Projects run the gauntlet of Maori consultation

By GEOFF CUMMING

Complaints that major developments are delayed or held to ransom by Maori are as frightening as the taniwha.

The swamp-dwelling creature drew international attention 16 months ago when local iwi Ngati Naho complained that the route of the Waikato expressway would disturb a taniwha at a bend in the Waikato River. Work was held up for more than a month until Transit agreed to build an embankment to avoid disturbing the one-eyed creature.

But this was not the first time the taniwha issue has reared its head. Construction of a regional prison near Ngawha Springs in Northland has been dogged by Maori protesters objecting for cultural reasons - including the claim that construction would disturb the taniwha Takauere.

The project ran a gauntlet of two years of consultation and appeals to the Environment Court, High Court and Court of Appeal. After the protesters were removed last year, it emerged that the department was paying more than $100,000 a year to northern iwi Ngati Rangi and consultants Gardiner and Parata for cultural advice.

Property developers have for years complained that the Resource Management Act's requirements to consult with Maori are a recipe for extortion. They cite huge fees charged by monopoly providers of cultural audits, and cases where objectors withdraw from appeals in return for payments.

Confusion over which iwi or hapu to deal with and what constituted wahi tapu and kaitiakitanga (stewardship) plagued consultation on the Whitianga Waterways canal housing development.

Last March, Coromandel iwi Ngati Puu's stance on resource consents was blamed for holding up a proposed marina at Whangamata for more than 10 years. A leaked document revealed that the iwi's first rule on applications was to object. The second rule? To object. "If in doubt go back to rule one."

But councils charged with enforcing the RMA requirements say such stonewalling is rare and tends to occur only when consultation goes awry.

Under the act, not all consents require consultation but councils must ask applicants to consult with iwi when they consider developments may affect ancestral lands, sacred sites or water; kaitiakitanga (the guardianship of physical resources) or the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, which binds the Crown to protecting tangata whenua in the use of their resources and taonga. Tangible and intangible values are equally important under the act but there are limits on the weight given to spiritual values.

Graeme Ridley, consents and compliance manager for the Auckland Regional Council, says issues can usually be resolved by negotiation, avoiding the need to impose conditions on consent. He says it's important to remember that consultation is not an end in itself but a way to identify and address concerns "in a balanced manner."

Ridley says developers are "getting used to" the consultation requirements. "At the end of the day, it's just communication - you need to be upfront about it."

Auckland Property Group spokesman John Parker says iwi consultation delays major developments, adding huge costs. "But the problem is not so much consultation with Maori but council management of it."

Parker, a Maori, says councils too often require consultation over issues that don't concern iwi. "They lack enough professional Maori staff or culturally sensitive staff to decide what should or shouldn't be consulted on." Some are better than others at using their discretion.

Parker says consultation with Maori is "part of the industry's general concern about the RMA". He has yet to strike a case of Maori abusing the system for financial gain. "But, like anything, if you give anyone unlimited power a certain number will abuse it."

Councils acknowledge that it has taken time since the act's introduction in 1991 to introduce the policies and procedures needed. Many now have iwi liaison teams while iwi have developed iwi management plans.

But cultural consultant Greg Innes says there is a cultural gap to consider.

To Maori, the process of decision-making is as important as the outcome, whereas councils and developers are driven by immediacy.

The costs associated with consultation remain an issue.

Where councils undertake the consultation, they usually attempt to recover the cost. Likewise iwi.

Says Ridley: "We get plenty of phone calls saying, 'I've been asked to consult and why do I need to pay $500?'

"But it quite clearly fits with the intentions of the RMA and it makes sense to go through the process - and there is a cost."

Herald Feature: Sharing a Country