Sowry Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Sowry Roger: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:611;Page:8103] 
1. Hon ROGER SOWRY (Deputy Leader—NZ National) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: Does she stand by the statement in the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet foreshore and seabed pamphlet that says that the Maori Land Court would be able to consider fully the range of claims and could this give rise to compensation where the Government is unable to give full effect to claims without awarding title? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 I stand by the actual statement which was a little different. The Government proposal is that if the court found it was unable to give full recognition to customary interests that it found had continued to exist since 1840 then the court would be able to alert the Government to this consequence. The Government would then discuss with those affected what steps might be taken to address the issue. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: In the light of the Hon John Tamihere’s statement regarding customary rights to the seabed and foreshore that: “If exploration of those rights finds that they have been extinguished then that becomes an issue for compensation.” does this mean that the Government has now given the green light for compensation claims for extinguishment of customary rights not just extinguishment of the title; if not why? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: No. I am not aware there was ever a customary right to a freehold title. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Prime Minister consider that raising compensation as an issue is simply a tactic to heighten groundless fears of a taxpayer burden given that tangata whenua have not expressed any desire to exchange their mana whenua and kaitiakitanga for money? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Some of the tangata whenua comment has of course come from a quite explicitly commercial angle while other comment has come from a sovereignty angle. A lot of the Opposition comment has just come from a desire to stir the pot. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Given the absence of specific definitions of customary title customary use and customary access does she have confidence that the Maori Land Court as it stands at the moment would be able to make determinations on those points that would not cut across the Government’s policy objective of ensuring that everyone has equal and unfettered access to the seabed and foreshore? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Frankly not at the moment and that is why the discussion document talks about a specialist division of the Maori Land Court and the Maori Land Court needing to be resourced to deal with such issues. 
Dail Jones 
: Is the Prime Minister saying from her answers and especially from her first supplementary answer that Maoris who lose their customary rights will never be able to get compensation? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: It is not an issue of losing customary rights. The proposal is about seeing that the Maori Land Court is not able to issue a fee simple title. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. On the face of it this may be a complex issue but it is not so complex that the Prime Minister can avoid a very straight question which is not what the purview of the Maori Land Court new and reconstructed as it might be in the future might decide but whether if Maori or iwi were to lose their customary rights the Government in its policy contemplates compensation. It is a totally different issue. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order. The Prime Minister gave an answer. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With respect this is a very important issue. The Prime Minister may have given an answer but she did not concentrate on the question and she failed to give the New Zealand people and this House any idea as to what the Government’s thinking is which is the purpose of this question time. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Prime Minister addressed the question. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Does the Prime Minister not accept that in a country that has the rule of law if some citizen loses a property right then that is a matter that should be compensated by the courts not at the arbitrary whim of the Government? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: As I said in answer to the first supplementary question I am not aware there was ever a customary right to hold a freehold title. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Having the Prime Minister repeat her answer to a different question cannot in any way be regarded as an answer especially when I am trying to get the Prime Minister to clarify. It is a very simple question and I think the Prime Minister should answer it. Is the Government of New Zealand saying to one class of New Zealanders because they are Maori that they cannot get compensated but everyone else can? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is for the Prime Minister to determine in her answer. It might not satisfy the member but it was an answer. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: Was the Hon Margaret Wilson correct when she said: “If people then want compensation or want money then I suppose that will become as everything is a matter of negotiation.”; if that is so what exactly does the Government intend to compensate Maori for? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The proposal is clear in saying that if the Maori Land Court found that it could not give full recognition to customary interests then the court would be able to alert the Government to this consequence. The Government would then discuss the matter and what steps might be taken. It has not drawn any firm conclusion as to what they might be. This is a highly abstract and theoretical issue at this point. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Putting aside all questions of freehold or fee simple title—and given that customary rights have to have some value otherwise the Maori people would not be arguing for them—if they are lost to a Maori a hapu or an iwi does the Government intend now in its 6 weeks’ negotiation with Maoridom and apparently nobody else to compensate them if they are lost? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: This proposal is very specifically about upholding customary rights. I might also point out to the member that the consultation period is for consultation with the whole range of interested New Zealanders and that includes marine interests local government recreational interests and any others who wish to come forward. 
Hon Roger Sowry 
: How can she portray this issue as being “highly abstract” to quote her words when she has two Ministers Margaret Wilson and John Tamihere both on the record as saying that if the exploration of those rights finds they have been extinguished then it becomes an issue for compensation; who is being abstract the Prime Minister or her Ministers? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The reason for believing that it is a largely abstract and theoretical issue is that the Court of Appeal judgments implied strongly that that was so.