New Fisheries Bill Turns Fishermen Into Global Criminals
The New Zealand Seafood Industry Council is bitterly disappointed that the government is promoting a bill that will
effectively turn honest New Zealand fishermen into global criminals.
General Manager Trade and Information Alastair Macfarlane said the Fisheries Amendment Bill No 3 aimed to make New
Zealand fisheries law applicable outside the New Zealand EEZ so that New Zealand could meet its obligations when it
ratifies the UN fish stock agreement. (UNFSA.)
However under the bill New Zealand citizens who operate fishing vessels registered by another country will still require
a fishing permit from the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries. The chief executive of the Ministry of Fisheries will only
grant that permit if a foreign nation in question meets certain legal performance standards determined by New Zealand
legislation.
“The bill is aimed at giving greater control over fishing activities by New Zealand vessels outside New Zealand and in
turn it means New Zealand can exert greater control over foreign fishing vessels fishing near New Zealand,” Mr
Macfarlane said.
“However the Bill goes too far. In fact it applies the same principles as the recent law against paedophiliac sex
tourists.”
“What the bill does is elevate New Zealand law above that of the countries where New Zealand fishermen may fish as
employees. That is likely to incur the wrath of other nations who will rightly object to the New Zealand Government
straying into areas of another countries jurisdiction and sovereignty.”
“Again the government has been served bad advice by officials High Seas fishing should have been dealt with under
separate legislation. The industry supports trying to eliminate fishing under “flags of convenience” but this bill takes
a shotgun approach to a complex issue. The ramifications of this draconian law will impact unreasonably on New
Zealanders who want to take responsible and legal advantage of the fishing opportunities outside our territorial waters.
ENDS
Background To The Fisheries Amendment Bill No3
The Fisheries Amendment Bill No3 is being reported back to the House. It is mainly about making New Zealand fisheries
law applicable outside the New Zealand EEZ so that New Zealand can meet its obligations when it ratifies the United
Nations Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA)
The New Zealand fishing industry supports the UNFSA and supports the New Zealand intention to become a full party to
the agreement.
In return for allowing the government to exert greater control over their fishing activities outside New Zealand, New
Zealand industry recognises that the UNFSA will allow New Zealand to exert better control over fishing vessels which
fish near New Zealand on fish stocks that we have an interest in.
The UNFSA will provide a catalyst to negotiating effective regional fisheries management agreements to manage high
seas stocks in relation to our EEZ or which will benefit New Zealand high seas fishing businesses. The industry supports
this objective.
The New Zealand industry does not believe that making the UNFSA obligations part of the current Fisheries Act is
appropriate The New Zealand Industry supports a separate International Fisheries Bill that gave effect specifically to
international obligations and capabilities required as a party to the UNFSA. The argument, addressed in detail in our
submission to the Select Committee, was rejected.
THE BILL GOES TOO FAR
The Fisheries Amendment Bill goes further than the UNFSA requires. The UNFSA requires participants to control their
vessels, the Bill will allow New Zealand to control fishing vessels and New Zealand nationals. It is this matter of
individual liability that requires to be addressed.
Where a New Zealand national is involved in operating fishing vessel registered in another country, the New Zealander
will still require to get a permit from the New Zealand Ministry of Fisheries.
A permit – or a dispensation from a permit – will only be granted if the Chief Executive considers that the foreign
country concerned meets certain minimum standards of legal performance determined by New Zealand legislation. There is
no such requirement in the UNFSA.
New Zealand will create global criminals of its citizens and possibly incur the wrath of other nations who will no
doubt object to New Zealand straying into areas of national jurisdiction and sovereignty.
The only parallel in New Zealand law is the law against paedophiliac sex tourists.
There is a real issue which the Bill is trying to address – poorly
New Zealand government and industry share an interest in wanting to limit and if possible eliminate “flag of
convenience” fishing.
There is no easy solution to this issue. The solution offered by the Bill imposes unnecessary restrictions on the
freedom of New Zealand nationals that are not being made by other UNFSA participants on their nationals.
It will encourage New Zealand nationals who see their future fishing business interests as being outside New Zealand
not only leaving New Zealand but taking their capital with them and requiring to change nationality as well.
SOME REAL WORLD EXAMPLES OF THE IMPACT
1. A New Zealand tuna fisher who moves to Australia (forced out by Cost Recovery charges as many have been) who takes
his now Australian registered vessel under permit from the Australian government up to the Pacific to catch tuna will
also have to get a permit from M’Fish in Wellington. Australia has acknowledged its responsibilities as the “flag
state”, but without a personal NZ high seas fishing permit, the New Zealander will be deemed a criminal if he ever comes
back to New Zealand and face a fine of up to $250,000. He would have to hand back his New Zealand passport and become
and Australian citizen in order to avoid this requirement.
2. A company expands its New Zealand business to take on a fishing venture in Chile which uses Chilean flagged vessels.
The venture receives authority from Chile to fish in the Southern Pacific outside the Chilean EEZ. The New Zealand
Company would also require a permit from M’Fish to carry out its legally authorised Chilean business, although New
Zealand has no discernible interest in the business or the fish species concerned. Chile is unlikely to join the UNFSA
in the foreseeable future. The Bill requires the CEO of M’Fish to judge whether Chile has an adequate body of law to
govern its fishing activity on the high seas. Should he decide it does not, it will make the New Zealand company into
criminals and its Directors liable if they persist with the operation which is unable to obtain a permit from New
Zealand. In addition to liability to a fine, the company’s capacity to retain a fishing permit for its New Zealand
operations may be put under threat. New Zealand may also incur an unnecessary dispute with a country New Zealand tries
to have good relations with.
3. New Zealanders orange roughy fishing masters are regarded the world’s experts and work today on vessels from Iceland,
France, South Africa and Australia. There is growing interest in orange roughy resources in the high seas – and not just
in the high seas between New Zealand and Australia. If a New Zealand national is regarded by New Zealand M’Fish as being
in any way responsible for the activities of such a high seas fishing venture, the national will require to seek a
permit from New Zealand, or like the tuna fisher, face the possibility of a $250,000 fine. He may also be unable to
obtain a permit to fish in New Zealand should he choose to return here to fish, as many do.
4. In relation to the above, some of the skippers working Australian fishing vessels in the High Seas outside Australia
on the South Tasman orange roughy fishery are New Zealanders. New Zealand would require them to obtain permits from here
to enable them to fish under Australian permit. No such requirement is contemplated in regard to any Australian
nationals who may skipper a New Zealand venture. The relationship between New Zealand and Australia in regard to Tasman
Sea resources is already delicate enough without adding this bureaucratic aggravation.
New Zealand Seafood Industry Council Ltd