The front-page advertisement that ran in last Wednesday's NZ Herald.
A group of legal experts has outlined four key reasons why they say a Hobson’s Pledge ad was misleading – but the lobby group is standing by its ad.
A group of more than 170 legal academics and lawyers say an advertisement for the Hobson’s Pledge lobby group – published on the front page of the NZ Herald last week – was “abhorrent” and likely to “mislead, deceive or confuse customers both explicitly and by implication, ambiguity, exaggeration and false representation”.
But Hobson’s Pledge is standing by the ad, inviting opponents to outline exactly what they have got wrong – trustee Don Brash claims there is nothing untrue and that opponents are attempting to suppress political discussion and dissension.
The group of lawyers, academics as well as the Māori Law Society, the Auckland Women Law Association and The New Zealand Women’s Law Journal said in a statement today that the ad was likely to fuel racism against Māori, and set out four key points where they say the advertisement was misleading.
“First, the advertisement calls for the ‘restoration’ of the foreshore to public ownership,” says the group of signatories.
“The foreshore has never historically been in public ownership: it is not owned by anybody, except for the areas of the foreshore that are currently in (mainly non-Māori) private ownership.”
Secondly, they say the ad implied that “customary marine titles” gave iwi, hāpu and/or whānau the right to own parts of the foreshore.
“This is not true. On the contrary, the legislation’s effective extinguishment of Māori property interests in the foreshore has been found to breach their human rights by UN human rights bodies that oversee New Zealand’s human rights compliance.”
Thirdly, they say the ad implied a “customary marine title” would prevent New Zealanders from accessing beaches, including to fish and swim.
“This is not true. The legislation enabling the award of customary marine titles secures public access to the foreshore.”
And fourthly, they say that “contrary to the impression created by the advertisement, there are very hard legal tests to be met before a wāhi tapu (including a rāhui) will be recognised”.
“Moreover, wāhi tapu are subject to statutory restrictions, and cannot, for example, prevent fishers from taking their lawful entitlement in a quota or fisheries management area.”
The group says Hobson’s Pledge is entitled to “robust expression of opinion but are not entitled to mislead and deceive consumers”.
“The Herald should have known, or investigated, whether the information was misleading or deceptive before the advertisement was published.”
The group said the attempt by Hobson’s Pledge to reignite the division and discrimination of the foreshore and seabed issues from the mid-2000s was “abhorrent”.
Signatories to the statement include the Māori Law Society and more than 170 individual legal academics and lawyers including Petra Butler, Erin Matariki Carr, Natalie Coates, Claire Charters, Toni Collins, Renata Davis, Craig Elliffe, Rachael Evans, Jodi Gardner, Julia Harper Hinton, Max Harris, Anna Hood, Jayden Houghton, Elizabeth MacPherson, Ani Mikaere, Khylee Quince, Marcelo Rodriguez Ferrere, Nicole Roughan, Jacinta Ruru, Katherine Sanders, Māmari Stephens, Linda Te Aho, Julia Tolmie, Lynell Tuffery Huria, Tania Waikato and Tracey Whare.
Herald publisher NZME has been approached for comment over the lawyers’ and legal academics’ statement.
It comes as the Herald rejected a second ad for Hobson’s Pledge, which the lobby group had hoped would be published tomorrow. The ad was set to reinforce the group’s position.
An NZME spokeswoman said earlier: “We are reviewing our policies and processes around advocacy advertising and we have advised Hobson’s Pledge that we will not be running their advertisement.”
It is understood the media company’s executive team will meet to discuss the issue.
Earlier, Hobson’s Pledge said those claiming the front-page ad was “misinformation” did not have “evidence or even specifics of what exactly we have got wrong”.
“Those flinging accusations of misinformation need to front up with evidence to demonstrate what is incorrect,” Hobson’s Pledge trustee Don Brash said in a statement, as reported by Te Ao Māori news.
He said there was nothing “untrue” about the ad.
The map used in the ad was from the Te Kete Kōrero a Te Takutai Moana Information Hub (Kōrero Takutai) on the Te Arawhiti Māori Crown Relations website.
He said it showed areas with current High Court applications.
“Likewise, our information on the rights that come with customary marine titles was sourced from the Te Arawhiti Māori Crown Relations website.
“The level of rage the ad generated speaks to the degree to which radicals have whipped their supporters into a frenzy. It is concerning and appears to be escalating.
“Hobson’s Pledge has repeated that we abhor political violence and that all of our activism and advocacy is utterly non-violent. Judging by the messages we have received in the past few days, our opponents do not take the same position.
“Our opponents appear not to be angry because we said anything false but because we printed truthful information that they do not want to be widely understood.
“Whatever one’s position on customary rights to the foreshore and seabed, New Zealanders having access to more information about it should not be a negative. The information is already there on a government website. We are simply drawing attention to it.”
In the statement, Brash also took a swing at Te Pāti Māori, which last week spoke out about it, calling the ad “anti-Māori propaganda”.
In a statement on Friday, Te Pāti Māori announced it would no longer engage with Herald journalists because of the advertisement and the “disgusting attack” by Hobson’s Pledge.
It has also cancelled co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer’s regular Herald column.
“The New Zealand Herald have allowed themselves to be bought off by a well-resourced anti-Māori collective. They have promoted misinformation on their front page so they can feast off the anti-Māori agenda being pursued by this Government,” said co-leader Rawiri Waititi.
Brash said in a statement: “Te Pāti Māori should be condemned for attempting to strong-arm the media into not publishing advertisements that they disagree with. They are interfering in commercial relationships. The kind of power they are demanding is intoxicating and will not stop here. Once they know they can bully the media they will use the same tactics on other issues and other advertisers.
“It starts to look like cartel behaviour when activists co-ordinate to bully businesses which publish information that they don’t want shared.
“The information on our ad was factual and sourced from a government website. We said that we don’t agree with the status quo. If discussing legislation and its implications is now beyond the pale and generates such visceral anger we are in big trouble.
“Healthy democracies do not accept suppression of political discussion and dissent. Te Pāti Māori and its proxies are welcome to share their alternative perspective, but they aren’t entitled to bully and silence their opponents,” Brash said.
Editor-at-Large Shayne Currie is one of New Zealand’s most experienced senior journalists and media leaders. He has held executive and senior editorial roles at NZME including Managing Editor, NZ Herald Editor and Herald on Sunday Editor and has a small shareholding in NZME.
The event is described as a series of aggressive sales pitches.