Foreshore & Seabed Bill a Sell-out

Foreshore & Seabed Bill a Sell-out to Corporate Iwi

“National’s new bill to repeal the 2004 Foreshore and Seabed Act is a sell-out to corporate iwi and the Maori Party”, Dr Hugh Barr, spokesman for Coastal Coalition said today. The Coastal Coalition represents thousands of New Zealanders who want the foreshore and seabed retained in Crown ownership for the benefit of all.

“By defining tribal customary title in the broadest possible way, National has substantially lowered the bar for those seeking customary title.

“Under clause 105 (2) of the new bill, National has just assumed that customary title exists by stating ‘It is presumed, in the absence of proof to the contrary, that a customary interest has not been extinguished’. This is even though no claims for customary title were ever submitted to the Waitangi Tribunal as part of the Treaty claims process, because Maori, along with everyone else, believed the foreshore and seabed was owned by the Crown.

“It must be a great relief to iwi to have the new bill assume customary title exists as it means they don’t have to try to prove their fires of occupation, ahi kaa, burned on the seabed, or that they lived underwater on the area, or indeed that they have a right to an area that stretches out to twelve nautical miles offshore, when the territorial sea only extended three nautical miles in 1840!

“Another astounding concession in the new bill is that tribes don’t even need to own land down to the water’s edge to claim title, which is a requirement under the current law. The definition of land at the water’s edge has also been changed to include land where there are reserves, marginal strips, esplanade reserves, public roads or even railway lines between it and the sea. And even where they do own land up to the foreshore, iwi don’t have to have occupied it exclusively or continuously. According to clause 60, their ownership and exclusive use is ‘without substantial interruption’, something that is not defined. That gives a Minister or Court a large amount of leeway to decide in the tribe’s favour. This effectively opens the floodgates for tribes to make customary claims.

“For example this means that, if the hapus owning land on the renowned nature sanctuary of Kapiti Island apply, they are likely to get all the foreshore and seabed (marine and coastal area) around Kapiti Island to a distance of 22.2 km offshore – that includes some 50 km of mainland shoreline from Paremata to well north of the Otaki River mouth.

“The Iwi leaders and the Minister seem to have spent many days looking at Maori land property boundaries working out how they can write legislation to rort the greatest possible amount of customary title for themselves, at the expense of the other Kiwis. There appears very little opportunity for the general public to challenge this nonsense either in the Minister’s Office, or participate in Court proceedings. This proposed Bill is a complete National Government sell-out to iwi.” Dr Barr said.

ENDS