Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) to the Attorney-General: Does he agree with ACT leader Rodney Hide’s statement on Radio New Zealand this morning in relation to ACT’s amendment to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill to explicitly prohibit Māori with customary title from charging fees for access to coastal areas: “I have an e-mail here from the Attorney-General’s office saying that they would support such a provision in the bill—that is to say I’ve got that in writing”? HILARY CALVERT (ACT) to the Attorney-General: Will he support my proposed amendment to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill to include a specific prohibition on customary title holders charging for public access to New Zealand beaches such as is provided for in the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004; if not, why not? AARON GILMORE (National) to the Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage: What assistance is the Government providing to assist with the repair, restoration, and strengthening of heritage and character buildings in the Canterbury region? Hon JOHN BOSCAWEN (Deputy Leader—ACT) on behalf of Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) to the Attorney-General: Why didn’t he follow ACT’s advice to repeal the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 and use Parliament’s power to put iwi back to their pre-2004 legal position so Māori could have their day in court? Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour—Waimakariri) to the Minister of Justice: Does he stand by his statement in relation to the Sentencing and Parole Reform Act 2010: “I am very relaxed about where it ended up. I was involved in the negotiation of the policy right up to the end.”? RAHUI KATENE (Māori Party—Te Tai Tonga) to the Attorney-General: What requirements must the Crown meet in relation to the burden of proof in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill, and how different is this to former legislation in respect of how the full burden of proof falls on hapū and iwi? Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Attorney-General: When he answered yesterday that “hopefully” the new foreshore and seabed bill “will settle the protracted controversy around the issues of the foreshore and seabed”, was he aware that the Government’s confidence and supply partner the Hon Pita Sharples told TV3 that he was “not entirely happy” with the new bill? Questions for Oral Answer [Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill—Proof of Customary Interest] 15/09/2010
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Māori Party—Waiariki) to the Attorney-General: What is the burden of proof under the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill in relation to applications for customary interests, and what type of evidence would the Crown be required to produce to prove that a customary interest had been extinguished? Questions for Oral Answer [Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill—Definition of “Tikanga”] 15/09/2010
DAVID GARRETT (ACT) to the Attorney-General: Does he agree that “tikanga” as it is described—[Interruption] Mr SPEAKER: I apologise to the member. The House will come back to order. That was totally unnecessary. I remind members that when a member has made a personal explanation, that is it as far as this House is concerned. DAVID GARRETT: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Does he agree that “tikanga” as it is described in the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill will differ in meaning from iwi to iwi and hapū to hapū? METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) to the Attorney-General: Does he stand by his statement that the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill “treats all New Zealanders including Māori without discrimination”? | In the House ArchivesDecember 2010 CategoriesAll |
