Fitzsimons Jeanette: Fiordland Marine Management Bill — First Reading 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Fiordland Marine Management Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:622;Page:18123] 
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 Fiordland National Park is the largest area of true wilderness remaining in New Zealand. It has a very special interface between land and sea. Its national and international importance are so great that in 1986 it was given world heritage status by the World Conservation Union. It has ecological features that are simply unique in the true meaning of that word. Because of the fresh water that runs on top of the saltwater which prevents the light penetrating through that lens we have extraordinary corals that are normally visible only at enormous depths where divers cannot go and they flourish in those fiords. It is an ecological treasure. But despite that and despite Fiordland’s long status as a national park and its many years as a world heritage park only two small areas of the sea are protected. There are only two small marine reserves. 
In addition to that need for additional marine reserves the fisheries have been in decline for some time. If we talk to old-timers we hear them say more than 10 crayfish pots were regarded as ridiculously unnecessary because they could not get around more than 10 pots before the first one was full again—they simply could not pull them in fast enough. That is not how the cray fishery is now. The blue cod fishery down there is so threatened that two whole fiords have had to be closed in a rahui while the fishery rebuilds. There is conflict between charter boats recreational fishers and commercial fishers who are competing for the same fish. 
I want to add my congratulations too to the local community which has sorted out an approach to deal with those issues. The local people have pulled off an extraordinary achievement and I congratulate them on it. But let us be honest that what initiated this process was the fear of a proposal for a Fiordland marine park and a determination on the part of local people to take matters into their own hands first. Initially they determined that there would be no representative of environmental or conservation interests on their group—no representative whatsoever. It was not just the Forest and Bird Protection Society and it was not just national organisations that were totally shut out; local people with a longstanding concern for marine conservation were also shut out. Initially the group called itself the Guardians of Fiordland’s Fisheries and Marine Environment. It was entirely a fisheries resource-sharing arrangement that it was into. That is not to say that many of the people concerned did not have a real love of the marine environment and a desire to protect it but the fishing issue was of primary concern to them. When the group’s first discussion document went out for comment it was clear that it considered only fisheries and how to protect a few areas the group called “china shops” where the corals and other wildlife were so precarious that simply dropping an anchor in the wrong place was capable of doing a great deal of damage. 
Other members of the community looked at that document and said it was not good enough. They said Fiordland was actually an area that needed to have a balance between fisheries and marine conservation and there were other interests that needed to be in there. Minister Hodgson and I give him full credit for this and got Alan Mark put on the committee. Professor Mark is a person with the skills to work alongside people and the proof of Alan Mark’s skills in that area is the fact that after coming into that group at the last minute and negotiating with the community the group has provided an outcome that is very significantly better for conservation than it would have been. Alan Mark has brought all of that group on side. I object very strongly to the slanderous and ignorant comments about Professor Mark that were made by Gerry Eckhoff a few minutes ago. 
There are some very good outcomes from that process. There are restrictions on fishing methods that damage unique ecologies. There are reductions in take for threatened fisheries so that they can rebuild. Commercial fishers have been pushed out to the fiord entrances in order to protect the inner fiords for recreational fishing or biodiversity reasons. Codes of practice are to be set up to protect “china shop” areas dealing with things such as anchoring and ballast water. The outcome enshrines kaitiakitanga and not just for customary fishers but so that NgaiTahu can be fully represented for other management issues as well. The bill creates eight new marine reserves. They are small. There are no whole-fiord marine reserves so there is no complete representativeness. No outer fiords are protected as marine reserves and there is not a full range of protected eco-systems. But the result is a lot better than it might have been had Pete Hodgson not put Alan Mark on that committee. It is a concern that new applications for marine reserves are outlawed for 7 years no matter what needs may become apparent in the meantime. But there is a review process in place whereby that could change if necessary. 
The biggest outcome though—the biggest success—is the community buy-in. It actually does not matter what one does in law because if the community does not respect the law it will not accept it. Of all the places in New Zealand Fiordland must be the hardest place in which to get enforcement of fisheries regulations and conservation regulations. So this is a big success. It is not everything it might have been but it is a good compromise among those who have taken part in the process. It is actually an example to the Government of how to do things when there is great contention. Many times this year I have stood in this House and said to the Government over the foreshore and seabed legislation that it should just get around the table with Maori and see whether it could negotiate something that they would accept. 
I want to finish by quoting a comment made by Mark Solomon in the same article from  
North and South  
that Gerry Eckhoff has been quoting. Mark Solomon was shaking his head in amazement at the achievement in Fiordland and said: “If we dealt with the seabed and foreshore issue like this we wouldn’t have had a problem.” That is what Maori leaders around the country were saying and it is very sad that that opportunity was not taken.