Minister for Oceans and Fisheries Shane Jones. Photo: RNZ / REECE BAKER
The government says the changes will streamline regulations and bring back economic prosperity. A marine environment advocate says it's a return to the 'doom loop'.
The government's proposed changes to New Zealand's fisheries management mark the most substantial reforms in decades, and have sparked debate over environmental oversight and public transparency.
LegaSea, a non-profit organisation dedicated to supporting and restoring the marine environment, is among those rocking the boat to halt the changes.
"We are bewildered by the proposed changes," Sam Woolford from LegaSea tells The Detail. "We want some long-term thinking, we don't want a three-year election cycle, soundbite-grabbing reform process. We actually want something that will put us on the right trajectory.
"And what we have had over the last decade, in particular, is a series of poor decision-making from the officials to put us in this position now, where it very much feels like it's a short-term approach.
"We are going back to the 80s, it's neo-liberal behaviour, and if we are not careful, we will kill the goose that lays the golden egg."
The government proposed the changes last month, saying they want to streamline regulations, improve data collection, and enhance sustainability while protecting fishers' privacy.
The consultation document outlines options to set sustainable catch limits, change discard rules under the Quota Management System and refine onboard camera regulations.
This includes barring footage from being included in Official Information Act requests.
"If there are offences being committed in the industry, they should be charged in the court of a legal forum, not charged on TikTok, not charged in the court of public opinion," Minister for Oceans and Fisheries Shane Jones said at the launch of the document outlining the proposed changes.
He has long been vocal about not wanting cameras on boats and does not think the public needs to know what is happening, saying "no, I do not believe in state surveillance."
But LegaSea argues "why would we not want to give transparency. We stand up with our trade nations and we say we have this amazing quota management system; we wax lyrical about how we are managing our fish populations, but we won't let people see what is going on. It's very much out of sight, out of mind.''
The fishing industry generates around $1.6 billion in exports each year and employs 9000 people directly.
In a bid to improve efficiency, certainty and responsiveness, Jones wants to cut red tape from decision-making processes.
"It's driven by a need to boost the productivity, boost the jobs and create more export income out of this sector which is really valuable in certain parts of regional New Zealand," he says.
LegaSea is not convinced.
"He wants to allow the management processes to change so the public is removed from consultation processes," says Woolford.
"So, future fisheries management decisions, we are out, we have no say in it, the minister gets to do autonomously what he wants to do."
Major players in the fishing industry welcome the proposed changes, saying it will allow New Zealand to fight its way back to economic prosperity.
"It's a great start to being able to mend a framework that has been around for a long time while the industry has changed substantially," Sealord chief executive Doug Paulin said at the document's launch.
"It will enable the framework to become much more agile and flexible, which in turn will take out costs, and it enables us to invest more in innovation, and modernise our boats, which is good for fisheries, good for fishing, which is good for the economy."
Paulin welcomes amending commercial fish discard rules to allow unwanted fish to be dumped overboard at sea.
"You don't have to land species that have no economic value, you can return it to the sea and that's the best place to return it... because I bring those fish from the sea and then they go to landfill and then it gets turned into methanol and has all sorts of unintended consequences.
"So being able to return it to the eco-system, it's a much better result for us all. And because it's monitored by observers or by a camera, you can prove it's being done."
But LegaSea is not onboard for this.
"For us, this is really alarming," says Woolford. "And it will immediately lead to high grading - if you don't like what you are catching, you throw it over the side... it's a really destructive way of fishing.
"If it's not of economic value, they throw it away and start fishing again."
Feedback on the proposed changes was meant to close this month but has been extended two weeks, until 11 April.
Check out how to listen to and follow The Detail here.
You can also stay up-to-date by liking us on Facebook or following us on Twitter.
