Government Forges Ahead With Foreshore And Seabed Law
The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act.
That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline.
The government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling.
At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans.
On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October.
"Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right."
Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted.
"We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100 percent of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve."
Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell".
"There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do."
The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest.
More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered.
That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country.
"I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand."
Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs.
The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership.
The 2004 law - introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government - provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori.
National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown.
Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption.
The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored.
The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
5 hours ago
- 1News
Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law
The Government is forging ahead with plans to change the law governing New Zealand's foreshore and seabed, despite a Supreme Court ruling last year that appeared to undercut the rationale for the change. The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline. The Government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling. At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans. ADVERTISEMENT On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October. "Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right." Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted. "We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100% of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve." Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell". "There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do." The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest. ADVERTISEMENT More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered. That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country. "I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand." Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs. The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership. The 2004 law, introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government, provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori. National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown. ADVERTISEMENT Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption. The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored. The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Taranaki Regional Councillors Urged To Quit Election Over Treaty Principles Fiasco
Article – RNZ Councillors involved in quashing debate over the Treaty Principles Bill at the Taranaki Regional Council have received a dressing down at a fiery meeting. , Taranaki Whanganui regional correspondent Councillors involved in quashing debate over the Treaty Principles Bill at the Taranaki Regional Council have received a dressing down at a fiery meeting in Stratford. Council was considering a report which found councillors colluded not to make a submission on the bill and halt debate. New Plymouth District Councillor Dinnie Moeahu – whose deputation was shunted down the agenda in December – addressed council today in front of whanau and supporters. 'What unfolded that day was absolutely disgusting and shameful. I witnessed some elected members bully their way to getting what they wanted. 'And now your conduct has been extensively investigated, documented, reviewed and condemned and made public for the world to see.' He said what happened was not just a breach of process, but a breach of trust and the fundamental democratic and cultural responsibilities the TRC was obligated to uphold. Moeahu said a submission prepared by TRC which expressed concern about the Treaty Principles Bill was abruptly dismissed without discussion. 'Let's not mince words that was not governance, that was cowardice hiding behind collusion.' He said the offending councillors attempt to brush-off their actions as a miscommunication didn't wash with him. 'I was met with contempt, I was made to feel less.' Moeahu said the TRC had statuary obligations to take the Treaty of Waitangi into account and it had partnering with Māori explicitly enshrined as a strategic priority in its long-term plan. 'This isn't a training issue. It's an absolute failure in governance. When elected members treat Treaty matters as too political or not appropriate you betray your role.' He hoped the point of reckoning the report represented could be a turning point for the TRC. 'Leadership is a privilege you have been afforded… do better Taranaki Regional Council.' Dinnie Moeahu's father Peter – an iwi appointee to the council's Policy and Planning Committee – also made a deputation and took aim at councillors by name. 'People who spout democracy but connive behind closed doors to suppress it. 'People like councillor (Tom) Cloke, councillor Donald McIntrye and councillor (Neil) Walker who used their privilege position to bully the regional council chair and chief executive into submission at the December 10 meeting.' Peter Moeahu said whether the councillors adopted the report or not he would not trust them or forgive them for how they treated his son. He called on them to withdraw from the local government elections. 'Our community deserves better, our community deserves people who are open-minded, environmentally focussed … and willing to have a meaningful and open relationship with hapū, iwi and manuwhenua. 'My recommendation? Withdraw from the ballot.' At the closing of his deputation, the Moeahu whānau performed an impassioned haka. Council chief executive Steve Ruru then spoke briefly to the report which he authored. He reminded the council of its findings that the Treaty Principles Bill was relevant to TRC business and to make a submission and debate it appropriately. 'One of the big learnings coming out of this is that process issue again which is highlighted in there and obviously there are a range of recommendations made.' Taranaki Māori Constituency councillor Bonita Bingham believed council had underestimated 'the impact of the trampling of our mana' events of December had for Māori. 'I really thank Peter and Dinnie for their kōrero today because their words expressed what many of us are feeling. 'I would like all councillors to deeply reflect on the actions and collusion and predetermination that lead to the decision on December 10. 'This was no miscommunication this was a deliberate attempt to squash our voice.' After sitting in stoney silence Donald McIntyre was the only one of the three councillors directly under fire to speak during the meeting. 'Obviously I've upset some people with my actions and I'm sorry they feel aggrieved.' McIntyre acknowledge that it was correct the Treaty Principles Bill submission was on the December agenda. But he said if Dinnie Moeahu being shunted down the agenda was a problem someone should have raised it at the time. 'I have yet to see any reference of standing orders being breached and like I say if they were they weren't highlighted at the time.' McIntyre believed the procedures used on the day were appropriate and democratic because they were all voted on in an open meeting. 'Morally we may have been better to have discussed the item that is probably something we can reflect on in the future, but I still stand by the decision we made at the time.' McIntyre said iwi council relations had not been set back significantly 'there hasn't been a good relationship in the first instance'. That fired up councillor Susan Hughes. 'I find it extraordinary that you are sitting here today trying to justify what wasn't in fact and never could be justified. 'You set out to exclude myself and councillor Bingham from being involved in any of this. That was the plan and that was the plan that was executed. 'You undermined the integrity of this organisation by behaving as you did.' Council voted to adopt the report and all its recommendations with McIntyre voting against the motion. Following the meeting, Walker said he would not be withdrawing from the local government elections in October. 'I think we're done with this. We've done our thing and we'd like to draw a conclusion over it and put it aside.' He denied any collusion had ever occurred. 'As far as I'm concerned there was no meetings or any of those things. There was discussion at meetings like today but not meetings.' Walker was not inclined to apologise. 'What for?' Cloke declined to comment on whether he would pull out of the election race. McIntyre was not standing for re-election. He accepted councillors had colluded ahead of the December meeting. 'What's new about that? Of course we did, like I say, when we elect a chairman we collude before the meeting, is there something wrong with that.' McIntyre made an apology of sorts.
Scoop
6 hours ago
- Scoop
Government Forges Ahead With Foreshore And Seabed Law
The government is forging ahead with plans to change the law governing New Zealand's foreshore and seabed, despite a Supreme Court ruling last year that appeared to undercut the rationale for the change. The proposed legislation stems from a clause in National's coalition deal with NZ First, which promised to revisit the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. That commitment was driven by fears that a 2023 Court of Appeal decision could have made it significantly easier for Māori groups to win recognition of customary rights over parts of the coastline. The government introduced a bill to Parliament last year to prevent that, but it hit pause in December after the Supreme Court effectively overturned the earlier ruling. At the time, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith welcomed the development and said ministers would take time to reassess their plans. On Tuesday, Goldsmith confirmed to RNZ that Cabinet had agreed to press ahead with the law change regardless and to pass it before October. "Everybody in New Zealand has an interest in what goes on in the coastline, and we're trying our best to get that balance right." Goldsmith said he was not convinced that last year's Supreme Court ruling had set a high enough test for judging whether customary rights should be granted. "We've had a couple of cases that have been decided since then - which have shown almost 100 percent of the coastline and those areas being granted customary marine title - which confirmed to us that the Supreme Court test still didn't achieve the balance that we think the legislation set out to achieve." Asked whether he expected an upswell of protest, Goldsmith said that had been an earlier concern but: "time will tell". "There's been a wide variety of views, some in favour, some against, but we think this is the right thing to do." The legislation was one of the key objections raised by Ngāpuhi leaders last year when they walked out on a meeting with Prime Minister Christopher Luxon in protest. More than 200 applications for customary marine title are making their way through the courts. Under the amendment bill, any court decisions issued after 25 July 2024, will need to be reconsidered. That would appear to cover seven cases, involving various iwi from around the country. "I understand their frustration over that," Goldsmith said. "But we believe it is very important to get this right, because it affects the whole of New Zealand." Goldsmith said the government had set aside about $15 million to cover the additional legal costs. The Marine and Coastal Area Act was originally passed by the National-led government in 2011, replacing the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004, which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership. The 2004 law - introduced by Helen Clark's Labour government - provoked widespread protest and led to the creation of the Māori Party, now known as Te Pāti Māori. National's 2011 replacement declared that no one owned the foreshore and seabed but allowed Māori groups to seek recognition of their rights - or "Customary Marine Title" - through the courts or in direct negotiations with the Crown. Customary title recognises exclusive Māori rights to parts of the foreshore and seabed, provided certain legal tests are met, including proving continuous and "exclusive" use of the area since 1840 without substantial interruption. The 2023 Court of Appeal ruling, however, declared that groups only needed to show they had enough control over the area that they could keep others from using it, and that situations where the law itself had prevented them from doing so could be ignored. The Supreme Court subsequently overturned that and said the Court of Appeal had taken an unduly narrow approach in its interpretation.
