Eckhoff Gerrard: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:15190] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 Part 2 as previous speakers have alluded is all about mussel spat. One of the most interesting aspects of sitting on the Primary Production Committee which I did with my colleagues was asking the ministry officials why mussel spat should come into the quota management system. Everybody knows that the ACT party is totally in favour of the quota management system. Well we found out that the ministry has no idea where mussel spat comes from that it has no idea about the volumes of spat and that it has no idea about the breeding cycles of the stuff. 
I asked what the concern was. The concern was about the eight or nine people who have a permit rushing down the beach in their vehicles once the spat is running. The ministry was concerned about the impact on the sand—on the environment. That came directly from Ken Smith of the Minister of Conservation’s office. The Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand put in a submission to the ministry stating it was very concerned about that. Pardon me but do buses not roar down Ninety Mile Beach? Do motorbikes and four-wheel drives of all shapes sizes and descriptions not do that? Yet we had ministry officials concerned about a handful of people—eight people—jumping into a vehicle when the spat is running and popping out to get whatever spat they can. That was the rationale I picked up for the bringing of mussel spat into the quota management system. 
I share some of the concern expressed by Mr Peters a moment or two ago about handing over the allocation of spat to a very very small number of people—eight entities if one likes. I flag that as the mussel spat industry burgeons such a situation could potentially enable the capture of the industry and price-jack it. It could well end up with some sort of cartel amongst the eight individuals who have an exclusive right to that public resource—nobody else is allowed to go out there and capture it—deciding to jack up the price. 
 Or it could be that the mussel companies will make an offer that the catchers of mussel spat cannot refuse. Those companies would then get exclusive use of the mussel spat and could potentially jack up the price to all new entrants into the mussel industry. So there are some very real concerns that I have around the availability of mussel spat and around what might happen in the future. 
As I said earlier when it comes to the issue of the sustainability of a species there is no doubt whatsoever that the quota management system is the appropriate mechanism and vehicle to manage it with. But because of eight people rushing down Ninety Mile Beach the ministry thought that no it had to bring muscle spat into the quota management system. There is one more reason: according to the deed of settlement 20 percent of any fish stock brought into the quota management system will go to Maori. That I think has to be the main reason. So those with existing permits will lose 20 percent which will go to something called the Maori Fisheries Commission and that commission will decide on what will happen to it. I am opposed to that as I am sure are most members of the Opposition. This is a very small industry and there is absolutely no need for that. According to the ministry there are no concerns around the issue of sustainability which according to everybody these days is the huge issue. 
So if there are no concerns surrounding the viability and continuance of the mussel spat doing its thing where is the problem? Why bring it in? I would like the Minister to address the question about the impact on the environment and the effect that has on mussel spat. I wonder whether the Minister might take a call—just a brief one.