The seemingly impossible has occurred, with the division of land between the 12 Auckland tribes and the Crown being largely settled. Chris Barton reports on how this notoriously sensitive task has been accomplished
In june 2006, lawyer Paul Majurey was urgently told by his elders: "Boy, go out and do what you need to do."
He wasn't the only one given the hard word. Key members from all the Marutuahu tribes were also left in no doubt about their kaitiaki (guardianship) responsibilities.
"We were tasked with trying to bring justice to bear," says Majurey, who at the time was working for Russell McVeagh.
He and others had long been working for their people in advancing their Treaty of Waitangi claims, but what now had everyone exercised was a just announced deal between Ngati Whatua o Orakei and the Crown.
It was a deal that gave the tribe exclusive, paramount, mana whenua rights to large tracts of Auckland land and some of the city's maunga (mountains) - land and maunga that Marutuahu had long asserted was rightfully theirs.
"There was a lot of distress and upset back home among the old people that we were being cut out of Auckland," says Majurey. "So we were told to pursue all avenues - legal, on the marae and in the media."
But it was easier said than done. Engaging with the Crown was a nightmare of bureaucratic stonewalling, redress via the Waitangi Tribunal seemed futile, talk on the marae simply increased the frustration and the media wasn't interested.
"The one-tribe myth was so deeply embedded in Auckland that the media thought what they were hearing from myself and people like Lou Paul [fighting for his tribe Te Taou] was just nonsense."
Majurey says the response, even with Maori media, was always the same - the story didn't have legs. Everyone knew from the Bastion Point protest days there was only one tribe in Tamaki Makaurau and that was Ngati Whatua.
The tide began to turn after a couple of articles - in Metro and the Herald - outlining just how much valuable Auckland land was at stake and how tribes like Marutuahu, Ngai Tai and Ngati Te Ata were unhappy about what was going on.
What unfolded over the next four years had it all. There were bitter words - on one occasion Ngati Whatua was described by kaumatua as kupapa (traitors).
There were unprecedented actions - a procession of tribes appealing to the Waitangi Tribunal for an urgent hearing about how unfairly they had been treated.
There was pathos - in the middle of the first Waitangi Tribunal urgent hearing it was announced that Sir Hugh Kawharu, Ngati Whatua o Orakei paramount chief and architect of the deal in the spotlight, had died.
There was deception - when the urgent hearing finally happened the Crown deliberately concealed documents from the Tribunal, documents that included historical research critical of Ngati Whatua's claim and others which highlighted legal risks about Ngati Whatua o Orakei's refusal to talk to other Auckland iwi.
Then there was the bombshell - the Waitangi Tribunal, previously described as a toothless tiger, grew some teeth and recommended the deal with Ngati Whatua o Orakei be stopped in its tracks.
But that was then. A week ago Paul Majurey and representatives from 11 other iwi signed Nga Mana Whenua o Tamaki Makaurau - a framework agreement covering shared ownership of 11 of Auckland's volcanic cones, a joint process for resolving claims regarding the city's islands and harbours and a shared "carousel" right of first refusal process to buy surplus Crown land.
That's not all. Ngati Whatua o Orakei has signed up to a new deal that sees it get $18 million cash and the right to buy $80 million of Navy housing land in Devonport - with leaseback details still to be finalised.
Waitakere-based Kawerau a Maki - one of the smaller tribes, which with the help of lawyer Stephen Clark (now a Maori Land Court Judge) fought alongside Marutuahu in the Waitangi Tribunal, now has a deal for $6.5 million, plus an option to purchase key properties in Waitakere City and Riverhead Crown forest licensed land.
As well as signalling the way forward for a further 10 iwi to settle their Auckland claims, the framework opens the way for settling further Kaipara and Hauraki claims.
In total, around $250 million is on the table to settle claims from 20 different iwi stretching from the Kaipara harbour, north of Auckland to Coromandel in the south.
If it works, it could confirm a new fast track process for Treaty claims and go some way towards meeting the Government's goal of settling all claims by 2014.
Twelve tribes of Auckland - it sounds biblical. Is everyone happy? Mostly.
Certainly Marutuahu people (Ngati Maru, Ngati Paoa, Ngati Whanaunga and Ngati Tamatera) are. Majurey is looking forward to working with his relations to finalise their Auckland and and Hauraki claims in conjunction with the Pare Hauraki iwi covering the Coromandel-Thames area. All up, 12 Hauraki iwi are involved in a settlement estimated to be worth over $100 million.
Looking back, Majurey recalls a meeting with the Crown late in 2006 when officials were outlining Crown policy of the time and justifying their decision to give exclusive ownership of maunga on the basis of a construct called "predominant interest".
Majurey demanded to know why on Maungawhau (Mt Eden) anyone had a predominant interest over the Marutuahu people. The Crown said it was how Crown policy worked, that here it was to be applied in favour of Ngati Whatua and that was how it was going to be.
"I told them with some frustration, 'We'll do whatever it takes to make sure Maungawhau does not go into the exclusive ownership of one tribe.' It was heartfelt."
Majurey is pleased Maungawhau was protected, but recognises the shared deal is a compromise. "It means all of us are everywhere. There's been a levelling out of interests. For some that would rankle because there are some very strong histories within tribes about who is where. For each of the tribes, the question has been where is the greater good here?"
PEACE breaks out in Tamaki Makaurau - Tamaki of the 100 lovers - where war and conflict has raged for centuries How did the impossible happen? Majurey sees three key factors.
The first was the blueprint of shared interests in Tamaki Makaurau put in place by Judge Carrie Wainwright, Professor Wharehuia Milroy and Joanne Morris in their Waitangi Tribunal report.
The second was leadership among the tribes to put aside acrimony and quietly agree on an outcome. The third was the blitzkrieg that was Sir Douglas Graham.
Chief Crown negotiator Michael Dreaver agrees: "It [the Waitangi Tribunal] gave the Office of Treaty Settlements a real slapping." He says Graham as facilitator put in place "the bones of the deal" - a basic structure to get around the various problems such as who had rights to the maunga. "He can say stuff that I can't," says Dreaver. "He can be incredibly blunt, but his judgement is magnificent."
For his part, Graham credits Dreaver as the one doing all the hard work. "He was the one who pulled it all together and negotiated all the details." Graham says his role was to conceptualise how it could be done.
At the beginning he says Ngati Whatua were unhappy - believing they had acted in good faith, as did the Crown. "Both were a bit piqued at the Waitangi Tribunal's quite stringent criticism. However there is no point moping around feeling sorry for yourself - you have to... get on with life."
Dealing with mana whenua rights was the next step. Graham pointed out that spiritual links to maunga endured for hundreds of years and that had to be recognised. His solution was to put all with claims on the maunga and natural resources together in a room and say 'work it out for yourselves'.
Graham also did something not tried before. He put a deal on the table for everyone to see with the amounts the Crown thought they should get. "Not only did I tell them what I thought they'd get, but I told them how I'd worked it out."
Using the Te Uri o Hau settlement as the benchmark, Sir Douglas calculated the cost per hectare, discounted it by 20 per cent for overlaps and then applied the formula to the areas claimed by each iwi.
Majurey says it was akin to a blitzkrieg because everything was done quickly and in reverse of previous Crown policy.
Instead of dealing with one tribe at a time - described as the Crown "picking winners" - all interests were addressed in parallel. And instead of "a merry dance of negotiations" done in secret, an offer was up front for all to see.
Majurey says the previous Crown policy of negotiations was primarily responsible for the ill feeling between tribes and the solution now being followed was clearly charted by the Waitangi Tribunal.
What Graham brought to the table was mana, direct action and a willingness "to bring a firm hand to bear."
In Marutuahu's case Graham and Dreaver also sorted an impasse as to who had the mandate to negotiate for each tribe - an internal conflict between the Marutuahu Confederation and the Hauraki Maori Trust Board. Their solution was to send the issue back to each tribe to elect interim negotiators to keep the process going while formal mandating took place.
The other key difference is the role of chief Crown negotiator. Dreaver is one of several independents contracted by the Ministry of Justice to work with an Office of Treaty Settlements' manager and team.
They've been selected by the Treaty Negotiations Minister Christopher Finlayson, have a more direct line to the minister and are able to operate more independently than officials.
"An interesting tension ensues at times," says Dreaver. "We just cut out all the bureaucracy in this process and dealt directly with people."
He sees his role as that of go-between, one who can take the heat out of negotiations on both sides.
"I go on to the marae and let the aunties and uncles and granddads give me a shouting - ask me directly why the Crown has a particular policy and that takes some pressure of the negotiators. So I spend my Saturdays getting shouted at which is a small price to pay."
Dreaver got into treaty negotiations in 1996 to escape five years of "incredibly boring" tax policy advice for Treasury .
He's worked with the Office of Treaty Settlements and for iwi. "I've been on both sides, so I've got a bit of the flavour of that huge frustration with bureaucracy when you're working for iwi."
Another key development in the Auckland deal is right of first refusal process for purchasing Crown land, which will be offered in turn to each of the three tribal groups - Ngati Whatua, Tamaki and Marutuahu.
The process will include some $250 million of Navy housing land in Devonport. While Ngati Whatua gets rights to buy up to $80 million, the remaining $170 million and any other surplus Crown land in Auckland will be offered on a rotating basis to the other iwi groups.
If a group declines first right of refusal, a second right will be opened up to the remaining iwi.
Also to be worked out is what leaseback terms Ngati Whatua o Orakei will be offered. Graham criticised the previous deal which had the tribe leasing back the land to the Crown with a ground rent of $5.2 million a year.
The deal had perpetual right of renewal but for the first 35 years the rent was waived - in effect creating a neutral transaction worth $85 million. Graham said the deal was not on a proper commercial footing.
"No one in his right mind would ever sell his property on such terms." Dreaver hopes a more transparent deal will be finalised by the end of June.
But while peace is threatening to break out across the isthmus and beyond, there are a couple of dark zones where conflict still rages. Graham acknowledges major problems with Ngati Te Ata land near Waiuku.
"Ngati Te Ata are the ones with the ropatu block. They say, 'We lost the land and we should do the negotiation'. Waikato [Tainui] say, 'No, we did the settlement in 1994 for all of the 33-35 hapu and we want to finish the job and we are going to'."
Graham says he's done all he can to resolve the impasse, but doesn't see an immediate solution.
Then there is the vexed question of the lost tribe of Auckland - Te Taou - a dispute which may be headed back to a Waitangi Tribunal urgent hearing.
It's a question that asks whether there are indeed 12 tribes of Auckland - whether the three Ngati Whatua entities signing is fair, and just how Te Taou fits in. For Lou Paul (Paora Kawharu) who has been fighting for almost 20 years to get recognition for Te Taou as an independent iwi, it's a deeply personal issue of identity.
Graham acknowledges the problem: "Some say Ngati Whatua was a hapu of Te Taou.
Others say it's the other way round. Well who knows? What we do know is that Ngati Whatua and Te Taou became inter-married and inter-mingled and some of them under Tuperiri stayed in Auckland and some of them went back to the Kaipara."
Graham says he has tried to acknowledge the two lines of Te Taou in the framework agreement - "those that do and do not descend from Tuperiri" - but he leaves both under the banner of Ngati Whatua.
For Paul that's a sleight of hapu that subsumes Te Taou to obscurity - an injustice that must be corrected. He argues the real Te Taou line traces to chief Wahaakiaki, who conquered Auckland around 1750, and is quite separate from the Tuperiri line claimed by Ngati Whatua o Orakei.
Graham, Dreaver and the Crown are unmoved. "When he [Lou Paul] sends me his whakapapa, he conveniently leaves out a bit - that's the bit which makes him a cousin of [the late] Hugh Kawharu," says Graham.
"We are sure his [Lou Paul's] mandate is held by Ngati Whatua o Orakei for central Auckland and by Ngati Whatua o Kaipara for any Kaipara interests," says Dreaver. Both views are consistent with Crown position.
Not surprisingly, Paul finds pakeha, even with the mana of Graham, telling him he has his whakapapa wrong extremely insulting. He says whakapapa matters are traditionally debated on the marae by manawhenua, not by "those of Scottish descent".
He says also that articles by the late Sir Hugh Kawharu are consistently contradictory about Ngati Whatua and Te Taou whakapapa and history.
"I am flabbergasted that a desperate Crown is now saying that potential Maori beneficiaries become entitled by marriage rather than direct descent. Te Taou looks forward to dispelling the Crown's obvious ignorance before the Waitangi Tribunal."
Twelve tribes of Auckland may have settled their differences, but for Te Taou, the battle is far from over.
