Ad Feedback

Key signals end of seabed law

By MICHAEL FOX and TRACY WATKINS - The Dominion Post
Last updated 05:00 02/11/2009
Don Brash
ROB KITCHIN/Dominion Post
WRONG: Former National party leader Don Brash says National got it wrong when it opposed iwi being able to test their claim to ownership of the foreshore and seabed in court.

Relevant offers

Politics

Sharples' stepson to be ordained in marae first Buy your furniture or we'll sell it, Crown tells ministers Harawira may not be forced out of party Consultants 'scandalous waste of money' Complaints about Harawira flood in 'Sticking points' stall ETS Parents know better than you, Children's Commissioner told Auckland Supercity structure unveiled Copenhagen negotiations on track - Groser National makes progress on ETS bill support

The foreshore and seabed legislation will almost certainly be repealed, but no decision has been taken on what might replace it, Prime Minister John Key said today.

Cabinet today discussed a paper about the Foreshore and Seabed Act though final policy decisions might not be known for months.

The controversial Act followed a 2003 Court of Appeal ruling that made it possible, in some instances, for Maori customary title to convert into freehold title.

Mr Key said this afternoon that the act would remain in place until an acceptable alternative was worked out in conjunction with coalition partners the Maori Party and iwi leaders.

"I think it's better to try and get some agreements before we make some decisions to repeal," he said.

Mr Key added it was "in New Zealand's interests to get to a point where there is cross party support," he said. 

He said discussions had been positive so far.

The Maori Party has welcomed what it called "the clear indication" that the Act would be repealed.

"There is a process in place that we support," said co-leaders Pita Sharples and Mrs Turia.

"As the Maori Party our job is to secure repeal - now the initiative moves to iwi and hapu to find a way forward in negotiations with the Government."

Mr Key said there was no rush to come to decisions and these would be made in the coming months with the entire process completed in 2010.

Ministers had no expectation on making final decisions today and Mr Key appeared relaxed about the Maori Party saying a repeal decision could be announced.

"It is something they care a lot about, it was the genesis of the party."

Mr Sharples told an Anglican Church hui last week that the Government would scupper the act after months of consultation.

The ministerial review team recommended repealing the act and replacing it with an interim system recognising customary rights and public access while wide consultation over a replacement took place.

National opposed the legislation when in opposition and former leader Don Brash whipped up a Pakeha backlash with his "one law for all" speech at Orewa in 2004. National's iwi/Kiwi billboards in the 2005 election rode the wave of dissent.

Dr Brash said yesterday he had no regrets about the billboards, but admitted National got it wrong, in his view, when it opposed iwi being able to test their claim to ownership of the foreshore and seabed in court.

The Foreshore and Seabed Act was written in response to a Court of Appeal case that suggested iwi able to prove continuous customary use of the foreshore and seabed might have a claim to freehold title.

Ad Feedback

The act stopped Maori seeking title through the courts, but opened the door to compensation. However, it was attacked by Maori as a massive land grab, causing protests and giving birth to the Maori Party.

"I suspect that had the iwi concerned been allowed to test their case we might have avoided a great deal of subsequent history," Dr Brash said.

"A number of legal experts have suggested ... the ability to prove customary rights would actually have been quite limited. And we might have avoided much of the controversy that occurred."

His comments stunned some former opponents – Labour MP Shane Jones was momentarily speechless. "He said that? Well, s ..., he's been mugged on the way to Damascus."

Mr Jones blamed Dr Brash for much of the "inflammatory, divisive and extremely hurtful" debate around race relations and the act.

"It's a good reminder for those of us who are in politics that Maori are a football that people regularly use for a cheap political hit or a cheap thrill. The country, I believe, is much the poorer for what [Dr Brash] did."

- with NZPA

72 comments
Post a comment
peter pan   #72   07:49 pm Nov 03 2009

John Bones #68 Ignorance is no excuse for stupidity JB. In terms of human history it was only yesterday. In terms of Law, it is still binding. Try telling your bank that you wont pay your credit card because you signed the agreement in the past and it was a contract between an idiot (true) and a foreign power (most likely).

the real jake the snake   #71   06:07 pm Nov 03 2009

Sam #69 "Maori just forgot the injustices caused by some iwi to each other"

Not so Sam. In recent years there have been many actions taken to redress past injustices between Maori. In fact, Moriori and Taranaki Maori have engaged in considerable work to acknowledge the pain caused in the Chathams. Rather than ignorantly saying 'let the past be the past', they have engaged in healing so all can move forward. It is a model for all the country.

pete   #70   04:24 pm Nov 03 2009

Sam, the points of view of long term ethnic majorities or any others are irrelevant. What matters is the agreement between the Crown and Maori in the form of the Treaty of Waitangi. Love it or hate it an agreement is an agreement. That is why successive governments are trying to address historical grievance.

Sam   #69   02:48 pm Nov 03 2009

Maori should get their day in Court to have their claims heard and this is why the Act should be repealed.

However, Maori want freehold title to the SB&FS, this is absolutely crazy, both for the marine environment and public access. Anyone who has travelled to a country where you have to pay to go to the beach would know this kind of thing just creates racial tension and oppression.

If Maori get title to the SB&FS, but the title is heavily covenanted to allow public access/protect the environment then I would be happy. Do Maori think this would be a just result???

All this Maori/White Maori/Maori stuff is pretty irrelevant, as Maori never signed a treaty with other Maori, which is legally significant. Though from a moral pov I have always found it amazing the Maori just forgot the injustices caused by some iwi to each other e.g. Ngati Toa to Ngai Tahu, even though the fact this happened is acutally a good thing and something I hope Maori can adopt someday towards other groups.

I have always been interested in the views of Asian people on the rights of Maori, do you care? You certainly cannot throw in treaty guilt? This is because as the long-term ethnic majority your views are probably most relevant.

John Bones   #68   12:17 pm Nov 03 2009

This has nothing to do with a treaty, that was between a dictatorial English monarchy and group of Neolithic people trapped in a never ending stone age- neither of which have any relevance in our modern society. It has everything to do with the born to rule idiots thinking they can make money by creating racial hatred.

Adolf Marx   #67   10:41 am Nov 03 2009

Richard, you are not alone in your concerns vis a vis Treaty issues. Much of middle New zealand thinks this way, and erronously so. The reason for redress has nothing to do with 'race,' (it is ethnicity by the way--and if you don't know the difference please educate yourself)... it is about honouring a contract, and the spirit of that contract. The alternative is ... well, just read a little history, and not just our own. Post-colonial environs world wide scream the same message. The lesson is simple; Maori are not just going to be'assimilated' into the white potato either by force or social engineering. The only way forward that will engender social harmony, as I see it, is through a true partnership, a relationship built on consensus building, mutual respect and enrichment.

Bernie   #66   10:24 am Nov 03 2009

Bill #54

Australia is more forward thinking than New Zealand? Wow! You're obviously NOT an indigenous Australian. As for the smarter Kiwis moving to Aussie, how much more room do you have over there, 'cos there's plenty of Kiwi's here that are welcome to make a new home in your country. Yes folks! There's a plane leaving right now to the fair and forward-thinking isles of Orstralia so if you've had a gutsful of those "pesky" Maori fulla's then you know what you can do.

Alternately, you can stay here, READ and EMBRACE our history and help get the future of this country on track. A future that includes our most precious taonga - our indigenous people, the Maori.

Poppy   #65   10:15 am Nov 03 2009

Rangi #35

Great to see your post again and to be proved right re: Maori Party suporting National - ACC, to trade off for this. Congrats to you.

But I think this goes further, I believe customary rights will include selling mining rights to Rio Tinto and the other mining companies sniffing around our shores, the govt has already sold prospecting rights for most of the west coast of the north island. Whatever the case I voted Labour and list vote went to Maori Party. They've let me down. Im only voting Labour if Shane Jones leads if not my next vote goes Green and list Green. Everyone else is a sell out!

pete   #64   09:56 am Nov 03 2009

TP #62,

You hit the nail on the head. It was and still is all about land grab, and theft from those who are deemed not fitting to own such assets by those who still see themselves as genetically and culturally superior. It is repeated throughout the world wherever there are indigenous people with land.

The problem here is they attempted to do it part through brute force and part through legislation, which is coming back time and time again to haunt them.

If you don't like your treaty which was your idea, written with your ink on your paper then don't live here.

TP   #63   09:32 am Nov 03 2009

Bill #54 08:51 pm Nov 02 2009

"Somehow what the Pakeha did doesn't seem that bad, (they spared their lives)."

Did they? It wasn't through a lack of trying. Do some research into history and you'll find many occasions pointing to the opposite. The Europeans didn't "spare their lives" they tried to overpower Maori and found it didn't work. All you're doing is painting Maori with the barbaric label, and Europeans with the merciful label. Unbelievable.

"Do we blame Maori today for the slaughter of the Moriori?" -uh, read the posts below, and in any Maori-related comments story.


Show 13-62 of 72 comments

Post comment


Required

Required. Will not be published.
Registration is not required to post a comment but if you sign in, you will not have to enter your details each time you comment. Registered members also have access to extra features. Create an account now.

I have read and accepted the terms and conditions
These comments are moderated. Your comment, if approved, may not appear immediately. Please direct any queries about comment moderation to the Opinion Editor at blogs@stuff.co.nz
Ad Feedback
Special offers

Featured Promotions