Hide Rodney: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Aquaculture Reform Bill — Second Reading Instructions to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:622;Page:17728] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 The ACT party is against this bill. It is a bill that shows how the Government and—after hearing Doug Woolerton speak—New Zealand First lack vision of what aquaculture could achieve through the years ahead in New Zealand. It also shows how they lack insight into what an industry needs so that it can develop. It is very very simple. Members should try to imagine—I would not expect the Minister in the chair to understand this but I would expect Mr Doug Woolerton to appreciate it—a dairy farm operating under rules like these. They should try to imagine developing the farming industry on land under rules like these. 
R Doug Woolerton 
: Dairy farmers have twice as many rules as there are in here my friend. You wouldn’t have a clue. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Doug Woolerton calls out and says: “Hang on—the dairy industry has twice as many rules as the aquaculture industry has.” Well we are not about defending those rules for dairy farmers; we are about getting rid of them. But here is the thing: dairy farmers at least have some security of tenure on the land and some security of tenure on their investments. 
It is true to say that the socialist Government David Benson-Pope and Dover Samuels represent is marauding dairy farmers’ land and other farmers’ land with their “right to roam” legislation which I see that New Zealand First supports. We have tried this experiment before in New Zealand and it failed. We tried this experiment in the high country of New Zealand. 
Hon Dover Samuels 
: When? 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Yes we did. I know that Dover Samuels would not know but I expect other members to know. When the high country of New Zealand was put out at short lease like this what was the result? It was a failure of investment of over-grazing and of the destruction of the land. That is what happens when farmers do not have secure title. 
We have an enormous coastline and vast ocean resources out to the 200-mile limit for deep-sea farming. If we had a Government—indeed a Parliament—that had some vision for what New Zealand could achieve in this country with aquaculture we would not be debating this bill; we would be debating something far far better. Its basis would be secure property rights for aquaculturists just like those rights provided so that farming can develop in New Zealand. Mr Samuels should try to imagine these rules applying back in 1840 to the farmers who cut farms out of the bush of New Zealand. They would not have done it. They would not have invested and they would not have worked to develop their markets. Can we not learn from that lesson? Dover Samuels sits over there but he would not apply these rules to his wonderful motel in Matauri Bay because he would want to have secure property rights. He will not work away in an industry in which potentially he will lose his rights after a few years—where the Government can come along at any time and change the rules. 
This bill lacks insight into what an industry needs to develop and it lacks vision. It lacks the vision of what this country could achieve by looking ahead 10 or 20 years. I think that in the future when aquaculture around the world is a standard way of rearing and harvesting fish New Zealanders will look back at this legislation and wonder what Parliament was thinking of. How dopey could it be to repeat the mistake that had already been made on the land in the high country of New Zealand? Just as we look back on what was done in the high country we can ask how the Government could create such a perverse set of incentives that would fail to see an industry take off. Well that is what David Benson-Pope’s legacy to New Zealand is. I know that Dover Samuels has such a short-term horizon that he just thinks this is funny. However here we are standing at the dawn of a wonderful industry that could do so much for our country.