Woolerton R Doug: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Woolerton R Doug: Aquaculture Reform Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17772. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
R DOUG WOOLERTON (NZ First) 
: 
 I want to just— 
Stephen Franks 
: Embarrass myself? 
R DOUG WOOLERTON 
: No I was not going to do that. I have had good lessons because I have seen the ACT party and the National Party embarrass themselves right through this bill and I do not intend to do that at all. 
The Aquaculture Reform Bill is aptly named. It does not reform the aquaculture industry as such. It gets rid of a moratorium. Why the National administration did not do that years ago I have no idea. I have heard all sorts of criticism about what is happening in this bill. However I did not see any lead given to the industry in the formative stages of this industry—not even to the degree of help. In my opinion National cannot really talk. It is not the industry itself that is being reformed here; it is the administration of the industry and that was well overdue for reform. 
One thing I have to mention that was not mentioned in Part 7 was the business of off-site farms. I mention that to show the sort of administration that needed to be reformed—that is over the years in many parts of the country aquaculture farmers through the best will in the world I am sure have let their farms become off-site. In other words they are not where they are supposed to be on the sea floor. They are not in the right space like some members of the National Party at the present time. They are not quite in the right space. Aquaculture farmers have to bring back their farms into the space that they are supposed to occupy. 
That is all very well and so on but who will pay for that? New Zealand First implores the Minister to give some consideration to helping local councils with that because it was lack of oversight and control by the Ministry of Fisheries that has enabled those situations to happen. We see it as hardly fair to now require local councils to put those things right. We implore the Minister to look at that and to be understanding of that particular matter. 
The 20 percent allocation to Maori my goodness me has caused a furore and National and ACT have got really excited about that. I would just mention again for the fourth time that the precedent for the 20 percent was set by the National Party back in 1992. At the time my leader and his brother carried on by a third brother in Parliament today said when they were part of the National Party that those things would happen and they have. This Aquaculture Reform Bill could not have been passed without the 20 percent allocation in it. Quite clearly that would otherwise have been challenged in the court and those challenges would have succeeded. 
I wanted to mention where New Zealand First was coming from on those issues and say that they were mentioned by the Peters brothers many years ago when the precedents were jammed through the House by the then National Government. It is no use those National members wimping on about a 20 percent allocation when the 20 percent precedent was set by the National Government. If that was not continued clearly it would have been open to challenge. Whatever the people of the day thought and whatever was written down we are dealing with those things now. 
So I think the title is particularly apt. New Zealand First is supporting the bill. Those involved in aquaculture have our support and regard. I am sure they will carry on to make this the wonderful industry that it has been from the start and will continue to be. 
I cannot sit down without thanking the officials who guided us through. I also give credit to the chairman the Hon David Carter but especially to the officials without whom we would have been in trouble.