 |
|
|
| Article: Public Access New Zealand Challenges Mt Hikurangi Freeho |
|
|
|
Home Editorials Reader Letters Archives |
|
16 September 1999 at 21:02:09 Monday 13 September 1999 Mt Hihurangi freeholding to be challenged Proceedings to review a 1990 decision by the Minister of Conservation to gift Mt Hikurangi to Ngati Porou are about to be commenced in the High Court in Wellington. Interim orders will also be sought to prohibit the Crown acting further on an agreement signed on 29 August this year, including any registration of documents on the title to these conservation lands. The action is being jointly brought by Public Access New Zealand, and Dr Hugh Barr of Wellington. PANZ is a national advocate for recreational users of public lands. Dr Barr is a past president of the Federated Mountain Clubs of New Zealand. The plaintiffs believe that Government's decisions and those of the Maori Land Court are illegal and they seek to overturn their decisions. They believe that Government wilfully used a vesting order through the Court, as a means of avoiding public notification and objection procedures required by the Conservation Act. The plaintiffs are alarmed at the national implications for the security of public lands that arise from this precedent. In 1990 the then Minister of Conservation made application to the Maori Land Court for the vesting of the ownership of 3780 hectares of the Park in Ngati Porou subject to a conservation covenant and the establishment of a public walkway. The original covenant and walkway conditions have not been honoured, with Ngati Porou on several occasions closing or restricting public access. A new amended agreement struck by Conservation Minister Dr Nick Smith makes even weaker provision for public access to the mountain, with closures for farming and unspecified cultural and religious purposes for up to 50 days per year. There is also potential for further periods of closure in case of death or serious accident. The agreement is also subject to review and is therefore impermanent. Government cannot reclaim ownership of the mountain if Ngati Porou breaches the agreement, however Ngati Porou can terminate the conservation and public access provisions while retaining ownership of the land if they believe Government to be in 'material failure' of the agreement. Members of the public, as intended beneficiaries of the agreement, are specifically excluded from suing either party for breach of their obligations under the new agreement. These arrangements are a very poor substitute for the protections for the public provided by public ownership. Dr Barr and PANZ believe that the area should have stayed as public land and will continue to advocate this. The deal between Government and Ngati Porou has not arisen from any Treaty of Waitangi settlement. Ngati Porou has not lodged any claim over the area. The plaintiffs believe that there is no legal or moral justification for Government's actions, these being gravely prejudicial to the public interest. The plaintiffs unsuccessfully sought resolution of these matters with the Government prior to taking legal action. However Dr Smith rejected their requests for negotiation by signing the amended deal with Ngati Porou on 29 August. The proceedings will be lodged in the High Court in Wellington later this week.
|
|
Copyright 1999 Victoria University of Wellington