Katene Rahui: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Katene Rahui: Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Volume:668;Page:15319] 
RAHUI KATENE (Maori Party—Te Tai Tonga) 
: 
 The House is now immersed in a debate on yet another omnibus bill. The Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill (No 3) makes amendments to the Aquaculture Reform (Repeals and Transitional Provisions) Act 2004 the Fisheries Act 1996 the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004 and the Resource Management Act 1991. On its own this legislation may seem like just a technical clean-up or another piece of legislation driven by administrative purposes. 
As the MP for Te Tai Tonga I will bring two important points of distinction in speaking to this bill. The first is that it has been 6 years since the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act was passed. Urgent progress must proceed to ensure iwi get the full value from that settlement. The Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act 2004 provided a full and final settlement of Maori commercial aquaculture interests since 21 September 1992. I remember the advent of that legislation very clearly. It was something that iwi from Te Tau Ihu or the top of the South Island for those not in the know were especially interested in. The purpose of the 2004 legislation was to enable the marine farming industry to continue growing without risk of litigation relating to contemporary Treaty grievances and to ensure iwi access to coastal marine space to develop their marine farming interests. The proposed legislation is arguably then a work in progress especially in consideration of the changes aimed at simplifying the process in relation to the allocation of new space for aquaculture activities. It is also a means of achieving incremental progress taking into account the interim measure put in place to allow for the continuation of the 20 percent allocation mechanism for Maori interests in aquaculture. 
Our sources tell us that aquaculture management areas have not at all been successfully designated by regional authorities due to a lack of resourcing and planning capacity. The main problem with that is that in order to allocate the 20 percent of new space for Maori aquaculture activities under the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act those areas need to be established. So the purpose of this new bill is to streamline planning and consenting processes by removing the requirement for aquaculture management areas to provide stronger incentives for industry development while maintaining existing processes to ensure environmental limits are respected to enable central government to take a more active role in aquaculture planning and consenting and to honour the settlement under the Maori Commercial Aquaculture Claims Settlement Act. 
I will speak to that last point in more detail because it is the second point of distinction that the Maori Party brings to this debate. This legislation is not just about tidying up the statutes for the purpose of housekeeping. It has a long whakapapa with whanau hapu and iwi who seek genuine progress in respect of their connections with their maunga awa moana marae tupuna and atua. 
I want to share a little story with members about my own whanau experience. Many years ago the people of Waitohi were moved by the Government at the time from Waitohi to Waikawa so that the Picton township could be built where they were living. At that time Waikawa was a swamp and my uncle Mike Reeves was born and raised in Waikawa. He has talked to me about life in the mid-1940s in Waikawa when both sea and freshwater food were plentiful. The whanau regularly benefited from the ample supplies of lamprey eel and ordinary silver-bellied eel found in the swamp from the beach. This was also a breeding area for whitebait and thousands of baby flounder right across Waikawa Pa foreshore. In those times of plenty the people enjoyed fresh flounder scallops cockles and pipi and tons of herrings and mackerel. There was also a huge snapper area on the west side of the bay. In the bay itself there was plentiful blue cod paua and kina. The whanau went to their beach to pick mussels kopakopa and other kai moana. For those people who are listening I will stop right now to give them a chance to stop salivating. But this is not a good news story. Eventually the Waikawa Marina was dug out and the land was reclaimed by uplifting the seabed and filling in the beautiful swamp. In that one act of human intervention the people were robbed of their source of natural healthy sea and freshwater food because of the marina pollution. Their scallops have shifted out of the bay into deeper water because of pollution and the only shellfish left kopakopa is way out in the bay. 
If we fast forward to 2010 we see that Port Marlborough wants to shift the shellfish from where it has been for hundreds of years by extending the marina so that more wealthy outsiders can moor their expensive toys there. So the bill comes at a very good time for our people who are outraged at the decisions that local authorities continue to make which are seemingly more focused on profits than people and more focused on financial return rather than the long-term environmental health and well-being of the people. 
There are certainly issues within this legislation on which I would seek the expert advice and knowledge of our whanau leaders like my uncle Mike Reeves. I am thinking particularly about the nature of the new space allocation mechanism. The proposed reforms seem to normalise aquaculture by removing the need to create aquaculture management areas and rebranding across the board all aquaculture activities as coastal permits. There is concern that this is an interim measure with no clear indication as to what will replace it and when it will be replaced. In our opinion this issue should be finalised first before the legislation is progressed. In fact if we were to talk with any of our people involved in aquaculture I suggest we would hear that their main focus would be that the 20 percent allocation of new space for aquaculture activities should be increased not removed. 
We all accept that the current legislation has not worked as it should have because not enough progress has been made in the allocation of new space for aquaculture activities by regional councils. The proposed reforms on the allocation of new space although not ideal are at least a step forward in simplifying the complex process of allocating new space for aquaculture activities. But and this is the crucial thing we must see ongoing and formalised consultation with iwi as a vital step in making progress. The commitment shown in regard to future consultation with iwi leaders on this issue is encouraging. The Maori Party promotes ongoing and continuing engagement with Ministers and iwi leaders in the hope of reaching a speedy resolution that can promote the development of the aquaculture industry and secure a central position in that industry for iwi. 
Just for the record I will outline some of the key understandings we have in respect of iwi leaders operating in this and other fora with Ministers. The role of the Iwi Leadership Group is strictly focused on advising Ministers on the development of options that best advance iwi interests. It is to be noted however that members of the Iwi Leadership Group do not purport to speak for or represent any iwi other than their own; no one-size-fits-all template provides the generic iwi answer. Accordingly the Iwi Leadership Group does not have a mandate to negotiate or reach agreements on behalf of any iwi. Its focus is on reporting back to iwi both directly through e-panui and hui as required and through regular meetings of the Iwi Chairs Forum. 
Finally it should be noted that engagement between Ministers and the Iwi Leadership Group does not derogate from the Treaty relationship between iwi and the Crown and it is no substitute for direct engagement between the Treaty partners. 
With all these principles in mind I acknowledge the leadership of iwi and record our respect for the views that they bring including the views of experts from regions with interests in aquaculture as well as outside expertise where that is required. 
I remember what my Uncle Mike keeps fighting for: a quality of life; a clean pristine environment; the ability to go to the beach and pick one’s own food; and leaving behind a legacy of beauty for our mokopuna. The Maori Party welcomes the open-door approach and will support this bill at the first reading to enable the korero to be had.