Latest / Early Edition with Ryan Bridge / Chris Finlayson: Former Treaty Negotiations Minister on the Supreme Court allowing an appeal regarding customary marine titles

Transcript

Chris Finlayson: Former Treaty Negotiations Minister on the Supreme Court allowing an appeal regarding customary marine titles · Early Edition with Ryan Bridge

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Forcuerre and Seabed update on the court proceedings yesterday. So
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: this is basically the Government being allowed to appeal a
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: decision that was made last year by an appeals court.
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: It's the Supreme Court that's handed out this somewhat of
• 0:13
  Speaker 1: a win for the government. You'd have to say, it's
• 0:16
  Speaker 1: all about customary marine title, customary rights to the Foreshaw
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: and Seabed. Christin Lason is the former Treaty negotiations minister
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: and attorney generally is with us this morning.
• 0:25
  Speaker 2: Good morning, Good morning to you.
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: How significant is this?
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: I think it's a very significant decision. The Supreme Court
• 0:35
  Speaker 2: has considered the background to the Marine and Coastal Act
• 0:41
  Speaker 2: two thousand and eleven and has had a good hard
• 0:45
  Speaker 2: look at Section fifty eight, which deals with customary marine title,
• 0:51
  Speaker 2: and has has repaired the problems caused by the Court
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: of Appeal judgment. So it's a very significant judgment.
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: So we still have to wait for the government to
• 1:03
  Speaker 1: appeal the decision. Right they have been given the right
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: to appeal the decision, but they haven't said that they
• 1:08
  Speaker 1: will do that yet. Does this nullify the need for
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: the government's amendment to the bill?
• 1:14
  Speaker 2: I think that's a very good question. Legislation was introduced.
• 1:19
  Speaker 2: It may have been better to have waited until the
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: Supreme Court delivered its decision before deciding whether to proceed
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: was legislation. But I've given a lot of thought to
• 1:31
  Speaker 2: your questions since I read the judgment yesterday afternoon, and
• 1:36
  Speaker 2: that I can't see the needs for legislation now.
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: So you would stop it because it's from memory past
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: its first reading. I think it's submissions have been called
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: from a select committee. You just get rid of the bill,
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, because they can appeal it, but then it
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: could still bounce back again.
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: Right, Well, they have appealed it and the Attorney General
• 1:55
  Speaker 2: was successful in the Supreme Court. But question is, given
• 2:00
  Speaker 2: that success, given the decision of the Supreme Court, is
• 2:03
  Speaker 2: legislation clarifying the Court of Appeal decision now necessary? And
• 2:08
  Speaker 2: I don't think it is right. I think one can
• 2:11
  Speaker 2: proceed on the basis of the Supreme Court decision without
• 2:15
  Speaker 2: the need for legislation.
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: I guess they don't call it the Supreme Court for nothing,
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: do they. Chris fin Lason, thank you very much for
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: your time. The Attorney General and form a treaty negotiations.
• 2:23
  Speaker 1: Minister For more from Early Edition with Ryan Bridge, listen
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: live to news talks it'd be from five am weekdays,
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio