Where we have come from;

This kōrero was written by Pat Tauroa for the purposes of an online presentation on 11th February 2022. The purpose was to outline the involvement of Whangaroa in the Waitangi Tribunal process.  

I have been asked to utilise this zoom time to share with you all how Whangaroa came to be in this Waitangi Tribunal process. 

So, to begin at the beginning: 

1.The Treaty of Waitangi: Te Tiriti O Waitangi: 

I have listed the relevant decisions of the Crown regarding The Treaty of Waitangi, that have brought the Settlement animal alive.  These are just  key points and if you want to know more you can read more by logging onto these items on the internet. 

How many signed Te Tiriti? About 540 Māori;  

How many signed The Treaty? About 39 Māori.   

There are nine copies of the Treaty at Archives New Zealand, including the Treaty in Māori signed on 6 February 1840. All but one of these copies is written in longhand, and only one is in English. The original document in English has not been located. 

2. Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 – New Zealand Legislation 

The Treaty of Waitangi Act provides for the observance, and confirmation, of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi.  

3. Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 – established the Waitangi Tribunal to deal with Te Tiriti grievances. 

On the 10th October 1975 – The Tribunal concluded that governments had breached the treaty on countless occasions since 1840, and that Pākehā New Zealand had been built on many broken promises and bad deals. 

4. The Waitangi Tribunal is not a court. 

 It was established as a permanent commission of inquiry, its method of investigation differs significantly from that of a court in several important respects: Generally, the Tribunal has authority only to make recommendations. 

 Claims to the Waitangi Tribunal are allegations that the Crown has breached the Treaty of Waitangi by particular actions, inactions, laws, or policies and that Māori have suffered prejudice (harmful effects) as a result. 

5. Crown Forest Assets Act 1989. – New Zealand Legislation.

 Every forest that comprises principally exotic trees growing or standing on Crown forest land; 

The Crown Forestry Rental Trust (CFRT):

The Crown Forestry Rental Trust was set up under the Crown Forest Assets Act 1989, after the New Zealand Māori Council and the Federation of Māori Authorities took court action to protect Māori interests in the Crown’s commercial forests. 

The Act allowed the Crown to sell licences for forestry, but prevented it from selling the land itself until the Waitangi Tribunal recommends who has ownership of the land – Māori or the Crown. 

 CFRT provides funding to eligible Māori claimants to prepare, present and negotiate claims against the Crown, which involve, or could involve, Crown forest licensed lands, and the accumulated rental fees for all Crown forest licensed lands are returned to successful claimants who are the confirmed beneficiaries as a result of achieving negotiated settlements with the Crown. If, at the end of the Trust’s operational life, it retains any Trust funds (which have not been returned to successful claimants), these funds will be returned to the Crown.

7. Forestry Agreement 1989

Made between the Crown, and the NZMC and FOMA, plus the amending Deed made on 17 October 1989. 

8. Runanga A Iwi Act 1990:  Runanga Iwi Act Repeal Act 1991

While the Act was passed in 1990 – it was repealed in 1991.  These are the Political Actions that have been taken to address Māori concerns regarding Crown breaches of Te Tiriti O Waitangi: The Treaty of Waitangi.

9. Te Runanga O Whaingaroa

Established in 1987 by the kaumātua living in Whangaroa then. This included: Nuki Smith, Haupuru (Wallace) Heta; Charlie Hikuwai;  Iwa Alker; Ihapera Baker; Hakopa Adams;  Marlin Epiha; Sam Williams,  H. Heta, Te Uru Heta, Ihaka Riwhi, Turo Tepania.  Wilfred & Elizabeth Peterson,  Wake and Henry Tua; Poihakena Kira, Doreen Renata, Hemirua Rapata and others. These kaumātua as a group, met with kaumātua from each of the rohe bordering Whangaroa to gain their agreement that Whangaroa was an iwi and rohe in its own right.    

Te Rohe o Whangaroa was designated by Taitokerau kaumātua in 1945 with a whakatauki  delivered by Arapata Taniora.   That rohe whakatauki is maintained still by Te Runanga O Whaingaroa.   

Due to the area described in the Whakatauki, it was determined by the Whangaroa kaumātua that the Runanga would include those who define Whangaroa as their hau kainga even though they whakapapa to Ngāti Kahu and Ngāpuhi. In reality it was established as  Te Runanga O Ngāpuhi ki Whangaroa and Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa.   

The Runanga was formally registered  with a Constitution in 1991.  Just for the record I was not a Board member of Te Runanga O Whaingaroa prior to 1991. I became the Treasurer following its registration. 

The discussion on whether it should be Whaingaroa or Whangaroa continues.

10. I note that due to the Arapata Taniora rohe determination, Whangaroa does not lie within Te Whare Tapu o Ngāpuhi. 

I timatanga i Oruru tae noa ki te awa o Orua-iti. Me huri aku kamo ki te whatu o Parikihana i Mangonui-Taipa. I hakawhiti atu ana ki Maungataniwha ki Te Hauauru o Otangaroa tae noa atu ki te ngahere o nga puki tiitii o te waka o Mataatua.

I rere tenei o nga manga ra roto whenua, ra runga whanuia o Waipapa, Te Whau, Upokorau.
I marere atu au ki te moana o Takou ki te awa o Te Kaua Kawau te wahi i takoto mai ana te waka tupuna o Mataatua.

Toro atu ki te takutai o Te Rawhiti me huri ana te kanohi ki te Pokopoko o Hinenui Po me te Urenui o Mauipotiki. Mai Te Aukanapanapa, he tohu mo te ara taku tai moana tae noa atu ki te tuawhenua ki Tangitu.

11. Registration of Wai 58: the Whangaroa claim. 

The Wai 58 claim was filed by the Whangaroa Māori Executive in October 1987.  The named claimant was Terry Smith, representing the Tribes of Whangaroa. 

In 1992 the Kaumātua who were also members of Te Runanga O Whaingaroa moved a Runanga motion to transfer the claim to Te Runanga O Whaingaroa with Hiwi Tauroa as the named claimant. This motion was carried and actioned by the Waitangi Tribunal.    

12. Waitangi Tribunal : Crown Forest Rental Trust: Te Taumata o Tangitū

Early in 1993,  CFRT began resourcing claimants who held claims over Crown Forest lands.   This included the Otangaroa Forests claimed by Wai 58.   Funding was made available for further research. To receive funding a stand-alone group was required to be formed:   

This body was called Te Taumata O Tangitū.  

Members were: Hiwi Tauroa (Claimant); Te Uru Heta (Chairman) Nuki Aldridge (Co-ordinator). Committee members: Poihakena Kira, Leo Bowman, Paraire Eruera; Dan Pehi; Nancy Harris;  Hariata Strongman. Kaimahi were:  Secretary treasurer – Pat Tauroa; Administration – Doreen Puru; Research Oversigh – Aroha Harris: Researchers: Pita Pangari; Lucy Te Awa; Tony Tuoro; Reuben Taniora; Anania Hohaia.  Archives – Kawhi Kārena.   

Funding was received for about 18 months when CFRT changed its funding criteria.  At that time the 1995 CRFT Reported Otangaroa State Forest Claim as being “unique.” – largely as it claimed 10 Crown forestry blocks under one claim – Wai 58.  CFRT ceased funding in 1995. 

From this period on, Te Taumata o Tangitū, although not officially active, continued to meet as a body for Judicial Conference meetings and also held regular meetings with Waimate Taiamai and  Hokianga claimants with Ngāti Hine and Whangārei claimants often attending meetings.   

The objective was to maintain our groups and to maintain continued communications with CRFT.  Although Te Taumata O Tangitū was not operating fully, I attended  all meetings as Te Taumata o Tangitū; Poihakena Syd Kira, Leo Pomana and other Whangaroa whānau often attended those meetings as well.

• Click here for Te Taumata o Tangitū, April 1995 (booklet)

13. Waitangi Tribunal : The Ngāpuhi Design Group 

In the 1990s the Waitangi Tribunal held regular Judicial Conferences at Waitangi for Northland claimants and these were always attended by Te Taumata O Tangitū members.  Over these years, Sonny Tau and Titewhai Harawira constantly requested that the Tribunal should hear Ngāpuhi claims.   Consequently, at a Judicial Hearing in 1995* Judge Williams instructed Ngāpuhi to form into a Group representing the eight CFRT regions in the north to Design a Hearing Process for Ngāpuhi: Thus, the Ngāpuhi Design Group was formed.                                                                                                                                                      

14. Ngāpuhi Design Group

The Ngāpuhi Design Group began meeting immediately, under the chairmanship of Sonny Tau.  All those who held claims were entitled to attend the Design Group meetings.  The first Whangaroa representatives on the Ngāpuhi Design group were Tāhua Murray and Erimana Tāniora.  Both were not able to attend regularly and eventually each withdrew: Whangaroa representation was then maintained by Pat Tauroa.  Meetings were open to any, and all interested persons. 

Much of the Ngāpuhi Design Group energies and time was taken up with educating many of the members about the Tribunal hearings processes.   Also there was a constant reminder by legal counsel that the Tribunal was restricted in the period that they could hear claims on and that this could not include actions of the Crown prior to 1840. After several  months with zero progress on a recommended process, Sonny Tau required that each rohe group was to return to the next hui with a written specific plan as to how they proposed that the hearings be held.                                                                                  

A meeting to formulate a Whangaroa proposal was called.  Just two people attended that meeting – Ani Taniwha and myself – Pat Tauroa.  By chance, Mike Smith was in Kaeo and we asked him to join us and help us come up with an idea to take back to the Design Group.   

Eventually our recommendation was that the Waitangi Tribunal must immediately hold a hearing on the relationship between He Wakaputanga: The Declaration of Independence and Te Tiriti O Waitangi.  We insisted that the relationship must be based on the Māori versions of Te Tiriti and He Wakaputanga.  

Following that hearing the Tribunal  could then realistically hear evidence on the breaches of Te Tiriti O Waitangi.  On presenting our Whangaroa proposal to the Ngāpuhi Design Group meeting, it was immediately endorsed by all those present.  The Waitangi Tribunal accepted the Proposed Design presented by the Ngāpuhi Design Group. 

15. Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa  

At a regular monthly meeting of Te Runanga O Whaingaroa in 2001 a request was presented by Pita Pangari for the Runanga members to agree to the withdrawal of Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa from Te Runanga O Whaingaroa. Pita Pangari’s Wai 116 Taemaro claim had been heard during the final stages of the Waitangi Tribunal Muriwhenua Wai 45 hearings and he requested the withdrawal so that he could progress his claim through negotiations and settlement as Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa.   

Following considerable discussions, Wake Tua, who held the Kaitangata Wai 258 claim, stated that he would place his claim with Wai 116  and  also seek progression as Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa.  With the majority of the meeting in agreement,  the withdrawal of Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa from the Te Runanga o Whaingaroa Board was approved.  

It is understood that in recent years, the marae of Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa have rejoined Te Runanga o Whaingaroa Board. 

• Click here for Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017

16. Crown Forestry Rental Trust : Whangaroa Papa Hapū

Early in 2003, Crown Forestry Rental Trust had revised their processes and began again funding Wai claimants to research their claims.   Any claim that could include Crown Forests would be resourced to carry out research.  Crown Forest Rental Trust kaimahi met with Te Taumata o Tangitū to advise of their new process and to consider participation.    

Whangaroa claimants at that time who agreed to work collaboratively to proceed with their claims were: Wai 58 -Hiwi Tauroa; Wai 919 -Ivy Williams; Wai 179 – seconded by Ani Taniwha and Syd Kira; Wai 230 – Dover Samuels – seconded to Pat Tauroa; Wai 1312 – Kana Pourewa with Tarzan & Waereti Hori.        

Membership of the Whangaroa Papa Hapū at that time were: Uru Heta – Chairman, Syd Kira, Ani Taniwha, Hiwi Tauroa, Kana Pourewa, Ivy Williams, Iwa Alker, Toka Williams, Pat Tauroa – (on behalf of Dover Samuels).  Erimana Taniora was appointed secretary, Pat Tauroa – treasurer. Other people joined the Papa Hapū as they saw fit to do so.   New members were Nuki Aldridge, Bryce Smith, Louisa Collier, Rihari Dargaville, Iris Niha, Ihapera Baker, Tāhua Murray, Louie Kātene, Tarzan & Violet Hori amongst others. 

Te Uru Heta remained as Chairman and requested that Te Taumata o Tangitū be renamed Whangaroa Papa Hapū to ensure that all hapū of Whangaroa would be able to participate whether or not they held an individual claim.   

Other existing claimants and future claimants were free to join the Papa Hapu if they choose to.  However, those five claimants agreed to a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that would see them work together. Future claimants wanting to join were required to also agree to the MoU.  Whangaroa Papa Hapū was resourced by CFRT to begin preparation of their claims for presentation to hearings. 

The Waitangi Tribunal had also widened its claims scope and many individuals and whānau filed claims with the Waitangi Tribunal.  Many within the Whangaroa rohe choose to join with the Whangaroa Papa Hapū to progress their claims while others presented through other claimant groups. 

The following additions have been made to the original Wai 58 claim:  

• In June 1992 the Kohumaru Station was added following the Tribunal upholding an injunction  being placed by Patricia Tauroa and Ihapera Baker on the proposed sale of the station;  
• October 1992 Geothermal resources was also added to Wai 58;
• In June 1996 Whangaroa Hospital Board land was added when an injunction was placed by Hiwi Tauroa on the proposed sale by the then National Hospital Board Authority;  
• In August 1997 Hiwi Tauroa placed an injunction on the Old Kaeo Post Office to prevent its sale by Far North District Council; 
• In December 1997 a block of land in Turner street, Kaeo was also added to the Wai 58 claim. 

It is noted that the above amendments and interactions with the Waitangi Tribunal occurred prior to the Waitangi Tribunal Hearings process for Northland claims.   

From 2005-2006, Wharehuia Hemara was commissioned to compile the Whangaroa Scoping Report. This was a first step towards the compilation of a larger project, conducting interviews, wānanga and research for the Whangaroa Oral and Traditional History Report.

• Click here for Scoping Report (pp. 1-47)
• Click here for Scoping Report (pp. 48-76)
• Click here for Oral and Traditional History Report for Te Rohe o Whangaroa, July 2013

17. Te Paparahi O Te Raki Hearings Process

Stage One 

The Ngāpuhi Design Group at one of its early meetings, considered a name for the Hearing Process.  It was generally agreed that Tai Tokerau did not adequately cover the whole of the area that was covered by the claims.  Ngāpuhi Hearings was also not favoured as many people held more significant whakapapa to hapū other than Ngāpuhi.   

Matua Patu Hōhepa eventually nominated the name Te Paparahi o Te Raki which includes the area from the North Shore of Te Waitematā to a line from Whāngapē harbour to north of the Whangaroa Harbour. This was unanimously approved. 

The first Te Paparahi o Te Raki hearings the – Stage One Hearings – were held at Te Tii marae Waitangi between May 2010 and February 2011. 

18. 2014 Stage One Report

The Stage One Report is the result of the hearings of claims made by kaumātua from around Ngāpuhi and the Te Paparahi o te Raki rohe, who presented evidence regarding the relevance of He Wakaputanga to and with Te Tiriti O Waitangi in terms of Te Ao Māori tikanga and kaupapa. 

The Stage One Report of the Waitangi Tribunal was handed over to Māori at the Te Tii Marae, Waitangi on the 15 November 2014. 

 In essence the Report found that Ngāpuhi did not cede their rangatiratanga to the Crown in 1840 at the signing of Te Tiriti O Waitangi. 

 19. Te Paparahi O Te Raki Stage Two

Following the completion of the Stage One hearings, claimants continued with their preparations of presentation of claims to put before the Waitangi Tribunal in Stage Two of the process to present claims of injustices against the actions of the Crown. Around 420 claims were heard in the Te Paparahi o te Raki hearings.   

The Waitangi Tribunal  stipulated 14 Statements of Issues (click here to view) that they wished to hear evidence of injustices on, with a further two issues relating to two specific sub-regions. 

1. Tino Rangatiratanga, Kāwanatanga and Autonomy;  Political engagement between Maori and the Crown.  
2. Old Land Claims, Scrip and Surplus Lands. 
3. The Northern War, 1844 – 1846 
4. Crown Pre-emption and Acquisition of Māori land, 1840-1865.   
5. The Native Land Court, 1865-19  
6. Māori Land Alienation, 1865- 1900.  
7. Twentieth Century Alienation, Retention, Titling and Administration of Māori Land 
8. Public Works and Other Takings  
9. Local Government and Rating  
10. Ownership and Management of Environmental, Water and other non-land resources 
11. Takutai Moana/Foreshore and Seabed.  
12. Economic Development and Capabilty  
13. Socio-economic Issues 
14. Te Reo Māori, Wāhi Tapu, Taonga and Tikanga Remaining sub-regions 

By the completion of the Hearings Phase, 21 Whangaroa claimants had signed the Memorandum of Understanding to affiliate to the Whangaroa Papa Hapū. They were/are:

WHANGAROA PAPA HAPŪ AFFILIATED CLAIMANTS
Wai No.	Named Claimant/s	Affiliation Date
58	Patricia Tauroa	4 Dec 2013
230	Dover Samuels, Patricia Tauroa	4 Dec 2013
375	Anaru Kira	5 May 2015
523	Anaru Kira	5 May 2015
919	Ivy Williams	10 Mar 2014
1253	Dover Samuel	4 Dec 2013
1312	Karanga and Hinemoa Pourewa, Tarzan and William Hori	2 May 2013
1333	Erimana Taniora	1 April 2015
1613	Eric and Hikuwai Hikuwai	12 Mar 2015
1643	Louie Katene, Emma Puru, William Puru	5 Dec 2013
1661	Moana Wood and Waitangi Wood	26 June 2014
1666	Ani Taniwha	22 Nov 2013
1722	Iris Niha	12 Dec 2013
1832	Owen Hape-Kingi	22 Nov 2013
1843	Terry Tauroa and Lane Tauroa	2 Dec 2013
1846	Sailor Morgan	3 Dec 2013
1848	Anthony Paki	12 Mar 2015
1968	Reuben Porter	26 Sep 2015
1943	Audrey Leslie	22 Nov 2013
2149	Amelia Taniwha	22 Nov 2013
2389	Tahua Murray, Kawhena Paul, Wiki Todd	1 Dec 2013

Several more Whangaroa claimants were supported with resourcings, communications and in preparing their submissions.

‘Resourcing’ includes the loan of equipment, providing travel assistance and support for claimant hui for instance.

‘In Communications’ indicates that claimants were in engaged with governance and/or management, and at times, attending Whangaroa Papa Hapū facilitated hui.

Preparing Submissions’ indicates that assistance was provided to Claimants in some manner, for example research documents, mapping assistance or loan of office equipment.

They were/are:

WHANGAROA TAIWHENUA CLAIMANTS SUPPORTED BY WHANGAROA PAPA HAPŪ
	Wai No	Named Claimant	Current Status in Inquiry	Supported	In Comms	Preparing Submission
1	179	Ruiha Collier	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
2	234	Hemi Rua Rapata	Rohe participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
3	295	Tarewa Rota	Awaiting re-amalgamation to Wai1040		Yes	Yes
4	515	Wilfred Peterson	Amalgamated with Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa	Yes	Yes
5	517	Wilfred Peterson	Amalgamated with Ngāti Kahu ki Whangaroa	Yes	Yes
6	573	Mere Apiata, Kevin Samuels	Unrepresented.	Yes	Yes
7	1249	Pairama Tahere	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
8	1259	Eru Lyndon	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
9	1380	Trevor Rakena	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes
10	1400	Paddy Paki	Unrepresented.	Yes	Yes	Yes
11	1487	Florence & Don Bishop	Unrepresented		Yes
12	1536	Mary Ann Baker	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes
13	1540	Naomi Epiha	Rohe participant		Yes	Yes
14	1673	Ann Davies	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
15	1681	Popi Tahere	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
16	1838	William & Tai Hikuwai	Rohe participant		Yes	Yes
17	1849	Wiremu Samuels	Rohe participant		Yes
18	1850	Hera Epiha	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes
19	1851	John Terewi	Unrepresented		Yes
20	1852	Nau & Hohepa Epiha	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes
21	1917	Rihari Dargaville	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
22	1918	Mataroria Lyndon	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes
23	2148	Haylee Rhodes	Rohe participant		Yes
24	2151	Mireama Stewart	Rohe participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
25	2179	Rihari & Lucy Dargaville	Rohe/Inquiry participant	Yes	Yes
26	2254	Lissette Rawson	Rohe participant.		Yes	Yes
26	2371	Lissette & Kylie Rawson	Rohe participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
28	2376	Nuki Aldridge	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
29	2377	Nuki Aldridge, Bryce Smith	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes	Yes
30	2382	Nuki Aldridge	Rohe/Inquiry Participant	Yes	Yes	Yes

20. Te Kotahitanga  

The wider rohe groupings, including Whangaroa, continued to maintain their groups, meetings and relationships across the wider Taitokerau rohe meeting together as Te Kotahitanga.   Meetings were held regularly and unity of purpose was maintained.   

At a Kotahitanga meeting in Kaikohe in October 2015*  members were made aware that the Ngāpuhi Runanga had formed Tūhoronuku – a body that would take Ngāpuhi claims through the settlement process.  Tūhoronuku was agreed to and funded by the Crown.

21. Tūhoronuku

The forming of Tūhoronuku by the Ngāpuhi Runanga, and its endorsement by the Crown, did cause concern.  To ensure that Whangaroa was kept up to date with that process, three Whangaroa hapu elected representatives were appointed to be on the Tuhoronuku Board.    The eventual establishment of the Maranga Mai process did go some way towards progressing a claims process for negotiations and redress.  However, its eventual demise – however much some tried to bring about unity, was doomed to failure. 

AND HERE WE STAND TODAY.  WHAT HAVE OUR GAINS BEEN? 

In short the positive I see is a Waitangi Tribunal finding that Māori did not cede their sovereignty when our tupuna signed Te Tiriti.                     

Yes the Crown gives us opportunities to voice our concerns:  they listen with deaf ears and go on doing what they wish to do. 

They have established a Sovereignty Fund to invest in commercial entities: commercial entities that are already polluting the environment. 

There is still a process that we need to embrace and vary where necessary if we wish to see sound progress and eventual redress for the wrongs dealt out to our tūpuna Māori and our people by the succession of Crown entities, Governments and all other bodies that have refused to acknowledge the Tino Rangatiratanga that our tūpuna held so strongly to. Now it’s our turn to hold onto our Tino Rangatiratanga. 

If we want to see any redress in our foreseeable future, then the processes that are needed to achieve that outcome, are here with us right now:  we need to work on them; promote them and action them: for our hapū, our tūpuna, our tamariki, our future and ourselves. 

There is still a long way to go and a lot of mahi to be done. A few are not able to do that mahi on their own. 

SO….WHAT DO YOU SEE AS A WAY FORWARD?   

IS THE PAPA HAPU ON THE RIGHT TRACK?  IF NOT – WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS? 

WHAT WILL REGISTRATION DO?  REGISTRATION OF WHAT? 

HOW WILL YOUR HAPŪ MAKE PROGRESS?  WILL YOU HELP YOUR HAPŪ? 

WHAT DO WE INCLUDE IN THE TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR WORKING WITH THE CROWN? 

HOW CAN YOU HELP THIS PROCESS TO PROGRESS?