Thursday, September 21, 2006

Foreshore and Seabed and property rights

I haven't commented yet on the Maori Party's plan for a Private Member's Bill promoting the repeal of the Foreshore and Seabed Act, and the reinstatement of the right to appeal for common law recognition to property rights in seabed in foreshore. The Herald reports:
Mrs Turia said the issue was a "property rights" one and she doubted that ordinary people realised what actually happened when the legislation passed because it was "sold to them" as being a battle over access.

The bill could cause a few headaches around Parliament if it is drawn from the ballot because several parties have hinted that they could vote for it.
It could cause a few headaches. And it might even help get property rights back on the agenda. Here's what I've said before on this, here and here.

As Hone Harawira said yesterday (who is unfortunately only concerned himself with property rights when the holders of said rights are brown and indigenous) ACT should support the Bill because they're in favour of property rights, National should support it for similar reasons (not that I'm convinced they are supporters of property rights however, particularly in this area), and given that United's Gordon Copeland is the promoter of a Private Members Bill to place property rights in the Bill of Rights, you would think United might also be supporters if the Bill was drawn to go before the House.

So good for the Maori Party. The debate should at least show everyone where each of the parties stands on property rights, and it might even begin a process of reinstituting legal protection for them.

LINKS: Turia bill aims to repeal foreshore law - NZ Herald
A Brash dismissal of Maori rights - Not PC (April, 2005)
Selling the foreshore - Not PC (April, 206)
Libertarianz submission on Foreshore and Seabed Bill - Libertarianz, July 2004
Support for Property Rights - Not PC (August, 2005)

RELATED: Property Rights, Maori Party, Politics-NZ, Libz, Common Law

Labels: ,

3 Comments:

Anonymous Sus said...

This would be the same Hone Harawira who would ban smoking outright, let alone being content with banning it in cafes, clubs, etc.

His endorsement of the importance of property rights is a crock. He wouldn't know a property right unless it came complete with moko, bonecarving and koha.

9/21/2006 02:15:00 pm  
Blogger Lewis said...

Hone Harawira simply uses property rights as a means to make the case for the Bill. He's clearly disingenous in his support for rights to property.

9/21/2006 02:20:00 pm  
Blogger PC said...

Yes, he's completely disingenuous. But isn't it nice for change to see a politician pretending to be for property rights because he thinks there's political support for it.

Doesn't happen often.

9/21/2006 02:40:00 pm  

Post a Comment

Respond with a polite and intelligent comment. (Both will be applauded.)

Say what you mean, and mean what you say. (Do others the courtesy of being honest.)

Please put a name to your comments. (If you're prepared to give voice, then back it up with a name.)

And don't troll. Please. (Contemplate doing something more productive with your time, and ours.)

<< Home