Baldock Larry: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Baldock Larry: Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine  Management Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:19895] 
LARRY BALDOCK (United Future) 
: 
 I rise on behalf of United Future on the third reading of the Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine Management Bill soon to become an Act. First I echo the comments made by the Hon Marian Hobbs in appreciating all the players who have been involved in bringing the legislation to this point. They include some outstanding people who are real pioneers really in a new concept of the way we may deal with the management of our inshore areas and the precious parts of our New Zealand coastline. I commend them for the work they have done. 
This bill establishes eight new marine reserves—approximately 10000 hectares. It is not an inconsiderable amount of marine area. But it is disappointing that instead of hearing all members in this House celebrating this achievement there is one party that continually whinges about there not being enough in the way of protection. I refer of course to the Green Party. King Solomon many many years ago when he was writing his proverbs said that there were six things that could never be satisfied—and I am sure that if the Green Party had been around in those days he would have said there were seven. We have a Green Party that is never satisfied no matter how many marine reserves are established. 
Many people said that it covers only 1 percent of the area but they did not acknowledge that it covers actually 13 percent of the inner fiords area which is a significant amount to go into marine reserve protection. People often go on about there not being enough marine protection and a press release issued yesterday by Mr Weeber of the Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand bemoaned the fact that we are well behind Australia when it comes to marine protection and that Australia has over 6 percent of its marine area in no-take reserves. Now of the two things that are not taken into account in that statement the first is that nearly all of that 6 percent would be in the Great Barrier Reef reserve— 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: It’s multi-use. 
LARRY BALDOCK 
: Yes and it does not fully exclude fishing in all parts of it anyway. Secondly although in New Zealand we may not have as much area in marine reserves we have a quota management system that is a form of marine protection and extends out to the 200-mile exclusive economic zone. If that were not some form of protection I would wonder why we even had the quota management system. So it is not always good to make comparisons of ourselves with our neighbours. 
Mr Weeber identified an opinion poll showing that 95 percent of New Zealanders wanted marine reserves. Therefore we can be sure as we pass this bill today that a great number of New Zealanders will be happy. But that poll brings on for me an inspiration for perhaps another Tui billboard message which would say: “95 % of New Zealanders want a marine reserve in their favourite fishing spot—Yeah right”; or “95% of New Zealanders want a marine reserve in their backyard—Yeah right”. Of course when we have polls that ask questions about that we have to make sure they ask the right questions. 
Jill Pettis 
: Yes but they like them there when they want to sell their property. 
LARRY BALDOCK 
: Yes everybody wants a marine reserve somewhere else but if we were to ask whether they wanted one in their area I think we would get a much lower percentage than 95 percent. I think that the very process the guardians have been through which has been a very lengthy process is confirmation of the fact that we may all want marine reserves around our coastline but when it comes to saying where they will be a great deal of consultation is required as well as the “gifts and gains” process that has been part of this whole initiative. We also need always to take into account that concept of “not in my backyard thank you very much”. 
So I again commend the guardians for having guided their local residents and stakeholders through this process and for having been able to decide where the marine reserves would be. Some complained that not a whole sound or fiord was in marine reserve protection but some arms of the sounds—almost complete arms—are in marine protection. I was sorry that Mr Shirley was not able to make it down there but after my having been down there and having a look I think significantly large areas are protected in order to preserve the areas that people are concerned about. 
United Future welcomes the strengthening of the guardians’ position in the bill as it is now nearing completion and going to its third reading vote in a short while. We believe that the guardians are integral to the success of the legislation and we also look forward to the Minister’s review in 5 years’ time. Perhaps as I mentioned earlier we may see a recommendation there that some more democratic process may creep into the future appointment of guardians in the area which we think would be an improvement. 
I welcome the commitment from the Minister of Fisheries the Hon David Benson-Pope who has acknowledged through the Hon Marian Hobbs in this debate in the House that he will consult with the ministerial advisory panel of recreational fishermen regarding the regulations to be changed in relation to recreational fishing bag limits prior to making those decisions because normally those regulations would have another consultation period. In relation to his statement that there was no need for that consultation because there had already been consultation I think it is helpful to hear him say that he will at least take some advice from that new panel he is establishing. I hope that further studies to be carried out in the area will give better science on the fish stocks and the habits of fish species there and perhaps will lead to a review of the regulations in due time. 
This bill is a good example of why United Future’s proposals to restructure the Department of Conservation are a good idea. Local people are capable of making good agreements to preserve their marine areas without the department initiating and driving the process. It would be a vast improvement in New Zealand I believe if the Department of Conservation were relieved of its advocacy role to concentrate on managing the conservation estate and marine areas once established through a community process that everyone could own from the very beginning. That is the hallmark of this whole bill and we commend it to the House.