John MacDonald: Ngāi Tahu Environment Canterbury Ecan Bill unnecessary and wrong

Ngāi Tahu is a step closer to getting permanent seats on Environment Canterbury (Ecan). Photo / Christchurch Star

OPINION:

I had a bit of an epiphany last night when I was driving across town listening to Te Tai Tonga MP Rino Tirikatene on Newstalk ZB talking about the Canterbury Regional Council Ngāi Tahu Representation Bill.

That is the official name of the legislation that's going through Parliament at the moment to allow Ngāi Tahu to appoint two representatives to Environment Canterbury, the regional council.

Tirikatene is the MP responsible for the Bill. And the plan is for these appointments to happen after this year's local body elections.

So the Ngāi Tahu representatives won't be elected, they'll be appointed, over and above the 14 elected council members.

And they won't be appointed by Ecan, they'll be appointed by Ngāi Tahu.

But just like the Ecan councillors who are elected, the non-elected Ngāi Tahu representatives will have full decision-making and voting rights just like any other elected councillor.

Now the fact this Bill is going through Parliament wasn't news to me. I've known about it for a while, as you probably have.

And I've seen and heard some of the anti sentiment that's been coming through about it being undemocratic etc etc.

I suspect some people have been opposed to it just because it's Ngāi Tahu or because it's Māori and they think it's all part of "Jacinda Ardern's communist regime". Tongue firmly in cheek there, by the way.

As for me, I'm all for iwi being part of some of the big decisions facing our country.

An example is iwi representation on the new water authorities the Government wants to set up as part of the Three Waters reforms.

I think the reforms are flawed, but I've had no issue with iwi representation on the water authorities.

And I still don't have an issue with it.

But the epiphany I had last night came when I realised that this legislation to allow Ngāi Tahu to appoint non-elected members to the Canterbury Regional Council, and give them full voting rights, is completely unnecessary.

It's unnecessary because, already, Ecan pretty much doesn't do anything without talking to Ngāi Tahu about it first.

And if Ngāi Tahu puts the kibosh on something, it generally doesn't happen.

This is largely because of the local government legislation that Ecan operates under, but also because of a formal partnership Ecan has had with Ngāi Tahu since 2016, which is known as Tuia.

As Ecan says on its website, Tuia is about the regional council recognising that its work is "inextricably linked" with Ngāi Tahu and its ancestral land.

And I've got no qualms with that because, of course, Ecan exists to oversee the management and protection of Canterbury's natural air and water resources which are sacred to Ngāi Tahu.

They should be sacred to all of us but I think it's fair to say that air and water are well and truly in Ngāi Tahu's DNA.

But I think that this legislation is completely unnecessary and, in fact - I'll go further than that - and say that I think it's wrong.

I think it's unnecessary because Ecan already has this deep relationship with Ngāi Tahu.

And I think it's wrong because legislation will reinstate an arrangement that was in place when the previous National government kicked out all of the Ecan councillors and brought in commissioners.

Remember that?

As part of that arrangement, there were a couple of Ngāi Tahu reps on board. Which made perfect sense when everyone else around that council table was appointed. The place back then was being run by appointed commissioners, not elected councillors.

But things are different now and Ecan is being run by elected councillors.

So bringing in a little bit of the old set-up makes no sense. And it makes even less sense to be appointing people from Ngāi Tahu to sit on the regional council with full voting rights (without being elected) when, already, Ecan doesn't do anything without Ngāi Tahu saying "yes" first.

And it's wrong, simply because it's cherry-picking from a time when regional council democracy in Canterbury was walked all over by the Government.

And, in my mind, you can't have democracy with a side serving of no democracy.

And that is exactly what this is.