Landfill support causes relationship rift

DOME VALLEY LANDFILL do know that you all don’t know with 100% certainty that this proposed site will not cause or create any issues for our environment, particularly downstream and into the Kaipara.”

Only the rejection of Ngāti Manuhiri’s recent agreement to support plans for a new regional landfill in the Dome could fully restore previously good relations between them and Ngāti Whātua.

That was the view expressed by Ngāti Whātua o Ōrākei cultural expert and language and history advocate Joe Pihema when he gave his cultural evidence in the Environment Court this month.

He said that while he accepted that Ngāti Manuhiri had full mana whenua, or authority, over the landfill site itself, and he didn’t have a bad relationship with settlement trust chair Mook Hohneck, there was a dark cloud hanging over Ngāti Whātua over the issue, especially since the trust decided to support the tip.

“There are deep concerns about the downstream and negative effects of any leaching, breaching and all the rest of it,” he said. “I’m not a scientist, but I

Pihema said any “leach or breach” would not only cause an environmental catastrophe but threaten the Hoteo, Kaipara Harbour and the ability of people to feed themselves.

He said it was also seriously affecting the whanaungatanga (kinship) between Ngāti Manuhiri and Ngāti Whātua.

“Whanaungatanga goes up and goes down, it’s fluid. It’s all dependent on the behaviours of the parties involved. It can go so low it’s hard to recapture a sense of camaraderie, friendship and familial ties,” he said. “At the moment, the whanaungatanga with Manuhiri, I’m not overly positive or clear as to where it’s heading.”

Pihema said what any iwi or hapu did was up to them, but hopefully they would take into consideration the broader effects of any decisions made.

“I don’t think Manuhiri have taken into consideration the broader impacts of this cloud that now hangs over Ngāti Whātua,” he said. “I think the only way we can restore a sense of really good whanaungatanga with Ngāti Manuhiri leadership is if Manuhiri rejected the arrangement with Waste Management and we were able to start again on some kind of joint waste minimisation strategy.”

He said there were some decisions made by Manuhiri that caused him to wonder where their whanaungatanga was heading. “They’ve got their objectives and they have their own agenda, and no doubt it’s for their people. I have mine and we have ours for the betterment of our people. Sometimes they clash, we get it,” he said. “But this is one of those situations where it would be very hard to look Mook and others in the eye with a genuine warm feeling in my heart. So, let’s just say it would be tough, but it’s not too late – if Manuhiri rejected the Waste Management proposal and we were able to start again.”

Mook Hohneck said there had been a willingness by everyone to come to the trust’s door and sit with them when they were opposing the landfill, which had shifted to an unwillingness when they had a “difference of opinion”.

Under cross-examination, Hohneck said the change of ownership at WM had led to a different approach by the company and he acknowledged that had WM not put more on the table than just consent conditions, Ngati Manuhiri would not have reversed its position from opposition to support.

He said it was not something done lightly and was all about getting whenua back.

“Before we came to any agreement, we put a lot of hours into discussions, contemplating in our own hui and our own tikanga to come to this position,” he said.

“Getting our whenua back – because we were robbed by everyone between the wars and now – that’s what drives Ngāti Manuhiri. So if land becomes available and all things being equal and we’re happy with the parameters and conditions, then that’s up for consideration.

“We’ve considered it and that’s our decision.”

He said he was aware of the responsibility of looking after the landfill land and its taonga species in 30 years’ time and was confident the trust could carry it out.

Referring to criticism by Omaha Marae trustees, Hohneck said “they should keep quiet and listen to those who our people support to speak for them, or at least respect the decisions that are made”.

Omaha Marae chair Annie Baines said she was shocked to hear how the NMST regarded the marae.

“We are Ngāti Manuhiri. To be a registered member of Ngāti Manuhiri, you must descend from that marae. It’s hurtful to think that we’re maybe just a number (to them) – definitely we are not. We have a voice, we have a voice and we are allowed that voice,” she said.

Baines added that NMST had done nothing to engage with them on the landfill or their decision to support it.