Damien Grant: Protect property rights

Maori have a right to test their land claims in court. Photo / APN

At the heart of modern capitalism is the concept of property rights. A belief in the sanctity of personal property is what separates decent god-fearing right-wingers from angst-ridden agnostic lefties.

So it is with annoyance that I have been reading about the sophistry being foisted upon us by the malcontents in the Coastal Coalition and others.

Back in 1840, a deal was done. The nature of that deal is complex and I'm not going to go near the details because I don't understand them. But I do know this - there were some shonky land sales over the following century and a lot of land was transferred under dubious circumstances.

One thing Maori got in 1840 (whether they signed up for it or not) was British justice and, by extension, its belief in the enforceability of contracts, property rights and access to litigation.

What many conservative pundits, including Muriel Newman of the aforementioned coalition, fail to come to grips with, or perhaps choose to ignore, is that some iwi may have a valid claim to some beaches around the country. They have a right to test their claim in court and the last government was wrong to arbitrarily remove this entitlement. The current foreshore bill partially restores this right.

Rodney Hide's anaemic contribution to the debate is to try and insert the word "free", confirming public access to beaches that may be subject to customary title. He should instead focus on removing Section 93.

This pernicious section gives those seeking customary title a six-year window to do a deal directly with the Crown, thus escaping the burden of proving their case in court.

This is a case where transparency should trump efficiency. The public may perceive that deals over land will get intermingled with politics. This would undermine public acceptance of any settlement agreements.

Pita Sharples points out that Maori have never restricted or charged a fee for access to coastline where they claim ownership. But this is not the point.

If the courts find that the land should be returned to the local iwi then it's their property, (subject only to the vicissitudes of local council district plans and the burdens of the Resource Management Act). Muriel Newman and I may not like it but our feelings are of no concern. If you own the beach you should be allowed to charge people to use it. Property rights are a cornerstone of our legal system that should not be compromised for short-term political advantage. Those who own property should think about the importance of that principle.