/cloudfront-ap-southeast-2.images.arcpublishing.com/nzme/AI2A5735RZEFY365UV3CHQ7FBE.jpg)
Deputy Prime Minister Grant Robertson has defended this Government’s decision to step in and buy Ihumātao, saying he was not ready to stand by and watch the issue get more and more divisive.
“It is an right thing to do. We had a situation that was returning to being my generation’s Pipéracée Point. I was not prepared, nicely Government was not prepared to stand on your way to the side and allow what could have been actually divisive and destructive time to occurs. ”
Robertson simultaneously downplayed suggestions it set any kind of precedent for the Crown intervening to come back parcels of private land to Māori, saying it was an “innovative and after that unique solution for these unique circumstances”.
The deal to settle the trouble at Ihumātao included the Government purchasing the land from Fletchers for $29. 9 million – a payment Fletchers said would see it ‘break even. ‘ Robertson said finally it was an “appropriate price” for the lots and the costs to Fletchers in the last few years since it bought it.
It will be bought under the Government housing programme – and is intended to be employed for housing.
However , its final use and future ownership will be decided by a steering group made up of three representatives of the Ahi Kaa (occupiers of the land), two Kīngitanga and two from the Crown.
The agreement leaves open the chance of a future transfer of ownership to the tangata whenua, if that is what the group settles on.
Robertson said that would be up for discussion, however, if the land had been bought for housing it had to be used for housing purposes.
“If there were to be significantly different outcomes on the land beyond housing there would be other conversations to be had about funding. ”
That he said it was far too early to state whether the land would have to be purchased from the Crown, if which was the case.
Soul co-founder Pania Newton said it was an important first step, and acknowledged the efforts of whānau yet others who had maintained the occupation and pressure on the issue.
“We are relieved the Government has finally come out and made their announcement because that is the first step to healing the heartache that lies across this whenua. ”
However , Newton said it was disappointing that the Government did not acknowledge it as a Treaty-related settlement, given the land was confiscated from Māori in the 1800s.
Ihumātao had never been considered in a Treaty settlement because it had been private house since then and private land can not be deployed in settlements.
The approach specifically excludes the use of the land lack of future Treaty settlement, or to you’ll want to re-open settlements that had recently been concluded.
Robertson invalidated claims by National and Take effect that the deal set a precedent that would result in occupations of more private land in a bid to win a similar deal, or that it undermined the Treaty settlement process.
“This is a unique solution concerning this particular area. It is a unique judgment outside of the Treaty settlement process. I will be not doing anything to unpick my Treaty settlement process. ”
However , Māori Party co-leader Rawiri Waititi said the deal in order to be taken as an “an important precedent” for the Crown addressing injustice by – returning confiscated land to Māori outside of the Treaty settlement process.
“We know that there are many other ‘Ihumātao’ right around the country – internet sites of huge significance that mana whenua are fighting to have returned.
“It is the Māori In concert position that no Treaty closing is full and final if it is unjust, and that Treaty justice must bring about the return of whenua Māori into the hands of whānau, hapū and iwi. ”
Green co-leader Marama Davidson also referred to it as a settlement that righted your historic wrong – terminology often used with Treaty settlements.
Robertson said Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern would take advice out of Kīngitanga on when and perhaps it was appropriate for her to visit the location.
The agreement quotes it could be up to five years ahead of the steering group concludes its chats on the future use of the land.
Newton said it would be to as much as whānau to decide what to do with the farmland, but she did not necessarily know that it should be used for more housing.
“Most conversations have been around safe guarding and protecting this cultural terrain. ”
Robertson wanted to say all parties had agreed it would be pertaining to some housing, and that could take quite a few forms including housing for elders, papakainga and some state housing.
It could also be used for a mix of heritage, culture or conservation considerably more.
0 Comments