Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
Brownlee Gerry: Foreshore and Seabed Bill — Procedure Second Reading 
[Volume:621;Page:16933] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
: 
 A Government that is confident about a bill as important as this would not spend so much of its introductory speech-time pre-empting what the Opposition might say. The Government would not so quickly put itself into defence mode unless it knew that the bill was incredibly divisive and was going to be a problem for it.  
Now some 18 months after the Court of Appeal decision on NgatiApa very little has changed. Government members went around the countryside consulting so-called with Maori and holding hui here there and everywhere. Then just before Christmas last year the Government introduced the Foreshore and Seabed Bill into the House—an appalling bill that now lies in tatters on the Table of the House. The Government has come up with a very substantial Supplementary Order Paper which makes the bill a very different bill. This bill was not put together by the Government; it was put together by the Government’s white knight in this case—namely Winston Peters and the New Zealand First Party.  
I will explain what is so significant about this Supplementary Order Paper. The Court of Appeal decision on NgatiApa upheld the premise that the Maori Land Court could issue title to foreshore and seabed to some Maori applicants. In terms of the bill now before us those same Maori applicants can go to the High Court to seek territorial customary rights which lead to co-management or a cheque for compensation. It is clear that Dr Cullen has not read his own press release so for his benefit I will quote from it: “Where a territorial customary rights finding is made and the group does not seek the establishment of a reserve”—that is the co-management bit—“the High Court shall refer the finding to Ministers to discuss other redress options.” Everyone knows “other redress” means a cheque. John Tamihere certainly knows that “other redress” means a cheque. So there is very little change from exactly what was the case 18 months ago.  
The select committee process was a disgrace. However in saying that I do want to pay tribute to the chairman Russell Fairbrother. He is a very able fellow and he must wonder what the heck he is doing in Parliament after his previous illustrious career. He was under an incredibly hard drive all the time from the Prime Minister and Michael Cullen. He knew that he could not listen to people that he could not allow the committee to listen to people and that he could not take on board their views because the Government was always going to do what suited it best. Sadly because the numbers fell over the Government had to go to Dail Jones to write the Supplementary Order Paper and to Winston Peters to help them out in order to get the legislation through. Members of the select committee were fascinated with the goodwill—by and large—that was exhibited by many of the Maori submitters who felt aggrieved and were very uncertain 
. 
 It was interesting to note that the uncertainty felt by Maori submitters was paralleled just as strongly in the non-Maori community. This bill does nothing to allay those fears—on the part of either party.  
Dr Cullen suggested that somehow there was something wrong with National’s suggestion that the Government should have considered Te Ture Whenua Maori Act when looking to sort this problem out. That legislation came before the House only 11 years ago so that is in living memory of many members here. For the benefit of those of us who were not in Parliament then we went back through all the submissions received on that bill and we went back through all the speeches in  
Hansard. 
 We found that not one submitter MP or Maori MP at the time mentioned that the foreshore or the seabed was land. Not one! It was never ever suggested despite what Government members might think that the foreshore or the seabed was land. That was the view of 11 years ago. What has happened within the Maori community that makes them suddenly decide that the foreshore or seabed is land? The Government is in this pickle because Helen Clark overreacted to the appeal court decision. She was caught on the hop when she was asked what the Government was going to do about it. She immediately said that the Government would legislate to fix it. So about 18 months later we have this bill before the House but it will do nothing to change those circumstances—not a thing.  
Maori will be able to make a claim to the High Court to get a declaration of customary rights over an area and a reserve will be created which apparently everybody can walk over everybody can stomp up and down on and everybody can use a boat on but there will be a management committee that somehow will administer that reserve. Dr Cullen knows and everybody in the Labour Party knows that when one sets up committees—and Labour is good at that—then inevitably there will be rules there will be charges and there will be restrictions on use. No matter what this bill says that is what they will do. The bill contains plenty of clauses—[ 
Interruption 
] and the member for Taupo ought to read them—that will allow the access issue to be parked up. How can anybody in this country be confident with the bold claim made by Dr Cullen today that this bill has no more in it to fear than the Resource Management Act? Well I can tell members opposite that their votes their seats are being undone on a daily basis because of their insistence that the Resource Management Act is all fine and dandy and nothing needs to be done about it.  
Dr Cullen challenged National to give a position on the Government’s decision to take the ancestral connection provision out of the bill. Well the Government has not done that. It will argue that it has gone—because those words are not there—but if anyone looks at the purpose of the bill and at clause 2A “Object” it is patently clear that ancestral connection is now very much embedded in the bill. So if one is a Maori one has an opportunity to claim a special connection to specific parts of the coastline. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: No. It’s gone. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Mr Winston Peters sits there and says it is gone. I ask him to tell us what it means where it states that a Maori group can go to the High Court to have a customary rights finding in their favour.  
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: It doesn’t say that. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That is exactly what it says. If that is somehow not something special that those of us who are non-Maori cannot claim then what is it? If it is not saying that those groups have a preference in our society what is it saying?  
John Tamihere 
: Ask Georgina. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I wish John Tamihere would shut his mouth because when it comes to dishing out cheques no one in this House knows more than he does. That is what this bill does. This bill is designed to placate Maori with a cheque and convince other New Zealanders that everything is OK when it is not.