ENQ 45709 N3L6C4 information for release Redacted.pdf

1
Darryl Ward
From:
Allan Freeth
Sent:
Tuesday, 14 December 2021 11:56 am
To:
Executive Leadership Team
Subject:
Two More Things - IMPORTANT
Afternoon now.
 The Chair and I are keen to develop a stronger co-governance model for the EPA between the
Board and NKTT.  This has arisen from discussions between Rob and Mavis, and my changed
position in relation to the EPA and 3,30, 300 year strategy, and less so from judgements such as
TTRL, although that gives us strong justification.  Clearly there will be legal and other constraints,
but nothing stopping us operationalising such an approach with tikanga, mātauranga, and standard
governance disciplines.  I believe this is exciting and could be quite ‘cutting edge’ for a Crown Entity
given our strong foundations in He Wheuet Marama.
 Kevin Millar will join the Investment Committee as the independent member.
Thanks Allan
Allan Freeth
Chief Executive
+64 4 474 5403 |  s 9(2)(a) OIA
Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn.
Our New Zealand Business Number is 9429041901977.
This email message and any attachment(s) are intended for the addressee(s) only.
If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attachment(s).
1
1

2
Darryl Ward
From:
Allan Freeth
Sent:
Tuesday, 18 January 2022 10:12 am
To:
Erica Gregory; Susanne Frances
Cc:
Mavis Mullins; Rob Campbell; Carol-Anne Skjellerup
Subject:
A New Way of Working?
Good morning

I am in the process of a rewrite of our 3,30, 300 strategy for our year start, and as a basis for the Board’s
upcoming day workshop that will involve NKTT.

Myself. Rob, and Mavis have been talking around the concept of operationalising greater involvement
and/or co-governance of the EPA between NKTT and the Board – I am excited by this concept and feel we
could lead the way in government, like we have with mātauranga..

Could you both draft up a description of how this could look for me to incorporate into the strategy
document I am creating.  It probably needs some thinking. But does not have to be very long – I suspect
much of the sentiment and philosophy of joint governance will come from the Māori perspective not
Pakeha.

This will be a draft for the input of Board and NKTT.

I will need it ASAP – sorry – end of next week at the latest.

Thanks Allan

Allan Freeth
Chief Executive

+64 4 474 5403 |   s 9(2)(a) OIA

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter  Instagram  and LinkedIn.
Our New Zealand Business Number is 9429041901977.
This email message and any attachment(s) are intended for the addressee(s) only.
If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attachment(s).

1
2

3
Darryl Ward
From:
Erica Gregory <[email address]>
Sent:
Friday, 28 January 2022 5:00 pm
To:
Fiona North; Evelyn Cole
Subject:
FW: Models of NKTT and Board Co-governance
Attachments:
Memo to Allan from Susanne Frances and Erica Gregory.docx; In the spirit of the
Treaty - Co-Governance.docx
Follow Up Flag:
Follow up
Flag Status:
Flagged
Kia ora korua

FYI – Allan’s email to Rob Campbell and Mavis Mullins.

Please review the papers. Susanne and I would like us to meet next week to discuss them. Sharon
Johnson will find a time for us all to meet.

Ngā mihi
Erica

Erica Gregory
Manahautū, General Manager
Kaupapa Kura Taiao

+64 4 474 5743   |  s 9(2)(a) OIA

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

Our New Zealand Business Number Is 9429041901977.

This email message and any attachment(s) are intended for  he addressee(s) only.
If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender and delete  he message and any attachment(s).

From: Allan Freeth <[email address]>
Sent: Friday, 28 January 2022 10:03 am
To: Rob Campbell <[email address]>; Mavis Mullins <[email address]>
Cc: Carol-Anne Skjellerup <[email address]>; Wendy Chappell <[email address]>;
Erica Gregory <[email address]>; Susanne Frances <[email address]>
Subject: Models of NKTT and Board Co-governance

Good Morning

As promised, here are some papers related to co-governance models between NKTT and the EPA
Board.  There are two papers from different authors and have quite different approaches:

  One from Susan and Erica which sets out a model and a series of mechanisms that carefully
respect the legislative context and does not read anything into the ‘silence’ in the Acts.
  One by myself, which in comparison, is quite radical, and takes the view that while the legislation
does not say the EPA can do something, they also do not say it can’t (sorry about the double
negatives).  I suspect this model may set the lawyers ‘hair on fire’.

1
3

4
Whatever the outcome of your considerations, I wish to include the final proposal in the strategy documents
that I have rewritten and are in the process of been complied.

Very curious to see your response and suggestions.

Best Allan

Allan Freeth
Chief Executive

+64 4 474 5403 | s 9(2)(a) OIA

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and LinkedIn.
Our New Zealand Business Number is 9429041901977.
This email message and any attachment(s) are intended for the addressee(s) only.
If you receive this message in error, please notify the sender and delete the message and any attachment(s).

2
4

5

Memorandum
Suggested ways of working - EPA Board & Ngā Kaihautū

To: Allan Freeth
Copy to: Kelsi Henderson, Kendyl Oates, Evelyn Cole and Fiona North
From: Susanne Frances and Erica Gregory
Date: 21/01/2022

The purpose of this memorandum is to set out the proposed mechanisms for operationalising
greater involvement and partnership between Ngā Kaihautū Tikanga Taiao (Ngā Kaihautū)
and the EPA Board.
Our understanding is that the EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū wish to work in partnership with
each other to the greatest extent possible within the landscape of the current legislative
settings.
The mechanisms proposed below wil  enable EPA Board to work in partnership with Ngā
Kaihautū, despite the legislative shortcomings. Our existing legislative framework is over a
decade old and, despite being advanced for its time, has some limitations. While we can
successfully create a partnership model using the proposed mechanisms within the existing
legislative framework, in order to put in place a co-governance model, the legislation will
need amendment.
Existing Framework
1.  It is helpful to set out the existing framework which the partnership mechanisms wil
operate within.
2.  These are set out in the Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011 (EPA Act). This
sets out some aspects of governance, which the EPA is required to comply with.
3.  The requirements relating to the EPA Board are:
a.  The Minister must appoint between 6-8 people as members of the EPA Board.1
b.  The Minister must appoint at least 1 member who has knowledge and experience
relating to the Treaty of Waitangi and Tikanga Māori (Māori customary values and
practices) to the EPA Board.2
c.  The EPA Board is the governing body of the EPA, with the authority to exercise the
powers and perform the functions of the EPA. Al  decisions relating to the operation
Legal y Privileged

1

5
1 Section 9(1) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
2 Section 9(3) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011

6

of the EPA must be made by the Board in accordance with the EPA Act and the
Crown Entities Act.3
d.  The functions of the EPA are to:
i.  advise the Minister on any matters relating to the EPA Act and the environmental
Acts.
ii.  exercise and carry out the functions and duties under the EPA Act and the
environmental Acts.4
4.  In performing its functions, the EPA Board must act consistently with its objectives,5
which are; to contribute to the effective management of New Zealand’s environment, and
enable New Zealand to meet its international obligations.6
5.  The EPA Board requirements relating to Ngā Kaihautū are:
a.  EPA must appoint between 4-8 people as members of Ngā Kaihautū, one as the
chairperson.7
b.  EPA must not appoint one of its own members to be a member of Ngā Kaihautū.8
c.  EPA must set terms of reference for Ngā Kaihautū and review them at intervals of no
more than 3 years.9
6.  The functions of Ngā Kaihautū are to:10
i.  provide advice and assistance to EPA on matters relating to policy, process and
decisions of the EPA under an environmental Act or the EPA Act,
ii.  provide advice on marine consent authority when the commit ee’s advice is
sought.  This function falls outside the scope of this paper.
b.  Any advice and assistance must be given from the Maori perspective and come
within the Ngā Kaihautū terms of reference.11
7.  The legislative framework, as described above, sets out important distinctions between
the EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū, which must be taken into consideration when
developing the new ways of working between EPA Board Ngā Kaihautū.
8.  Al  decisions relating to the operation of the EPA must be made by the Board. Ngā
Kaihautū is an advisory commit ee to the EPA Board. Their statutory role is to provide
advice and assistance to the EPA on matters relating to policy, process and decisions of
the EPA . This can include providing advice to any part of the EPA or directly to the EPA
Board. Matters relating to policy, process and decisions of the EPA under an
environmental Act or the EPA Act should be interpreted broadly to enable partnership.
However, Ngā Kaihautū does not have authority to direct the EPA. Only the EPA Board
has this authority. Where Ngā Kaihautū provides advice to the EPA Board, the EPA
Board has discretion to take Ngā Kaihautū advice into account.  This discretion should

3 Section 9(2) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011; Section 25 Crown Entities Act 2004
4 Section 13 Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
5 Section 14 Crown Entities Act 2004
6 Section 12 Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
7
2  Section 18(2) and (4) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
8 Section 18(3) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
9 Section 20 Environmental Protection Authority Act 62011
10 Section 19 Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011
11 Section 19(2) Environmental Protection Authority Act 2011

7

always be exercised through the framework provided by He Whetū Mārama, so while
EPA Board has the discretion, it should take Ngā Kaihautū advice into consideration in
the spirit of partnership.
Suggested new ways of working
9.  To better enable Ngā Kaihautū to provide advice on matters relating to policy, process
and decisions under an environmental Act, we suggest changing/implementing
processes that enable Ngā Kaihautū to provide advice to the EPA Board regarding
matters relating to policy, process and decisions of the EPA under an environmental Act
or the EPA Act.
10. Current examples of matters relating to policy, process and decisions under an
environmental Act or EPA Act are:
a.  Compliance Framework
b.  HSNO processes
c.  3, 30, 300 strategy paper
11. We have identified three changes to facilitate collaborative working/partnership between
NKTT and the EPA Board:
a.  Reframing the terms of reference to better reflect a relationship of partnership,
b.  No further letters of expectation to be sent by the EPA Board to Ngā Kaihautū;
instead Ngā Kaihautū and EPA Board enter into a dialogue on strategic priorities in
the spirit of partnership, informed by the objectives of the EPA, and
c.  Aligning Board practices and Ngā Kaihautū practices.
12. These changes are detailed below. Further thinking is needed to determine how best to
implement internal processes to support these changes.
13. To ensure these proposed changes work for both EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū as well
as EPA staff, we propose reviewing these new ways of working 6 months after
implementation. This review should include feedback from both the chair of Ngā
Kaihautū and the chair of the EPA Board, as well as EPA staff, particularly the CE, GM
KTT and General Counsel.
A – Reframe terms of reference
14. The EPA Act requires terms of reference to be set for Ngā Kaihautū but does not specify
the content of these. We suggest reframing the terms of reference to prioritise
partnership, protection, potential and participation under He Whetū Mārama.
15. While the terms of reference must be set by the EPA Board, they can (and we suggest
should) be developed jointly by Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board, in the spirit of
partnership.  As a starting point, we consider the terms of reference should:
a.  explicitly establish that the relationship between Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board is
one of partnership;
3
b.  incorporate He Whetū Mārama as the guiding framework;
7

8

c.  confirm the role and function of Ngā Kaihautū under the EPA Act in relation to the
EPA Board, including instruction of EPA management; and
d.  address meaningful ways of working together and provide for Ngā Kaihautū to give
advice and assistance to the EPA and EPA Board, including where advice or
assistance is not requested (consistent with Ngā Kaihautū’s functions).
16. We propose that the terms of reference should be developed and finalised by the joint
working commit ee of Ngā Kaihautū and EPA Board members with input from the CE,
GM KTT and General Counsel. The EPA Board wil  then set the terms of reference, as
required under the EPA Act.
B – No further letters of expectation
17. Unlike the terms of reference, there is no statutory requirement for the EPA Board to
send a letter of expectations to Ngā Kaihautū. Only one such letter has been sent.12 We
consider this practice should not continue as the instructional tone undermines an
effective partnership between Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board and the principles of He
Whetū Mārama more broadly.
18. Instead, we suggest the following:
a.  the EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū should both work towards delivering their
respective functions in light of the objectives of the EPA.
b.  the EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū should discuss EPA priorities, identifying areas
where EPA Board would benefit from the advice and assistance of Ngā Kaihautū.
c.  Enable Ngā Kaihautū to determine their own priorities in line with the objectives of
the EPA and to provide advice and assistance without request from the EPA Board.
C – Aligning EPA Board & Ngā Kaihautū practices
19. Below are the processes we suggest implementing in order to align the practices of the
EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū and enable them to work in partnership.
20. To ensure these processes work for both EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū as well as EPA
staff, we propose reviewing these processes 6 months after their implementation. This
review would include feedback from both the chair of Ngā Kaihautū and the chair of the
EPA Board, as well as EPA staf  involved in the workings of the EPA Board and Ngā
Kaihautū.
21. The proposals include:
a.  Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board should meet on consecutive days, with Ngā
Kaihautū meeting the day before the EPA Board.
b.  Two representatives of the EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū respectively should attend
a section of both meetings for shared discussions on papers where Ngā Kaihautū
may provide advice to the EPA Board. See Table 1 below for the proposed structure
and attendance at Ngā Kaihautū and EPA Board meetings.
4
22. One attendee should be the relevant Chair, while the second attendee would be a
rotation of EPA Board and Ngā Kaihautū m8embers respectively. This will ensure

12 This was sent for the 2020/2021 financial year

9

consistency, deepen relationships and build a culture of collective partnership.  It will also
provide a direct and practical opportunity for the EPA Board to have the benefit of
hearing the formulation and rationale behind Ngā Kaihautū advice, which will enrich their
decision.
23. Having the Board meetings on consecutive days also provides the EPA Board and Ngā
Kaihautū the opportunity to spend time together outside of these meetings in the
evening, between the Ngā Kaihautū meeting and the EPA Board meeting, to build and
maintain cohesive relationships between members. Prioritising relationships is an
important aspect of an ef ective partnership between Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board.
Pre-Meetings
24. There are several opportunities to determine whether an EPA Board paper should be
shared with Ngā Kaihautū:
a.  In their regular discussions between EPA Board Chair and the Chair of Ngā
Kaihautū, either Chair can identify a matter as being appropriate to seek Ngā
Kaihautū advice.
b.  In their regular discussions between Ngā Kaihautū and KTT, any member of Ngā
Kaihautū or KTT can identify a matter as being appropriate to seek Ngā Kaihautū
advice.
c.  When EPA Board requests a paper from management, it can advise whether that
paper should be shared with Ngā Kaihautū and Ngā Kaihautū attendees can ask for
a paper to be shared with Ngā Kaihautū.
d.  When ELT review the schedule for papers proposed for the EPA Board, the CE will
consider which papers are suitable to be shared with Ngā Kaihautū, on advice of the
GM KTT and GC&GM and suggest it to Ngā Kaihautū & EPA Board.
e.  Once confirmed, the EPA Board papers schedule should be shared with Ngā
Kaihautū. In response, Ngā Kaihautū can ask EPA Board for the opportunity to
provide advice on any of the board papers listed on the schedule.
f.  When EPA Board papers are writ en, authors wil  consider, in the spirit of
partnership, whether papers are suitable to be shared with Ngā Kaihautū.
g.  When EPA Board papers are submitted for review, the CE in consultation with
GC&GM and GM KTT (where necessary) wil  identify which papers are suitable to be
shared with Ngā Kaihautū.
h.  The draft EPA Board agenda wil  be shared with Ngā Kaihautū to enable them
opportunity to identify which matters they wil  provide advice on.
25. In determining whether an EPA Board paper should also go to Ngā Kaihautū,
consideration wil  be given, in the spirit of partnership, to whether the content of the
paper is relevant to Ngā Kaihautū’s statutory function of providing advice on matters
relating to policy, process and decisions under an environmental Act or the EPA Act. A
broad interpretation wil  be taken of what policy, process and decisions under an
environmental Act or the EPA Act.
5
26. These EPA Board papers will be marked as
9  to be shared with Ngā Kaihautū and will be
circulated to Ngā Kaihautū and the EPA Board at the same time.

10

27. Where Ngā Kaihautū has identified an opportunity to provide advice, they will notify KTT
who, in consultation with CE and GC&GM, will notify the EPA Board through the Board
Secretary.
NKTT Meeting Processes
28. We suggest having two EPA Board members at end the latter section of the Ngā
Kaihautū meetings where Ngā Kaihautū wil  be formulating their advice to the EPA
Board.
29. This will enable the Board members in attendance to develop a deeper understanding of
the reasoning and the process followed in the development of Ngā Kaihautū advice. This
will facilitate a more participatory partnership.
30. The Ngā Kaihautū chair wil  enable EPA Board attendees to engage in the discussion
through their usual facilitation. This includes asking questions and providing additional
context on the matter being considered, where it would be helpful.
31. However, to ensure Ngā Kaihautū advice remains independent of the EPA Board, EPA
Board attendees wil  not input into nor influence the Ngā Kaihautū advice.
32. Where Ngā Kaihautū do not wish EPA Board attendees to be present for their
discussion, the Chair may ask EPA Board attendees to leave for that item. This will
safeguard Ngā Kaihautū’s independence and protect Ngā Kaihautū free and frank
discussion when determining advice.
33. General Manager, KKT and General Counsel wil  also attend this section of the Ngā
Kaihautū meetings to provide additional support.
EPA Board Meeting Processes
34. We suggest having two Ngā Kaihautū members attend the earlier section of the EPA
Board meetings where there wil  be discussion of papers shared with Ngā Kaihautū as
well as the EPA Board. During this section, management wil  present and speak to their
Board Papers. Ngā Kaihautū attendees wil  have the benefit of hearing that discussion.
35. The EPA Board chair wil  enable Ngā Kaihautū attendees to engage in the discussion
through their usual facilitation. This includes asking questions of management.
36. Keeping in line with its statutory role, the EPA Board wil  give management directions or
seek further information from management. It wil  be acknowledged that while Ngā
Kaihautū can participate in the discussion, the statutory framework requires that only
EPA Board may direct management on EPA matters.
37. However, Ngā Kaihautū can advise the EPA Board to seek further information from
management. Technically the EPA Board can either take that advice into consideration
or disregard it. If the EPA Board accepts that advice, then the EPA Board wil  request the
relevant information from management, who wil  share the advice with both EPA Board
and Ngā Kaihautū where directed to do so by the EPA Board. If EPA Board does not
accept that advice, then it wil  proceed with making its decision in accordance with its
6  statutory function. However, we suggest that any advice offered by Ngā Kaihautū should
be taken into consideration in the spirit of partnership.
10

13

DRAFT AND CONFIDENTIAL
He Whetu Mārama Mahi – In the spirit of the Treaty
Who’s Who
1.  The statutory governing body of the EPA is the EPA Board. This body has the authority
to exercise and perform the powers and functions and make decisions; all within the
mandate provided by the EPA Act 2011 and the Crown Entities Act 2004.
2.  The Minister appoints between six to eight people as members of the Board with at least
one who has knowledge and experience related to the Treaty of Waitangi and Tikanga
Māori (Māori customary values and practices now deemed law by judgements of the
Court of Appeal and the Supreme Courti).
3.  Ngā Kaihautū Tikanga Taiao (NKTT) is an advisory committee of the Board, established
under the EPA Act, comprising four to eight people appointed by the EPA Board.  The
role of NKTT is to provide advice and assistance to the EPA on mat ers relating to policy,
process, and decisions of the EPA, provide specific marine advice when requested, and
provide general advice and assistance from the Māori perspective.
4.  This can include providing advice to any part of the EPA or directly to the Board on these
matters and should be interpreted broadly to enable partnership.
5.  The relationship between the EPA Board and NKTT has ‘waxed and waned’ over the
years, and tensions have developed over several issues and concerns about Māori
interests and the voice of Māori in the EPA’s work.  The development and implementation
of the mātauranga Māori framework in recent years has eased these, but in the last two
years, the relationship has been weakened.

He Whetū Mārama
6.  The EPA is committed to He Whetū Mārama, the framework that guides us in
undertaking our work.  It is established on the foundation of the Wawata that the unique
relationship of Māori to the environment informs EPA decision making (brought to life in
our mātauranga Māori framework).
7.  This approach is guided by the four key principles of the Treaty:
a.  Partnership: requires that we act reasonably, honourably and in good faith to
ensure the making of informed decisions affecting the interest of Māori
b.  Protection: requires us to take positive steps to ensure Māori interests,
knowledge, and experience are valued in its work
c.  Participation: informs the development of EPA strategy, policy and process that
enables effective engagement and input of Māori
d.  Potential: recognises that our work have impacts on the direction for future growth
and development in a Māori cultural and economic setting.
8.  Our efforts have been sincere, but in recent times, Māori representatives and the Courts
have observed that we are falling short especially in consultation, and the some of the
key sentiments of the Treaty.
1
13

14

A Vision for He Whetū Mārama
9.  At last year’s strategy session between the Board and NKTT, there was considerable
discussion about how to make the relationship between the bodies, and the nature of
each’s work, more meaningful.  Frustration was expressed by some NKTT members on
their ‘distanced’ role as an advisory commit ee and, to be frank, the ‘holding’ of decision
making powers by the Board.
10. This discussion was in the context of the contemporary debate across Aotearoa about
Māori self-determination and the serious issues related to Māori health, welfare, and
environment degradation.  The call for various forms of co-governance and the
movement to focused institutions seems to be well established, and the most recent
example being the Te Mana Hauora Māori, the Māori Health Authority.
11. The 3,30, 300 strategy is fully consistent with te Tiriti o Waitangi and aspires to introduce
an operational form of co-governance within the mandate and limitations of the EPA’s
empowering legislation.

How Could It Work
12. Whatever operational form is undertaken, the governing and legislative powers of the
EPA rests with the EPA Board. They are directors under the Crown Entity Act and have
responsibilities and liabilities that go with that role.
13. The recent re-establishment of the NKTT Tumuaki, as a non-voting member at the EPA
Board has been positive but does raise the question of that individual been deemed a
director if he/she participates directly in the governance and decision making of the
organisation. (This is obviously a grey area and would be subject to judgement and
debate if ever tested).
14. However, the possibility of other NKTT members been captured by the same fate under
some form of co-governance needs consideration as part of any model.
15. That aside, there is nothing in the legislation that prevents the EPA Board holding its
meetings in a wider forum perhaps called the EPA Council in partnership with NKTT
members – in effect, a joint meeting.
16. This meeting would run to an agenda reflecting both the Board’s and NKTT’s work plans
and overview, but with final decisions as they relate directly to the governance of the
organisation and its operations been restricted to EPA Board members.
17. In the interest of making this work meaningful, there would need to be total transparency
and inclusion on all aspects of the Board and NKTT’s work including strategy, budgets,
people, and CE performance and appointment.
18. The issue of one Chair, co-Chairs, or rotating Chairs could be considered, but as the EPA
Board Chair holds a specifically recognised accountability and liabilityii, as established by
case law and legislation, it may have to be the EPA Board Chair that runs these
meetings.
19. Success of this model depends on personalities, but in terms of Chairs especially, and
the stars have aligned with the appointment of Mavis Mullins and Rob Campbell as NKTT
2
14

15

and EPA Chairs respectively – both with considerable governance experience and a style
and approach that would support and assist such a proposal.
20. Given the size of the combined body and the appointment of members of the EPA Board
by the Minister, consideration could be given to reducing the size of NKTT to the
minimum of four members to make the combined number of 12 members of Council
work. However, this is a matter of judgement and may not be considered an issue under
this model.
21. We suspect this type of structure is not unique, although it has not been researched, but
universities and membership organisations often have councils or bodies with tiered
levels of membership and voting rights.
22. If the EPA implemented such an approach, it would continue its track record of ‘making
history’, building on the inclusion of mātauranga Māori in EPA decisions making practices
and provide strong leadership in the public service.

i Reference relevant judgements
ii There is a Court case making it clear that a Chair is a special case of a director.
3
15

16
Environmental Protection
Authority Board
Meeting Minutes
Held at 9.30am, Thursday 10 February 2022
HELD VIA ZOOM

16

17

Out of scope
3e   Board and NKTT Co-Governance
The Chair opened the discussion on Board and NKTT co-governance by advising this matter had been
discussed with both Ministers Parker and Twyford, s 9(2)(g)(i) OIA
. He also requested
feedback on the two papers provided; ‘Suggested ways of working – EPA and NKTT’ and ‘He Whetu Marama
Mahi – In the spirit of the Treaty’.  These may be found on pages 5 - 15 of this document
The Board noted:
•
The CE had been considering the relationship between the Board and NKTT, observing some of the
frustrations and taking into account the wider sentiment of the government and community.
•
The strategy had been rewritten to highlight the improved way the EPA was undertaking work in this
area.
•
The EPA was exemplar in the way it was already working with Māori, and this appeared to be the right
time to naturally progress partnership as both Chairs and CE supported working together.
•
Given the imbalance embedded in the current legislation, there was stil  an opportunity to behave in
ways that were equal and respectful.
The Board discussed the two papers and were unanimously supportive of the partnership moving forward,
subject to the expectations being very clear, the practical and legal issues worked through i.e meeting logistics
addressed, issues being addressed regarding NKTT providing DMC advice and any legal ramifications being
looked into.
4
10 February 2022
17

18

In addition, the Board suggested the NKTT Letter of Expectations was no longer a requirement.
The Board:
a.
Received and noted the two papers on options for Board and NKTT co governance.
b.
Resolved to proceed to positively seek the input from NKTT and work together to find a practical proposal for
both the Board and NKTT.
Out of scope
5
10 February 2022
18