Analysis of Written Submissions on the Report Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors
Background
Analysis of submissions on the report “Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors”
Establishment of the Land Access Ministerial Reference Group
A Ministerial Reference Group (the Group) was established in January 2003 by the Minister for Rural Affairs to study issues around access to land. The Group was created in response to concerns over the need to clarify and enhance the legal situation pertaining to public access to the foreshore of lakes and the sea and along rivers and over private land.
The Group was well-balanced in composition, comprised of individuals with a wide range of knowledge and experience in areas of tikanga Maori, conservation, recreation, farming, land law and local and central government. It was chaired by farmer and former Meat Board Chairman, John Acland.
The Group engaged in dialogue with stakeholders who have an active interest in access to land policy. Over 230 written submissions were received on land access, as well as presentations by various groups.
The report, Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors
The report of the Group, Walking Access in the New Zealand Outdoors, was published in August 2003 together with a companion report, The Law on Public Access Along Water Margins (Hayes, 2003). Both reports can be viewed at www.maf.govt.nz/mafnet/rural-nz/people-and-their-issues/access/.
Consultation
More than 50 hui and meetings were held around New Zealand following the release of the report and notes were taken at each meeting. The meeting schedule concluded in mid-November 2003. Summaries of comments made at the meetings and hui have been peer-reviewed and are on the Internet at www.maf.govt.nz/mafnet/rural-nz/people-and-their-issues/access/. The summaries of comments and this analysis should be read together to obtain an outline of views. Many people may have attended a meeting but did not make a submission.
Those interested were invited to make submissions on the report and on any other matters related to access by 30 November 2003. This deadline was subsequently extended and submissions were accepted by MAF well into January 2004.
MAF received 1,050 submissions in response to the report. The submissions were summarised, with particular attention to the recording of key opinions, responses to the report’s proposals, themes, useful suggestions, and any important issues which may have been overlooked in the report itself.
Some organisations especially made substantial submissions to the Group in March 2003. They made shorter submissions in this process but referred to, and endorsed, their previous submission. Hence, the analysis of written submissions on the report does not stand alone.
Submissions and presentations were made by individuals, user and landholder organisations, iwi and hapu representatives, Maori Trusts, local government (including city, district and regional councils), government departments and non-governmental organisations.
The submission process helped to gauge the opinions on the report’s proposals as well as to gather information, feedback and suggestions from sources of local expertise and experience. This document is an analysis of those submissions, rather than a critique of them. It provides an overview of opinions that emerged during consultation and an indication of the level of support for objectives in the report. This document has been peer-reviewed by the members of the Group who facilitated the consultation meetings and received copies of all submissions on the report.
This document
Content and style
The summary of submissions was formatted according to the chapter headings of the Group’s report, so that issues relating to the topic of each chapter appear with that chapter number. As submitters’ views and comments did not necessarily follow the report’s format, and many of the issues are referred to repeatedly throughout the report, there may be some variation as to which issues are ascribed to which chapter number. For example, comments regarding private property rights would generally be listed under Chapter 5 “Discussion on Property Rights”, but may alternatively be listed under Chapter 9 “Access onto Private Land”, as this theme links in with both these chapters. Care has been taken to ascribe the themes as consistently as possible.
Emphasis is placed on the range of views presented, and the comments supporting these views, rather than on the numbers advocating a particular position. Counting is difficult as some of the submissions represented a single voice, while others carried the formal mandate of many. The diversity of responses also made counting difficult. For example, some submitters commented on only one specific aspect of an issue or may have supported some points while disagreeing with others.
An indication of the level of support for various positions is, however, useful. Accordingly, this document uses everyday language such as “a few”, “some”, “many”, “most” and “almost all” to convey how widely held a particular position might be.
Quotes are used to give a sense of the submitter’s voice. Care has been taken not to alter the original intent of the statement, nor to take statements out of context. In the interests of privacy, individuals’ names are not supplied.
It is important to note that quotes give a “flavour” of the opinions voiced on a particular aspect. They may represent a few or, indeed, many opinions on a topic. Ideas that have not been quoted do not have any less interest or value. It is simply that a few were selected to reflect a common view on many interesting ideas and topics relating to access, particularly how access problems might be overcome and/or access enhanced. These ideas are welcomed. Many innovative solutions are pertinent to the implementation of any policy that might eventuate.
Contact for Enquiries
Mark Neeson
Manager, Land and Water Policy
Pastoral House
25 The Terrace
PO Box 2526, Wellington
Phone: +64 894 0703
Fax: +64 4 894 0745
