Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 03 April 2012. Volume:679;Page:1562. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
 to the  
Minister for Primary Industries 
: Will he extend the area of proposed protection for Maui’s dolphins beyond the proposed levels in the consultation document if submissions are overwhelmingly in favour of larger protection areas? 
Hon DAVID CARTER (Minister for Primary Industries) 
: 
 As the member will be aware the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Department of Conservation are currently considering additional measures to protect Maui’s dolphins in the Taranaki region. I will await the outcome of this consultation and the advice from the two departments before making any decision whether to extend the set-net ban. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Does he agree that his decision gives the New Zealand fishing industry an excellent marketing opportunity to promote itself as a sustainable fishing industry and that this opportunity would be better than eliminating Maui’s dolphins? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Every decision I make with regard to fishery management gives the fishing industry every opportunity to market offshore that it is managed in a very sustainable manner here in New Zealand. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Is the fishing industry the sole source of research that his ministry is relying on to make its recommendations to him in regard to the protection of Maui’s dolphins; and if the fishing industry is not the sole source of research what other and independent research is being used? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: There is a substantial piece of research under way at the moment led by the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry called the threat management plan which is looking not only at Maui’s dolphins but also at Hector’s dolphins. I expect that work to be completed by around the end of the year. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister’s answer was very interesting but it was to an entirely different question. My question was specifically in relation to the research undertaken by his ministry in relation to the current consultation round not the management of threatened species which is an entirely separate piece of work. I would ask you to ask the Minister to address my question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I clearly did not understand the question myself. 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: Nor did I. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the member to repeat her question to avoid the confusion. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Is the fishing industry the sole source of research that his ministry is relying on to make its recommendations to him in regard to the protection of Maui’s dolphins; and if the fishing industry is not the sole source of research what other and independent research is being used? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: No. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Can he assure the House and the over 11500 people who have to date signed the petition to the Prime Minister to save the Maui’s dolphins that he will do everything he can to save this dolphin subspecies from extinction and that his decision will be made on the basis of independent evidence on Maui’s dolphin habitat? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: The final decision will be based on the scientific information and advice presented to me by the Department of Conservation and by the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry not specifically on the number of submissions received. 
Gareth Hughes 
: As part of the review of protection measures is the Minister also considering increasing the current statutory 48-hour period within which notification of the injury or death of a Maui’s dolphin must occur? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: That may well be part of the information finally presented to me by the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. I will consider that information when the report has been received. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Is the reason why it took 18 days for the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and 28 days for the Department of Conservation to be notified of the recent death of a Maui’s dolphin in fishing gear off the coast of Taranaki because of an agreement between the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Department of Conservation regarding the waiving of the 48-hour notification period? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: I have no knowledge of how long it took for the report to come in that the dolphin that died may well have been a Maui’s dolphin. I do not have that information. 
Gareth Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am in some trouble here. For months we have been debating this as a Maui’s dolphin the Minister’s own press release says it is a Maui’s dolphin and now he brings it into question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Minister is the person being questioned. The Minister has given information in his answer. He answered the question and the Speaker has to accept the Minister’s answer. There is a further supplementary question should the member wish to use it. 
Gareth Hughes 
: Why did it take 18 days for the Minister and the ministry to become aware of the death of a dolphin; and will he be starting a prosecution given that we have seen the law being broken: given the law requires a 48-hour notification period? 
Hon DAVID CARTER 
: As I have just answered to the member I have no idea how long it took for the reported fatality to come to the notice of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry and the Department of Conservation. That information has never been presented to me.