Eckhoff Gerrard: Fiordland Marine Management Bill — First Reading 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Fiordland Marine Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18122] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 This morning I spent a considerable period of time on the telephone talking to a number of people in the Te Anau district. Rather unusually for a politician I suppose in some respects I asked people what they really think about the Fiordland Marine Management Bill. Those people are involved on the ground floor. But first of all I would like to thank Marian Hobbs and Pete Hodgson and to recognise the job they have done. I think it is important to give credit where it is due so I thank Marian Hobbs the Minister for the Environment and Pete Hodgson for their efforts and the fact that they understood what the locals were trying to do. I quote from a comment made by Pete Hodgson who was Minister at the time in  
North and South 
 magazine. He said: “What the locals have gone and done is what central government and organisations like Forest and Bird have failed to do. The lesson for all of us in the technocratic and bureaucratic age is that it’s entirely possible as a community to get it done.” That is absolutely correct. 
I will also quote again from the same article which I think is very good. It was written by Peta Carey—I assume that is a lady—who goes on to quote John Steffens. She states: “As much as the Guardians of Fiordland claim to have consulted all interest groups in Fiordland there was one voice expressly excluded in the first few years of discussions that of Forest and Bird. John Steffens admits they were simply not invited. ‘Personally I felt that from the behaviour I’ve noticed in other groups I’d been involved with that if Forest and Bird had sat around the table with the Guardians they would have tipped the group over. People would have given up in disgust and walked away.’ ” That is the group that controls the Minister of Conservation and I commend again Marian Hobbs and Pete Hodgson for their foresight and common sense. The comment was also made to me this morning that the Minister of Conservation has not even replied to those people. I think that is quite outrageous. So I am delighted especially at this time of the year to offer that little bouquet to those two Ministers. 
However on listening to those people this morning—and I do listen to them—I did hear them express some very very real concerns. I asked them whether it was possible that the whole process could be open to capture and one gentleman said to me that that was absolutely right and there was a concern that they had created a monster. As long as the process is controlled by the local people that will not happen but the concern is that through a political process Marian Hobbs may not be the Minister forever. Well it may last a few days—who knows? But never mind. Those people are concerned that Ministers who understand the process may be taken away in the future—whether it is next week next month next year or whenever it is. That is their very real concern. The bill allows for the Minister to appoint the guardians and that would be wrong in every sense. The appointments should come from the local people with perhaps one or two being appointed by the Minister to give some sort of outside perspective. But we cannot allow ministerial appointments to dominate the guardians in the future. As I say we open ourselves up for total capture of the absolutely excellent job that people like John Steffens and other members of the guardians have done. 
I must say that one thing that really concerned me was the appointment of Professor Alan Mark to the guardians. Professor Mark is well known to me and to the high-country community because he has alienated virtually every farmer in the high country over his top-down approach to the whole process. Quite frankly Alan Mark is a bad appointment to have made to that group. I concur totally that in order for these sorts of organisations to succeed there has to be a bottom-up approach which is exactly what we have in the guardians group at this time. But we cannot have people like retired emeritus Professor Alan Mark believe that people from Dunedin or Wellington are the appropriate people to have as the guardians of this most remarkable area of our country. Professor Mark stated in  
North and South 
 magazine that he was “marginally acceptable to Forest and Bird”. Well the only thing I can say to that is “Yeah right”. 
Professor Mark is well known as New Zealand’s foremost preservationist. I make the distinction between conservation and preservation because this bill should be about conservation not preservation. Conservation would be welcomed I am sure by everybody in this House including me and members of the ACT party. Irrespective of who it is conservation is what we are about—perpetuation of the species if one likes. Preservation especially in remote areas is all about creating a haven for poachers. If Government members and other members have not worked that out yet they should come and talk to me and I will point them in the right direction towards the people who understand that. 
Something I think I should also reflect on is the reason why the guardians group was created. I suspect it was that the egos of people in the southern regions are significantly smaller than the egos of the people concerned with the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park for example where all sorts of problems and agendas occur. That is not happening in the far south at this time so I am delighted to see that we can proceed. In fact I listened to Dr Smith’s speech and I think he was quite correct when he said that this group offers a way forward for the future because it is a blueprint or template. The Romans had a principle they called usufruct whereby the locals controlled local resources. Sure there was an input from on high from the emperor—or in this case from Helen Clark. Such input is possible. However we want to be given no more than input. I think this bill is an excellent opportunity to show the rest of the country where our marine reserves are being depleted that it is local people—not the Department of Conservation certainly not the Forest and Bird Protection Society and certainly not Kevin Smith—who will show the way to ensure a sustainable future around our coastlines.