Toitū te marae a Tāne, toitū te marae a Tangaroa, toitū te tangata.  

If the land is well and the sea is well, the people will thrive. 

The ocean shapes all of our lives. A healthy ocean is critical for feeding us, supporting our wellbeing, and one of the greatest tools we have for addressing the climate crisis.  

But our ocean is in a sustained state of decline, with marine species on the brink of extinction and many of our commercial fish stocks overfished and depleted. We are already seeing negative impacts of climate change on fish stocks and critical marine ecosystems in Aotearoa New Zealand and globally.  

Shane Jones says these proposals will bring ‘economic prosperity’, but what he fails to see is that without a healthy ocean, our economy would cease to function as we know it. 

What is the Government consulting on? 

Fisheries New Zealand, led by Minister Shane Jones, is seeking feedback on proposed changes to the Fisheries Act 1996. The Fisheries Act regulates how Aotearoa use our fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability. 

The proposed changes from the Government are concerning and risk undermining the resilience and sustainability of New Zealand’s fisheries and marine ecosystems. These proposals are also only the beginning of a suite of changes that Shane Jones is planning for our fisheries – there may be worse coming.  

Making your voice heard on these changes now will make it clear to the Government that New Zealanders want to prioritise the protection of our oceans and not commercial interests.    

Submissions do not need to be long or comment on all aspects of the consultation. What matters is that your position is clear.   

We recommend you make your submission by sending your thoughts in an email to: [email protected]

You can also fill in the survey linked here. However, the survey may mean you are unable to comment on areas you would like to due to the way it is set up.

Please do your submission before April 11th at 5pm when the consultation closes. 

What could my submission say? 

Make it clear that you OPPOSE the current proposals by saying: 

• I strongly oppose the proposed changes to the Fisheries Act that risk privatising New Zealand's fish - our shared public resource. 

• I want the Minister to manage our oceans with sustainability at the forefront and ensure that fish are available for local communities, now and for the generations to come. 

We suggest you provide your feedback around three key areas. These proposals will: 

1. Weaken environmental protections and threaten the long-term sustainability of our oceans; 
2. Reduce critical monitoring of the fisheries industry, and; 
3. Lock the public out of decision-making. 

1. Proposals that will weaken environmental protections and threaten the long-term sustainability of our oceans include: 

• Seeking to delay catch reductions in a depleted fishery due to the impacts the cuts might have on commercial fishers. This incentivises overfishing of an already depleted fish stock. The health of a fish stock should come first and foremost. 

• Removing the Minister’s statutory duty to reduce maximum catch limits in depleted fisheries by legitimising shelving of Annual Catch Entitlement (ACE), a voluntary catch reduction by commercial fishers.

• Allowing commercial fishers to toss even more fish overboard. That means more dumping, more high-grading (when fishers keep the most economically valuable fish and discard the rest overboard to maximise profits and continue fishing), and more damage to our marine ecosystem.  

Together, these changes increase risks of environmental damage and biodiversity loss that may be irreversible.   

You could say:  

• I do not support the proposed changes that will allow more fish to be thrown overboard.  

• I do not support the proposals seeking to allow commercial fishers to carry forward any uncaught catch entitlements to the following year. More intensive fishing the following year could jeopardise an already depleted fish population. 

• I reject any attempt to weaken camera regulations, including limiting public access to footage through the Official Information Act and allowing onboard cameras to be switched off at certain times. An MPI report revealed a 46 percent increase in fish reported being tossed overboard after cameras went live. Weakening camera regulations will erode transparency and public confidence in commercial fishing. 

2.The proposals reduce critical monitoring through:  

• Allowing commercial fishers to switch off their monitoring cameras at times, offering an unmonitored window when fish can be discarded behind closed doors. We know that cameras on boats work to show us what really goes on at sea.  

• Restricting public access to footage under the Official Information Act, reducing transparency and eroding public confidence.  

• Removing the Minister’s duty to reduce maximum catch limits in depleted fisheries, with no requirement for commercial fishers to reduce actual catches.  

You could say:  

• I reject any attempt to weaken camera regulations. We need more cameras on boats - not fewer - and they should be extended to the entire commercial fishing fleet, including the deepwater fleet, which harvests the vast majority of New Zealand’s commercial catch. Weakening camera regulations risks eroding transparency and public confidence in commercial fishing. 

• Changes made to accessing camera footage under the Official Information Act should consider that the footage may need to be available for labour law and health and safety purposes.  

• I strongly oppose any attempt to remove the Minister’s statutory duty to reduce the maximum catch limit in a depleted fishery because I am concerned that voluntary catch reductions by commercial fishers will fail to rebuild depleted fish stocks. 

3. Proposals will lock the public out of decision-making by: 

• Setting limits for up to five years at a time—with only one chance for public consultation. This is a dream scenario for commercial quota holders but a nightmare for sustainability. Public participation in fisheries is critical. Our fisheries are a shared public resource; decision-making powers should not be further limited to Ministers and the interest groups they serve. 
• Allowing quota owners to voluntarily stockpile catch entitlements instead of reducing catch limits when fish stocks are struggling. That means more fish taken out of the water in the long run, regardless of the state of the fishery. 

You could say:  

• I believe public participation in fisheries decisions is critical to ensuring our oceans remain healthy for generations to come. 

• I do not support shortcuts enabling the Minister to approve plans to adjust annual commercial and recreational catch limits without requiring consultation for up to five years at a time. Providing for submissions once every five years may be too late to save a fish stock from collapsing.