Fishhooks on the foreshore

Idiot / Savant

Idiot/Savant is an anonymous blogger living in exile.  He blogs about human rights, international affairs, and politics from a left - liberal perspective. Check out his blog

It seems the government's Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill has a nasty fishhook: a six-year time-limit on applications for customary rights. National has inserted this because it wants finality. But as with its time-limit on Treaty claims, there is a real chance that it will come at the expense of justice, and be used as a procedural barrier to claims and the righting of past wrongs.

/img/placeholder.gif?aHR0cDovL2k1OTYucGhvdG9idWNrZXQuY29tL2FsYnVtcy90dDQ1L2dldGZyYW5rLzA5MDYxMC9UYWt1dGFpTW9hbmEuanBnFortunately, it is easily fixed. And if it isn't done at select committee or at the committee stage, then the Māori Party will just bring a member's bill on the issue. Or relitigate it through the coalition process after the next election. Either way, if there's any real chance of iwi and hapu missing out, I don't expect it to last.

(The government may have an interest in extending it anyway, as claimants are eligible for legal aid. Removing the time limit would save money in the short-term, by not concentrating the cost of claims).

Meanwhile, The Standard takes issue with the Maori Party's approach of conditional support for the legislation and their intention to tweak it later. This is another example of the quest for finality encapsulated above. But what Eddie (and a host of others, including John Key) do not understand that their opinions on this do not matter. They can stamp their foot and say "its over" as often as they want - but until Māori get a fair deal, they will keep raising the issue (and, in the case of the Māori Party, applying pressure through the coalition process). The only thing that makes it go away is justice. And where that is lacking, progressives should not expect the victims to stay silent and meekly accept it.

 
Sort by
  • Kieran says
    I think a time limit is a good idea, but 6 years isn't long enough. The country needs finality so we can move on as a nation and Maori people get a fair deal too. The bill (even if it does need some improvement) is a great move in the right direction for this though!
  • Oliver says
    Correct, finality is very important, both for the financial security of the government and for the cultural unity that will hopefully be instilled. It must be remembered of course, that the government will ALWAYS have the power to revoke this proposed law. Should public policy sway violently, the government can easily pass an Act re-opening the right to claims. That is how this Bill must be viewed - with a mind toward the democratic freedoms of our executive government. However Maori may state that this Bill stifles their ability to claim, it will always be true that if 'New Zealanders' believe that Maori claims are genuine, just, and correspond to our moral belief of rightousness, the claims process can be resurrected. This Bill would not be as finite as Maori with potential legitimate claims fear.
  • Karl says
    Question. If Maori are now (some of them) looking to claim ownership, and not just customary rights, is that not a contradiction of their original beliefs? It is my (very limited) understanding that Maori who 'own' land are simply guardians for the next generation who will use the land. To me, this is what the idea of public ownership will mean anyway. Shouldn't it be that as a nation we all take a responsibility to look after or greatest asset, our coastline, to ensure that is will always be available for future generations to enjoy as our previous generations have enjoyed, without the prejudice of having to ask someone else if they can enjoy what as a nation should be rightfully ours.
  • harksgal says
    Speaking of fishhooks, my son was casting a hand line into the canel beside our house and got the fishhook stuck on top of his hand. His friend came running toward me saying omg Caleb has a fish hook stuck in his hand. When i saw it i wanted to faint but i had to stay strong for my son. He was actually completly calm considering it looked pretty scary. I rang my partner at work and he wipped home and cut the top of the barb off and then pulled it out.

  • samala says
    Why does New Zealand have to be divided? Cant the National Park be all of ours? Cant the sea and the land around it be all of ours? Where is the kiwiness in it all if we are saying that's mine and that's your's. I would love to tell my kids one day that that is kiwi land not the Queens not the Maori's but all of our's. Would be nice in a perfect world but I do realise this wont happen, just saying I wish we could be as perfect as we make out to the rest of the world.
  • Ella says
    I agree with Samala - why do we have to divide everything into Maori or Pakeha this and that? I'm proud to be from a mixed heritage family - both Maori and Pakeha, and I'm honestly sick of all the nonsense. What our ancestors did was important, but it's history and should be remembered but not used to punish or take advantage. Put simply, we are New Zealanders - every one of us. It shouldn't matter what our blood line says, because that one thing should mean that we are all treated the same.

Post your comment

Want to have your say?

It's quick, easy and 100% free.

  •  

Latest discussions

Competitions

Endorsed Events