Sage Eugenie; Parker DavidHon EUGENIE SAGE (Green): Thank you Madam Chair and can I thank the Minister for his as always very thoughtful contribution. I just want to put it on record because I have been a bit concerned by some of the comments made by National members that the Primary Production Committee did not unanimously support pre-set decision rules. There was not unanimity in the submissions around pre-set decision rules. There was a lot of concern that came through in a number of submissions about how the regime would work. And there were comments made in the submission of the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition for example about avoiding committing to a management regime with insufficient detail and consultation to judge its effectiveness through these pre-set decision rules. There was a real concern about the fact that it would really embed a focus on single stock management when a lot of the desire in the environmental sector and amongst recreational fishers is to move to ecosystem based management but pre-set decision rules wouldn't do that. There was also a lot of concern that the way they would operate had not been well consulted on with stakeholders. And as the Minister has noted the Prime Minister's Chief Science Advisor in her report which Todd Muller talked about as well this morning this lack of trust across the sector is increased if you don't have transparency in decision making. So if you have a decision-making tool where the public cannot have a say where it's done behind closed doors then there will be increased distrust. And that distrust of the Ministry for Primary Industries and Fisheries New Zealand is partly a result of things like Operation Hippocamp and Achilles and it's partly because there is a strong view that the ministry has been captured by the fishing industry. I acknowledge all of the mahi of officials but that perception exists and if you move to a less transparent decision-making mode you're only going to embed that because things happen that are not in the light of day.The whole move to put cameras in place is taking a longer time than was initially anticipated when it was first proposed. There is a lot in this bill that can take up the time of officials and the sector to improve fisheries management without doing the pre-set decision rules and there's always the opportunity for the Minister or a future Minister to go out do more consultation and consider a mechanism in future. But the question I wanted to ask the Minister was that concerns also came through in submissions around the harvest strategy standard 2008 which was overdue for review in 2013. As a result of setting the pre-set decision rules aside in the bill is there any intention to actually review that and update it and bring it more in line with an ecosystem-based management approach?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for Oceans and Fisheries): Thank you Madam Chair. The member is right that the harvest strategy does need a refresh. Apart from anything else litigation in respect of the terekee or of the terakahi decision—tarakihi decision—Mark Cameron: Terekee"!Hon DAVID PARKER: "Terekee"—ha ha! Sorry about my pronunciation; I always get that wrong. There was a discovery that there's actually an error in it and even after all these years it's only just been noticed through the litigation that Forest & Bird took last year in respect of the decision that was overturned. That decision overturning the decision is itself under appeal. So we await the decision of a higher court in that regard. But yes the harvest strategy will be reviewed. It's not a matter of prime urgency but it is the intention of the ministry to do that. Can I say some things in defence of the ministry? Because I don't want to leave the impression that I'm distrustful of the ministry. My experiences of the ministry have been very good and I find them open. One of the things that I have asked of the ministry is that we actually own the past in respect of Hippocamp and Achilles and that we respond to it as we are now in order to build trust between the ministry and different aspects of the fishing sectors including the fishing industry but also the recreational and customary sectors. I find the ministry responsive to that and I will soon be turning a page myself to say: look we've dealt with those issues we now have transparency via cameras on boats and we've learnt the lessons of the past; we can move on and build levels of trust. But my judgment was that if we persisted with the pre-set decision rules we would actually be taking ourselves backwards in that regard. And that's why for what I think is a relatively tangential part of the fisheries management system I'm proposing through that Supplementary Order Paper that we pull it from the bill. That doesn't mean to say as the member Eugenie Sage has already indicated that it can't come back and we can't work this issue through and try and engender a bit more support for it maybe have a few more safeguards or some oversights in it but at the moment we're not proposing to push it through."