Carter John: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
Carter John: Fisheries Amendment Bill (No 4) — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14559] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 I want to speak on clause 65 because it worries me that when legislation comes back to the House that has been through the select committee process taken a huge amount of time attracted a huge amount of public interest been quite controversial—there have been all sorts of television programmes and documentaries about it and all sorts of newspaper publicity—and had a huge number of submissions— 
Hon David Carter 
: There’s been a lawsuit. 
JOHN CARTER 
: There has been a suggestion of lawsuits I understand. On top of all of that I get really worried when the Minister of Fisheries comes to this Committee and tells us that there is a bit in the bill we do not need or want. I have to ask how we got into that dilemma. Why had his advisers not pointed it out to him? I am the first to acknowledge that this Minister does not know everything. He is a relatively new Minister. Prior to his getting this portfolio he was a Government whip. As a whip fish is not something that one deals with a lot. 
Hon Harry Duynhoven 
: Usually comes with chips. 
JOHN CARTER 
: Yes fish and chips on a late night is about as close as one gets. I accept that the Minister has a big learning curve. He actually needs to take advice from his officials. 
Shane Ardern 
: That’s what he did. 
JOHN CARTER 
: That is the very point and that is the important point about this issue. I have noted on the way through the issues of concern that have been expressed in the public domain by the media and by the committee members—their worries about the advice they have been getting. Indeed part of the inquiry around this issue was whether the advice that the committee was getting was good advice. When the bill was reported back our caucus was told that things seemed to be starting to come right that they were starting to get there. Then I come down to the Chamber and lo and behold I find that the third clause in the bill clause 65 is a mistake. Indeed the advice I am getting now is that we have to vote the clause down. 
Hon David Carter 
: Leave it in. 
JOHN CARTER 
: I do not think we will leave it in because this National Party always tries to make things right. We will support voting it down. But this issue is very serious. The people of this country have a right to expect this Parliament to put through legislation that is accurate. When we end up with legislation that has two commencement dates—a new one in clause 1A which states: “This Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.” and the one in the very next clause clause 65 which states: “on the day on which this Act receives the Royal assent.”—what are the public to think? They know there has been huge controversy around this bill. They have been told time and time again that there are a whole lot of issues that the officials are not sure about. Indeed later on we will be debating the fact that suddenly there are some boundary changes I understand. Again we will expect quite a lot of advice from the Minister and from the officials—or I assume we will. I certainly want that advice. Again it makes one wonder what sort of advice we will be getting. We in Parliament have to make decisions based on that advice because not every one of us is totally au fait with the fishing industry not every one of us knows about scampi not every one of us knows about the Chatham Rise and the fishing that happens out there. How am I a member of Parliament from Northland who is sitting here listening to this debate to believe— 
Lindsay Tisch 
: Do you enjoy fishing? 
JOHN CARTER 
: I do enjoy fishing in the Bay of Islands. It is the best fishing place. But how am I to be absolutely certain that the advice we are getting is correct?