Housing connecting whānau and whenua An opportunity for the housing sector is to enable construction on Māori land, thus connecting whānau with their identity and whakapapa111. It is also an opportunity to seek ways to enable reconnection where tūrangawaewae links were severed through land alienation but the desperate need for housing within a rohe remains. There is also an opportunity to enable whānau, hapū and iwi to define the values that they seek represented in housing, whether it be through design for identity or expressed connection with the whenua, the health of the whenua and waterways and provision for future generations. Kāwanatanga: the role of the Kāwana Kāwana constructive or effective accountability to Māori has been broadly absent or weak since the Treaty was signed in 1840. The key reason for that could be because, until the last 40 years or so, the Kāwana did not accept it had a responsibility to Māori except as a citizen of Aotearoa New Zealand, as with any other ‘subject’. The introduction of the Waitangi Tribunal was intended to address Treaty grievances, but the Tribunal is advisory, not determinative. The Kāwana remains in a position of power but now does treat Māori as a partner in the Treaty, albeit an inferior one. The references to principles of the Treaty as well as partnership discussion, which tended to avoid direct reference to the Treaty text, have been noted. The Cabinet Office circular of 2019, to which the New Zealand Law Society alerted its members,112 advised that, while the principles of the Treaty had previously been referenced, the Courts now take the text of the Treaty as the focus. From this, our understanding is that the Kāwana now recognises that concepts in Te Tiriti such as rangatiratanga are relevant to accountability, and as the Ministry of Health notes on its website,113 Tiriti obligations apply to the services the department provides (although they are referenced still as Treaty principles). Accountability in terms of Te Tiriti, by implication, applies to all Kāwana departments and services, including housing. While Treaty obligations and accountability to Māori might be accepted, the Kāwana mechanisms for addressing constructive or effective accountability are generally enacted and then enforced through parliamentary legislation such as the Resource Management Act (now under review). This legislation and administration of it, as well as that of education and housing, are examples that have frequently failed Māori in terms of accountability. We have also discussed relationships as an important factor for Māori in ensuring effective accountability and suggest that this is the sphere where accountability is best addressed in Kāwanatanga accountability to Māori. A Kāwanatanga collective responsibility in terms of Te Tiriti as is recognised and customarily enforced in terms of tikanga Māori could be considered as an approach by the Kāwana in terms of its accountability to Māori, including for housing. 47