Gary Taylor: Replace Foreshore and Seabed Act with coastal commission

The recent report from the ministerial review panel on the Foreshore and Seabed Act recommended the creation of a national overview body that would ensure that both customary interests of iwi and the public interest in all the coastal marine area could be recognised and provided for.

Before that panel's report was released, the Environmental Defence Society (EDS) argued at last month's national conference for the creation of a national body as well, one that would take responsibility for the management of the coast including coastal land, the territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone.

Could these two proposals merge? The answer is an emphatic yes.

Let's summarise the two proposals, then look for common ground. First, the review panel found that the Foreshore and Seabed Act took away rights of Maori to have their interests decided by the courts. If they had rights of customary title to specific areas, then they were expropriated by Parliament when the act was passed.

The panel called for the act to be repealed and a new basis for dealing with customary title to be found. The panel's preferred approach is a "mixed model" involving a national level settlement, a definition of rights and interests, and local co-management.

At the national level, a working group or commission would oversee the coastal marine area. It would have specific tasks including developing proposals on a national settlement for foreshore and seabed issues, on the allocation and recognition of iwi and hapu rights, and on co-management at a local level. The commission's members would come from Maori, central and local government and public interest groups. Importantly, it would also represent the wider public interest in the coast, including access rights.

Secondly, EDS argued, before knowing what the review panel would recommend, that we need a New Zealand Coastal Commission to provide national guidance on coastal management and to represent the national interest in coastal matters.

Because the coast is so important to our sense of identity and to our economic welfare, we need more national guidance and oversight, rather than leaving crucial management decisions to local councils.

Furthermore, some activities in the marine area are not subject to environmental regulation at all. In particular, the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) needs effective environmental management.

The review panel also echoed EDS's views regarding the wider legislative framework for the coastal marine area, calling it "too complex" and saying that it "needs reconsidering as a whole".

We couldn't agree more. EDS is releasing a comprehensive analysis of the governance framework for the coast and marine area next month, which shows an area crying out for simplification and reform.

So why not bring these two ideas together? A coastal commission could be responsible for:

Developing proposals for the resolution of foreshore and seabed issues.

Reviewing all coastal and marine legislation and developing proposals for a new Oceans Act.

Managing the EEZ.

Acting as a Resource Management Act board of inquiry for matters such as coastal projects of national significance and the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement.

Overseeing coastal spatial planning to address issues such as the location of outstanding landscapes, aquaculture and marine protected areas.

Maintaining and enhancing public access to the coast.

Monitoring and reporting on the effectiveness of coastal and marine management.

A coastal commission that is inclusive of all New Zealanders should not only defuse an issue that could be divisive but is an excellent model to take us forward together.

* Gary Taylor is chairman of the Environmental Defence Society (www.eds.org.nz).