Hughes Gareth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to MinistersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHughes Gareth: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers[Sitting date: 13 June 2013. Volume:691;Page:11130. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]10.GARETH HUGHES (Green)to theMinister of Conservation: Has he implemented the recommendations of the 2012 meeting of the International Whaling Commission’s Scientific Committee to protect the estimated 55 adult Māui’s dolphins remaining; if not why not?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister of Conservation):The recommendation of the International Whaling Commission’s Scientific Committee was to ban set nets and trawl fishing from Maunganui Bluff to Hāwera out to a depth of 100 metres. The Government has implemented a set net ban but out to 2 nautical miles. My scientific advisers do not agree with the width of the ban area being determined by water depth rather thandistance offshore as the evidence shows a greater correlation between distance from shore than depth. The dolphin death last year was the first in a decade. It was inside the 2 nautical miles caused by set netting and we do not know whether it was a Hector’s dolphin or a Māui’s dolphin. I do appreciate that Māui’s dolphins are one of New Zealand’s special endemic species and that their numbers are worryingly low. The Government is currently reviewing the threat management plan and I can reassure the member that we will be taking all practical steps to ensure the survival of the Māui’s dolphin.Gareth Hughes: Is it not the Minister of Conservation’s job to prevent the extinction of the last adult 55 Māui’s dolphins; if so why is he still allowing lethal gill-net and trawl fishing in 81 percent of where scientists say Maui’s dolphins live?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I do not accept the member’s view on the figures. The difference between the approach determined by depth and that determined by distance out from shore means that in some areas the current protection goes further than what the International Whaling Commission’s Scientific Committee recommends. In terms of the broader issue since becoming Minister I have asked for a number of additional reports on options for measures that might enable us to better protect the Māui’s dolphin. It is my expectation that I and the Minister for Primary Industries will be in a position to announce any changes to the threat management strategy next month.Gareth Hughes: Given that the Government’s own risk assessment attributes over 95 percent of human-caused Māui’s dolphin deaths to gill-nets and trawl nets why will he not stop these fishing methods in the 100-metre contour which is the recommendation of not only the International Whaling Commission’s Scientific Committee and scientists but also the International Union for Conservation of Nature the Society for Marine Mammalogy—the list could go on—and why will you not take the steps that scientists and experts are calling for?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I assure the member I am taking the very best of scientific advice around ways in which to protect the Māui’s dolphin. The Government has sought additional options around steps. I do think it is a bit of an esoteric argument as to whether it is a distance as in 2 nautical miles or whether it is a depth when for instance the area where the dolphin died last year—the first in 10 years—is actually an area where the approach of the International Whaling Commission would provide for a lesser level of protection than the 2-nautical-mile approach.Gareth Hughes: Given that there are only 55 left it is not exactly esoteric for them and is it not clear that we should listen to the international experts the international bodies and maybe the Minister should get better scientific advice—and my question is will the Minister consider it in the threat management plan?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: I do find it a little rich getting a lecture from the Greens about following scientific advice. When it comes to genetic modification they reject it. When it comes to issues of fracking they reject it.Gareth Hughes: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. He did not even attempt to address the question. He just tried to attack the Greens.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption ] Order! I invite the member to carefully look at theHansardaround his question when he has the opportunity. He was asking why the Minister should not take into account the international evidence and the Minister responded by asking why the Greens could not also in his opinion take into account other international scientific evidence. I think it was adequately addressed.Gareth Hughes: Given that we are talking aboutHansard  my question to the Minister asks whether the public should read anything into a document prepared by the Parliamentary Library that shows that in the Minister’s career as reported inHansard  he has talked about mining 95 times but in this House he has talked about dolphins zero times?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Actions speak louder than words. I have been directly involved in approving 16 marine reserves which is more than any other member in this House and actually 16 more than that member or the Green Party. I could solve the member’s problem by saying “Māui Māui Māui Māui” or “Hector’s Hector’s Hector’s Hector’s” but I actually think the Māui’s dolphin would do better by us actually putting in place the very best threat management plan.