no Hauraki involvement at all. Without any guidance and input from us, we cannot therefore have any confidence in the Museum to care for them appropriately and in accordance with our tikanga. We do not have the confidence in the museums and Auckland Museum in particular to care, protect and maintain our taonga and nor do we want them to continue to obtain our property without our input.

65. While we are very frustrated and unhappy with the current situation and relationship with the Auckland, Waikato museums and others that house our taonga, we will continue to attempt to engage with them to find a better way to care for our taonga and to be involved in what happens to our taonga.¹⁸

A BETTER APPROACH - THE NISGA’A MODEL

66. I have had a long interest in taonga going back over 20 years and given our immense dissatisfaction with the current situation I have compared the policies of some overseas institutions with the policies and practices currently carried out by our museums in New Zealand.¹⁹

67. In my opinion, our museum practice in regard to taonga is out of date and old fashioned in many respects. In particular, it is often stated that our taonga cannot be repatriated because of practical difficulties such as there being no security or secure environment available; that there are no physical facilities suitable for the ongoing care of the objects, taking into account humidity, temperature and lighting; or that the objects are too fragile and will get damaged if they are moved around.

68. I do not accept these excuses and believe there is a code of silence by the museums not to reveal innovative solutions which have been in place for sometime now in Canada as epitomised by the Nisga’a treaty

¹⁸ It is noted that at the current time, we have not received any response to a letter to the Waikato Museum outlining our interests in our taonga at that Museum, including the Kauri Point Combs. A copy of this letter is annexed and marked “B”

¹⁹ Refer Brief of Evidence of Dr Furey dated 25 September 2006