Just giving this a push along

The Hobson’s Pledge ad, and all that's wrong about it

A group of lawyers, legal academics and organisations aligned to or affiliated with the legal profession has spoken out against the front page Hobson's Pledge Ad placed last week in the NZ Herald.

Here's the text of the statement (with very minor edits to fit character limits):

The Hobson’s Pledge ad in The Herald on 7 August in relation to customary marine titles is likely to mislead, deceive or confuse consumers both explicitly and by implication, ambiguity, exaggeration and false representation. It is also likely to also fuel racism against Māori.

Hobson’s Pledge are entitled to a 'robust expression of opinion' but are not entitled to mislead and deceive consumers and, in our view, The Herald should have known, or investigated, whether the information was misleading or deceptive before the advertisement was published.

First, the advertisement calls for the “restoration” of the foreshore to public ownership. The foreshore has never historically been in public ownership: it is not owned by anybody, except for the areas of the foreshore that are currently in (mainly non-Māori) private ownership.

Second, the ad implies, on the front page, that “customary marine titles” give iwi, hapū and/or whānau the right to own parts of the foreshore. This is not true.

On the contrary, the legislation’s effective extinguishment of Māori property interests in the foreshore has been found to breach their human rights by UN human rights bodies that oversee New Zealand’s human rights compliance.

Third, the ad implies that “customary marine title” will prevent NZers from accessing beaches, including to fish, to swim and to enjoy our coastal environment. This is not true. The legislation enabling the award of customary marine titles secures public access to the foreshore.

Fourth, contrary to the impression created by the advertisement, there are very hard legal tests to be met before a wāhi tapu (including a rāhui) will be recognised.

Moreover, wāhi tapu are subject to statutory restrictions, and cannot, for example, prevent fishers from taking their lawful entitlement in a quota or fisheries management area.

Finally, in the light of the division and racism against Māori that resulted from the foreshore and seabed issue in the mid-2000s, we find the attempt to reignite that division and discrimination abhorrent.

Signatories include the Māori Law Society, the Auckland Women Law Association, legal academics and lawyers – from King's Counsel, partners and barristers to junior associates, in-house lawyers and non-practising lawyers. This little newsletter hereby adds its wholehearted endorsement.