Full removal of ‘cancer-like’ Rena

The Rena wreck is a ‘cancerous tumour' and only full removal will restore the life-force, or mauri, of the Astrolabe Reef and Bay of Plenty people, a Waitangi Tribunal has heard.

Speaking during the urgent tribunal hearings in Tauranga this week, Mataatua District Maori Council chairman Maanu Paul compared the wreck of the ship that grounded on October 5, 2011 to cancer that needs to be completely removed.

Containers fall from the Rena ship back in 2011.

"It's like this. Last year, my mauri was bang-on, then I got diagnosed with pancreatic cancer. My mauri went down, the surgeon removed it, my mauri came up again. That's exactly how we want it to happen on the reef,” says Maanu.

Maanu is part of three iwi groups claiming leaving the wreck on the reef is a breach of the Treaty of Waitangi.

The Rena owners Daina Shipping and insurers The Swedish Club have applied for resource consent to the leave the remains of ship on the reef, about 25km off the coast of Tauranga.

Hapu are also calling on the Government to enforce a Maritime New Zealand statutory notice, which says the wreck must be removed.

Maanu says this is a new low in Treaty of Waitangi relationships claiming the Crown has obstructed and deliberately misinformed Maori throughout the process. Read more about those claims here.

He told the tribunal it must make the recommendation that the Government oppose the resource consent application. The government is yet to take a stance on the wreck's removal.

Waikato University's Professor of international law Alexander Gillespie told the hearing that full wreck removal falls under international best practice through the Nairobi International Convention on the Removal of Wrecks, 2007, but is not a legal requirement in New Zealand.

Adopted by an international conference in 2007, the convention provides the legal basis for states to remove, or have removed, shipwrecks that may have the potential to affect adversely the safety of lives, goods and property at sea, as well as the marine environment.

The convention provides the first set of uniform international rules aimed at ensuring the prompt and effective removal of wrecks located beyond the territorial sea.

Alexander believes this convention will become statutory for NZ in 2015.

'The way that the convention looks at wrecks as if they are hazards, not just in terms of navigation but social and environmental hazards,” says Alexander.

New Zealand is instead a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity which states governments must "support local populations to develop and implement remedial action in degraded areas where biological diversity has been reduced,” says Alexander.

About 100 people, many from Motiti island, were present for the hearing before a panel consisting of Judge Sarah Reeves, Sir Douglas Kidd, Sir Tamati Reedy and Ronald Crosby.

The hearing continues today with cross-examinations and Crown evidence.

You may also like....

14 comments

Dangerous

Posted on 01-07-2014 11:54 | By DAD

The Rena removal is a Danger to Divers because of the remaining Cargo wich in time will wash up on our shores and cause a lot more than 10 million to ever be able to fix! The future health of anyone visiting our beaches in the future is being put in Danger


What about....

Posted on 01-07-2014 14:14 | By GreertonBoy

Every other wreck in NZ's waters, If this one has to be totally removed, surely then every wreck must be removed too? What about the poor creatures that now call the wreck home? What about the tourism aspect that the wreck will surely bring? There is more wrecks and junk in the ocean than we can imagine, as long as every effort is made to remove all toxic, loose or troublesome parts that can be safely removed, the sea will deal with what is left, just like it has the other 300 or so wrecks in NZ waters. Unless you just want to make someone pay, just because you can?


Earlier Wrecks

Posted on 01-07-2014 14:43 | By Jitter

What about the tug that was sunk off Motiti some years ago ?I don't recall any protests over that ! Wouldn't that have also damaged the ocean environment and been a "cancerous tumour" ? There were also frigates sunk off the Bay of Islands and Wellington and I don't recall any major protests over those either. Lets not forget the Rainbow Warrior. More "cancerous tumours" to pollute the sea bed. Oh I forgot there was no monetary compensation to be demanded or available in those days !!!!


If left untreated ...

Posted on 01-07-2014 14:51 | By Murray.Guy

If left untreated, in all likelihood a cancer will grow and eventually take your life. If the Rena is left partially treated, in all likelihood it will reduce in size and impact and further damage the reef some appear so keen to protect! - To treat it further will quite possibly take a 'human life'. What 'best practice' might prescribe is understandably, surely, NOT to hit a reef in the first place, and ideally, if reasonable and practical, to make good any damage, to put in place strategies to mitigate a repeat. The Environment Court is the appropriate way forward rather than some 'kangaroo court of uniformed and or misinformed public opinion'.


Gvmt's must

Posted on 01-07-2014 16:57 | By YOGI BEAR

Ok so on that score then my ancestors should be helped to restore the habitat of the Moa. I am sure that is the intention of the UN.


The Rena MUST go.....

Posted on 01-07-2014 18:26 | By SML

The Government is accepting a paltry $10.4 million, and absolving the Rena's owner and insurers the true cost to remove the rest of the wreck and the debris (likely to be between $500 million to $1 billion). However, will the $10.4 million be available to put right problems which will surely arise in the future? I'm betting it won't be, nor would it be enough should a foreign tourist's family decide to take legal action against the Government if a family member died diving after being caught on debris at the wreck site. This is quite apart from the loss of the Taonga to the local Iwi, and all the local residents and businesses likely to be affected in the future by the toxic affects that will affect the Papamoa, Maketu and Motiti Island shorelines as the containers slowly but surely decay, and release their contents.


Previous wrecks - Jitter & GreertonBoy

Posted on 01-07-2014 20:13 | By SML

Apart from very historical wrecks, recent wrecks, deliberately sunk for recreational diving purposes (Bob Owen's tug, the Taimoa(sp?, The Rainbow Warrior, etc, have all had parts welded closed, machinery removed, and generally "made safe" for divers to move freely through the vessels, without danger of entanglement. If you read the descriptions of the bent and torn superstructure of the Rena, ripped apart by storm and man (quite apart from the container and contents issue), the debris is a major disaster field, not a safe diving zone. Apart from the depth issues, why do you think divers say it's unsafe to work on? Because they've been cut, hoses have been cut, there's been injuries..... and yet, the Government is willing to let the owners/insurers off their responsibilities to remove this man-made toxic rubbish dump!! Read up on what's REALLY going on - it's been in the media for months...


racism again

Posted on 01-07-2014 20:23 | By Captain Sensible

I do not understand why the "local iwi" get a mention. Is their opinion more valuable than us non-maori? Are we just second class with no understanding of the environment compared to those high and untouchable iwi? This racism towards me and other non-maori is revolting.


Wake up

Posted on 01-07-2014 22:44 | By Raewyn

The reason the Rena is unafe to shift is because of the Debri and Toxins still in the hull!


A twisted cap'n

Posted on 02-07-2014 09:12 | By robin bell

no you don't understand,thats your problem.Educate yourself and understanding will come.Iwi have every right to pressurize the Crown to remove the wreck. Robin Bell.


Rena

Posted on 02-07-2014 14:54 | By Capt_Kaveman

or at least remove whats on board containers and oil fuel etc then i would be happy to leave the steel hull but while it has crap still inside it must be removed


Didn't see you there Jitter

Posted on 02-07-2014 15:31 | By awaroa

I was there at the scuttling of Taioma. Were you? We were the ones protesting. The ones you say you never saw. Your talk is what we call hamuti.. full of it.


EEF

Posted on 02-07-2014 15:34 | By awaroa

Just opened YOGI. Make an application and see how you get on. All hamuti I suspect..


A twisted cap'n

Posted on 29-07-2014 14:17 | By YOGI BEAR

No they don't, not on the basis of a partnership that does not exist, not on the basis of a tainted and biased WTF tribunal outfit that all occurs behind closed doors, not when commentary tabled is in the garbage department ... The Government does the deal and that is how it is, finish, end of story.


Leave a Comment


You must be logged in to make a comment.