12 April 2001

Paul Barnes
Option4
18 Styca Place
Glen Eden
AUCKLAND

Dear Mr Barnes

Thank you for your letter detailing your proposals for Option4's
participation in a ministerial advisory group

I've thought through carefully it's contents it is my view that the
government does not need to generate another discussion paper on options to
reform recreational fishing. This was done under the Joint Working Group
process. The public has provided extensive feedback on range of issues.

The Joint Working Group provided a detailed and robust report that provides
a great deal of information and background to the public's views on
recreational fishing. It is now time for the government to move forward with
reforms to improve recreational fishing or leave the rights as they are.

Option4 has put forward its detailed proposal for consideration. That
submission will provide the necessary information regarding the position of
Option4 and if further clarification is required it can be achieved through
discussions with Option4. Consulting with key submitters on their
submissions in this manner is a normal part of the Governments business
during the policy development phase.

The Ministerial Advisory Group is about something else entirely. It is
asking individuals to go the extra mile and help to ensure that the solution
to some longstanding issues is both durable and fair. I am not seeking input
from representatives of particular organisations, instead I am seeking some
honest feedback by knowledgeable individuals about the issues at hand.

What I am now looking to do is to select, from the information that the
public consultation process has produced, a preferred option for reform.
What is proposed is that we provide a perhaps somewhat unusual opportunity
for individuals with a knowledge and passion for recreational fishing to
provide a sounding board for proposals for reform during the final policy
development phase.

Participation, in what is normally a role for the executive and its
advisors, will be necessarily constrained by the adherence to some rules of
conduct. We will have to select people on this basis. Legal advice should be
unnecessary. We will ask that confidentiality be maintained, but only when
necessary. The group is not intended to recreate the role of the Ministry as
policy advisor. Rather it is there to test the policy proposals as they are
developed.

I would like to think that there are individuals within the recreational
fishing community who are prepared to fulfil this task. There is no doubt
that within the Option4 group there is the knowledge and expertise that the
policy development process could benefit from. I also acknowledge that it
may well be that conflicts of interest or other difficulties prevent
participation in some cases.

While I am departing for New York to attend to climate change matters, I
will be back in the country by the 24th of April and it would be useful to
be able to advance this issue on my return. I look forward to your response.

Yours Sincerely

Pete Hodgson
Minister of Fisheries