Turei Metiria: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Turei Metiria: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill — Second Reading In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 September 2008. Volume:650;Page:19003. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
METIRIA TUREI (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. The Green Party is supporting this Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill so I will take just a short call on it. 
In our view aquaculture can be a growth industry and it can be a very good supplier of an alternative source of seafood for New Zealand particularly while our wild fisheries recover from the incredible over-exploitation of those stocks that is going on as we speak. But really aquaculture is useful for this country only if it is done sustainably and excludes any kind of genetically engineered aquaculture. Aquaculture processes must protect conservation values and the public recreational and customary rights that our community has to the resources and places of the coast. It must avoid damaging fish-breeding grounds and valuable aspects of the coastal ecosystem. It must not pollute; there is always a serious risk of that with aquaculture. It must not pollute it must be sustainably managed and what is very important it must involve the public in decision making on aquaculture management areas. There is considerable uncertainty as to whether the current regime—with or without this amendment and with or without its more substantial brother bill which the House is yet to debate—can adequately do that. 
The National Party has described aquaculture as having stagnated under Labour. Although there are complications with the resource management of aquaculture it does not mean that all aquaculture development has been stalled at all. I am advised that the Northland Regional Council has approved many aquaculture management areas recently with only six applications out of 25 being contested. Most of them have gone through relatively easily. That said it is also suggested that the council railroaded the community and non-governmental organisations in some of those instances and there is considerable disquiet in the area about the loss of public coastal places to marine farming. It is our coast it is not the developers’ coast and the community has the right to have a say. The public must never be shut out. 
The Minister of Conservation must also have a say lest our marine ecosystems are sacrificed simply for profit. National’s intention to liberalise coastal management will be disastrous for the community for the habitat and for conservation values. 
I know that there is a particular Maori interest in aquaculture. It has been discussed here before and no doubt it will be discussed later this afternoon. I had the privilege of talking with the Wakatu Incorporation about its aquaculture proposal in Nelson. It is very exciting. The Greens are looking forward to that development. 
National’s policy is about certainty for investors. National’s policy is about having the freedom to change species about reducing bureaucracy and cost and about removing—entirely removing—conservation from the picture of aquaculture management. This means that National would shut out conservation and shut out the community; it would shut out those interests from decision making over commercial projects so that those projects can reduce costs and can have more freedom to make a profit at the community’s cost and expense. That is not what New Zealanders want to see happen with their coastal areas. They want to have a say. There is no doubt that there are opportunities for development and for local and regional economic development in this area but not at the cost of destroying the environment destroying the habitat and preventing people from being involved in those decisions. 
There is considerable concern about GE aquaculture. Members will remember the threat of GE king salmon back in the 1990s. The Greens fought GE aquaculture hard then and we will continue to do so if it rears its ugly head again. The world does not want GE and our New Zealand brand advantage including the brand for aquaculture is clean green and 100 percent pure. GE aquaculture would erode and indeed destroy our competitive advantage. It is not only that; the biosecurity risk of GE marine organisms is very high as the ocean is a very dynamic environment. They would put at risk our marine environment for no benefit whatsoever to the community or to our industry. 
This bill is very technical. The Greens look forward to its brother bill being debated in the House. We are pleased that the bill restricts applications to approve aquaculture management areas only and we support it.