Editorial: Hope for speedy end to treaty claims

To many people, the Maori claim to exclusive foreshore and seabed ownership came like a bolt from the blue. So sweeping were the claim's implications that it raised inevitable questions: whatever will be next, and will this business ever end? New Zealanders must have a broadly based understanding of these issues if we are to avoid becoming a society divided by ignorance.

Today, the Herald details what has been achieved in the Treaty of Waitangi settlement process and what is still to come. It also analyses today's state of play. What emerges provides reason for cautious optimism, the poisonous potential of the seabed-foreshore imbroglio notwithstanding.

It would be easy to be cynical about the "new new" approach being used to accelerate claims, particularly that relating to the central North Island. Speed has never been associated with the settlement process. Previous attempts to prod and galvanise have failed. Claims have tended to simmer for a long time, rather like the seabed-foreshore issue before it burst upon the public scene.

Yet a happy convergence of interests suggests the process can indeed be accelerated. Whatever the risks in the new policy for those involved, they are more than matched by the potential rewards.

The Government's ambition is to have the settlement process fairly much completed by 2015. More immediately, it would love to boast a major success before the next general election. The central North Island, a settlement involving a third of Maori, offers that.

The Government's chosen route is a process that involves more direct dealing with claimants. Negotiations will be in tandem with the work of the Waitangi Tribunal, rather than evolving from its determinations on alleged grievances. This suggests that to some extent the tribunal may come to play a role like that of South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation Commission. If so, its changed function would make it no less worthwhile.

Maori, for their part, know the National Party has pledged to take a knife to the settlement process and that National could make great electoral play if progress continues to be perceived as snail-paced. Much rides on the central North Island claim, with its preponderance of grievance issues, valuable assets and sizeable iwi. Success with the new approach would encourage other outstanding claimants. Significantly, it has also concentrated the mind of the Crown Forestry Rental Trust, whose income helps claimants to prepare cases. Most of its funding will disappear with a central North Island settlement.

But there are substantial risks for all parties. To accelerate the process, the Crown must more readily admit treaty breaches, thereby increasing its potential liability. And iwi, in placing less emphasis on the Waitangi Tribunal, may sell themselves short in settlements that must be durable, full and final.

Given that, the new policy will only be as good as those who sit around the negotiating table. Their work will be delicate but they have the advantage of an approach that is a product of the trials and tribulations of previous settlements - and a recognition of what works and what does not.

So far, the seabed and foreshore issue seems not to have affected the ardour of the claimants. Nor should it, even given its potential to raise temperatures, especially if the Government chooses to legislate. The foreshore question is a legal one related to customary rights, an area that is specifically excluded from the settlement of historical grievances. If good sense prevails, that distinction should negate any fall-out on a settlement process that is moving faster than ever.

There may yet be the odd startling development but the chances of surprises are dwindling. They will diminish even further if a brisk central North Island settlement provides the impetus for a 2015 finish-line. Appearances, if judged by the foreshore controversy, could be highly misleading.