joint bid to put appeals on hold

This is smelly. Meridian like getting everything sorted before the court case and they have a system worked out - a system that has worked in getting DOC and some runaka on side with them, against the river and nature.

From NZH

"Meridian Energy and the Department of Conservation (DOC) have filed a joint memorandum in the Environment Court requesting the appeals relating to the Mokihinui hydro proposal be put on hold."

Meridian chief executive Tim Lusk said the project was proposed for stewardship land administered by DOC and required the consent of the Minister of Conservation to go ahead, as well as the usual resource consents."

Taking the time to carefully work through these issues before advancing to the Environment Court is the most logical and cost effective way of simplifying a complicated process for all concerned," said Mr Lusk.

He said that in applying for the minister's consent, Meridian may have the opportunity to address some matters raised by DOC in its appeal to the Environment Court.

"It would be more efficient and appropriate to see if we can deal with those issues as part of that dialogue," Mr Lusk said.

It seems that going direct to the minister may prove more fruitful - you can negotiate all of the little things out the way before.

Meridian is committed to the Mokihinui hydro project," he said.

And we are committed to stopping this damn dam. I like the red-tape and delays - anything that ensure the decision is put off and off until eventually it is too hard and too costly to go ahead.

if you sell out are you a sellout?

What a disgrace - that some would sellout their kaitiaki role for money. What about the children and their children?

From stuff

"Meridian Energy has confirmed it donated money to a West Coast iwi which changed its mind over its opposition to the massive Mokihinui River hydro dam.

Te Runanga o Ngati Waewae, the council representing a sub-tribe of Ngai Tahu, strenuously opposed the dam, but changed its mind during the hearing. This week, it publicly supported the scheme.

Yesterday, the iwi said Meridian had agreed to pay into a fund "to monitor effects". Information on "anything else" would be released after a runanga meeting at Arahura this weekend, runanga chairman Francois Tumahai, of Christchurch, said.

Meridian confirmed that it had made a payment, but declined to say how much.

Meridian said yesterday that it had made a payment so Ngati Waewae could "fund other cultural initiatives". "They did a lot of work for us in assessing the cultural impact of the project," spokesman Alan Seay said. "The cultural project we are funding is to offset the impact of the project on the mauri [life force] of the river."

In Ngati Waewae's original submission, represented by Richard Barber, it opposed the scheme for cultural reasons. "Ngati Waewae considers that the construction of the dam, power-generating stations and the associated infrastructure, such as the lake and transmission lines, will degrade the awa [river] and present a significant loss to the tangata whenua," he told commissioners.

However, Mr Tumahai said Mr Barber had not represented the true views of Ngati Waewae. The iwi had originally had a neutral stance on the project, he told Westport News.

Idiots - you think you can offset the destruction of the mauri of the awa by setting aside some cultural fund?

Destroy the rivers, destroy the land and destroy your mana. What a shameful incident, I hope the true voices of Ngati Waewae oppose these sellouts.

water = money, maybe, for meridian

This is classic. Do a feasibility study after you have applied to take water - shouldn't it be the other way round?

"Meridian Energy Ltd is preparing for a major engineering feasibility study into its proposed Waitaki River north bank tunnel power scheme to finalise the design, derive an up-to-date costing and determine its commercial viability."

"External relations manager Clare Shaw yesterday said the study would provide Meridian Energy with a clearer view of the commercial viability of the north bank scheme."

"Carrying out the full study will depend on issues such as a decision from the Environment Court on whether water should be granted for the scheme.

The study's first stage will look at the viability and economics of the project, identify a preferred layout and pursue land-use resource-consent applications with the Waimate District Council.

The decision to proceed with the study's second stage will be dependent on the Environment Court's decision and the viability and economics of the project determined during stage 1."

So meridian haven't even worked out if the proposed descecration of the river would be 'economically or commercially viable'. Doesn't that seem strange? Are they already thinking of their next overseas owner? How can you put forward applications for water take when you cannot say whether it is economically viable? And the whole 'economic viability' arguement is bogus anyway - if you set something up to be economically viable, in todays economic environment - what happens when that economic environment changes? As it always does.

Will iwi support grey power nelson?

Nelson Grey power leading the way against rip offs by big electricity companies.

"Nelson Greypower has begun a campaign to get $4 billion overcharged in electricity repaid to New Zealanders.

The 12,000-member organisation is the largest Greypower association in the country, and its president Gordon Currie is calling on all welfare and service groups and other national organisations to bombard Energy Minister Gerry Brownlee with letters demanding compensation.

The Commerce Commission revealed in May that Meridian, Genesis, Contact and Mighty River Power overcharged New Zealanders by $4.3b between 2001 and 2007.

Mr Brownlee has commissioned an electricity industry review.

Mr Currie's message was not to pussyfoot around with the $4b. He said consumers had been ripped off. "It belongs to us so 'Give it back'," he said today.

Mr Currie said the $4b amounted to $1000 for every New Zealander."

Good on you Grey Power Nelson - I support this move. meridian aren't the good guys, they have ripped us all off. And who are the ones that suffer most?

I hope some iwi organisations add their weight to this call. If they do it will create lots of good feelings and goodwill between grey power and maori - and that will be a really good thing.

Conservation leads to sustainable outcomes

Classic!

"State-owned power company Meridian Energy has criticised the Canterbury Water Management Strategy as disproportionately slanted towards the environment.

The strategy, which arose from the droughts of the late 1990s, is in its fourth stage.
At a hearing in Christchurch on Thursday, Meridian's resources policy manager Hamish Cuthbert said water sustainability required a balance of social and economic factors.

"It's seriously flawed by what's not there," he said. "The principles have a highly environmental focus ... which are disproportionate.

"It would lead to conservation ... but not a sustainable outcome.""

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad. The big barrier to creating sustainable approaches to energy and the need for dams, is the attitude expressed by Meridian. Conservation is a sustainable outcome, in fact it is the only sustainable outcome.

Water under threat in Te Wai Pounamu

Mokihinui dam before and after - thanks Forest and Bird

It's a worry. We seem to have a range of plans for dams, tunnels and irrigation all coming out or applying for consents at the moment. And all affect Ngai Tahu because they are all on our rivers and concern our water.

Mataura dams - up to 4 dams proposed for Matauta/Clutha River

Papapuni/Nevis Valley dam - two dams and flooding eight kilometres of river in part of the 7891 hectares of valley floor

Waitaki north tunnel plan - Remove 66% of the water from the natural riverbed for 53% of the rivers length

Mokihinui hydro project - an 85 metre high dam, Fourteen kilometres of gorge will disappear under 80 metres of water; 330 hectares of river bed and forest will be flooded

Fish and Game are complaining about water quality problems in Otago

We also have DOC with 12 agreements made in secret with power companies

and in Saturdays press, news that massive irrigation plans threaten the Mackenzie Basin.

Conservation groups say that the plans could transform parched, high country land into a replica of the Canterbury Plains.

DOC oppose the plans because of the clash with it's proposal for a 30,000ha Mackenzie Basin Drylands Park. The Mackenzie Basin is home to 56 threatened plant species.

Forest and Bird have called it a "water grab". And why do they call it that?

- 36 applicants
- Consents sought 128 to take water, change land use and discharge to water
- Water takes: 90 million cubic meters a year (new), 56 million cu m (renewal)
- Water takes are from: Upstream of the Lake Ohau outlet, upstream of Lake Pukaki, upstream of Lake Tekapo and upstream of the Waikaki Dam but below the glacial lake outlets
- Land area to be irrigated at least 27,125 hectares

and on the same page in the press we had a story about Solid Energy applying for resource consent for a new dam.

This hydro development is on the Sockton Plateau near Solid Energy's open cast coalmine. The scheme would divert streams through a series of reservoirs, tunnels and power station outfalls.

And this is the kicker - in capturing the tribitaries before they ran into the Ngakawau River, they say they will improve the water quality, which has suffered from mining runoff.

I'm sorry but just how stupid do you think we are. The streams were stuffed by you and now you want to abuse the streams more, with this power scheme, and you are doing it to help clean up the streams! Clean them up anyway you made the mess.

The under sea micro-tunnel would run about 600 meters offshore. 110 hectares will be inundated. So far over 30 submission with 9 opposed.

So I think you would agree there is a lot going on around water.

My questions are:

Do we have the resources within OTRONT to fight these projects and maintain the mauri of these waterways? We have opposed most of these projects. We have had our kaumatua and kaiwhakahaere, our legal team and other OTRONT people all put strong and impassioned Ngai Tahu case's up. But what do we do if they just ignore us?

If we don't fight and stop the degradation of these waterways we might not get another chance. Already the arguement is used, "Well it is already not natural, so it doesn't matter." If we don't fight, if we accept the economic arguements , the jobs arguements what is that saying about us?

We have a relationship with Meridian Energy. Does that relationship influence anything we do in this area?

I have a few other questions and some answers as well... but I've save them up for later.

The way it is?

Tremain ODT 25/5/09

Go here for more info.

Protect the mauri of Waitaki and the mana of Ngai Tahu

I have read the commissioners interim decision regarding meridians proposed north tunnel power project on the Waitaki river. I don't think they gave enough weight to the submissions made by maori and environmentalists.

The maori submissions against the project were strong and the commissioners even adopted one of the principal submissions from Paul Horgan (on behalf of TRONT). Good on you Paul!

So what did maori say?

All spoke of the past degradation of the mauri of the river since the dam was built and the future increased degradation if the proposed tunnel was built. Concerns were raised about the rock art and their protection.

Our kaiwhakahaere stated that, "... the significance of Aoraki and the Waitaki Catchment for the cultural identity and wellbeing of Ngai Tahu cannot be overstated."

He said, "Waitaki literally means 'The waterway of tears.' It is often referred to as 'the tears of Aoraki' that spill into Lake Pukaki and eventually make their way along the river to the coast."

He also spoke about the degradation of maori values and sites as a result of existing hydro electricity developments and the importance to Ngai Tahu of ensuring not only that this did not continue but that restoration also takes place.

Mark also said, "The diversion of up to two thirds of the water from what remains of the existing river in order to produce additional electricity is culturally insensitive."

So what exactly are they going to do?

Remove 66% of the water from the natural riverbed for 53% of the rivers length!

This river is the 8th longest in this country and the Waitaki Catchment is the second largest and it is also the longest braided river.

Potentially 13 out of 20 wetlands will be affected and two of the wetlands could face major changes.

Okay... so what did the commissioner say about the maori submissions.

(Bold my emphasis)

"On the Maori values in section 6 (f) and these are also recognised in the Plan we have come to the conclusion that the NBTC should not be refused consent because of any effect on these values as they were put to us in evidence by the Runanga representatives. We agree with Ms Dawson that the values spoken of all find their expression in the natural values that we have been considering for other purposes and we must also remember that the Lower Waitaki River is not and has not been a natural river for many decades. While we understand the reasons that lead to statements such “enough is enough” and that because of past degradation the Lower River is even more precious, we respectfully disagree with conclusions. There will still be connectivity from the mountains to the sea and the adverse effects on the wetlands can be remedied and mitigated. Indeed MEL specifically seeks the assistance of the Runanga groups to do this. We expresss the hope they will get involved and be active particpants if consent is granted."

So guess what maori - they don't care what you think about this. They believe that because they have already put a dam on this river, that it is now not natural, and so this gives them the right to do anything they like!

"We said earlier in this decision that we would heed the words of the Privy Council in McGuire v Hastings District Council (supra) and we have done that. While they are strictly speaking obiter dicta, they are of course deserving of the highest respect by us. They exhort us to recognise that section 6 (c), section 7(a) and section 8 of the RMA are strong directives and that we should be particularly sensitive to Maori issues. If a suitable alternative can be found that would not adversely affect Maori values then these provisions should strongly encourage the adoption of that alternative. We have held that in our view the values in section 6 (e) and to the extent they are recognised in the Plan will be affected but those effects are capable of being remedied or mitigated."

Thats right - the degradation of the river including the mauri and spiritual values can be mitigated - what a load of rubbish! You cannot bring back that which has already been lost. Once the river is reduced and strangled you cannot mitigate those effects by building a little wetland somewhere or making sure the fly fishers or jet boaters can get on the river. We are talking about maori values - we will determine if the effects can be mitigated not some pakeha!

"We do not recall any specific reference to Treaty of Waitangi principles in thecourse of the hearing of the Runangas’ case and so we do not need to refer to section 8 ofthe Act any further."

Ok - so here is the way forward. use the treaty.
Do we give up - NO!
Do we bow down - NO!
We fight and continue to fight for the mauri of this river, for our ancestors and our children and for the ability to form our own future away from the paternalistic pakeha.

Don't give up TRONT and don't stop fighting this!

Waitaha group oppose meridian and Ngai Tahu

Who is providing kaitiakitanga to the Waitaki River?

Came across this information, where Ngai Tahu have withdrawn their environment court appeal to the north bank tunnel project, over the weekend.

"A second major opponent of a new $900 million power scheme on the lower Waitaki River is withdrawing its opposition after reaching an agreement with the project’s proponent, Meridian Energy Ltd. Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu and its Arowhenua, Moeraki and Waihao runanga will withdraw their Environment Court appeal against the north bank tunnel concept scheme and work with Meridian to complete a mitigation agreement."

and in the comments section I found this from the Waitaha group

"Firstly is common belief of the Crown and their Agents namely Local Authorities’, Government Departments and Major Local and International Companies that the since the Ngai Tahu Treaty Settlement that Ngai Tahu are the only consultation group contained within the Settlement.Although Waitaha were legislated against their wishes into the Ngai Tahu Settlement Act 1998, there are many Nga Uri (descendants’) of Waitaha who have not registered with Ngai Tahu Whänui but exercise the right to maintain their identity, cultural values, tikanga and kawa of Waitaha under The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Rights: The Resource Management Act 1991 further more defines Local Authority obligations to Maori ; Resource Management Act 35A: Duty to keep records about iwi and hapu; The Local Government Act 2002 where it clearly defines under Section 14 Principles Relating to Local Authorities Clause (d); The Treaty of Waitangi Article Two (2) clearly defines property rights as Hapu, Whanau and Individual rights. Te Runanganui O Waitaha me maata Waka Inc are supporting others in the objection to this Project."

So I followed their link to here

"Te Runanganui O Waitaha & Maata Waka Iwi Authority Inc. Provides for the wellbeing of the members of the Runanganui. Membership is automatically bestowed on the Uri of the Hapu of Kahea, Waitaha, Kähui Tipua, Rapuwai and Häwea who are willing to participate by their attendance at meetings and be bound by the kawa of Waitaha and shall be subject to the rules and regulations or by-laws of the Runanganui."

The website is pretty good. Only 750 visits to the website. I don't have any issues if these people choose to highlight certain whakapapa lines, after all we have always done that. And it is in our nature to vote with our feet when we disagree with some leader or approach. Ngai Tahu can dismiss this group but I cannot see them going away.

My interest was stimulated because I am opposed to damn dam's (or tunnels) being built. Ngai Tahu put a very strong case for the protection of this river, but now have conceded and are negotiating with meridian, who is still opposing this north tunnel? Do we just have to accept the defilement of our awa further? Can we appeal or is this the best we can do.
If we can't protect this river, who can? Who is providing kaitiakitanga?