Government under fire over Maori customary reserves

By RUTH BERRY

The Government has been accused of making it harder for Maori to create successful customary reserves under last-minute changes to the foreshore and seabed legislation.

Territorial customary right (TCR) claims provide the most substantial avenue for recognition of Maori customary rights in the bill.

Iwi, hapu and whanau with strong ownership claims can ask the High Court to make a TCR order directing either the establishment of a reserve they will become guardians over, or the Government to negotiate redress.

Most of Labour's Maori caucus believe more than 10 per cent of coastal land may end up in reserves, but would not confirm this when grilled by Opposition MPs over the issue in Parliament yesterday.

But critics say the changes made could mean hardly any reserves are set up.

Under the bill tabled earlier this year the threshold set for establishing a TCR included requirements that, but for the legislation, the group would have held aboriginal title.

The group would also have had to demonstrate it retained exclusive possession and occupation of the coastal land in question.

It has always been considered that ownership of land adjoining the foreshore would significantly strengthen TCR claims.

But this was not written into the original bill, leaving the court greater discretion to determine what constituted a TCR.

Neither was the issue a requirement in Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet briefing papers to the foreshore select committee.

Under the supplementary order paper tabled late on Tuesday, the Government has now made contiguous ownership of a significant part of the land adjoining the foreshore a requirement for awarding a TCR.

Grant Powell, a lawyer for iwi foreshore lobby group Te Ope Mana a Tai, said the change, with other TCR requirements, meant the bar had now been lifted so high it was questionable whether any Maori group could get a TCR.

Te Ture Whenua Maori Act, which, but for the bill, would have enabled the Maori Land Court to award freehold titles, stipulated the bar should be "land held in accordance with tikanga Maori" - a more appropriate requirement, he said.

Another new clause preventing consideration of "spiritual or cultural" association with an area unless it is manifested in a physical activity or use, effectively excluded consideration of basic fundamental Maori concepts around land ownership, he said.

Tainui MP Nanaia Mahuta also raised concerns yesterday in Parliament.

Ms Mahuta said there was "too much weight" placed on the contiguous issue and not enough on the significance of tikanga Maori.

"What happens ... if the test is so high that no TCR can be awarded?" she said.