Carter David: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Carter David: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:615;Page:11608] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 With a contribution like that and an endorsement from the junior whip the newly appointed Minister of Fisheries David Benson-Pope embarks on his ministerial career without much chance of success. I rise to say that the National Party will certainly be voting against the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill. I say at the outset that this legislation shows graphically what a shambolic mess this Government is now in. This legislation as my colleague Nick Smith has just pointed out is the very first legislation under the name of the new Minister of Fisheries the Hon David Benson-Pope and it does nothing to help fishing. It continues the inhibiting of a very vital industry to this country. 
During the shambolic proceedings of the last couple of weeks the attention was certainly on the fact that Lianne Dalziel lost her job without ceremony but attention should also have been focused on the fact that Pete Hodgson lost his job as the Minister of Fisheries. It is little wonder he lost his job as Minister of Fisheries because the industry—this industry that is vital to New Zealand—had totally lost confidence in the Minister and his ability to shepherd this very important industry through its processes. I quote from a question in the House on 29 July 2003 when the Minister was asked for an assurance that the 2-year moratorium he had imposed on the aquaculture industry would not be further extended. 
Phil Heatley 
: Who asked that question? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: That question was asked by my colleague Phil Heatley the National Party spokesperson on fisheries. Pete Hodgson’s response was: “As I told the marine-farming industry last week my aim is to avoid any extension of the moratorium and I expect to know in a few weeks whether I will succeed.” Nearly 12 months on members know that Pete Hodgson has failed to succeed. We know that he has broken another promise and we also know that amongst the flak around the Lianne Dalziel issue for misleading the public of New Zealand the Prime Minister surreptitiously took the opportunity to sack Pete Hodgson who has been the most ineffective Minister of Fisheries that Parliament—and the industry—has seen in my time here. He has been replaced by the Hon David Benson-Pope who comes to the House today with the first bill in his name and what does it do for the industry? It puts the brakes on an industry currently worth $320 million in revenue and $260 million in export receipts and we are debating it on the day—as Nick Smith pointed out—that we have seen the worst trade deficit figures since the mid 1980s which was the last time the country suffered under a Labour Government. 
I take the opportunity of hoping that the Minister will assure the House that the moratorium now being extended to the end of this calendar year will not require further extension. No Mr Benson-Pope will not give that assurance to the House today. We discussed it at the select committee. I was concerned about whether we would be back in the House before the end of the year debating a further extension and we were assured by Labour members on that select committee that that would not happen. I doubt that. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What does the Minister say? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I asked the Minister and he sat dumbfounded. He did not have any officials around him to help him with that question so the House does not know whether the Minister has any confidence at all that this moratorium will not require extension. But I think it will. I say that because for months we have been promised the new legislation associated with aquaculture. For months we have been told that it is being drafted and discussed with the industry. I might add that it is the height of rudeness that at this stage the Government has not bothered to discuss the legislation with the members of the select committee—certainly not the National members. It has not tabled it in Parliament. 
Phil Heatley 
: Or regional councils. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Mr Heatley says that it has not discussed it with regional councils—the very organisations that will be required to implement it. So I suspect despite assurances from the previous Minister of Fisheries that the legislation has not been drafted and that it will not be tabled in the House in the near future. We all know why—the aquaculture legislation has become tied up in the seabed and foreshore issue and we know that the Government does not have a policy on that. Helen Clark says one thing and the very next day Margaret Wilson in the House says something completely different. I do not know what the policy is on the seabed and foreshore. David Benson-Pope nods his head to say that he does not know either. I accept that because I do not think anybody does. 
Until that issue is resolved the Government cannot define the aquaculture legislation necessary table it in the House or get it before the select committee so that we can call for submissions and give the opportunity to the industry to comment on the legislation so that we can try to get the industry alive again. 
One of the most moving submissions we had was from a man from Christchurch Brad Govan who manages Pacifica Seafoods—in Mr Anderton’s electorate interestingly. He said that he has been wooed by South American countries and by Australia asking him with his expertise to go away from New Zealand and establish aquaculture in Chile and Australia. Mr Benson-Pope is surprised by that. He has had that portfolio only a couple of weeks so maybe he was not aware of that submission. I invite the Minister to have a look at the submissions because while I quote Brad Govan he was but one of many people in the aquaculture industry who said that the opportunities for them to establish business in countries other than New Zealand were available. In some places they were being encouraged with payments. 
What is the Government’s response? It is: “Well if they want to go somewhere else that’s their business.” I have a quote from the previous Minister—no wonder he was sacked—in which he said: “Overseas developments were just good business in some cases.” What he is saying is that if those companies want to go overseas to establish aquaculture because this Government does not appreciate their interests and their ability to make money for New Zealand then that is a good business decision. With a comment like that by Pete Hodgson it is no wonder that Helen Clark took the opportunity to fire him. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Take the Marlborough Sounds to England. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: That silly member David Cunliffe said that we should take the Marlborough Sounds to England. We do get a lot of inane comments chucked around from Ministers on occasion but that has to be the most stupid one I have ever heard. Maybe that is the Labour Party’s policy! David Cunliffe should take the next call and confirm whether that is the case. 
We are talking about an important industry employing well over 4000 people with the ability and the will to expand and we have a Government that says that it cannot sort out the problem so it will slap a moratorium on the industry and not allow it to expand. That is what has happened. The Government’s job is to govern. Moratoriums are what Governments do when they do not have solutions. I say to David Benson-Pope that he should develop a solution and get it to the House because I do not want to be debating another extension at the end of this calendar year.