Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Brownlee Gerry: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:618;Page:13845] 
4.  
GERRY BROWNLEE (Deputy Leader—National) 
 to the  
Minister of Fisheries 
: Does the recent aquaculture proposal allow Maori to tender for aquaculture space from the general pool as well as being allocated a blanket 20 percent of new aquaculture space; if so why? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Minister of Fisheries) 
: 
 Yes this proposal does allow Maori to make their own business investment decisions in relation to marine farming in addition to the proposed allocation of 20 percent of new aquaculture space. Just as Maori individuals families companies or entities are able to purchase fisheries quota in addition to any allocation they are entitled to under the National Government - negotiated 1992 fisheries deed of settlement this Government will not constrain Maori business and economic development. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Do Ngati Awa of the Bay of Plenty have a preferential right to purchase up to 5 percent of further space and do Ngati Tama of Taranaki have a preferential right to purchase up to 10 percent as well as both being part of the blanket allocation and having the right to tender into the general pool; if so how does the Minister justify specific Maori entities having three bites of the cherry? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I am grateful for the opportunity to clarify this issue for the member. He is clearly referring to the provisions of some historical pre - September 1992 treaty settlements where as one of the forms of redress iwi have been provided with a right of first refusal to up to 10 percent in some cases of coastal space that is tendered. This is a preferential right to purchase up to a certain proportion rather than an allocation as such. Maori are required to purchase the authorisation at market price and are not provided with additional money to do so. The provision for example in the NgaiTahu settlement is contained in schedule 105 of the NgaiTahu Claims Settlement Act. I would be pleased to provide the member with a copy if he wishes one. The NgaiTahu settlement was of course negotiated by the National Government. 
Russell Fairbrother 
: Is the Minister’s newly announced proposal a way forward for the aquaculture industry and is it a response to the unfinished business of any previous Government? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Yes. This proposal does present a way forward for the aquaculture industry and I must say I fully agree with the editor of the Christchurch  
Press 
 when he said on 19 June: “The criticism from National is especially hollow given its record. In essence the present aquaculture proposal mirrors the 1992 Maori fisheries settlement … Indeed aquaculture might be regarded as the unfinished business of 1992.” The quote continues: “Even as National’s current Maori Affairs spokesman Gerry Brownlee is condemning the Government Graham is saying that the marine farming plans are in line with the 1992 settlement.” 
Metiria Turei 
: Does the Minister agree that the Opposition claim that the 20 percent is a foreshore-seabed trade-off is completely ridiculous when no person Maori or Pakeha would willingly exchange property rights for a convoluted Resource Management Act consent and plan-change process—through traditionally hostile local authorities—for extremely limited marine space for a restricted period of time and for which he or she must then pay coastal occupation charges which is hardly a fair trade-off? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is an assertion about another party’s policy and the Minister has no direct responsibility for that policy. The member did not word the question in accordance with the Standing Orders. 
Metiria 
Turei 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Do I have the opportunity to reword the question so that it fits within the Standing Orders? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member wants to use up another question to do so she can. I will allow her to do that. However that is another question she is asking. I will let her do it straightaway. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: What role did Trevor Mallard the Coordinating Minister Race Relations play over the allocation issue; and has the Minister of Fisheries received written advice from Minister Mallard over the impact of a 20 percent special allocation to Maori? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I made it clear to the questioner in my answer yesterday that the issues he raised would clearly be addressed as part of that process and I can only stress that no formal final Cabinet position has yet been achieved in that regard. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Can the Minister confirm that under the Government’s foreshore and seabed proposals where Maori have ancestral-connection orders to the coastline they have a veto opportunity on areas for marine aquaculture; and that the only way the Government can be certain that the industry will expand is to create an incentive for those areas to be large by ensuring that Maori get 20 percent of them? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In so far as that question directly refers to the Minister’s portfolio the Minister can respond. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I have no responsibility for that legislation. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Minister about areas that are for marine farming. The Government has made a big play in recent days of saying that it wants to progress the 20 percent allocation to Maori so the industry itself can progress. For the Minister to suggest he has no knowledge of or responsibility as a Minister for legislation that will materially affect his own portfolio is at the least a stretch. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is the Minister’s answer. If he says that that is his answer. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Well he is obviously incompetent. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. The member cannot make that sort of comment. I think that denigrates Parliament. I ask the member to withdraw that comment. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I withdraw. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. How many times have people in this Parliament referred to Ministers as being incompetent and not had to withdraw their references? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Not on a point of order. As far as I am concerned on a point of order that comment is inappropriate. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I want to draw to your attention that my colleague’s question was in respect of the ancestral-connection changes to the Resource Management Act. Of course the Minister concerned is not only the Minister of Fisheries but also the Associate Minister for the Environment responsible for the very issue that my colleague Mr Brownlee raises with regard to aquaculture and the ancestral-connection amendments to the Resource Management Act. I think it is reasonable that the deputy leader of the National Party obtains a response to that very reasonable question. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: Ministers often hold more than one portfolio but the question is addressed to them only within the portfolio that question relates to. Someone cannot ask me as the Minister of Finance a question about my duties as Leader of the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I cannot second-guess Ministers’ replies. That is not my job. My job is to see that a reply is within the Standing Orders and it was. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: Can the Minister inform the House whether there was ever any discussion or any report relating to the matter of the 20 percent allocation that mentioned considerations around the seabed and foreshore legislation and its effects? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Certainly not that I am aware of at this point.