Judge finds some merit in asset claims

By SCOTT MacLEOD

Maori worried about the way $700 million in fisheries assets will be carved up have lost their bid to have the process frozen.

But the High Court has made special arrangements for them to air their grievances at a hearing within two months - which may give a result before a new Maori fisheries law is introduced.

The plaintiffs are listed as Sir Howard Morrison, Mere Broughton, Te Runanga O Muriwhenua, Nga Rauru O Nga Potiki, John Hanita Paki, and "others".

They wanted the carve-up frozen to give time for a judicial review before the movement towards a new law became irresistible.

Their concerns centred on the He Kawai Amokura report that has been largely approved by Fisheries Minister Pete Hodgson and which is a blueprint for a new Maori Fisheries Act.

Some Maori claim allocation plans are unfair, fail to take into account past iniquities and the loss of fish to recreational anglers, and that they had been poorly consulted.

The latest flare-up comes after a decade of bickering over the assets, which are held by the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission.

Justice Barry Paterson said in a reserved judgment that many of the arguments were weak, and he would not issue an order for interim relief.

However, the court had arranged a hearing for early November because there was some merit to two of the claims: that the plan would not benefit all Maori, and that the commission should adjust the payouts to take into account iniquities.

Dr Don Mathieson, QC, had argued that Ngai Tahu creamed two-thirds of the tender payouts between 1990 and 1993, despite making up just 6 per cent of Maori.

Justice Paterson said the plaintiffs should be allowed to argue their case at a substantive court hearing before the Maori fishing bill went before the House. And he spoke of the "considerable frustration within Maoridom that a settlement effected 11 years ago has not been implemented".