Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Cullen Michael: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:652;Page:1705] 
11.  
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Maori Affairs 
: What advice if any has he received from Te Puni Kokiri on the main aspects of the Court of Appeal decision  
Attorney-General v Ngati Apa 
 (2003)? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES (Minister of Maori Affairs) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Speaker. Tena tatou. The advice that I received from Te Puni Kokiri was that the  
Ngati Apa 
 decision provided clarity. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: How can the Minister argue that position when the Chief Justice herself in her statement said: “The outcome of the appeal cannot establish that there is Maori customary land below high water mark. And the assertion that there is some such land faces a number of hurdles in fact and law …”? How does the Minister reconcile that statement with his view that Maori own all the foreshore and seabed? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: The Hon Dr Cullen asked me what advice I had received from Te Puni Kokiri and that is the advice I received. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: Tena koe Mr Speaker. What advice has the Minister received about the former Government’s response to the Court of Appeal decision  
Attorney-General v Ngati Apa 
? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Tena koe. I have received a report from the Waitangi Tribunal that states that the Crown’s policy response breaches the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and gives rise to serious prejudice—namely that cutting off Maori access to the courts and effectively expropriating their property rights puts them in a class different from and inferior to all other citizens and that the policy takes away opportunity and mana and in their place offers fewer and lesser rights. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: How does the Minister reconcile the quoting of that report issued before the bill was actually drafted with the statement by Mr Gerry Brownlee that of the interest that was thought to be held in common through Crown ownership and subdivided amongst the public and Maori Labour has traded away the birthright of all New Zealanders and the unrestricted ownership of the Crown of all the foreshore and seabed and turned it over to racially based control? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I am not responsible for Mr Brownlee’s statements. 
Hon Christopher Finlayson 
: What other reports has the Minister received in relation to yesterday’s announcement of the Foreshore and Seabed Act review? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Tena koe. I have received a statement by the Labour Party stating: “Labour will constructively engage with the Government over the review of the Foreshore and Seabed Act”. I have also seen a report of comments from the Hon Shane Jones to Maori media that criticises the review. This is yet another indication of Shane Jones’ seeking to undermine the Leader of the Opposition and to position himself as a suitable candidate for Labour Party leadership. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Has the Minister read the Foreshore and Seabed Act in its entirety; if so how does he reconcile his many statements on this matter with sections 33 to 45 covering customary title and applications to the High Court for rulings and sections 46 to 61 covering customary rights orders and applications to the Maori Land Court for rulings? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: Yes I have. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: What advice if any has the Minister received on the legal and policy dimensions arising from the Court of Appeal decision  
Attorney-General v Ngati Apa 
? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: I have received a report from Cara Conroy-Low of Victoria University who concluded that: “The government had an opportunity to help create vibrant and positive race relations in New Zealand but failed.” The analysis of Ms Conroy-Low was that the Foreshore and Seabed Bill had been motivated by a desire on the part of the Labour Party to portray itself as not favouring Maori but rather siding with non-Maori. The review announced yesterday therefore enables the politics of division and conflict to be replaced by a new era of nationhood in which we can look afresh at this situation rather than take sides. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Does the Minister stand by his previous view that Maori will “lose their culture and identity.” with the passing of the Foreshore and Seabed Act; if so what is his evidence over 4 years after its passing that Maori no longer have any culture and identity? 
Hon Dr PITA SHARPLES 
: That statement was made in reference to cutting off customary rights.