Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | News Video | Crime | Employers | Housing | Immigration | Legal | Local Govt. | Maori | Welfare | Unions | Youth | Search

 

Fact sheet: Foreshore and Seabed

Fact sheet: Foreshore and Seabed

3 July 2003

Kia ora, below is a Q & A fact sheet re the debate about the foreshore and seabed, prepared by Te Hau Tikanga / The Maori Law Commission, which we are circulating as a follow up to last week's 'Alert! the 2003 land confiscation plan'.


A FORESHORE PRIMER

Prepared by Te Hau Tikanga - The Maori Law Commission.

This Primer canvasses some of the questions being raised in the current debate about the foreshore and seabed. It is based upon common concerns expressed by Maori over a course of Crown action that has already been labelled a new confiscation and which raises serious constitutional issues about the true nature of the Treaty relationship.

* Is this debate a new issue?

No. Ever since 1840 Iwi and Hapu have claimed that the foreshore and seabed fall within the exercise of tino rangatiratanga because they are both part of the whenua. However the Crown has assumed that it has absolute ownership of it and there have been numerous Maori protests and court cases through the years.

* So it's a Treaty issue then?

It is clearly covered as a Treaty right in Article Two which acknowledges that Iwi and Hapu have "exclusive and undisturbed possession" of lands etc.

However the Treaty merely reaffirmed a right and authority which Maori had exercised for centuries before 1840.

* Why has the debate become so prominent only recently?

The Court of Appeal decided on June 26 that the eight Iwi in Marlborough could have their claim to their stretch of foreshore and seabed heard in the Maori Land Court.

* Was the case decided as a Treaty issue?

No. The Court considered the matter as a common law issue because English and colonial law had long ago decided that "aboriginal" or "customary rights and title" continued after the Crown had established a colony.

The Court decided that it was the job of the Maori Land Court to define what they were.

* Are these common law "customary rights and title" the same as those claimed by Iwi before 1840?

No. There are similarities but the major difference is that the extent and nature of the common law version is actually defined by the Crown which has also assumed a right to extinguish or remove them.

What may be called the tipuna or Maori law version was defined by Maori - thus for example only Nga Puhi could define their rights and title and certainly no other Iwi had any right to extinguish them.

* So what was the government's reaction to the decision?

The day after the Court decision government raised objections and announced it would pass legislation clearly vesting ownership of the foreshore and seabed in the Crown. It effectively sought to override both the tipuna version and its own common law version of Maori rights.

* Why?

The Prime Minister and the Attorney General argued that it had always been "assumed" that the Crown owned the foreshore (had "title" to it) and that it merely wished to confirm that for the benefit of "all New Zealanders".

They also said Pakeha people were worried that Maori might block off access to the beaches or sell them.

There was also concern because many of the free trade agreements that the government enters into require that there be no confusion over title.

* Has the government done this kind of thing before?

Lots of times. Only a few weeks ago it rejected a Waitangi Tribunal Report acknowledging a Maori interest in oil and petroleum.

* Did the government discuss the issue with Maori?

No - not even its own Maori MP's.

* Do the other political parties support the Government?

Most appear to do so.

ACT and National have already said the Crown must immediately extinguish any Maori claims to title because of the "public interest" and because there must only be "one standard of citizenship for all".

* What is the current government position?

It has effectively not changed since its original announcement.

The obvious Maori opposition to its policy has resulted in meetings with Maori caucus and other Maori groups but its basic stance is still that it will legislate to take ownership while recognising certain "customary uses". It has also raised the possibility that compensation for Iwi might be considered.

* Isn't that some sort of progress though?

The extent of progress always depends where you measure it from and the government's current position as outlined by Michael Cullen is seriously flawed.

It justifies caucus discussions because it has "an electoral mandate to represent Maori" but their representation is within the government - the Crown in effect is talking to the Crown.

It illustrates its argument that the key issue now is customary use by suggesting that Maori never had a concept of ownership. However the use absolutely depended upon the "title" of rangatiratanga - without that title and its "full and exclusive" authority the rights could not be properly protected or exercised.

In that context the issue is a fundamental constitutional one and such questions are never best or finally settled by the payment of compensation.

* What does the government decision mean?

It blocks access to the courts for those iwi and Hapu who wish to pursue common law claims. In effect the government is denying one of the fundamental rights in the Magna Carta.

It subordinates rangatiratanga to the whim of the Crown and acts in breach of the Treaty.

It assumes Iwi and Hapu are claiming "special" rights from the Crown when in fact Maori are simply trying to reaffirm rights that have been in existence for centuries.

It suggests the Crown needs to assume exclusive title to the foreshore and seabed in order to guarantee free access for everyone when in fact under Maori law covenants of use could always be negotiated.

It incorrectly implies that Iwi and Hapu might freely sell off the foreshore when in fact an interest held collectively and exercised according to tikanga was non-tradeable.

* What are Maori doing?

The government has left few options open for Maori.

However a National hui has been called in Paeroa on the 12th of July.

Some Iwi and other groups are still trying to pursue their court actions and lodging new claims with the Waitangi Tribunal.

Others are organising actions to block beach access to Crown officials without obstructing the public in any way.

* The Customary Rights Justification:

In a Parliamentary debate on Tuesday June 24 the Attorney General reassured Maori that customary rights would not be affected and that it was "the government's intention to preserve the ability of Maori to pursue claims to the foreshore and seabed compatible with the Crown's ownership rights".

There is at best a dubious logic in such an approach because in denying Maori title the Crown effectively restricts the nature of the customary right and makes it liable to future extinguishment by the Crown. As an analogy, if a couple has title to their home they can make whatever alterations they choose and exercise complete rights in relation to it. However if they are tenants and ownership is vested in someone else they cannot do so without permission and the extent of their rights is diminished.

The Crown proposal reduces Maori to tenants of the foreshore which Iwi and Hapu have exercised kaitiakitanga over for centuries. It subordinates tino rangatiratanga to the whim of the Crown.


<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Peace Movement Aotearoa
the national networking peace organisation
PO Box 9314, Wellington, Aotearoa/New Zealand
Tel +64 4 382 8129, fax 382 8173 email pma@xtra.co.nz
PMA website - http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/
Not in Our Name - http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/nionnz.htm
<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
>> war on terrorism? war is terrorism << <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>

© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

There Is A Field: Reimagining Biodiversity In Aotearoa

We are in a moment of existential peril, with interconnected climate and biodiversity crises converging on a global scale to drive most life on Earth to the brink of extinction. However, our current worldview and political paradigm renders us incapable of responding adequately due to its disconnected and divisive default settings.

These massive challenges can, however, be reframed as a once in a lifetime opportunity to fundamentally change how humanity relates to nature and to each other. Read on The Dig>>

The Dig: Scoop’s Engaged Journalism Platform Launches
The Scoop Ecosystem has grown bigger with the launch of The Dig - a new public interest, in-depth, Engaged Journalism platform. More>>

 

Unscoped Or Missed Damage: Resolution For Canterbury Owners Of On-Sold Homes

People with over-cap on-sold* properties in Canterbury can now apply for a Government payment so they can get on and repair their homes. More>>

ALSO:

Hamilton-Auckland: First Urban Growth Partnership Signed

New Zealand’s first urban growth partnership between the Government, local councils and mana whenua was signed at a meeting of mayors, chairs and ministers in Hampton Downs today. More>>

ALSO:

Vote On Action Next Week: Secondary Principals Walk From Negotiations

“Unfortunately we consider there is no further value in continuing negotiations at this point. The government has not been able to table an offer that will be acceptable to our members.” More>>

Patrol Car Stolen, Glocks Taken: Manhunt In Gore

The driver rammed the patrol car before fleeing on foot with Police chasing, also on foot. The man has then circled back around, stolen the patrol vehicle, which had the keys left in it, and rammed another Police car... Two Police-issued Glock pistols were stolen. More>>

ALSO:

"Shocking And Dangerous": Accused Mosque Shooter's Prison Letter Posted Online

The man accused of the Christchurch mosque attacks has sent seven letters from prison and had two others withheld, Corrections Minister Kelvin Davis says. Corrections has now blocked the accused gunman from sending or receiving mail... More>>

ALSO:

Standing On List Only: Paula Bennett To Run National’s Election Campaign

The National Party is pleased to announce the appointment of Paula Bennett as our Campaign Chair for the 2020 General Election, President Peter Goodfellow says. More>>

Waiver For State Care Inquiry: Historic Abuse Survivors 'Can Speak Freely'

Abuse in state care survivors can take part in the forthcoming Royal Commission proceedings without being bound by any confidentiality obligations to Crown agencies under their historic claim settlements, Minister of State Services Chris Hipkins said. More>>

ALSO:

Trail Trial: Sexual Violence Court Reduces Lead-Up Times And Trauma

An evaluation of New Zealand’s first sexual violence court has confirmed that the approach taken in the judge-led pilot considerably reduces the time that cases take to reach trial. More>>

 
 
 
 
 

LATEST HEADLINES

  • PARLIAMENT
  • POLITICS
  • REGIONAL
 
 

InfoPages News Channels