The Matiatia Marina is in breach of the NZ Bill of Rights. Why, because the Auckland Unitary plan has a bylaw preventing houseboat livaboards from residing anywhere except in a marina. The houseboats of Putiki Bay already exist. Those people who live on board will be priced out by the purchase price of the Marinas berths. These berths will range from $50,000 to up to
$200,000. House boaters and any liveaboards will be left with valueless homes that cannot be sold.
Using money to conveniently step around the Bill of Rights doesn't constitute a legal justification to make people homeless. Of further interest is in the freedom camping bylaw which prevents anyone from sleeping overnight anywhere above mean low water spring.
Another bylaw introduced which allowed the dumping of sewage 500m offshore in more than 5m of water has been changed to allow dumping of sewage 1 kilometer offshore in more than 5m of water. So convenient for zillionaires. However, liveaboards would prefer no dumping of sewage anywhere in the Hauraki Gulf but that shore based facilities should be provided for, for which liveaboards are happy to contribute toward in tariffs or a form of rates.
What liveaboards would like is a residential mooring permit and an agreement between the leasee and leasor in a form similar to a tenancy agreement with regular inspections of holding tank facilities and such other criteria agreed upon to ensure compliance.
Also, that vessels must be kept in a reasonable condition as to be seaworthy and attractive for tourism.
That the vessel must be at least 10m off mean highwater spring to allow public access on the beach and that the standard of behaviour of occupants be in accordance with general expectations within Auckland City bylaws and that a policing of unruly behavior be dealt with in a timely manner in keeping with existing law and order.
It cannot be expressed strongly enough that the responsible liveaboards are very aware of their public presence and are willing and able to find a solution to the dilemma they find themselves in, in a fair and final matter.
Please do not victimize one group or culture in the community to appease those who have a selective view of how they perceive others should live.
Remember the four well-beings: Unesco 2001-social, environment, economic and cultural. 'The concept of cultural diversity is as necessary for mankind as biodiversity is for nature, it becomes one of the roots of development understood not simply in terms of economic growth but also a means to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence. In this vision cultural diversity is the fourth policy area of sustainable development. Agenda 21 emphasizes the broad public participation in decision making as a fundamental prerequisite for achieving sustainable development.
The UN-Bruntland Report states - Sustainable development is that, that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Two key points to consider are:
1. Any limitations imposed by the state of technology and social organization on the environments ability to meet present and future needs and:
2. The concept of 'needs' in particular the overriding priorities of the poor.
Tolerance of cultures is a lawful requirement; it is not selective and no-one can use direct or indirect discrimination against a society, group, their beliefs, differences, economic status, social or cultural status. Culture being defined as a way of life and own beliefs and attitudes common to the group or organization.
The mission statement of the Putiki Maritime Community can include thus:
1. The need to reduce the economic and institutionalized barriers between society and sustainable liveaboard communities.
2. The need to reduce the overall negative affects that conventional housing has on the planet and the affects such living has on families and individuals.
3. The tolerance of other cultures; a culture being defined as a way of life and own beliefs and attitudes common to the group.
4. The need to reduce such misconceptions that people may also have against our differences.
Since liveaboards can not buy or lease a piece of the sea from the government on which to live, the government has forced liveaboards to live in a public space, albeit a public space where only boats can uniquely dwell. One chooses to live on the land and therefore builds a house; one chooses to live on the sea and therefore builds a boat. Both are home owners with equal rights and both are private property owners.
To quote, The NZ Bill of Rights. Re, Private Property
Section 11A. clause 4:
1. Everyone has the right to own property; the right not to be deprived of property (inserted, clause 4).
2. No person is to be deprived of the use or enjoyment of that persons property without just compensation.
These two points reach back to the Magna Carta, and via the Treaty Of Waitangi they were explicitly introduced into the legal framework of our nation.
Those rights are not just for land based homeowners but for all New Zealanders.
The Regulatory and Enforcement Provisions of the Local Government Act 2002, chapter 5.7 states: Implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990:
A bylaw that unreasonably interferes with the rights and freedoms in the Bill of Rights will be held to be unreasonable and invalid.
Under such implications, case law can develop very quickly.
The purpose of the Marine and Coastal Act 2011 states:
The purpose of the act is to establish a durable scheme to ensure the protection of the legitimate interests of all New Zealanders in the Marine and Coastal area of New Zealand.
I ask that Auckland City considers legitimising existing houseboat liveaboards and considers a fair ceiling limit of houseboats within agreed upon, defined areas.
Steve Matatahi, Mary Christie and the four children of the Houseboat Kukurei, Causeway, Putiki Bay, Waiheke Island, Auckland City, New Zealand.
Thehouseboatbay@gmail.com
stevematatahi.blogspot.com
