The Resource Legislation Amendment Bill, now at select committee stage, will make it mandatory for councils to involve iwi authorities in the appointment of hearing commissioners as well as in the critical stages of preparing council plans, Auckland Federated Farmers president Wendy Clark said.
While she agreed consultation with iwi before plan notifications was appropriate, she argued there should be consultation with anyone directly affected by the plans.
“Unfortunately, that’s not the intention,” she said.
“There will be no similar level of engagement with the rest of the community, not even with those who have a legal interest in land through ownership.
“It represents a major constitutional change.”
Aucklanders were well placed to understand where the rest of the country might be heading, she said.
“Under special legislation Auckland’s Independent Maori Statutory Board already has this level of involvement.
“Appointed board members vote on council committees. They are notified of consent applications.
“Iwi consultation has reputedly absorbed around one seventh of Auckland’s projected $30 million Unitary Plan costs.
“Such serious influence over council decisions diminishes the democratic rights of the rest of the community.”
She pointed to the contentious listing of 3600 sites of value to mana whenua without public consultation. Many of the sites were known by local landowners to be inaccurate.
In one case what were thought to be Maori fighting trenches on a farm at South Head proved to be the remnants of two old silage pits dug in the 1950s.
Some sites had been removed because they could not be verified but on those remaining, farmers still could not do minor earthworks such as digging a posthole in surrounding areas without notifying some or all of the region’s 19 iwi groups to see if they had any objections.
Farmers hoped RMA reforms would strengthen private property rights and make consents quicker and cheaper, Clark said.
“Instead, property rights have been ignored and the new Iwi Participation Arrangement provisions add bureaucratic complexity and cost.”
And the RMA would undergo further amendments if the ambitions of the Freshwater Iwi Leaders Group were realised.
“The group wants tribal ownership of Crown-owned rivers and lakes,” she said.
“Last year they took this position around the country for tribal ratification.
“The Government agrees that iwi and hapu have certain rights and interests in freshwater but they don’t spell out what those rights and interests are or how they differ from those of the rest of the community.”
The Government’s Next Steps for Freshwater document suggested iwi authorities should partner councils in consenting, appointment of committees, monitoring and enforcement and other regulations when it came to water access and management, she said.
“It is difficult to reconcile New Zealand’s democratic traditions with a move to give non-elected people a major role in making decisions on behalf of the whole community.
“Such measures have the potential to be divisive and to undermine the good relationships that many local iwi have with their communities.
“We are one people in a nation of many cultures. We should all enjoy the same rights.”
Environment Minister Nick Smith said there were no new requirements in the Government’s proposals for resource legislation reform or in the Next Steps for Freshwater document that imposed additional consultation requirements in respect of iwi.
“What is proposed is participation agreements between councils and iwi so they are able to identify the areas where iwi have an interest and actually make the consents process more steamlined,” he said.
“The problem with the system at the moment is that a council can be dealing with thousands of resource consents that are referred to iwi, many of which iwi have absolutely no interest in.
“The big advantage of the iwi participation agreements is actually sorting out issues where iwi should be consulted where they have an interest and those where they don’t and are happy for people to get on with business.”
