Tangata Whenua accountability to the Kāwana 2 Rangatiratanga Kāwanatanga Tangata Whenua Kāwana In a range of circumstances, Tangata Whenua section 18 of the Environmental Protection may be accountable to the Kāwana. Examples include appointments and relationships where Tangata Whenua advise the Kāwana. For example, Ngā Kaihautū Tikanga Taiao is the statutory Māori Advisory Committee established under Authority Act 2011. The committee’s statutory requirement is to provide advice and assistance from a Māori perspective. Although they may be applying tikanga within their role, the committee’s accountability is to the Kāwana. In what circumstances would Māori be accountable to the Kāwana in terms of tikanga Māori? Accountability to the Crown outside of contractual or work obligations or Kāwana legal requirements such as taxes and rate payments does not seem to reflect the process of tikanga Māori, which takes place in the Māori sphere. Māori whānau and hapū have an effective, operational accountability system that requires accountability to whānau, hapū and, in identified cases, iwi and at the national level. This tikanga Māori system operates alongside the parliamentary system of laws. However, as a Tiriti partner, the whānau/ hapū accountability system is to whānau/hapū through mana motuhake, and that in turn enables Māori to attain tino rangatiratanga. Currently, both Māori and Pākehā are required to respond to parliamentary law. Services are provided in line with Kāwana policies, and there are public (constructive) accountability systems in place to ensure that responsibilities and policies are given effect to (such as penalties for non-payment of taxes). The calls to strengthen the Kāwana accountability systems are discussed in the following sections. In only limited examples, as our case studies indicate, are Māori able to manage systems for Māori in ways culturally appropriate for Māori, even though examples of mana motuhake or tino rangatiratanga are operating in other countries with positive cultural responses. However, He Puapua74 envisioned a future for Aotearoa New Zealand where tikanga as constructive accountability might also function under the Crown’s authority in certain circumstances – in other words, a system that respected the systems of accountability of both Māori and Pākehā. 31