Horowhenua StarIt’s an unfortunate reality of local government that much of council’s work goes unnoticed.
Even open discussion at council meetings doesn’t always translate into broad public understanding or awareness. That’s not necessarily a failure; many council activities are routine or technical. But it does place a clear responsibility on elected members to keep the public informed, particularly when it comes to major policies or significant funding decisions.
One major workstream under way is the development of a Māori Engagement and Partnership Framework. Council is fortunate to have long-standing, positive relationships with local iwi/hapū. In most cases, these relationships are shaped by legacy partnership agreements, with corresponding commitments to resourcing and support.
Council allocates $839,000 annually to support iwi/hapū participation. Additional funding is also sometimes provided for cultural impact assessments, project input, and through separate side agreements linked to major infrastructure consents (e.g. wastewater projects).
Over the past three years, significant work has gone into understanding the scope of these arrangements. The new framework is intended to provide consistency, transparency, and certainty, establishing the expectations and parameters for how council engages with iwi/hapū as well as how any resourcing is determined, with the practical detail and delivery worked through individual partnership and resourcing agreements.
At its core, the framework should help council meet its legal obligations under local government legislation.
But why raise this now, and why should it matter to you?
There are, understandably, differing views about what the framework should include and how far council should go, particularly in terms of extending beyond legal requirements in pursuit of ideological views about the Treaty and its principles in a local government context. While most elected members support a framework that is expansive in its scope and ambition – setting out broad and, at times, loosely defined concepts and expectations for council – others, myself included, believe it’s essential we remain grounded in our statutory responsibilities and the democratic mandate we hold as elected representatives.
A framework that drifts into aspirational territory risks creating open-ended commitments that overstep council’s mandate and blur governance roles, and will ultimately undermine relationships rather than strengthen them. Given the framework includes an engagement spectrum that allows for potentially unbounded co-governance and co-management models, it’s important the public understands the implications.
My view is simple: if council proposes going beyond its legal obligations – by enabling additional roles, rights, or funding arrangements – this must be done with care, transparency, and clear public support. It’s a challenging conversation, but a vital one, to ensure any changes are built on legal clarity, uphold democratic accountability, and carry clear community backing.
Councillor Mike Barker and I have asked for advice on what public consultation could involve; but to proceed, it would require the support of a majority of elected members. If the final draft framework signals a new direction in iwi/hapu relationships and engagement, then residents should be fully informed and be able to have their say and shape that path.
Let me be clear: strong, pragmatic relationships with local iwi/hapū are essential. But they must rest on mutual understanding, clear expectations, and the support of the wider public. Valuing and resourcing iwi/hapū engagement is important – it can deliver real public benefit by saving time, reducing cost and risk, and improving outcomes. However, this must be backed by a clear community mandate, because ultimately, it is the public who enables and funds it.
Sam Jennings is a Horowhenua councillor
... loading ...
