The government’s Marine and Coastal Areas Act overhaul has been attacked as a serious step backwards for Māori rights, writes Catherine McGregor in today’s extract from The Bulletin.
To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.
Last-ditch petition calls for halt to law change
A petition opposing the government’s plan to tighten Māori customary rights over the foreshore and seabed was delivered to parliament on Thursday, capping a four-day hīkoi from Ahipara to Wellington. Led by veteran activist Rueben Taipari, the petition, signed by nearly 20,000 people, calls for the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Amendment Bill to be scrapped. Taipari told RNZ’s Tuwhenuaroa Natanahira he made the journey to raise awareness about the changes, calling them worse than the Foreshore and Seabed Act 2004 that the current law replaced.
The bill, which passed its second reading this week, was promoted up the parliamentary order paper for rapid debate. Commentator and Gone by Lunchtime cohost Ben Thomas, who once served as press secretary to former attorney-general Chris Finlayson, said in a tweet that the government seemed “to be trying to blast it through” while the media and opposition were focused on the ructions in Te Pāti Māori. The Spinoff’s Lyric Waiwiri-Smith recaps the debate over the bill, and the rest of the week’s parliamentary business, in this morning’s Echo Chamber column.
A law rewritten – and made retrospective
As Luke Fitzmaurice-Brown explains in The Spinoff, the amendment would make it significantly harder for Māori to secure customary marine title by tightening the legal tests for proof of continuous, exclusive occupation. It would also operate retrospectively: any Marine and Coastal Area Act (MACA) court decision issued since July 24, 2024, would be invalidated and must be reheard. The government argues the move restores the law to its “original intent”, but both the Waitangi Tribunal and many legal experts dispute that claim. The Tribunal noted there was “no identified public right or interest that requires protection” to justify such a drastic change.
The MACA Act was introduced in 2011 to replace the highly controversial Foreshore and Seabed Act, which had attempted to extinguish Māori customary rights and prompted nationwide protest. While MACA sought a balance between Māori customary ownership and public access, critics say the amendment upends that compromise and breaches Treaty principles.
From courtroom to legislation
The amendment follows years of litigation over how courts should interpret key MACA tests. A 2023 Court of Appeal decision clarified them in ways the government opposed, prompting a Supreme Court appeal. But while the Supreme Court eventually sided with the government on parts of the interpretation, ministers pressed ahead with their own legislative fix regardless – effectively rewriting the law mid-process. According to Fitzmaurice-Brown, the bill was “specifically designed to overrule the Court of Appeal decision” even before the higher court’s ruling was known.
The retrospective nature of the amendment means several long-running hearings will have to start over, despite months of testimony. The Waitangi Tribunal has called that approach “a breach of active protection and good government”, arguing it undermines both judicial independence and the good-faith engagement Māori have shown since MACA’s creation.
Critics warn of constitutional and Treaty breach
Legal experts and Māori leaders have condemned the bill as an attack on both Māori rights and constitutional norms. In a passionate column for E-Tangata, lawyer Toni Talamaivao wrote that the legislation “will torch the already fragile Māori-Crown relationship”, describing it as a “gross breach” of Te Tiriti and the separation of powers.
Even Chris Finlayson, the former National minister who helped draft the original MACA Act, said the government’s justification was false: “These amendments do not restore the original intention of Parliament. They undermine them. Let there be no doubt about that at all.” While the planned changes are widely reviled, a rearguard action against them is unlikely: the government has signalled it intends to push the legislation through its remaining stages next week.
