Presented by Waimarie McFarland on behalf of Save Our Unique Landscape Campaign (SOUL)

Transcription

1 Presented by Waimarie McFarland on behalf of Save Our Unique Landscape Campaign (SOUL) 5 February 2015

2 Looking at Ihumātao through our eyes 1

3 2

4 3

5 1. PURPOSE OF THIS SUBMISSION THE PETITION THE PETITIONERS: SAVE OUR UNIQUE LANDSCAPE (SOUL) CAMPAIGN Membership of the SOUL Campaign Group Public and political support for the Campaign PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT LAND OWNERSHIP AND POLICY BACKGROUND Timeline of events SPECIAL HOUSING AREA LEGISLATIVE PROBLEMS SHA incorrectly designated Treaty of Waitangi implications SHA 62 breaches the Government s human rights obligations FACTORS OF SIGNIFICANCE CONCERNING THE IHUMĀTAO SITE SHA 62 in context Historical significance of the site Cultural significance of the site Archaeological and geological significance of the site SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF PROPOSED HOUSING DEVELOPMENT Negative impacts on the community and residents of Ihumātao Significant contributions made by the people of Ihumātao to the City of Auckland COMMUNITY EXPECTATION AND DESIRE THAT THE LAND BE RESERVED Plans to reserve the land under the Manukau Gateway Heritage Area Restoration efforts threatened by development of SHA AUCKLAND S HOUSING SHORTAGE COMMUNITY ACTION SOUL Campaign actions RISKS ARISING FROM GOVERNMENT FAILING TO ACT The irredeemable desecration of a site of significance A wound that will continue to fester Loss of confidence in Government decision-making The potential for a protracted struggle and social unrest GOVERNMENT ACTION REQUIRED Immediate Government actions required RECOMMENDATIONS

6 APPENDIX ONE: THE PETITION...33 APPENDIX TWO: LIST OF COMMUNITY LEADERS IN SUPPORT OF SOUL APPENDIX THREE: SOUL TIMES EDITION ONE APPENDIX FOUR: SOUL TIMES EDITION TWO APPENDIX FIVE: HAKI WILSON, AFFIDAVIT TO WAITANGI TRIBUNAL APPENDIX SIX: ZONING MAP OF IHUMĀTAO APPENDIX SEVEN: MAP OF AUCKLAND SHA S: OVERVIEW OF TRANCHES

7 The purpose of this submission is to provide background information to the Social Services Committee in support of a petition regarding 32.7 hectares of land at Oruarangi Road Ihumātao, Māngere, which is now designated as a Special Housing Area (SHA 62) The petition calls for the revocation of the status of Special Housing Area given to an area of land on Oruarangi Road, Ihumātao, in a rural part of Māngere (SHA 62), and asks that no building on this land be allowed. More broadly, the aim is to have this land recognised for its significant historical, cultural and archaeological values and preserved for future generations as a public open space The petition was initiated by Waimarie McFarland on behalf of the Save Our Unique Landscape Campaign (SOUL) and signed by over 4000 people The petition was presented to the House of Representatives by Su a William Sio on 5 November Membership of the SOUL Campaign Group SOUL founding members are rangatahi of Makaurau Marae and mana whenua SOUL has mana whenua support from Te Wai-o-Hua, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngāti Whātua and Waikato-Tainui The SOUL Campaign Group is made up of residents and ratepayers of Ihumātao, Māngere and Māngere Bridge, others from across the Super City and the country, as well as a wide range of community groups opposed to the development of SHA Public and political support for the Campaign The SOUL Campaign (the Campaign) has generated considerable and growing public support. SOUL has strong support among local residents and community leaders (See Appendix 2 for List of Community Leaders) as well as support from others in Auckland and around the country. SOUL events demonstrate active and diverse community participation. The Campaign raised over $6000 at short notice to fund the publication of two community newspapers distributed to 13,000 households in November and in December

8 The Campaign has also gained significant political support. Local Board Māngere-Ōtāhuhu unanimously opposed the creation of SHA 62. Seven Auckland City Councillors signed a Notice of Motion dated 4 August 2015, requesting the revocation of the Governing Body resolution that designated the Ihumātao site as a Special Housing Area. Those Councillors were Cathy Casey, Mike Lee, Alf Filipaina, Arthur Anae, Wayne Walker, John Watson and Ross Clow. A number of Members of Parliament from all major parties except National also support the Campaign Fletcher Residential Limited plans to develop land at Oruarangi Road, now designated as SHA 62. The land is privately owned and borders the Ōtuataua Stonefield Historic Reserve in a rural part of Māngere called Ihumātao, situated near Auckland Airport. The private owners have accepted a conditional purchase agreement from Fletchers to buy the land Fletcher Residential has applied to Auckland Council to rezone most of the 32.7 ha site, to build up to 480 homes. Their plan is to build a mix of housing types including standalone, terraced and duplex dwellings. 7

9 5.1. Timeline of events The following timeline provides a historical view of the ownership and policy decisions affecting the land in question at Ihumātao Ihumātao land belonging to Te Wai-o-Hua is wrongly confiscated for their support of Kingitanga / the Māori King Movement. 1860s - present Through a Land Grant, the land at Ihumātao is given to the Wallace family and their descendants, and used as farmland until the present day. This explains how the land in question became known as the Wallace Block Manukau City Council creates Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve (also known as the Stonefields ) following its purchase of a 100 hectare block at Ihumātao in Manukau City Council, as part of planning for the Manukau Gateway Heritage Area, states that, Land adjacent to the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve is designated and will be acquired by Council for Public Open Space, for the protection of the landscape and natural and cultural heritage values. 1 1 Nov 2010 Manukau City Council along with six other territorial authorities and one regional council is amalgamated into the unitary authority of the Auckland Council. 15 June 2012 Despite strong opposition from Auckland Council and the Ihumātao community, an Environment Court decision directs Auckland Council to rezone Ihumātao land from Rural Land to Future Development Zone (FDZ) Sept 2013 The Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act (HASHA) is passed under urgency. 20 Mar 2014 Fletcher Residential Ltd enters into a conditional purchase agreement for the Oruarangi Road Block dependent on obtaining resource consent allowing for the development of a Special Housing Area (SHA). 1 ] 2 While it was accepted by the Court and all parties that the land to the west of Oruarangi Road, including the Wallace Block was of special significance to Māori, the Court felt that sympathetic development which protected the heritage, cultural and historic values of the area could be undertaken with the right planning regime. The Council was ordered to amend the District Plan, including a description of the new FDZ subzone that was to identify and provide for among other things the Māori cultural associations with the area, including wāhi tapu, the heritage and historic associations, the coastal environment and the landscape values. The Environment Court could not have foreseen the HASHA which effectively takes away any right to oppose plan change applications. 8

10 1 May 2014 Auckland Council votes that the land at 545 Oruarangi Road, Māngere be recommended to the Minister of Housing for declaration as an SHA. 31 July 2014 A block of 32 hectares at Oruarangi Road is gazetted as an SHA. 3 Sept 2014 The Overseas Investment Office grants consent for the purchase of land on Oruarangi Road by Fletcher Residential Ltd. June 2015 Fletcher Residential applies to Auckland Council for a plan variation to the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) to rezone SHA 62 from Future Development Zone in the District Plan and Future Urban in the PAUP to a combination of Mixed Housing Suburban, Public Open Space Conservation, and Green Infrastructure Corridor. (The Re-zoning) 16 June 2015 SOUL presentation to Auckland Council s Heritage Advisory Panel uncovers deep concerns over the SHA designation of the Oruarangi Road Block given its unique archaeological, historical, cultural, farming features and social implications. 27 August At the SOUL presentation to Auckland Council Governing Body some 2015 Councillors declared their decision was not properly informed when voting on SHA designation for the Ihumātao site. They said the decision-making process did not allow for proper consideration of crucial factors in relation to the site. 7 December An Application is submitted to the Waitangi Tribunal for an Urgent Inquiry 2015 into the Crown s actions concerning the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013, and the development of the Ihumātao SHA. 3-5 Feb 2016 Auckland Council hearing scheduled on the re-zoning of the SHA 62. Notice of decision required to be given within 30 working days. 9

11 6.1. SHA incorrectly designated SOUL submits that the land at Oruarangi Road Ihumātao was incorrectly designated as a Special Housing Area (SHA 62) under the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas (Auckland) Order 2013 (the SHA Order). This land does not meet the criteria specified in Section 16(3) of the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA) Criteria - Section 16(3) HASHA provides that the Minister for Housing must not recommend the making of an SHA unless the Minister is satisfied that there is (or will be) adequate infrastructure to service the likely developments and there is evidence of demand for housing in the area. Auckland Council has issued additional guidance on the criteria it is to take into account when assessing a request to create an SHA. 3 The Council will consider current or future infrastructure, demand for housing, whether the SHA is in a strategic location, proposed housing yield and contribution to housing affordability. It is also to consider local board and iwi views Demand and Affordability - While there is high demand for housing in Auckland, there is no demand from Māngere residents for housing of the type proposed at SHA 62. The price range proposed for housing proposed at SHA 62 will not alleviate the chronic shortage of affordable houses in Māngere. While 10 % of the SHA 62 housing stock will be sold at 75% of the Auckland region median price ($770,000 in December 2015), $577,000 is not within the reach of most Māngere residents. There are no plans for social housing at SHA Infrastructure - SHA 62 is not well serviced by existing infrastructure. Relevant facilities would include transport links, parks, and social and community infrastructure. 5 SHA 62 is not within walking distance of a town centre, shops or any stations on the Rapid Transit Network or the Frequent Transit Network Yield - SHA 62 has a proposed density of 15 houses per hectare. This compares with a density of 100 dwellings per hectare at Walmsley Road, Māngere (SHA 59), and a density of 31 dwellings per hectare at Kirkbride Road, Māngere (SHA 93). In fact, SHA 62 is the only low density 3 Auckland Council, Refined and consolidated criteria for SHAs in Auckland, issued September See above, n.2. 5 See above, n.2. 10

12 development that Auckland Council has approved as a Special Housing Area (25 homes per hectare is considered low density) Views of the Local Board and Iwi - The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board is firmly opposed to SHA 62 and has stated that it was not consulted prior to its creation. Mana whenua are also totally opposed to SHA 62 and have made an urgent application to the Waitangi Tribunal outlining their concerns. They state that they were not adequately consulted prior to the creation of SHA 62 (discussed below) Treaty of Waitangi implications SOUL submits that the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA) and the development of the SHA 62 fail to uphold Treaty principles. In brief, the following principles have been breached: The principle of partnership: Both the Act and SHA 62 were created without proper and adequate consultation with Māori. Local residents and mana whenua of Ihumātao have been denied almost all rights to object to the development of the land at SHA 62. The principle of active protection: The SHA legislation does not provide any mechanism for the active protection of sacred sites and taonga associated with the land at Oruarangi Road. It fails to acknowledge and therefore undermines the ability of the residents of Ihumātao to exercise their kaitiaki role in relation to the land Once SHA 62 was created, rights of mana whenua and local residents to object to developments on the land were severely curtailed. Within special housing areas, Qualifying Developments are afforded a streamlined consenting process. Developers of Qualifying Developments have the option of applying for resource consent under the HASHA. Where the developer elects to proceed under the HASHA, the Resource Management Act (RMA) does not apply, except as expressly stated in the HASHA. 6 The RMA provides protection for local and iwi interests through requirements for notification and the opportunity to make submissions Where the HASHA applies, a local authority is prohibited from notifying or holding a hearing in relation to a resource consent or plan variation application except as specified in the Act. Only the owners of adjacent land, local councils, and infrastructure providers may be notified. Only a notified person may make an objection to and be heard on the resource 6 Section

13 consent application. 7 This notification excludes anyone who is not an adjacent landowner, local council or infrastructure provider. And allowance for participation by adjacent owners only in the development of SHA 62 is minimal The HASHA effectively excludes participation of any kind by Māori in relation to the development of their traditional customary whenua regardless of the level of potential impact as a result of the developments proposed by the HASHA An Application for an Urgent Inquiry was lodged with the Waitangi Tribunal on 7 December 2015 (WAI 2547) in respect of these concerns. It requests that the Tribunal examine and make recommendations on the Crown s actions concerning the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHA) and the development of the Ihumātao SHA 62. Among recommendations sought is that, The Crown should immediately remove the Special Housing area designation of the SHA 62, the Ihumātao SHA Many of the recommendations of the historic Manukau Claim (WAI 008) have not yet been implemented and would also preclude the development of SHA SHA 62 breaches the Government s human rights obligations SOUL also submits that the creation of SHA 62 breaches New Zealand s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In particular New Zealand is in violation of its obligations under Article 27. In passing the Act, the New Zealand Government did not take account of the rights of mana whenua to use and enjoy their ancestral lands and to be consulted with, in respect of developments which may impact on their ancestral lands or sacred sites. These rights have frequently been recognised by the United Nations Human Rights Committee in its decisions interpreting Article 27. Similar rights are recognized in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, See Articles 18 (right to participate in decision making), 19 (right to consultation), 25 and 26 (right to enjoyment of traditional lands), and 37 (right to recognition of treaties). 7 Section 29 and 67 8 Section 29(3)a of the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 requires notice to adjacent land owners only. Section 79 of the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 states that there is not right of appeal or objection. 9 WAI 2547 Statement of Claim, p 13 12

14 The creation of SHA 62 is also a violation of mana whenua s right to access to justice as recognized under the ICCPR. Sections 78 and 79 of the HASHA deny residents of Ihumātao the right to object to or appeal against any decision made by the local authority in respect of a resource consent or plan change unless they are adjacent land owners. This is a violation of Article 2 of the ICCPR which provides: 2. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes: (a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognised are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity. See also Aticle 40 of the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples which provides: Article 40 - Indigenous peoples have the right to access to and prompt decision through just and fair procedures for the resolution of conflicts and disputes with States or other parties, as well as to effective remedies for all infringements of their individual and collective rights. Such a decision shall give due consideration to the customs, traditions, rules and legal systems of the indigenous peoples concerned and international human rights. 13

15 7.1. SHA 62 in context The entire Ihumātao area is a cultural landscape embedded with identity, meaning, and significance. Its character and integrity is drawn from the maunga (mountain), the awa (river), the papakainga (village), and the open nature of the landscape. Taking this view, SHA 62 cannot be considered in isolation from the peninsular, as its very location places it in the heart and history of Ihumātao. To the north and west of SHA 62 is the Ōtuataua Stonefields. To the north and east of SHA 62 lies the Ihumātao papakainga. This submission therefore considers the Ihumātao peninsula as a whole, including the significance of the adjacent Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve (the Stonefields), before focussing on the specific land designated as SHA 62. The Manukau Gateway website introduces the area with these words: This is an area of international significance and one of the very few places in Aotearoa, New Zealand where there is continuity of people and place where geology, flora, fauna and natural heritage come together with cultural heritage and centuries of human history Historical significance of the site Early history of human occupation at Ihumātao Ihumātao is among the sites of earliest human occupation of Aotearoa and home to the longest continually occupied papakainga in Auckland. Carbon dating of an archaeological site on nearby Puketūtu Island dates human settlement by the people of Ihumātao in the range of 1160 A.D. Around the 14th century the Tainui waka settled in Ihumātao with descendants of Te Wai-o-Hua who gave Tāmaki Makaurau its name Unbroken history of cultivation The rural character of the area has supported a complete unbroken history of human occupation and activity over the centuries, including from gardening to pastoral farming. It is crucial to understand that the Stonefields reserve and the adjacent land in SHA 62 form one indivisible landscape. The Ōtuataua landscape lent itself to early settlement because of the exceptional fertility of the soil. The underlying volcanic stone retains the heat in the soil and offers an extended growing season, it is this, the

16 underlying volcanic stonefield which gives its name to the area - the Ōtuataua Stonefields. Māori grew kumara, taro, yams and gourds - all plants with short growing seasons to accommodate the climate. The earliest stone walls were built by Māori adapting the intensive pig and dairy farming methods of the English Missionaries. By the mid nineteenth century they were cultivating intensive gardens, growing wheat and oats, which they transported to Onehunga by boat for the Auckland market. European settlement started in the early 1800s. The introduction of modern weapons of war led to inter-tribal warfare, known as the Musket Wars, which virtually decimated the area of occupation. The first missionaries arrived in the mid-1830s. They set up a missionary station on the Ōtuataua Stonefields. They introduced Christianity and modern farm management practices with their sheep, pigs and cattle. They started to clear scoria rock and build the many dry stone boundary walls to contain their stock. These stone walls are a notable feature of the landscape that survives to the present day. With the influx of European farmers, over 1000 acres of Māori land was confiscated (discussed below) and the farming landscape seen today is a reflection of subsequent European farming practices. The people of the papakainga provided a farm labour force over the following generations, and survived through subsistence living. In 2001 the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve was established to protect 100 of the remaining 160 hectares of stonefields that survived urban sprawl. The renowned archaeologist, writer and historian, Dave Veart, reinforces the international significance of this unbroken history of human occupation: We now have the reserve at Ōtuataua, but we also need the adjacent land (SHA 62) to tell the full story. The reserve and surrounding areas are wāhi tapu (a sacred place) to Ihumātao residents. Ihumātao is one of the last remaining original and liveable papakainga in Aotearoa. The SHA 62 development will mean that Ihumātao will no longer be recognised as a papakainga but become another urban space Land Confiscation The destructive impact of colonisation haunts the land now designated as SHA 62. In the 1860s the then colonial government confiscated land from Te Wai-o-Hua (in total around 1100 hectares including the land now designated SHA 62) because they refused to forgo their allegiance to 15

17 the Kingitanga Movement. Through the legal mechanism of a Government Land Grant, ownership was given to a farming family who have maintained their residency on the land since then. Many Waitangi Tribunal Reports and esteemed Maori scholars, such as Professor Mason Durie, have detailed the pervasive, devastating and far reaching impacts of land confiscation on Maori. Suffice to say, the Ihumātao land confiscation contributed to significant psychological, social and spiritual trauma experienced by Te Wai-o-Hua and its wideranging effects are felt to this day. The economic loss of their land meant Te Wai-o-Hua could not participate in the developing national economy. The confiscation devastated their aspirations and possibilities for economic growth and development. They were stripped of their ability to get ahead, individually and collectively. Whanau suffered financial hardship and were forced to endure subsistence living. The fact that Fletcher Residential (a majority foreign-owned company) is to reap financial benefits from a housing development on land traumatized by colonisation and considered tapu by its original owners pours salt in the wound of confiscation Cultural significance of the site For mana whenua, whose ancestors have lived at Ihumātao since the earliest human habitation of Aotearoa, SHA 62 is a significant site and intimately connected to the touchstones that inform their identity. One of these is Pukeiti also known as Te Puketāpapatanga a Hape a volcanic cone whose name translates to the flat resting place of Hape, an ancestor said to be the first human to set foot in Aotearoa. The lower slopes of Pukeiti and of a second sacred mountain, Ōtuataua, fall within the boundaries of SHA 62. The site slated for development lies directly between these mountains and the village effectively separating marae from their maunga. Makaurau Marae, home of the hapu of Te Ahiwaru, sits beside the Oruarangi stream an awa that has suffered pollution in the past and whose ongoing restoration will be jeopardised by stormwater runoff from SHA 62. The Ihumātao peninsula contains several features that are taonga to mana whenua such as maunga, lava caves, lava tubes and natural springs. Examples of each of these taonga within the SHA 62 development are described in our Waitangi Tribunal claim (see WAI 2547). Lava tubes and caves are known to 16

18 have been used as urupa (burial sites) and may still contain human remains. The current owner of SHA 62 remembers collecting a sugar-bag full of human bones as a child for a school talk. 11 In an affidavit to support the WAI 2547 claim (see Appendix no 5), Haki Wilson describes how the relationship of mana whenua to this land and their duty to care for it is ongoing. 12 The relationship that Te Wai-o-Hua, Te Kawerau a Maki, Ngati Whatua and Waikato-Tainui hold with Ihumātao is unchallenged and has been presented on numerous occasions in many forum and to many audiences. It is from this long history of connection with the whenua at Ihumātao that the wahi tapu and taonga have been formed, and it is from these wahi tapu and taonga that our duty as kaitiaki arose, and which continues to this day. It is important that I also acknowledge that our wahi tapu and taonga on the Ihumātao Peninsula do not stop at these areas but extends further to the south to the location of the land around the Auckland Airport and further east into areas that are now heavily developed for industrial use. Ihumātao was taken by the Crown in 1863 as part of the raupatu committed against the Kingitanga and those hapu and iwi that supported it. As a result of the raupatu and alienation of whenua at Ihumātao we lost full control of our whenua and the protection of our whenua and taonga became threatened. The planned development at SHA 62 is an anathema to the people of Ihumātao and further threatens wahi tapu and taonga Archaeological and geological significance of the site SHA 62 is likely to have significant effects on the visual and physical integrity of the landscape and risks further degradation of a geologically and culturally distinctive region of the Auckland Volcanic Field (AVF). SHA 62 is part of the geological and topographical complex centered on the scoria cones of Pukeiti and Ōtuataua. 11 Collins, S. (2015, June 12). 480 homes planned for Maori burial site. The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from 12 Sworn affidavit of Haki Wison to the Waitangi Tribunal (2015, December 7) regarding claim WAI

19 Planned modification to significant geological features Pukeiti scoria cone was quarried in the past, however a large proportion of the cone itself and lower slopes remain intact. Pukeiti is widely acknowledged as the smallest scoria cone in the Auckland Volcanic Field (AVF), a considerable distinction when one considers the numbers of cones and other types of volcanic landforms contained in the AVF. The proposed SHA 62 housing development will require considerable earthworks modifying the topography of the lower slopes of Pukeiti. Preserved lava flows will also be modified, with the removal of considerable portions. Within SHA 62 boundaries is a significant lavacave complex formed within lava flows originating from Pukeiti Archeological features not yet fully explored The archaeological record of human habitation of this area adds to the significance of the topography surrounding these two cones. While archaeological sites within the boundaries of the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve (OSHR) are protected, the archaeological, cultural, and historical significance of this landscape extends well beyond the boundaries of the OSHR and applies to the Ihumātao peninsula as a whole. According to archaeologist and historian David Veart (2015) 13, there may be similarities between the SHA 62 site (the Wallace Block) and other sites in Ihumātao which displayed limited surface evidence but when examined contained complex evidence of occupation. In a review of archaeological investigations and recorded sites in the Māngere Puhinui Rural Zone, Furey (2005) 14 noted that the volcanic field bordering OSHR has not been systematically surveyed and the historic farming landscape of the area has not been systematically surveyed (p. 6). Referring to a sacred lava cave complex within the boundaries of the development site, the Waitangi Tribunal claim notes traditional stories identifying at least half a dozen cave entrances and lava tubes connecting caves. These caves were used as urupa and may still contain human burial remains. Due to large amounts of farm rubbish dumped in the caves in the latter half of the twentieth century, no up-to-date survey has yet been undertaken using modern archaeological and 13 Veart, D. (2015). SHA 62 Statement. Written submission to limited notification consent hearing panel, February 3 rd and 4 th, Furey, L. (2005). Mangere Puhinui rural zone review: archaeological appraisal (Report to Manukau City Council). Auckland, New Zealand: GFC Heritage. 18

20 surveying methods of the cave complex. The physical extent of the cave complex, and the presence of archaeologically and culturally significant remains and artefacts, is unknown Bid for World Heritage Status will be undermined The volcanic field (which is comprised of eruptive centres, scoria cones, lava flows, and volcanically derived soils) may be viewed as a distinct region in its own right within the wider context of the Auckland Volcanic Field. Searle (1964) 15 described a fascinating group of volcanoes, interesting individually in their smallness and complexity (p. 86), and due to their collective variety an intricate and complete volcanic field in miniature (p. 86.) The SHA development, and its potential impacts on the landscape described by Searle (1964), will undermine current efforts to gain World Heritage Status for the Auckland Volcanic Field. In 2007 the Department of Conservation lodged a submission with UNESCO to have the Ōtuataua Stonefields and other sites in Auckland recognized for their mixed cultural and natural heritage values. 16 In addition, the 2006 Department of Conservation report, Our world heritage: A tentative list of New Zealand cultural and natural heritage sites, noted the AVF as a mixed cultural/natural site of high priority for immediate world heritage listing, with particular reference to Ōtuataua Stonefields. Yet access to this internationally recognized natural and cultural heritage site will be through the sprawling SHA 62 urban development should consent be granted. Fletchers concede in its Qualifying Development Application that: Adverse effects on historic heritage sites and landscape values, although reduced through the proposed areas of open space/development setbacks, and the protection of remains relating to both Māori and Early European settlement, are more than minor (p. 47). While some mitigation is planned, none of the proposed measures are sufficient to offset the negative impacts of a sprawling urban development with buildings up to eight metres high, on the lower slopes of the volcanic cones, and adjacent to the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve. 15 Searle, E. (1964). City of volcanoes. A geology of Auckland. Auckland, New Zealand: Paul s Book Arcade. 16 Details available at: 19

21 8.1. Negative impacts on the community and residents of Ihumātao The circumstances of the SHA development (location, scale, and proximity to village) mean that the wellbeing of the associated iwi, and those who reside in the papakainga, will be directly and intimately impacted Population and urbanisation The increased population created through SHA 62 has the potential to impact negatively on the character and integrity of the papakainga. The proposed housing will force suburban development upon the papakainga, without the prerequisites for the building up of community. The population of the SHA will outnumber that of the papakainga by 3-5 times, depending on what figure you take for the expected number of residents per dwelling. 17 This will effectively make the existing village a small neighbour within its own landscape and turn a rural community into an urban one Economic impacts The SHA development is likely to significantly impact local land prices and housing rentals in the long-term. If this happens, iwi members will struggle to purchase land within or near their village. Increased rates and rental prices may force resident whanau to leave their papakainga Increased traffic The increase in population will lead to an increase in traffic flows through the centre of the village, with various knock-on effects including: increased noise, congestion, vehicle emissions, and road safety issues, a particular concern given the large number of children living in the village. During the construction phase, multiple truck and earthwork movements will inevitably give rise to potential dust and noise issues, creating disturbance among those living in the papakainga Cultural impacts SHA 62 sits between the Ihumātao village and its maunga, with expected stormwater discharge to the Oruarangi awa potentially impacting on the wellbeing of the iwi kāinga. The awa has been polluted before and stormwater discharge could further undermine the aspiration of mana whenua to restore its health and once again use the creek for kai and recreation. 17 In 2013 there were just 87 homes in the Ihumātao village providing for 294 people. With approximately 480 new homes planned an additional population of around 1,440 people is expected (assuming an average of 3 persons per dwelling). 20

22 8.2. Significant contributions made by the people of Ihumātao to the City of Auckland Even a brief look at the history of the area will show that the people of Ihumātao have made significant contributions to the wider city of Auckland, at a great cost to the local Te Wai-o-Hua people The quarrying of the volcanic cones of Ihumātao has contributed to the construction of the roading network and other infrastructure of the City. This quarrying has severely impacted the form and integrity of several sacred maunga, many of which are no longer recognisable Large tracts of (originally confiscated) land have been given over to Auckland Airport and surrounding industrial development resulting in a clear economic benefit to Auckland but loss of taonga and whenua by the original people In addition, the construction of the Māngere Wastewater Treatment plant in the 1960s has allowed Auckland to treat its sewerage volumes, but cost Te Wai-o-Hua the ability to use their harbour and awa to sustain themselves SOUL submits that further costs must not be imposed on the people of Ihumātao without their consent and against their express wishes for the private gain of the developers of SHA

23 9.1. Plans to reserve the land under the Manukau Gateway Heritage Area Prior to the creation of the Super City and the SHA legislation Manukau City Council agreed to extend the Ōtuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve. The then Council intended to purchase the land now encompassed within the boundaries of SHA 62. It recognised the importance of and need to protect this unique landscape, and its natural and cultural heritage values. The community expected this intention to be upheld and the land reserved as Public Open Space for future generations. This expectation remains strong and is at the heart of the SOUL Campaign Restoration efforts threatened by development of SHA 62 Residents of Ihumātao and the wider Māngere community are understandably alarmed by the prospect of a suburban development and increased population in an area known for its unique landscape, bird roosting, and in times past, its abundant fisheries. People are concerned that existing restoration efforts in relation to the Manukau Harbour and Oruarangi Stream will be negatively impacted by stormwater discharge, pollution, and thoughtless human action Restoration of harbour foreshore and Oruarangi Stream The construction of the Māngere sewerage ponds cut off Oruarangi Stream to tidal flow in 1958, completely changing the regime of the awa from estuarine to freshwater. This action killed all flora and fauna in the creek and precluded the exercise of cultural fishing practices. With the removal of the sewerage ponds, which began in 2001, restoration work was undertaken on the Oruarangi Stream and the newly opened area of harbour foreshore. By 2013 there was a healthy and abundant freshwater fish and eel population, dominated by short-fin eels and inanga as well as some long-fin eel and banded kokopu. In July of that year, in a calamitous industrial incident, the Oruarangi Stream was polluted by 1000 litres of purple dye killing all of its resident fish and eel population, and almost half of the mud snails and other species in the estuary. It also drastically affected various oyster beds in the area, with many oysters being killed. Fishing was banned for months. At the time this incident was described as Auckland's most destructive freshwater and marine pollution incident in decades and the freight forward company responsible, Jenners Worldwide Freight, was fined $103, Morton, J (2015, February 12) Wildlife killed by purple dye spill in the New Zealand Herald. Retrieved from 22

24 Other natural features and birdlife Other natural features exist within and near SHA 62 that are likely to be affected by the development. These include the productive gardening soils, the mature pohutakawa tree and other native vegetation, and the native fauna such as copper skinks. In addition, the seven kilometre coastline stretching from Ambury Farm Park to the Ōtuataua Stonefields is internationally recognised as a bird roosting and feeding area. About 80 bird species, including rare and migratory shore birds, make their home here such as dotterels, bartailed godwits, the grey warbler, tui, oystercatchers, gulls, pipit, and the kahu (also known as the NZ harrier hawk). Eighty-seven year old Ray Clough, a local ornithologist and long-time resident of Māngere, laments the SHA 62 development. In a recent interview he explained that the loss of habitat is the biggest factor in the declining number of birds that once made their home all around these shores. With farmland dwindling in the area large numbers of birds have gone. Reduction of green space accompanied by an influx of humans who bring their pets and pests, and Auckland airport s planned second runway, pose a real threat to the internationally significant birdlife in the area. Also, the Ōtuataua Stream and Harbour coastline will ultimately be the receiving environment for the SHA s stormwater discharge. 23

25 10.1 SOUL recognises that Auckland is experiencing significant housing problem. SOUL also acknowledges the pressure on local and central governments to make significant in-roads to relieve this problem. SOUL supports various measures to ease Auckland s housing shortage The Campaign is not opposed in principle to SHAs, nor to large housing developments. For the many reasons given in this submission however, the site chosen for SHA 62 is entirely unsuitable for housing development. Also, creating new problems while attempting to solve existing problems is unlikely to deliver sustainable solutions or engender public confidence in government decisionmaking. 24

26 11.1. SOUL Campaign actions SOUL is a nimble, strategic, and developing campaign. It is led by experienced and resilient leaders who are determined to prevent any building on the Ihumātao land in question. The Campaign is focussed on achieving an outcome agreeable to all affected parties. SOUL has presented one possible option for responding to the problem of SHA 62 - a land swap, but is open to other options and taking a proactive approach by considering new possibilities that might be more palatable to interested parties. The following chart provides an overview of key SOUL actions to date. Early 2015 Following discussions among rangatahi of Makarau Māori and with local community leaders concerned about the future of the Ihumātao site, the SOUL Campaign is created. A working group is established and regular planning meetings get underway. May SOUL activates and maintains a multi-media public awareness and public Ongoing support strategy The SOUL website and Facebook page is established to engage with the public. SOUL engages with news media through national and local media with stories appearing in print, radio and television media outlets, including Māori TV, NZ Herald, Manukau Courier, Radio NZ, The Wire Bfm. SOUL delivers presentations to many community groups and organisations in Māngere and across Auckland. Stories of Ihumātao are told to a wider audience via a series of video clips published online. SOUL members frequently attend the Māngere Bridge Sunday markets to raise awareness and gain support from locals and visitors. 8 June 2015 Soul writes to the Office of the Ombudsman requesting that it examine details of the application by Fletcher Residential to purchase 32 ha of farmland in Māngere (case ). 10 June 2015 SOUL holds a packed public meeting at Manukau Rugby League Club in Māngere at which participants strongly oppose the SHA 62 development. 11 June 2015 SOUL requests Overseas Investment Office Review of the consent granted to Fletcher Residential to purchase 32 ha of farmland in Māngere in The Office agrees to conduct the review. 11 June 2015 A SOUL delegation makes a presentation to the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board who reiterated their opposition to SHA

27 16 June 2015 A SOUL delegation makes a presentation to the Auckland Heritage Advisory Panel, which expresses its deep concern about the likely impacts of SHA 62 development and recommends to the Auckland Development Committee (ADC) that a thorough investigation of heritage values (including natural, cultural and historic heritage) be undertaken as part of the Plan Variation process. It also requests that ADC grant SOUL a public input request to speak at an upcoming meeting as a matter of urgency and that the Auckland Council Housing project Office also engage directly with SOUL. 6 July 2015 SOUL sends letters to every Member of Parliament, with the Labour Party, Green Party, and Māori Party co-leader Marama Fox, expressing support to SOUL. 21 July SOUL delegation meets with Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse and Councillors Casey and Lee to explain community opposition to the SHA designation and in particular concern about the lack of consultation with mana whenua and community during the process. 5 August SOUL delegation meets with Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse and Councillors Casey and Lee to discuss the Land Swap proposal. 12 August SOUL members present to the AGM of the Māngere Bridge Residents and Ratepayers. Over 70 members attend and support is expressed by members present signing the petition. 19 August A SOUL delegation tables the Land Swap proposal at the Māngere- Ōtāhuhu Local Board Meeting. 27 August Presentation of a 4,000+ signature petition to Auckland Council Governing Body meeting in August, with more than 250 SOUL supporters in attendance. The Land Swap Proposal is tabled. 9 September A Community Leader s List is established in support of SOUL Campaign. 23 Mayor Len Brown hosts, what he describes as, the first of a series of September round table discussions including a SOUL delegation, Ken Lotu-Iiga 2015 (Fletcher Residential), Ree Anderson (Auckland Council Housing Projects Office) and Lydia Sosene (Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Chair). Others were invited but did not attend. Participants shared points of view and explored alternatives. SOUL members also explained why residents and community oppose the SHA SOUL holds a silent protest at an Auckland Council Governing Body September meeting held on Makaurau Marae. Protest signs are erected around the papakainga. 16 October A SOUL delegation visits the Watercare Treatment Plant in Māngere, at Watercare s invitation. 26

28 14 October Engagement With Minister of Māori Affairs through a Te Puni Kōkiri Housing Adviser who attends at a SOUL meeting, following up on an earlier approach made by SOUL. November 13,000 copies of SOUL Times newspaper delivered to households across Māngere, Māngere Bridge and Ihumātao (Edition 1) 5 November A SOUL delegation travelled to Wellington to present a 4,000+ signature petition to Parliament. It is met with support from a number of Labour and Green Party MPs. 9 November A SOUL delegation meets with representatives from the Auckland Council Resource Consents Department staff to deliver more than 300 submissions against the zone change for the SHA development at Ihumātao. 12 November A SOUL delegation supports the Three Kings Community Action Group at the Auckland Council Governing Body meeting. 17 November SOUL members attend Fletcher Building s AGM to raise awareness amongst shareholders of company s participation in SHA 62. A SOUL member and shareholder voiced concerns inside the meeting (garnering significant media coverage in the NZ Herald) and others protested outside. 19 November A SOUL delegation presents at a PechaKucha evening as part of the Urbanesia Festival at the Metro Theatre in Māngere. The crowd showed overwhelming support. 21 November A group of SOUL members attend the Hīkoi for Homes Rally in East Auckland. 28 November Distribution of SOUL newspapers (Edition 1) and flyers at the Māngere East Community Festival. December 15,000 copies of SOUL Times newspaper delivered to households across Māngere, Māngere Bridge and Ihumātao (Edition 2). 7 December An Application is submitted to the Waitangi Tribunal for an Urgent Inquiry into the Crown s actions concerning the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 and the development of the Ihumātao Special Housing Area. Dec 2015 SOUL members conduct guided walks through the Ōtuataua Stonefields Feb 2016 Historic Reserve. These Sunday afternoon tours are well-attended by members of the public. 3 February 2016 Rally at the opening of the Auckland Council hearing on Fletcher s application to re-zone land at Ihumātao for the development of SHA February Adjacent landowners and their expert advisors make oral submissions in opposition to the rezoning of the Ihumātao site at Auckland Council hearings in Manukau. 27

29 5 February SOUL makes a written submission to the Social Services Committee in support of its earlier petition. Current Filmmakers are working with residents of Ihumātao to create a documentary film Other strategic action is currently underway to pursue alternative solutions that can benefit all interested parties. 28

30 12.1. The irredeemable desecration of a site of significance If land within SHA 62 is built on, its unique features will be gone forever. Having somehow survived over 800 years of challenges, the remaining archaeological and geological land forms are now at risk of obliteration along with evidence of significant farming developments. Also, the proposed development will negatively impact the character and wellbeing of the neighbouring Ōtuataua Stonefields possibly in unforeseen ways A wound that will continue to fester Auckland s housing crisis will not be solved through action which aggravates an existing problem. If SHA 62 goes ahead, it will exacerbate the enormous harm wreaked through the nineteenth century Ihumātao land confiscation, which caused severe disruptions in the relationships between mana whenua and this land. These relationships risk being extinguished if SHA goes ahead, leaving behind further traumatic memories, broken hearts and social unrest. Significantly, mana whenua will not be able to exercise their Treaty rights through their kaitiaki role or live as Māori as defined by them. Such outcomes will create a moral blight on the Government s political achievements and reinforce the colonising agenda still at work in New Zealand society Loss of confidence in Government decision-making Legal and political processes have failed to preserve the special history, status and wellbeing of the Ihumātao site for future generations. If SHA 62 goes ahead, it will reinforce public concern about flaws in the SHA legislation (particularly in relation to limitations on consultation with affected parties, including mana whenua) and flaws in government decision-making processes related to SHA The potential for a protracted struggle and social unrest If Government does not act to disestablish SHA 62, the political struggle is likely to become more protracted and could cause considerable social unrest. Despite huge personal cost, the founders of SOUL rangatahi of Makaurau Marae - continue to exercise the extraordinary vision, leadership and resilience witnessed in other major social actions in New Zealand such as Bastion Point and the Springbok Tour. These whanau members are supported by people who display moral commitment and courage, and who are experienced social activists. The SOUL Campaign will continue to grow, and could shame the Government into action, instead of politicians embracing the opportunity now to exercise moral leadership and political wisdom to disestablish SHA

31 13.1. Immediate Government actions required Two immediate actions are required for the Government to resolve the problem created when the Ihumātao land was designated as a Special Housing Area. The immediacy cannot be overstated; the risks outlined above reinforce the potential for a protracted struggle First, Government action is required to enact a process to dis-establish SHA 62. Taking decisive action will demonstrate political leadership and communicate to mana whenua and others that the Government is seeking to act reasonably, honourably and in good faith. Decisive action will also create space to consider viable alternatives Second, a commitment is needed by the Government to work with, and/or assist mana whenua, SOUL/the local community, Auckland Council and Fletcher Residential to work together to create an alternate future for the Ihumātao land (currently designated as SHA 62) that will preserve it for future generations and ensure mana whenua can exercise their kaitiaki role in relation to it. Ideally, someone of Pat Snedden, Dr David Williams or Dr Graeme Campbell s mana would be hired to help facilitate a process that explores viable options and creates a sustainable solution agreed by all. This person would also have Treaty knowledge, a capacity for innovative thinking, relationship capability, experience of working across sectors, and importantly have the respect of all parties. 30

32 In respect of the serious concerns raised in this submission, SOUL requests that members of the Social Services Committee: 14.1 NOTE that the SOUL petition to the Government was signed by 4000 people and is calling for the revocation of the status of Special Housing Area given to land at Orurangi Road in a rural part of Māngere called Ihumātao (SHA 62). The land is privately owned and borders Ōtuataua Stonefield Historic Reserve. The petition also asks that no building on this land be allowed and that its significant historical, cultural and archaelogical values be recognised and preserved for future generations in the form of open public land NOTE that this petition was initiated by Waimarie McFarland on behalf of the SOUL (Save Our Unique Landscape) Campaign. Waimarie and other founding members of SOUL are rangatahi of Makaurau Marae and mana whenua. The SOUL Campaign has also earned the support of local and neighbouring residents and ratepayers, community organisations and community leaders. The Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board, a number of Auckland Councillors, and a number of MPs across political parties (other than National) have also expressed active support NOTE Fletcher Residential entered into a conditional purchase agreement for the Oruarangi Road Block dependent on obtaining resource consent allowing for the development of an SHA. Fletchers has applied to the Auckland Council to rezone most of the 32.7 hectare site to build up to 480 homes including a mix of housing types NOTE the history of land ownership and policy background outlined in this submission. In particular, that the land was originally confiscated in the 1860s from Te Wai-o-Hua for their support of the Kingitanga Movement and has since been held by the Wallace Family who have farmed the land over the generations NOTE SHA legislative problems and in particular reasons why land within SHA 62 was incorrectly designated NOTE that an Urgent Treaty Claim has been accepted by the Waitangi Tribunal in relation to SHA legislation and SHA62. This claim outlines breaches of the Principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, especially the Principle of Partnership (in particular inadequate consultation with mana whenua) and the Principle of Active Protection (of Taonga and of the role of Kaitiaki). 31

33 14.7 NOTE that the desination of SHA 62 breaches the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights NOTE the serious archaelogical, geological, cultural concerns and social implications in relation to SHA 62 outlined in this submission NOTE community expectations and desire that the land (now designated as SHA 62) be reserved as public open space. These expectations stem from the earlier Manukau Gateway Heritage Area project NOTE SOUL s recognition of Auckland housing shortage and support for various measures to ease Auckland s housing shortage. The Campaign is not opposed in principle to housing development, but argues that SHA 62 is wholly unsuitable for housing development NOTE the strategic focus and multi-pronged community-led action undertaken by SOUL and its determination to achieve justice for Ihumātao NOTE the serious risks, if Government fails to disestablish Ihumātao site as a SHA, including a protracted struggle and social unrest AGREE to take urgent action to address this matter with the Minister of Housing, resulting in a process to disestablish SHA 62 on the basis that the land is unlike any other Special Housing Area due to its unique features and cultural history AGREE to raise with the Minister the necessity for a facilitated process (involving mana whenua, SOUL/local community, central and local government, and Fletcher Residential) that explores viable alternatives in relation to the Ihumātao land in question and that decides on an option agreed to by all. And, to consider the names of those suggested above to facilitate this process (refer ). 32

34 The petition signed by more than 4,000 people and presented to the House of Representatives by Waimarie McFarland on behalf of Save Our Unique Landscape Campaign (SOUL) on 5 November Stop the Special Housing Accord (SHA) in Ihumatao-Māngere! Petition addressed to: NZ Minister of Housing, Nick Smith Auckland Mayor, Len Brown An area of land on Oruarangi Road, Ihumatao Māngere has been added as one of three Special Housing Areas in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu community. Foreign-owned Fletchers Residential Ltd are proposing a development of 500 houses on this piece of farmland. This location is adjacent to the Otuataua Stonefields Historic Reserve, a public green space with rich historical, environmental and cultural significance and, Ihumatao Pa, one of the last remaining original and livable papakainga in New Zealand. Save Our Unique Landscape campaign recognises there is a housing shortage in Auckland and do not oppose the other two locations for SHA in the Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Area. But, a development of this magnitude, in this location, will have huge, negative effects. It will be detrimental to the residents of Ihumatao, community members of Māngere and other interested parties, from a historical, cultural, spiritual, social, and environmental perspective. This proposed SHA will not contribute to making Auckland a livable city, but destroy one of the few significant and unique spaces Auckland has left. In 2012 the Environment Court ordered the land be re-zoned to Future Urban. The developers are now in pre-application discussions to rezone the land to Residential, and apply for a subdivision to develop this SHA. Join us in telling Mayor Len Brown and Housing Minister Nick Smith that the Auckland Council must revoke its support for the SHA in this location and all applications for rezoning the land and future developments of this sort, must be rejected. 33

35 A list of community leaders who have added their names in opposition to the SHA 62 in Ihumātao Alan Worman Alec Hawke Anahera Pono Morehu Andrew Honore Angeline Henry Arihia Stirling Arthur Anae Arvind Dharamsi Barbara Dixon Bil Urale aka King Kapisi Bill Peace JP Bruce Hayward Caitlin Smith Cameron Hockly Cat Fooks Catherine Delahunty Cathy Casey Charlotte Huddleston Chuck Joseph Clifford Wadsworth Clovis Viscoe Dame Nganeko Minhinnick Local business co-owner and co-founder, with Emily Worman, of Science in a Van Kaumatua, Orakei Marae Kuia, Orakei Marae President Māngere Rotary Club, Māngere Bridge Trolley Derby Event Organiser President, Te Rakau Ture, University of Auckland Maori Law Students Society Principal, Te Kura Maori o Nga Tapuwae, Māngere Auckland Councillor (Manukau Ward) Manager, Māngere East Post Office St James Church, Māngere Bridge Hip Hop Artist, Producer & Clothing Designer, Silver Scroll Award - Song writer of the year 1999 STRIVE Team Manager, Māngere Geologist, Co-Author of "Volcanoes of Auckland: The Essential Guide" Musician, poet, internationally recognised singing and voice coach Lawyer, Bennion Law Artist Green Party MP, Spokesperson for Education, Water, Human Rights, and Te Tiriti o Waitangi Auckland Councillor Director, ST PAUL St Gallery, School of Art + Design, Faculty of Design and Creative Technology, AUT NZ Artist, Edge City Pastor, Cornerstone Church Nationally recognised sculptor and 3D artist, co-owner and founder Modeltech Ltd. Ruruhi o Ngati Te Ata, Te Wai-o-Hua 34

36 Dave Veart Donna Wynd Dr Benedicta Rousseau Dr Bianca Hester Dr Michelle Mills Dr Paul Cullen Dr Renus Stowers Dr Vaaiga Autagavaia Dr. Mark Beehre Dr. Nick Roskruge Elizabeth Gaul Errol Wright Eugene Sage Filipe Tohi Fiona Dawson Fletcher Beazley Gabriel White Gordon Toi Hami Doyle Hayley Theyers Henarata Ham Herawhakamana Sarah Grey Hirere Moana Hohepa Joe Hawke Hone Fowler Ilmars Gravis Archaeologist, historian, author, member Auckland Council Heritage Advisory Panel Long-time resident and Public transport advocate Lecturer in sociology and anthroplogy Post-Doctoral Fellow, Independent Contemporary Artist, University of Sydney Environmental scientist, director MK environmental consulting, Author: "Restoring the Mauri of Oruarangi Creek" Associate Professor & HOD Visual Arts, Faculty of Design and Creative Technology, AUT Māngere Doctor Māngere Doctor GP, photographer Chairman,Tahuri Whenua/National Maori Horticulture Collective. Kuia, Orakei Marae Film maker and Co-producer "The Last Resort" and "Operation Eight" Green Party MP, Spokesperson for Environment Ta Fotunga (Sculptor): Comissioned works nationwide and Pacific Islands. Māngere East Community Centre Administrator Project Manager, Māngere Auckland filmaker, Director: "Tamaki Stories" and "Unplanned Masterpiece" House of Natives, NZ's prolific Multi Media Artist, Ta Moko, Sculptor, Carver & Actor Principal, Te Kura-a-Iwi o Whakatupuranga Rua Mano, Otaki Hayley Theyers Photography Principal, Te Kura o Hirangi, Turangi Kuia, Orakei Marae Principal, Te Wharekura o Maniapoto, Te Kuiti Kaumatua, Orakei Marae, Former Labour MP & Bastion Point Occupation Leader Māngere East Community Centre Manager Māngere Bridge resident, Blogger: "Māngere Bridge Rocks" 35

37 Jacqueline Carter James Papali'i James Russell James Shaw James Shaw Jan Lambert Jan Logie Janice Beazley Janice Roberts Jason Mareroa Jeremy Treadwell Jerry Daniels Jim Peters Joe Trinder John Watson Jon Zealando Jos Very Judith Webster Julie-Anne Genter Karen Crisp Karen Matata Karoly Nemeth Kris Bryant Libby Patterson Louise Rive Lydia Sosene Lyn Doherty Poet, teacher aide, and production assistant: Kapu Ti Productions. MANA Pasifika Editor, Element Magazine, NZ Herald Green Party Co-leader Green Party Co-leader ESOL Educator, Māngere Green Party MP, Spokesperson for Social Development, State Services, Local Government. Parenting Educator, Māngere Kuia, Makaurau Marae, Ihumatao Mauri Ora Kaiwhakaruruhau, Te Korowai Aroha Senior Lecturer, School of Architecture & Planning, University of Auckland Presidents & Maori Student Officer, Nga Tauira Maori, University of Auckland Maori Students Association Pro Vice Chancellor (Maori), University of Auckland MANA, Māngere Auckland Councillor New Zealand Grand Master of Magic, long term Māngere Bridge resident Māngere Bridge real estate agent, long term Māngere Bridge resident Designer, Co-founder and owner Modeltech Ltd. Green Party MP, Epsom MA, nationally recognised photographer, Technical Teaching and Learning Advisor, Design and Visual Arts, Unitec, Auckland Manager - ME Family Services ECE, Ihumatao Co-leader of the IAVCEI (International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth Interior) Commission on Volcanic Geoheritage and Protected Volcanic Landscapes Managing Director, New Zealous Music, Perth, Austrlia Artist NZ Artist, Edge City Chairperson, Māngere-Ōtāhuhu Local Board Service Manager, Ohomairangi Trust 36

38 Maia Te Ra Fowler Marama Davidson Marama Fox Martyn Bradbury Mary Autagavaia Mary Clifford Mary Foley Metiria Turei Mike Lee Moana Wilson Maurice Maru Wilson Naomi Lange Ngaa Rauuira Puumanawawhiti Ngaio Kemp Ninakaye Taanetinorau Pania Newton Peeni Henare Peter Crossley Peter Sykes Phil Twyford Qiane Matata-Sipu Ra Kopu Ramona M Walters Rebecca Hobbs Reece Autagaivaia Rene Hawke Rev Emily Worman Rev Les Dixon Rev Vicki Sykes Richard Grey Robert Jahnke Coordinator, Māngere East OSCAR Green Party MP Maori Party Co-Leader Political commentator and blogger: "The Daily Blog" Māngere Educator Head of Faculty: Art, Drama, Music, Kelston Boys High School Ex Māngere Resident, Whatuwhiwhi Green Party Co-leader Auckland Councillor, Chairperson Auckland Council Heritage Advisory Panel Kuia, Makaurau & Orakei Marae Makaurau Marae Long-time Māngere East resident Pukenga Matauranga Maori / Lecturer, Te Wananga o Aotearoa Orakei Marae Representative of Te Runanga o Ngati Whatua Manager & Sister, Tiki Taane Executive Member, Matike Mai Aotearoa Rangatahi, NZ Maori Youth for Constitutional Transformation Labour Party MP Geologist, recognised expert in lava caves of Auckland CEO, Māngere East Family Service Centre Housing Spokesperson, Labour Party Journalist/Photographer, Ihumatao Conceptual Maori Design & Ta Moko Artist, Kopu Inc Kuia, Orakei Marae Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Creative Arts, Manukau Institute of Technology (MIT) CMDHB Member, Lawyer Kuia, Ngati Mahuta Founder of Church in Progress: Manukau Community Church Reverend, St James Church, Māngere Bridge Consultant Kaumatua, Orakei Marae Professor of Māori Visual Arts & Senior Lecturer, School of Art, Massey University 37

39 Robert Roberts Robert Sly Roger Fowler Russell Hollings Sandra Coney QSO Saubree Edinberry Sophie Tukukino Steffan Browning Steven Matejan Su a William Sio Tanya Batt Te Hamua Nikora Te Hei Deanne Tamariki Te Kahui Morehu Thomas Leuluai Thomas Rawiri Tigilau Ness Tui Rolleston Veronica Tawhai Waimarie McFarland Warren Viscoe Watson Ohia Wayne Walker Wikatana Popata Wiremu Pikitekaha Aperahama Yvonne Thomas Kaumātua, Makaurau Marae Local Business owner and landscape designer QSM Director, Māngere East Community Centre, Coordinator of ROCC (Respect Our Community Campaign - Māngere) Artist, owner Russell Hollings Gallery, Onehunga. Chair, Waitakere Local Board. Author, Historian Chairman, Manukau City AFC Principal, Te Kura Maori o Porirua, Ascot Park, Porirua Green Party MP, Spokesperson Organics, GE, Biosecurity, Pesticides and Food Safety President, Onehunga Māngere United AFC Labour Party MP, Māngere Internationally recognised childrens author and storyteller Comedian, Presenter & Motivational Speaker Kuia, Orakei Marae & Taumata Deputy Chairperson Kuia & Secretary of Whiti-te-Ra Marae o Reweti NZ Warriors Utility Player, Māngere Lead Singer, IHI Musician (Godfather of NZ Reggae & Original member of the Polynesian Panthers) Principal, Te Kura o Matapihi, Matapihi, Tauranga Policy & Politics Lecturer & Treaty of Waitangi Educator, Massey University Māngere Mountain Education Centre Manager Nationally recognised sculptor Principal, Nga Taiatea Wharekura, Baverstock, Hamilton Auckland Councillor Activist, Kaitaia Airport Kaitiaki, Ratana Temple Co-ordinator and Manager, Old School Reserve teaching gardens, Māngere 38

40 A newspaper printed by the SOUL Campaign and distributed throughout Māngere. PDF attached. 39

41 A newspaper printed by the SOUL Campaign and distributed throughout Māngere. PDF attached. 40

42 Affidavit by Haki Wilson to the Waitangi Tribunal in the matter of an Application for an Urgent Inquiry into the Crown s actions concerning the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 and the development of the Ihumātao Special Housing Area. PDF attached 41

43 Oruarangi Road, Māngere Special Housing Area (SHA) - July Information from the Housing Project Office. PDF attached. 42

44 Map of Auckland special housing areas, an overview of tranches 1 to 8. PDF attached. 43