Carter David: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Carter David: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15129] 
Hon DAVID CARTER (National) 
: 
 As this legislation goes through the Committee stage members need to understand that in the last few days a substantial Supplementary Order Paper No. 246 was tabled in the House and that effectively it guts one of the most controversial parts of the legislation. Today in the House I moved that that particular Supplementary Order Paper go back to the Primary Production Committee in order for that committee to examine it quickly and report back to the House within a couple of weeks. That would not have delayed the passing of the legislation significantly at all. The Minister—David Benson-Pope—and Michael Cullen the Minister of Finance denied leave of the House for that Supplementary Order Paper to go back to the select committee. We wanted to have a chance to examine the content of one of the most substantial Supplementary Order Papers that have ever been tabled in this House and that was denied by the Minister of Fisheries and the Minister of Finance because they did not want it to be scrutinised. 
Those Ministers know that Supplementary Order Paper 246 is about as big a mess as the original bill was. They know that if this legislation is scrutinised they will go through the same embarrassment they went through at the select committee when the select committee worked on a Government bill in very good faith to try to tidy it up and as Doug Woolerton said did its bit very very well. We were bogged down because the legislation was such a mess and I personally asked the Minister for the committee to be given another week as we might then have been able to make something out of that very messy legislation. He denied us the opportunity to have a week’s extension and the legislation went back to the House but only after it had been lost at the select committee. The Government was done over with regard to its own legislation in the select committee because it was such a mess. What was then amazing was that when the legislation went back into the House the Green member Ian Ewen-Street appeared to have a change of heart. I think that was because the Supplementary Order Paper has a clause that effectively would undo the whole issue about the highly migratory species. 
 What the National Party argued was this: why should we put fish that are caught outside New Zealand territorial limits into the quota management system when there is no need to do so? The Minister argued that in the future the Government may negotiate a regional fisheries management plan which may be the solution for the sustainability of those species. We were told it would be 5 to 10 or maybe 15 years before that happens and that is why the National Party opposed the bill. The sneaky Supplementary Order Paper effectively achieves that. It passes the legislation in substantive order—it gives the ability to put those species into the quota management system—and then curtails the Minister’s ability to do that because there are no regional fisheries management plans in existence as we speak so the species cannot come in. 
Why is that important? The reason it is important of course is that here is another opportunity for Maori to claim 20 percent of the quota for highly migratory species caught by New Zealand operators off the coast of Fiji. That is what Larry Baldock the United Future spokesperson will be supporting if he votes for this legislation and that is what Ian Ewen-Street as a member of the Green Party will be supporting if the Greens vote for it. We have had various interpretations of the 1992 deed of settlement but I just refer members to clause 4.2 which quite specifically states that Maori endorse the quota management system and acknowledge it is a lawful and an appropriate regime for the sustainable management of commercial fishing in New Zealand—in New Zealand. The quota management system was always for New Zealand territorial waters—the 200-mile limit. It was never envisaged that the quota management system would be extended by the Ministry of Fisheries to international waters and more significantly if that was to occur that Maori would suddenly have a claim extending well past New Zealand’s economic zone and into the waters of foreign countries. 
This legislation is an absolute outrage. The Supplementary Order Paper is an outrage and the Minister should either stand and take the opportunity to answer the questions that are raised or allow the Supplementary Order Paper to go back to the select committee so that it can be adequately examined.