I'm not a big fan of private ownership of the foreshore and seabed by anyone, but it's certainly unreasonable to deny Maori rights while non-Maori are allowed to own private sections of the coastline. Wahi Tapu can't be declared at random, and is a potential issue with only a tiny fraction of the coastline. Do you think your right to do whatever you want anywhere you want should automatically take priority over what's important to Maori, when there are plenty of other places still accessible to everyone?

Hi Josie.

Perhaps you mean wahi tapu - as in a sacred space?

If so, we have equivalents of wahi tapu in New Zealand's European cultural traditions too - e.g. cemetaries, or our war memorials commemorating the sacrifice of those who fought in the cause of freedom. I would hope that all New Zealanders - Maori and those of European, Pacific or Asian origin - would respect each other's views and would avoid causing needless offence by inappropriately using spaces which some groups would consider sacred.

The vast majority of New Zealand's shoreline remains open to New Zealanders to enjoy for recreational purposes, and the fears held up by extremists about the Marine and Coastal Act have not been born out by the reality since this moderate, sensible and fair law was enacted. 

Paul

For any area to be declared Tapu, it must be a spiritual area (in a simplistic sense). This means areas cannot be arbitrarily declared to be Tapu, they have to be shown to be an area of spiritual importance.

Tapu is often commonly mistaken to mean forbidden, or restricted. While it can have that meaning, it's primary meaning is actually something that should be respected and protected. This closest european example I can think of are Churches and Graveyards.

Now I feel that areas that are Tapu, while needing to be respected and protected, does not mean that the public shouldn't have access to observe, and perhaps interact (depending on the Tapu).

The area needs to be respected, and you cannot respect that which you do not know. Therefore it should be possible for the public to in someway access, or observe areas that are Wai Tapu.

We already have examples of ways we are doing this for our nature reserves: Marine Reserves, Designated sea shore walking paths, observation points, swamp walkways, and limitations on the number of people allow to access an area at a time. Similar models could, and should be used for areas of Wai Tapu.

One of the core policies of the Pirate Party is Governmental Transparancy. I believe this should apply to central government, local government and also to tribal government. Specifically on this topic, I the public should be able to see what a tribe is doing to respect it's areas of Wai Tapu, and to ensure that they can be respected by the public.

Hi Josie,

The Greens' position on the Marine and Coastal act is that it is discriminatory and repeats the injustices of the original act. It creates one set of rules for Maori title, and another for the 12,500 existing private titles in the foreshore and seabed,

This Act is essentially the same as Labour’s Act. It undermines the Treaty relationship, and sets down a unreasonably high threshold for proving Maori customary rights. It doesn’t really restore access to the courts because it overrules the common law and replaces it with restrictive tests.

It is only fair that Maori common law rights to go to court should be restored, and the public should be guaranteed the right to access all the foreshore not just the parts associated with Maori.

For more information, take a look at http://www.greens.org.nz/speeches/marine-and-coastal-area-takutai-moana-bill

All the best,

James