Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill – 2nd reading
Hon Dr Pita Sharples, Co-leader of the Maori Party
Tuesday 8 March 2011; 5.30pm

I stand today, driven by the support of the wider Maori Party, to speak at the second reading of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill.

Two months after the submissions closed for the Takutai Moana Bill, Te Karere carried out a poll of just over 1002 Māori voters from the Māori and General rolls interviewed during the month of January.

There was only one percentage point difference between those who thought the Maori Party should support the Bill and those who shouldn’t.

But by far the greatest result was a massive 37.2% of voters who fell into the ‘don’t know’ category.

Minister Turia and I attended a number of Iwi Leaders’ hui. At one of these hui, there were over 70 tribal and hapū leaders present. Some spoke in support of the bill, some spoke against it, but ALL expressed their support for the Māori Party’s stand to repeal the 2004 act as we promised.

I also recall the Iwi Leader’s hui on Waitangi weekend in Waitangi where iwi leaders voiced their thanks and support for the Māori Party’s activity and effort.

Mr Speaker the point is this, any talk of 95% of Māori opposing this bill is fabrication and mischievous.

We need to remember that the Maori Party cannot afford to walk away. We could not face our future giving away the best opportunity we have to make a difference.

We knew that neither of the larger parties – red or blue – would touch this legislation with a bargepole if it was not to achieve progress in this term

And yet not one Maori has come to me, and said, please do what we can to entrench the 2004 Foreshore and Seabed Bill for the rest of time.

In fact as the Tamaki Makaurau electorate membership told me so forcefully yesterday just “hurry up and repeal the foreshore and seabed act”.

Of the close to 4000 submissions received on the 2004 Act; 94 percent opposed it.

Five years later in the 2009 Ministerial Review of that Act, the bitter opposition to that 2004 Act was still profoundly evident. The Ministerial Review’s first recommendation to Government was, and I quote:

“First of all, the Act should be repealed. That Act is built on such shaky foundations that it should be repealed rather than amended. It is necessary to start again. It also gave Maori such umbrage that many of them will not buy into an alternative statutory regime unless the old Act is seen to be repealed.”

And so what we have done, very simply, is to start again.

We have started again, by restoring the ability for customary title to be recognised.

This Bill explicitly recognises the enduring mana based relationship of whanau, hapu and iwi to the marine and coastal area in their rohe. The automatic award of Mana Tuku Iho demonstrates this. Maori do not have to prove anything in order to achieve this recognition - it is theirs by right as tangata whenua.

But importantly, this Bill starts again, by establishing the fundamental - indeed the pivotal importance of tikanga – in determining title.

The 2004 Act did not incorporate tikanga in its tests. This Bill – the Takutai Moana bill – encompasses tikanga as a key element in the test for customary title and allows for differences in tikanga from group to group.

The tests, of course, have been a major concern for whanau, hapu and iwi and a key point of negotiation for us in the duration of this Bill. We have argued for recognition of the different ways that Maori have continued to exercise kaitiakitanga over foreshore and seabed areas.

We acknowledge too the very real need to ensure that raupatu claimants are not excluded through the requirement to satisfy the court or crown officials that raupatu did not cause a substantial interruption to their exclusive use and occupation of the takutai moana.

We welcomed the initiative taken by the hapu of Ngati Ranginui iwi who provided wording which would exempt iwi and hapu from having to do this; to give raupatu iwi the certainty that they seek to ensure that raupatu will not be deemed a substantial interruption when they make claims for title.

And we acknowledge the very significant contribution made by Ngai Tahu to this aspect of the debate. Mark Solomon spoke passionately to the select committee about being disqualified from the bill by reason of their generosity. He was speaking about the practice of manaakitanga - of hospitality and sharing – which was demonstrated in their sharing the bounty of the sea – and the bounty of the foreshore.

We believe the consideration of manaakitanga is vital to successful understanding of the framework around this Bill – and we are pleased that through our intervention it now forms part of the Preamble to the Bill.

I think it is important to note that a historical breach of the Treaty does not automatically break the chain of continuity necessary to prove exclusive use and occupation. It is possible that customary title could exist in an area where breaches of the Treaty have occurred. It all depends on the facts and circumstances of each case.

Everyone in this House knows that this Bill is not the perfect Bill; it will not please everyone.

But it provides recognition and protection of customary rights - and that is why Ngati Apa took a case to the Maori Land Court all those years ago – to have these rights recognised.

It has not just happened overnight – many thousands of submissions, of hui, of legal papers, of frameworks, of polls and surveys have been undertaken since 2003 when the Court of Appeal agreed that Ngati Apa could have customary title investigated by the Courts

This Bill restores the ability of Maori to seek customary property rights in the High Court. Customary interests extinguished by the 2004 Act are restored.

And as Tariana has said earlier, this Bill places the burden of proof on the Crown to prove that extinguishment of customary title had not occurred.

I concur with the thinking of esteemed leaders who have encouraged hapu and iwi to start preparing for the negotiations process, to establish a precedent. We have worked hard to ensure that there is funding in place, to be made available to iwi in a manner similar to how claimant funding is provided for in the Treaty settlement negotiations process.

We do of course, recognise, that the Bill does not settle all the issues – but it does keep them alive. There was a very strong message from the submissions made by whanau, hapu and iwi, that we must apply every effort to ensure the momentum is maintained, in creating a new Treaty based longer conversation to recognise and give effect to the mana of hapu and iwi.

The Maori Party pledges our ongoing commitment to that call – a call we will take up with passion in the Constitutional Review – and indeed a call which will continue to motivate us in every policy outcome we seek.

And if there is one key challenge that we must adhere to in every successive stage of this Bill – and every bill in front of the house – it will be to carry the message of the 2004 Hikoi – the message of the various United Nations reports – the message of the Waitangi Tribunal – that we do our utmost to ensure the longer conversation takes place in a way which is enduring, meaningful and honours the intent of Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

We support the second reading of this Bill.

ends

© Scoop Media