Davis Kelvin: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Davis Kelvin: Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:17237] 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 Before I start I would like to acknowledge John Boscawen for his tenacity in his points of order earlier. I do not agree with his politics and where he is heading but I admire a new member a new Minister who stands up and is prepared to speak his mind regardless of how wrong it may be. 
I would like to carry on from what Metiria Turei said about neither the Crown nor any other person owning or being capable of owning the common marine and coastal area which is stated in clause 11. I bring up this point because as she said it is a fallacy that the Crown can say that nobody owns the common marine and coastal area yet the Government retains the final say in what happens on the seabed. The Government can still override what Maori want in terms of the common marine and coastal area. 
I want to raise an example—and there are members of my own caucus who disagree with my argument on this topic. There is a proposal for Crest Energy to build some turbines in the Kaipara Harbour for tidal power generation. There will be 200 of these turbines if the whole proposal goes through and each will be the size of a small apartment block. They will cover an area in the mouth of the Kaipara Harbour that is about 7 kilometres long and a couple of hundred metres wide so these electricity turbines will be plonked on a substantial area of seabed. 
Nobody is opposed to renewable energy generation. However the point is these turbines will create a massive footprint on the seabed. There will be no navigation rights over the top of these turbines obviously for safety reasons. So what is being created is a property right—if this proposal goes ahead—over a substantial area of the seabed. That is what the Maori Party has agreed to. It has agreed that nobody will own the seabed yet it agrees that the Government has the final say as to what can happen. The Maori Party is agreeing that the Government can create in effect a property right over a substantial area of the seabed in the Kaipara Harbour against the wishes of Te Uri o Hau the local hapu and against the wishes of Ngati Whatua. The Maori Party has agreed that it is OK for that to happen. So basically the tino rangatiratanga of that area of seabed is being gifted to the Government. 
I cannot believe that the Maori Party is agreeing to this. I cannot believe that the Maori Party is allowing the Government to take total control tino rangatiratanga of this area of seabed. Even if customary marine title to the Kaipara seabed is given to Ngati Whatua and Te Uri o Hau a process outlined in schedule 2A on Supplementary Order Paper 207 allows projects like this which would be an instance of significant national and regional infrastructure to be built. Crest Energy can bypass the wishes of Ngati Whatua and Te Uri o Hau and can go to the Minister for Land Information who at the end of the day has the final say and can decide that this project may go ahead. The Maori Party is legislating for tino rangatiratanga not to reside with the local hapu Te Uri o Hau or with Ngati Whatua but to reside with the Crown. That in my opinion goes against everything the Maori Party is meant to stand for. The Maori Party is going against its own values and its own principles by saying that the tino rangatiratanga of that particular part of the seabed is to rest with the Crown. 
That will not be the only example of a project that is—