Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:617;Page:12622] 
1. JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Deputy Prime Minister 
: Does he agree with the Waitangi Tribunal when it said in respect of the foreshore and seabed that claimants and the Crown agree: that the public generally should have access to the foreshore and seabed except where this causes harm; that it should not be sold; and that customary rights in the foreshore and seabed exist and need to be recognised and protected? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Deputy Prime Minister) 
: 
 I am aware of the section in the tribunal’s report that pointed out that there is some common ground between the Government’s policy and the position taken by the claimants. The Government’s view on the access issue is that it should be as of right. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Is he confident that Maori agree that the Government’s proposals protect customary rights when outside Parliament right now 20000 sons and daughters and mokopuna of Dame Whina Cooper are protesting against this Government’s unjust legislation to extinguish customary title? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Dame Whina was a wonderful woman but I doubt whether she had 20000 mokopuna by herself. However my estimate of the crowd would be somewhat lower than that. Clearly there is considerable concern amongst Maori about some issues in this bill. I am sure that if they proceed through the select committee process legitimate concerns can be addressed and will be well understood. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: What is the potential cost to taxpayers of the claims for fee simple title over nearly 3900 kilometres of coastline that are currently before the Maori Land Court and which of course can now be subject to compensation under the Government’s foreshore and seabed bill? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The applications before the Maori Land Court are for customary land status. Fee simple title would flow from that potentially—[ 
Interruption 
] If the member can understand that small point there is progress after some months. However what the bill provides for is not any application with regard to fee simple title at all. But in relation to territorial customary rights applications to the High Court which would trigger redress of course—[ 
Interruption 
] Is the member suggesting that the removal of the capacity for recognition of those customary rights should be done without the capacity for redress? It is fascinating that the National Party is now arguing that any form of territorial rights be removed without any form of redress. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I ask you to consider very carefully the way Dr Cullen answered the latter part of that question. It seems to me he was asked a very straight and simple question that he then chose to overly complicate. He then took an opportunity after a heckle from one of his own crew to avoid answering at all. I wonder whether we might get a simple answer as to what it will cost to compensate Maori for the Government’s proposals over the seabed and foreshore. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: That was not the question. The question was a different one. The question was based upon a false assumption. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want to rule on the point of order. For a start there was a large number of interjections in the second person which I presume related to me. They came mostly from the member’s side and they were out of order. I do not mind some interjections during question time. I like to have a free flow. However interjections have to be reasonable and in the right person. The Minister did address the question. 
Peter Brown 
: Does the Minister agree that the most effective way to guarantee public access to the seabed and foreshore as this bill does is to ensure that it remains in Crown ownership—exactly as New Zealand First has been advocating now for some months? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Certainly I think that Crown ownership is the simplest legal procedure to ensure that—coupled of course with a statutory right of access. It is possible to have Crown ownership without a statutory right of access. 
Rod Donald 
: How can the public of New Zealand be sure that Crown ownership will not lead to the foreshore and seabed being sold to overseas owners when a simple majority in a future Parliament could overturn the no-sale provision? We all know that New Zealand Governments have the sorry history of selling off parts of the foreshore. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: This country’s constitution is founded upon the theory of parliamentary sovereignty—a matter I might discuss somewhat further in a coming special debate on a Monday in a couple of weeks’ or so time. The essence of parliamentary sovereignty is that no Parliament can bind its successor. The issue the member raises could be raised about almost anything else including the Human Rights Act the abolition of capital punishment or the existence of the Green Party. But it need not worry—this Government is not going to abolish the Green Party. 
Dail Jones 
: Can the Minister confirm that the main way to ensure New Zealand ownership of the public foreshore and seabed is to support New Zealand First at the election because it is our policy that such New Zealand - owned assets should not be sold to overseas interests—unlike the National Party as indicated by the interjection just now. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes and that interjection is the only interjection that member will make during the asking of questions. 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: The member will understand that my preference would be that people will vote for the Labour Party to ensure continued public ownership of the foreshore and seabed. I shall see him on the hustings above or on the high-tide mark. 
Metiria Turei 
: Why did the Government reject Green Party proposals—such as amendments to the Te Ture Whenua Maori Act—when those amendments would have provided for a collective customary title where those rights still exist as well as ensuring negotiated public access to the foreshore; and would that now provide a way out of the corner into which this Government has backed itself? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: In fact the Greens’ original position was that the foreshore and seabed should be held in the commons. This view subsequently underwent a somewhat strange change to “Maori collective customary title”. However that would not be a sufficient protection nor does it avoid the issues around confiscation rights and redresses that the member seems to think because there is a world of difference between that and what is now available under the Ngati Apa decision. If the member had been meeting with Te Ope Mana a Tai she would realise that one of the issues it was pursuing was the right of economic development on the foreshore and seabed. 
Sue Bradford 
: Can the Minister name any other group in society apart from Maori who have had their property rights forcibly replaced by a weakened right of consultation; if not is this not an example of racial discrimination against Maori? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Parliaments over a very long period of time in New Zealand have changed a number of property relationships and property issues—sometimes with and sometimes without consultation sometimes with and sometimes without compensation. There is nothing unique about the processes being followed here other than the care being taken for the better recognition and protection of customary rights and ancestral connection. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Government believe in one rule of law for all; if so in the interests of consistency will it now be expropriating the property rights of non-Maori who own parts of the foreshore? 
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN 
: Nobody who has fee simple title to any part of the foreshore and seabed however that arose is having those property rights expropriated. The Government’s position is that it will seek to negotiate over time with any such owners. I want to place very clearly on the record that the notion that that is somehow racially based is nonsense. Some of those private titles are held by Maori.