Pugh MaureenMAUREEN PUGH (National): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I too stand to speak to a Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) tonight in the committee stage of the Conservation (Indigenous Freshwater Fish) Amendment Bill and that is Supplementary Order Paper 390 and that is the tabled amendment to the former Supplementary Order Paper that was submitted. It is in the name of my colleague Sarah Dowie. Now Ms Dowie is a former lawyer with the Department of Conservation and National's spokesperson on conservation. I've got to say her pragmatic approach to conservation is to be applauded and this amendment is a classic example of that pragmatism that we are already talking about here tonight. I've got to say it's not clouded by idealistic goals or blanket rules or a dictatorship mentality. What this SOP seeks to do is to put a new subsection into new section 26ZJA in clause 9. It inserts that new section 26ZJA as it relates to situations where the Director-General of Conservation identifies a spawning area and we are talking mostly about a spawning area for whitebait. Now as it currently reads the bill allows for the Director-General of Conservation to declare an area as a spawning area if the Director-General has reasonable grounds"—not proof—that the area is to be used or can be used or is being used for the spawning of freshwater fish. It is if he has "reasonable grounds" or it is suitable for the spawning of freshwater fish—"suitable"—but what on earth does that mean? If it's suitable and there's no freshwater fish there right now but they might take up residence at some time in the future is that suitable? When I read that I thought well that sounds a little bit like KiwiBuild to me. It's "Build it and they will come." and we know how that turned out. So this SOP suggests that before such a declaration is made over private property—and remember we are talking about private property here—the director-general must consult with that property owner. I actually believe that that's a very reasonable suggestion. The SOP also suggests that the director-general must provide for an appeal process so that the private property owner actually can be heard—his views can be heard and taken into consideration. We're talking about private property and generally that will be in a rural area. It is likely to be a farm of some type. Also this SOP suggests that the director-general must give effect to the private property owner's rights to justice under section 27 of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. I would even go further with this SOP Ms Dowie and suggest that if there actually is a national good to declaring private property to be a suitable spawning area then surely there is a national obligation to that private property owner to offer some kind of recompense because what's going to happen is if there is a declaration made—and I'm talking about fair and reasonable recompense—because there is going to be loss of use of that land and remember that once that declaration has been made then no further modification can happen to that particular parcel of land. There'll be no grazing there'll be no cropping and possibly you can't even take the kids and the dog for a swim down there during the summer. So I'm challenging the assertion in this bill that whitebait of course is only part of the freshwater fish that we are seeking to protect. As I've said in this House before the only expert that we have been able to find in this country is a man who works out of Canterbury University. He will assert based on his research and science that whitebait are not actually threatened with extinction. It is their habitat that is at risk but the species certainly is not. So if the habitat is really the issue at heart here then what is the problem—[Bell rung]—with our regional councils— CHAIRPERSON (Adrian Rurawhe): Are you seeking another call? MAUREEN PUGH: Yes Mr Chair. So I would assert that our regional councils who are charged with the administration of the Resource Management Act have the oversight by mandate to protect those habitats. I can assure you that the West Coast Regional Council does take account of whitebait habitat when they are considering resource consent applications. So if that's not working in other parts of the country I suggest that we look at the processes that those regional councils are following and maybe use the example of the West Coast Regional Council in how they are managing habitat over there. They are a really good example. This SOP does ensure that the private property rights of these rural landowners are protected that their voice is heard and that they have an opportunity to challenge or to have input into any declaration that the Director-General of Conservation may make over their private property. As I said Ms Dowie I think we could even go one step further and protect that private property right by asking that the recompense for the loss of use of that land for the national good is paid for. Thank you very much Mr Chair."