Mayor at heart of foreshore row skips hui

By RUTH BERRY political reporter

The Marlborough mayor accused of sparking the foreshore and seabed furore will not attend a national hui on the issue in his town tomorrow - instead, he will be riding into Blenheim in a horse and cart dressed in Victorian period costume.

Mayor Tom Harrison, called a "racist" by Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen in Parliament this week, was also not planning to attend a foreshore and seabed meeting today between his council and local iwi.

Te Tau Ihu, the eight Marlborough iwi which took the case to the Court of Appeal, were expecting several hundred people to arrive at Omaka Marae today, ahead of tomorrow's meeting.

It is the second national hui on the issue and the first time whanau, hapu and iwi from across the country will meet to discuss the Government's proposals.

Mr Harrison had been angered by Dr Cullen's accusations, pointing out he was not the region's mayor when the iwi, frustrated they were being shut out of the marine farming industry by the district council, went to the courts.

Dr Cullen yesterday refused to apologise for his allegation. "I certainly think that the mayor, in stating that those iwi who won the Court of Appeal case were Maori bully boys, was going well beyond the grounds of reasonable public discourse."

Te Tau Ihu spokesman John Mitchell yesterday defended Mr Harrison against some of the accusations, saying central Government agencies' failure to recognise iwi interests in the coastal marine environment had also driven the case.

Dr Mitchell conceded his defence of Mr Harrison was ironic given "he has accused us of apartheid and greed".

He said it was disappointing the mayor would not attend today's meeting with his fellow councillors.

"We would dearly love for him to be there. It would be nice to sit down and eyeball to eyeball put on the table the issues."

Mr Harrison, who has been locked in battle over his stance on the issue with some of his councillors, said he had a prior engagement, but might yet manage to get to the end of the meeting.

He had not been invited to the hui and would not attend as he had other engagements, including a celebration for a 100-year-old band rotunda in the city centre.

"My wife and I will be dresssing up Victorian costumes and riding in a gig to the centre of town."

Dr Mitchell said Te Tau Ihu wanted those attending the hui to consider its draft framework and models other groups may have drawn up, as well as discuss the Government's proposals.

These were widely considered a "huge snow job", he said.

The issues facing the hui were multi-layered. While there is broad agreement that Maori have proprietary interests in the coastal environmental, different views were emerging around the extent of the interest and how the issue should be resolved.

The Government has signalled no intention to extend its proposed six-week consultation period, despite widespread concern it was too short.

Customary use of coastal environments typically occurred at a whanau or hapu level, creating further problems around consultation.

A Northland hui last weekend forbade iwi authorities from signing deals or speaking on their behalf.

Confusion around the various different terms being bandied about was creating confusion in Parliament and on marae - although this could yet also provide a space for compromises.

The Government proposes preventing the Maori Land Court from awarding a freehold title to foreshore and seabed and has avoided using the phrase customary title.

Some groups were insistent that due process should be be followed, while others were simply saying they want their role as kaitiaki (guardians) of the foreshore and seabed recognised.

For some this included the exclusive right to manage the area in question; others were talking co-management.

All expressed concerns about protecting cultural and spiritual sites and practices and the coastal marine environment.

Legislation now in place (covering land and sea) and proposed already provided for some of this - at issue were concerns these did not properly reflect Maori interests and aspirations.

Commercial interests flowing from customary rights varied, but included marine farming and claims to exploit or regulate the use of natural resources.

The Waitangi Fisheries Commission was pushing this issue and now the Government had dealt with the public's "barbecue on the beach" fears, it was the number one risk area for the Government.

Dr Cullen said the Maori Land Court would define the nature and extent of customary rights but was suggesting few commercial (development rights) would flow from them.

He has restated Crown policy that petroleum, gold, silver and uranium were owned by the Crown, regardless of who owned the foreshore or seabed.

But if the court found significant property interests, it could identify rights to regulate use of natural resources and to collect royalties, for example, from their use.

Iwi leaders, in Omaka and over coming weeks, were likely to call on the Government to make no attempts, when redefining the land court's powers, to further restrict the way it would be able to define customary rights.

Strengthened recognition of Maori interests in legislation, such as the Resource Management Act, could also provide economic spin-offs.

Points of contention

* Ownership of foreshore and seabed and associated resources, including plan to extinguish rights to claim a freehold title through Maori Land Court.

* Who has the right to regulate use of coastal marine area and its resources.

* Extent of commercial rights that flow from customary rights.

* Length of consultation process.

* Right of whanau, hapu and iwi to veto Government plans.