After the vote, Negotiation Trust chairman Ken Mair acknowledged the “courage and commitment” of councillors.
“You’re part of this journey of systemic change that is based upon values that permeate and come from this land. To see the majority of our council support that journey and that systemic change is fantastic.
“It will be a challenging journey but it’s a journey we need to take as a community, as hapū and iwi and in fact as a country.
“For too long we’ve had a system that has shown no integrity, has lacked authority in regard to decision-making and hasn’t shown any thought in regard to the health and wellbeing of the land.”
Councillors considered the proposals over nearly three hours of debate before a packed gallery on Thursday.
Many appeared determined to ensure the debate was accurate and relevant, with five councillors calling a series of points of order against the first line of questioning put by councillor Rob Vinsen.
Earlier, chief executive David Langford described the topic as “highly political” and asked the mayor to close down questions that tried to draw officers into the debate.
Before the debate, councillor Kate Joblin questioned Mayor Andrew Tripe’s decision to preface the chief executive’s introduction with comments of his own. She asked if this was the most even-handed way of introducing the matter.
Tripe stuck to his guns, saying he was looking forward to what was contained in the draft relationship agreement, Te Tomokanga ki Te Matapihi. If voted in, the agreement would prove positive for the community, Tripe said.
He condemned “unhelpful mistruths, exaggerations and scaremongering” from lobby groups such as Free Speech Union, Stop Co-Governance, Centrist and Hobson’s Pledge and said he had received more than 200 emails, many containing misleading and inaccurate information.
Whanganui Airport ownership was not being transferred, unelected representatives were not being appointed to council, co-governance was not being embedded within the council and there would be no additional cost to ratepayers for a new reserves board to manage specific reserves.
The relationship agreement notes an intention to transfer 128ha of grazing land on Airport Rd and South Spit to Ngā Hapū o Te Iwi o Whanganui via settlement legislation.
Langford told councillors an agreement signed by then mayor Michael Laws in 2009 signalled the council’s intention to return the land at Landguard Bluff to hapū but specifics had not yet been agreed.
Relationship agreements with iwi were common in local government, Langford said.
The agreement set out how the council would work in partnership with iwi and hapū in the future.
“[It] does include the requirement to create processes for iwi and hapū to contribute to council decision-making. That is nothing new and the clauses just ask council to do what it is legally required to do under the Local Government Act.”
Langford said feedback from community engagement was highly polarised and heavily influenced by national lobby groups.
A survey received 1269 completed responses but only 463 (36%) identified as being from or living in Whanganui.
Deputy Mayor Helen Craig expressed concern that the relationship agreement was legally binding.
Langford said most agreements the council entered into were legally binding.
“The relationship agreement largely just commits you to exploring matters and having discussions with our partners to try to figure out the specifics of what you will subsequently agree to further down the track, so from officers’ point of view ‘legally binding’ is not an issue.”
Councillor Michael Law said he was uncomfortable with clauses agreeing to explore potential ownership of eight sites, including part of Queen’s Park/Pukenamu and Gonville Domain, and did not understand the intention to transfer the grazing land.
He was also uncomfortable with providing opportunity for hapū to acquire council-owned land, right of first refusal or long-term leases.
Councillor Charlie Anderson said the matter was not council core business and the risk of further disharmony in the community set him against the proposals.
Vinsen said he supported the social entity Toitū te Whānau as a noble cause but there was not enough detail for the council to agree to it. He did not support a joint reserves board, and the council already had relationship agreements with several iwi that had worked well for many years.
Councillor Philippa Baker-Hogan said there was an agreed strategic intent between the council and iwi in 2009 to transfer the grazing land on Airport Rd and South Spit.
“It was a promise, and not a promise I intend to break.”
Baker-Hogan said she was sickened by the claims of lobbyists.
“I’m not weak, I’m not woke and I’m not ignorant. I’ve served 20 years around this table.
“I don’t see anything to be feared. It’s about opportunity, trust and relationships. We’ve got an opportunity to be in this relationship. It’s something to be proud of.”
Councillor Josh Chandulal-Mackay said the proposals would enable iwi and hapū to reconnect with land they were alienated from and to reassert their mana and kaitiakitanga over that land, as promised in Article II of the Treaty of Waitangi.
He condemned the “spreading of lies, misinformation and inflammatory language” by lobby groups. It was a deliberate and shameful attempt to scare people and “ignite a reaction that subverts a political process”.
Councillor Kate Joblin said adopting the proposals would be an important step for Whanganui and for the country’s nationhood.
“Only good can come of it.”
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air
