Chris Finlayson: former Attorney-General on the Marine and Coastal Area Amendment Bill entering its third reading

Questions have been raised regarding the Government claim over changes likely to make it harder for Māori to claim customary marine titles.

The divisive Marine and Coastal Area Amendment Bill is likely to pass its third reading in the House tonight.

The Government claims it'll restore the legislation to its original intent.

Former Attorney-General Chris Finlayson says these changes aren't restoring any laws or clarifying anything.

"It doesn't clarify the law at all, it changes it. And if they want to do that, well of course Parliament's sovereign, but why don't they come out and say it - instead of indulging this myth?

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
Afternoon. Parliament is set to change the law later today
to make it harder for Ewe and Hapoo to gain
customary title over coastal areas. It's a change to the
Marine and Coastal Area Act, which was originally introduced by
their Attorney General, Chrispin Layson in twenty eleven under the
Key government. And he's with us now.

Speaker 2 (00:15):
High Chris hihether, I'm trying to get home to Wellington.
I bet you're pleased you don't live in Candala anymore.

Speaker 1 (00:22):
Lord. There are many days where I think the good Lord,
I don't live in Candala anymore. Good luck getting home.
But thank you for your time, listener. You challenging the
government's assertion that this change brings the law closer to
what was originally intended.

Speaker 2 (00:35):
Yes, it doesn't. It changes the law and you've only
got to look at the section dealing with burden of
truths to realize that they playing around with it. So
it doesn't clarify the law at all. It changes And
if they want to do that, well, of course Parliament's sovereign.
But why don't they come out and say it instead
of indulging in this myth?

Speaker 1 (00:52):
So what was the original intention. How much of this
land would have been handed back under the original intention?

Speaker 2 (00:59):
Well didn't it? Well that's the wrong question. Really, the
question is what was the test, And it was a
test that was worked out over quite some considerable time
with the Maori Party and the officials. So it's a
property right. In order to prove you had the property right,
you had to prove that you're held in accordance with
Tea konger and exclusive use and occupation since eighteen forty

(01:21):
without substantial interruption.

Speaker 1 (01:23):
As of what's it been changed too?

Speaker 2 (01:25):
I beg your pardon?

Speaker 1 (01:26):
What is it being changed too?

Speaker 2 (01:28):
Oh well, the test for proving extinguishment now flips to
EWE and the test for establishing customary title has been made.
I would say it's even harder than what Halen Clark
had in her foreshore legislation in two thousand and four.

Speaker 1 (01:45):
Okay, practically under your test, how much of the land,
had you, guys, foreseen, would have been handed back?

Speaker 2 (01:52):
Oh? Well, it's not handed back because public access was
always guaranteed and if there was an urgent walks that
needed to be built or some kind of infrastructure, that
was all covered under the accommodated Activities so the question
you're asking is what had I anticipated would probably be
the area where there would be extant customary title and

(02:17):
I would have said, I said in about twenty twelve
something around the region of ten percent, But that was
sort of a guestimate on my part.

Speaker 1 (02:26):
Okay, And do you have any idea what the changes
will lead to down from ten percent.

Speaker 2 (02:32):
I'll probably nil you regain.

Speaker 1 (02:35):
Question is why have you left it until the day
it passes to say.

Speaker 2 (02:38):
This, I haven't. Why do you say that I've been
in a principled way, consistent with my respect for property
rights and the rule of law, raising these issues. Audrey's
article appeared in the Herald today, but it's not the
first one. There have been a number of points that
I've been making over the last six months about this

(03:01):
because it's a matter that means a lot to me,
because I work very hard with the Maori Party and
with various interest groups like the Ports Association to craft
a response to the Foreshore and Seabed Act which would
be enduring, and these people are just sweeping it away,
paying no attention to the past.

Speaker 1 (03:23):
Chris, thank you for your time and good luck getting
back to Candala. That is Chris fin Lesson, the former
Attorney General.

Speaker 2 (03:29):
For more from Hither Duplessy Allen Drive listen live to
news talks. It'd be from four pm weekdays, or follow
the podcast on iHeartRadio.