Kiwis Against Seabed Mining

Petition to Parliament
Further Submission to the Environment and Local Government Select Committee :

   

Further submission of William Leslie McNatty on behalf of Kiwis Against Seabed Mining Inc (KASM) in support of the petition to the House of Representatives to enact legislation to prohibit mining of iron sand on the seabed.

I request the opportunity to address the committee in person.
To implement the changes to legislation requested by KASM our members consider that there should be two inter-related strategies.

1. Long term strategy.

a. No minerals permits for the seabed be considered until a comprehensive oceans policy be both formulated and implemented; and further
b. That the science interpreting data collection from the policy implementation can demonstrate that there will be no harm from any proposal to the coastal marine ecosystem; and
c. Return the Crown Minerals Act as a section within the Resource Management Act (1991) as in the original Resource Management Bill

2. Short term or interim strategy until such time as the long term strategy noted in 1. is implemented.

Make minor amendments to the Crown Minerals Act (1991) and the Resource Management Act (1991) that will ensure all seabed minerals permits are accorded iwi and community consultation together with environmental scrutiny.

a. Amend the Crown Minerals Act to allow that the Environment Court is the court of record for any minerals permit application.
b. Amend sec32 of the Crown Minerals Act to prohibit the ‘apparent’ rollover of prospecting, exploration and mining permits. It is deemed to be acceptable that an existing permit holder to have a priority for succession as in the case of renewed resource consents. KASM considers that as the Act is written, succession is given as a right.
c. Amend sec 3.2 “Minerals programme for minerals other than coal and petroleum” to be consistent with the body of case law from the High Court and Privy Council decisions on ‘having regard to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi’.
In Carter Holt Harvey Limited v Te Rununga o Tuwharetoa ki Kawerau the High Court outlined a list of central principles of the Treaty
They include
• Partnership. The Treaty has the basic object of two peoples living together in one country;
• Mutual obligations to act reasonably and in good faith. This includes good faith consultation between the parties;
• Active Protection. The Crown has an obligation to actively protect Maori interests. Kawangatanga is less than absolute sovereignty and carries with it protective obligations;
• Mutual Benefit. Neither party can demand its own benefits;
• Development. The Treaty is to be adapted to modern, rapidly changing circumstances;
• Rangatiratanga. This includes a tribal right to manage resources in a manner compatible with Maori custom.
d. Amend the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement of the Resource Management Act to state by definition: that in the case of minerals - prospecting, exploration and mining of the seabed are restricted coastal activities. (Such amendment will amend all regional plans as those plans must not be inconsistent with the Coastal Policy Statement)
e. Include the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement as policy directives when considering applications for minerals permits in the continental shelf and the extended economic zone

Appendix 1

Raewyn Peart, 2005 “Looking Out To Sea: New Zealand as a Model for Oceans Governance” Environmental Defence Society Inc (Included with submission by express permission of the author)
Executive Summary

Appendix 2

Exerpt from the Minerals Programme minerals not coal or petroleum 1996

3 REGARD TO THE PRINCIPLES OF THE TREATY OF WAITANGI

3.1 Section 4 of the Crown Minerals Act 1991 provides that all persons exercising functions and powers under the Act shall have regard to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi (Te Tiriti O Waitangi) (“the Treaty”). This means that Parliament has directed that the principles of the Treaty are a relevant factor that must be given weight by all those exercising a power of decision under the Crown Minerals Act 1991.9

3.2 This requires the Minister and Secretary to have regard to the following basic principles:
• that the Crown acts, in accordance with what is the paramount principle, reasonably and in good faith to its Treaty partner;
• that the Crown must make informed decisions; and
• that the Crown is to avoid creating impediments to providing redress for grievances under the Treaty (this will be more relevant where there is an application for a permit in respect of land or resources that is the subject of a claim before Government or the Waitangi Tribunal).