The Opportunity Party (Opportunity) is a New Zealand political party founded in 2016 to enact policy that affords every New Zealander equal opportunity to pursue their potential in ways that are socially, economically, and environmentally sustainable. 

Our ‘Healthy Oceans’ policy sets out a comprehensive programme to restore fish abundance; protect 30% of our ocean territory in accordance with international treaties we have signed; phase out destructive fishing practices such as bottom trawling; and grow a high‑value blue economy. 

We approach this Bill from the perspective that fisheries are a public resource, held in trust for current and future generations, and that Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations must be central to ocean governance.

We wish to make the following comments:

This Bill asks Parliament to believe that New Zealand can continue to treat our fisheries as an extractive industry first and a living system second. We do not accept that premise. Our oceans are not simply a harvest zone; they are the foundation of coastal communities, biodiversity, food security, regional employment, and long-term national prosperity.

Opportunity’s ‘Healthy Oceans’ policy begins from a simple but urgent truth: if we do not restore the health of our marine environment and adapt to the significant changes occurring within the ocean globally, we will not secure the future of our own fisheries. Yet this Bill moves in the opposite direction: it weakens the precautionary approach; shifts risk further onto the marine environment; and fails to provide the protections needed to rebuild depleted stocks and preserve ecosystem resilience.

Opportunity believes that New Zealanders deserve better than short-term gain dressed up as reform. They deserve fisheries management that is transparent, science-led, and accountable to the public interest. This Bill does not deliver that. It gives far too much weight to immediate commercial convenience and too little to the long-term carrying capacity of our ocean and its ability to provide now and for future generations.

To remove any doubt, Opportunity believes the commercial fishing industry has a strong and prosperous future in New Zealand if - and only if - it is appropriately incentivised, regulated and supported, and fully integrated into the ecological, social, cultural and economic spheres in which it operates.

Healthy oceans require healthy limits. They require confidence in our regulatory system - genuine monitoring, stronger compliance, and holistic decision-making - that is grounded in ecological reality, not industry pressure. They require protection of spawning grounds, bycatch reduction, habitat preservation and a commitment to actively rebuilding biodiversity alongside economic use. This Bill fails to set that direction.

For coastal and iwi communities especially, the stakes are high. Fisheries are not merely an economic asset; they are a cultural inheritance, a source of sustenance, and demand intergenerational stewardship. Any legislation that diminishes the health of the marine environment also diminishes the rights, responsibilities, and opportunities of those communities most connected to it.

Opportunity believes in a different vision: one where New Zealand leads the world in sustainable, high-value fisheries, marine regeneration, and ocean-based prosperity. That future is not built by loosening protections and hoping for the best. It is built by investing in nature, science, technology, people and communities. It is built by aligning the management of fisheries with the health of the whole ocean system.

This Bill does not meet that test. It is not a healthy oceans Bill. It is not a prosperity Bill. It is not a future-focused Bill. And it is not a Bill this Committee should support.

The legislative process behind this Bill is fundamentally flawed

Opportunity considers the process behind this Bill falls well short of the standard New Zealanders should expect for legislation with such far-reaching environmental, economic, and constitutional consequences. Good governance demands transparent, evidence-based policymaking that balances the interests of all stakeholders. Instead, the Government’s process with respect to this Bill has been disproportionately shaped by a narrow set of commercial outcomes,  while the perspectives of fisheries scientists, environmental organisations, customary interests, recreational fishers, and the broader public remain marginalised.

When these proposals were consulted on in 2025, around 25,000 New Zealanders submitted in opposition. That level of response should have been a clear signal that the public expected a more rigorous, balanced, and accountable approach. Instead, the Bill was introduced to Parliament in substantially the same form, with little meaningful evidence that widespread public concerns had materially influenced its design. That is not responsive government; rather, it is the type of policymaking that erodes public trust and confidence.

The confusion and controversy surrounding the Bill’s ‘minimum size’ provision only deepened these concerns. Public backlash, disagreement between coalition members, and the Government’s subsequent retreat on the proposal exposed serious weaknesses in the policy development process. If the Cabinet was not operating with full transparency around key provisions, as has been suggested by a number of Ministers, it raises broader questions about what level of scrutiny this legislation has genuinely received. 

The subsequent decision to allow only 16 working days for submissions on a Bill of this complexity not only undermines confidence but is also inconsistent with democratic best practice. Meaningful public participation requires adequate time for communities, experts, tangata whenua, and stakeholders to assess implications, test assumptions, and provide informed feedback. Compressing that process weakens both the quality of scrutiny and the legitimacy of the outcome.

Opportunity believes durable policy is built through transparency, robust evidence, and genuine public engagement. Proceeding with reforms of this scale despite overwhelming public concern, inadequate consultation, and visible process failures suggests a government more focused on expediency than stewardship. New Zealand’s fisheries are a national asset, and reforms governing them must be developed through a process that reflects the seriousness of that responsibility.

Environmental safeguards, ecosystem-based management and the role of the New Zealand public

The purpose of the Fisheries Act 1996 is “to provide for the utilisation of fisheries resources while ensuring sustainability." At its core, the Fisheries Act recognises that fisheries management is not simply about maximising catch; it is about ensuring fish stocks remain productive within functioning ecosystems.

This Bill materially weakens that framework. By narrowing the role of environmental principles in catch-setting decisions and reducing broader ecosystem considerations to secondary status, the Bill risks reverting toward a more siloed, extraction-first model. This is inconsistent with modern ecosystem-based resource management and undermines New Zealand’s ability to sustainably manage cumulative and increasingly uncertain environmental pressures.

The Bill appears to be designed to streamline decision‑making primarily for the benefit of commercial expediency, by reducing consultation requirements, limiting public challenges, and weakening environmental checks when setting catch limits and other key parameters. It simply takes us in the wrong direction.  Our current system already allows ecological complacency under the guise of “sustainability”, with government reporting that 87% of fish stocks are in “good shape” even as local communities see declining abundance and ecosystem collapse.

Opportunity strongly supports retaining (and, in fact strengthening) ecosystem-based fisheries management because no fishery operates in isolation; data uncertainty should trigger caution, not deregulation; long-term stock resilience is economically superior to short-term maximisation; and New Zealand’s global export and environmental credibility depends on maintaining high standards.

Opportunity’s Healthy Oceans policy calls for:

• Raising management targets from 40% to 50% of virgin biomass,
• Increasing soft limits from 20% to 40%, and
• Increasing hard limits from 10% to 20% to ensure stocks are genuinely abundant and ecosystems remain functional. 

Any fisheries management reform that proceeds must, at minimum:

• Remove any provisions that reduce environmental safeguards, diminish the role of independent science, or further restrict appeals and judicial review;
• Embed ecosystem‑based management, with explicit statutory objectives to rebuild fish stocks to at least 50% of virgin biomass and prevent functional extinction;
• Require the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries to consider cumulative impacts, habitat damage, and climate stress when setting catch limits and authorising fishing methods, not just single‑species stock assessments; and,
• Ensure public participation and the ability of communities, iwi, and NGOs to challenge unsustainable decisions are retained as essential safeguards in a system where the resource is shared by all New Zealanders.

Minimum size and undersized fish provisions

The Bill’s approach to minimum size requirements appears designed to facilitate the landing and commercial sale of undersized juvenile fish rather than to reduce their capture in the first place. Allowing fishers to profit from the harvest of undersized fish fundamentally undermines incentives to fish selectively.

Opportunity’s position is clear: Count and land all fish caught (including undersized fish) and ban the sale of undersized fish. This:

• Ensures robust accounting of total fishing mortality and prevents superficial “discards on paper” and
• Holds operators immediately accountable for indiscriminate fishing practices by imposing a real cost—hold space, fuel, time, and potential penalties—rather than rewarding them.

Any fisheries management reform that proceeds must, at minimum: 

• Prohibit the commercial sale of undersized fish or levy QMS species catch landed at a size under the current minimum size limit for that species;
• Discourage fishers from targeting stocks of small fish through stepped deemed value levies if small fish landed catch exceeds pre-described % of ACE;
• Require all commercial operators to land and report all catch, including undersized and non‑quota species
• Ban the sale of undersized fish; and
• Maintain robust penalties for non‑reporting or high levels of juvenile bycatch

On‑board cameras, transparency and enforcement

The rollout of cameras on boats must serve the public interest. Opportunity strongly opposes provisions in the Bill that remove camera footage from the scope of the Official Information Act and introduce fines of up to $50,000 for individuals who share footage. We consider these changes entrench secrecy, reduce independent scrutiny, and undermine public trust in both the industry and regulators.

Opportunity’s Healthy Oceans policy calls for transparent and accountable commercial fisheries with 100% observer coverage through cameras on boats and independent monitoring. 

Any fisheries management reform that proceeds must, at minimum:

• Leave on-board camera recordings subject to the OIA (and therefore a presumption of disclosure), subject to standard OIA grounds (e.g. personal privacy).
• Put in place statutory requirements for independent review of a meaningful sample of footage for each vessel and fishery, with summary compliance statistics, bycatch data, and significant incidents published regularly.
• Extend explicit protection to whistle‑blowers, observers and crew who disclose evidence of serious non‑compliance or systemic issues, consistent with Opportunity’s wider commitment to integrity of government and regulatory systems.

Deemed values, penalties and equity between fleets

The Bill proposes changes to deemed values and penalty regimes that risk entrenching inequity between large deep‑water fleets and smaller inshore operators. 

Opportunity supports a more graduated penalty regime where sanctions are proportionate to the scale and intent of offending, but not one that systematically lowers the cost of over‑catch or bycatch for large operators. Any move to weaken penalties for exceeding catch limits or to relax deemed values for high‑impact operations undermines both sustainability and fairness.

Any fisheries management reform that proceeds must, at minimum, calibrate deemed value and penalty provisions to ensure they:

• Maintain strong incentives to avoid over‑catch and bycatch;
• Do not privilege any particular vessel size, type or harvest method; and, 
• Align with an overall strategy to phase out unsustainable harvest practices.

We wish to make the following recommendations:

Opportunity considers the Fisheries Amendment Bill to be unacceptable, unfair, and environmentally dismissive in its present form. Rather than modernising fisheries management, it sets New Zealand on a course to prioritise short‑term extraction over long‑term abundance, secrecy over transparency, and corporate convenience over public oversight and ecological integrity.

As outlined above, Opportunity recommends that the Primary Production Select Committee recommend that the House not proceed with this Bill and instead initiate a robust, transparent, inclusive and purpose-driven policy development process to deliver ecosystem-based management and improve transparency in New Zealand’s fisheries management regime, with a view to ensuring the intergenerational wellbeing and prosperity of Aotearoa’s marine resources, blue economy and coastal communities.