7. Question No. 7—Oceans and FisheriesDARLEEN TANA ((Independent)) to the Minister for Oceans and FisheriesQuestion No. 7—Oceans and Fisheries7. DARLEEN TANA ((Independent)) to the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries: Does he agree with the statement by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment that the Resource Management (Extended Duration of Coastal Permits for Marine Farms) Amendment Bill is a Bill that is a case of a sledgehammer being used to crack a nut"; if not why not?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Minister for Oceans and Fisheries: On behalf of the Minister no. This bill responds to longstanding and widespread concerns by the aquaculture sector about the costs and uncertainty and mahi—that means work—associated with re-consenting processes for existing marine farms under the Resource Management Act. This process of re-consenting is inhibiting aquaculture growth. These marine farmers many of whom are Māori don't want the unnecessary costs and uncertainty; they want to be allowed to refocus their efforts on investment on jobs and on exports.Darleen Tana: What does he say to councils and environmental non-governmental organisations who consider that the national environmental standards for marine aquaculture are working efficiently and effectively for re-consenting and that a blanket extension of consents for 1200 marine farms by a further 20 years is unnecessary?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Well answering both those two questions the person who first drafted the legislation is the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment namely Simon Upton. This was in 1991. He was told back then it wouldn't work and that parts of it had to be fixed up to ensure that the kinds of exports which we desperately need in a safe environment went ahead. Of course he's entitled to his opinion and so are those other councils except they're dramatically wrong. Why do we have Ngāi Tahu waiting all this time and all this money for a simple resource consent? Why do we have so many other precious operations which will bring wealth to our country to all sorts of people—and parallel the biggest mussel farm in the world now being built in Ōpōtiki and the Māori people down there—why don't we focus on that as being our purpose rather than this constant big-city small-minded complaint?Darleen Tana: How does he reconcile blanket-consenting 1200 marine farms by another 20 years pushing aside environmental standards and upholding the Crown's obligations to Te Tiriti o Waitangi with free-trade obligations and particularly chapters that relate to mauri of marine ecosystems and kaitiakitanga?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: That is not a matter of reconciliation because when you stand up and by way of a question state a number of untruths and misnomers it requires no response at all other than to say this: this bill does not change or remove the existing Resource Management Act (RMA) provisions that manage consented activities. Existing marine farms will continue to operate under the conditions of their consent according to the RMA. Those are the facts that so-called critics should understand. Many marine farms' consents have conditions that are consistent with standard environmental practice under the RMA. The bill will also provide councils with a one-off opportunity to review the conditions of any consent extended in duration under this bill to update them to improve the environmental management of the consented activity. But the CEO of the Ministry for Primary Industries is required to agree so that they do not stop people trying to progress in these difficult times from starting new jobs and new export industries and turning this economy around."