Industry Lobby Group's ‘Fishy' Marine Protection Claims Under Fire
In an open letter published today, the signatories accuse Seafood New Zealand of misleading the public with its repeated and unsubstantiated claims that Aotearoa New Zealand has already achieved the global target of protecting 30% of its ocean territory by 2030.
'Claiming New Zealand has already protected 30% of our ocean is utterly disingenuous and creates a dangerous illusion of progress – when in reality, less than 1% of our ocean is highly protected and our fragile marine species and habitats remain exposed to immense harm,' says Dr Kayla Kingdon-Bebb, Chief Executive of WWF-New Zealand.
Seafood New Zealand continues to argue that New Zealand has already protected 30% of its ocean because it counts a type of protection known as 'Benthic Protection Areas' (BPAs). While these areas restrict bottom trawling and dredging on the seabed, they still allow midwater trawling, longlining, and other extractive industrial practices to continue unabated. They fall wildly short of 'highly protected' as defined by internationally recognised standards.
Even the Department of Conservation acknowledges BPAs don't protect sufficient biodiversity to meet the standard of a Marine Protected Area.
'These areas were chosen – by industry – because they had little impact on commercial fishing operations, not because they protect biodiversity. Most of these zones were never bottom trawled in the first place - because they're simply too deep for it - and in many of them, harmful industrial fishing practices are still rampant. That's not protection – it's pulling the wool over Kiwis' eyes,' says Dr Kingdon-Bebb.
'Calling BPAs 'protected areas' is a dangerous distortion that risks delaying the urgent action needed to safeguard ocean health. It gives the public and policymakers a false sense of progress while deep-sea corals, seamounts, and vital habitats for our declining native species and key fish stocks remain under immense threat.'
Dr Kingdon-Bebb says Seafood New Zealand's continued peddling of misinformation does a disservice to many of New Zealand's commercial fishing companies.
Fishing company Sealord, for example, has publicly backed the 30% ocean protection target – and acknowledged the significant effort still needed to reach this goal.
'There are commercial fishing companies genuinely trying to do better, but they're being undermined by an industry lobby group more interested in greenwashing and spin. That needs to change,' says Kingdon-Bebb.
Since 1970, the health of some of Aotearoa New Zealand's commercial fish stocks have plummeted. In the Hauraki Gulf/Tīkapa Moana, scallop and crayfish fisheries have nearly collapsed.
Our country's waters are home to half the world's whale and dolphin species, but 22% of marine mammals are now on the brink of extinction. More species of seabird breed in Aotearoa than anywhere else on earth – but a staggering 90% are now threatened or at risk.
'With our marine life on the brink and New Zealand lagging behind the rest of the world in ocean conservation, we urge Seafood New Zealand to stop overstating the nation's marine protection efforts and instead back meaningful, inclusive, science-led conservation that upholds Māori rights and interests. Our fragile marine environment deserves more than paper parks and poorly executed PR spin. It needs real protection,' says Kingdon-Bebb.
The full list of signatories to the open letter include:
Dr Kayla Kingdon-Bebb, WWF-New Zealand
Dr Russel Norman, Greenpeace Aotearoa
Nicola Toki, Forest & Bird
Professor Conrad Pilditch, Marine Scientist, University of Auckland
Professor Simon Thrush, Marine Scientist, University of Auckland
Professor Daniel Hikuroa, Earth Systems Scientist, University of Auckland
Vince Kerr, Marine Ecologist, Kerr and Associates
Nicola Rata-MacDonald, Ngāti Manuhiri Settlement Trust
Duncan Currie, Deep Sea Conservation Coalition
Natalie Jessup, Endangered Species Foundation
Daren Grover, Project Jonah
Anna Campbell, Yellow-Eyed Penguin Trust
Karen Saunders, Native Bird Rescue
James Gibson, BLAKE
Tom Karstensen, New Zealand Underwater Association
Jenny Craig, Dive Pacific
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
2 hours ago
- 1News
What we know about new road user charges and end of petrol tax
The Government made it official this week that the petrol tax is on the way out, to be replaced by electronic road user charges, or RUCs, for everyone. Drivers of all light vehicles – petrol, hybrid, diesel and electric – will now pay for road use based on distance travelled and vehicle weight, instead of an extra charge at the pump. Right now, Road User Charges (RUC) only apply to vehicles not powered wholly by petrol, and all vehicles weighing more than 3.5 tonnes. An awful lot of the specifics around the new system remain uncertain, as the government considers how to implement the plan. But here's what we know so far. The petrol tax will go, but what's replacing it? ADVERTISEMENT All of Aotearoa's 3.5 million light vehicle owners will need to pay RUC fees to help pay for road upkeep and maintenance. But exactly how the fees will be set and collected are still a work in progress. In making the announcement, Transportation Minister Chris Bishop said it was "the biggest change to how we fund our roading network in 50 years". It comes as more and more drivers use hybrids, electric vehicles or other technology. Bishop said the number of fuel-efficient petrol hybrid vehicles has jumped from 12,000 in 2015 to 350,000 today. "As our vehicle fleet changes, so too must the way we fund our roads. It isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and who can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often. "This is a change that simply has to happen. The government has recognised reality and is getting on with the transition." Replacing fuel excise taxes with electronic road user charging was part of National and ACT's coalition agreement. The government's been signalling this move for some time and last year scrapped an Auckland regional fuel tax of 11.5 cents per litre. AA principal policy adviser Terry Collins said while the association thinks the changes are good in principle, "we need to see the detail". ADVERTISEMENT How much will all this cost drivers? AA principal policy advisor Terry Collins discussed the "pros and cons" of replacing petrol tax with electronic road user charges. (Source: Breakfast) That's one of the big question marks right now. Under the system, all vehicles would be paying for road use based on distance and their vehicle's weight, Bishop said, but no detail on the weight limits was given. The current RUC for light vehicles – under 3500kg – are $76 per 1000km. The average Toyota Corolla weighs between 1200-1500kg. Charges can widely vary for larger vehicles under the current RUC, according to NTZA's website. There's also an administration fee of $12-$13 per transaction. ADVERTISEMENT No costs or parameters for the new system have been announced, but just as an example under the current RUC setup, a small electric vehicle would pay more than $760 including fees for 10,000km worth of credits. Will this bring petrol prices down? Again, answer unclear. Bishop said currently, petrol drivers pay a tax of about 70 cents per litre. However, the AA says that the full cost of fuel excise, duties and taxes such as GST altogether was over $1.20 per litre as of mid-2024. There's no real way of knowing yet if the changes would automatically drop 70 cents or more from fuel prices. When will it take effect? ADVERTISEMENT Chris Bishop said paying for RUC would be similar to paying an electricity bill at the end of each month. (Source: Breakfast) Legislative work toward the changes will begin next year, with the government eyeing 2027 for the new system to take place. "At this stage, no date has been set for the full transition of the light vehicle fleet," Bishop said. "That's a deliberate choice, as we're focused on getting the system right rather than rushing its rollout." The legislative plans include: Removing the requirement to carry or display RUC licences, allowing for digital records instead; enabling the use of a broader range of electronic RUC devices, including those already built into many modern vehicles; supporting flexible payment models such as post-pay and monthly billing; separating NZTA's roles as both RUC regulator and retailer to foster fairer competition; and allowing bundling of other road charges like tolls and time of used based pricing into a single, easy payment. "The changes will support a more user-friendly, technology-enabled RUC system, with multiple retail options available for motorists," Bishop said in announcing the changes. "Eventually, paying for RUC should be like paying a power bill online, or a Netflix subscription. Simple and easy." ADVERTISEMENT Bishop told ThreeNews that users could possibly pay road RUCs through an app, and log in and pay what they owed at the end of each month. The next step for the plan is changes to the Road User Charges Act 2012, and a bill will be introduced to Parliament and referred to a Select Committee for public input. "I expect to pass legislation in 2026, followed by an updated Code of Practice for RUC providers," Bishop said. "We will also engage with the market in 2026 to assess technological solutions and delivery timelines. In parallel, NZTA and Police will upgrade their systems to support enforcement in a digital environment." How do RUCs work now for those who pay them? Bishop called the current setup for light vehicles a "clunky" system. You keep track of your odometer readings, pay for RUC in 1000km chunks and put a sticker on your windscreen that shows how many km they are good for. Once your odometer passes the number you've paid for in RUC, you need to pay for more. "We're not going to shift millions of drivers from a simple system at the pump to queues at retailers," Bishop said. "So, instead of expanding a clunky government system, we will reform the rules to allow the market to deliver innovative, user-friendly services for drivers." ADVERTISEMENT The AA's Martin Glynn told RNZ's Morning Report that it's not the easiest system for users. "The biggest problem with it, people need to keep an eye on their odometers and see if they've used up their RUC and need to buy more. That's probably the biggest problem with it." However, the Government said it wants to shift away from the "outdated" system and replace it with greater use of electronic RUC, or eRUCs. What are eRUCs, anyway? Basically, instead of having to keep track of your odometer readings and paying as you go for km credits, it's a device that does that work automatically. There are a variety in place now for current requirements. There are several approved eRUC providers for the heavy vehicle fleet of vehicles over 3.5 tonnes. "EROAD's system automatically records the distance each vehicle travels on-road and accurately records all off-road travel with its intuitive GPS-tracking capability," the website of one of the providers, EROAD, states. ADVERTISEMENT Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive Nick Leggett applauded the change and said it could work well with other transport charges. "User-charging is a fair, proven way to fund infrastructure. ERUC will make it easier to apply that principle consistently across all vehicles, whether petrol, diesel, electric or hybrid, and as our transport system evolves. "We also see the use of flexible payment methods and the integration of eRUC with other transport charges such as tolling and congestion pricing as sensible moves." However, there's still a lot of questions around the costs of implementing eRUCs for everyone. Would all cars be fitted with new devices or would some kind of self-monitoring system be in place for those with older vehicles? And what does that eRUC technology mean for privacy? There's also been a fair bit of talk doing the rounds on social media about the idea of electronic records on vehicle travel and worries about the government tracking people. In a statement to RNZ, Bishop said there were privacy protections in place and it would remain a concern in developing the new systems. ADVERTISEMENT "The Road User Charges Act 2012 has existing provisions that protect privacy by limiting what RUC electronic information the RUC collector can access. "Location data can only be accessed to verify where the driver is owed a refund for off-road use. "Officials will be engaging with the market and stakeholders (including the Office of the Privacy Commissioner) on the features of potential solutions, such as cost, privacy and ease of use." The AA's Collins said it would be important to see the detail of "who has that information and what's done with it". "Everybody in the trucking industry wants to have that technology fitted. I don't think that's the case in the light fleet." Collins noted that our phones – which almost everyone has with them in their cars – are also packed with tracking technology. Other countries have managed similar systems, he said, but "it's what the data will ultimately be used for in the future that's the biggest concern". ADVERTISEMENT Private firms will be in charge of collecting the new fees In their announcement, the Government also said that private firms will take over the collection and administration of charges from NZTA, "to foster fairer competition". Tax Justice Aotearoa said they were concerned about that change and taking the responsibility away from the Government. "We are deeply concerned by this initiative as using the power of the state to require citizens to pay charges decided by the state is a core function of government," chairman of Tax Justice Aotearoa Glenn Barclay said in a statement. "It should not be for the profit of anyone and it means that the details of thousands of road users will be held and managed by private organisations with no accountability back to the public." "Putting RUC in the hands of private companies, who will need to make a profit on the transactions, is a recipe for higher fees for drivers," the Public Service Association union's national secretary Fleur Fitzsimons said. Will all this actually save people money? ADVERTISEMENT It's unclear. Petrol could in theory be cheaper, but will be somewhat offset by RUCs all vehicle owners must pay. "This is a once-in-a-generation change," Bishop said. "It's the right thing to do, it's the fair thing to do, and it will future proof how we fund our roads for decades to come." Collins said the distance-based changes could benefit certain drivers, such as those who own multiple vehicles that aren't actually travelling much, or boat users. "Nothing's going to be cheaper, we know that," he said. "It's like saying do you think that your cars are going to be cheaper in three years' time?" "Realistically, we want to be building a modern safe roading network and that's not cheap. All of us as road users need to contribute to that." By Nik Dirga of
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
New Zealand signs new agricultural trade deal with Indonesia
Minister of Agriculture/Trade and Investment Todd McClay and Indonesian Minister of Agriculture Andi Amran Sulaiman sign a new bilateral arrangement on agricultural cooperation in Jakarta, 7 August, 2025. Photo: Supplied New Zealand and Indonesia have signed a new agricultural trade agreement, as part of the government's bid to double export values in 10 years. The minister overseeing both agriculture and trade, Todd McClay, said the deal would create new commercial opportunities for farmers and agribusinesses in both countries. He signed the new bilateral arrangement in Jakarta on Thursday, alongside Indonesian Minister of Agriculture Andi Amran Sulaiman. "This new agreement will make it easier for our agricultural sectors to collaborate, share expertise and open doors for trade and investment," McClay said. "It provides a framework for stronger cooperation in areas like livestock development, smart agriculture, biosecurity, agricultural research, and streamlined trade processes." The arrangement would also see a dedicated 'Consultative Forum' established to coordinate both countries' regulations and reduce red tape for exporters. The forum would hold its first meeting within a year. "This is about building long-term commercial partnerships. It will help more New Zealand businesses connect directly with Indonesian partners, support our farmers to get their high-quality products into market, and encourage ... investment in agriculture from both sides," McClay said. "Agreements like this one help to grow the value of our exports, lift returns to the farmgate, and unlock future growth for the entire economy." Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
5 hours ago
- Scoop
Regulation Ministry To Tackle 30 Different Product Labelling Regulations
Minister for Regulation Hon Scott Simpson Minister of Commerce and Consumer Affairs Unnecessary costs and frustrations throughout the economy are caused by complex and outdated labelling regulations. Minister for Regulation David Seymour and Commerce and Consumer AffairsMinisterScottSimpson have today announced the Ministry for Regulation will conduct a sector review into product labelling to address this. 'The Ministry for Regulation is in a unique position to take on regulatory costs that make it harder for Kiwis to get affordable goods. Because these regulations are imposed by so many departments, it takes one ministry with a mandate for cutting red tape,' says Mr Seymour. 'New Zealand product labelling requirements are made up of over 30 different codes, standards, and regulations. This leads to high costs for businesses to label their products to comply with New Zealand standards. 'New Zealand's labelling regime drives up prices and limits wage growth. Exporters face extra compliance costs preparing products for overseas markets, while consumers miss out on global goods because importers face differences in labelling requirements. Many countries are also shifting to QR codes that link to online labels, easily tailored for different markets and changing needs. 'Complex labelling rules hit businesses at every level. From small exporters navigating conflicting overseas standards, to pharmacies putting medicines on their shelves. Businesses are forced to print multiple versions of essentially the same label. It's also building products and agricultural sprays; the list goes on. Those costs ultimately get passed on to consumers at the checkout. 'The price of groceries is a major concern for Kiwis. Current settings mean products packaged for Australia might not be able to be sold in New Zealand. This forces businesses to waste time and money repackaging,' says Mr Seymour. 'If we want new international retailers to come here, we need to show them we welcome business investment. The best way to do that is to get out of their way when it comes to annoying compliance that isn't benefiting anyone. 'Businesses like Chemist Warehouse have been a game-changer for Kiwis purchasing cheaper pharmaceutical products. However, they're also tied up by excessive labelling requirements adding costs to their operations.' 'This is a step towards lower compliance costs for businesses and increased global competitiveness for Kiwi goods on the world stage,' says Mr Simpson. 'This Government is working with businesses, industry groups, and consumer advocates to identify pain points and gather input to shape the review's terms of reference. 'In a time when households are feeling the pinch, every unnecessary cost we can remove from the system is a win for families and businesses.' The review is expected to be complete by December 2025.
