Seabed act likely to be axed

CARYS MONTEATH/The Press

OUR PLACE: Kiana Bebbington, 2, and her father, Luke Bebbington, play on Sumner Beach yesterday. While the Foreshore and Seabed Act may be scrapped, New Zealanders' right of access to the beach was "an absolute bottom line" for the Government.

Relevant offers

Politics

MPs' travel bills leap during election Remedial work for navy's problem ship Wait for new oil law before awarding permits, Govt urged TVNZ included in police Electoral Act investigation Sea law 'an environmental risk' Govt defends 50c an hour minimum wage lift Maori queue-jumping for SOEs raised More claims about PM's man and doco funding Peters demands apology over Whanau Ora row Today in politics: Friday, February 10

Maori are set to claim millions of dollars in compensation over the Labour government's Foreshore and Seabed Act, which is likely to be scrapped.

A review of the contentious 2003 legislation, which vested ownership of the foreshore and seabed with the Crown and stopped Maori seeking customary title through the courts, recommended the act be repealed.

The review, a condition of the Maori Party's supply and confidence agreement with National, said the Government should start negotiating a settlement with affected iwi.

The review panel's report, which runs to hundreds of pages, was released yesterday and says the public's "use and enjoyment" of beaches should be enshrined in any new law giving title to Maori.

It also says Maori should not return to court over the issue. Instead, it says, all affected iwi should receive customary title and usage rights to the foreshore and seabed, with a caveat that the public's "reasonable" use and enjoyment of the area also be protected.

The review panel slams the current law as "simply wrong in principle and approach" and says it "discriminates against Maori".

It considered demanding an apology or recognition of wrong from the Crown, but this was not in its terms of reference.

Prime Minister John Key said a national settlement could involve millions of dollars in compensation, but that was also possible under current law.

He declined to say whether National would repeal the act, but regardless of what happened to it, New Zealanders' right of access to the beach was "an absolute bottom line".

He did not believe the debate would be as contentious as it was in 2003, when the Court of Appeal ruled that Marlborough iwi were entitled to take a claim for customary title on the foreshore and seabed to the Maori Land Court.

Attorney-General Chris Finlayson said the law was "spectacularly unsuccessful" and "a source of discord".

The panel says Maori had a right to go to court taken away without sufficient compensation.

"The act should be repealed and the process of balancing Maori property rights in the foreshore and seabed with public rights and public expectations must be started again," it says.

The panel gives the Crown four options allowing Maori to return to court to determine their rights; implementing a Treaty of Waitangi settlement-style process; negotiating a national one-off settlement with affected iwi; or a mix of a national settlement and local access rights.

It says allowing Maori to return to court over the issue would probably be "protracted, laborious and expensive" and could result in "an unmanageable patchwork of litigation".

The panel recommends the mixed option, which would include national recognition of Maori customary title to all foreshore and seabed, specific access and usage rights for iwi and the public right to "access and navigation" over the area.

It also recommends an interim law that would repeal the current act, recognise customary rights, provide the public with rights of "use and enjoyment" to the area and set up the mechanism needed for the settlement process.

The panel says formal legal title to the foreshore and seabed should remain with the Crown in the interim.

The review team held 21 hui, met all parties affected by the law and received 580 submissions. More than 80 per cent of submitters opposed the act.

On the Government's response, Finlayson would only say it would ensure that interests and concerns of all New Zealanders were balanced.

The legislation had proven to be one of the most contentious laws in recent history, he said.

Asked if compensation was likely, he said: "If there's a national settlement, that's the sort of thing that would be involved."

Maori Affairs Minister Pita Sharples said the report confirmed there was "widespread dissatisfaction" with the law that was not confined to Maori.

Labour leader Phil Goff said it was important to reconcile the differences between Maori and Pakeha on the issue.

"I think there must be agreement that there is free public access to our beaches that is fundamental.

"Equally, it's possible to recognise customary rights and customary title without giving away that fundamental right of New Zealanders," Goff said.

Ngai Tahu chairman Mark Solomon said the report offered a balanced approach to an issue "blown out of proportion" by the former government.

- © Fairfax NZ News