Ririnui Mita: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Ririnui Mita: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:11750] 
MITA RIRINUI (Labour—Waiariki) 
: 
 I want to take a reasonably brief call in this third reading of the bill. Before doing so I say that I think the previous speaker made some of the most outrageous statements I have ever heard in the House in relation to a number of issues. One issue was the “space for race”. If there was a race for space and space for race back in the time when National was in Government then Maori were not even at the start line. They would not even have had a look in. I think that the member forgot that. 
The next issue is that there really is a race for space in this particular industry and that is the very reason the moratorium bill was applied 2 years ago. The esteemed member for Whangarei Phil Heatley was a member of the Primary Production Committee at that time and he probably still is. The previous speaker stated that Mr Heatley would probably be the next Minister of Fisheries which is totally outrageous—and I think that he and the people of the north agree with me. 
Mr Heatley sat on that select committee and he is well aware of why the moratorium was necessary. The moratorium was probably described as a blunt instrument but had his party been vigilant in the 9 years it was in Government it would not have been necessary to apply this sort of instrument to a very important industry. National went to sleep on the job. The industry developed to the extent that our environment—in particular the Marlborough Sounds—was under threat from development particularly in the choking of waterways. Name it and it was happening in that industry. 
Of course marine farmers wanted to just proceed pillage plunder develop not take too much notice of the Resource Management Act requirements not have much concern about the environment and just keep going. The Minister at the time the Hon Pete Hodgson—although he has a lookalike in the House at the present time—made the decision to apply a moratorium and that is why we have it in place. It is necessary to extend it because a number of other issues have compounded this matter. I am sure that the previous speaker will appreciate that. 
As for Maori in the industry opposing this moratorium I think members of the select committee will recall that a number of Maori organisations had lodged applications with regional councils having made quite a large financial commitment in terms of developing their farms. They were seeking some flexibility from the Government to allow them to proceed. That was the only issue those people had. I think that the statements made in the House this evening were pretty incorrect. 
Jim Peters 
: That’s just not true. That was wrong. 
MITA RIRINUI 
: The member who interrupted was not even in Parliament at the time. That is how outrageous that member is. In fact a lot of his own people from up north were appreciative of the time given through this moratorium to allow them to develop so they could get up to the start line. He was not even in this House at that time. That is all I have to say about this matter.