A/HRC/18/35/Add.4 (b) Various laws and policies in New Zealand require the Government to consult with Maori, to varying degrees, in relation to decision-making about lands, resources, fisheries, and conservation, among other matters. Most notably, the Resource Management Act of 1991 (No. 69)7 requires that regional councils consult with iwi authorities at various stages under the Act, including during the development of resource management plans. (c) The Government holds nationwide or regional public consultation procedures to collect Maori views on various initiatives, as it did with the review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act and on the issue of Maori participation on the Auckland City Council. (d) Maori consultative or advisory bodies have been formed to assist in policy development on certain issues. For example, working groups of iwi leaders, which operate under the purview of the Iwi Leaders Forum, have been formed to engage in negotiations with the Government on strategic issues including climate change, freshwater management, the foreshore and seabed, and the Whanau Ora programme (discussed in para. 65 below). (e) As part of some Treaty settlements, the State and Maori share management and decision-making responsibilities in relation to natural resources. For example, as part of the Waikato-Tainui settlement, the State and iwi share responsibilities for governing and managing the Waikato River.8 Also, in relation to the Te Arawa Lakes, consent of both the Te Arawa iwi and the State is required before persons may build or modify structures on the lakebeds.9 21. Despite these arrangements, even when the State has a duty to consult under a specific law or policy, consultation procedures appear to be applied inconsistently, and are not always in accordance with traditional Maori decision-making procedures, which tend to involve extensive discussion focused on consensus-building. Finally, there are complaints of several barriers to the effective participation of Maori in decision-making, including inadequate technical capacity at times, the costs affiliated with ongoing negotiations, and often, the lack of political will to implement what are perceived as “special measures” for Maori people. C. Remedies for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi 22. The settlement of grievances for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi is carried out through two principal, complementary mechanisms: the Waitangi Tribunal and Treaty settlement negotiations with the Government. Although not addressed in detail in the present report, New Zealand courts can also provide remedies for breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi by directly applying the Treaty provisions where these have been incorporated in legislation, by using the Treaty to interpret legislation and, in theory, by applying the doctrine of aboriginal title to protect rights to land and resources, though this has not yet happened in practice. 1. The Waitangi Tribunal 23. The Waitangi Tribunal was established under the Treaty of Waitangi Act of 1975 (No. 114) with the mandate to hear claims brought by Maori against the Government alleging breaches of the Treaty of Waitangi. The Tribunal is charged with determining the 7 8 9 8 As at 1 November 2010. New Zealand, Office of Treaty Settlements, “Background reports for the United Nations Special Rapporteur” (12 July 2010), p. 12. Contribution of New Zealand to the Study of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Right to Participate in Decision-Making, para. 14.