RAHUI KATENE (Māori Party—Te Tai Tonga) to the Attorney-General: What progress has recently been made in the Government’s review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General) : Late yesterday afternoon I met with the review panel and received its report. The report, together with the summary of submissions and the full submissions in their entirety, should now have been publicly released on both the Beehive and Ministry of Justice websites. I would like to express my gratitude to the panel for its work.
Rahui Katene: How does the Government intend to respond to the review panel’s report?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: The Government will carefully consider and analyse the panel’s recommendations, and hopes to be in a position to make an initial response around the end of August. This Act has proven to be one of the most contentious pieces of legislation in New Zealand’s recent history. If we are to move forward together as a nation, it is important that we take the time to consider all the issues carefully, and strike the appropriate balance between recognition of Māori customary interests and the right of the wider public to use our beaches.
Hon Tau Henare: Will the Foreshore and Seabed Actreview lead to an ongoing negotiation or settlement process similar to the historic Treaty settlement process?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: It is important we do not predetermine what the outcome of the review might be. The panel has made a number of recommendations, all of which will need to be very carefully considered before the Government is in a position to make an initial response. The Government is committed to the speedy and durable settlement of Treaty grievances, and will be guided by similar principles in considering its response to the panel’s report.
Hon Nanaia Mahuta: In light of that response, was the Minister aware that the review panel’s report on the foreshore and seabed was being released under embargo, in a low-key manner, by the Māori Party to a select group of media; if so, was that under his instructions, so as not to draw attention to the predetermined outcome of the panel’s recommendations?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: No, I am not aware of that. And I can assure that member that there is no predetermination of the issues, at all. We are taking, as I said, a good look at the report. I have had an opportunity to read only volume 1; I have not read volumes 2 and 3. As I have advised the House, the Government’s initial response will be revealed toward the end of August.
Hon Tau Henare: What did the review panel say with regard to the public interest in the coastal marine area?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: The panel noted that the non-legal public interest in the coastal marine area prior to the Ngāti Apa case was, and it still is today, in maintaining it as a natural environment—that is, a public recreation ground, the birthright of every New Zealander. The Prime Minister has previously made it clear that guaranteeing public use of our public beaches is a bottom line for this Government.
Hon Nanaia Mahuta: Can the Minister confirm that if the Foreshore and Seabed Act is repealed, as promoted by the Māori Party, it would result in hapū and iwi owning the foreshore and seabed, as claimed by that party?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I do not think it is helpful on such an important issue to indulge in speculation or “what ifs”. As I have said, and as I assure the member, we will look very closely at the panel’s report. We will come up with our initial response at the end of August, and then that member can ask as many questions as she likes on those and other issues.
Te Ururoa Flavell: What approach will the Government take in responding to the review panel’s report?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I note earlier comments by my opposite number in the Labour Party, David Parker, that “Labour will constructively engage with the Government over the review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act.”, and that “The last thing New Zealanders need is for this issue to be used to incite disharmony again and we won’t go there.” I endorse those comments, and I look forward to working with all political parties on this important issue. I acknowledge the very constructive engagement I have had with the Māori Party on the issue, and I look forward to working closely with its members in the coming months.
Te Ururoa Flavell: Supplementary--
Mr SPEAKER: I believe that the Māori Party has already had its two supplementary questions for today.
Te Ururoa Flavell: I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I spoke to my colleague the National Party whip about an additional supplementary question. I believe that that request was passed on to your office.
Mr SPEAKER: The procedures require the Speaker to be advised of such an arrangement. We have not been advised, but it seems that there might have been a slip-up. I will accept a further supplementary question from the honourable member.
Te Ururoa Flavell: Thank you, Mr Speaker; my apology for that. How many submissions did the panel receive; and can the Attorney-General advise the House how many of those favoured repeal of the current Act?
Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I can advise that, from my reading of volume 1, the review panel received 580 written and oral submissions. Eighty-five percent of those who expressed an opinion on what should happen to the Act favoured repeal. Of the remaining 15 percent, many favoured making substantial amendments but would be happy to see the Act repealed, and 5 percent favoured retaining the current Act unchanged. The panel believed that the Act severely discriminated against Māori, and said that it believed that the Act should be repealed.
