Game Animal Council (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment Bill

Committee of the whole House Part 2 Consequential amendment to National Parks Act 1980 CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Members, we now come to Part 2. This is the debate on clauses 5 and 6, “Consequential amendment to the National Parks Act 1980”. The question is that Part 2 stand part. Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:53): Thank you, Mr Chair. I cannot stress strongly enough what this part does. This part inserts a section into the National Parks Act which tells anyone reading that Act, if they’re interested, to go and look at the part or the clause or the section of the Game Animal Council (Herds of Special Interest) Amendment Act that we just voted on. That’s all this part does—the entire part. It says, “If you’re reading the National Parks Act and you’re interested in this particular area, go and have a look at the Game Animal Council Act. You’ll notice that we’ve inserted a section providing that a herd of special interest can be designated a national park.” That’s all it does. INGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri) (11:54): Thank you, Mr Chair. I’ve just got a question around clause 6 in Part 2, because although clause 6 could be seen to be technical, it is actually the mechanism by which the law gets to operate differently. The main concern I have is whether the Minister is satisfied that this part of the bill has adequate safeguards to stop there being further exemptions and carve-outs under the bill. The question from the Hon Eugenie Sage in her submission was the slippery-slope argument. It’s easy to see that this bill does that, because there is a fundamental change in the decision-making hierarchy. I’m wanting to understand from the Minister, how can he be sure that this is not the beginning of a change to our national parks, where we’re going to see more and more of these exemptions apart from just trophy hunting? Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:55): Well, unless the slippery slope is a procession of sections which tell people to go and look at other statutes, the only thing this clause does—and I can read it out; new section (3), inserted by clause 6: “*See section 16(3A) of the Game Animal Council Act 2013, which provides that, if a herd of special interest is designated in a national park, subsection (2)(b) does not apply to that herd.”. The only thing that this part does is it inserts a section in the National Parks Act that tells people, “If you’re interested in this area, go and look at the Game Animal Council Act.” It has no other operative provision, and it is inserted in there as a response to the select committee’s view that this might provide some helpful clarity or direction to people who are reading the National Parks Act. That’s all it does. It has no operative provision and doesn’t change the law in any way—it just tells Ms Stevens, when she’s reading the National Parks Act, “Go and look at the Game Animal Council Act if you’re interested in a good time.” Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) (11:55): Thank you, Mr Chair. Yes, that’s correct: it makes a reference or strengthens, I guess, the link between the two pieces of legislation, the Game Animal Council Act and the National Parks Act. However, the Minister made the point earlier on that the whole reason for this change and the subsequent strengthening of this provision at select committee was the legal uncertainty around the status of the current community agreement for Wapiti between the Department of Conservation and the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation. This is something that was traversed, in a sense, at select committee. However, I do want to ask the Minister what advice he’s received on the—I guess—necessity of this part and of this legislation, because we had heard and again through Eugenie Sage’s contribution to select committee, which is very detailed. What she says, and I want to test this with the Minister, is that there is already an alternative that is available that doesn’t require this legislative change under the status quo—she says, of the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation applying to the New Zealand Conservation Authority for an exemption. This bit refers to the Game Animal Council Act, which refers back to the exemption to section 4(2)(b) of the National Parks Act. But through that, there could have already been an exemption, which would then satisfy both camps: the hunters who want the exemption to maintain a herd of a certain size within a national park, and the conservation activists who want to protect, as far as possible, the ecological benefits and values of the national park. Can the Minister share what advice he has received on the rationale for this whole bit, and why he thinks that the status quo exemption was not strong enough? Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:58): In relation to this part, I received some advice from the Environment Committee, who recommended that, to help make clear the effect of the bill’s proposed amendments—which we have voted on before—we should insert a cross-reference in the National Parks Act to direct humans reading that Act to the Game Animal Council Act. INGRID LEARY (Labour—Taieri) (11:58): I’d just like to ask the Minister if he has given any consideration, or would, to my suggestions of a new clause 7 in this part. I’m not going to read them out—they’re quite detailed—but the first one essentially inserts a provision that would review the operation of herds of special interest. The second one would provide details of annual ecological monitoring and reporting. The third one would simply, basically, be a sunset clause on the bill at five years, so that the bill would be deemed to be out of time and probably needing reconsideration at the end of five years, unless there were good reasons to keep it in place. These are all the safeguarding provisions that we don’t see currently. The Minister seems intent on progressing this bill; could he please adopt those amendments so that we have some safeguards in the bill? Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (11:59): No, I won’t be adopting those amendments, because there’s already a five-year review requirement in the Game Animal Council Act to review any designated herd of special interest. That’s section 19. RYAN HAMILTON (National—Hamilton East) (11:59): I move, That debate on this question now close. Hon PRIYANCA RADHAKRISHNAN (Labour) (11:59): A quick question to the Minister: has the Minister received any advice that would point to anywhere in Aotearoa New Zealand where recreational and trophy-hunting management has been successful in controlling animal numbers in such a way that it protects forests, shrub land, and alpine grassland, given that we’ve been talking about the differences in priorities and motivations between the two groups? Hon JAMES MEAGER (Minister for Hunting and Fishing) (12:00): Well, it’s not directly related to the section of this part, which inserts a section to refer people to look at another Act. But I’ll refer the member to the select committee report, which I’m sure she’s very well aware of, which has some—or the departmental report has some very good information there about the effects of the Fiordland Wapiti Foundation’s work. TOM RUTHERFORD (National—Bay of Plenty) (12:00): I move, That debate on this question now close. A party vote was called for on the question, That debate on this question now close. Ayes 67 New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Noes 55 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi. Motion agreed to. CHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono): The question is that Ingrid Leary’s tabled amendment inserting new clause 7, new section 4A “Independent review of operation of Herds of Special Interest provisions” be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 55 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi. Noes 67 New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Amendment not agreed to. CHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono): The question is that Ingrid Leary’s tabled amendment inserting new clause 7, new section 4A “Review of operation of Herds of Special Interest provisions” be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 55 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi. Noes 67 New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Amendment not agreed to. CHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono): The question is that Ingrid Leary’s tabled amendment inserting new clause 7, new section 4A relating to annual ecological monitoring and reporting be agreed to. A party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 55 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi. Noes 67 New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Amendment not agreed to. CHAIRPERSON (Teanau Tuiono): Ingrid Leary’s tabled amendment inserting new clause 7 relating to the expiry of amendments is ruled out of order as not being in the correct form of legislation. A party vote was called for on the question, That the Part 2 be agreed to. Ayes 67 New Zealand National 48; ACT New Zealand 11; New Zealand First 8. Noes 55 New Zealand Labour 34; Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand 15; Te Pāti Māori 4; Ferris; Kapa-Kingi. Part 2 agreed to.