Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill

I move, That the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill be now read a first time. I nominate the Local Government and Environment Committee to consider this bill.

New Zealand’s Subantarctic Islands, the Antipodes Islands group, Bounty Islands, Auckland Island, Campbell Island, and Snares Islands are located in the south-east of New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone. The islands and their territorial seas are internationally important for their conservation values and were awarded Unesco World Heritage status in 1998. The land area of each of the Subantarctic Islands is fully protected through having national reserve and nature reserve status. They contain exceptional marine biodiversity in a remote setting largely free from human impacts, resulting in near pristine ecosystems. The islands generate significant economic activity through a multimillion-dollar wildlife tourism industry that brought between 800 and 1,100 tourists visiting the islands in each of the last two seasons. Local and international visitors want to experience the climate and iconic wildlife. The islands are absolutely stunning, with an abundance of native species, albatross, penguins, sea lions, fur seals, and southern right whales.

The islands are protected as nature reserves, befitting their World Heritage status, but it is not only the islands that were considered World Heritage. The high conservation values continue to the sea as does the World Heritage status, which extends to the limits of the territorial sea surrounding the islands. Reserves around the Bounty Islands and Campbell Island covering 58 percent and 39 percent—and I think I have lost one of my pages, but that is all right.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I’m sure you can find it.

I am sure I will, Mr Speaker. The reserves around the Bounty Islands and Campbell Island cover 58 percent and 39 percent of those islands’ territorial seas respectively. In total, 435,163 hectares will be protected in these marine reserves. Combined with the existing marine reserves around the Auckland Islands, nearly a million hectares of New Zealand’s subantarctic territorial sea will then be fully protected in a no-take marine reserve. No longer will marine conservation be lagging behind the terrestrial protection in what is one of the world’s most ecologically important natural areas.

As on land, beneath the surface of the sea each island group is significantly different—each with its own unique suite of habitats and species. For example, the Antipodes Islands rocky reefs are dominated by encrusting corral and algae and the islands have their own unique species of bull kelp, even though the reefs at the neighbouring Bounty Islands are dominated by encrusting animals such as sponges, barnacles, and mussels.

But the difference does not end there. Although the Subantarctic Islands terrestrial areas are fully protected already as national nature reserves, only at the Auckland Islands has a similar level of protection been afforded to the marine environment, through the establishment of a marine reserve back in 2003. This bill rectifies that situation by extending protection out into the territorial sea around three of the subantarctic island groups. Protection that befits the World Heritage status has been accorded.

I must emphasise that this bill is the result of a stakeholder-led process. Representatives of science, iwi, fishing, and conservation groups gathered to examine the areas, their marine biodiversity, and the islands’ associated stakeholder interest. After public consultation, recommendations were made for marine protected areas in the territorial sea around the Antipodes Islands, Bounty Islands, and Campbell Island groups. The bill progresses the work of the stakeholder forum by establishing the marine reserve around the Antipodes Islands covering its entire territorial sea—that is, out to 12 nautical miles—and, as stated, establishes two large marine reserves around the Bounty Islands and Campbell Island, covering 58 percent and 38 percent of those islands’ territorial seas respectively.

My colleague the Hon David Carter, the Minister for Primary Industries, is adding further protection to the remainder of the territorial sea. In addition to existing prohibitions on bottom trawling and dredging, new prohibitions on Danish seining will be introduced in an additional 250,000 hectares around the three island groups. This means the territorial sea of all three island groups will have achieved marine protected status.

The creation of marine reserves, through the bill, recognises existing users. The established ling fishery will be allowed to continue using long lining in some areas around the Bounty Islands as this technique has a very limited bycatch. The bill also grants a 5-year window to allow for a potential deep-water crab fishery to be explored around Campbell Island. At the end of that 5-year period the status of this area will be reviewed. If it is decided that a viable and sustainable crab fishery does not exist, then the entire territorial sea around Campbell Island could become a marine reserve. These will be the first marine protected areas to be implemented under the Government’s Marine Protected Areas Policy, which sets out New Zealand’s new, more coordinated, and collaborative approach to protecting our marine biodiversity.

The Government is introducing the bill in order to establish these marine reserves in a timely and efficient manner. This recognises the comprehensive process undertaken by the forum in planning for and consulting on the marine reserves proposal. To proceed with individual applications for each marine reserve under the existing Marine Reserves Act 1971 would be to duplicate some of the processes that the forum has already undertaken. This Government is looking to update that old marine reserves legislation to provide for a better statutory process for establishing marine reserves in due course. In the meantime, however, this bill will give the seas surrounding three of New Zealand’s Subantarctic Islands the protection they deserve. This bill fulfils the expectations of the World Heritage Committee that New Zealand will protect these internationally recognised conservation values in a manner befitting their status. I commend this bill to the House.

The Labour Party very strongly supports this legislation, the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. In fact, this legislation is the outcome of the marine protected area strategy that Labour introduced many years ago, back in about 2006 or 2007. We introduced it because we understood the lessons of the northern hemisphere. The northern hemisphere ruthlessly exploited its fisheries. It has turned its seas into marine deserts. It has wiped out species.

New Zealand wants to be a world leader in the area of protecting its marine and coastal areas. In fact, the Labour Party policy is to achieve about 30 percent of the marine area being under some form of protection by 2020. I have to say that it is really good to be able to support something in the conservation area that the Government has introduced, albeit on the back of the work that the former Labour Government did, because this bill follows the shambles of the Ross Sea Marine Protected Area.

New Zealand has a deep interest in the Antarctic and the subantarctic areas, and we were seen as a world leader in terms of protection. We held out against the tourist and mineral developments in Antarctica, and there were other countries that had a vested interest in doing it. We opposed those things from a high moral principle—that is, that we have to protect our pristine Antarctic and subantarctic areas. And yet, with the Ross Sea, in order to protect something that at best was worth about $20 million in fisheries, the National Government at the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources meeting went in there actually demonstrating that New Zealand was no different from any other country—that if our economic or commercial interests were at stake, we would sacrifice our principles. We lost that moral leadership, and it is a real regret that we did so, because, actually, even in economic terms, leaving aside the critical environmental and conservation issues, having Christchurch as the gateway to Antarctica is worth several hundred million dollars a year to our economy.

By taking a principle stand in that area, we would have carried real weight in opposing the commercial exploitation of Antarctica in other ways. The United States offered a partnership for us. I think our Minister of Conservation probably supported that, took it to Cabinet, and was rolled. Consequently, we did not go in with a joint position with the United States. In a panic we suddenly developed a joint position, but by that stage it was too late, and we lost the opportunity at that Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources meeting to do something significant in terms of the Ross Sea.

Then, of course, we had the Government turning up at a conservation meeting in Korea that was the International Union for Conservation of Nature. There was a resolution there to protect the Māui’s and the Hector’s dolphins, the two most endangered dolphin species in the world. And what did New Zealand do under this National Government? We were one of only two countries that opposed that additional protection. That is a matter of absolute shame.

It is good that we are seeing a result from the earlier period under a Labour Government in relation to this bill. This bill creates three new marine reserves in the territorial sea around three of New Zealand’s Subantarctic Islands groups. Those reserves are the Moutere Mahue, which is Māori for “abandoned island”, but better known, perhaps, as the Antipodes Islands Marine Reserve; the Moutere Hauriri, which is an interesting term, being Māori for “angry wind”, which is probably an appropriate description of the Bounty Islands and, perhaps, our opponents across the House; and the third marine protected area will be the Moutere Ihupuku, which is literally “nose and belly”. I tried to find out what an explanation for that would be, and the best Shane Jones could offer is that maybe it is about this Government being belly up.

The other two things this bill does that are worthy of support are that it provides for a review of the Campbell Island Marine Reserve in 5 years’ time, to consider protecting the remainder of the Campbell Island territorial sea by including all of it in the marine reserve. I hope, indeed, that that will happen in 5 years’ time. The other thing it does, interestingly, is deem certain commanding officers of the New Zealand Defence Force to be rangers under the Marine Reserves Act 1971 in respect of the marine reserve. That makes sense because the most frequent visitors to those island groups is, of course, the Royal New Zealand Navy, and it has a very positive role that it can play.

The New Zealand Subantarctic Islands and their territorial seas have been internationally recognised for their outstanding conservation values. Indeed, back in 1998 we were proud that they were awarded World Heritage status. The marine reserves and the prohibitions on Danish seining, combined with the existing Fisheries Act and regulations and prohibitions on bottom trawling and dredging, will provide those marine protected areas over the wider area of the territorial sea of the New Zealand Subantarctic Islands with the protection they need.

There will be some impact on commercial activities. It will change the areas where commercial fishing for ling takes place, for example, and it will limit mineral-related activities. Prospecting, exploration, and mining will be restricted to low-impact activities, and it is appropriate that we put constraints on those forms of exploitation.

On the other side of the ledger there will be real potential benefits for nature-based tourism in the area. The proposal represents the first comprehensive opportunity to address New Zealand’s World Heritage obligation in respect of the territorial seas around these island groups. Action was taken earlier in 2003 to fully protect as a marine reserve the territorial seas around the Auckland Islands. That was an initiative under the last Government, and it was a good initiative. Why is this justified? Well, apart from the obvious factor that they have World Heritage status, each of these island groups is highly distinct biologically, geologically, and geographically. Each has threatened and/or endemic species living or breeding only on or around that particular island, and the islands in the surrounding waters have been subject to minimal human impact and are therefore, as ecosystems, very close to being pristine. It is in our interests as a country, and it is our obligation as a member of the world international community, that we provide that protection.

The land areas of the islands were, of course, protected way back in 1977 under the Reserves Act. The Auckland Islands and the sea around them were protected as a marine mammal sanctuary, again back in 1978, and the territorial sea, as I mentioned earlier, was fully protected in 2003. A marine protected areas policy was jointly developed between the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Fisheries under the last Labour Government, and was released in January 2006. It provides the framework for protecting marine diversity by establishing a network of marine protected areas. The Subantarctic Islands Marine Protection Planning Forum was set up, again under Labour, in 2008. That gathered the information, it did the consultation, it heard the submissions, and it presented the Government with options. The bill today is a product of Government decisions made in December 2010.

We do have an obligation to meet the responsibilities associated with the World Heritage status listing. That means we need to acknowledge that the natural sites are of a quality that is of global significance, and we must undertake to protect and conserve them on behalf of the world community. Labour will be fully supporting this legislation.

I am delighted to support this Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill at its first reading. I absolutely agree with the Hon Phil Goff that it is great to see these marine reserves being created, particularly when they are in such a distinctive area, which has been recognised by World Heritage status.

The Local Government and Environment Committee is very keen to get on with this work. We have done a lot of work on marine protection already this year with the exclusive economic zone legislation and it is the beginning of a whole tranche of legislation, with the new marine reserves legislation to be introduced next year. While we were listening to submissions on the exclusive economic zone legislation we learnt how much New Zealanders care about the sea—not that we actually had to be told. All New Zealanders seem to be connected. We come from an island with huge sea masses around us. We like to look at the sea, we like to sail on the sea, and we like to swim, and dive, and surf in the sea. So it is particularly important that we get our marine protection right. The National Government absolutely supports that.

We have a proud history of marine protection. We passed the original Marine Reserves Act in 1971 and that established the first marine reserve at Cape Rodney in 1977, so it was the beginning of a whole list of things that have come up, to this day. Since we have been in Government we have announced nine new marine reserves, which is a dramatic increase on what was there before, and I think it is about another 36 percent of protected areas. Once these marine reserves are gazetted, 9.4 percent of New Zealand’s territorial seas will be protected by marine reserves and I think that is something we can all be proud of.

But I would really like to focus on these particular reserves. They surround the islands—Antipodes Island, Bounty Islands, and Campbell Island. Those are islands way down south, about 800 kilometres south-east of Stewart Island / Rakiura. Nobody lives there at the moment, although there have been times when they have been inhabited by sealers, and then there has been some pastoral farming done there, but nobody lives there now, and they are protected with nature reserve status.

What this bill will do is protect the seas around them, and that is particularly important because these islands are known particularly as important seabird breeding areas, particularly of the albatross, but also petrels, penguins, and shags, and also, surprisingly enough, the Antipodes parakeet, which is a brightly coloured parakeet that seems sometimes out of place on these cold and windswept islands. As a matter of interest, they are also well known for their mega-herbs. These are enormous plants with colourful flowers that are a little bit like desert flowerings. They come all together and there are magnificent herbs, mega-herbs, across the islands. They had been eaten down in the past, but since the protected area status, they have now been flourishing. Just as a matter of interest, this is a similar model to what we have done with the Auckland Islands, protecting both the land and the water, and that seems to have been particularly successful.

So the Local Government and Environment Committee is looking forward to dealing with this bill. We are very keen and enthusiastic to get it right and so we are hoping that maybe Parliament might insist that we take a trip to these islands, as a select committee visit. Thank you.

To take up the suggestion of the member who has just resumed her seat, Nicky Wagner, I do not think the visit should be restricted to the Local Government and Environment Committee. I believe that anyone who has made the effort to be here at 20 past 12 on a Wednesday afternoon deserves the right to be there, and I see Amy Adams is seconding that idea as well.

The Labour Party is certainly supporting the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. I think it is worth noting that the area we are talking about here actually does have World Heritage status. New Zealand should be rightly proud, but also at the same time feel a sense of responsibility for ensuring that we continue to support the status of these very important parts of the planet.

Previous speakers have gone through in some detail the nature of the islands that we are talking about and the process that they have been through in terms of protection, initially for the land itself under the Reserves Act and then carrying on through there, with the Auckland Islands territorial sea becoming fully protected in 2003, and moving through various regulations, to the point that we can reach now where these sets of islands will be protected. As I say, on this side of the House we are strongly supportive of that process.

What I wanted to focus my comments on in this first reading was the way in which this legislation comes to the House. This is special legislation to create these marine reserves. We are not creating these reserves under the law that currently exists for the creation of marine reserves, the Marine Reserves Act 1971. A number of excellent things occurred in New Zealand in 1971. I was born, for instance, as one of those things. That is a moment that many people will note, I am sure. Louise Upston was possibly born just a little before then, I think.

💬 Louise Upston: No, that year. Come on!

Oh, that year? That year, sorry. I thought it was the year before. I apologise—

💬 Louise Upston: No, 1971.

I withdraw and apologise for that—another 1971 baby there as well. So 1971 was overall—on balance—a good year, although it is starting to waver a little. But overall it was a good year, and it was the year in which New Zealand passed its marine reserves legislation that put us at the forefront of marine protection in the world. This was legislation that was world-leading in terms of creating, effectively, no-take zones around our coastline. Other countries were well behind. My colleague Phil Goff has already spoken about the damage that has been done in other jurisdictions by not having this kind of legislation.

The issue that New Zealand now has, fast-forwarding 40-odd years, is that New Zealand is now actually falling behind in terms of the way that we go about marine protection.

💬 Colin King: There was nothing done for 9 years.

We are left with 40-year-old legislation that is, in fact, cumbersome. It has been suggested that this is something that could have had something done about it in Labour’s 9 years. I actually do accept that. I accept that the last Labour Government did need to try to make progress on this. To that end, it had marine reserves legislation that sat on the books. The problem the Labour Government had, in these days of MMP and minority Governments, was getting a coalition of parties that would support that legislation. I recall this very well, because it was part of my working life at the time to try to find the support for that legislation. Members on the other side of the House who have such enthusiasm now for marine reserves may wish to reflect that they were not in favour of that legislation, but neither, unfortunately, was a majority of the House.

What that now means in 2012 is that we are left with legislation that is, in fact, hopelessly out of date and very inefficient. For this bill, one of the considerations that officials had to have was whether or not this bill should be special legislation to create these marine reserves, or whether or not it should go through the Marine Reserves Act process. Well, what the regulatory impact statement on this bill tells us is that the average time to establish a marine reserve under the Marine Reserves Act is 12 years. It is between 1 year and 23 years. But 12 years is not a figure that anyone in this House can be proud of. We need to be able to establish marine reserves in a way that is a lot more efficient and a lot more comprehensive than that.

So I do think that it is time for this House to turn its attention back to the legislative framework for the establishment of marine reserves. The Environmental Defence Society has this year put out a publication around its views of what needs to happen in terms of marine reserves legislation. I had the honour of launching that earlier this year. I tend to agree with the society that the time has come not to return to the legislation that Labour had in front of the House 10 years ago, because time has passed that as well, but to create new marine reserves legislation that actually allows for the efficient promulgation of these kinds of reserves, that allows for the creation of a network of different types of marine protected areas, all the way from no-take areas through to the full protected reserves that most people would understand.

We need to ensure that the purpose of any legislation that puts in place marine reserves is the protection of biodiversity, because at the moment that is not completely clear. It particularly is not clear if you are creating no-take areas under the Fisheries Act, because that purpose is not even there. So having a focus on the protection of biodiversity, having the ability to create a range of instruments, and having a network of marine reserves and protected areas is the kind of approach and framework that I would like to see us undertake. I would hope that we could work across the House to find a way of developing that kind of legislation. It must not be as difficult as it is now to establish these kinds of reserves.

Alongside that, the other thing that New Zealand Governments have been working on since the late 1990s is the establishment of some kind of integrated oceans policy in which marine reserves can sit. There are some good models of this around New Zealand that we can look at. I am thinking here about the spatial planning exercise in the Hauraki Gulf and elsewhere, where we can actually see integrated oceans management supporting the protection of biodiversity. So I do urge the House that we do need to return to this question of what new, modern marine reserves legislation would look like, and ensure that we take on the very best practice around the world so that New Zealand once again can be a world leader in that area.

There is one specific aspect of this bill that I think would feed into that. My colleague Phil Goff has already mentioned the fact that the establishment of these marine reserves actually arose from a process called the Subantarctic Islands Marine Protection Planning Forum. That was a piece of work that was begun under the previous Government. It is based on the marine protected areas policy from 2006. But the situation we have now is that we have an excellent policy on marine protected areas, and legislation that does not match up with that policy, which is why we need to make changes to allow marine protected areas and marine reserves and other types of protected areas to be included.

But the process that was used in that planning forum is one that should be incorporated in any future legislation. That is a far more collaborative process that brings together stakeholders within a particular area and gives them the opportunity to be part of developing these models. I think there is an even better model, and that was the one that was used to develop the Fiordland (Te Moana o Atawhenua) Marine Area. That was a model that truly included all of those in the community who were interested in marine protection in Fiordland, including recreational fishers, not that there are any recreational fishers in the Subantarctic Islands. But it included all of the stakeholders who would have wanted to have a say. It was quite a long process, but at the end of it there was universal buy in, and, importantly, an ongoing role for that community in Fiordland in the continuing management of marine space.

As a result, I think that there are some things in the way that these marine reserves were created that could find their way into future legislation. But what I would not like to see is the need to continue ad hoc development of marine reserves. What we need is comprehensive legislation that facilitates the efficient creation of marine reserves, based on the principles of the protection of biodiversity, and enables New Zealand to move beyond just our territorial waters and out into the exclusive economic zone, and protects the marine areas that are required in those spaces. The exclusive economic zone legislation that was passed by this Government did not sufficiently take that into account, and it is going to limit New Zealand severely in being able to play the role that it should in protecting our marine areas.

We do endorse this bill. These islands are an important part of the World Heritage network, and I hope that members of the House will take on board the importance of this kind of legislation and give New Zealanders a framework for establishing marine reserves that we can be proud of.

Kia ora, Mr Assistant Speaker. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. It is good to rise to take a call on the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. It is good to be voting for marine reserves legislation in our Parliament. I do not think we do enough of it, and it is good to see we are getting cross-party support behind this bill.

What we are talking about are the Subantarctic Islands—the Antipodes Islands, the Bounty Islands, Campbell Island. They are special, unique, pristine parts that are iconic to New Zealanders and iconic for our environment and our biodiversity, with incredible species of biodiversity down there. Obviously, the islands have played a role in our historical development as a country and as a nation. We have seen livestock run wild. We have seen people shipwrecked there two centuries ago and establish crafts to try to get off. They have got a wonderful tale, and it is good to be voting in our Parliament to support greater protection of them.

I have not had the privilege to travel down to any of the Subantarctic Islands, so I would second the call by the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee for an investigation or a trip down there. I think if more New Zealanders could get a chance to visit these amazing parts of our country that so few of us get the chance to visit, there would be a greater desire to protect them. I think the work of artists, in particular, to highlight the special places that we have has been particularly effective. I would like to congratulate all those artists and the groups involved in the Subantarctic artists programme.

What this legislation does is set up marine reserves in the territorial sea around our Subantarctic Islands. We see the entire Antipodes Islands protected, we see 58 percent of the Bounty Islands protected, and we see only 39 percent of the Campbell Island’s territorial sea protected. I would like to touch on the point made by the member Grant Robertson. It is pretty incredible that we have to resort to legislation to enact marine reserves in New Zealand, given we have had legislation—world-leading legislation for its time—on our books since 1971. It is an outrage that we cannot get marine reserves in New Zealand, essentially, without legislation. I think it is an indictment on our law books at the moment. I think it is an indictment of successive Governments that have not tackled it. Hopefully, this can act as a catalyst so that we can progress with coherent, robust marine reserves legislation.

I have got to say before I go into the substance of this speech that although I was heartened to hear that marine reserves legislation was going to be enacted next year, I am deeply disappointed that this was the forum that the member Nicky Wagner would take to address this to the country. I had a commitment earlier this year and a week ago from the Minister Kate Wilkinson that we would see the marine reserves legislation this year. It is disappointing to see it delayed yet another year. What we know is that the marine reserve bills currently languishing at the select committees have the silver medal. They are probably never going to get the infamous trout legislation gold medal for the amount of time left at a select committee, but we are talking about legislation sitting there, stuck there, for almost a decade. I think it is an outrage, given that we know that, on average, it takes 12 years in this country to get a marine reserve under our antiquated, difficult-to-enact legislation. Although it is good to hear that we will be seeing some legislative action on marine reserves, this probably was not the forum to announce that it has been delayed yet another year.

But on to the good—it is good to see this legislation passing. What it is going to be doing is adding 435,000 hectares to New Zealand’s total marine reserve area. This is a big deal, because at the moment we are doing woefully in terms of marine reserve coverage. Nicky Wagner will say: “Look, we’ve got 9 percent of our territorial sea in marine reserves. Aren’t we doing so well? We’re so close to our 10 percent target.” But what the member did not point out is that in fact our 10 percent target is not just our territorial sea; it is our territorial sea plus our exclusive economic zone, which is the space of water between 12 and 200 nautical miles. What we know is that at the moment we are at 0.31 percent of our combined waters. Only 0.31 percent—that is less than 1 percent—of our waters are protected in marine reserves. Although it is good to be seeing these 435,000 extra hectares added, this is only going to be taking us up to 0.41 percent, I understand, on advice from the Parliamentary Library. It is a start, and we congratulate the start—that is why we are voting for the bill—but we could be going a whole lot further.

We are disappointed that we are not seeing the entirety of these islands protected. What we know is that they are World Heritage sites. It would have been pretty unacceptable, I think, for the Government to not be enacting this legislation, given they are World Heritage sites and given they have been World Heritage sites for quite a while. So we think that there should be greater protection. We think that the 5-year crab trial around Campbell Island is not out of order. We should not be having to go to the ends of the world to get our seafood. The problem is, of course, that we are fishing too hard and fast around our waters. We should not have to go to Campbell Island. We should not have to go to the Ross Sea. We should be able to sustainably manage our fisheries.

A quick legislative point I would like to question is clause 8. The text—and it seems quite odd language—is: “The Department of Conservation (or its replacement) …”. I am not aware of any legislation where we refer to a department by saying: “The Department of Conservation (or its replacement) …”. I guess the question is: why are we using such odd drafting language? Is there an ulterior motive? It would be interesting to explore that in the select committee.

This bill has come about as a result of the collaborative process, the planning forum. It is really good to see. We saw it on the West Coast as well. But it is disappointing that we have seen only two. It was trumpeted quite loudly by the current Government when it came into Government that it was a great process. It was trying different things, such as water management. But why have we stuck with only two? Why is this the last one? Why have they not taken the lessons? Obviously we can get a collaborative buy-in from both fisheries and conservationists. Why have we not seen another one?

I guess the question is: if we are going to have real cross-party action on marine reserves, why are we not doing more? Why are we not updating the legislation now, not delaying it yet another year? Why is the Government delaying and refusing marine reserves now, like it is in the Akaroa Harbour? Why is the Government not taking action right now? Tomorrow it could introduce legislation to protect the Kermadec Islands; tomorrow the Government could introduce legislation that would make the world’s largest marine reserve, and it would displace, on average, only $100,000 worth of fishing. A Government that has got such a dire, terrible environmental track record—which is being run through the mud of the international press for the clean, green, 100 percent pure myth, the sham, and has been called to account—tomorrow could introduce legislation to protect the marine waters around the Kermadec Islands. This would be 620,000 square kilometres. It would displace, as I said, only a small amount of fishing. It is something good that I think everyone in this House could support. It is one of those win-wins, of which I think the Government has not taken enough opportunities.

Likewise, we have seen an embarrassing situation with the negotiations over the Ross Sea. The Government could be doing more there. It is likewise with the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act, which the Government benches raised. We have got a real risk of these activities such as deep-sea oil drilling occurring in our oceans. I think the Minister for the Environment should rule out making deep-sea oil drilling a permitted activity. I think it would be outrageous that one would require a consent to build a deck, but one would not require a consent under the legislation, which is so new that it has been passed only this year, to drill in our waters, with the corresponding risk that that entails.

Under the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act, the Government has the ability to identify the special areas in our exclusive economic zone—these areas of amazing biodiversity. I think the Government should be more proactive and map out where these will be protected into the future, if we have marine reserve legislation that allows marine reserves to be extended out into the exclusive economic zone.

Ultimately what we need is a coherent oceans strategy. At the moment we have got a piecemeal approach that is, unfortunately, putting at priority the interests of deep-sea oil drillers, not marine protection. The interests of toothfish fisheries and crab fisheries at Campbell Island are put at priority, not marine protection. What we see are dolphin sanctuaries that do not provide sanctuary to dolphins off the coast of Taranaki. We see the benthic protected areas that do not protect from activities like dredging for phosphate on the Chatham Rise. It is good to see progress. We can do a whole lot more. The Green Party is committed to work with the Government, if it can, to get better marine reserves legislation and a coherent oceans policy, which is only going to protect our waters. They are so special and unique, and such a part of who we are as New Zealanders. Kia ora.

Tēnā koe, Mr Speaker. Thank you very much for the opportunity to rise and speak to the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. Members on the other side of the House will be pleased to note that in National’s 2011 conservation manifesto we committed to introducing a new marine reserves bill—expected next year from the Minister of Conservation—to improve the process for creating marine reserves and allowing them outside the 12 nautical mile territorial sea into the exclusive economic zone. That must be good news to members of the Opposition. It is very important for us to realise that.

This is an excellent bill, which is progressing the establishment of these marine reserves. I want to pay tribute right now to the conservation work that our New Zealand Navy is doing. Right now, sailing down to the southern seas is the HMNZS Otago. It is going down to the Ross Sea to patrol on behalf of the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources and the New Zealand Government, to ensure that there is suitable patrol there and compliance by nations in that place. Even right now, down the west coast of the North Island the inshore patrol vessel the HMNZS Rotoiti is on dolphin patrol, looking for Māui’s dolphins. In fact, from the last report I have heard that there have been 8,000 observer hours on vessels off the Taranaki coast, but, unfortunately, at this point in time there has not been a Māui’s dolphin sighted. It is probably too cold. There is certainly a lot of activity off the west coast of the North Island to look at those situations. Of course, there are some biological concerns regarding matters of infection in that population, and we would like to see some progress on those.

I am very happy to commend this bill to the House. Thank you.

I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First on the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. We also, of course, will be supporting this bill, and we are very proud to be part of it. Looking at the background to these islands, I see that the first islands, the Antipodes Islands—aptly named—were first charted in 1800 by Captain Henry Waterhouse on the British ship HMS Reliance. So it goes back an awful long way, in terms of the origins of modern civilisation in New Zealand, that these islands were first discovered in about 1800.

The three different groups of islands—the Antipodes Islands, the Bounty Islands, and Campbell Island—are actually quite a distance apart. The Bounty Islands are the northernmost, the Antipodes Islands are right out on the date line—it is probably about the first place in the world to ever see the rising sun, I would think, because it is right on the date line—and then Campbell Island is further down, getting down towards the Auckland Islands. So that covers a vast area of ocean, a vast area of our exclusive economic zone. It is a most important area, because it is such a huge area for marine life, for the sea and what comes from the sea, and for the impacts that has on the New Zealand land mass as a result.

So it is very important that we do have these areas protected, and important that these marine reserves are put through in terms of supporting, also, that World Heritage Site situation. You know, it is very, very precious that when we have these World Heritage Sites they also have the appropriate legislation such as this to back them up and to make sure that that is the case.

The islands are a long way away—860 kilometres south-east of Stewart Island are the Antipodes Islands. When you think about that distance, it is very, very significant and it shows you the outreach that New Zealand has. When we were sitting at the Local Government and Environment Committee this year on the exclusive economic zone legislation, to understand that we have the fifth largest economic zone in the world was quite impressive, really, for a small country of 4½ million. To have such a massive exclusive economic zone is a big responsibility. It is a significant requirement on our country to make sure that we do what is best by that massive zone and that massive potential resource out there, and to make sure that if resources are taken from it, they are taken in an environmentally sustainable manner that will not have adverse effects on the precious environment that we have.

So we are very pleased. Like all marine reserves around New Zealand, the more the merrier. Those of us who are familiar with some of the more inshore marine areas such as Goat Island always marvel at the outcomes and the improvement in the fish and the sea life that are there as a result. Therefore, the more marine reserves such as this—and in these remote areas as well—that can protect our marine life, help grow our marine life, and expand the resources that are there, the better. So New Zealand First is very pleased to support this bill.

I am very pleased to support this bill, the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill, and the continuing good work of the National Government in areas of conservation. I commend the Minister of Conservation in particular for this bill. What it is about has been made very clear by other members of the House, but it does sit on that ongoing process of work that this Government is committed to. I note, as my colleague Jonathan Young pointed out, that the Marine Reserves Bill is anticipated to be put forward through the House next year to make the process of organising these reserves much easier. So, as with previous bills today, I ask that it move swiftly and quickly to conclusion. These are positive bills and positive actions by the Government, and I look forward to the support of the House.

It is a pleasure indeed to rise and speak on a really positive bill in this House, because sometimes it seems like we are relentlessly debating things that are negative for the future of this country—certainly, under this Government. But the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill is a really positive bill, and it does follow on from a tradition and a culture that have been brought about in this country over many Governments now, but I think in particular I am very proud of Labour’s track record in this regard with our recognising that special connection that New Zealanders do have with the sea and that special commitment that we have to protecting it in the best way that we can.

The three marine reserves that are set aside by this bill sound like a very exciting part of our country—a part that I have never been to, as many other members have said in this debate. But, none the less, just because we have not been there does not mean we cannot understand the special connection and the importance of actually protecting all the species involved—[Interruption] That is right, I am not going to apply Maggie Barry’s Standing Orders to this particular debate. I have not been there. I do not expect I will ever go there in my lifetime, but I still think it is important to support this bill none the less.

I am not going to take up too much more of the House’s time on this. I just reflect that Grant Robertson’s contribution was interesting, talking about the 1971 Marine Reserves Act and how we do need to renew and refresh our approach to marine reserves. I guess we were probably an early adopter, and now what we find is that there is a need to actually improve and modernise our approach to this, and I fully endorse that sentiment.

My first connection with a marine reserve in New Zealand was the Goat Island reserve in the area of Leigh. I was once, when I was very young, working as a reporter for the Rodney and Waitemata Times in that part of the world, and it was certainly a huge benefit for that area to have that marine reserve. I remember that being one of my earliest experiences of actually snorkelling and being involved in close contact in a marine reserve situation, and I can certainly recommend it to any New Zealander who has not had that experience yet.

Without any further ado I would like to support this bill and continue on the good work that Labour started with regard to marine reserves. Thank you.

What a privilege it is to speak in support of this Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill. I am very pleased that it has broad support across the House. Of course, it creates these new marine reserves around three Subantarctic Islands.

The bill, as other contributors to this debate have already noted, extends the protection that is already in place for the land of the islands but not the waters around the islands. So this bill is a good thing, and it continues the very proud tradition of National Governments in support of our environment and our marine reserves. This bill is just another step along that proud history and that proud tradition.

There are real benefits for all New Zealanders in terms of tourism and scientific research, and it is very likely that even through the promotion of sustainable fisheries our export opportunities will increase. I am pleased to note that the Minister of Conservation, the Hon Kate Wilkinson, has stated that she plans to introduce a new marine reserves bill into this House next year. I think that will be very good, because it fulfils part of this National Government’s 2011 conservation manifesto. It is timely, therefore, to remember that it was, in fact, a National Government back in 1971 that passed the original Marine Reserves Act. I will be looking forward to participating in the debate when the new bill is introduced next year.

One of the interesting things that I note from this piece of legislation is that due to the islands’ remote nature the legislation is going to provide for every officer in command of a New Zealand Defence Force vessel or aircraft to be deemed a ranger under the terms of the Act. I think, given the remoteness of the islands, that is a terrific thing. I commend this bill to the House.

The question is that the motion—

💬 Eugenie Sage: Mr Speaker—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I call the honourable member Eugenie Sage.

Thank you, Mr Speaker.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): I will ring the bell with 1 minute to go.

Thank you. I am pleased to take a short call on the Subantarctic Islands Marine Reserves Bill, which the Green Party will be supporting. Certainly, the heavy seas and the strong winds that Wellington has been experiencing this morning give an insight into the conditions that prevail on these islands, though I suspect that the wind-chill factor there is likely to be much higher. I have never had the privilege of visiting the Subantarctic Islands but would certainly welcome the suggestion of the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee, Nicky Wagner, that we go down to the Antipodes Islands, Bounty Islands, or Campbell Island groups. They are some of our wildest and most remote places, and they are some of our least modified and most natural environments remaining in New Zealand. Certainly, they are a nirvana for nature photographers. They have got dramatic sea cliffs and luxuriant mega-herbs, and then you get species like the albatross nesting amongst the tussock. It was certainly a major achievement in 2001 to 2005 when the Department of Conservation undertook the largest rat eradication project in the world and cleared Campbell Island of rats. There has been a major improvement in the health of the flora since then.

It was the universal value of the Subantarctic Islands—the Antipodes Islands, Bounty Islands, Campbell Island, and Auckland Islands—that was recognised when they were listed for World Heritage status in 1998. That listing included all of the territorial seas around the islands, but it is only the territorial seas of the Auckland Islands that have been protected since 2003. So this bill is very welcome because it is an initiative to put in place our World Heritage obligations to protect the territorial seas around three others of the islands. It is certainly a big improvement on the lack of protection around those other groups, the Antipodes Islands, the Bounty Islands, and Campbell Island.

Certainly, in terms of the Antipodes Islands, all of the 12 nautical mile territorial sea would be protected as a reserve, and that is an excellent result for conservation. But around the Bounty Islands only 58 percent of the territorial sea will be protected, though there will certainly be initiatives under the Fisheries Act to prohibit Danish seine fishing. Around Campbell Island it is only around 39 percent of the territorial waters, and, as Gareth Hughes noted, we are disappointed that that crab fishery is to be allowed, given that it is not even in existence yet. That is a shortcoming in the bill.

I would just like to talk about the collaborative process that resulted in the recommendations to the Government. It was out of the Subantarctic Islands Marine Protection Planning Forum, which had representation from all of the stakeholders—commercial fishers, environmental interests, and others—and the conservation interests on that stakeholder group certainly sought to have a much larger area protected. As a member of the select committee I look forward to their submissions making the case that the boundaries of the reserves that will be established in this bill should be extended.

But the Government has really dropped the ball on marine protection, apart from this initiative. The Subantarctic forum was established under the former Government and we had the Marine Protected Areas Policy, which was a joint initiative between the Ministry of Fisheries and the Department of Conservation in 2006. That was supposed to govern these collaborative forums set up around the country, and the only ones we have seen have been the Subantarctic one and the West Coast one. Having been a member of the West Coast Marine Protection Forum I know that these forums are an excellent initiative to get away from the hostility that you get and the attacks on reserve proposals that proceed on a one-off basis. Getting all the stakeholders around the table means that you can have a good discussion. Yet there have been no new collaborative forums established subsequent to the West Coast and the Subantarctic ones. That is really disappointing. We keep hearing that a new marine reserves bill will come in next year. That is definitely needed, but we keep hearing “next year” without the bill being introduced.

Certainly the Green Party supports this bill. It is a very valuable initiative in marine conservation, but we need more comprehensive initiatives to protect representative areas across our territorial sea and in the exclusive economic zone. Thank you.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee.

The House adjourned at 12.58 p.m. (Wednesday)