As the receiver of the Central North Island Forestry Partnership, I am deeply concerned that the Government may sign the final deed of a Treaty of Waitangi settlement with Ngati Awa this week without resolving ownership and access rights over the roading network in the Kaingaroa forest. If this happens, the Government's actions will not only breach the partnership's ownership rights but could affect the viability of a billion-dollar forest resource and damage New Zealand's commercial reputation. The Government has delayed the signing of the controversial Ngati Awa deed of settlement until Thursday, saying this was to allow us time to be reassured that the partnership's ownership and access rights across the private roading network in the Kaingaroa forest would be protected. Ngati Awa has said it will not be unreasonable in its negotiations, but it refuses to negotiate until after the signing of the final deed. The Government has said the same thing. Despite the absurdity of being asked to pay to use roads the partnership already owns, we have put a generous offer to the Government which cuts through the legal debate, confirms the partnership's rights, and provides certainty for the future. But both the Government and Ngati Awa are refusing to consider it before signing the final deed, and after it is signed the partnership's rights will have been irreparably damaged. The reason is that the Government will then have a duty to Ngati Awa to pass legislation which implements the final deed as signed. The provisions of the initialled deed, which the Government and Ngati Awa signed last July, significantly alter the partnership's existing rights of ownership and access over the private roading network within the forest. Yet we have not been consulted by the Government over the effect of the Ngati Awa settlement on the partnership's ownership and access rights. We know that other tribes have been. This sends negative signals to potential overseas investors. The result is uncertainty for all concerned: For the partnership because it will be stripped of its ownership rights and does not know what price it will be forced to pay for access. For us as receiver because it affects our ability to sell the licences. For other iwi because they do not know what they will have to pay for access across Ngati Awa's land. For the regional economy as forestry players consider the ongoing viability of Kaingaroa and the implications of a significant increase in the use of public roads by fully laden logging trucks. For the national economy because of the size of the forestry sector and because the Government's actions in this case may make major international players nervous about investing in New Zealand. This did not need to happen. In 1989, the then Government wanted to sell forestry land, including the Kaingaroa forest, to repay debt. To quell Maori concerns that this would prejudice claims for the return of land, the Crown Forest Assets Act was passed. This allows the Government to sell the cutting rights to the trees while keeping ownership of the underlying land for possible return to Maori. In 1990 the then Government transferred ownership of the trees and the road network to the partnership's predecessors under the Crown Forests Assets Act and 13 licences. In addition, while the Government remained owner of the land, it gave the right to use the land to the partnership in return for a licence fee. The Government has argued that the licences do not state what rights flow from ownership of the road network. While that is true, ownership has strong legal rights attached to it. The partnership has, since 1990, used the entire road network to service all 13 licences. The Government has always known that this is the way the forest works and has readily agreed to it because it increases the licence fee which the partnership pays the Government for use of the land. These ownership and control rights have existed since 1990. The partial change in the identity of the licensees forming the partnership is not relevant. Nothing that has happened since 1990 has changed those rights. These ownership and control rights continue after the underlying land passes from the Government's ownership to Ngati Awa. So we are not trying to create rights where none existed. The Ngati Awa settlement has triggered a change in the Government's approach. It gives ownership of the roads to the Government and Ngati Awa, and forces the partnership to pay for roads that it already owns. Ngati Awa will benefit since not only will it now own and control the road network on its land but it will be able to get a commercial return on the road network which the partnership owns. Not only the partnership will be affected. Other iwi who have claims over the forest will suffer because they will have to pay Ngati Awa for access over its land. The Ngati Awa land is a gateway to the rest of the forest. If access rights are not resolved, it could devalue any other land returned to other iwi in the Kaingaroa forest. The value of cutting rights and the underlying land is affected by the availability of access. The deed establishes a template which the Government wants to reproduce for the rest of the forest. This will result in a significant number of inter-iwi negotiations, which may take decades. We are faced with the unenviable prospect of either entering into lengthy and uncertain negotiations with the Government and Ngati Awa, or expensive and lengthy legal proceedings. Other iwi with interests in the other parts of the forest will be put in a similar predicament. It is a process that iwi and the commercial world will watch with grave concern. (c) The New Zealand Herald, 2003