7. METIRIA TUREI (Green) Link to this
to the Minister of Fisheries
Does he stand by his claim that “Most New Zealand fisheries are sustainable”; if so, why?
Hon JIM ANDERTON (Minister of Fisheries) Link to this
Yes, I am satisfied that most of our fisheries are managed sustainably. Of the fish stocks for which we have comprehensive information available—this includes most major commercial fish stocks—85 percent of those are at, or near, the maximum sustainable yield levels. Where fish stocks are below target levels, measures are in place to ensure stocks are rebuilt to sustainable levels. Where serious concerns exist I have—and I will in the future—closed fisheries, as I did with orange roughy fishing area 7B from 1 October this year.
How has cutting the funding for fisheries research into the orange roughy stocks during his term as Minister contributed to our understanding of the state of fish stocks and the supposed sustainability of that fishery?
The amount of funding spent on fisheries research in the term of this Government is close to over $200 million. There are further funds for such research, both funded by the industry itself and by the Government, but no amount of money, no matter how fast one printed it, would give us all of the information we need on fish in our oceans. This is literally almost a bottomless pit. We have to be careful that we do not overstate our position or over-commit ourselves. I think we are doing a respectable amount of research, and it will continue, but it is clear that no amount of funding that I could possibly envisage in the future would give us the perfect situation of all the information we need to know about our fisheries.
When the Minister made his claim was he aware of the collateral damage whereby 58 of the 75 fisheries cause adverse ecological impacts, over half of New Zealand fisheries kill significant numbers of seabirds, 60 percent kill significant numbers of marine mammals including dolphins and sea lions, and two-thirds cause habitat damage; if so, when he said “Most New Zealand fisheries are sustainable”, what exactly did he mean by “Most”?
I meant 85 percent, as I said in my first statement. Again, I have a responsibility as Minister of Fisheries to see that our fish stock is utilised effectively and efficiently in terms of its economic utilisation, but I also have a responsibility to see that that is done without overdue damage to the environment or the fish stock in terms of its sustainability. That is a balancing act, one has to do one’s best, and I think the Ministry of Fisheries performs a very important task and does it well in the interests of New Zealand.
Can the Minister confirm that of the 75 commercial fisheries in New Zealand, 75 have no management plan, one-third are overfished or have seen a substantial decline in stocks, 85 percent catch too many non-target fish, and fewer than 20 percent have had a full stock assessment in the last 10 years; if so, again, when he said that “Most New Zealand fisheries are sustainable”, what part of “Most” did he not understand?
For the benefit of the member, again, by most I mean 85 percent. The fishing plans being developed by the Ministry of Fisheries are an important element in the sustainability of our fisheries into the future. I have to say that the member has overstated and exaggerated all of the points she has made, and they can be refuted in great detail. If the member wants a dissertation on those points, then she can put it to me in writing and I will give it to her.