Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill

I move, That the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. At the appropriate time I will move that the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill be referred to the Primary Production Committee, with an instruction that the committee presents its final report on or before 21 June 2013.

First of all, I want to thank the Hon Paul Swain, Neil Walter, and Sarah McGrath of the Ministerial Inquiry into Foreign Charter Vessels panel, who have delivered the comprehensive and thorough report that has led to this bill. I want to also thank my predecessor as Minister for Primary Industries, the Hon David Carter, who led the Government’s response along with the Hon Kate Wilkinson, as the Minister of Labour at that time. Both did a sterling job in getting this legislation through to where it is today. I was also involved myself as Minister of Immigration at that time. I would also like to thank Andrew Hill and his team of officials for supporting the inquiry panel to produce a report of such a high standard. I also acknowledge the officials from the Ministry for Primary Industries, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, Maritime New Zealand, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, who provided robust advice to Ministers on the inquiry’s recommendations.

The Government set up the ministerial inquiry into the use and operation of foreign charter vessels with the main objectives of protecting New Zealand’s international reputation and trade access, maximising the economic return to New Zealand from our fisheries resources, and ensuring acceptable and equitable New Zealand labour standards on all fishing vessels operating in New Zealand’s fisheries waters within the exclusive economic zone.

Following serious allegations of mistreatment and underpayment of foreign crews working on some foreign charter vessels the inquiry made a number of legislative and non-legislative recommendations to improve agency coordination and monitoring and compliance of foreign charter vessels. The non-legislative measures are currently being implemented as we speak. I am confident that most foreign charter vessels have significantly improved their actions since these changes were brought about.

To complement these measures further legislative amendments are proposed through this bill. These amendments improve the management of vessel safety, employment and fisheries management matters on board foreign charter vessels, and provide New Zealand with full jurisdiction to enforce New Zealand standards.

From 1 May 2016 foreign-flagged fishing vessels will no longer be able to legally operate in New Zealand waters. Over the next 4 years all foreign charter vessels will be required to reflag to New Zealand. The 4-year transition period will enable the fishing industry and the Government to adjust to the new regime and the Government is working closely with the industry to help facilitate changes to existing business practices. It is my understanding that some vessels will reflag this year, which is a very positive move indeed.

The decision sends a clear message to the world that New Zealand is serious about the fair treatment of fishing crews, the safety of vessels, and sustainable fishing practices. Reflagging will further strengthen compliance with New Zealand laws and provide greater transparency around the operation of foreign-owned vessels. Once vessels are flagged to New Zealand the full range of New Zealand law including employment relations and workplace health and safety law will automatically apply and be enforceable. Reflagging will provide greater protection to the crews as they will be employed by a New Zealand - based party under a New Zealand employment agreement. If breaches of labour law occur, such as an underpayment of wages or illegal deductions, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment will be able to investigate them, and I expect swift action will occur.

The bill also expands the range of tools available to the Government. Risks posed by all vessels can now be managed in a more responsive manner through the introduction of new powers to suspend or cancel the registration of fishing vessels and thereby withdrawing permission to fish. The bill includes a robust process to ensure that these powers are used only in exceptional circumstances and that there are opportunities for the industry to make submissions to the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries before these suspensions take effect. Agencies with responsibility for employment, vessel safety, and fishery laws will continue to use existing tools to ensure compliance with those laws in the first instance.

The bill strengthens the powers of the Director-General of the Ministry for Primary Industries to consider a wider range of matters when consenting to the registration of both domestic and foreign-owned vessels. These matters are extended from fisheries management matters to include employment and vessel safety conditions. These measures enable the director-general to act upon intelligence gained through improved coordination and communication with other agencies if necessary. The bill also extends the functions of observers to collect information on these matters and allows for the new functions to be cost recovered or directly charged to operators through the making of regulations.

Finally, I want to stress that our improved management of foreign charter vessels is not limited to the changes proposed in this bill. The Government is already implementing a number of measures that have improved our monitoring and enforcement of fisheries management, vessel safety, and labour issues on board foreign charter vessels.

Overall, this bill is about making sure New Zealand has a world-leading fishery system with high standards on employment and safety. It sends a strong statement that the Government takes ethical issues in the fisheries sector very seriously. I look forward to the industry and other interested parties engaging in the select committee process to have their say. I commend this bill to the House.

Firstly, I would like to congratulate the Minister for Primary Industries; I think this bill, the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Bill, will be his first bill in the House as the Minister for Primary Industries. It is fairly obvious, actually, because he has given so much praise to his officials. I am sure that down the track he will not place so much faith in all the advice that he gets from them, particularly in this area, because it is an area that has been fraught over the years.

I acknowledge—and it is through this Opposition party supporting the bill—that this is a good piece of legislation. It is well intended, it is necessary, and perhaps it is overdue. It is always very difficult for me to get up here and praise the Government—and, in doing so, can I say that I hope it does not happen too often—but I am just concerned about the framework.

The Minister has correctly outlined all the provisions in the bill, and I think that is great, but he said that foreign charter vessels have vastly improved their operation since the inquiry. Well, I am not sure that that would be the case. I know in fact that this bill will be necessary to make the changes, because there is a culture on foreign charter vessels that has been allowed to continue for too long in spite of warnings—to us in Government as well—and officials have been denying the reality of the conditions on those boats. It has taken us too long to sort this out.

I applaud the Government. I would like to acknowledge our former colleague Paul Swain, who chaired the inquiry. The report was a good one. It correctly identified the problems that we have perhaps known about. We have investigated. In fact, I do not think the member was a member of the Primary Production Committee, but we had an inquiry back in the early 2000s, when another piece of legislation came through the system.

We knew things were not right. We brought the officials in. We sought information assurance. We were given it. I am sure Mr Ardern, as a member of the select committee at the time, will remember the assurances we were given—quite wrongly, in fact—that all was well and that we could enforce fair conditions and fair protection for workers on foreign charter vessels. Well, we could not, and we did not. I guess we have to apologise to all the workers of those vessels, over a number of years, who have been, effectively, slaves for many, many reasons. My colleague in the Lyttelton and Port Hills electorate has met many of them, as we all have.

I would like to just go back to a bit of history, to 1997 when the fisheries bill went through—1996-97. In fact, it was our former colleague Graham Kelly who insisted at that time that anyone working on a boat catching New Zealand fish should be paid at New Zealand rates of pay and get New Zealand conditions. It was agreed to at that time—somewhat reluctantly by the National Government, I have to say, but it was agreed. Then there were a lot of fingers crossed in the hope that we could in fact carry that through and enforce that.

Why I have some concerns is because again the Minister for Primary Industries in his speech to the House today says that this will ensure that we have fair payment at New Zealand rates and that we have fair protection. We cannot do that onshore. We cannot do that in some of the businesses around Auckland and around the country now. So it is going to be a big ask to be able to ensure that that occurs on boats a long way offshore around this country. It is with good intention that we have laws to protect workers in this country working onshore, but we cannot guarantee it—we should.

What I say to the Minister is that although good intents are worthy and noble we need proper enforcement. The Department of Labour has shown in the past its inability to enforce the legislation around health and safety and around fair employment conditions. The Government needs to put greater resource into enforcement to follow this piece of legislation through, otherwise we will end up with where we have been for too long.

Again, back in the 1990s we had a commitment by the New Zealand fishing industry to “New Zealandisation”. That was that we would move to have New Zealand - owned and controlled vessels and New Zealanders catching what is an incredible resource. One of the biggest fishery zones in the world is here on our doorstep—beautiful fish; protein that the world wants. We had committed as a country and with the industry to “New Zealandisation”—that is, that we should own and control it, invest in it, and get the best value from it.

Well, we moved in that direction, but foreign charter vessels have stopped that progress. They have been in place for too long. The requirement now to reflag is, I think, a good step. I hope that we see fewer of those vessels in our waters and that we have more of our own. There is an argument put forward by the industry that it needs these contract vessels to catch the lower-value species. Well, the lower-value species, dare I say, can be higher-value species over time. I think we have underestimated the value of wild fish. Protein grown and nurtured in the Pacific Ocean, in the Tasman Sea, is, in my view, worthy of premiums in the world market, and I do not know whether we have extracted the best we can from that incredible resource. So we must move forward with that.

This legislation is one step that will add cost to some fisheries companies, and I say “tough”. We demand that we have standards and payments to workers in this country that are fair, at least above minimum wage, so they can survive. It is up to the companies to work together to get better value for that incredible resource. So Labour does support this bill.

I ask a few questions because although it is progress, the Minister himself said in another quote that the suspension of registration will occur only in exceptional circumstances. So the question I ask is how many of the fishermen and fisherwomen out there will have to be underpaid before the Minister steps in and deregisters a boat.

💬 Hon Nathan Guy: Director-General.

Well, the Director-General; yes, I appreciate that—the Director-General. The Minister will not intervene at all, of course. That is the Government’s kind of mandate—“We do not intervene, we do not do anything, we hand it all over to other people.” The issue here is—[Interruption] I hate to remind the House of the Government’s policy, but anyway, can I say that the question will remain. When will—

💬 Hon Maurice Williamson: Every weekend, Damien on the high seas.

I know that Minister would not. Look at leaky homes. That is a great example of that Minister’s inaction. Can I say that with good legislation we need the ability to intervene to police it, and to follow it and carry it through.

I ask a question of the Minister. He got up and said that there would be four key objectives, and he named three of them. I am wondering what the fourth objective was for the fishing industry. I acknowledge and I applaud those objectives, and I think it is important that he clarify the four of them.

There are other questions coming out about the transition period of 4 years and why, indeed, the Government is allowing that. There are some people who believe that 2 years is a fair transition time to ensure that we have people working for New Zealanders in New Zealand and being paid at least the minimum wage. That is a fair expectation, but this piece of legislation proposes to allow that to roll-out over 4 years, which, in our view, is too long.

In summary, this is a good piece of legislation. It puts us on the right path, but there are many issues, and I am sure the Primary Production Committee will tease them out, because we have heard many of the debates, many of the excuses, I guess, in summary, put before us over a number of years. We want to get this right. We need to ensure we have a fishing industry with a good, solid, sustainable future. We cannot have New Zealand companies, who are paying proper wages and providing proper conditions, competing with slave labour on boats that are decrepit and unsafe, and that is the situation at the moment with foreign charter vessels. The question will be for the coalition partner of the Government, the Māori Party, to ensure that it can hold fast and make sure that these conditions are supported through legislation.

It is a pleasure to rise in this debate on foreign charter vessels with foreign crews. The Minister for Primary Industries has spelt out very clearly—and I also congratulate the Minister on his new appointment; it is wonderful to see that we have got another farmer in the primary industries sector willing to step forward and be part of this process—and pointed out in the early ministerial statements in this debate that the objective is to ensure that crews on foreign vessels have fair pay and conditions. It is also true what the Labour Opposition spokesman said about these conditions having been well below standard for some time.

It is welcome that the Labour Opposition is supporting the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, but not surprising in the sense that my first introduction to this topic was actually when Graham Kelly had a member’s bill drawn out of the ballot and it came to the Primary Production Committee. What I was surprised about at the time, though, was how, under a Labour Government, that bill got kicked for touch. One of its own member’s bills did not progress as well as it could have. I was a little bit surprised about that, I have to say, at the time. I also say that, like others, I think the former member the Hon Paul Swain has done a very good job of the inquiry into what the situation is.

I think we need to recognise at this point that this is a substantial industry, and a growing industry, with $1.5 billion worth of exports, and the opportunity to double and triple that over time in a sustainable way. But reputation is everything when it comes to marketing products around the world. The fact that we may have had some activity going on in the industry that would not hold us in good stead as far as our reputation goes is something that those in the industry themselves should be concerned about. No doubt, during the select committee process we will hear all the pros and cons of the debate on foreign charter vessels versus New Zealand - owned ships, and already we know what some of that debate will be about.

It is about being able to manage quota for a very short season. It is about low value in some quota fish, etc., and being able to capture that where we may not be able to commercially capture that if we could not have foreign charter vessels. It is not about suggesting to the industry that it cannot use foreign charter vessels; it is just about making sure that those who work on those boats and the conditions that they work in are up to the standard that New Zealand would expect and up to what would normally happen in New Zealand. Being able to reflag those ships in New Zealand waters so that New Zealand law will apply in that regard is, I think, a great step forward. I look forward to the bill coming to the Primary Production Committee, where we can hear from those in the industry and work through those concerns one by one. Thank you.

As my colleague Damien O’Connor has said, we will be supporting this bill, the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. It is perhaps long overdue. Often in this House we find ourselves passing legislation in the wake of a tragedy or an unfortunate event, and of course this bill was brought about because of the loss of six lives on a South Korean foreign charter vessel in New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone. That is a tragedy that I am sure everyone in this House regrets, and it is a shame that far too often we are dealing with issues after the event instead of, perhaps—with the benefit of hindsight—realising that some of these tragedies could have been avoided.

Certainly, there is no question that there has been a spotlight on the activities and the practices aboard foreign charter vessels for a long time. In recent years, in particular, it has become a particular kind of focus of investigative journalism, and I think all New Zealanders will be shocked to have seen many of the stories, the photos, and the documentary evidence coming off these vessels of violence, of physical and sexual abuse, of slave labour—things that are absolutely unthinkable in New Zealand but have, unfortunately, been occurring under our laws and have been occurring on our watch.

So we do welcome this legislation. We hope that it will be the beginning of a new era in terms of the treatment of those workers who are on board these foreign charter vessels, and, hopefully, we will not see those tragedies like the one that we saw with the South Korean vessel that had the loss of six lives.

This bill is an important step forward, and the Government is to be praised for the step it has taken, which was, to its credit, beyond what the inquiry actually called for. The Government has decided to go further and require that these vessels be flagged in New Zealand waters, which means that they will be subject to all New Zealand laws, including those of health and safety, whereas before they were subject only to the Minimum Wage Act and to food safety legislation, and then for everything else they were subject to the laws of the country in which they had registered, or flagged, their vessel.

New Zealand, again, unfortunately—this is not a world-leading kind of movement. We are one of the few countries in the developed world that actually has not taken this step already. I think only Namibia and Brazil still allow foreign charter vessels to be flagged in other countries, so this really brings New Zealand into line with where the rest of the world has already moved to.

One of the questions I would ask the Minister for Primary Production is that I assume that this will also bring our foreign charter vessels into New Zealand taxation laws, so that these vessels will not only be subject to health and safety legislation, the employment legislation, and the environmental legislation of New Zealand but also be required to pay the same taxes that New Zealand fishing vessels pay—for example, the carbon charge that is on fuel under the emissions trading scheme. I know it has been difficult for New Zealand vessels that they have been subject to that particular charge, but the foreign charter vessels that they are in direct competition with have not been subject to that same taxation, excise tax, GST, and the many other taxes that we have. So I am assuming that this legislation, in requiring vessels to be flagged in New Zealand waters, will also bring those foreign charter vessels under New Zealand taxation legislation, which provides a level playing field with our own operators in New Zealand, of course.

I want to pick up on a point that my colleague Damien O’Connor made because I think it is a really critical one, and that is that you can pass all the legislation in the world but it will not make a blind bit of difference if it is not able to be enforced. And we know how difficult it is to enforce legislation in parts of New Zealand it is easy to get to and parts of New Zealand it is easy to monitor, so when we are talking about hundreds of kilometres out in our exclusive economic zone, I think what we are going to want to hear from the Government at select committee is how it is going to be enforcing New Zealand laws aboard these ships. If we do not get an answer to that question, then passing this bill will not do anything.

It is that enforcement aspect that will determine whether or not this legislation is successful, and it is not good enough to kind of say we will see how it goes, or that we already have current Department of Labour processes in place. We are dealing with a very, very different environment and a very, very different set of circumstances when we are talking about fishing vessels in the exclusive economic zone than when we are talking about young workers at McDonald’s, for example, and ensuring that they are getting paid the minimum wage and that their health and safety and their rights are being looked after. So that issue of enforcement and of how we are going to monitor and ensure that this legislation is being adhered to and is being followed is going to be the critical point, I think, at select committee for members of the Labour Party.

We also have concerns around the ability of the New Zealand fishing vessels to compete with these foreign charter vessels, and I know that one of the concerns has been the issue around when fishermen are out there fishing their quota and suddenly, for example, there is a native bird caught in the set line, and often the fishery can be shut down. This happens not infrequently, and it is a real frustration for local fishermen. They come to you and say that every single time this happens, it is not them doing it. They get shut out, their fishery gets shut down, they lose income, and they lose the ability to fish their quota because someone out there has not shown the environment the respect it deserves, and has not shown the wildlife the respect it deserves—something that our fishing fleet in New Zealand does do; to its credit it does that. It takes its commitment to protecting the wildlife and the environment that it is working in very, very seriously, and, in fact, the entire ecology of the system because it is reliant on it for its very income.

So those fishermen’s frustration is that in their experience it is always foreign charter vessels that are capturing these birds, that are causing these incidents, and that are causing the fishery to be shut down, and there is nothing that they can do about it. They do everything right and then they get punished for the actions of others who are not subject to the same laws and who are not subject to the same conditions as they are. And I really hope that this piece of legislation will start us down a track to rectifying that and to ensuring that the ability of New Zealand fishing operators to carry out their activities does not continue to be hampered by the actions of a few who do not take the protection of New Zealand’s wildlife and the protection of our marine environment seriously.

Hopefully we will be able to hear from the New Zealand operators as to whether or not they believe that this legislation goes far enough in ensuring that a level playing field and a fair situation are created for what is left of our domestic fishing fleet. And, unfortunately, there is not a lot left of it. I think we are seeing the results of what I know the Ministry of Fisheries thinks is a really great thing—that we now just have a lot of really big quota owners instead of a whole lot of little ones.

But I think the flip side of that has been what we have seen with these foreign charter vessels, which is that instead of having the families who have done the fishing, who have had that quota, who have passed it on from generation to generation, who care about the environment, and who understand and respect the lifestyle, we have gone to this very corporate model with, unfortunately, operators who do not show that same level of respect. And it might be efficient for the Ministry of Fisheries to have a few really big quota holders, but I think we have seen the environmental damage of that, and we have seen the impact on the workers in that industry, which would indicate that perhaps that change is not nearly as efficient or positive as perhaps the Ministry of Fisheries would lead us to believe.

We think that there is a missed opportunity in this legislation, and we will be pursuing that at select committee. We think that there is actually an opportunity here to encourage maximum participation of New Zealand fishing operators within the industry by moving towards a minimum of 50 percent New Zealand crew on any vessel fishing within New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone. We think part of the solution to this problem has to be building up the capability within our own domestic fishing industry, and we do not think that there is anything wrong with a Government saying that we want to see a minimum of 50 percent New Zealand crew on these vessels.

I will tell you what else that would do. It would go a long way towards ensuring that that monitoring and enforcement function that I discussed earlier is actually carried out. Having those eyes on board is something that perhaps removes part of that problem that we discussed earlier around how we make sure that this legislation is actually enforced. So we will be pursuing that at select committee because we think we have a real opportunity here—a real opportunity—to support New Zealand’s local fishing industry and to make the implementation of this bill easier.

The only other point I would raise is that we think the 4-year transition period is far too long. We think this could be in place within a year or—if not—two. Four years provides a big window of opportunity for more abuse to happen, for more tragedy to occur, and we want to see that time frame, whilst being realistic—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member.

I rise to speak to the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. This bill implements decisions on the regulation of foreign charter vessels following the allegations and then the recommendations of the ministerial inquiry that followed. It requires that all vessels are flagged as New Zealand ships from 1 May 2016. We think it should be a little bit quicker, but the bill is a move in the right direction. It strengthens the chief executive’s power to consider a wide range of matters when consenting to foreign charter vessel applications. These matters extend from fisheries management matters to employment and vessel safety conditions. Bringing together those different aspects is very important, and it is a very timely move.

The bill extends the functions of observers—and I will talk about that a bit more—on foreign charter vessels to collect the information on employment and vessel safety conditions. It begins with a phase-out of foreign charter vessels in New Zealand waters, which is a good thing. It, unfortunately, takes a few years, as I have said, to get to that point. There are some gaps in the bill, and we will be looking forward to the select committee, hopefully, addressing some of those. The crew of foreign charter vessels, their pay, their health, safety conditions, all need to be lifted in terms of this bill. Although the breaches will be more readily reported, this bill fails to address many of the issues raised in the inquiry.

Migrant fishing crews working on foreign charter vessels fishing in New Zealand waters have been exploited over two decades. Research reveals human rights abuses, forced labour, exploitative and appalling conditions coupled with an absence of accountability, despite legislation. The National Party’s links with the fishing industry should be looked at as well.

💬 Hon Simon Bridges: Oh, come on! Look at the party next to you.

In response to the noise from the other side, maybe I need to repeat that. The crews come to New Zealand with the goal of earning a decent income. Instead, they become victims of forced labour by fishing companies associated with others in this House. If decisive action had been taken when accounts of fishing crew exploitation first emerged in the 1990s, recent shocking incidents of abuse that have been in our media could have been avoided.

Globally, the fishing industry is home to some of the worst examples of abuse in the workplace, and it is to our shame that New Zealand waters have been the scene of some of this abuse. Countries such as Indonesia provide a ready pool of impoverished migrant workers to our fishing industry. The nature of the employment itself—fishing vessels operating at sea for months on end, with little if any regulatory oversight—means transparency and accountability is problematic. The New Zealand Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment must also take responsibility for poor enforcement of our weak laws. In 1999 a case initiated by over 100 crews from three vessels went to the Court of Appeal, and despite a series of investigations the Department of Labour undertook no prosecutions. The question has to be: who was it taking instruction from?

The exploitation of foreign fishing crews has been a feature of the New Zealand deep-sea industry for decades, unfortunately. New Zealand fishing companies began using foreign charter vessels in the late 1970s to help them develop the deep-water fisheries, and many of them are crewed by migrant Asian workers, particularly, as I said, Indonesians. In 2004 over 150 foreign crew abandoned their vessels, leading to yet another investigation by the Department of Labour, which reconfirmed the appalling exploitation of foreign workers. Subsequently, a non-binding code of practice was introduced in 2006 and an auditing programme was introduced 2007, but, of course, the problems in this industry just continued. Codes of practice—yeah right. Things just carry on.

Many crews in our waters come from impoverished regions of Indonesia, and we will talk about that. These crews become victims of forced labour at the recruitment stage. They are misled into providing guarantees in securities to a staffing agency and may also have to pay a cash bond before they are allowed to sign their employment agreements. They are then required to hand over birth certificates, family identity documents, and education certificates to these agents. Many have flown to New Zealand, with the cost of visa fees and transportation at an inflated level deducted from future wages. This happens after signing employment contracts that lock them into a form of slavery. Crew on these ships are required to sign blank time sheets. Work by New Zealand researchers has also found wage fraud.

The dreadful treatment meted out to the crew of the Shin Ji is the most recent example of how these workers have fared in New Zealand waters. After months of exploitation these fishermen walked off the job, seeking help from our authorities. What did we do? We kicked them out of the country. These crewmen feared returning home because of the agents who hired them. Their removal from New Zealand came despite the calls the Greens and Labour made that they be allowed to stay to assist the inquiry that investigated the slave labour conditions suffered by around 2,000 mainly Asian men working on foreign charter vessels. A study by the University of Auckland business school found inhumane conditions and abuse on foreign charter vessels. These men had been hired by Indonesian agents for as little as two sixty a month. The money was to go into a bank account in Indonesia. According to some crew, they were paid only 5,000 for 22 months. I have to ask who was actually gaining from this in New Zealand. We really need to be looking at those people.

Crew claimed that they were subject to sexual abuse, with claims that the younger male crews nightly were made to massage the captain. Others claim to have been assaulted. Sixteen-hour days were expected, and one man spoke of working 30 hours straight. Sick leave or rest days were unheard of. After fleeing the boat, the crew stayed at a motel but ran out of money and food and had to appeal for help. They got some from unions but none from the people tasked with enforcing our regulations, the Department of Labour, and I question the people who benefit from their slave labour. Some I am aware of, anecdotally, ended up painting a house while they were being put up. It was somewhere to actually be until things were sorted out for them.

💬 Colin King: That was in Samoa, wasn’t it?

No, it might be wee bit closer to you than you realise. The story of foreign charter vessels in our waters exposes the failure of New Zealand’s elected representatives and Government officials to decisively root out forced labour over the last two decades. [Interruption] Do not tempt me. In 1996 Parliament was told that we had closed our eyes at home to those abuses occurring under our noses. We cannot have a commercial fishing industry developed on the backs of Third World exploited labour. Little had changed by the time the abuses of the Shin Ji were discovered. Fishing operators continued to ignore the law, the Department of Labour continued to take a benign approach to enforcement, and crews continued to be exploited and mistreated.

The Green Party will be supporting this legislation because it does make some changes. However, we consider for this industry to be cleaned up the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment must beef up its enforcement capabilities, and it must act with a firm hand. We cannot allow these abuses to occur in our waters.

Part 2 of the bill is a very important part too. It is fantastic that there is an increase in observers. However, the increase in observers will not go far enough for protection, in terms of labour, or for the benefits we expect for the conservation of biodiversity and for managing fishing quota. There has been a minimum of one observer on all foreign chartered vessels. Two observers have been placed on vessels deemed to be of high risk to ensure 24-hour coverage. How the hang is that meant to work when factoring in shift changes, breaks, meals, health issues, etc? We definitely need more than two observers to ensure that there is a 24/7 coverage, and that must be provided. That, hopefully, will be rectified through the select committee process.

We have to look at what has been spent on observers on fishing boats and how that compares with each of the last 5 years. In this last period where this has come in, spending on observers is actually lower in the 2011-12 period than in the previous year because no observer coverage was provided to inshore fisheries. We still need coverage there as well, despite the fact—

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Sorry to interrupt the honourable member. His time has expired.

This Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill is very important legislation. It protects human rights, and it also protects New Zealand’s reputation as a high-quality food producer. Having said that, the business model of having charter boats or foreign charter vessels will remain a legitimate business model for the very reason that quite often a quota holder will catch his quota in a short period of time, and there is no profit in having a boat tied up at the wharf.

The Primary Production Committee is looking forward to listening to the submitters who will come forth on this bill. But, again, it is a Government that is addressing the issues that reflect and that have put a spotlight on New Zealand, and we certainly need to tidy up. So it gives me great pleasure in supporting and commending this bill to the House.

I am pleased to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a call on this, the first reading of the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. I would also like to join with my colleague the Hon Damien O’Connor in congratulating the Minister for Primary Industries on bringing this bill to the House.

New Zealand First agrees with the broad aims of this bill and we are pleased to support its referral to the Primary Production Committee, where some of the minor concerns that we do have may be addressed. In addition, we hope that during the select committee examination of this bill, and the submissions that it will undoubtedly attract, there may be an opportunity to include the prohibition of shark finning within the bill’s ambit, as we feel this is a very necessary addition to the New Zealand fisheries management that is not covered elsewhere in the law. At present the finning of live sharks, that is the removal of fins from sharks that are still alive, is not permitted within New Zealand’s jurisdiction. But there is no prohibition on the practice of removing fins from dead sharks and then returning the remainder of the carcass to the ocean. New Zealand First regards this practice as incredibly wasteful, particularly so in a world of growing populations and shrinking resources. Whether sharks are caught deliberately as a target species or as bycatch from other fishing activities, we believe the entire animal needs to be harvested and made use of. We feel the best way of achieving this is to require sharks to be brought ashore with fins naturally attached, as is the best practice advocated by New Zealand Shark Alliance and others.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: Why is he speaking in our House?

Because this a democracy that allows free speech, Mr Henare. There is some resistance, we know, from within the fishing industry due to constraints on boat space and the limited market that currently exists for some shark species. But it is our belief that the adoption of this methodology will allow for both the better utilisation of the resource and the minimisation of the risk of live finning, which, although illegal, still has the potential to be carried out, out at sea beyond the view of our limited number of inspectors and observers.

In general terms New Zealand First salutes the decision to require all vessels operating in our fishery to be New Zealand flagged.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: He should leave this House.

I am quite sure, Mr Henare, you will be leaving the House before I do.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: You should leave the House.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! Order! These interjections across the cross benches—tone it down. I am calling Richard Prosser, I would like to hear what the member has to say.

💬 Hon Tau Henare: You’re the only one in New Zealand, Mr Speaker.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! [Interruption] Order! That is an attack on the Chair. I will ask the member to refrain from such comments.

Thank you, Mr Assistant Speaker. In general terms New Zealand First salutes the decision to require all vessels operating our fishery to be New Zealand flagged. We applaud this as the central plank of this bill and we are pleased that it will mean that crews working on boats within our jurisdiction will receive the protection—

💬 Colin King: Hey Richard, just speak a bit slower.

—of New Zealand’s labour laws and the benefits of wages guaranteed at New Zealand domestic rates. Thank you, Mr King. At present too many vessels operating in our waters do not meet our standards of health and safety. Too many crews suffer under conditions that we would describe as manifestly insufficient—working for wages, which, as other members have alluded to, border on slavery. This bill will address those realities in a very tangible way and we applaud its construction and intent with regard to that, but we do question that it will take another 3 years for these changes to come to pass.

We salute the direction that this bill is taking the New Zealand fishing industry in, but we struggle to comprehend why it will be 1 May 2016 before all fishing vessels operating in New Zealand’s waters are New Zealand flagged and subject to New Zealand laws. For three more years what are, currently, largely foreign crews on the largely foreign-owned charter fishing vessels that dominate our fishery will continue to have to suffer under the inadequate conditions as they exist. New Zealand First asks why it should take this long for the changes to be implemented. We hold genuine concerns that the real reason may be pressure from within the fishing industry itself, which puts economic concerns, the cost associated with additional wages and the upgrading of vessels, ahead of the welfare of crews. We are concerned by that. We would be very concerned if that were indeed the case. We certainly hope it is not, and we look forward to having this issue examined in the select committee.

We also have a concern that although the regime initiated by this bill will vastly improve conditions and pay for the crews involved, the reality is that a majority of those crews will still be foreign citizens and the bulk of the increased pay that they receive will still disappear overseas. New Zealand First is very keen to promote the “New Zealandisation” of the fishing industry, and we would very much like to see an industry where the majority of boats operating are New Zealand - owned and are crewed by New Zealand citizens. We realise, however, that the demands of deep-sea fishing and the requirement to follow the tides and the weather, rather than a fixed working-week calendar, mean that in some cases it is not always going to be possible to find New Zealand residents to fill crew requirements.

We wonder whether this is one of those cases where a degree of targeted immigration may be necessary and indeed desirable, in order to provide our fishery with the pool of skilled labour that it requires. I would add that my Labour colleague Moana Mackey’s suggestion of a 50-percent minimum quota sounds very much like an elegant partial solution to this problem. New Zealand First sees this as being one more way in which a maximum return from our fishery resource may be retained in New Zealand.

Lastly, New Zealand First is eager to hear the views of the public, the fishing industry, and other interested parties on these concerns and on other aspects of the bill. We are pleased to support its timely allocation to the Primary Production Committee where it can be examined, progressed, and adjusted as and where necessary under the fine stewardship of Mr Ardern. New Zealand First is pleased to be voting in support of the first reading of this bill. Thank you.

I firstly want to congratulate Minister Guy on his elevation to what I consider to be the most important ministry in this Government. I also want to congratulate the Labour Party on supporting this bill, the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, despite the member for West Coast - Tasman touting for work as a fisheries observer.

This bill is at the heart of what we stand for as a country. It is important that we have an international reputation for food production of the highest quality, including sustainable fishing practices and good, safe work conditions, including reasonable pay and excellent health and safety records. This bill plays an important role in ensuring that the fishing industry in New Zealand can hold its head high internationally, alongside our other key industries, the red meat industry and the milk industry—or food industries, really. The European horse meat scandal may be far removed from us in New Zealand but it does point strongly to the need for integrity in all forms of food production and food-related products. Of course, NAIT Ltd will gain significant credibility as a result of that.

I have no problem commending this bill to the next step. I think it is a great step for us to take, and certainly will tidy up something that has been very untidy in our fishing industry for a number of years. Thank you.

Kia ora, Mr Speaker. It is my pleasure to make a contribution at this first reading of the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. As my colleagues have expressed in their contributions, we support this bill. We do welcome it. It is a long time coming. We know that it has been brought about through some unfortunate circumstances, in particular the terrible tales of exploitation, exploitative employment practices, and tragedies that have occurred on the high seas with foreign charter vessels such as the Oyang 70 around about 2 years ago. There was the Ministerial Inquiry into Foreign Charter Vessels, which followed that tragedy. It is very good to see that of all the recommendations expressed in this bill, the Government has gone further than what the ministerial inquiry recommended. There was a bit of a toss-up between whether it would continue with bareboat charters or go to complete reflagging of vessels. Following consideration by the ministry and its recommendations, the ministry advised and the Minister for Primary Industries has taken on board that all foreign charter vessels operating within New Zealand waters will be reflagged come 2016.

That is an issue that I would like to take up, because, following the ministerial inquiry conducting its work—and it heard submissions up and down the country, and heard many submissions right across the industry—the panel said in its conclusion: “[We have] concluded that urgent corrective action is required in the way New Zealand regulates the activities of foreign charter vessels in its exclusive economic zone.” Well, urgent corrective action—waiting for another 3 to 4 years for this reflagging to be implemented is not that urgent. We know that some leading figures in the fishing industry have made calls for bringing that requirement forward to, say, 2 years, a 2-year time frame. But, alas, the Government has decided that it wants a 4-year lead-in so that companies can prepare and can alter their commercial or contractual charter arrangements, or, indeed, find a new catching capacity so they can bring in new foreign charter vessels under the new regime. So it will take a while before the full force of this legislation is going to be felt, but at least it is a good step forward that these measures are being put in place.

I guess we have heard, and from looking at the submissions, you know, everyone in the fishing industry loves to fish, obviously. Fishermen love to fish. They love to catch lots of fish, and obviously they want to catch them profitably and make a good return on their invested capital, whether it is in their vessels or on their property rights with their quota and annual catch entitlements. I know that there were calls from the Māori investment in fisheries—and obviously Māori are significant stakeholders in the fishing industry through Te Ohu Kaimoana and Aotearoa Fisheries and all of the assets that are owned within those companies, like Sealord’s 50 percent shareholding, and also the property rights that are held by iwi directly through their allocated shares by the Māori fisheries settlement. I know that there has been concern expressed from those elements of the Māori fisheries sector that they did not want to see the introduction of too much of a compliance regime for foreign charter vessels, because of the potential increased costs that it will impose on the industry and the resulting loss in value of their property rights. In terms of the iwi groups around the country, many of them have actually had quite good business relationships with foreign charter vessel companies by virtue of the fact that they could run at a lower cost than other industry players—other domestic industry players, that is—because they were exploiting their labour. It was operating in a false economy. But on the flip side of that, the resource rentals, or the returns that could be paid to the iwi quota owners, were a lot higher than what, say, the prevailing market will be—we shall see—with the more consistent regime that will apply through this piece of legislation.

So not everyone will be happy, but there is a 4-year lead-in time, so no fishing boat owner will want to have their boat tied up. Wherever they are around the world, there is a lot of excess fishing capacity, and I suspect it will not be too hard for existing companies or charter operators to find new commercial arrangements or, indeed, to just tweak their current commercial arrangements with their foreign boat owners to ensure that they meet the grade and can operate to consistent levels right across the board. We do not want to see more of the horrific stories about abuse and exploitation that have occurred.

I have been on one of those charter vessels. They are—and this one in particular was—usually very, very big and very old, over 50 years old at least, and they have been through multiple owners. They are what we call old dungers in the industry—very sturdy but very unsafe. They are not cut out for big guys like me—6 foot 4. You have to sort of duck to get around, like in any rabbit warren, in these big old vessels. That is why they are crewed largely by small crew, many of them sourced from Indonesia—good friends of our mate Mr Prosser over there, we hope. But they are good, hard-working crew, and it is great to see that we can raise their standard so at least they can be on a consistent level with all New Zealand fishers. [Interruption] Just continuing on—they draw crew from all around the world.

I would just like to refer to the Government’s objectives in relation to foreign-owned flagged vessels, which the Minister mentioned in his speech, and one of those objectives is to “Ensure that acceptable and equitable New Zealand labour standards … are applied on all fishing vessels operating in New Zealand’s fisheries waters”. This legislation does achieve that, albeit that it will not kick in for another 3 years’ time. But what that objective does not, alas, include is securing opportunities for Kiwi workers. So it is great that there will be fair and acceptable equitable labour standards, but it would have been great if the Government had gone a step further and also made sure that in relation to the labour on those vessels, the opportunities are there for Kiwi workers. Labour’s policy is to have a progressively built-in 50 percent requirement that if all the crew are on a consistent level under New Zealand law, then we get a larger proportion of those workers, up to 50 percent, being Kiwis. That is what we want to see. I am sure that is what Māori want to see. Those Treaty rights that were recognised through the fisheries settlement were for Māori to get into the business and activity of fishing. So it would be great to see more Māori crew on those boats and getting fairly rewarded for a hard day’s work.

I would also like to say that fishing is more than just food, because now we are seeing our major companies diversifying into nutraceuticals and into fish oils. In fact, there is a lot of extra value. A low-value fish can be turned into a high-value fish. We just need the research and development investment to go into those companies, and, hopefully, Labour will give those incentives so it can turn that $1.5 million industry much higher. Kia ora tātou.

I want to acknowledge the Minister, as others have, as this bill, the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, is the first bill he has introduced as the Minister for Primary Industries.

My contribution will be short. I just wanted to acknowledge that a few weeks ago I was talking to constituents in the great seat of Tāmaki who have worked their way through the fishing industry, from being deckhands to now being owners, who are very supportive of this bill and its intentions. I think that is the key, that we are, as a House, supportive of this, and we welcome getting it to a select committee and, of course, eventually passed.

Is the next call a split call?

💬 Hon Ruth Dyson: It is a split call—that is correct.

Right, 5 minutes.

Can I begin by congratulating the Minister for Primary Industries and say that this bill, the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill, is an excellent bill to have as your first bill in a new portfolio. I am sure the Hon Nathan Guy will be justifiably pleased that it has fallen into his hands to present to the House, and I am really pleased that Labour is supporting it.

I want to make just three points about the bill, but, before I do, can I say that the issue of foreign charter vessels and the abuse of crews has been a very real issue for me as the member of Parliament within whose electorate is the Port of Lyttelton. We have a large number of foreign crews in our electorate, and the stories of abuse are shocking. They really upset people. I want to pay tribute to the people of Lyttelton and Sumner particularly, who have literally taken foreign crew into their own homes to support them in the way that we would want New Zealand to be regarded as supporting people who come to our shores to work.

The first point I want to make is that this bill requires New Zealand flagging, and that has been an issue of considerable debate, actually, since day one of my time in the House. I think it is a move whose time has certainly come. Not only will it improve the ability of the officials to know what is going on, because there is always some debate about what regulation and what legislation applies to different vessels, but, for absolute clarity, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment will be able to monitor all the legislation and regulation as if each vessel was a totally New Zealand - owned and operated business. That clarity is going to be really helpful for our officials. I want the officials to know that they will have the backing of all parties in this Parliament if they see any abuse of workers, because not only is it terrible for the workers involved to be treated so badly but also it really damages New Zealand’s reputation to have our name attached to the abuse of workers. I do not think anyone in the House would like to see that. So the first point is the most important part of this bill, which is the fact that all ships will be New Zealand flagged.

The second point I want to make is about something the bill does not do, and I hope the Primary Production Committee is able to remedy it. It does not do anything to address the other issue that is of concern at any time, but, of course, more so in times of high unemployment, as we tragically have now under the do-nothing, hands-off National-led Government. The displacement of jobs that New Zealanders could take but that are currently being filled by these foreign crews is something that I think the select committee ought to address. We have a large number of young people who I think would thrive if they were in that environment. It is a hard life. It requires a lot of discipline, but I know that many of our young people, particularly, would respond very well to that opportunity. So, hopefully, the issue of jobs for New Zealanders on these charter vessels will be looked at as well.

The third point I want to make in my contribution to this debate is the length of time before this legislation is going to be implemented. I cannot recall any bill that has had a waiting time of 4 years. That is nearly the time from a baby being born to starting school. It is a large amount of time, and it is totally unnecessary. It means that we are condoning bad practice, although the whole of Parliament is admitting that it exists and agrees on the solution. The bill will go through a select committee process and may be tidied up, but then we are saying that we will wait for 4 years to implement it. I do not understand that. It is one of the very few issues on which the maritime lawyers and the maritime union are totally as one. They say that it is too long, as well, and I would want to be hearing from the officials at the select committee, and perhaps even from the Minister during the Committee stage if the select committee does not fix this up, some justification for this taking so long.

As I said at the beginning, it is a real pleasure for me to be part of the Labour team, which is standing in support of this bill. What it does is excellent, and it will make a real difference to people who are actually in very vulnerable situations. When you are on the other side of the world, your job is on a ship, and you cannot necessarily speak the first language of the country whose port you are in, you are in a very vulnerable situation. So we are saying that we are standing beside those workers. We want to improve their conditions. I hope we also make opportunities for New Zealanders to have jobs, as well.

Kia ora. Ngā mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. I rise to speak in support of the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill. The Green Party supports this bill. It supports the intent of this bill. This is something we have been calling for, for years, even when Labour was defending the practice during the 2000s. For years we have been calling for an end to this abhorrent practice, and it is a good day as our Parliament is finally getting around to this, dealing with and, hopefully, addressing and stopping this abhorrent practice, which has happened on our high seas for far too long and has impacted on far too many foreign workers in our name and for our profits in New Zealand.

First up, I want to acknowledge those people who put it on Parliament’s agenda, who put it on the nation’s agenda, and who put it on our conscience. We have got the likes of the Service and Food Workers Union. We have got the Sunday Star-Times, which ran a long campaign trying to highlight the injustices. We see, in particular, Darren Coulston, whom I have met a number of times and who has tirelessly worked to raise this issue in the country’s consciousness. He has done a good job.

This is an old issue—a very old issue. Listening to the Government members, you would think it was something new that they have only just discovered happening in our waters, but this exploitation has been happening for decades. I need not remind members that only in 1999 we had over 100 crew go to the New Zealand courts, to the Court of Appeal, yet it was the Department of Labour that sat on its hands and did not act. It is clear that this has gone on for too long. We have been skimping on wages, we have been skimping on conditions, and we have been skimping on costs, but the New Zealand quota owners have been feasting on the profits and the sweat of these foreign workers. It is terrible that it has dragged on so long, but it is good that we are finally addressing it. The history goes back to the “New Zealandisation” debates we had in the 1970s, which were about how we go out and exploit—in the language of the time—the deep-sea resources that were being discovered, mostly by foreign exploratory vessels. New Zealand did not have a deep-sea fishing fleet, so the agreed plan at the time was that we would bring in some of the foreign capital, expertise, and vessels, and we would use that foreign assistance to develop our own industry.

But instead what we have done is get hooked on skimping on wages and conditions with the foreign charter vessels. We have had, of course, the terrible impacts that we have seen on those real human lives, but also the country has missed out. There are around 2,000 foreign workers, I understand, employed in the sector. These are 2,000 jobs that Kiwis could be doing at a time when the unemployment rate is as bad as the last time the National Party was in Government. This is a big issue—7.3 percent, or 2,000 jobs, is not something to be sniffed at. We have missed out on all that tax revenue and ACC contributions. The whole country has lost by the policy to date. It is good we are changing it, but disappointing we are waiting for 4 years to finally implement the phase-out of foreign charter vessels. Hopefully, this can bear, and face, some good scrutiny at the Primary Production Committee, and, hopefully, it can be changed, because, as everyone agrees, as we have heard from numerous Labour Party members, 4 years is far too long. There is no justification.

I am not sure whether any other members did, but I researched my case and I submitted to the Ministerial Inquiry into Foreign Charter Vessels. In researching and talking to fishermen as preparation for that process, what I learnt was that there were absolutely horrible conditions. We know that foreign workers were beaten on the ships and that they were forced to work for days, but it was not just the working conditions; it was the ships themselves—absolute rust buckets and unsafe conditions. We saw the workers and heard that they were not being paid appropriate wages. Of course, everyone who knows the law said they had to get paid the minimum wage, but everyone knows that was not happening, in part because of the agents and in part because of the process. We very clearly heard that it was akin to slavery, what these Indonesians, Malaysians, and other people from developing nations went through. We have seen the dumping of fish and, tragically, we have seen the fatal consequences, most prominently when that 31-year-old rust bucket, the No. 1 In Sung from Korea, sank in the Ross Sea with 22 lives lost.

It is disappointing that the Government is addressing only six of the 15 recommendations of that ministerial inquiry, but we welcome this bill. We support the intent. We will be supporting it through the select committee process. We hope people will make submissions.

Ultimately, what we are talking about is the future of our fisheries. Let us learn the lessons and learn from the mistakes of the last couple of decades. Let us focus on a sustainable, brand-based fishery so we can maximise those economic opportunities. Let us get those premiums from the high-end export market, which cares about issues such as Māui’s dolphin becoming extinct, which cares about issues like slavery when we are catching our fish, and which cares about the fact that, as we saw in the news last night, we are killing dozens of endangered sea lions, 300 fur seals, and around 70 common dolphins every year in our trawling fisheries. They care about the way we are fishing. So let us make the most of it, let us learn the lessons, and let us have sustainable fisheries. Kia ora.

We have had some very intelligent and thoughtful contributions to this debate from all members in the House this afternoon. I would like to thank them for that constructive engagement. I am sure that members of the Primary Production Committee will apply themselves with equal good sense to the work ahead, and I wish them well in that task.

Bill read a first time.

Bill referred to the Primary Production Committee.

on behalf of the Minister for Primary Industries: I move, That the Primary Production Committee report the Fisheries (Foreign Charter Vessels and Other Matters) Amendment Bill to the House on or before 21 June 2013.

Motion agreed to.