulties. But nothing that can't be worked through with respect and patience.
I'd just like to complement you on your positive attitude. But I do have one thing that I found curious. Around Taranaki or Taranaki/Mt Egmont National Park a piece of land, this Crown land is long-standing, wasn't part of the apparent ownership by Maori tribes in the first place. But I understand it has special significance.
No, that's not quite true sir. The mountain was part of the original confiscation. My grandfather along with some of our other whanaunga, Lindsay and my relations, went to Rob Muldoon when he was Prime Minister and said "Give us our mountain back". Rob Muldoon said "Yeah, sure, as long as you sign it back to the nation". And within a wink, wink, not a week, a wink, my grandfather received the title of Maunga Taranaki and signed it over to the nation with love, with love to the nation on behalf of the eight tribes of Taranaki. And his name was Pehe Manatamete. He was Chairman of the Trust Board of the time, Taranaki Maori Trust Board.
The significance of Maunga Taranaki is recognised by the Crown in that it's excluded from petroleum exploration under the Minerals Programme for Petroleum. And that was at the request of iwi as part of the consultation for that process and in recognition of the gifting as well.
I see it as a great gesture on behalf of our people who have suffered so much, who have lost so much, to still say to this wonderful country that we have "We gift you something that means so much to us with our love". And it's actually worded aroha in the Act. It's worded that way. Let's not make any mistake ladies and gentlemen. We live in a fantastic country and we've got a great future and oil exploration is just one part of it.
Last modified: 8 Oct 2002
