Mapp Wayne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Mapp Wayne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:615;Page:10948] 
3.  
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
 to the  
Attorney-General 
: Does she stand by her statement to Parliament yesterday that Maori customary-rights holders would have the “same rights and consequences” as attached to any other property right and does that mean that customary-rights holders have an “effective power of veto over development proposals” as stated by the Solicitor-General to the Waitangi Tribunal? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON (Attorney-General) 
: 
 Yes. This Government respects and upholds property rights whoever holds them. A power of veto will be exercised only if the development prevents the exercise of the customary right. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: If the customary-right holder does exercise that right of veto and says no does that mean a yes answer could be purchased by the payment of a fee as indicated by Dr Cullen in a radio interview on 9 February? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I am unclear as to what the question is. Could I ask for clarification as to what he means? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Perhaps the member could ask the question again. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: To make it perfectly plain to the Minister: had an answer that would have originally been no been changed to yes by the payment of money as apparently indicated by Dr Cullen in a radio interview on 9 February? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I suppose as with all property rights one can sell them and buy them and whatever. But the point is that in this particular instance as the member knows there is a process that is gone through. So it is difficult to answer in the generality because it is meaningless unless the specific circumstances are known. 
Tim Barnett 
: What would be the process if the Maori Land Court determined a claimant group had a customary right over a specific area of foreshore and a developer applied for a resource consent that affected that area? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: The territorial authority would determine whether the proposed development would have a significant impact on that customary right. If it determined that it was not a significant impact then the resource consent would be issued subject to the normal Resource Management Act criteria. If however it was determined that there was a significant impact on that right so that it could not be exercised then the developer would have to negotiate with the customary-right holder. 
Metiria Turei 
: Can the Minister then confirm based on her previous answer that the Government’s foreshore and seabed proposal does not confer a power of veto to Maori because it is the territorial authority that decides whether a Resource Management Act application will be declined if it has a significant impact on a customary right? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: It would be the authority that would determine whether there was a significant impact on the basis of evidence given. If there was not agreement with that assessment then of course there would be a right to review that decision. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Now that the Government acknowledges that customary rights are capable of commercialisation including sand extraction and mining why would that not result in at least some limitation on the right of access in the area of sand mining? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: I was not aware in that generalisation that commercialisation in terms of digging up a whole beach—if that is what the member is implying—is in fact the situation. I think there is a fundamental difference here—and I am sorry if I sound like a teacher—but a customary right is specific to an area. 
Rodney Hide 
: Not a very good one. 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: Well it is the pupil of course; the teacher is not always responsible. A customary right is to a specific area and it has to be on the basis of continuous use. So to talk about commercialisation in relation to taking a few buckets of shingle or what have you I suppose one could argue that it is commercial. 
Metiria Turei 
: Given that it is still the territorial authority that makes the decision does the Minister agree that under the Government’s proposal Maori will have no more say than they do now? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No I cannot agree with that. There will first of all be the acknowledgment of a customary right which is not there at the moment. There can be no continuing of the hearing of an application unless that customary right is acknowledged and has the capacity to be able to be exercised. 
Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Is the Minister suggesting that the taking of a few buckets of shingle as she puts it would actually amount to a commercialisation of a sand-extraction right when everyone knows that commercialisation is on a much larger scale than that and would inevitably lead at least in the area of the extraction to the exclusion of access? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No as I pointed out yesterday in answer to a question there is a right of public access. That is there. If the use of a customary right does involve some danger to a person then obviously that person would not go there. But if the member is trying to say that as a general rule no he is not right. There is a right of public access there is a right to exercise a customary right and there is a process to see how that would excise out in practice in that particular circumstance. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Can the Minister confirm that a customary right to extract a few buckets of sand cannot be turned into a commercial right to dig up a whole beach? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No not unless one is a member of the Opposition obviously.