Peters Jim: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Peters Jim: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11646] 
JIM PETERS (NZ First) 
: 
 New Zealand First as I stated in the second reading debate reluctantly accepts the purpose andtiming of this bill. We accept it for a second reason: despite what has been said by the previous speaker if the Government were so wise as to accept the New Zealand First position with regard to the foreshore and seabed—namely Crown ownership and customary use—there would be no need for any deviation or for any supposed hold-up. In fact this bill could be seen to run through to 31 December 2004 and on 1 January 2005 those interested in the industry and those who have a vital part to play in the industry could begin to take up their role. But that will not happen unless the Ministry of Fisheries and those involved in this bill get a move on. But before that happens I want to refer to the actual date. 
There is something much more pressing that the Minister should be aware of if this moratorium and marine farming are to be successfully advanced and that is the appalling state of his ministry’s marine permits. Broken frames are floating in the open sea and leases have been left lying for years in various states of disrepair. Abandoned silt areas abandoned frames—a real mess—are all the products of past ministry leases. In our region of Northland and no doubt in others this mess has nothing to do with the future of the industry but is very much a record of past ministries past Ministers and a lack of attention to what should be a pristine environment in which modern marine farming could take place. I want to draw the Minister’s attention to that very issue but before we advance too far upon the future let us look back at where the industry was—and I have some very vivid examples from the Bay of Islands here which the Minister could share—and look to see whether he will be able do a lot better than his predecessors in previous ministries. 
But to come back to the matter in hand the issue for New Zealand First is not further support for the bill. The issue is what we have always stated and that is absolute adherence to a finish date of 31 December 2004. That is so that those who are involved in marine farming—and for the potential that marine farming has for New Zealanders not least for those of us in the rural regions—are able to make informed decisions about the future. For that reason there needs to be much more known than has been evident so far from the ministries involved in this whole issue of marine farming. 
 We have had very little advice as to what the application of clause 3 in Part 1 and clause 4 in Part 2 really mean. We have out there a state of uncertainty and those submitters who came to the select committee said so over and over again. In some ways they were as ambivalent as other parties in the House might be because they realised that they could be and should be able to proceed. But because of the advanced notice and projected nature of what the Government thought it might do and noised around in certain places but not in the wider public area there was uncertainty about how things could proceed. 
The real issue for us in New Zealand First is not really that this legislation should not be passed. We believe that the time has come to push on. What we really want the Minister and his ministry to do is to give confidence and certainty to the many many people who see in that industry a real opportunity—not least Maori and not least those in the regions. I refer most of all to those people who have long seen the changed nature of the industry—particularly in large-scale operations—and one in income and job terms that has a tremendous economic future and potential. 
To that degree we support those clauses and hope that the Minister turns firstly to the matter of past leases and secondly gives clarity from now on until the end of 2004 so that councils people in the industry the ordinary person on the street and people on the coastal margins are given real knowledge of what is intended once this legislation is passed.