The Port of Tauranga is New Zealand's largest port. Photo / Mead Norton
The Port of Tauranga has offered a $3.75m funding package to local iwi and hapū parties to help mitigate any potential effects of its proposed $88 million expansion.
The Port of Tauranga Limited has applied for resource consent for a 385m wharf extension and 1.8ha land reclamation at Sulphur Point, as well as a wharf extension stretching 530m north and 388m south of its tanker berth, and a 2.9ha reclamation for its Mount Maunganui wharves.
An associated 14.4ha shipping channel extension would involve dredging up to 1.5 million cubic metres of the sea floor, of which 800,000 cubic metres was already consented.
A consent hearing in the Environment Court at Tauranga has been told the project is an “urgent national priority” to address severe capacity constraints expected within a few years. Eleven iwi and hapū parties, however, have raised unresolved issues over the expansion plans.
The hearing began before a judge and three commissioners on Monday and continued on Tuesday with the port company’s general manager of properties and infrastructure David Kneebone giving evidence.
Kneebone was cross-examined over his evidence about the consent conditions offered by the applicant, and particularly a mitigation funding package totalling $3.75m over 35 years.
The court heard the package included two one-off payments of $1m to the Ngā Mātārae Charitable Trust or another entity approved by Tauranga Moana iwi, as an investment into ongoing projects and marae infrastructure.
The package offered also included an annual payment of $25,000 towards marae infrastructure projects, adjusted annually for inflation, and a further $25,000 a year to enable a Tauranga Moana Iwi Cultural Effects Monitoring and Mitigation Plan to be developed.
The port already contributes $50,000 a year to the Ngā Mātārae Charitable Trust as part of an existing resource consent condition, the court heard.
Pia Bennett, representing Te Runanga o Ngati Kahu and Ngāti Tapu at the consent hearing, questioned Kneebone over the level of engagement in seeking feedback from the iwi and hapū over the expansion plans.
Bennett also asked whether Kneebone fully understood the Māori perspective versus the Western science view on the biophysical effects and the broader impacts on the cultural values of iwi and hapū if the plans went ahead.
Kneebone said while he was not Māori, two out of seven Port of Tauranga Limited board members were Māori and he had referenced in his written statements and oral evidence the steps taken to gain a better understanding of mana whenua views, and the results of that were detailed in the consent conditions.
Kneebone said the port had endeavoured to engage with all the potential affected parties.
Some parties, including Whareroa Marae Trust, made it quite clear from the outset they were vehemently opposed to the consent, which made having further dialogue “quite challenging”, he said.
Commissioner Jim Hodge told Kneebone he understood the “complexities in this case” but also he wanted to fully understand whether the consent conditions proposed were clear and reasonable to the applicant and mana whenua.
Kneebone said he was satisfied the conditions were appropriate given evidence from expert witnesses Professor Chris Battershill and Dr Willem de Lange, who both had not identified any effect on the harbour’s Te Paritaha pipi bed as result of this proposal, and Battershill’s evidence that Te Awanui [Tauranga Harbour) was in good health.
Kneebone also said in relation to Whareroa Marae, the port had “significantly reduced” the extent of the proposed development at the southern end of the Mount Maunganui wharves, and the resource consent did not include dredging near Te Paritaha.
“We saw this as the biggest single thing to mitigate any effects on the marae.”
The hearing continues before Chief Environment Court Judge David Kirkpatrick and three commissioners, Jim Hodge, Anne Leijnen and Glenice Paine. It is expected to take three weeks.