logo
Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law

Government forges ahead with foreshore and seabed law

1News2 days ago
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.
rnz.co.nz
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Cheaper petrol on its way under new system – but will drivers end up paying more?
Cheaper petrol on its way under new system – but will drivers end up paying more?

The Spinoff

time34 minutes ago

  • The Spinoff

Cheaper petrol on its way under new system – but will drivers end up paying more?

While Chris Bishop calls it the biggest change to road funding in 50 years, details on how the new system will work remain scarce for now, writes Catherine McGregor in today's extract from The Bulletin. Major shift from fuel tax to pay-per-km The government has announced it will scrap fuel excise duty and move all vehicles to a system of road user charges (RUCs), in what transport minister Chris Bishop called 'the biggest change to how we fund our roading network in 50 years'. He said the surge in fuel-efficient, hybrid and full electric vehicles had eroded the longstanding connection between petrol consumption and kilometres driven. Under the new system, charges would be based on distance travelled, vehicle type, time and location. The timeline is still vague: Bishop expects legislation to pass in 2026, with the system 'open for business' by 2027. But a full transition date for light vehicles remains deliberately unannounced, with Bishop explaining the government is 'focused on getting the system right rather than rushing its rollout', reports the Herald's Jamie Ensor. Privatised and digitised Alongside the policy shift comes a sweeping modernisation of the road charging system. Gone will be the paper labels stuck to windscreens, replaced by a fully digital e-RUC system. The NZTA's dual role as both regulator and RUC retailer will be split, with private firms taking over the collection and administration of charges. The idea is that this will drive innovation and reduce compliance costs by allowing the market to offer high-tech solutions, such as integrations with in-car computers. 'Instead of expanding a clunky government system, we will reform the rules to allow the market to deliver innovative, user-friendly services for drivers,' Bishop said. Flexible payment options like monthly billing and post-pay models are being considered, and RUCs could be bundled with tolls and congestion charges in a single bill. As Luke Malpass writes this morning in The Post ​ (paywalled), the new system is being designed with one eye firmly on a future where our most expensive roads are funded with tolls, and ease of payment will be key to getting people to use them. 'Roads have to be paid for somehow,' he notes. A pattern of reform The transport minister's announcement came as a surprise to many, but the move had been clearly signalled for years. National ran on eliminating fuel taxes and the policy was part of the National-Act coalition agreement. Last year the government scrapped the Auckland regional fuel tax and oversaw the imposition of RUCs on electric vehicles, ending a long-standing exemption. These earlier moves laid the groundwork for yesterday's grand shift. As the number of petrol hybrids on the roads climbs – from 12,000 in 2015 to 350,000 today – there's a growing mismatch between fuel tax contributions and actual road usage, Bishop said, adding that lower-income drivers of older cars are effectively subsidising wealthier owners of hybrids and EVs. The missing details While the move has been widely framed as a step toward fairness and future-proofing, many of the key details remain unresolved, writes Stuff's Michael Daly. One key question: how much drivers will pay. Bishop gave no indication as to how much the government is planning to charge different vehicle types under the new system. Currently, light diesel vehicles pay $76 per 1000km, but that figure may not translate directly to petrol vehicles. Owners of small, fuel-efficient cars could be forgiven for worrying they'll end up paying more under a RUC system, regardless of the weight class tiers. There are also concerns about the cost of privatising tax collection. 'The only people who will see any benefit from this scheme are the corporates who take their cut to gather the tax,' said Fleur Fitzsimons of the Public Service Association, whose members include NZTA employees. As the legislation progresses and the 2027 rollout approaches, the government will need to spell out what motorists are actually signing up for – and how much they'll be paying.

Marine and coastal rights law changes not justifiable, former United Future leader says
Marine and coastal rights law changes not justifiable, former United Future leader says

RNZ News

time2 hours ago

  • RNZ News

Marine and coastal rights law changes not justifiable, former United Future leader says

Peter Dunne, was leader of United Future in 2011 and voted in favour of the original Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. Photo: RNZ / Rebekah Parsons-King Former MPs who supported the National government's foreshore and seabed legislation back in 2011 are lambasting the coalition's move to make it harder for Māori to get customary rights. The government will amend the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act to toughen the customary rights test. Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said the changes would restore Parliament's "original intent" for the law, after a 2023 Court of Appeal ruling made it easier for groups to win customary title. A Supreme Court ruling overturning that decision meant the government paused introducing the changes last December. But, on Tuesday, it announced it would push ahead with amending the law saying the Supreme Court decision was still "able to be interpreted in quite a broad way". The changes will mean those seeking title will need to prove they have had continuous exclusive use and ownership of the area since 1840. Former Attorney-General and National MP Chris Finlayson has condemned the move calling it foolish and saying it would "undermine" Parliament's original intention and be "extremely harmful" to race relations. There is a similar sentiment from Peter Dunne, who was leader of United Future in 2011 and voted in favour of the law. He told RNZ the original legislation was designed to sort out the public's access to the foreshore and seabed while also recognising customary rights of Māori, if they could prove a "continuous connection" to it. Proving that connection, Dunne said, was already "quite a high test". "It was set out to be relatively high for quite a specific purpose; to make sure that the claims that were being made were genuine and well founded and not frivolous or opportunistic... it was generally accepted there needed to be a high bar." The Supreme Court had already made the law's original intent clear and he did not know why the government wanted to make it "clear times two". "It seems to me that that's almost a way of saying 'we want to make it tougher than was originally intended' and I don't think that's correct or justifiable." The Marine and Coastal Area Act replaced the controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 , which had extinguished Māori customary rights in favour of Crown ownership, provoked widespread protest, and led to the formation of the Māori Party - now Te Pāti Māori. Dunne said the Supreme Court decision was definitive and if he were still in government he would lobby the government to "let sleeping dogs lie". "Uphold the spirit of the 2011 legislation [because] I don't think this issue, which has caused such controversy over the last nearly 30 years, needs to be reopened and all those old wounds brought to the surface again," he said. "It's time to now to move on, let the situation resolve itself according to that legislation, and do so without further provocation." Tau Henare was a member of the National Party at the time, and speaking at the bill's first reading, said the difference between the Marine Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act and its predecessor the Foreshore and Seabed Act, was access to the judiciary. "Everybody has a right, it does not matter whether they are black, white, red, or green; it does not matter, everybody has an absolute right to go to court to find out whether they are right or whether they are wrong." "This is about human rights, and that is what that whole debacle was about. Fifty thousand people were outside the front door of this place," he said at the time. Speaking to RNZ on Wednesday, Henare said Chris Finlayson was "absolutely right" and there was not "one person" in caucus who had any experience with "Treaty Jurisdiction Prudence". "It's a play for the dumb red neck vote. It shows how backward National have slipped. Be glad to see them go," he said. The law change is expected to pass before October. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store