The only specialised marine publication in Oceania that focuses on the maritime industry, from super yachts to small craft to large commercial ships, including coastal shipping, tugs, tow boats, barges, ferries, tourist, sport-fishing craft
Issue link: https://viewer.e-digitaleditions.com/i/48969
EDITORIAL Fishhooks dealt to SMALL FRY T BY KEITH INGRAM he aquaculture reforms the Minister of Aquaculture, Phil Heatley, promised our industry after the last election have now become law. It remains to be seen how they will pan out. But the industry may have taken its eyes off another important component of the reform package while the law- making process consumed our attention. On April 2009, the then minister announced the formation of a dedicated Aquaculture Unit within the Ministry of Fisheries. MFish's chief executive, Wayne McNee, described the role of the unit as, "to take the lead on aquaculture across central government in a 'one stop shop', working with the aquaculture industry, regional government and all other groups with an interest in New Zealand's coastal waters". The aquaculture industry greeted the announcement enthusiastically, as they had long felt as though they were the poor cousins, as aquaculture development risked being neglected by a ministry primarily focused on fi sheries matters. The long list of other government agencies with a fi nger in the aquaculture pie – the Ministry for the Environment, the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Economic Development, to name three – also seemed to do little to advance the cause. It was a case of too many cooks in the galley. Concerns had been expressed for some time that aquaculture lacked a "champion" inside the government machine; an agency which would proactively support the development of the industry and was unaffected by the competing demands of other stakeholders and priorities. This concern was highlighted in the review of the regulatory regime for aquaculture in New Zealand during late 2008 and early 2009, which revealed the lack of clarity in the government's responsibilities for aquaculture. The 2007 government strategy on aquaculture was endorsed by six different ministers, with fi ve government departments having direct input. The report recommended establishing a new, independent aquaculture division or sub-agency within an existing government agency (ie, the Ministry of Fisheries) to "direct policy development for aquaculture". The authors of this report must have envisaged this agency would be something akin to Biosecurity New Zealand, an autonomous body with its own strategy, management and governance structure and funding. The same theme was picked up in one of nine core recommendations contained in the report of the Aquaculture Technical Advisory Group appointed by Heatley in July 2009. This group, chaired by Hon Sir Doug Kidd, recommended there was a need to "strengthen the role of government by establishing an Aquaculture Agency within the Ministry of Fisheries to provide policy direction through an aquaculture strategy with national consistency and standards". So an Aquaculture Unit was established. Dan Lees, a former aquaculture manager with MFish, was appointed as its director. He began employing staff with a range of skills and the unit has been going about its work ever since. The only problem is that MFish has undergone the bureaucratic equivalent of a sex change after being merged into the Ministry for Agriculture and Forestry. Yet another restructure has accompanied the merger. The director-general of the new ministry pledged to save at least $10 million per year. The same hand that gives now takes it away. What position does the Aquaculture Unit occupy within this new super-ministry? At this point it's not entirely clear. It certainly doesn't have the autonomy of other standalone units under the ministry's aegis, such as Biosecurity New Zealand and the Food Safety Authority. Its funding has been cut. The new ministry's organisational structure is shaking down into a series of "branches" headed by deputy directors-general, of whom none is the head of the Aquaculture Unit, meaning its status is debatable. The extent to which the unit has been, or will be, hit by the need to make budget savings is also unclear. It has been suggested the unit was never fully staffed before budget cuts began trimming the number of staff it would be able to take on. At the same time, a number of MFish employees from outside the unit engaged in developing and shepherding the recently enacted aquaculture legislation. Whispers around the traps hint that some employees who are concerned about how they might be affected by the reshuffl e might have started talking up their aquaculture credentials in an effort to bolster their job security It is a fact that the ministry's policy advice on aquaculture does not appear to be drawn solely – or even primarily – from within the unit, but from the policy division of the ministry, a potential confl ict. While there is no doubting the intent of sound principles and the role of the Aquaculture Unit, in reality it has limited autonomy, questionable status and only a small number of staff. It is by no means the government's principal advisor on aquaculture as fi rst envisaged and what the ministry's own website describes it as. This is not to say the unit can't make a signifi cant contribution to the development of the aquaculture sector. But it will struggle to be the panacea for resolving past government inaction and confusion that advocates hoped it would be. SUBSCRIBE NOW TO Name ________________________________________________________________________________ Address _____________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________ Postal code ______________ Email _______________________________________________________________________________ ■ Enclose a cheque for ________________ ■ Visa/Mastercard (only) _______________________ Card Number _________________________________________________________________________ Card Name __________________________________________________________________________ Signature __________________________________________________________Expiry date ——/—— ■ $30.00 for 6 issues GST No: 68-684-757 Post to: VIP Publications Ltd, 4 Prince Regent Drive, Half Moon Bay, Manukau, 2012 NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 2011 ■ NZ AQUACULTURE ■ 3 ISSUE 43 ■ SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2011 $5.00 AQUACULTURE BILL IS NEARLY READY Koura farms need a higher profile NORWAY LOOKS TO KIWIS TO BUILD ITS CRAB EXPORTS THE INDEPENDENT VOICE OF NEW ZEALAND AQUACULTURE