Goff Phil: Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoff Phil: Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 January 2014. Volume:696;Page:15666. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon PHIL GOFF (Labour—Mt Roskill): Former Labour Prime Minister David Lange once famously described New Zealand as being a strategic dagger pointed at the heart of Antarctica. He was making a very obvious point to I think the geriatric generals at the time which was that if anybody was planning to invade New Zealand on the way to somewhere else the only place that they were on the way to was the subantarctic waters and Antarctica.But we have had a very special relationship with those areas. They are part of our exclusive economic zone. We have particular responsibilities for the Subantarctic Islands. We have responsibility for the fisheries that are there and we have special responsibilities for Antarctica. That was reflected in the fact that New Zealand was an original signatory to the Antarctic Treaty back in the 1950s. New Zealand would very much like to be seen as a world leader in protecting the environment in these areas. We had the chance to do this when in 1998 the areas that we are talking about the Subantarctic Islands and their territorial seas were declared to have World Heritage status.World Heritage status created special responsibilities for New Zealand. We were the guardians for the world community to ensure that these areas were properly protected. I was proudly part of the fifth Labour Government which started to make some very important inroads into the protection of those areas. For example in 2003 we moved to fully protect as a marine reserve the area round the Auckland Islands which are part of this widespread island group. In 2007 we moved to prohibit both bottom trawling and dredging. There is an important reason why we did that. We looked at the northern hemisphere and we saw how the northern hemisphere countries had turned their oceans into deserts wiping out the fish life. Having wiped out the fish life in the northern hemisphere the next target would be the southern hemisphere including the areas forwhich we had responsibility. So those important steps were taken to protect the Auckland Islands as a marine reserve area and to stop bottom trawling and dredging.Then in 2006 the Government brought together the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries and said that it needed a marine protected areas policy—a marine protected areas policy—which was the foundation for the legislation that we are looking at tonight the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. To develop that policy in 2008 we set up the Subantarctic Islands Marine Protection Planning Forum. That was to bring in expert and public opinion to go through a thorough consultation process to determine how we could protect the islands and the seas round them. The islands themselves were not so much of a problem because they are protected under the 1977 Reserves Act. So we could protect the pristine beautiful and bleak nature of those islands but we needed further legislation to deal with the marine areas around them.The islands that we are talking about are very special places. Antipodes Island which inMāori—if I have got my pronunciation right and Moana Mackey will correct me if I have not—is MoutereMahue. What does that mean? It means an abandoned island. Well when you look at the Antipodes you cannot imagine that it was ever inhabited but the term “abandoned island” gives you a sense of the bleakness but also of the beauty of that place. The Bounty Islands inMāori are MoutereHauriri—angry wind—and that tells you something about that area of the world and the nature of it which is inhospitable but nevertheless because it was so inhospitable it was an area that remained ecologically pristine. Very few human beings intruded on that area and therefore the ecosystems were intact. Our obligation in this generation is to continue to protect that ecosystem.Campbell Island has another meaning inMāori—Moutere Ihupuku—which is “nose and belly”. I have tried everywhere to find out why it is called “nose and belly”. I think I talked to Shane Jones about it at one time and Shane Jones said something about it reflecting that Government policy was belly up on this area.All of these islands are very special and the areas around them are equally special. When I look at the regulatory impact statement on this bill it makes these comments and I think they are worth reflecting upon: “each of the island groups” it says “is highly distinct biologically geologically and geographically. [The] Antipodes Island rocky reefs support subantarctic shallowsubtidal marine communities dominated by encrusting coralline algae the rocky reefs at the Bounty Islands are dominated by filter and suspension-feeding invertebrates such as encrusting sponges barnacles and mussels.” It says this: “Each island group also supports its own suite of threatened and/or endemic species living or breeding only on and around these remote islands. The subantarctic islands and their territorial seas have been subject to minimal human impact and are therefore near-pristine …”. The reason that we need this legislation is to ensure that it stays that way.We have progressed this legislation at each point. I spoke at the first reading in support of it. Our members on the Local Government and Environment Committee did a great job in examining and supporting it. My only regret is that it is 4 years since the forum was set up to make progress. I think it is a reflection of the low priority that has been given to environmental protection by this Government that it is has taken 4 years for this legislation to get here today. It is our intention today not to delay the legislation in any way but to ensure it proceeds through its Committee stage and gets its third reading so that it can be brought into effect as soon as possible.If we want to be leaders in the protection of the subantarctic and Antarctic environments we need to act here. I regret that we have not been effective in other areas. We seem to have totally stuffed up if I can use that term the Ross Sea marine protected area which is before the Commission for the Conservation of AntarcticMarine Living Resources group which is trying to protect the fisheries in the Ross Sea. One of the reasons that we stuffed it up is that we failed to coordinate with the Americans in the first instance and it looked more like we wanted to protect our $20 million fishing industry in the area than protect the inherent value of the environment. That lost us credibility in the world because they said: “You’re just like all the other countries. You’re only interested in this for what you can extract out of it.” We have a responsibility as the guardians of this area.I have to agree with my colleague Ruth Dyson on her comments about theMāui’s and the Hector dolphin. Those are the most endangered species in the world but in the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s World Conservation Congress meeting in Korea in 2012 we were one of only two countries that opposed the protection of these dolphins—in our own area. There are 55Māui’s dolphins left and the National Party opposed it. So one of the reasons why we need this legislation to go through with all speed now is to try to resurrect some of our credibility as a country that is worthy of leadership in the subantarctic and Antarctic areas and that is why we are supporting this legislation.This is legislation that was initially promoted not by a National Government but by a Labour Government but was fortunately followed through with all due slowness by this National Government. It is time we had this protection on the books and in legislation. It is time for this legislation to pass.