Carter John: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Carter John: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:11750] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I want to make a contribution to the debate on the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill. There are three or four important points that I need to make. The first thing is as has been said in this House by previous speakers it is an absolute disgrace that we are here discussing this bill right now given that we were given an absolute assurance when the bill was introduced that this Government would sort the whole mess out in 2 years. It said it would need 2 years. I distinctly remember the Minister at the time— 
Hon David Carter 
: Pete Hodgson gave his word. 
JOHN CARTER 
: It was about the only thing he could give because he has nothing else to give—and that obviously did not work either. The point is that it has been 2 years and what has happened? Nothing! Absolutely nothing! Now the Government is saying that it needs another 9 months. I am happy to wager that we will be back here in 9 months’ time debating another extension. We will be taking up the time of the House using taxpayers’ money and having to listen to my colleagues like Phil Heatley explain why this should not be happening at the same time as the Government is determined to ram this sort of stuff through. It is just not good enough. It is not good governance. It is deplorable. 
Hon David Carter 
: It’s not governance at all. 
JOHN CARTER 
: It is not governance at all as my colleague David Carter says. 
There are a couple of issues that I have not heard anyone mention and I want to bring them into the debate. We are now seeing in regions like Northland—and indeed across the country—as part of this move regional councils going around advertising and having meetings about things called “AMAs”. I had a group of people come into the constituency clinic in Kaitaia on Monday. Those people were quite perturbed. They had brought in maps showing what had been proposed by the regional council. I must say that the council had tried under quite difficult circumstances to do its best with the issue but the problem is that councils are not getting support from the Government. The major concern is that aquaculture management areas are being advertised as “AMAs” because that is what the regional councils have been told to advertise them as and no one knows what an “AMA” is. 
Hon Member 
: So they don’t turn up. 
JOHN CARTER 
: So nobody turns up. In fact what happened up in Hauhora where this meeting took place was that somebody rang up Fish and Game after about half an hour and asked whether its members knew that the meeting was on. Three or four groups of people were invited but not the people directly affected—not the fishermen or the landowners. There were one or two people whom the regional council thought it had to invite so it let those people know about the meeting but most of the public did not know. So members of Fish and Game and one or two other people heard about it—by sheer chance—went along to the meeting and started asking some questions. 
The upshot was that the regional council postponed that meeting and held another one. Word of mouth got around and in the meantime the local people held a meeting themselves and there was a hall full of people who were suddenly concerned about what was being proposed. A significant part of their harbour and a whole chunk of their coastline was to be put aside for aquaculture purposes. Of course they were interested in it. They wanted to know. They wanted to be told. They have a right to have a say. They do not want a Government like this just ramming those things through and interfering with the rights and the usage that they have had for years but that is what is happening. It is being done by stealth. 
We have to be concerned about that. It would have been far better for this Government to have gone out there and said: “Listen. You people in New Zealand need to know that we are going to set this bay aside for fishing and commercial fishing purposes so that people can run their aquacultural commercial fishing enterprise here and you need to know about it.” But oh no not this lot! They are sneaky as! I know—and I know that my colleague Phil Heatley will confirm it—that there will be places right across New Zealand where the regional councils had meetings to which no one turned up because no one knew about them. The consequence is that these aquaculture management areas may well be passed and people will find out in a year or two’s time that they have suddenly got some sort of marine farm out in front of their bay or in their harbour inlet that they did not know about. I am absolutely concerned that this sort of legislation does not help people to know what is going on in their backyards. 
Even more important is that as we see in the Waikere Inlet there is now a conflict between aquaculture—in this case oyster farming—and residential development. 
Hon Chris Carter 
: And Maori. 
JOHN CARTER 
: And a number of other issues as well. But quite honestly they are not compatible. Somewhere somebody has to sit down—before we pass legislation and before we do the resource management—and decide whether we want to have an aquaculture industry. That is the first question to ask. Somebody needs to make that decision. If so then someone has to be brave enough to stand up and say that yes we do want to have an aquaculture industry and therefore we are going to set aside areas of New Zealand—on the sea and in inner harbours if necessary—where that will be the activity and there will be no residential development sewerage outlets or activities that will pollute those farms because they are not compatible. 
That is what happened in the Waikere Inlet. That is a classic example. Over a period of time—20 or 30 years—oyster farmers developed beds. Twenty or 30 years ago there was the odd bach dotted around. Some of them had a couple of outhouses but most of them were not significantly used so it was never a problem. Well over recent times there has been significant development and suddenly there is a problem with sewage—both from yachties and from some of the residential developments. There have certainly been problems with the Kawakawa sewage. Other things have also impacted on the oyster farmers’ livelihoods. 
The upshot is that there is now a conflict to the stage that most of those farmers up there have gone bankrupt. It is not their fault but it has become a major problem. Indeed it is an issue that is going before the courts to see whether it can be solved. But it will not be because the two things are not compatible. One cannot have residential development—which has to have outlets for sewage and all sorts of things in order to dispose of effluent and human waste—right alongside a fishing industry. 
Someone needs to sit down and say that yes we want to have an industry and yes we will be firm enough to say which areas will be set aside for the industry and which areas will be developed and by the way folks that means no residential development here because the two things are not compatible. 
An aquaculture industry would have to be developed through resource management and through this sort of legislation and when I see this Government coming back to the House with legislation containing proposals that are credible and that make some progress with this sort of thing then members will find that we will be able to make a positive contribution. But all we are getting today is: “Hey folks we just want another 9 months’ delay.” 
That is just not good enough. I say to the Minister and to the Government that that is not acceptable. That is why our party—as well as a number of other parties in the House I am sure—will be opposing this legislation. The Government has had 2 years to get this sorted out and I have heard nothing that convinces me that over that 2-year period it has made any progress. Quite honestly one would have thought that it could have because it has done nothing else. Surely to goodness in that 2-year period the Government could have made some progress with this industry and done some of the things that I have spoken about but I do not see any sign of it. My colleagues are shaking their heads and saying that they have not seen any signs of it. [ 
Interruption 
] Certainly another 9 months will not add to it. I am not convinced that it will. There is no reason why National should support this bill and we intend to vote against it.