Iwi to appeal port dredging

Consent to dredge the Port of Tauranga shipping channels is being taken to the Court of Appeal.

Last month the High Court dismissed Tauranga hapu Ngati Ruahine's appeal to stop consent to widen and deepen the shipping channel to allow bigger ships access to the port.


The appeal was lodged after the Environment Court granted consent to dredge the port at the end of last year.

Port of Tauranga chief executive Mark Cairns told the annual meeting yesterday the hapu has decided to take the case to the Court of Appeal.

'Unfortunately, we received notice last week that Ngati Ruahine is appealing to the Court of Appeal.

'Ngati Ruahine is a hapu of Ngati Ranginui iwi, one of twenty four hapu that make up the Tauranga Moana Collective.”

Mark says the port will challenge the legitimacy of the appeal.

The dredging consent was initially recommended by a panel of Independent Commissioners in May 2010 before being confirmed by the Environment Court in December 2011 and also the High Court last month.

'We hope the appeal to the Court of Appeal can be resolved quickly,” says Mark.

'Once we have the consent finally approved, the dredging project will be carried out in several stages. We had hoped to commence the first stage towards the end of next year.

'New Zealand's economy desperately needs the $338 million of benefits that the New Zealand Shippers Council estimates will flow from bigger ships operating on the South East Asia trade routes.”

Mark says the four-year dredging process has cost the port $2.5million.

'We consider that it has been undertaken with a great deal of mutual respect and co-operation from most hapu,” says Mark.

'One of the proposed resource consent conditions requires the establishment of a new trust that will set priorities and allocate funds for harbour improvement projects.

'The Environment Court described this as a relatively sophisticated approach to dealing with the various issues that arose during the case and concluded that the proposed conditions offered by the Port during the closing of its case; ‘adequately avoid, mitigate, or remedy the cultural effects'.

'We sincerely hope the new trust will provide a forum for building on the relationship between the port and iwi and really making a difference in improving the health and wellbeing of the beautiful harbour that we share.”

Mark is hoping the second phase of reforms of the Resource Management Act which are expected before Christmas will include ports under Section 6 of the Act – to be considered as matters of national importance.

Almost all 99 per cent of New Zealand trade by volume, passes through a port.

56 comments

What's the odds...

Posted on 26-10-2012 12:31 | By Persephone

..that none of the iwi work at the Port???


Sensible economic development held to ransom.

Posted on 26-10-2012 12:42 | By SpeakUp

Ahhh, an opportunistic appeal by the usual suspects. Nothing a bribe to the taniwha wouldn't solve, aye bro?


Dredging

Posted on 26-10-2012 12:43 | By donmac

What else can we expect from a Stone Age culture that couldn't even discover the wheel...


.

Posted on 26-10-2012 12:55 | By traceybjammet

if the Iwi wish to just ensure that its about condervation and keeping an eye out for the Port I dont mind some discussion but the reality NZ needs the jobs and the money coming in and out I suspect this is about greedy Iwi once again not conservation


Time wasting

Posted on 26-10-2012 13:46 | By penguin

I hope the appeal is lost. Time to get over it and move on...


Here we go again

Posted on 26-10-2012 14:13 | By chewy

They don't care about the big picture. It seems to be easier for them to claim for this ,object to that,than contribute to our already weak economy.


How Idiotic

Posted on 26-10-2012 14:50 | By AratakiJive

Biting the hand that feeds them. Where does the Ngati Ruahine think the money comes from? From overseas exports. Of course this is absolutely NOTHING to do with thge harbours well being and everything to do with another handout to appease the delicate nature of Iwi members.. sheesh!


Go for costs

Posted on 26-10-2012 14:54 | By Phailed

What a ridiculous waste of money. I hope iwi aren't getting legal aid for this. What they should get is a large bill for the Port's legal costs if they lose or withdraw. Thank goodness for the Port, a beacon of light in a sea of beneficaries.


Rastus

Posted on 26-10-2012 16:11 | By rastus

Iwi you are losing respect from so many including other maori who depend upon such ventures as the port provides for their income - get real and applaud sensible - responsible development.


Give me money

Posted on 26-10-2012 17:24 | By hapukafin

I bet they all keep putting out their hands for money and benifits


Who Pays Costs

Posted on 26-10-2012 17:31 | By Jitter

Who is paying the cost of lawyers and court costs for this appeal ? I hope the iwi are paying their own and it is not dumped on the taxpayer - AGAIN ! This is ridiculous. Every time anyone tries to make a move to take the country forward into the future, an iwi, the Waitangi tribunal or the Maori Council try and stop it.Do they want NZ to revert to the situation it was in during the 19th century ? They obviously do. All this talk about conservation is about one thing only as we all know. How much money can iwi extract from the taxpayers and ratepayers. Absolutely disgusting.


Hapu should buy shares

Posted on 26-10-2012 17:56 | By Johnney

I would recommend the hapu buy some shares in the Port of Tauranga. Pipi's live in the shallow water so deepening the channel will make no difference. Do you ever see hapu gathering kaimoana in the shipping channel. If they take this back to court I hope they pay their own legal costs.


IWI

Posted on 26-10-2012 18:01 | By PLONKER

Really want the shares, that is what it is really about.


port development.

Posted on 26-10-2012 19:56 | By Glen Clova

It will all be fixed with money,just you wait and see.


Persphone...

Posted on 26-10-2012 22:06 | By The author of this comment has been removed.

Whats the odds that none of the iwi work at all?


Enough is Enough

Posted on 26-10-2012 23:00 | By carpedeum

How ridiculous this local tribe is being- just get over it and stop waiting to be offered money to go away- try and develop the best interests of all NZ and all NZers instead of self interest for a change


Iwi obstruction

Posted on 26-10-2012 23:16 | By Pamax

Just exactly who are these iwi? The applicants (PoT)and their objectives are well known,they are "up front" and open for all to see, but these iwi persons are invisible, hide behind tribal titles and refuse to be open with the community they live in. We all understand and respect persons with different views but transparency is part of democracy and if these iwi won't voluntarily stand up and be counted the media should publicly name and shame them.


Ouch

Posted on 27-10-2012 10:11 | By Fun in the Sun

Not a lot of support for the IWI here?


JEROEN

Posted on 27-10-2012 17:59 | By YOGI

You noticed that to, but well that is not really a surprise as the "education" provided since 1975 and perhaps before is to just decide on a claim for something you want, have it rubber stamped by the Waitangi Tribunal and then it is yours to take. The problem here uis that PoT are allowed to place an objective arguement ahead of IWI (something they are not acustomed to) and so the claim goes nowhere. Anyway the subject of money has already been raised and quantified and it is in line with the over the top claims, call it a desire for history to repeat as has been the case to date from Government coffers, this time it is not so easy as there is no case. Yes I agree with costs being awarded against the IWI to date, and again for this one to, there is economic losses for PoT also.


LOOK BEHIND THE MIRRORS

Posted on 29-10-2012 12:55 | By YOGI

Looks to me that there si a lot of feelings about IWI and the money grabbing ways, feeble attempt to try and hide that behind environmental, nature and conservation. I think that many are now only starting to see what it is all really about now.


sadly

Posted on 29-10-2012 18:33 | By dero

iwi are not doing themselves any favours.the myth of harmonious ,spirit driven,conservationists has steadaly eroded with time.cant keep blameing pakehas forever.maybe we will see litagation between tribes for injustices done.


DERO

Posted on 29-10-2012 23:07 | By YOGI

Maori blaming Maori? unlikely they are on a gravy train like none ever before right now, in some cases on the fourth round of claims. Like don't kid yourself that the current path there is no need of change as it has been more than encouraged and fruitful to the few recipiants.


haters

Posted on 30-10-2012 09:23 | By wazzock

I find it incredible the amount of bile and hate poured out when a group of people pursue their lawful rights in the courts of the land. We all have these hard won rights. Far too many of us take them for granted and are willing to strip others of the opportunity to be heard.


WAZZOCK

Posted on 30-10-2012 13:17 | By PLONKER

You are right generally of course, however in this particular case the claims made relate to seeking leverage by IWI over PoT, IWI have already made it very clear that they want some KOHA from this, that means cash or kind paid to consent to the PoT plans. End result the IWI are trying to use legal due process to further their own personal financial gains from all of this and from behind the skirt of IWI.


LAWFUL RIGHTS?

Posted on 30-10-2012 17:21 | By YOGI

Sorry WAZZOCK mate, I am a bit confused here, are you referring to the free for all IWI handouts from taxpayers or what?


Why?

Posted on 30-10-2012 19:43 | By Kiritiwa

I'd be interested to know why my earlier post wasn't put up here. Plonker if you had actually read the article and the judgment of the High Court, the Port's application for resource consent to dredge was granted with conditions, one being the requirement to establish a trust with iwi and port members, to be funded by the Port, for the mitigation of adverse environmental impacts of sites significant to iwi/hapu. This proposition was rejected by the appealant and in taking this to the Court of Appeal it is rejected again, no this is not about handouts its about drawing a idealogical line in the sand regarding care for the environment v economic growth. Its sad to see that so many people use this thread to spread bile instead of making reasoned arguments


WHAT IS IN A NAME?

Posted on 30-10-2012 22:04 | By YOGI

"I Want It" that is about what IWI stands for I reckon.


JUST ABOUT ONE THING

Posted on 31-10-2012 09:03 | By PLONKER

The money, I would be fully in support of the claims made possibly if it was about the environment or some harm somewhere and some how, yet that has little to do with it all.


arguments

Posted on 31-10-2012 10:22 | By wazzock

well, I thought my earlier post was pretty clear on the position that every single one of us have rights to argue against decisions in the courts. If we take these rights away from some groups in our society, what options are left to the people who feel they have no voice??


WAZZOCK

Posted on 01-11-2012 12:13 | By PLONKER

You were clear before, but missed 1/2 the picture, the part where this is all about the money and nothing to do with the envirnment.


outdated

Posted on 01-11-2012 17:30 | By [email protected]

I'm sorry the waka has been superseded by larger more functional vessels that sometimes need deeper water.


SECURITY FOR COSTS

Posted on 02-11-2012 12:54 | By TERMITE

I hope POT applies for this and gets it, also the delay in the thrice approved expansion of the port is costing millions of lost revenue to the local economy. Compensation should also be paid as well.


WAKA

Posted on 02-11-2012 14:39 | By TERMITE

Defintiely not sea worthy, seems almost 'magical' that a Waka could make it the thousands of nautical miles to NZ from where ever the nearest Islands are + 'wandering' distances added by the seas currents and the wind. Coconuts can only last one so long while at sea and in a hollowed out log.


GREAT PROJECT FOR POT

Posted on 04-11-2012 11:16 | By PLONKER

Looks to me to be a great project, pitty the extra cost and delays by IWI, in fact many from all walks of life locally would benefit.


WASTE COURTS TIME

Posted on 04-11-2012 22:20 | By PLONKER

I think that would be best that this one should be withdrawn, and let teh Port get on with business.


.

Posted on 05-11-2012 07:21 | By Dollie

This is not healthy debate SUNLIVE. Most of the above comments are repetitive and actually harm race relations in Tauranga. It is a lawful process that is being pursued by the iwi group, just like any other person or group has.


DOLLIE

Posted on 05-11-2012 15:16 | By YOGI

This has been a wonderful debate raging onward here, it is placing many issues in the public arena and testing them with genuine and real commentary from many, this should only be encouraged and made more open and wide spread than is already the case now.


To Dollie

Posted on 06-11-2012 23:27 | By Dollie

I agree with the point of view from Arguments. That is the democratic system. That's what we are aren't we? Snide comments are unhelpful. Dislike.


DOLLIE

Posted on 07-11-2012 10:23 | By PLONKER

The problem here is that generally the claims of Maori are not "tested" and as such the decisions of the Witangi Tribunal amoutn to little more than that of an advocate for the cause. Without well rounded, objective, robust and strong process most will sooner or later lose any respect for the decisions made. That is what is happening here. If one listens to the same tune over and over again the results will become the same (aka Rev John Jones)


Plonker

Posted on 07-11-2012 13:23 | By Kiritiwa

The issue of the Port being granted consent to dredge the harbour has nothing to do with the Waitangi Tribunal. The appeal that is being filed by the appellant (Ngati Ruahine) is a lawful process that is open to any party to legal proceedings following a Court judgement that was not in their favour. This is the process that both Dollie and Wozzack refer to. Whether the appeal is an abuse of process is for that appellate Court to consider and if they so determine, this is often reflected in a refusal to hear the matter or an award of costs to the other party. At the end of the day not everyone agrees with the outcome of a Court case but an issue is put to no greater test than when it is heard in Court - particularly at High Court/Court of Appeal/Supreme Court level. People who suggest that the appeallant is doing this for money and being publicly funded to do so have no idea of the costs involved in pursuing a matter to the Court of Appeal and the difficulty of getting a grant of legal aid in Civil litigation. There is no financial gain to be made if the appellant is successful merely the knowledge that the Port cannot change our harbour any further - that I imagine to the appellant is priceless.


ROLLIE DOLLIE?

Posted on 07-11-2012 19:06 | By YOGI

Democratic, now where did you get that idea from, The Waitangi Tribunal does not allow anyone to see, comment, respond and disect the claims made through the Tribunal, could you tell me how that is "Democratic" or even perhaps 'fair', equitable. In fact could you tell me what you would describe that system/process as. PS please do confine yourself to words within the Collins English dictionary.


Dollie

Posted on 07-11-2012 19:35 | By Dollie

The Waitangi Tribunal is not the only place that Maori debate. Maori argue their points in front of the courts that are open to all too as with the Dredging case where there are statutory provisions. They argue with the same robustness expected in any court. As in any profession, there is craft involved and I'm sure you would agree.


DOLLIE

Posted on 08-11-2012 15:58 | By YOGI

I agree on the different places to argue teh points, however what is obvious is that the Witangi Tribunal is 100% one way, the real courts are 0% as in this case of the PoT, I guess the WT results v's a real court explains teh generally positive attitude to "I can not lose" idea that prevails and so the appeals continue endlessly.


HERE NOW IS A PRIVOLEDGE

Posted on 09-11-2012 13:48 | By Schroden-Fraude Bob

To be ehre in NZ today to witness the unravelling of the "Treaty-gate" con upon all New Zealanders for the benefit of a few self appointed beneficiaries.


Dollie

Posted on 09-11-2012 21:18 | By Dollie

To Rollie Dollie - Can you make Official Information Requests for the the claims that are made to the Waitangi Tribunal? That is the government process. Thank you Plonkers - you have put my case clearly, far better than I.


BRAIN DOLLIE

Posted on 11-11-2012 13:03 | By PLONKER

No, thankyou, you clearly missed the entire intent and facts of what was said, please try to read again with an open mind.


SECRET CLOSED MEETINGS

Posted on 12-11-2012 23:21 | By PLONKER

OIA's dont help when when the meetings are all secret and 'confidential' and all that?? That is why they have them of course.


The question is ...?

Posted on 13-11-2012 18:43 | By Schroden-Fraude Bob

Do we want one nation, one people? or do we want a multi-layered society where a few are paid money from the rest of us because of the colour of the self-proclaimed colour of the skin (claimed pedegree is something else?) The vote at the meeting yesterday was 98%/2%. I will let you guess who were the 2%.


Sailornz

Posted on 15-11-2012 11:59 | By Sailornz

Can't the Iwi see that the money spent on Court cases would be better spent on bettering the lives of their members.Educating kids & feeding them is better than fighting others.


SAILOR NZ

Posted on 15-11-2012 22:07 | By YOGI

To much Huto


@ SAILORNZ

Posted on 17-11-2012 19:07 | By PLONKER

The couple of claimants do not want the money for the betterment of the general members of IWI, the claims are not about that, they are about the fat cats in Wellington feasting off all of the taxpayers of NZ. It is about the rich getting richer, power and control. Don't you think for a moment that the general populous of IWI will see much if anything of the claims paid out to IWI.


MAORI SOLD IT

Posted on 19-11-2012 00:01 | By PLONKER

I have seen a set of paperwork that clearly shows that loal Maori sold the lands of and around the port to other Maori (not local). That land was then taken by the War Act in the 1940's, the land was not returned nor was compo paid. A futher claim was lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal and they have not yet been able to even acknwledge that it is on their desk. So that then challenges the local IWI claims and the validity of the Waitangi Tribunal.


Kreaming the Koha

Posted on 21-11-2012 17:48 | By RORTSCAM

Money money money its all about money nothing else matters.Want to control the development and the money trail forever and ever or in blunt terms a never ending gravy train.


Dollie

Posted on 21-11-2012 21:57 | By Dollie

Please enlighten us Plonker - who sold what to who and what is your source so we can all read about it


@ RORTSCAM

Posted on 24-11-2012 10:39 | By TERMITE

It has never been about anything else.


untitled

Posted on 24-11-2012 15:43 | By Te Ponui

The last time the entrance was blasted to clear some rock shelves was about the same time the kelp beds disappeared. Just take a look at some old postcards and see how much has changed. What further impact has this had on the harbour? Good on anyone who opposes a free ticket to exploit our beautiful harbour.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.