Dear Minister,

Option4 thanks you for making the time available to meet with us on 15 March.

We appreciate your commitment to moving the process forward in a constructive manner. We have carefully considered your invitation to join the Ministerial Advisory Group. Our debate has focused on the statement you made at our last meeting, i.e. that the first steps towards a proper process are all about building trust.

Option4 is keen to become involved in balanced, well-focused discussions. To that end we discount the findings of both the Independent Review Consultants and the subsequent recommendations from the (now disbanded) Rights Working Group because it is clear that their statistical analyses have not weighed the response from the public accurately, and their recommendations have not promoted the need for recreational fishers rights to be a clear priority.

Definition of the right of the public to harvest seafood from the marine environment is, in our opinion, the essential first step if we are to know what we will protecting and managing. Previous proposals by successive administrations have failed because they neglected that step. The public rejected the Soundings process for the same reason: although it purports to deal with the definition of public rights, it is really about management and structure. Hence option4.

Regardless of how we got here, we are now in a position to move forward on the real issue and your Ministerial Advisory Group could well be the ideal vehicle to achieve it. All that remains to be done is to give clear, unambiguous terms of reference to empower the Group to thoroughly debate the nature and extent of the public’s right to harvest seafood. Progress will not be made if we are limited to thrashing out management issues.

Option4’s mandate is presently constrained to issues contained in its submission. If the Ministerial Advisory Group’s findings are significantly different from the position outlined in option4’s submission, it will be essential to have a further round of public consultation prior to implementing any recommendations.

On the assumption that there will be fair and reasonable remuneration and reimbursement, option4 will make experienced people available as required. We would therefore be grateful if you would tell us the number of persons required from option4, timeframes and budget for the Ministerial Advisory Group. If we are to address the rights issue in a definitive manner, option4 believes the Ministerial Advisory Group must have expert legal advice to report to it directly, not through the Ministry. These costs will need to be taken into account early.

As discussed at our last meeting, option4 will agree to a reciprocal bail-out clause if the process fails to progress on the issues. As agreed at that meeting, no disadvantage to either party should occur if the Ministerial Advisory Group fails, or one or more groups withdraw.

We will also need to know if option4 will still be able to freely communicate with its support base and if any limitations will be placed on option4’s activities while it is involved in the Ministerial Advisory Group.

If the terms of reference for the Ministerial Advisory Group can encompass the points we have outlined in this letter then option4 looks forward to joining the Group and giving of its best.

In a discussion between Stan Crothers and Kim Walshe on 28 March, Stan suggested that Option4 might wish to propose draft terms of reference for the Minister to consider. Accordingly, we attach our suggested terms of reference:

Minister, we thank you for your willingness to engage so fully and candidly in this most challenging process.

Yours faithfully,
Paul Barnes
Project Leader option4.co.nz

DRAFT TERMS OF REFERENCE FOR THE RECREATIONAL FISHERIES ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
OBJECTIVES:

1. To develop a Marine Recreational Fishing Rights options paper to be used as a public discussion document in mid to late 2001.

Alternatively the Minister may prefer the objective to be:
To assist and advise the Minister on defining the recreational fishing right as part of a Ministry Public discussion document on Marine Recreational Fishing Rights.

2. To define processes to implement Marine Recreational Fishing Rights.

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP:

1. The Minister, after discussion with the various recreational fishing organisations, will appoint the committee members.

2. The Minister may revoke at his choosing the membership of any committee member. Committee member may, on notifying the Minister, withdraw from the Advisory Committee at any stage.

3. The Minister or his representative will chair the Committee

4. The Committee will comprise the Minister (or his representative), representatives of the recreational sector and officials appointed by the Minister. The Committee will not include representatives from other marine interests groups (such as the environmental or commercial fishing sectors).

WORK PROGRAMME AND TIMETABLE
The Committee will endeavor to achieve the objectives by November 2001.
The major actions to be achieved within the timeline are:

1. Development of a Marine Recreational Fishing Rights consultative document.
2. Public consultation on the discussion document.
3. Analysis of the consultations.
4. If required the development of draft legislation for tabling in
Parliament in December 2001 (or later).

COMMUNICATION
Minutes of the meetings should be available to the public.

FUNDING
1. Members will be paid the standard allowances for such committees.
2. The Minister may approve the use of additional funds to be used by committee members for such purposes as gathering information or seeking expert advice.