maritime NZ can pick and choose who comes into NZ?

Forums › Off topic › maritime NZ can pick and choose who comes into NZ?

richgamer

224 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

Topic # 29614 13-Jan-2009 13:21

maritime nz is stopping a person coming into new zealand on his boat:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10551609

how can maritime new zealand do this if he hasn't committed a crime?

n00dy

478 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 3

Reply # 189198 13-Jan-2009 13:29

I support MNZ for this stance as if the whole story is read, this person is just using NZ as a stop off point on his way to rowing around antartica and as MNZ is responsibile for rescue in that area they stated it would be extremely difficult to mount a rescue mission to someone in need as well as it costing BIG $$$, it also said Tazmaninaian Police and Maritime officials tried to do the same but could not as their law doesnt allow it and they tried to get the guy to abort his decision. I think Oliver Hicks, the rower, is completley ir-responsibile for not heeding advise from experts. I would not have a problem if he has insurance to pay for the rescue but he does not

photoman

217 posts

Master Geek

Reply # 189223 13-Jan-2009 14:51

richgamer:
maritime nz is stopping a person coming into new zealand on his boat:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10551609

how can maritime new zealand do this if he hasn't committed a crime?

Correction - They are stopping him from using NZ as his departure point for his expedition.

It's a moot point really, as if he does need rescuing, it will be Maritime NZ that will have to do it, risking their lives in the process. Oliver Hicks may have accomplished some mean feats, but he was in circumstances where rescue was a possibility. With this particular expedition, the liklihood of rescue goes through the roof and the chances of being rescued goes through the floor.

richgamer

224 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

Reply # 189231 13-Jan-2009 15:08

but it's like censorship for people entering nz. it's like the government saying no foreign press in new zealand is allowed.

maritime nz are basing their decision on what could happen. they are not psychics so they have no proof he will need rescuing.

what law of the maritime act are they using to deny him entry into nz?

think of it, if you had a mother who needed to fly from australia to nz for a funeral of her son, and the government saying no you can't come into new zealand because you might be so upset in nz that you may need medical attention and we know you have not committed any crimes but we can pick and choose who comes into nz without anyone committing a crime.

Jarno

268 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 49

Reply # 189252 13-Jan-2009 15:57

He is free to come to NZ, and free to leave. What he is not free to do is operate a vessel in a manner that is a likely endanger himself or those that would be sent out to rescue him.

Similarly you are not allowed to operate a motor vehicle or take off with an airplane in a manner that is likely to get someone killed.

I seem to recall a few years ago the law being strengthened because of a spate of rescues of people from overseas coming here with dangerously substandard boats.

---JvdL---

wellygary

3394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 925

Reply # 189258 13-Jan-2009 16:10

richgamer: but it's like censorship for people entering nz. it's like the government saying no foreign press in new zealand is allowed.

maritime nz are basing their decision on what could happen. they are not psychics so they have no proof he will need rescuing.

what law of the maritime act are they using to deny him entry into nz?

think of it, if you had a mother who needed to fly from australia to nz for a funeral of her son, and the government saying no you can't come into new zealand because you might be so upset in nz that you may need medical attention and we know you have not committed any crimes but we can pick and choose who comes into nz without anyone committing a crime.

There is some misreporting going on here, he has not been denied admission to NZ, he chose not to come to NZ after he discovered that the Maritime Transport Act allows the director to detain his vessel or prohibit its use.
--------------------
The act is below

Maritime Transport Act 1994 No 104 (as at 10 September 2008), Public Act

55 Detention, etc, of ships and maritime products

(1) The Director may from time to time do all or any of the following:

(a) Detain any ship or any ship of a particular class:

(b) Seize any maritime product or any maritime product of a particular class:

(c) Prohibit or impose conditions on the use or operation of any ship or any ship of a particular class, or the use of any maritime product or any maritime product of a particular class:

(d) Impose conditions on the release from detention or seizure of the ship or maritime product.

(2) The powers under subsection (1) of this section may be exercised where the Director believes on clear grounds that—

(a) The operation or use of any ship or maritime product or class of ship or maritime product, as the case may be, endangers or is likely to endanger any person or property, or is hazardous to the health or safety of any person; or

tonyhughes

Hawkes Bay
8477 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4

Mod Emeritus

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 189282 13-Jan-2009 17:18

richgamer:maritime nz is stopping a person coming into new zealand on his boat:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10551609
how can maritime new zealand do this if he hasn't committed a crime?

Really?

No - honestly.... REALLY?

~~Can you~~ did you read the article?

Some key points from it:

Under the Maritime Transport Act 1994, MNZ has the necessary powers.
(MNZ) are concerned about his safety and the high cost of rescue.
Rescue missions in the region are "extremely difficult" because of the scarcity of ships or aircraft.
The hostile Southern Ocean made capsize almost inevitable.
"The risks inherent in Mr Hicks' proposed voyage are substantial and the likelihood of rescue being required is significant.
In MNZ's view, the proposal posed an extreme risk to Mr Hicks' safety."
The mostly 55-degree south latitudes of his Antarctica adventure were a far more dangerous prospect.

RedJungle

Phil Gale
1107 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 44

Trusted

Red Jungle

Subscriber

Reply # 189351 13-Jan-2009 21:33

I liked this bit in particular:

His blog said he was making the Antarctica voyage to emulate "old fashioned explorers"

Sooo.. he'll be happy for no-one to come looking for him then? just like the "old fashioned explorers"?

Seriously - why do we always end up footing the bill for rescuing these people? If you want to throw caution to the wind, take extreme risks and be an "Adventurer", fine by me. Just don't expect to be rescued when it goes tits-up.

Red Jungle: we make fantastic software

Dratsab

3127 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 947

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

Reply # 189361 13-Jan-2009 22:07

richgamer: maritime nz is stopping a person coming into new zealand on his boat:

As already commented on by Photoman before you posted:

but it's like censorship for people entering nz. it's like the government saying no foreign press in new zealand is allowed.

Also, read what jarno, wellygary and tonyhughes have posted as well and *please* try to comprehend what is being said to you...