My base understanding is this.
The land was taken from Ngai Tahu
The crown worked on a settlement
A clause to ensure the value of the land was not reduced, was in there
The crown said there were no circumstances for reducing value
ETS if in force would reduce the value because when you cut down trees you incur carbon debt
Ngai Tahu indicates it will enforce rights of contract because they were not told about this
crown says they disagree with that interpretation
crown and maori party and iwi negotiate
A good article from Rawiri Te Whare
"For reasons of circumstance, rather than on fairness or justice, forests have figured disproportionately in settlements. The reasons are, in simple terms, because forestry land also comes back to iwi with accumulated rentals charged to lease the land to foresters.
It is also because iwi can only seek the return of land still owned by the Crown. Private land is excluded, so irrespective of the nature of how the land was taken, by unjust confiscation, or the actions of flawed law, Maori can only seek the return of that which is still currently on the Crown books.
Forestry land - former state forests - are therefore often a key aspect of a settlement.We were ripped off and when recompensed we were going to be ripped off again but because of our smart people we have forestalled the latest rip off.
"It is worth remembering at this point that on average iwi settlements equate to compensation at the rate of around 3 per cent of the value of that which was taken."Don't get me wrong i thing all of the ETS/carbon money stuff is too little, too late - but if we are to do something - it shouldn't disadvantage those who are already disadvantaged. It is not the job of maori to carry the load - if anyone doesn't like the deal they should complain to the crown and not moan at maori or blame them.