Eckhoff Gerrard: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill — Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:616;Page:11659] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 I may be mistaken but I thought we were in a debating chamber. This is where one side of the Chamber puts forward a proposition—a point of view—then after the member from this side has spoken the Government stands up and refutes what was said and gives the reasons for that. All we get from Government members is “I move that the question be now put.” We have been asking for the Minister. We have a Minister of Conservation in the Chamber who is directly affected and has had no doubt a huge input into Part 2. He sits in the Chamber and says absolutely nothing. Why? Perhaps I am mistaken. Perhaps a member might inform me that I have it totally wrong but we are not having a debate. The Government is shutting down this whole question. It is refusing to elaborate the various points and answer the perfectly legitimate questions being put forward by ACT and National members that ask why these sorts of things are taking place. We are getting no response. 
Part 2 is of course a very important one because it does something quite sensible in ensuring that the coastal permits some marine farmers have will not lapse over the extension of this moratorium period. Yet again I say to the Committee that this extension will apply well after 31 December. I would just about stake my left arm on that point—[ 
Interruption 
]. I see the member across the Chamber is laughing. I am perfectly certain that this moratorium will be extended so it is right and proper that these permits do not lapse during the extension of the moratorium. 
The previous speaker alluded as I had earlier to the role of the Department of Conservation in this debate. As I said earlier the department has its beady little eyes or very big eyes on at least 10 percent of our coastal waters for marine reserves. The Minister of Conservation—he is in the Chamber at this time and I would encourage him to stay and listen—wants all the time in the world to make his decision as to whether one permit can go ahead or another permit should cease. 
We in the select committee have given—I think probably with some reluctance—an extension of time to the Minister to get through this whole process. I say again as I have said many times in this Chamber in debates where the Department of Conservation is involved that its role in all of our legislation that pertains to the environment is just getting excessive. We have to downsize the role of the Department of Conservation whether or not we are talking about the Resource Management (Aquaculture Moratorium Extension) Amendment Bill. It does not really matter because the concept of having this power of veto which is essentially what the Minister has is hugely excessive. Giving the Department of Conservation this role of advocacy in the wider environment—whether it is in the marine environment or land-based it does not really matter—ensures that nothing happens. We constantly run into a brick wall whereby industry players that are breaking their necks to take this country of ours into the top half of the OECD want to develop this industry into a multi-billion dollar industry but the Government says no. It tells industry to slow down while it has another cup of tea. We have seen this for years. How long has this Government been in power? It is about 5 years. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: It seems like 50. 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: Mr Prebble is absolutely right—it seems much longer. But when it comes down to a real business decision-making process that this Government should be making it just does not have the expertise amongst its ranks to follow these concepts through.