Te Ohu Kai Moana argues urban Maori benefit from iwi-dominated $20m trust

Te Ohu Kai Moana, the body set up to oversee Māori fisheries assets, has defended its control of a $20 million trust set up for the benefit of urban Māori who have taken a High Court suit seeking a greater say over the assets.

The National Urban Māori Authority (NUMA) and Te Waipareira Trust began their case on Wednesday, telling the High Court that the Te Putea Whakatupu Trust couldn't truly benefit urban Māori – those that aren't affiliated with an iwi – because the trustees are appointed by the iwi-dominated Te Ohu Kai Moana.

The plaintiffs are seeking court orders to require Te Putea trust directors to have knowledge of, and represent, the interests of urban Maori, and for the court to quash plans by Te Ohu Kai Moana to make changes to the trust's governance they say would give iwi even more control.

In reply on Thursday, defence counsel James Ferguson said Te Ohu Kai Moana understood that Te Putea "is there to make sure no-one can slip through the cracks" but said the plaintiffs went too far in asking the court to restrain what iwi could do.

Te Putea was set up under the 2004 Māori Fisheries Act as part of the settlement of Māori fishing rights claims to provide for urban Māori who might not benefit from iwi-based settlements because they no longer had an active association with their tribe.

The plaintiffs say Te Ohu Kai Moana failed to meet its statutory obligations because only one of Te Putea's three directors - John Tamihere – was affiliated with urban Māori, while the other two – Rikirangi Gage and Richard Jefferies – had strong iwi connections and no urban Maori connections.

Messrs Gage and Jefferies are listed as interested parties in the case.

As well as appointing directors, Te Ohu Kai Moana Trustee can make decisions about changes to Te Putea's governance arrangements and currently has a proposal to increase the number of directors to five, which the plaintiffs also object to.

But Mr Ferguson said Parliament hadn't intended to "compartmentalise" Māori in the way the trust was established and it was "there to make sure all Māori could benefit" from the fisheries settlements.

Justice Simon France asked Mr Ferguson about the status of an independent review of Te Putea by Wellington barrister Tim Castle in 2015, which had recommended urban Māori get more say over the trust.

Mr Ferguson said the report had been rejected by a working group set up by Te Ohu Kai Moana, which had instead proposed a plan which would give even more control to iwi interests, including directors being appointed directly by iwi rather than through the Māori electoral college.

"If it's the case that more Māori are able to benefit through iwi. That's a relevant consideration in the defence's submission," Ferguson said.

Justice France replied that while the defence talked of the benefits to all Māori, "the question is whether the correct section of Māori is benefiting."

(BusinessDesk)