4. Fisheries—Regulation of Industry and FishServeJAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Primary IndustriesFisheries—Regulation of Industry and FishServe4. JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for Primary Industries: Does he agree with the reported view of the Ministry for Primary Industries that there is nothing wrong with the fishing industry being allowed to monitor itself?Hon NATHAN GUY (Minister for Primary Industries): No. The reported view is incorrect and Newstalk ZB has now changed the headline that the member is referring to. The Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) never made such a statement as it would be misleading. As the regulator it is important that MPI retains independent oversight of the industry. However I think there is benefit in allowing the industry to manage some administrative functions. There are five levels of audit in place to ensure the information is correct.James Shaw: Does he see no conflict in having FishServe a company that is owned by New Zealand's fishing industry monitoring the catch of species like red snapper John Dory and blue nose—all of which have been overfished by that industry?Hon NATHAN GUY: Well monitoring is indeed a broad term. Most people's understanding of monitoring is about compliance monitoring. But punching and recording numbers is not the same as compliance monitoring. Compliance monitoring is the sole function of MPI; it is the regulator and it has complete access to FishServe's records. As I mentioned in the answer to my primary question there are five levels of audit as well.James Shaw: Is he confident that FishServe is accurately reporting on overfishing given that MPI identified errors in 17 percent of forms reporting commercial fishers' catch?Hon NATHAN GUY: Yes I do have confidence in the audits that are in place. Of course they pick up any issues as they work their way through. There is an MPI audit there is a financial audit that is done by Ernst & Young there is a FishServe internal audit and there is also catch effort auditing. And the member may be aware that MPI is going to be rolling out starting on 1 October this year electronic reporting. As a result of that that will speed up the efficiency of FishServe. It will actually also mean more transparency and moving away from paper-based records where there are currently some errors.James Shaw: Can the Minister confirm that in 2013 he gave FishServe new powers to determine when bans on commercial fishing could take effect in overfished areas?Hon NATHAN GUY: First of all these powers were originally devolved to FishServe in 2001 by Pete Hodgson. The 2013 Order in Council just rolled them over. The changes that I made in 2013 were making FishServe the approved service delivery organisation; before this it was the Seafood Industry Council. And secondly allowing FishServe to manage client number management in sequencing i.e. one two three four—very technical changes indeed.James Shaw: Surely he will concede that if FishServe has the power to decide when fishing bans take effect then it does have a regulatory role in the fishing industry?Hon NATHAN GUY: I think I have addressed that already this afternoon by saying that FishServe is basically just a collection of data. MPI has access to all that data. When a fisher indeed does go over their annual catch entitlement (ACE) they need to go and get more ACE or indeed there is a financial penalty through deemed values that I set as Minister.James Shaw: Can he assure the House that there is nothing in the 14 reports on fish dumping investigations which MPI is currently refusing to release to university researchers that raises the same kinds of issues highlighted in the Operation Achilles scandal last year?Hon NATHAN GUY: MPI has been incredibly transparent particularly on the back of the Heron report where there was a huge amount of information that was released. MPI has continual investigations under way and when they are at specific stages it is not appropriate for it to release that information.James Shaw: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question then was quite specific in relation to the 14 reports—the 14 specific reports—that MPI is currently withholding from university researchers. The Minister did not address those reports.Mr SPEAKER: No but the question was not specific enough. It talked about Can he assure the House there is nothing in those 14 reports?" and mentioned that they were being withheld. The first thing is the member responded by saying MPI is very transparent. The question has been addressed.James Shaw: Yes!Mr SPEAKER: If the members want assistance—and I have told the House many many times—with their questions tighten them up.James Shaw: Thank you Mr Speaker. Will he ask MPI to release the 14 reports on fish dumping investigations that it is so far refusing to release?Hon NATHAN GUY: The member has been in the House a while now; he should know that politicians do not get involved in matters that are to do with prosecutions or investigations. I do not tell MPI when to release official information; it releases it itself when it is ready."