PROSPECTING IN THE DOMINION

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Volume 81, Issue 63, 7 December 1937, Page 3

PROSPECTING IN THE DOMINION

r »rp«o 1

Rights of Natives Strongly Urged PROPERTY-OWNF.R'S SHARE

/By

WELLINGTON, L&st Night. When the House of Representatives imefc at 2.30, the Supplementary Estiimates were introduced by Governor[General 's message and referred to the 'Committee of Supply. J Urgency -was accorded the passing of jfche Petroleum Bill, moving the commitrtal of which the Minister of Minea |(Hon, P. C. Webb) stressed the value |of the discovery of oil in commercial •quantities in the iDominion. It would iprove a tremendous stimulus*to the industry of the country. Under the present law an adequate search for oil was not being made, and it was quite impossible for small enterprise, with antiquated equipment, to ascertain whether •we had oil or not. When he had visited Taranaki the fact had impressed itself lupon him that wo did have oil, perhaps fin small quantities, but nevcrtheless [oil. He had then made the statement jthat he intended to introduce legislafion based on the lines of the English legislation, by which difficulties in the wa y of a proper search for oil in the Dominion would be removed and an adequate search for the commodity Would be enabled, either by the State tor private enterprise. If private enterprise failed, he would have no hesita1 jtion whatever in asking the Gqvernj toent .to prosecute a search. He had ! [de«ided to grant prospecting licenses on ! Ithe lines of the English legislation, cov»ring 200 square miles, a,nd mining privileges covering 100 square miles. , The fact that no real effort to discover

, oil was being made on a large scale detaonstrated amply that the present law did not meet the requirements of the age. The Government was determined ! that a comprehensive effort should be . made. Oil Might Oome rrom Miles Away Mr. Webb proceeded .to deal with the question of rovalties. He stated that oil was a very migratory commodity. I For instance, a bore might be put down | in Parliament grounds and oil discov- ] tered, but that oil might come from | .tinder properties miles away. It was ! only right that the Crown should have I the right to royalties on that oil. j jProperty-owners under whose prdper'ty I the oil might come knew nothing of it, • andi the Bill laid down the fundamentai ' principle in connection with Toyalties f which had been laid down in the Bri- ! tish House of Commons in 1934, in j Western Australia in 1935, also in Vicj toria. In fact, it was laid down ; throughout the Emp'ire that oil belongj ed to the Crown. The New Zealand j- Government, however, had made provi- { sion for compensation to property-own- | ers should damage result to their properties. The whole question was a national one. Everyone must see what ' a wouderful thing it would be for the Dominion, both in peace and war, ifoil j were discovered. If war broke out, the j transport of fuel supplies would be cut j out almost immediately. Australia would be .in the same position, and ths Commonwealth would gladly welcome the discovery of oil in New Zealand, so close to her own shore3. Mr. Webb paid a tribute to the president and secretary of the itPmers' Union for their broadminded view in, connection with the matter. Mr. W. W. Mulkolland had said that personally he would not oppose the rights of tho Crown regarding oil if found on privato property. However, he had made certain stipulations Tegarding -rights of entry to private property, which the Minister had included in the Bill. The Bill had been accorded support in many I of the big papers of the Dominion, which held it would remove obstacles in the way of adequate prospecting. Bef ore one gallon of- oil could be exported from New Zealand, said Mr. Webb, the demands of the local market must be met. The question of the rights of Maoris had been mentioned, but he

nssured .them that the Government would go to any extent to protect the rights of the nativo people. He emphasised, however, that there must not be two laws in this country — one for Europeans and one for Maoris. Tho Government was not interfering with the mineral rights of any propertyowners, but it did say that, if as a re sult of the expenditure of a lot of money, they discovered a payable flow of oil, it should belong to the people of New Zealand. The Maoris would benelit to an equal extent as the pakeha. Capital Wculd be Available

When the Bill was passed, capital would bo available, both overseas and in New Zealand, for one of the biggest prospecting schemes for oil which had ever been attempted in New Zealand. If it were not found, they would at least have the satisfaction of knowing that a thorough search had been made to find it. He appealed to members not to take a parochial view of the matter, and ipxplained that the Bill had been amended to allow companies to have the use of natural gas which they might discover. He added he -v^ould not like to see the native question arise in relation to the Bill. He had gone to a lot of trouble along with the SolicitorGeneral to see that rights granted under the Bill did not infringe those conferred on Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi, which laid down rights of , equality and justice for both races. Tke same principles were contained in this Bill; they wanted to co-ordinate with the Maoris as brothers. The Bill j would not be instrumental in taking a • ^ancj- ftcst tha »c» QX Ha j

owners ©f freehold properties, Iwt it did say that the Crown had the right to tha oil under the ground of which owners of property had no knowledge.. With xegard to the flxing of pro^pec$ors' liceqse fees at. £1000 for 200 acres, the Minister added they had fixed a substantial fee because they did not want people coming along and paving, say, a 5s fee and holding up the discovery of oil. When the Bill became law in three months' time or so, he had an assurance that an effort would immediately be made to drill for oil, ! "A New Type of Equality" " Sir Apirana Ngata said he could not understand what the Government was doing to entitle it to a royalty of 5 per cent. or more. He could not see why the rights of native landowners should be subjected unnecessarily to the public interest. It was a new type of equality Which was being given to the Maoris and was setting the pace for the poor pakeha landowner. It was a new interpretation of Waitangi. If the Government paid £G000 for rights to native lands under water, as it did in the case of lake beds in Rotorua, Rotoiti and other lakes, also £3000 for similar rights at Taupo, why should. the Government deprive the native^ of rights to oil beneath their own properties. He continued that, if oil were struck on the East Coast, they would have deputations of Maoris session after session, asking that they should be given something that had been tak'en away from them. He suggested that the Maoris should divide any royalties with the Crown. Experts had agreed for many years that oil existed on the East Coast, and a legend had grown up among the Maori people »concerning it. They hopcd that something, somewhere, sometime would turn up. Mr. J, Thorn stated that the first and maia reason against the payment of royalties on petroleum to private individuals was that it might flow under 100 different properties. Why should royalties be paid to private individuals in New Zealand when the Conservative Government of Great Britain in 1934 had refused to recognise any such -rights, and when it was at present also considering the wiping out of private royalties on coal.

Sir Apirana: On payment of compensation. Mr. Thorn: Yes, but they are wiping it out all the same. He contended that the natural resources of New Zealand were not owned by any individual pakeha or Maori, but by the whole of the people. It was easy to conceive that the time would come when tho Maoris themselves would regari the Treaty of Waitangi as a dead lettcr, because in other ways they were seeured in their rights and no longer had need of the provisions of fchfl treaty. Breach of Treaty 2 Mr. W. A. Bodkin strongly opposod the principle of denying property-own-ers the right to share in royalties. H« could commend the Government fo: making it possiblo for private enter-. !>rise'to do prospecting in New Zealand. and the greatest adinission that tha Government was looking to private companies to undertake the work could be found in the deletion of the originai clause which gave the Government the j right to take over any field once oil had been found. Regarding the question of 1 royalties, he said no one could say that a Bill which took away the clear rights of the Maoris was not breach of the Treaty of Waitangi. ' The present Government was making History, for it was on the way to breaking up the tradition that, where a,' treaty had been drawn between the British Government and the native people, tho rights of the natives were never denied them. Certain land on the East Coast of the North Island, owned by Maoris, had been explored by an American firm, and that firm had entered into an agreement with .the owners of the property. to pay them 5 per cent. royalty in the event of oil being found in payable quantities. The Government was seeking to pass a Bill removing the right of the Maoris to those royalties. Mr. W. M. C. Denliam'said the only | provision which had been objected to was that royalties should go to the Crown. He confended that the Bill in no way inf ringed . the rights of the Maoris under the Treaty of Waitangi. There was a great need for a thorough e'xploration for oil in this country, and he hoped that, as a result of the Bill, oil would be discovered in payable quantities in New Zealand.

Mr. W. P. Endean said the mam difference between the ideas of the Opposition and the Government 011 the Bill concerncd the payment of royalties; . otherwise the'- opinions of both sides of the House were pretty much the same. He favoured the Bill up to the extent of the payment of royalties, but he would suggest that not only Maori but also pakeha landowners should have rights to the payment of royalties. The debate was interrupted by the adjournment at 5.30. The House continued the debate when it rcsumed at 7.30 p.m. Mr. II. M. Christie said there was no product of more importance to any country than oil. The Bill gave some reasonable security to the people prepared to spend largo sums in the search for oil. It had been stated earlier in the debate that the amount ,of oil beneath the ground could be

accurately estimated from the surface, but he contended that the only real way of ascertaining the quantity of oil was boring |or it. New Zealand, with all the upheavals of iiature we had had, must be one of the most diflicult countries in the world i'or aucuraio surface estimate, and the companies which had to go to tho expense of making these deep bores must have some form of protection and security. Approximately 2,500,000 gallons of crude oil had I been seeured in New Zealand as aa'esult of prospecting and boring — only sufiicient to produce enougli petrol U supply our needs for one week. This was inost unsatisfaetory. lic ''contended that oil would not be obtain ed m the D9mi.Tii.0n. .in. .ths form oi j

deTZ °r SUr?Ce 0U> but 0n]y 1r®s' a^d these expensive companies doing tho work must be as*ared of some adequate return for it and for mvestment of their capital. Sir Apirana Ngata said the present measure was not an easy one to oppose, and the reasons ,put forward by the Minister for its passing were very difficult ones with which to quarrel. As e representative of the Maori people, however, he did think the Bill went too far. In one respect the Minister had uot convinced himself or anyone in the House or outside it, that royalties on petroleum belonged to the Crown, Mr. lA'ebb: Would you support the Bill if that provision were removed? Sir Apirana Ngata: It is too late now. The honourable gentleman has shown his hand; he has made it plain that the •fovernment is going to take the royalty. Sir Apirana Ngata added that the natives would not be able to understand why if prospectors put down a bore on Maori land and discovered oil, they (the Maoris) should get nothing out of it. The dcclaration in the Bill meant that something that the Maoris possessed before this Bill was introduced was to be taken away from them. Ho appealed to the conscience of the Government to avert a misunderstanding, which should not exist, especially when tho Government was attempting to do something for tha banafit of tho BaaialHi , . ■.