Guy Nathan; Rurawhe AdrianHon NATHAN GUY (National—Ōtaki): What we just heard from Tracey Martin was the payback for the Greens voting and supporting the waka-jumping bill wasn't it? Because we heard that New Zealand First said Yes we'll support it to the first reading but we're not quite sure whether we'll support it thereafter." Well I'll tell you what'll happen. That was a speech written by Shane Jones because he's the true fisheries Minister. So the Minister standing in for Shane Jones Tracey Martin had to come down and deliver that speech. I thought what was really fascinating was she spent more time talking about ripply culverts on the Northern Gateway—she seemed quite an expert—but what she failed to mention is that New Zealand First are dead against a four-lane highway carrying on from there through to Whangarei which I think is really disappointing.Focusing back on this bill now—this is a very important bill the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill. It provides more tools for fisheries management of indigenous fisheries and of course the threat to fish and in particular noxious fish. We have heard numerous contributions this evening and actually some concern from this side of the House. And I want to run through some of those concerns that we do have. We are cautiously supporting this bill to hear the debate in the select committee. We look forward to hearing from iwi. I wonder if the Minister of Conservation has already spoken to iwi about this bill. I wonder if the Minister for Crown/Māori Relations has bothered to pick up the phone and let iwi know that this bill is coming. All the heads are down on the other side—even Willie Jackson's not even sure in the back row and you would've thought that he would've picked up the phone being connected to iwi and said "Hey this bill is coming. You may want to be alerted to it and spend some time focusing in on the deal." Was there any pre-consultation done by the Green Party Minister Eugenie Sage? That's a live question. It'd be great to hear the response from the next speakers. I doubt that there has been any. Iwi will be a bit concerned about this bill in particular their Treaty settlement and the obligations that this bill—this bill is basically going to give Department of Conservation (DOC) officials more power and I'm a little bit concerned about that.It also has an aspect to do with—it gives the director-general the right to declare any specified land to be a spawning ground for freshwater fish and prohibit or impose entry restrictions on to that land. These are wide ranging powers that need to be explored and fully debated in the select committee. That means the director-general can basically go on to a landowner's property and say "This is a very significant waterway for spawning of native fish species and we need to put a closure on it." Well then who's going to—if it's not fenced—cover the cost of the fencing? Who's going to cover the cost of the signs? What about compensation for that? These are all the questions that need to be explored through the select committee.Also this bill proposes effectively to outrank and come in over the top of the sports fish and game management plan. These plans have been in place for a long time. It's interesting seeing the political power play because normally these environmental NGOs—whether it's Greenpeace Fish & Game Forest & Bird—they all tend to line up with this Government but there's quite a bit of factionalism that's actually playing out in the background at the moment and that will play out in the select committee. So Fish & Game have gone as far as paying a QC to give them advice on the wide-ranging nature of this bill. So there's quite a bit of concern from Fish & Game and they represent—as we know—a hell of a lot of people.It was interesting to note that Horizons Regional Council covering the area that I represent—Iain Lees-Galloway and Ian McKelvie both MPs in the House this evening where Horizons represent the areas that they are constituency MPs for—wrote to the Minister in April. They wanted clarification from Minister Sage on trying to balance the interests of protecting trout and native fish species. The Minister said "Oh don't worry I'll come back to you in several months." Presumably this is her answer. We know that trout are a very invasive species. I think what's going to play out in the select committee is the Resource Management Act section 6 that has particular regard for the protection of trout and salmon where this bill is fundamentally about protecting native fish species and giving more wide-ranging powers to DOC officials that I have some concerns about.Also it's interesting and it's not covered in any of the speeches so far to note the work that farmers are doing and in particular Fonterra farmers who have signed up with DOC and they're on the crusade with a plan that covers off Living Water which is a partnership. And I have seen numerous examples where Fonterra farmers have worked in partnership with DOC to protect fauna and also do more to protect waterways and native fish species.It's heartening to see that Springston farmer down near Christchurch Phil Musson a dairy farmer who won the working with nature environmental award on behalf of North Canterbury Fish & Game—he restored the Powells Road drain which is a tributary into the Selwyn River and very important for a trout spawning area. So we have progressive farmers that are out there doing their bit to enhance these particular native fish species that we are all so concerned about.What's also interesting—in the last couple of moments—is to have a look at the recent media commentary around Federated Farmers indicating that farmers should be out putting their hands up to stand for the Fish & Game Council which I think's very appropriate isn't it? The elections are coming up in a couple of weeks' time. Farmers on most occasions when someone rings them up or knocks on their door let recreational users anglers duck shooters or hunters come on their property. You should have seen the negative comments that came back from Martin Taylor who's the relatively new chief executive of Fish & Game. He said "The idea seemed to be to get less progressive farmers on the councils"—this is the Fish & Game councils throughout New Zealand—"in order to stop Fish & Game pointing out that the intensive farming emperor has no clothes." And I could go on and outline other negative comments from Martin Taylor that really disappointed me because you would have thought that Fish & Game would want to have councils that are inclusive. Myself a dairy farmer and an avid and very excited duck shooter in every duck shooting season I go and buy a licence. What's wrong with me or my colleagues putting their hand up to say "We're interested in fishing and hunting. We want to have our voices heard on the Fish & Game regional councils."? Potentially they could get elected on to the national body where there's 12 gentlemen sitting on there at the moment. So I think there are challenges for Fish & Game who will no doubt be coming into the select committee saying "We've all got concerns about our fish and game management plans." The biggest concern that they've got is about being inclusive and getting farmers democratically elected on to their regional councils so that they can actually bridge the gap and the divide because these are the people that let hunters and anglers on to their property.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Adrian Rurawhe): I call Dr Deborah Russell.Hon Scott Simpson: Next Minister of Conservation."