Treaty of Waitangi Settlements - 5 ways to avoid negotiating what turns out to be an unsatisfactory deal!
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
AUTUMN 2014 Treaty of Waitangi Settlements – 5 ways to avoid negotiating what turns out to be an unsatisfactory deal! Reforms to appoint external managers over Maori land … make sure you have your say! Health & Safety shakeup for Primary Sector…fines significantly increased… Maori Trust Board loses employment case... Treaty of Waitangi Settlements – 5 ways to avoid negotiating what turns out to be an unsatisfactory deal! Some groups who have completed settlements of their Treaty of Waitangi claims with the Crown are now questioning the value of their settlement, and in particular whether the deal negotiated was in fact a good deal.
In our experience some groups who have completed settlements are now questioning matters such as: Sufficiency of the commercial quantum to meet the group’s ongoing aspirations; Value of the lands paid for out of commercial redress and the ability of these lands to generate income; Ongoing costs associated with maintaining cultural redress received; Ongoing costs associated with co-management of resources; and Ongoing costs of future engagement with the Crown. Ongoing costs can be substantial and provide a significant strain on the resources and viability of Post-Settlement Governance Entities into the future…and may as a result cause members of groups to wonder about the overall adequacy of the settlement deal entered into in the first place. The following are 5 tips to help ensure your group negotiates a deal that is fair and reasonable and that will allow for achievement of the group’s reasonable aspirations for the future. 1. Due diligence is critical. Doing your homework on what assets are to be included, and the benefits and costs associated with each asset into the future. 2. Identify the ongoing costs of managing cultural redress lands, and co-management, and factor these in to your commercial negotiation deliberations. There should be sufficient income from your commercial assets to meet all future commitments, including the costs associated with cultural redress/co-management. 3. Where costs for managing cultural redress and co-management are not covered by any commercial redress, consider whether these should be included in the settlement at all. If so how will such costs be met. 4. Consider how ongoing costs of future engagement with the Crown are going to be met. Will the Crown agree to make a contribution or will these have to be met solely by your group. 5. Get expert advice from advisers who are experienced in the area and aware of these types of issues. Complying with these 5 tips is crucial and will help ensure that you negotiate a fair and reasonable deal that the group need not question in the future!
CALL US TOLL FREE ON 0800 729 529 Reforms to appoint external managers over Maori land … make sure you have your say! The recently released Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 Review Panel Report contains a number of recommendations for reform of the laws relating to Maori land that, if implemented, may dramatically impact the ways in which Maori land can be managed or utilised. One of the key recommendations includes the ability to appoint external managers to administer under-utilised Maori land blocks when there is no engagement by the owners. It is unclear how this mechanism will be triggered and by whom? In particular there is no guidance about whether it will be able to be triggered by: Local councils for unpaid rates; Potential lessees who have been unable to obtain a quorum of owners to lease the land; The owners themselves; and/or Neighbouring Maori Land Trusts or Incorporations. Practical implications for Maori land owners The appointment of an external manager has the potential of moving the governance of lands over to a third party to utilise on the owners behalf and without their consent. Once appointed, it is unclear what powers the external administrator will have and whether or not they will be required to seek the views of owners who can be located before making decisions about how to utilise the land. It is likely that an external manager will be able to make key decisions concerning the utilisation of the land for a farm or lease out to a third party.
It is proposed that the amending legislation will be introduced following this year’s general election and following further consultation with Maori. Given the significance of the proposed reforms it is important for you to have your say. CALL US TOLL FREE ON 0800 729 529 Health & Safety shakeup for Primary Sector…fines significantly increased… Under the current law fines of over $100,000 are common and reparation orders of up to $250,000 made. These are likely to increase dramatically under a new Health & Safety at Work Act proposed in legislation introduced by the Government. The Act follows the inquiry into the Pike River disaster but will also apply to the primary sector including forestry, farming and fishing workplaces. The proposed Act significantly increases fines and terms of imprisonment for offences. It also strengthens the roles of inspectors and Health & Safety worker representatives. Risks must be identified. The responsible person must then eliminate the risks so far as reasonably practicable. If the risk cannot be eliminated then it must be minimised as far as reasonably practicable. Primary Sector Employers There is a duty on employers to ensure the health & safety of workers and others affected by the work. Primary Sector Self Employed The self-employed must ensure their own health & safety. Company Officers
Officers of companies and other entities including Maori land trusts and incorporations must ensure that they keep up to date with Health & Safety matters and ensure that they implement processes to comply with the Act. Workers & Visitors Workers and visitors must take reasonable care of their own Health & Safety, not harm others and comply with instructions & policies. The duties are not transferable and a person can have more than one duty. More than one person can have the same duty. If so they must consult, cooperate and coordinate with each other. Penalties The sanctions under the Act have been significantly increased. Individuals exposing a person to the risk of death or serious injury/illness can be sentenced to a five-year prison term, or a fine of $600,000, and the maximum fine for a company (including a Maori Land Trust or Incorporation) is going to be $3million. Everyone will need to be aware of their obligations under the Act and take steps to ensure they comply. Contracting out of the Act is prohibited and it is not lawful to insure against fines. CALL US TOLL FREE ON 0800 729 529 Maori Trust Board loses employment case... The Employment Relations Authority has ordered a Maori Charitable organisation to pay lost wages of tens of thousands and $12,000 compensation after it sacked its CEO only 88 days into her employment.
The Board raised 13 allegations of serious misconduct plus other allegations of misconduct but the ERA held that the process of investigation was so deficient the employer had not fairly investigated the allegations and that it was an unjustified dismissal. None of the allegations could be viewed by any fair and reasonable employer as amounting to serious misconduct. The Board’s disciplinary process was flawed, its investigation was not done properly, it predetermined the outcome and did not take the CEO’s explanations into account. All organisations carrying out employment disciplinary or performance processes need to do so in a fair way and being a charitable social service provider will not save the organisation from severe financial consequences if they get the process wrong. CALL US TOLL FREE ON 0800 729 529 Tel (04) 473 6850 Level 16 Fax (04) 473 9304 163 - 171 Featherston Street DX SP20010 PO Box 689 www.raineycollins.co.nz Wellington 6140 Follow
You can also read