Oceans Secretariat scrapped by Shane Jones

[Michael Szabo]

A cross-departmental group supposed to deliver holistic ocean management has been dissolved in a move slammed as short-sighted. Fisheries Minister Shane Jones announced he had dissolved the Oceans Secretariat last week week

The Oceans Secretariat was set up in 2021, with the government of the day saying the current marine management system was too fragmented. Supporting an oceans and marine ministerial group, the secretariat was hosted by the Department of Conservation and comprised officials from the Ministry for Primary Industries (including Fisheries) and the Ministry for the Environment. ...

Greenpeace oceans campaigner Ellie Hooper said it was a short-sighted power grab by Jones that risked less Department of Conservation input.

“Getting rid of the Oceans Secretariat is another power grab by Shane Jones. It’s designed to keep the actual Department of Conservation – who are mandated to look after protected marine species – completely sidelined when it comes to decisions that will affect those very species including dolphins, fur seals, sea lions and endangered seabirds like albatross."

“It’s simply another short-sighted move that favours industry profit over the well-being of the ocean and the planet.”

Link to story: https://newsroom.co.nz/2024/04/19/warni ... dissolved/

[Neil Fitzgerald]

It's hard not to get angry at the stream of bad news but we have done well to keep politics to a minimum here and I'd like to keep it that way. Unless it's directly related to birds, please leave it to other media.

[Michael Szabo]

The Oceans Secretariat is directly related to seabirds and we've previously had posts on the government scrapping the proposed Kermadec Ocean Sanctuary, seabird by-catch and the impact of sand mining on the NZ Fairy Tern, so what's changed?
viewtopic.php?f=3&t=12568&p=56843#p56843

[bdarlow]

I think a distinction needs to be made between party political - a direct support for the ACT party, say - and "political". Every aspect of life is "political" in that it is affected by government. As Michael has clearly itemised above, people of all party political persuasions who are interested in preserving our avifauna need to be conceorned about government decisions that will aversely affect vulnerable species. Brian Darlow

[Michael Szabo]

Yes, for example, in addition to the non-party political criticisms made by Birds New Zealand, the other scientific societies and the conservation and environmental charities such as Forest & Bird, Greenpeace, EDS, WWF, there has been non-party political criticism of the Fast Track Approvals Bill from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and the Auditor-General.

[Neil Fitzgerald]

Two things, volume and originality.
The amount could perhaps be better managed by combining the similar topics into a single thread. However, the main thing to consider is what new information or thought is being added. Opinion, questions, or highlighting opportunities for people to do something and explaining why they should (like submit on the Fast Track Bill – as F&B, EDS, WWF etc did) is different to a copy and paste from the news media.
If the Birds NZ magazine was just copy straight from the Herald and RNZ, I imagine few people would take it out of the envelope.
Highlighting something from a source that many might not see is different.
I'm sorry, but I don't see the connection to statements made by professional groups.
I have surely missed plenty of similar posts before. I try but I just don't have the time to check and reply to them all.

[Michael Szabo]

Okay then, there are two matters being discussed in these posts - the Fast-Track Approvals Bill and the impact of funding cuts/restructuring on the work of DOC and other government departments that work on bird conservation and bird-related policy.
So, how about setting up two threads in this forum on the 'Fast-Track Approvals Bill' and 'DOC funding cuts' - that seems like a tidy solution?