The Government's reconsidering amending customary marine titles legislation following a landmark Supreme Court decision.
The court's rejected a Court of Appeal judgment from October last year as a narrow interpretation of criteria.
It's unanimously ruled applicants must use and occupy an area for customary rights to the foreshore and seabed, and maintain this use without substantial interruption.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon told Mike Hosking it was a quick decision from the court.
He says it actually takes a lot of time to go through those rulings and understand the nature of them.
Luxon says Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith will go through it and have more to say in due course.
The Prime Minister is commending the Navy's handling of the fall-out from the Manawanui sinking.
An inquiry has found the sinking was the result of a series of human errors, including the autopilot being left on.
Luxon has confirmed he's discussed potential compensation with the Samoan Government after locals were prevented from fishing in the area.
The Prime Minister has laughed off a question from Hosking about whether Navy personnel should have known what autopilot was.
He says it's incredibly frustrating for everyone involved, but the Navy has done a good job of fronting.
LISTEN ABOVE
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Tuesday morning, Prime Mins to Christoph Luxan Is with us.
Good morning, Good morning, Mike. How are you very well? Indeed,
thank you? The Supreme Court decision yesterday overruling the Appeal Court.
What do you do just carry on with the law
as you're looking to reamend it?
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Yeah, I mean, I mean, obviously it was a very
quick decision, given we had appealed the decision of the
Court of Appeal as well, and the Supreme Court came
back very very quickly, frankly decision and it came out
like yesterday. It actually takes a bit of time to
go through those rulings to really understand exactly the nature
of it, and then Goldsmith or Godsmith will take some
(00:35):
time just to digest that and then obviously have more
to say about it in due course.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
But in saying something about it in due course, does
that change the way you were looking to put the
twenty eleven back the way it was or not?
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Yeah? Well, I mean for your listeners, essentially, you know,
we had a rule, you had a law pass in
Parliament twenty eleven. The Court of Appeal interpreted that law
in a way that lowered the threshold, which we felt
didn't get the balance right between the legitim Ministress of
all Key Weeks and also Malori Customery title. And that's
why we were actually legislating over the top to bring
it back in line with what Parliament intended that law
to be, and that was the process we're going down. Obviously,
(01:11):
we've had the Supreme Court overturn the Court of Appeal,
which is a positive thing, but we just need to
digest exactly and go through the detail of that ruling
to understand exactly what their decision has been.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well, the decision apart does anything else, is unanimous. Does
that mean the Appeal Court is activist and needs to
be told their activists? So we're not wasting god knows
how many millions of dollars going back and forward and
run around circles.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Well, as you know, under committee, I won't be commenting
on anything around the judiciary, but what I'd say is yes,
I mean, it was good to see the Supreme Court
come back very quickly given the appeal. It was a
very fast decision. I think it was within ten days
of the appeal being put in and it is a
unanimous decision. But as you know, when you get these
rulings and we only got it, you know, yesterday afternoon
(01:58):
or something. It just there's is a lot to it,
and I just need Paul to actually take some time
to digest it and work out what that means for
US legislation.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Reported to this morning, the Defense Force, the operating deficit
is looking at three hundred and fifty million in the
wrong way next year. Is that true? And more importantly,
where's your defense review at? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Look, I haven't been briefed on their budget spending. I
expect all agencies to work within budgets, obviously, and we
know we need to spend more on defense. The challenge here,
Mike is we need to spend more on defense ultimately,
but I want to put good money into a good strategy.
And we're in a place where we've actually have new
heads of Army, Navy, Air Force, new chief, new deputy chief,
(02:38):
new Secretary of Defense, new minister obviously, and I've asked
all seven of those leaders to say, right as a
new team, I want to see a good strategy that
actually we can invest in over the long term, that
actually builds capability for New Zealand. And we're very clear
about where we're going to invest and where we're not
going to invest, and once we've got a good strategy,
we can obviously tip more money into it over time,
and we certainly that is out. We put more money
(02:59):
in at the budget as you saw in budget twenty four.
We're very open to spending more on defense. But it's
a good case of if you're going to put good
money into, you need to be good money into a
good strategy. And that's my task of the Defense force.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
And so where is it that because it's all it
was due. It's ovid you, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
No, no, no, We said that early next year would
be fine, but actually they'll be making good progress that
we're working our way through those conversations and in fact,
we've had a number of very good sessions on it recently,
so you know they've got a good plan emerging. And
you know what I'm interested in is the choices of
where we're going to make those investments to build expertise
and capability that New Zealand can bring an add to
(03:36):
its alliance.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
Relationships as well. So part of the expert good things
like the sorry sorry I was going to say, would
some of the expertise be the ability to know what
auto pilot is well.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Look incredibly frustrating for everybody involved, and frustrating for us
as well as you would understand. But I thought the Navy,
in fairness, the new Admiral and the Chief of Navy
actually did a very good job fronting and that court.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
What else I mean, I watched it. I watched. I mean,
I thought you were unduly kind yesterday. I watched that
briefing on Friday with his extended pointer. Where do you
even buy an extendable pointer from? For God's sake, tailor,
He's got a photo of two thrusters and he's pointing
at the thrusters telling me that when auto pilots on
the thrusters don't work, really, come on, Well, I just
(04:24):
say to you, Mike, he is a good man, and
he surely is. I mean, he's a brand new Chief
of Navy.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
He stepped into this issue right from day one, owned it,
fronted it. We put a very number two up there
in Samoa. He's been working incredibly well cleaning up what
is a an unfortunate accident be caused by human error.
Incredibly frustrating for everybody, get it. But it's the question
of now, what do you do about it and next
to say the well that they'll work their way through
(04:51):
that ass as he said in the first quarter of
next year. I just think the Court of Inquiry process
has been run very very well. It's a very rigorous,
very robust process, and it's been very transparent and very
straight up.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
Are we going to look at in any serious way,
shape or form backing oil and gas to go find
oil and gas as per the letter written to Shane Jones.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Yeah, like I saw that yesterday. I understand Shane's received
advice on that or getting advice on that. We haven't
made any decisions about that. We have obviously made a
decision we want to reverse the ban on oil and gas,
and that's important because we're importing a hell of a
lot of Indonesian coal rather than you're trying to drive
domestic gas, which would be a hell of a lot
better for greenhouse gas emissions and also for our energy security.
(05:35):
But with particularly, I know Shane's taken advice or receiving
advice on it, but we certainly haven't had a conversation
about that or any discussion.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Are you open to it as a concept? As I
raise it with you this morning, it seems I assume
they're trying it on because I mean, you know, if
we're just going to foot the bill for every person
to come into the country and do whatever they want
to do, we're going to go broke. And we already
are broke.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, I think our real focus will be making sure
that we're doing the rig tree things that give certainty
and clarity about the regime going forward. You know, essentially
when you go kill oil and gas and the way
the previous government did, that just sends a chilling effect
right through the investment community. Say cheapest, you know, the
rules can change at any point in time, and why
would I invest for something that you know I might
need a fifteen or twenty year payback before I get
(06:17):
the return. So, you know, what we've got to do
is just you know, again, get the adults in the room,
get it gripped up, and be really clear to those
investors as to what the regime is going to be
and how it will be going forward. So and I
even heard, you know, I think Hipkins saying the other
day that you know, it's something that he wouldn't rush
to overturn once he's implemented anyway, And so you know
that that's I mean, it's crazy that they did overturn it,
(06:39):
you know, because that was like end oil and gas
and no plan, Okay, what comes next? And essentially that
just led to massive importation of coal and restop domestic
gas production, which is just you know, not think through
second third order consequences of a bumper slogan. And that's
a decision. So you do.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
You know what's happened at Soular zero.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Look very little there, I mean women And the reason
is essentially this New Zealand Green Investment Fund, which actually
has put significant capital committed to Solar zero, operates at
an arm's length from government. I mean the key thing
is this is a massive shop for folk when you
think about it, I mean there's one hundred and sixty
employees there. This was a significant solar energy compan I
(07:21):
think they had forty percent market share from memory and
it's you know, it's been unable to be continue trading
and therefore liquid aittors been appointed. So massive shock for
people impacted by it. But also the New Zealand Green
Investment Fund, which was sure the previous government set up
as an arm's length thing, has obviously committed capital to it.
Our ministers are meeting with them again later this week
(07:41):
to gain confidence that all the steps are being taken
that can be taken.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
But as part of what worries me though, is part
of the problem in our fascination with renewables. Is it
entirely possible that we're just not up for solar at
this scale and we're wasting our time and one hundred
and fifteen million dollars a twen exployers money. Or is
sol a zero just a bad business? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (08:05):
I don't really know mic on that because I think,
you know, you actually need to sort of what happens
now when you point liquidators is a you know, they
go off and look at their legal and the insolvency
advisors come back with a report to say what's a
company specific you know, it could be massive issues with
the business model that's cause the problem. This was a
sort of a subscription model as I understood it, versus
(08:25):
and up you know, people didn't spend money on the
upfront capital cost per se. So there's a whole bunch
of things in there that I just don't know where
that balance sits between is it a structural problem or
is it actually fundamentally.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
We need to get you one hundred and fifteen of
our yeah dollars correct.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
Significant amount of capital committed.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Yeah, exactly. Speaking of money, the French, you're here at CRL.
Do you know what the problem is and is serious?
Speaker 2 (08:49):
Not that I haven't been briefed on that at all.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
Don't you want to be it's the biggest infrastructural project
in the country.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Well, yeah, well I would like to know that at
the first I've heard about it, but it hasn't come
to my desk.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
This on who's running your office? For goodness sake, there's
a massive hole in blood underneath Auckland. Businesses have gone
bust for years. On the end, the thing is two,
if not three times over budget. It's years behind it.
The French are lying into the country because they're Bugget
what's going on? I asked the Prime Minister, and you don't.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Know, No, like you framed the question in a way
that said that there's something I know about CRL and
what's going on with this?
Speaker 1 (09:23):
Well, what's gone wrong? Why are the French here?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Well I don't know why the French are here, but
you'll have to have CRL that point of view. But talking,
we need to get this project. This project's been going
on forever and ever. Damn weell needs to come to
a close and get finished and get sorted and we
need to move on. But between the CRL but also
we've done some good work on that Central Interceptor and
Auckland too. We're through water Care by restructuring water Care
and getting it separate from the Council so that Wayne
(09:48):
Brown didn't have to take his rates up twenty six
percent as well.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Is why And I asked you this at the time,
why didn't you sack Sarah fit when you had the
opportunity at far MEC.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Well, I mean, those are just decisions for the Farmac board. Yeah,
but you put a new chair in yep, Paul a minute,
and then we.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Got patch trouble as of yesterday. We had culture problems previous,
and I said, why don't She's clearly and they are
clearly not the right people for the job and they're
all causing more troubles.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Well, the bit that I control is actually the board
and the governance of far Mec, and that's an appointment
that the government makes and we've done that through appointing
a new chair. That'll be a decision for the chair
and the board.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Okay, good to talk to you. You're back on Friday,
aren't you.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
I'm looking forward to my friend. I'm coming into your
studio to see you on Friday on your last show.
Appreciate up Christoph Lux and Primean to see. For more
from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news talks.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.
Tuesday morning, Prime Mins to Christoph Luxan Is with us.
Good morning, Good morning, Mike. How are you very well? Indeed,
thank you? The Supreme Court decision yesterday overruling the Appeal Court.
What do you do just carry on with the law
as you're looking to reamend it?
Speaker 2 (00:15):
Yeah, I mean, I mean, obviously it was a very
quick decision, given we had appealed the decision of the
Court of Appeal as well, and the Supreme Court came
back very very quickly, frankly decision and it came out
like yesterday. It actually takes a bit of time to
go through those rulings to really understand exactly the nature
of it, and then Goldsmith or Godsmith will take some
(00:35):
time just to digest that and then obviously have more
to say about it in due course.
Speaker 1 (00:39):
But in saying something about it in due course, does
that change the way you were looking to put the
twenty eleven back the way it was or not?
Speaker 2 (00:48):
Yeah? Well, I mean for your listeners, essentially, you know,
we had a rule, you had a law pass in
Parliament twenty eleven. The Court of Appeal interpreted that law
in a way that lowered the threshold, which we felt
didn't get the balance right between the legitim Ministress of
all Key Weeks and also Malori Customery title. And that's
why we were actually legislating over the top to bring
it back in line with what Parliament intended that law
to be, and that was the process we're going down. Obviously,
(01:11):
we've had the Supreme Court overturn the Court of Appeal,
which is a positive thing, but we just need to
digest exactly and go through the detail of that ruling
to understand exactly what their decision has been.
Speaker 1 (01:23):
Well, the decision apart does anything else, is unanimous. Does
that mean the Appeal Court is activist and needs to
be told their activists? So we're not wasting god knows
how many millions of dollars going back and forward and
run around circles.
Speaker 2 (01:37):
Well, as you know, under committee, I won't be commenting
on anything around the judiciary, but what I'd say is yes,
I mean, it was good to see the Supreme Court
come back very quickly given the appeal. It was a
very fast decision. I think it was within ten days
of the appeal being put in and it is a
unanimous decision. But as you know, when you get these
rulings and we only got it, you know, yesterday afternoon
(01:58):
or something. It just there's is a lot to it,
and I just need Paul to actually take some time
to digest it and work out what that means for
US legislation.
Speaker 1 (02:05):
Reported to this morning, the Defense Force, the operating deficit
is looking at three hundred and fifty million in the
wrong way next year. Is that true? And more importantly,
where's your defense review at? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (02:16):
Look, I haven't been briefed on their budget spending. I
expect all agencies to work within budgets, obviously, and we
know we need to spend more on defense. The challenge here,
Mike is we need to spend more on defense ultimately,
but I want to put good money into a good strategy.
And we're in a place where we've actually have new
heads of Army, Navy, Air Force, new chief, new deputy chief,
(02:38):
new Secretary of Defense, new minister obviously, and I've asked
all seven of those leaders to say, right as a
new team, I want to see a good strategy that
actually we can invest in over the long term, that
actually builds capability for New Zealand. And we're very clear
about where we're going to invest and where we're not
going to invest, and once we've got a good strategy,
we can obviously tip more money into it over time,
and we certainly that is out. We put more money
(02:59):
in at the budget as you saw in budget twenty four.
We're very open to spending more on defense. But it's
a good case of if you're going to put good
money into, you need to be good money into a
good strategy. And that's my task of the Defense force.
Speaker 1 (03:10):
And so where is it that because it's all it
was due. It's ovid you, isn't it.
Speaker 2 (03:15):
No, no, no, We said that early next year would
be fine, but actually they'll be making good progress that
we're working our way through those conversations and in fact,
we've had a number of very good sessions on it recently,
so you know they've got a good plan emerging. And
you know what I'm interested in is the choices of
where we're going to make those investments to build expertise
and capability that New Zealand can bring an add to
(03:36):
its alliance.
Speaker 1 (03:37):
Relationships as well. So part of the expert good things
like the sorry sorry I was going to say, would
some of the expertise be the ability to know what
auto pilot is well.
Speaker 2 (03:48):
Look incredibly frustrating for everybody involved, and frustrating for us
as well as you would understand. But I thought the Navy,
in fairness, the new Admiral and the Chief of Navy
actually did a very good job fronting and that court.
Speaker 1 (04:01):
What else I mean, I watched it. I watched. I mean,
I thought you were unduly kind yesterday. I watched that
briefing on Friday with his extended pointer. Where do you
even buy an extendable pointer from? For God's sake, tailor,
He's got a photo of two thrusters and he's pointing
at the thrusters telling me that when auto pilots on
the thrusters don't work, really, come on, Well, I just
(04:24):
say to you, Mike, he is a good man, and
he surely is. I mean, he's a brand new Chief
of Navy.
Speaker 2 (04:29):
He stepped into this issue right from day one, owned it,
fronted it. We put a very number two up there
in Samoa. He's been working incredibly well cleaning up what
is a an unfortunate accident be caused by human error.
Incredibly frustrating for everybody, get it. But it's the question
of now, what do you do about it and next
to say the well that they'll work their way through
(04:51):
that ass as he said in the first quarter of
next year. I just think the Court of Inquiry process
has been run very very well. It's a very rigorous,
very robust process, and it's been very transparent and very
straight up.
Speaker 1 (05:01):
Are we going to look at in any serious way,
shape or form backing oil and gas to go find
oil and gas as per the letter written to Shane Jones.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
Yeah, like I saw that yesterday. I understand Shane's received
advice on that or getting advice on that. We haven't
made any decisions about that. We have obviously made a
decision we want to reverse the ban on oil and gas,
and that's important because we're importing a hell of a
lot of Indonesian coal rather than you're trying to drive
domestic gas, which would be a hell of a lot
better for greenhouse gas emissions and also for our energy security.
(05:35):
But with particularly, I know Shane's taken advice or receiving
advice on it, but we certainly haven't had a conversation
about that or any discussion.
Speaker 1 (05:43):
Are you open to it as a concept? As I
raise it with you this morning, it seems I assume
they're trying it on because I mean, you know, if
we're just going to foot the bill for every person
to come into the country and do whatever they want
to do, we're going to go broke. And we already
are broke.
Speaker 2 (05:56):
Yeah, I think our real focus will be making sure
that we're doing the rig tree things that give certainty
and clarity about the regime going forward. You know, essentially
when you go kill oil and gas and the way
the previous government did, that just sends a chilling effect
right through the investment community. Say cheapest, you know, the
rules can change at any point in time, and why
would I invest for something that you know I might
need a fifteen or twenty year payback before I get
(06:17):
the return. So, you know, what we've got to do
is just you know, again, get the adults in the room,
get it gripped up, and be really clear to those
investors as to what the regime is going to be
and how it will be going forward. So and I
even heard, you know, I think Hipkins saying the other
day that you know, it's something that he wouldn't rush
to overturn once he's implemented anyway, And so you know
that that's I mean, it's crazy that they did overturn it,
(06:39):
you know, because that was like end oil and gas
and no plan, Okay, what comes next? And essentially that
just led to massive importation of coal and restop domestic
gas production, which is just you know, not think through
second third order consequences of a bumper slogan. And that's
a decision. So you do.
Speaker 1 (06:55):
You know what's happened at Soular zero.
Speaker 2 (06:58):
Look very little there, I mean women And the reason
is essentially this New Zealand Green Investment Fund, which actually
has put significant capital committed to Solar zero, operates at
an arm's length from government. I mean the key thing
is this is a massive shop for folk when you
think about it, I mean there's one hundred and sixty
employees there. This was a significant solar energy compan I
(07:21):
think they had forty percent market share from memory and
it's you know, it's been unable to be continue trading
and therefore liquid aittors been appointed. So massive shock for
people impacted by it. But also the New Zealand Green
Investment Fund, which was sure the previous government set up
as an arm's length thing, has obviously committed capital to it.
Our ministers are meeting with them again later this week
(07:41):
to gain confidence that all the steps are being taken
that can be taken.
Speaker 1 (07:45):
But as part of what worries me though, is part
of the problem in our fascination with renewables. Is it
entirely possible that we're just not up for solar at
this scale and we're wasting our time and one hundred
and fifteen million dollars a twen exployers money. Or is
sol a zero just a bad business? Yeah?
Speaker 2 (08:05):
I don't really know mic on that because I think,
you know, you actually need to sort of what happens
now when you point liquidators is a you know, they
go off and look at their legal and the insolvency
advisors come back with a report to say what's a
company specific you know, it could be massive issues with
the business model that's cause the problem. This was a
sort of a subscription model as I understood it, versus
(08:25):
and up you know, people didn't spend money on the
upfront capital cost per se. So there's a whole bunch
of things in there that I just don't know where
that balance sits between is it a structural problem or
is it actually fundamentally.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
We need to get you one hundred and fifteen of
our yeah dollars correct.
Speaker 2 (08:41):
Significant amount of capital committed.
Speaker 1 (08:42):
Yeah, exactly. Speaking of money, the French, you're here at CRL.
Do you know what the problem is and is serious?
Speaker 2 (08:49):
Not that I haven't been briefed on that at all.
Speaker 1 (08:51):
Don't you want to be it's the biggest infrastructural project
in the country.
Speaker 2 (08:54):
Well, yeah, well I would like to know that at
the first I've heard about it, but it hasn't come
to my desk.
Speaker 1 (08:59):
This on who's running your office? For goodness sake, there's
a massive hole in blood underneath Auckland. Businesses have gone
bust for years. On the end, the thing is two,
if not three times over budget. It's years behind it.
The French are lying into the country because they're Bugget
what's going on? I asked the Prime Minister, and you don't.
Speaker 2 (09:16):
Know, No, like you framed the question in a way
that said that there's something I know about CRL and
what's going on with this?
Speaker 1 (09:23):
Well, what's gone wrong? Why are the French here?
Speaker 2 (09:26):
Well I don't know why the French are here, but
you'll have to have CRL that point of view. But talking,
we need to get this project. This project's been going
on forever and ever. Damn weell needs to come to
a close and get finished and get sorted and we
need to move on. But between the CRL but also
we've done some good work on that Central Interceptor and
Auckland too. We're through water Care by restructuring water Care
and getting it separate from the Council so that Wayne
(09:48):
Brown didn't have to take his rates up twenty six
percent as well.
Speaker 1 (09:51):
Is why And I asked you this at the time,
why didn't you sack Sarah fit when you had the
opportunity at far MEC.
Speaker 2 (09:59):
Well, I mean, those are just decisions for the Farmac board. Yeah,
but you put a new chair in yep, Paul a minute,
and then we.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Got patch trouble as of yesterday. We had culture problems previous,
and I said, why don't She's clearly and they are
clearly not the right people for the job and they're
all causing more troubles.
Speaker 2 (10:14):
Well, the bit that I control is actually the board
and the governance of far Mec, and that's an appointment
that the government makes and we've done that through appointing
a new chair. That'll be a decision for the chair
and the board.
Speaker 1 (10:25):
Okay, good to talk to you. You're back on Friday,
aren't you.
Speaker 2 (10:28):
I'm looking forward to my friend. I'm coming into your
studio to see you on Friday on your last show.
Appreciate up Christoph Lux and Primean to see. For more
from the Mic Asking Breakfast, listen live to news talks.
Speaker 1 (10:38):
It'd be from six am weekdays, or follow the podcast
on iHeartRadio.
Popular Podcasts
40s and Free Agents: NFL Draft Season
Daniel Jeremiah of Move the Sticks and Gregg Rosenthal of NFL Daily join forces to break down every team's needs this offseason.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.