| |
Divide
and Conquer
NZ
Fishing News
Jan 2005
|
|
Check out the Crimpy
cartoon that accompanied this article in the New Zealand Fishing
News
here
» » (64Kb)
David Benson-Pope seems
to have taken a leaf out of the Department of Conservation's public
relations manual in proposing to give recreational fishers a "new
voice in fisheries decision-making". On initial reading the proposal
looks very promising but the
announcement from the Minister of Fisheries to establish an
independent ministerial recreational fishing advisory panel as well
as a network of forums is light on detail. If this proposal is not
a divide-and-conquer tactic then option4 will be pleasantly surprised.
option4 has been working
very hard with the other national recreational fishing organisations
to mount a legal challenge to the Minister's kahawai decision. The
NZ Big Game Fishing Council and the NZ Recreational Fishing Council
are the official applicants to the Kahawai Legal Challenge. Recreational
fishers have never been better represented. The court case is the
opportunity to define once and for all what is meant by the term
"non-commercial fishing interests" in the Fisheries Act.
No doubt the Minister has
considered the legal challenge and has decided that his interests
lie in splitting the country into small manageable forums where
Ministry staff can gain support for their initiatives.
The announcement states,
"the ministerial advisory panel will be an expert group of recreational
fishers and will advise the minister directly on the strategic issues
confronting the recreational sector." How much more advice does
this man require?
option4, the NZ Big Game
Fishing Council, the NZ Recreational Fishing Council and the NZ
Angling and Casting Association have spent the last four years,
since the Soundings debacle, discussing, meeting and debating
fisheries management and our rights to access these fisheries.
option4 is very willing to
meet with the Minister and discuss issues of concern but the reality
is we need to determine national issues, such as what is meant by
section 21 of the Fisheries Act. This says, "In setting or
varying any total allowable commercial catch for any quota management
stock, the Minister shall have regard to the total allowable catch
for that stock and shall
allow for
–
- The following non-commercial fishing interests in that stock,
namely –
- Maori customary non-commercial fishing interests; and
- Recreational interests; and
- All other mortality to that stock caused by fishing.
In previous discussion forums
even Ministry staff have agreed that it would be beneficial to have
this determination, so at least we can get on with participating
and having an impact on fisheries management decisions.
It's no wonder the Minister
says, "the regional recreational forums have the potential to be
as valuable as the regular meetings he has with the seafood industry,
which have helped to better understand issues in that sector." Unfortunately
since becoming the Minister option4 has not been able to have serious
influence on what Benson-Pope has decided. His kahawai decision
is a classic example of a new Minister leaning on an old Ministry
for advice.
The Minister goes on to say,
"the management of our fisheries resource recognises that commercial,
recreational and customary fishers all have a stake." But when the
allocation of those stakes is based on catch history alone it is
the companies that have thrashed the resource the hardest that get
the biggest share. When considering a fishery the Minister has to
allow for our non-commercial interests, that is Maori customary
and recreational. If he doesn't understand this concept then the
only course of action left to us is to have the courts determine
what our interests are.
While we are still considering
a formal response to the Minister on his announcement we have two
very clear recollections of Ministry staff making statements that
we will not forget. One was at a public meeting held in South Auckland
to discuss the Soundings proposal. When put under immense
pressure to explain why Soundings was the way forward
in fisheries management the Ministry representative said the purpose
of Soundings was to cap recreational take while avoiding
compensation issues for the Crown.
A more recent example of
Ministry attitude was delivered during the scampi debate, where
the Court of Appeal judge, Justice Ted Thomas, was particularly
scathing. He said: "It is possible that the Ministry is under the
impression that it is not obliged to act fairly in administering
the various provisions of the Act". He went on to say, "Ms
Duffy, who appeared for the Ministry and the Chief Executive, submitted
that the Ministry was not under a duty to act fairly in determining
fishers' access to fisheries. I emphatically reject this submission.
The court is of course acutely conscious that certain fishers have
acquired vested interests and that these interests will be disturbed."
It is apparent that the Court
of Appeal saw through the Ministry's strategy. The courts
can give an honest and independent view of the way the Minister
and officials acted.
It is now time the Ministry
and this Minister started viewing our fisheries as a national asset
and set about improving their quality rather than undermining them
to avoid compensation issues for the Crown. If a panel of advisors
to the Minister can deliver better quality fishing they may win
support. What we do not need are new groups to rubber stamp the
Ministry's proposals merely to meet the Minister's consultation
needs.
Check out the Crimpy
cartoon that accompanied this article in the New Zealand Fishing
News
here
» » (64Kb)
Please make a secure donation
online using your credit
card here.
TOP |
