A menu of rotten fish

Government press release for:

HEADS OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN NGA HAPU O NGATI POROU AND THE CROWN

Firstly: The negotiations are being conducted in accordance with section 96 of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004.
- so Ngati Porou now accept the confiscation act. Simple as that - no weasel words - they accept it, that is the pre-condition for the negotiations.

The Heads of Agreement aims to:
• recognise the unbroken, inalienable and enduring mana of the hapū of Ngati Porou in relation to the public foreshore and seabed in their rohe...
- and they must accept that the lie perpetrated in the confiscation act that it is "public" (ie. Crown-owned) and not theirs.

The agreement describes eight instruments through which the mana of the hapu of Ngati Porou, in relation to the public foreshore and seabed in their rohe, would be recognised at law in a way that is consistent with the object of the Foreshore and Seabed Act....
- the object being the confiscation of their property. So they have to beg these would-be colonial masters for a quasi-waiver of the confiscation act provisions only so long as the original unjust, racist intent of the act - the act condemned in the UN report amongst others - is adhered to. That is the basis of the deal.

1. A Statutory Overlay that recognises the special status [...] is recorded in key public documents such as district and regional plans and statements and is taken account of in consent processes under the Resource Management Act and the Marine Reserves Act.
- "notification" and "participation" in process only.

2. An Environmental Covenant, which will ensure that statutory plans prepared and administered by Gisborne District Council conform to a statement by Ngāti Porou on the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.
- the Gisborne District Council must "recognise and provide for the Environmental Covenant" in territorial customary rights areas and only "take into account" the covenant in all other areas. But any change due to it "will follow the normal public notification processes under the Resource Management Act 1991." - meaning it can be objected to presumably.

3. Relationship Covenants between the hapu of Ngati Porou and a number of Ministers
- perhaps funniest of all. They actually have the nerve to see this as some form of special acknowledgement. Ha! Whopdee shit, a bit of face time with a minister. The miners and the Tally Bros will get more time with the government players without any formal understandings of what courtesy amounts to. "The Crown will also write to the following agencies to encourage them to enter into relationship instruments with Ngāti Porou: Gisborne District Council and Transit New Zealand." That's right, they'll write a letter to them! Talk about padding.

4. A Fisheries Mechanism that will allow Fisheries Management Committees to develop customary fisheries resource management plans and subsequent regulations (made by the Minister of Fisheries)
- this is all under the 1996 Fisheries Act anyway, so it's more smoke and mirrors and the illusion of concessions, but get this: if the minister, once the public have had their say (of course) determines "an undue adverse effect on existing fishing interests" ie. Pakeha or commercial interests then... computer says 'no'.

5. A Wahi Tapu protection mechanism that will give the supporting hapu the right to restrict or prohibit access to wahi tapu and wahi tapu areas within the public foreshore and seabed in their rohe.
- yeah, because tapu areas are public aren't they? How can a tapu area be in a public area? Because the government made it public by the confiscation act so that they then have to negotiate beg for it to be recognised as tapu again from that much weaker position of having to establish that its origins "pre-date 1840" and the other "evidentiary" tests that the confiscation act stipulate.

6. A protected customary activities mechanism that will allow the supporting hapu the right to continue carrying out specified customary activities without resource consent in or on the public foreshore and seabed in their rohe.
- and here we start seeing this phrasing: "The requirement for the relevant hapu to give approval for resource consent applications that may have a significant adverse effect on a protected customary activity does not apply to certain accommodated matters." Whatever that means. It is important because it potentially undoes this clause. Oh, and once again, it's all in terms of the confiscation act's provisos anyway. Cullen has stated many times that all he considers this clause to mean is launching waka and collecting hangi stones.

7. A pouwhenua instrument that will give the hapu of Ngati Porou the right to erect Pouwhenua at culturally significant sites
- a form of boundary marker, but in this instance it has nothing more than "cultural significance". It isn't allowed to mean anything to the Crown that would imply ownership by Ngati Porou.

8. A placenames instrument that will officially recognise traditional names or alter names of culturally significant areas.
- well, once again whoopee! That would have happened anyway "in accordance with the New Zealand Geographic Board Act 1946."

Where specific territorial customary rights are recognised as part of this agreement the hapu signing this agreement will also have the following additional protections within those territorial customary rights areas:
• A Permission Right instrument that will provide the right to approve or withhold approval for any resource consent...
• An extended Fisheries Mechanism that provides the signatories with the ability to make by-laws under customary fishing regulations...
• An extended Environmental Covenant, which gives the signatories the ability to ensure all statutory plans that cover a territorial customary rights area recognise and provide for the approach of the hapū to the sustainable management of physical and natural resources in that areas.
- well now that final bit sounds like we're getting somewhere. But once again the "Permission Right does not apply to certain accommodated matters" etc. etc. It's all in the details and that has yet to be determined.

Once ratified, appointed representatives of [Ngati Porou] will file an application in the High Court for confirmation that the requirements for a finding by the High Court under section 96 of the Foreshore and Seabed Act have been satisfied. Legislation will also be required to give effect to the Deed of Agreement once the territorial customary rights areas have been confirmed by the High Court.
- so all the rigmarole of the tilted playing field that the confiscation act created must still be gone through anyway. Anyway. Like what's the diff? Not much at all it seems.

As Harvey Keitel says in the beer ad "what you say 'no' to - defines you." The mana of Ngati Porou leadership is on the line here along with the whole tribe (or at least the 40 of the 51 sub-tribes). They aren't saying 'no' to the confiscation act. And by extension they are saying 'no' to Maori solidarity.

------------UPDATE--------------
Watching Maori TV's flagship Te Kaea news programme I just heard the cross-eyed presenter, Scotty, exclaim at the end of the piece about the signing of the deal at parliament "Kamo te wehi! Ngati Porou" ("Awesome stuff, Ngati Porou") WTF! Awesome is it, Scotty? Try kupapa te wehi, Scotty. It's not just his eyesight that's all screwed up. Why doesn't he just wear a Labour party badge while he's at it. Unbelievable. Where was the critique from the Maori Party that the Pakeha networks had... you know... balance? Don't they exist? What's going on at MTS? Is H2 running it on behalf of the PM? Is their funding in jeopardy if they don't help the government? Are they run by pro-Labour hacks? I was going to make a pitch to put their news service online, but why would I want to transfer a Labour Party love-in onto the internet. Ditch that idea. Very disappointing. I'll have to keep a closer eye on them from now on.