Papawai Marae hosted the Maori Affairs Select Committee hearing. PHOTO/MARY ARGUE
Emotions ran high at Papawai Marae on Friday in a passionate and charged select committee hearing on Te Rohe o Rongokako Joint Redress Bill.
It was a “long, arduous, sore, but beautiful” day that threw the imperfect process of treaty settlements into stark relief.
A process that one negotiator described as seeking the “least worst scenario” for their people.
The bill, which passed its first parliamentary reading in March, would give effect to cultural redress shared between Rangitane o Wairarapa and Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa iwi provided for in deeds of settlement signed in 2016 and 2021.
Cultural redress included reserves at Castlepoint and joint management of Wairarapa Moana and Makirikiri Reserve.
Representatives of Ngati Kahungunu spoke in support of the bill, while the more than 20 submitters from Rangitane opposed the bill due to the shared management arrangement of Makirikiri Reserve.
Both iwi traced whakapapa to the reserve and ancestor, Te Rangiwhakaewa.
Opening submissions for Ngati Kahungunu ki Wairarapa Tamaki nui-a-Rua Settlement Trust, negotiator Robin Potangaroa said the iwi had been waiting patiently for 175 years.
“We know and understand the Crown breaches in taking our land. Our tipuna were left virtually landless.”
He said settling was in the best interest of Ngati Kahungunu while acknowledging “that not everyone is happy”.
Potangaroa said the Crown had made an appropriate decision on Makirikiri Reserve using the evidence available.
He said the painful settlement process was hurtful to both Rangitane and Ngati Kahungunu.
“It’s been a long road, with a lot of knives in the back and in the front and in the side.
“But whanau we’ve all got to get over ourselves, we all know what we have done to each other in this process, but we are still related.
“We have to find a way back together. It stops in our generation.”
Submitting on behalf of Rangitane Tu Mai Ra Trust, treaty negotiator Tipene Chrisp said the equal management of Makirkiri Reserve was the “bone of contention”.
However, he said the issue was not with Ngati Kahungunu but the Crown, and settlements were particularly challenging for smaller iwi.
“My overwhelming impression is that treaty settlements are imperfect. We work hard to get the least worst scenario.
“The frustration our whanau have expressed is around the management arrangement [for Makirikiri].
“Makirikiri all began with Rangitane, and we believe the evidence is overwhelming that two pieces of land are our hapu.”
Aroha Ripeka Kingi said the reserve should be left in the hands and management of Rangitane, and passing the bill in its current state would cause more division than unification.
She said Makirikiri Marae and the kura kaupapa Maori were “built on the foundation of Rangitane” and could not be separated from the reserve.
“They [Ngati Kahungunu] didn’t contribute to the kaupapa or foundation of the kura.”
Doctor Mahani Paewai said there was no easy solution and while Potangaroa’s submission touched him, “sometimes we are pushed into compromise”.
“Haven’t we done enough compromising?”
He said Ngati Kahungunu were not direct descendants of Makirikiri land.
“It should not be used in joint redress, so please do not give us another grievance.”
Charles Tamai Nicholson urged the select committee to come up with a solution that supported the mana whenua of the reserve.
“We’re lost in our reo, and we’ve had to fight for everything. The committee has a job to do. The future of Rangitane is in your hands.”
Rangitane o Tamaki nui-a-Rua trust chair Mavis Mullins said the trust supported Ngati Kahungunu to achieve settlement and the end of the process.
“It is a rotten place to be in, and I welcome getting out of it.”
She said, however, Makirikiri belonged with Rangitane.
“I’m clear about who our ancestors were, and who they are and who I am, and when you have that knowledge, you have a responsibility to uphold it.”
Maori Affairs Select Committee member Harete Hipango said the committee were listening to the submitters.
“We will debate that and take that back around the select committee table.”
Select committee chair Tamati Coffey acknowledged the submitters and the divisive settlement process.
He said it was a difficult hearing.
“Our hearts are full.”
