Chris Finlayson remains optimistic about Ngapuhi's settlement

A letter to Treaty minister Chris Finlayson recommended the Crown halt its negotiations. Photo / Stuart Munro

Treaty Minister Chris Finlayson is remaining optimistic about Ngapuhi's settlement despite the Waitangi Tribunal calling for a delay and ructions within the Tuhoronuku negotiating group.

Tuhoronuku is the group which the Government has recognised as having the mandate to negotiate Ngapuhi's settlement. Yesterday it elected academic Hone Sadler as its new chair after Sonny Tau pulled out of the contest at the last minute.

Mr Tau stood down as chair in June while being investigated for allegedly carrying kereru.
He has since been charged. Although he put his name up to seek re-election he pulled out just before the vote yesterday. Mr Sadler's election coincides with the release of a Waitangi Tribunal report recommending negotiations be put on ice until Tuhoronuku could get support from more hapu and hapu were given the chance to decide whether they want to be represented by Tuhoronuku.

Mr Finlayson hoped to complete the Ngapuhi settlement next year and yesterday he remained hopeful of achieving that. He would not commit to halting negotiations as the Tribunal recommended, saying he was yet to fully consider the report and wanted to talk to the leadership of Ngapuhi first.

He said there had been a number of further hapu elections onto Tuhoronuku since the Inquiry had its hearings and about seventy were now represented. "We are making progress. It really is a case of make haste slowly up there. You're never going to be able to get things done in five minutes, so I will be adopting that approach consistent with what I've done over the years." He said other iwi, including Tuhoe, had rocky patches in their settlement processes but those had been sorted out.

Mr Finlayson has previously put some of the problems down to personality conflicts between those on Tuhoronuku and other hapu. Asked if the replacement of Sonny Tau with Hone Sadler could help that, he said "I hope so." "I've known him for years. At the end of the day it's not for me to say who I want to negotiate with. You deal with whomsoever Ngapuhi wants."

Despite Mr Finalyson's optimism some of the hapu which opposed Tuhoronuku believed the Tribunal's report would allow them to break away and settle on their own. Mr Finlayson said the Tribunal itself had expressed support for unity and one settlement.

Hokianga claims leader Rudy Taylor, who is one of those leading the Kotahitanga hapu grouping that opposes Tuhoronuku's mandate, said he hoped Kotahitanga and Tuhoronuku would now sit down and work things through. He said the Tribunal recognised that Tuhoronuku did not properly recognise hapu authority. "It's time to sit down and talk, like the Tribunal says. It's time to put our swords and spears away and let's get down to some real work that we need to have confidence that our people still think the way forward can be Ngapuhi sitting around the table." He said the ruling gave the option to hapu of either staying within Tuhoronuku or leaving. If a lot of hapu pulled out Tuhoronuku could not claim to have a mandate and other hapu collectives could pick it up. He did not believe hapu should break off on their own to settle. "One hapu will not survive on its own. You have to have a natural grouping to work together and find a solution, and then think about what exactly we are settling."

Mr Finlayson said he was pleased the Tribunal had found the Crown had not pre-determined its decision to pick Tuhoronuku and acknowledged the years of genuine talks that preceded the decision. "One always proceeds on the assumption the Crown always losesin the Tribunal, so as far as this report goes it's a pretty good loss."

The Tuhoronuku mandate was challenged by about 15 hapu and iwi which sought the tribunal inquiry. That inquiry found the Crown had acted in good faith during the mandate process and had engaged with those hapu which opposed Tuhoronuku. However, the Crown failed to ensure that Tuhonronuku had the support of hapu. It said there was no need for the mandate process to start again, but negotiations should be put on hold while steps were taken to ensure Tuhoronuku had the support of hapu. The Crown should include a condition that Tuhoronuku would lose its mandate if it lost hapu support. The Government signed the terms of negotiation - the starting line for negotiations - in May. It also criticised the Crown for starting negotiations without any evidence of broad hapu support.
?