Editorial: Wreck still raw nerve

David Cunliffe. Photo/Warren Buckland

Labour leader David Cunliffe's promise to insist on the removal of the Rena wreck was all a bit too obvious.

Certainly the people the Bay of Plenty Times spoke to on the street recognised it for what it was: a ploy to win votes. They supported the sentiment but most said it would not change the way they voted.

It is unclear how he plans to ensure its removal.

National Party MP Simon Bridges said Mr Cunliffe's announcement equated to "pointless posturing" and the decision on whether or not the wreck should be removed should be made by the Environment Court.

While Mr Bridges might have a point, he does seem to underestimate the depth of feeling about the Rena wreck, which is not a good sign for an electorate MP.

A Government order issued to Rena's owners within hours of its grounding to remove the vessel remains but Rena's owner and insurer are to seek resource consent to leave it where it is.

Most Bay residents clearly remember the scale of the fallout that followed when the 37,000-tonne cargo ship hit the reef near Motiti Island. The Bay's coastline was soiled by 350 tonnes of heavy fuel oil, debris and more than 1000 dead birds, in what will be labelled New Zealand's worst maritime environmental disaster.

Several years on and oil spots and small plastic beads were still washing up along the Bay of Plenty coastline.

The wreck needs to be removed so we can draw an end to its awful legacy.

Regardless of his motivations, Mr Cunliffe has at least put Rena's owners on notice. It also gives some hope to those opposing the plan who, with far fewer resources, are facing a David and Goliath battle.

It's not surprising that Rena's owners should be looking to leave the wreck, removing it is a complex, demanding, dangerous and extremely costly job.

But it remains the right thing to do.