11. Fisheries—Commercial Fish Dumping and Recreational Bag LimitsKELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau) to the Minister for Primary IndustriesFisheries—Commercial Fish Dumping and Recreational Bag Limits11. KELVIN DAVIS (Labour—Te Tai Tokerau) to the Minister for Primary Industries: Why were bag limits for recreational fishers reduced when the Ministry for Primary Industries has ignored thousands of tonnes of fish being dumped by the commercial sector for years?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): I am presuming that the member is asking specifically about Snapper 1 because his question is slightly confusing. It is not correct to imply that dumping was the cause of the decrease in the recreational bag limit to do with Snapper 1. As the member should be aware the total allowable catch of snapper actually increased by 500 tonnes and this was all allocated to recreational fishers. However given growth in local population this meant a small decrease in the daily bag limit. I also refute the member's assertion that the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) has ignored the thousands of tonnes of fish being dumped. The Heron report clearly shows that MPI made a flawed decision not to prosecute in the case of Achilles but that in general it has a robust process and professional staff who conduct around 300 prosecutions every year.Kelvin Davis: Why then did his officials say in 2013: …the fact that we have known about these dumpings/discarding issues for many years and would appear to have done little to combat it would be very difficult to explain and be unpleasant at best."?Hon NATHAN GUY: Well I transgressed over this point several times yesterday—[Interruption]—in the House. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! The important point is that—[Interruption] Order! The question has been asked and an answer is to be given and substantially. If I have got to start asking people and giving final warnings and naming people I can. The level of interjection is just too high particularly from my left but not only from my left. The Hon Nathan Guy is to answer the question.Hon NATHAN GUY: What I meant to say was I traversed the answer to the questions in the House yesterday around this topic and what I said was that since the QMS has been in successive Governments and officials have been grappling with the dumping issue and there is no evidence that dumping has been a determinant in reducing recreational bag limits because 96 percent of our stocks of known value are at or above sustainability levels.Kelvin Davis: Under his ministerial leadership who is more likely to be prosecuted: a recreational fisher who grabs one undersized snapper or a commercial boat that dumps thousands of fish?Hon NATHAN GUY: We take it very seriously—to do with any issues of reporting and to do with anything that comes to light to do with dumping or discarding or recreational fishers not adhering to their bag limits. We have about 300 prosecutions a year across recreational customary and commercial fishing. Also we do about 3000 infringements a year and about 1000 vessel inspections. We take this very seriously but unfortunately with Operation Achilles as Queen's Counsel Heron's report says it was a flawed decision and I regret that MPI did not follow through with a prosecution.Kelvin Davis: Given that answer can he confirm that commercial fishers who dump thousands of fish make up less than 1 percent of all prosecutions compared with recreational fishers who make up more than 50 percent?Hon NATHAN GUY: It is a little bit hard to get into those numbers because what the member needs to take into account is that there is a large volume of recreational fishers—I think about 600000 or so; there could be 7000 recreational fishers in the Hauraki on any one day—versus about 12000 vessels fishing in the commercial sector. What we have done is double the number of observers so that we have more transparency in what is happening in the commercial fleet. We have also rolled out cameras electronic reporting and vessel monitoring systems in the Snapper 1 area which is hugely important for recreational customary and commercial fishers.Kelvin Davis: If his ministry had actually prosecuted commercial fishermen for illegal fish dumping how many millions more fish would be available for recreational fishermen?Hon NATHAN GUY: I have already answered that question in part by saying that there is no evidence that dumping has been a determinant in reducing recreational bag limits but what I have told the House over the last couple of days is that the Ministry of Fisheries and MPI have been grappling with this issue to do with dumping and discarding for a long period of time. It is not only New Zealand that has been grappling with it; other countries around the world have been grappling with it. I am determined to get on top of this particular issue to do with rolling out electronic monitoring make the changes that need to be made through the operational review The Future of our Fisheries and come into the House and change the law because it is hugely important that mum dad and the kids can go out and catch a fish and that we protect this precious resource for everyone to enjoy in the future.Kelvin Davis: Supplementary question?Mr SPEAKER: No the number of Labour supplementary questions has been used up for today."