Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:609;Page:6465] 
Tuesday 24 June 2003 
Mr Speaker 
 took the Chair at 2 p.m. 
Prayers 
. 
Questions to Ministers 
Question No. 1 to Minister 
Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
: 
 The question was originally put down to the Prime Minister and I seek leave that it be held over until the Prime Minister is here. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought. Is there any objection? There is. 
Foreshore and Seabed—Crown Ownership 
1. Hon BILL ENGLISH (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Justice 
: Does the Government’s announcement that it will introduce legislation to provide for Crown ownership of the seabed and foreshore prevent anyone from making an application to the Maori Land Court for title to the seabed and foreshore? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON (Associate Minister of Justice) 
: 
 The intention of proposed legislation is to give clear expression to the Crown’s ownership of foreshore and seabed for the benefit of all New Zealanders. It is also the Government’s intention to preserve the ability of Maori claimants to pursue claims to the foreshore and seabed compatible with the Crown’s ownership rights. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why did the Prime Minister make statements giving the impression that the Maori claims were blocked when in fact it is Government policy that those claims can continue before the Maori Land Court and the Maori Land Court will have the capacity today tomorrow—even when the legislation is introduced—to decide whether there is customary ownership? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: It is the Government’s intention to balance the interests of all parties in this matter. It is also the Government’s intention as it is stated to look now at the detail to ensure how those interests can be reconciled in the interests of all New Zealanders. 
Tim Barnett 
: If the Government did not legislate is it possible that the court processes could result in someone being given exclusive title to part of the ocean? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When the Associate Minister said on the Holmes programme this morning: “What the Government should do under those circumstances when the law has not been clarified is that we are announcing that in principle we are going to clarify it” could she tell us what legal principle this is and why does she and others in this House who for years have been passing separatist legislation not fly a white flag and admit it? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: The principle is that of parliamentary sovereignty. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Is not the real situation that the Court of Appeal found that customary use rights—customary access—to the foreshore was the equivalent of customary ownership so when the Minister says that the Government rejects Maori ownership of the foreshore but it accepts Maori claim to customary use and access that is a piece of sophistry and in fact what the Government is doing is agreeing to hand over our foreshore to a select number of New Zealanders? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No and no. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Minister agree that the Court of Appeal decision reflects the common law principles of aboriginal title applicable in New Zealand and as were applied in Australia in the Mabo case and does she agree that te tiriti creates even stronger obligations on the Crown to consult Maori rather than legislating as she proposes? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: No I do not accept that the Court of Appeal decision does what the member says but I do accept that the recent Australian decisions have in fact decided that there is no exclusionary use of waterways in aboriginal title; and yes there will be consultation with Maori in terms of working through the detail as to what legislation will be ensuring that everyone’s rights are protected. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: In the legislation that the Minister is foreshadowing how will the rights of recreational users and fishers other than customary users be protected? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: That is precisely what has to be made clear. It is the interests of all parties. One starts from the fundamental principle that if there is ownership in the Crown then it is for the Crown to ensure that those interests—Maori interests as well as recreational interests and commercial interests—are protected. It is a balancing of interests. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Has the Associate Minister seen the comments of her colleague Tariana Turia: “They want the Government to overrule a unanimous decision by the Court of Appeal.” and her similar comments made on the issue of oil and gas in Taranaki and could she please tell us what legal principles she has been informing her colleague about when she rises in this House and says that nothing has been done in respect of challenging a Court of Appeal decision? 
Hon MARGARET WILSON 
: If I understand the questions no I have not seen the comment of my colleague. The Court of Appeal decision related to jurisdiction and to access and that is not what has been challenged. In that process however the end point of the application to the Maori Land Court would lead to a private title in land and that is what was the concern of the Government. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. With respect I am asking for a very clear answer to a legal question. The reality is that Judge Hingston made that an issue when he said— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: No no let me finish. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will please be seated. That is not a point of order. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It is. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member has not yet come to one. The Minister is giving an answer. The member has an opportunity to ask her in a supplementary— 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Mr Speaker she has given a long extended answer none of which relates to my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will please be seated while I am on my feet or I will not call the member again. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well wait until I have finished my point of order. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will leave the Chamber. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Well you can run a protection racket if you like but the reality is that I want some answers in this House and so does everybody else. We have put up with this rubbish for years. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member does not leave he will be named as well. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I don’t mind if you name me Mr Speaker. I know what my name is. 
Question time interrupted.