Waitaha and Ngai Tahu are at odds over consultation with
Holcim (New Zealand) Ltd about plans for a new cement plant
in the Waiareka Valley, North Otago.
The division emerged at an Environment Court hearing in
Oamaru, where two Waitaha groups, Waitaha Taiwhenua o Waitaki
Trust Board Inc and Te Runanganui o Waitaha Me Mata Waka Inc,
were appearing as interested parties in appeals against
resource consents granted for the plant and its associated
quarries.
Ngai Tahu is adamant it is the statutory body with
responsibility for the area, but the Waitaha Trust Board has
told the court the Waiareka Valley is part of its ancestral
lands and holds cultural and spiritual significance.
It said Holcim's proposal would adversely affect that, and it
had not been consulted about the project. All consultation
had been with Ngai Tahu and its Te Runanga o Moeraki.
Yesterday, Moeraki runanga witnesses defended that approach.
Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu representative David Higgins
emphasised the Moeraki runanga was the body that would be
working with Holcim.
Mr Higgins rejected suggestions Waitaha's interest had not
been taken into account.
"It is insulting to assume that I or any of those consulted
by the [Waitaki District] Council and Holcim prior to these
proceedings put aside our Waitaha ancestry and knowledge," he
said.
"As a person of Waitaha descent, I consider that all the
issues raised by the trust board have been considered by Te
Runanga o Moeraki . . ."
Under cross-examination by Waitaha counsel Dr Joan Forret, Mr
Higgins said he was not aware of any political unrest within
the Ngai Tahu corporate structure in respect of Waitaha. If
there was any, it was outside that.
Some individuals of Waitaha descent wished to retain that
lineage and tended not to see the Ngai Tahu corporate
structure as their corporate structure, he said.
Judge Gordon Whiting said the court had the situation of two
parties representing Waitaha who wanted to retain their
identity and interests and felt they were not adequately
protected.
One condition required the Moeraki runanga be notified if
there was a discovery of artefacts of importance. Judge
Whiting asked Mr Higgins if there would be "any political
consternation" if Waitaha was included in that.
"These are sensitive issues and the last thing the court
wants to do is ride roughshod over and make them worse," he
said.
Mr Higgins said he would need to take advice on that from the
runanga, but suggested there was a way the condition may be
worded which would satisfy any concerns.
Acting chairwoman of the Moeraki runanga, Koa Joy Mantell,
said the first meeting with Holcim was held in April, 2006,
marking the start of formal consultation over the
development. Under the Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu Act and Ngai
Tahu Claims Settlement Act, the Moeraki runanga had that
authority.
A memorandum of understanding was being prepared to formalise
the relationship.
The runanga was satisfied with the consultation undertaken
and that issues had been addressed, she said.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.