Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Heatley Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:628;Page:484] 
12.  
PHIL HEATLEY (National—Whangarei) 
 to the  
Minister of Fisheries 
: Has he been advised of Forest and Bird’s  
Best Fish Guide 
 which states that no New Zealand fishery is sustainable and no commercial fisheries have a management plan; if so what if anything does he plan to do to address those assertions given his Ministry’s role of ensuring fisheries are sustainably managed? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 Yes I have seen the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society’s  
Best Fish Guide 
 
and I dispute its assertion that no New Zealand fishery is sustainable. New Zealand leads the world in its fisheries management. That is not to say of course that we have always got it right or that there have not been mistakes. But there have been some very real successes in fisheries management and every day we continue to know more about our fish stock and increasingly do a better job of managing it. I can advise the House today that the Ministry of Fisheries has prepared the first of three pilot fisheries management plans—for the southern blue whiting Coromandel scallop and Foveaux Strait oyster fisheries. Those will be released publicly next week. If they prove to be a success—and I encourage all stakeholders to engage in their implementation—then I hope we can extend those plans through the quota management system to ensure that a long-term approach is taken to the sustainability of our fisheries for future generations. 
Phil Heatley 
: Is the Minister concerned at all that the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society will undermine the domestic seafood market with its irresponsible comments—that there are no fish that consumers should eat; if so what direct action will he take to put the record straight so that the domestic seafood market is not damaged? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I have been encouraging all stakeholders in the fishing industry both commercial fishers and non-governmental organisations to meet with me and exchange views. I am certainly encouraging the fishing industry and the non-governmental organisation area to work more cooperatively together to improve the environment for fisheries in this country—and that includes the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society. 
Phil Heatley 
: Will the Minister actively assure the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society that contrary to its  
Best Fish Guide 
 the over $30 million in fishery management and conservation levies his ministry collects from Kiwi fishers is well spent by his ministry in managing the fishery? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I think there will always be contention about how well spent Government revenue is. But by and large in my short experience so far of looking carefully at what is being done by the Ministry of Fisheries I think the ministry does a very good job with the funds it has. It is managing our fishing and marine environment and resources extraordinarily well. 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Minister not agree that organisations like the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society that provide a critical service to this country in encouraging consumers to take responsibility for the effects of their consumption of our natural resources such as fish are right to raise these issues for the public to give consideration to; and will he ensure that in the strategy for managing the environmental effects of fishing that was proposed before the election there are clear standards and rules to protect the fishing industry and the fisheries themselves from exploitation and to protect the further unnecessary death of animals caught in by-catch? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: Of course it is a free country and the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society is entitled to its view. The idea of a guide to properly inform people about the status of fisheries in New Zealand is a good one provided that it is produced as a result of robust scientific process as is the case in other parts of the world. The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society in my view and in view of the advice I have received has not used robust scientific process to make its assessments. 
Phil Heatley 
: So can the Minister then clearly confirm that he opposes and disagrees with the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society’s claim and does support his ministry’s spending of the $30 million in levies that is collected from Kiwi fishers? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: The levies collected from the fisheries industry are used for the research and development of the fishery resource in New Zealand. It is my considered opinion that we probably—almost certainly—need to spend more than that but that is a matter that the Minister of Finance and I will have discussions on at a later date. 
Phil Heatley 
: Why then did the Minister remain silent over the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society’s media beat-up about the  
Best Fish Guide 
 over a fortnight ago that asserted that over 69 seafood species are poorly managed by his ministry when it spends $30 million of fisheries management levies and will the Minister remain silent now? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: I do not imagine that the criticism I have given in a public forum like Parliament is exactly remaining silent. 
Phil Heatley 
: That’s today; what happened a fortnight ago? 
Hon JIM ANDERTON 
: The member might like to listen. On the day that that release was made there was a discussion between the fisheries management and myself and it was determined that we would put the chief executive officer of the Ministry of Fisheries who is not only well qualified in fisheries management but is a marine biologist with very senior qualifications into the public arena to debate that issue with those from the environmental non-governmental organisations who wanted to do that. I watched that exchange very carefully and I think that the Government and the ministry were represented very very well by the chief executive officer in that debate.