August 10, 2025 • 22 mins
A self-described “Prince of the Provinces” - there are few politicians like Shane Jones.
He’s Minister of Oceans and Fisheries, Regional Development, and Resources -- and has been in the spotlight recently for spearheading a restart and expansion of oil and gas in New Zealand.
Over the years he’s face criticism for his close relationships with industry leaders OVER the environment. Comments like “Goodbye Freddy” when talking about if an endangered frog stood in the way of mining construction probably doesn’t help.
Today on The Front Page, Shane Jones is with us to take us through his latest push for oil and gas, changes to oceans and fisheries, and whether New Zealand’s power crisis is fixable.
Follow The Front Page on iHeartRadio, Apple Podcasts, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts.
You can read more about this and other stories in the New Zealand Herald, online at nzherald.co.nz, or tune in to news bulletins across the NZME network.
Host: Chelsea Daniels
Editor/Producer: Richard Martin
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:05):
Kyota.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Presented by the New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
A self described prince of the Provinces, there are a
few politicians like Shane Jones. He's the Minister of Oceans
and Fisheries, Regional Development and Resources and has been in
the spotlight recently for spearheading a restart and expansion of.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Oil and gas in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Over the years, he has faced criticism for his close
relationships with industry leaders over the environment. Comments like Goodbye
Freddy when talking about if an endangered frog stood in
the way of mining construction probably doesn't help.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Today on the Front Page, Shane Jones is with.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Us to take us through his latest push for oil
and gas, changes to oceans and fisheries and whether New
Zealand's power.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
Crisis is fixable.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
First off, when it comes to oil and gas, remind
me why we're repealing the ban in the first place.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
So the oil and gas industry is a contributor to
the energy mix of New Zealand. In the absence of
gas or coal, our electricity system doesn't work. We have
the option of importing gas, but then that worsens our vulnerability.
Although we may be forced to do it. Everyone wants
(01:39):
the race to achieve renewable one hundred percent electricity, but
in the transitional period we need fossil fuels, and I'm
a politician who believes we should use our own resources
before we import other people's resources. The two hundred million
dollars set aside as a part of the package beyond
(02:02):
the oil and gas band, is to both accelerate what
we know is already here and hopefully to durisk in
the future in the event that foreign firms or domestic
investors want to have another go and open up new
gas fields. So it's really an attempt on my part
(02:22):
on behalf of the government to buttress our security.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Will there ever be a day give it?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
You know, so five, ten, twenty years time when we
will be one hundred percent renewable.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
Do you think the challenge is that the best renewable
option for us is more hydro or more geothermal. The
difficulty with solar and wind, which people are investing in,
is that you have to overinvest because of the unreliable
nature of the weather. So let's say you build a
(02:57):
solar farm for one hundred megawatts. Figuratively speaking, you can
really only rely on it to give you forty or
fifty percent of that hundred megawats, So then you have
to build two hundred megawatts so that over the lifetime
and the cycle of the weather, you can get up
to one hundred percent. And just no one is ever
(03:19):
going to put in that additional investment. So us Kiwi's
historically what we've done. When it hasn't rained, We've drawn
on the natural gas, which has declined. I think it's
fair to say that the decrease is both a matter
of politics as well as mother nature. Look, I've made
(03:41):
an art form about blaming Jacinda, but a lot of
that is just because I'm a politician. But the real
danger of Jacinda's oil and gas band decision was a
chilled investment. It pretty much sent a signal to New
Zealand businesses and overseas investors there's no future in New
Zealand for this type of fuel to power the economy
(04:02):
because the government wants to ban it, and there are
so many other places overseas for foreigners to put the
capital in and use gas, and that's what they did.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
So you don't think that we'll ever move one hundred
percent away from oil and gas.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
I love sixty five. It won't happen in my lifetime.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
In terms of geothermal energy, though, you've promised that will
double production by twenty forty at the same time as
promising to restart the oil and gas industry.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Is it a bit of a contradiction? There?
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Are you just making sure that we've got fingers in
all of the pots.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
My mission is to create the most competitive priced energy
in the OECD. I want New Zealand to have the
most affordable energy in our comparable trading partner jurisdictions. So
that's what I'm not about. And for that to happen,
(05:00):
we need to boost and shoot every arrow in the quiver. Now,
geothermal may prove to be a game changer in a
fundamental way if we can commercialize what's called deep seated
supercritical energy, which has down at about five kilometers in
(05:20):
the Earth, and the international experts have advised me, along
with our own officials, if anyone can do it, the
Keywis can do it. It is a bit of a moonbeam shot. However,
such as the critical importance of energy, I think that
the community should expect the government is willing to put
capital at a risk and take on some of these
(05:42):
long term punts, and without a doubt, geo thermal supercritical
energy is one of them.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
Garcity is rewarded in terms of high prices instead of
high profits for gent tailors. And one of the things
we've observed in the market is that the price of
electricity has been decoupled from the cost of extra producing it.
So the cost of otricity, the four pasts of electricity
are currently well above the long run cost of building
new power stations and happening since twenty nineteen, and that's
(06:10):
a good sign that the market isn't delivering those sort
of outcomes that you'd expect from a competitive market.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
In terms of Gen Taylor's in this country. You mentioned
power prices for kiwis. Does there need to be a
reform into how gen Taylors work.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Yeah, Well, Gent Taylors exist for net profit after tax.
They're commercial profit seeking entities. They don't believe it's their
role to deliver either affordable energy or energy security. And
that's the trade off that we all entered into once
John Key sold them to the sheer market. The position
(06:50):
that I've always advocated is there needs to be more
transparency in separation within the gent tailors, their level of power,
rivals Australian owned banks and other quite a professional relationship
with them. They know, if I ever have my chance,
I'm going to visit or two on them on behalf
of New Zealanders who are experiencing energy hardship and energy poverty.
(07:13):
But at the moment I don't have enough votes and
I don't have the authority to do that. It's a
deversely complex area. This electricity area. We have an organization
called the Electricity Authority. I dismissed them as chocolate teapots,
although I've started to moderate my views and they are
looking at different options as to what might be some
smarter ways to regulate the energy sector and the gent
(07:39):
tailors to improve competition, so we have more private sector investors,
we have a diverse range of people creating energy, maybe
closer to where the energy is actually consumed. And one
thing that I'm looking at is the allocation of over
one hundred million dollars into some of the lines companies
in Northland where we've got arguable the best solar and
(08:02):
some of the best wooden generating capacity. But the transmission pipe,
the garden hose going to Auckland is literally a garden hose.
It's not capable of transporting new sources of energy at volume.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
If we move on, you're also Oceans and Fisheries Minister,
of course, so you need to be protecting the oceans
but also advocating for fisheries.
Speaker 1 (08:25):
But that must be.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
Quite difficult, hey, because if you do something that benefits
the oceans, the fisheries would presumably get pissed off, and
then obviously vice versa. As we've seen, how does that
all work? Should they be separated those portfolios?
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Do you think?
Speaker 3 (08:40):
Well, I don't remember there being an ocean's portfolio. I
think it was an innovation that came in with labor.
But I'm guided by what we campaigned on. I'm guided
by our manifesto, and we said that we were going
to generate more jobs, more investment and revenue from a
(09:05):
legacy industry called the commercial sea fishing industry. It's quite
a complex area, as you rightly point out, because lots
of litigation takes place. I mean, the re litigiousness in
this sector is akin to someone with a very drunken habit.
It just seems to roll on and on, which is
why I only want to see in the future responsible litigation,
(09:29):
not vexatious, frivolous or reckless litigation. And that's why we're
changing the law to restrict the ability of people to
litigate against the fisheries decisions unless it's tightly defined and
relevant to a fisheries decision. Not saving every ecosystem, not
saving the brought, or trying to pile onto fisheries the
(09:52):
responsibility for the broad health of the ocean around New Zealand.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
I mean, they're the ones out there though right.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Well, the men and women who eke out in existence,
often in the big vessels, going away for six weeks
at a time. They literally are taking their lives into
the cup of their hand. All you need to do
is watch those images of men and women going over
the Graymouth Bar and off the west coast of the
South Island to Taypotidy. There is a very lucrative fishery.
(10:21):
It's a dangerous wildlife industry. I had some experience in
the fishing sector when I was a younger man, advocating
for it in some respects. The lessons I learned in
the fishing industry have made me the politician who I
am today.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
So you've announced reforms, obviously to the fisheries.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Actually mentioned it's the most significant for decades.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
What else have you done to support fisheries lately.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Well, I've broadened my attention to both seafood farming and fisheries.
Most of the the seafood protein comes from fisheries and
related resources that are farmed. It's a relatively small percentage
that comes from wild caught fishery. But New Zealand has
(11:14):
one of the most enviable fisheries systems in the world.
There are quote a management system. So look what I've
sought to do since I've been the Minister is bring
some overdue change. The largest changes since nineteen eighty six
on the question of muscle farming and oyster farming. I
extended all the permits buy in large to twenty fifty
(11:36):
so people don't need to go and get any more permits.
They can just put the money into the business and
get on with running their business. I've initiated a body
of work with mister David Seymour, my senior colleague. He's
the deregulatory Minister, and we want to identify what rules
and regulations need to change so we can farm trout
and other freshwater species because we need to create new industries,
(12:00):
to create new jobs, we need to build new exports
and that's not going to happen unless we take risks.
So it's quite a busy dance card. I'm on the downside.
I need to be very careful that I explained to
the New Zealand public, in particular the recreational fishery sector,
that these changes are not going to hobble their rights
(12:23):
or their privileges.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And in terms of this portfolio, Shane, what have you
done to protect our oceans while you've been in charge?
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Well, that's been addressed mostly by the Foreign Affairs and
Winston Peters he attended the Ocean's Conference. I mean, obviously
New Zealand First has supported Honorable Tummer Portucker with his
introduction of some reserves around the Hodarky Gulf. I've closed
(12:51):
down some fisheries whilst I've been the Minister, such as crayfish.
I'm about to go out and consult and closing down
the harvesting of crayfish off the entirety of the coast
of Northland. Given that I come from Northland, and I
was born and bred on Kaimwana. You might imagine it's
going to be quite a stiff experience. But that's a
(13:13):
small example which shows that I don't shy away from
making some of these decisions which will be to the
benefit of our fishery resource and the community over the
long term.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
What about bottom trawling? Why can't we just say no
to that?
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Oh, well, that's because David Attenborough's documentary was a gross
misrepresentation of what happens in New Zealand. And then all
these sort of kind of social media critics and warriors
mistakenly thought that our fishing industry is ruining our ecosystems
(13:53):
by bottom trawling. The images on that documentary are not
from New Zealand, and bottom trawling is a very skillful
set of operations and it's easily catastrophized. But New Zealand
doesn't actually apply bottom trawling to much of our economic zone.
It's just some targeted areas and a lot of the
(14:14):
seamounts deeply located in the ocean, they're already protected. It
is a key feature of how the industry operates at
the moment, and with the advent and the expansion of cameras.
I'm sure over time people's fears will be allayed, but
it is an area You're right, that is easily weaponized
(14:35):
and exaggerated. But then I often find that the green
mania drives people to catastrophize the one or three events
that happen in the fishing industry which may be egregious,
but they're not reflective of the behavior or the experience
of the entire sector.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Is I mean, if it is done so little though there,
does the the benefit of just saying yes, we're going
to ban it outweigh the economic benefit of bottom trawling.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Say yeah, well, I know that there is an agenda
to ban it in New Zealand. I know that a
number of people have been agitating to ban it in
the Hodarky Gulf. That will not be happening for as
long as I'm the Fisheries minister. Why not once you
banned one part of an activity in a certain area
(15:27):
of the coastline, the fishing activity just moves to another
area and the bottom trawling references, which is not exclusively
but it pertains to the Orange Ruffi fishery, and obviously
the Orange Ruffy fishery has been very low in the
past and quota dropped off substantially in order for it
to recover. It's how the system works, and we're going
(15:48):
to have to look at those options going forward because
there is an issue obviously where the scientists and the
officials in the industry are concerned about the state of
part of the Orange Ruffi fishery in the South Island.
But you can't blame bottom trawling for that.
Speaker 5 (16:06):
Well, we'll have to wait and see when it comes
to actually the devil being in the details here. But
the idea of sustainability and Shane Jones is like fossil
fuels and climate action, the two do not max And
I think New Zealanders need to understand why this has
been so controversial for so long, because ultimately our fishing
industry is not run in a sustainable way and Shane
(16:28):
Jones wants to take the shackles off and see more
of our oceans exploit it.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
You've been accused of being out of touch and favoring
private or corporate interests while downplaying environmental concerns in favor
of economic development.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
You must get sick of that, Shane.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Why do you think it's such a bugbear and why
do you think that you're accused of it so often.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
I just think it's the blood sport of politics. I
think there's a new generation coming forward who've forgotten that
milk comes from cows, that fish is a wildlife industry
I just accepted for the political mix. It's got more
ubiquitous with social media. But for every person that's complaining,
(17:18):
I can tell you there's ten other Kiwis who applaud
and barracked me for being one of the plain, candid,
articulate men in politics who says it as it is.
And it's like I said, I know that triggers responses,
but then that's what politics is about. And I say
to all my critics, meet me at the ballot box.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
So you're not a puppet for private interests.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
I'm a great supporter and promoter for investment, for jobs,
for economic growth. And I say to the viewers who
are many and listeners to your program, we are going
through some severe economic challenges. We have to become familiar,
comfortable with making trade offs. And because our society has
(18:04):
become so metropolitanized, far too many of my critics have
forgotten that the wildlife industries, the farming industry, the growing industry.
They represent the bulk of our export earnings and New
Zealand will never be self sufficient unless it can use
(18:26):
its natural resources boost its income internationally. Because to the
best of my ability, I sought to convince my critics
living in Auckland you don't grow rich by doing each
other's laundry and shame.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Lastly, what does the future look like for you?
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Are you already thinking about campaign, you know for election
twenty twenty six?
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Is now all go? Or do you get to wait
a few months till next year?
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Well, obviously I've got my constitutional responsibilities as a cabinet
minister and most of those decisions, not all, are made
under the law, so I can be held legally accountable
for a number of my fisheries decisions and expansion of mining.
As you know, New Zealand is now regarded as a
(19:16):
consequence of the Fraser Institute analysis of mining destinations, New
Zealand has gone from last to number fifteen in the
whole world in terms of a desirable investment destination for mining.
But that's what I was asked to do by the
Prime Minister. That's what I was asked to do by
(19:37):
our government, and I'm going to continue to expand the
footprint of jobs investment. I've got no time for that
duo perched two hundred and fifty meters up in the
sky on top of a coal mine down in the
West Coast. I think that their beliefs have turned into
(19:59):
a statement of personal arrogance and conceit, and now they're
endangering all those jobs and their coal mine. And I
just think that it's reckless and it's as indefensible that
their personal luxury beliefs are now regarded as of such
importance that it would wipe out hundreds of jobs on
(20:21):
the West Coast.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You can see where they're coming from, though. I mean,
when we do talk about oil and gas and coal.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
Burning, etc.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Then you've got a planet that's heating, You've got kids
worried about their future due to climate change. We're getting bigger,
scarier storms.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
We had a tsunami warning the other week.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
I mean, so you do understand people's concerns when we talk.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
About oil and gas and everything.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
I mean, do you think that there's a toss up
to be had between saying, look, we need this in
order to have energy and be able to turn the
lights on in the future. But here we do concede
and say, look we are looking other options.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
I think often I get a bad rap. I'm the
politician that spent over two hundred million dollars dedicated to
protecting our stop banks, to stop rivers from flooding. And
I've been told by various regional councils if that money
hadn't have been allocated and spent by my good self,
areas such of Taradale would have been wiped out. I'm
(21:24):
the guy at a time of fiscal hardship dedicated sixty
odd million dollars to exploring for supercritical energy and if
we can pull it off, it'll completely invert the price
equation of New Zealand's energy. Also the guy funding at
the moment small communities from Stuart Island, Chatham Islands, the
(21:45):
East Cape, Northland community renewable energy projects. But it's easier
to focus on Shane Jones as someone who backs fossil
fuels that's going to fry the planet. And look, you
can't fight that level of emotional virtue signaling with facts.
(22:06):
And that's what brings me up with my own brand
of hyperboleon rhetoric. And all those bloodites that met their
match and much to a Shane.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Thanks for joining us, Shane.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Thanks for having me. Bye.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzidherld dot co dot MZ. The Front Page is
produced by Ethan Sills and Richard Martin, who is also
our editor. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the Front Page
on iHeartRadio or.
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Wherever you get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for
another look behind the headlines.
Kyota.
Speaker 2 (00:06):
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a
daily podcast.
Speaker 1 (00:10):
Presented by the New Zealand Herald.
Speaker 2 (00:16):
A self described prince of the Provinces, there are a
few politicians like Shane Jones. He's the Minister of Oceans
and Fisheries, Regional Development and Resources and has been in
the spotlight recently for spearheading a restart and expansion of.
Speaker 1 (00:33):
Oil and gas in New Zealand.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Over the years, he has faced criticism for his close
relationships with industry leaders over the environment. Comments like Goodbye
Freddy when talking about if an endangered frog stood in
the way of mining construction probably doesn't help.
Speaker 1 (00:51):
Today on the Front Page, Shane Jones is with.
Speaker 2 (00:54):
Us to take us through his latest push for oil
and gas, changes to oceans and fisheries and whether New
Zealand's power.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
Crisis is fixable.
Speaker 2 (01:08):
First off, when it comes to oil and gas, remind
me why we're repealing the ban in the first place.
Speaker 3 (01:17):
So the oil and gas industry is a contributor to
the energy mix of New Zealand. In the absence of
gas or coal, our electricity system doesn't work. We have
the option of importing gas, but then that worsens our vulnerability.
Although we may be forced to do it. Everyone wants
(01:39):
the race to achieve renewable one hundred percent electricity, but
in the transitional period we need fossil fuels, and I'm
a politician who believes we should use our own resources
before we import other people's resources. The two hundred million
dollars set aside as a part of the package beyond
(02:02):
the oil and gas band, is to both accelerate what
we know is already here and hopefully to durisk in
the future in the event that foreign firms or domestic
investors want to have another go and open up new
gas fields. So it's really an attempt on my part
(02:22):
on behalf of the government to buttress our security.
Speaker 1 (02:27):
Will there ever be a day give it?
Speaker 2 (02:29):
You know, so five, ten, twenty years time when we
will be one hundred percent renewable.
Speaker 3 (02:35):
Do you think the challenge is that the best renewable
option for us is more hydro or more geothermal. The
difficulty with solar and wind, which people are investing in,
is that you have to overinvest because of the unreliable
nature of the weather. So let's say you build a
(02:57):
solar farm for one hundred megawatts. Figuratively speaking, you can
really only rely on it to give you forty or
fifty percent of that hundred megawats, So then you have
to build two hundred megawatts so that over the lifetime
and the cycle of the weather, you can get up
to one hundred percent. And just no one is ever
(03:19):
going to put in that additional investment. So us Kiwi's
historically what we've done. When it hasn't rained, We've drawn
on the natural gas, which has declined. I think it's
fair to say that the decrease is both a matter
of politics as well as mother nature. Look, I've made
(03:41):
an art form about blaming Jacinda, but a lot of
that is just because I'm a politician. But the real
danger of Jacinda's oil and gas band decision was a
chilled investment. It pretty much sent a signal to New
Zealand businesses and overseas investors there's no future in New
Zealand for this type of fuel to power the economy
(04:02):
because the government wants to ban it, and there are
so many other places overseas for foreigners to put the
capital in and use gas, and that's what they did.
Speaker 2 (04:13):
So you don't think that we'll ever move one hundred
percent away from oil and gas.
Speaker 3 (04:18):
I love sixty five. It won't happen in my lifetime.
Speaker 2 (04:21):
In terms of geothermal energy, though, you've promised that will
double production by twenty forty at the same time as
promising to restart the oil and gas industry.
Speaker 1 (04:33):
Is it a bit of a contradiction? There?
Speaker 2 (04:35):
Are you just making sure that we've got fingers in
all of the pots.
Speaker 3 (04:38):
My mission is to create the most competitive priced energy
in the OECD. I want New Zealand to have the
most affordable energy in our comparable trading partner jurisdictions. So
that's what I'm not about. And for that to happen,
(05:00):
we need to boost and shoot every arrow in the quiver. Now,
geothermal may prove to be a game changer in a
fundamental way if we can commercialize what's called deep seated
supercritical energy, which has down at about five kilometers in
(05:20):
the Earth, and the international experts have advised me, along
with our own officials, if anyone can do it, the
Keywis can do it. It is a bit of a moonbeam shot. However,
such as the critical importance of energy, I think that
the community should expect the government is willing to put
capital at a risk and take on some of these
(05:42):
long term punts, and without a doubt, geo thermal supercritical
energy is one of them.
Speaker 4 (05:48):
Garcity is rewarded in terms of high prices instead of
high profits for gent tailors. And one of the things
we've observed in the market is that the price of
electricity has been decoupled from the cost of extra producing it.
So the cost of otricity, the four pasts of electricity
are currently well above the long run cost of building
new power stations and happening since twenty nineteen, and that's
(06:10):
a good sign that the market isn't delivering those sort
of outcomes that you'd expect from a competitive market.
Speaker 2 (06:18):
In terms of Gen Taylor's in this country. You mentioned
power prices for kiwis. Does there need to be a
reform into how gen Taylors work.
Speaker 3 (06:30):
Yeah, Well, Gent Taylors exist for net profit after tax.
They're commercial profit seeking entities. They don't believe it's their
role to deliver either affordable energy or energy security. And
that's the trade off that we all entered into once
John Key sold them to the sheer market. The position
(06:50):
that I've always advocated is there needs to be more
transparency in separation within the gent tailors, their level of power,
rivals Australian owned banks and other quite a professional relationship
with them. They know, if I ever have my chance,
I'm going to visit or two on them on behalf
of New Zealanders who are experiencing energy hardship and energy poverty.
(07:13):
But at the moment I don't have enough votes and
I don't have the authority to do that. It's a
deversely complex area. This electricity area. We have an organization
called the Electricity Authority. I dismissed them as chocolate teapots,
although I've started to moderate my views and they are
looking at different options as to what might be some
smarter ways to regulate the energy sector and the gent
(07:39):
tailors to improve competition, so we have more private sector investors,
we have a diverse range of people creating energy, maybe
closer to where the energy is actually consumed. And one
thing that I'm looking at is the allocation of over
one hundred million dollars into some of the lines companies
in Northland where we've got arguable the best solar and
(08:02):
some of the best wooden generating capacity. But the transmission pipe,
the garden hose going to Auckland is literally a garden hose.
It's not capable of transporting new sources of energy at volume.
Speaker 2 (08:16):
If we move on, you're also Oceans and Fisheries Minister,
of course, so you need to be protecting the oceans
but also advocating for fisheries.
Speaker 1 (08:25):
But that must be.
Speaker 2 (08:26):
Quite difficult, hey, because if you do something that benefits
the oceans, the fisheries would presumably get pissed off, and
then obviously vice versa. As we've seen, how does that
all work? Should they be separated those portfolios?
Speaker 1 (08:39):
Do you think?
Speaker 3 (08:40):
Well, I don't remember there being an ocean's portfolio. I
think it was an innovation that came in with labor.
But I'm guided by what we campaigned on. I'm guided
by our manifesto, and we said that we were going
to generate more jobs, more investment and revenue from a
(09:05):
legacy industry called the commercial sea fishing industry. It's quite
a complex area, as you rightly point out, because lots
of litigation takes place. I mean, the re litigiousness in
this sector is akin to someone with a very drunken habit.
It just seems to roll on and on, which is
why I only want to see in the future responsible litigation,
(09:29):
not vexatious, frivolous or reckless litigation. And that's why we're
changing the law to restrict the ability of people to
litigate against the fisheries decisions unless it's tightly defined and
relevant to a fisheries decision. Not saving every ecosystem, not
saving the brought, or trying to pile onto fisheries the
(09:52):
responsibility for the broad health of the ocean around New Zealand.
Speaker 1 (09:57):
I mean, they're the ones out there though right.
Speaker 3 (10:00):
Well, the men and women who eke out in existence,
often in the big vessels, going away for six weeks
at a time. They literally are taking their lives into
the cup of their hand. All you need to do
is watch those images of men and women going over
the Graymouth Bar and off the west coast of the
South Island to Taypotidy. There is a very lucrative fishery.
(10:21):
It's a dangerous wildlife industry. I had some experience in
the fishing sector when I was a younger man, advocating
for it in some respects. The lessons I learned in
the fishing industry have made me the politician who I
am today.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
So you've announced reforms, obviously to the fisheries.
Speaker 2 (10:45):
Actually mentioned it's the most significant for decades.
Speaker 1 (10:50):
What else have you done to support fisheries lately.
Speaker 3 (10:53):
Well, I've broadened my attention to both seafood farming and fisheries.
Most of the the seafood protein comes from fisheries and
related resources that are farmed. It's a relatively small percentage
that comes from wild caught fishery. But New Zealand has
(11:14):
one of the most enviable fisheries systems in the world.
There are quote a management system. So look what I've
sought to do since I've been the Minister is bring
some overdue change. The largest changes since nineteen eighty six
on the question of muscle farming and oyster farming. I
extended all the permits buy in large to twenty fifty
(11:36):
so people don't need to go and get any more permits.
They can just put the money into the business and
get on with running their business. I've initiated a body
of work with mister David Seymour, my senior colleague. He's
the deregulatory Minister, and we want to identify what rules
and regulations need to change so we can farm trout
and other freshwater species because we need to create new industries,
(12:00):
to create new jobs, we need to build new exports
and that's not going to happen unless we take risks.
So it's quite a busy dance card. I'm on the downside.
I need to be very careful that I explained to
the New Zealand public, in particular the recreational fishery sector,
that these changes are not going to hobble their rights
(12:23):
or their privileges.
Speaker 2 (12:24):
And in terms of this portfolio, Shane, what have you
done to protect our oceans while you've been in charge?
Speaker 3 (12:30):
Well, that's been addressed mostly by the Foreign Affairs and
Winston Peters he attended the Ocean's Conference. I mean, obviously
New Zealand First has supported Honorable Tummer Portucker with his
introduction of some reserves around the Hodarky Gulf. I've closed
(12:51):
down some fisheries whilst I've been the Minister, such as crayfish.
I'm about to go out and consult and closing down
the harvesting of crayfish off the entirety of the coast
of Northland. Given that I come from Northland, and I
was born and bred on Kaimwana. You might imagine it's
going to be quite a stiff experience. But that's a
(13:13):
small example which shows that I don't shy away from
making some of these decisions which will be to the
benefit of our fishery resource and the community over the
long term.
Speaker 1 (13:26):
What about bottom trawling? Why can't we just say no
to that?
Speaker 3 (13:31):
Oh, well, that's because David Attenborough's documentary was a gross
misrepresentation of what happens in New Zealand. And then all
these sort of kind of social media critics and warriors
mistakenly thought that our fishing industry is ruining our ecosystems
(13:53):
by bottom trawling. The images on that documentary are not
from New Zealand, and bottom trawling is a very skillful
set of operations and it's easily catastrophized. But New Zealand
doesn't actually apply bottom trawling to much of our economic zone.
It's just some targeted areas and a lot of the
(14:14):
seamounts deeply located in the ocean, they're already protected. It
is a key feature of how the industry operates at
the moment, and with the advent and the expansion of cameras.
I'm sure over time people's fears will be allayed, but
it is an area You're right, that is easily weaponized
(14:35):
and exaggerated. But then I often find that the green
mania drives people to catastrophize the one or three events
that happen in the fishing industry which may be egregious,
but they're not reflective of the behavior or the experience
of the entire sector.
Speaker 2 (14:55):
Is I mean, if it is done so little though there,
does the the benefit of just saying yes, we're going
to ban it outweigh the economic benefit of bottom trawling.
Speaker 3 (15:06):
Say yeah, well, I know that there is an agenda
to ban it in New Zealand. I know that a
number of people have been agitating to ban it in
the Hodarky Gulf. That will not be happening for as
long as I'm the Fisheries minister. Why not once you
banned one part of an activity in a certain area
(15:27):
of the coastline, the fishing activity just moves to another
area and the bottom trawling references, which is not exclusively
but it pertains to the Orange Ruffi fishery, and obviously
the Orange Ruffy fishery has been very low in the
past and quota dropped off substantially in order for it
to recover. It's how the system works, and we're going
(15:48):
to have to look at those options going forward because
there is an issue obviously where the scientists and the
officials in the industry are concerned about the state of
part of the Orange Ruffi fishery in the South Island.
But you can't blame bottom trawling for that.
Speaker 5 (16:06):
Well, we'll have to wait and see when it comes
to actually the devil being in the details here. But
the idea of sustainability and Shane Jones is like fossil
fuels and climate action, the two do not max And
I think New Zealanders need to understand why this has
been so controversial for so long, because ultimately our fishing
industry is not run in a sustainable way and Shane
(16:28):
Jones wants to take the shackles off and see more
of our oceans exploit it.
Speaker 2 (16:34):
You've been accused of being out of touch and favoring
private or corporate interests while downplaying environmental concerns in favor
of economic development.
Speaker 1 (16:46):
You must get sick of that, Shane.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Why do you think it's such a bugbear and why
do you think that you're accused of it so often.
Speaker 3 (16:55):
I just think it's the blood sport of politics. I
think there's a new generation coming forward who've forgotten that
milk comes from cows, that fish is a wildlife industry
I just accepted for the political mix. It's got more
ubiquitous with social media. But for every person that's complaining,
(17:18):
I can tell you there's ten other Kiwis who applaud
and barracked me for being one of the plain, candid,
articulate men in politics who says it as it is.
And it's like I said, I know that triggers responses,
but then that's what politics is about. And I say
to all my critics, meet me at the ballot box.
Speaker 1 (17:38):
So you're not a puppet for private interests.
Speaker 3 (17:41):
I'm a great supporter and promoter for investment, for jobs,
for economic growth. And I say to the viewers who
are many and listeners to your program, we are going
through some severe economic challenges. We have to become familiar,
comfortable with making trade offs. And because our society has
(18:04):
become so metropolitanized, far too many of my critics have
forgotten that the wildlife industries, the farming industry, the growing industry.
They represent the bulk of our export earnings and New
Zealand will never be self sufficient unless it can use
(18:26):
its natural resources boost its income internationally. Because to the
best of my ability, I sought to convince my critics
living in Auckland you don't grow rich by doing each
other's laundry and shame.
Speaker 1 (18:41):
Lastly, what does the future look like for you?
Speaker 2 (18:45):
Are you already thinking about campaign, you know for election
twenty twenty six?
Speaker 1 (18:50):
Is now all go? Or do you get to wait
a few months till next year?
Speaker 3 (18:55):
Well, obviously I've got my constitutional responsibilities as a cabinet
minister and most of those decisions, not all, are made
under the law, so I can be held legally accountable
for a number of my fisheries decisions and expansion of mining.
As you know, New Zealand is now regarded as a
(19:16):
consequence of the Fraser Institute analysis of mining destinations, New
Zealand has gone from last to number fifteen in the
whole world in terms of a desirable investment destination for mining.
But that's what I was asked to do by the
Prime Minister. That's what I was asked to do by
(19:37):
our government, and I'm going to continue to expand the
footprint of jobs investment. I've got no time for that
duo perched two hundred and fifty meters up in the
sky on top of a coal mine down in the
West Coast. I think that their beliefs have turned into
(19:59):
a statement of personal arrogance and conceit, and now they're
endangering all those jobs and their coal mine. And I
just think that it's reckless and it's as indefensible that
their personal luxury beliefs are now regarded as of such
importance that it would wipe out hundreds of jobs on
(20:21):
the West Coast.
Speaker 2 (20:22):
You can see where they're coming from, though. I mean,
when we do talk about oil and gas and coal.
Speaker 1 (20:26):
Burning, etc.
Speaker 2 (20:27):
Then you've got a planet that's heating, You've got kids
worried about their future due to climate change. We're getting bigger,
scarier storms.
Speaker 1 (20:37):
We had a tsunami warning the other week.
Speaker 2 (20:39):
I mean, so you do understand people's concerns when we talk.
Speaker 1 (20:45):
About oil and gas and everything.
Speaker 2 (20:47):
I mean, do you think that there's a toss up
to be had between saying, look, we need this in
order to have energy and be able to turn the
lights on in the future. But here we do concede
and say, look we are looking other options.
Speaker 3 (21:01):
I think often I get a bad rap. I'm the
politician that spent over two hundred million dollars dedicated to
protecting our stop banks, to stop rivers from flooding. And
I've been told by various regional councils if that money
hadn't have been allocated and spent by my good self,
areas such of Taradale would have been wiped out. I'm
(21:24):
the guy at a time of fiscal hardship dedicated sixty
odd million dollars to exploring for supercritical energy and if
we can pull it off, it'll completely invert the price
equation of New Zealand's energy. Also the guy funding at
the moment small communities from Stuart Island, Chatham Islands, the
(21:45):
East Cape, Northland community renewable energy projects. But it's easier
to focus on Shane Jones as someone who backs fossil
fuels that's going to fry the planet. And look, you
can't fight that level of emotional virtue signaling with facts.
(22:06):
And that's what brings me up with my own brand
of hyperboleon rhetoric. And all those bloodites that met their
match and much to a Shane.
Speaker 1 (22:14):
Thanks for joining us, Shane.
Speaker 3 (22:16):
Thanks for having me. Bye.
Speaker 2 (22:20):
That's it for this episode of the Front Page. You
can read more about today's stories and extensive news coverage
at enzidherld dot co dot MZ. The Front Page is
produced by Ethan Sills and Richard Martin, who is also
our editor. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the Front Page
on iHeartRadio or.
Speaker 1 (22:41):
Wherever you get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for
another look behind the headlines.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!