Be careful with seabed hopes, Govt warns iwi

Attorney-General Chris Finalyson is warning iwi leaders not to get their expectations for the foreshore and seabed too high as the issue of ownership emerges as a bone of contention.

Professor Margaret Mutu, chairwoman of the Far North tribe Ngati Kahu, said the starting point should be Maori ownership of the whole coastline, rather than requiring Maori to test that in the courts or try to secure it through negotiations.

"The truth is Maori own it and if the Crown want to use it, on behalf of non-Maori in this country, they need to come and talk to us. If they claim ownership, they need to prove their ownership to us."

However, another iwi leader, Apirana Mahuika of Ngati Porou, said Maori needed to be pragmatic and acknowledge that the Government's proposal addressed the concerns Maori raised in 2004 about Crown ownership and access to the courts.

Professor Mutu acknowledged political reality made it unlikely that the Maori ownership option would be taken. She believed there was potential for compromise and said the Government proposal was preferable to the Foreshore and Seabed Act, which many iwi were refusing to partake in.

"But it has to be replaced by something that reflects the reality on the ground and I still think there's work to be done." She did not believe hapu should be required to test it in the courts, saying it was a waste of money and resources.

Mr Finlayson said iwi leaders had to be careful not to get their expectations too high. "They ought to take note of a bit of history. The source of grievance was that having the right to go to court was taken from them. They're getting that back."

However, if iwi wanted to leave it completely to the courts without the Government putting in place the tests that would apply, they risked losing everything because there was little established law in the area.

"That's an option, but be careful what you wish for."

Mr Mahuika said the protest hikoi in 2004 was about vesting the foreshore and seabed in Crown ownership and blocking the way for Maori to claim customary title in court.

"Here is the opportunity for repealing the act - the very thing people marched for."

The challenge for iwi now was to decide whether the Government's proposal was preferable to the act.

Ngati Porou is the sole iwi to have agreed on a settlement under the 2004 act, but has held off on ratifying it while the new Government reviewed the issue.

Mr Mahuika said Ngati Porou would assess what a repeal would mean, but believed it was better off under its Deed of Agreement.

However, he said, Ngati Porou was in a different position from many hapu and iwi because it had maintained strong links to most of its coastline.

The Government released its discussion document on the foreshore and seabed last week and will consult on it until the end of the month. Prime Minister John Key has warned that if no reasonable consensus can be reached, the 2004 law will stay in place.

The Government's proposal is for the area to become a "public domain" with no absolute owner, but for hapu that could prove exclusive use and occupation since 1840 to claim customary title either by negotiations or through the courts. Any such title would carry property rights similar to those held by private owners, such as the ability to veto developments.