8 February 2002
Maori are now able to continue working towards the allocation of the Maori Commercial Fisheries Settlement after the
High Court today rejected an attempt to stop Iwi talking about resolutions.
Te Ohu Kai Moana will begin consultation next Monday, 11 February 2002, to discuss options put forward in the Discussion
Document He Anga Mua, A Path Ahead, released in December 2001. Te Ohu Kai Moana is proposing models that take into
account the allocation of Pre-Settlement Assets as well as the distribution of benefits of Post-Settlement Assets.
In the High Court in Wellington today, Judge Doogue dismissed the application by the plaintiffs. Today’s hearing
concerned issues over the Commission’s past annual lease rounds of quota to Iwi. Litigants in today’s failed court
action wanted the High Court to prevent Te Ohu Kai Moana from consulting with Iwi until it had provided information in
electronic format that had already been provided in hard copy.
In dismissing the application, Doogue J said he could not understand why such a trivial matter was before the court.
The Chief Executive of the Treaty of Waitangi Fisheries Commission (Te Ohu Kai Moana), Robin Hapi, said: “The public of
New Zealand are already concerned about what’s been deemed as a ‘grievance industry’, and with such wasteful litigation,
their concerns are possibly well founded.”
Mr Hapi said that work on allocation would continue and he hoped that issues of concern would in future be resolved
without the need for parties to litigate. “The consultation process is well underway. Te Ohu Kai Moana is committed to
seeing this settlement used for the benefit of all Maori.”
He said the Maori Commercial Fisheries Settlement was about returning a property right to Iwi. “Until allocation is
resolved, Te Ohu Kai Moana has leased to Iwi quota at discounted rates. The Iwi is then able to either on lease the
quota at market rates, thereby making a profit, or fish the quota.”
“Te Ohu Kai Moana has been scrupulous in its administration of the lease rounds. These rounds were based on Commission
policies that gave effect to principles emanating from the Maori Fisheries Act and various other findings including
Waitangi Tribunal reports,” he said. “This litigation was to hold up the consultation process necessary before the
Commission can make any final decisions on allocation.”
Ends