Unit Titles Bill;
Rahui Katene MP for Te Tai Tonga
Thursday 5 March 2009; 4.30pm

It is entirely appropriate to stand here, as a Maori woman, to talk to this Unit Titles Bill.

Our whakatauaki, our tribal traditions, have always made explicit the connection between wahine – our women; and whenua – our land. As they say:

He wāhine, he whenua, ka ngaro te tangata.
For a woman and land, men perish.

Women will be revered and respected as te whare tangata – literally the house of the people.

Our words are interchangeable – to be hapu, to be pregnant – also recognises the subtribe – hapu.

Whanau relates to both giving birth and to the family.

And when we give birth – our whenua (the afterbirth); and the pito (the umbilical cord) – is returned to the whenua – the land – making forever the link between that newborn baby and Papatuanuku – mother earth.

I give this very brief summary of our worldviews around land as means of an introduction to the importance of land to Maori. Just as we must value every woman as the bearer of the iwi – the generations to come; we must also guard and protect mother earth with that same reverence.

It is because of the strength of our beliefs that our people have literally walked the land in hikoi; acknowledging the special cultural, spiritual, emotional and physical significance of this relationship. We are tangata whenua – people of the land - the land and people are inseparable.

And so we take great interest in the proposal in this Bill to update the law regarding the subdivision, development and management of land. We take great interest in the issues around ownership and management of land, buildings and facilities.
And we will always be concerned to see whether or not any developments put forward will diminish Maori rights – or whether they can create opportunities.

In our worldview, land is a taonga tuku iho – a treasure to be preserved, respected and protected. If land and buildings are going to be subdivided into unit title developments owned by unit holders we want to be assured that tangata whenua are fully involved.

Maori land
Currently sitting at number 5 on the order paper for Members Bills, is a Maori Party Bill generated by the call that no more Maori land shall be taken via the Public Works Act.

In that Bill, my colleague, Te Ururoa Flavell, is recommending that Maori owners will be given the first right of refusal to purchase land that the Crown no longer requires for use as intended. I am interested to see whether in this Unit Titles Bill, there will be any recognition made for land taken under the Public Works Act and never returned.

In this Bill today, we are being offered the opportunity for a deviation from section 11 of the Resource Management Act which applies to restrictions on subdivisions of land; and Part 10 of that same Act – which is about subdivision and reclamation.

The question that this raises for the Maori Party is whether it creates potential for confusion as another critical party of section 11 is the requirements that any subdivision to be considered of Maori land can only be dealt with under Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993. We will be looking for clarity therefore on section 11.

We wonder what other considerations may need to be made in relation to Maori land including lands upon which Treaty settlements are currently in negotiation.

Multiply Owned Land
As I have said earlier, the importance we place on land as tangata whenua, is all encompassing.

Our land provides us with a tangible link to our tupuna; it is the site of our genealogical connection to all of our bloodline. And so we take seriously the role of guardianship, our kaitiakitanga responsibilities on behalf of those who have come before us, and those who descend from us.

But it would be stretching the rainbow to say that the management of the multiple ownership of land is easy. Indeed the ongoing fragmentation of multiple ownership, is a direct result of the individualisation of title, and a failure to recognise the principles of collective use and occupation.

Maori communities on multiply owned land will also often not face the standard market conditions that other land owners face – they may have limited access to markets; capital is often scarce; information is frequently incomplete and the requirements for decision-making of the collective are highly complex.

There are currently serious problems with the sub-division of Maori land, and particularly that the Maori Land Court won’t agree to the partitioning of Maori land.

Getting an application for an individual partition of land through is difficult because of the thresholds of agreement needed.

We need to find another way in which to both protect lands from misuse and/or sale while also allowing whanau and hapü to develop papakäinga housing projects if there is a reasonable level of consent.

One way might be to identity land suitable for a Maori housing scheme, and to lower the thresholds for partitioning for those lands, while also placing restrictions on the sale of the partitioned lands.

At present under the law, there is also no capacity to enable the owners of Maori (customary and freehold) land in a particular area or papakainga to join with one another and collectively manage their lands and to do things like restrict the sale of land, in order to maintain the integrity of the papakainga.

The question that needs to be put to the select committee is, can the bill be modified to take into account special Maori needs to protect their papakäinga. This is a potential opportunity offered by the Bill and we will be interested to see how submitters address this.

Another approach we have considered as a party is to introduce proposals to enable leasehold titles to be commercially bankable.

We are interested in the possibilities of third party financial institutions who may be interested in investing in multiply owned land – and so we are interested in this management proposals around bodies corporate to bring together all unit owners in a development, to operate and manage unit title developments.

Suffice to say, we have as many proposals and solutions as there are issues inherent in the development of land and resources to better enable whanau, hapu and iwi to advance on a socially and economically sustainable basis.

And so we are extremely interested in the evolution of the modern framework that the Minister suggests is needed to achieve the joint ownership and management of land, buildings and facilities.

Of course we are always wary of the actions of the state as they pertain to upholding the rangatiratanga our land. We only have to think back to the sale of prime Coromandel land at Whenuakite; the controversy of Rangiputa Station on the Karikari Peninsula; or the proposed sale of the Taurewa land blocks to know how deeply our people feel about the mismanagement of land and land disposal processes.

We will be interested to see whether Hauraki, Tuwharetoa, Ngati Kahu, the Tainui waka alliance, the Maori Council and other iwi who have been so closely involved with these activities will take up the opportunity to scrutinise the Unit Titles Bill and to share their views about whether it creates opportunities or whether it does it fact threaten Maori rights.

Finally, I leave with the oft-quoted words

Whatungarongaro te tangata, toitu te whenua.
Each generation passes in its turn, but the land remains.

We are absolutely dedicated in our pursuit to protect the integrity of our land.

But we are also absolutely dedicated towards the possibilities of development and opportunities for advancing the social, economic and cultural progress of tangata whenua.

We are not satisfied that this Bill adequately facilitates Maori housing development – and we will also be keenly listening to the Minister in subsequent stages, to see how these aspirations will be met.

We will support this Bill, to enable the korero to be heard.

ENDS

© Scoop Media