When, with the support of the Maori Party, the Government introduced its replacement for the Foreshore and Seabed Act, it warned that if a consensus could not be found the status quo would remain.
Maori expectations of legal enforcement for provable property rights to coastal areas would therefore remain unfulfilled.
The legislation, in the form of the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Bill, has now been reported back to Parliament after select committee consideration - and with no significant amendments.
This means that the objectionable provision - that tribes must meet a high test of proving they have had continuous use and occupation of a foreshore since 1840 in order to claim "ownership" - remains.
The presumption of Crown ownership of the common marine and coastal area will be replaced with the "no ownership" model; the right of Maori to attempt to claim customary interests through the courts, extinguished in the original Act, will be restored, but public access, fishing, and navigation rights for all New Zealanders throughout the common marine and coastal area will be protected.
The Bill will also be amended to make explicit that the public cannot be charged for accessing the common marine and coastal area.
There has been one fortunate minor victory for the Bill's opponents: the Attorney-general will not be able to negotiate private deals with tribes seeking to have customary title awarded without then having them approved by Parliament.
The Bill also enables tribes awarded customary title - by no means an easy feat - to own the minerals in the area.
The legislation's support in the House is very narrow and this was reflected in the select committee's own voting.
But the Government will be happy to see the end of this very expensive, greatly overblown quarrel.
Accusations that it wanted the matter dealt with in haste appear to be well supported, to judge by the way the select committee was permitted to function, including without the ability to seek independent legal advice.
This has been a disgraceful charade of minimal consideration - controlled by the Government members - of the many submissions, including even a 500-page departmental report on those submissions.
If the Bill passes in the House, then its provisions are bound to be tested by tribes, including here in the South by Ngai Tahu, who believe they can establish a property right in the courts or by negotiation with the Attorney-general.
Public reaction to such applications may well depend entirely on their scale.
If granted, customary title will open a whole new area of law: the possession of mineral rights, for example, which were once held by the Crown on behalf of everyone, could result in substantial transfers of wealth; customary right powers will also outrank the rights of local authorities by providing exclusive veto powers over such matters as conservation applications and resource consents - with no right of appeal.
Some might also wish to ponder legislation which sets a high test for customary use and guarantees public access no matter what, but does nothing whatsoever to guarantee public access to the 12,500 sections of foreshore already held in private title.
Legislation considered in haste invariably turns out to be wanting and soon in need of amendment.
The Government's reliance on Maori Party support has produced a result that reflects the worst aspects of coalition government, for the haste with which this legislation has been considered is entirely to do with fears the Maori Party might soon fall apart because of the Harawira affair.
The National Party also wants this inherited problem to be resolved as distantly as possible from the November general election.
Those members in the Maori Party who still support National, however uncomfortably, will vote for the Bill on the grounds that it repeals a law that prevented tribes from seeking redress through the courts.
The Bill now becomes a numbers game, in more ways than one.
In Parliament, its passage will be fragile.
The Labour Party, which was responsible for the original Act, and which supported the new Bill, now says it will not vote for it because the solution it appears to offer will not last.
Hone Harawira is opposed to it; former Labour MP Chris Carter intends following Labour's position, as does Jim Anderton.
The Green Party and Act will oppose it, but United Future MP Peter Dunne will support it.
This means the Bill likely will pass with a two-vote majority: hardly a satisfactory mandate or a secure and lasting one, but the Government will be happy to have it.
