Opinion: New Zealand’s behaviour at an international fisheries meeting is raising questions about our country’s current commitment to multilateralism and our credibility as a reliable international partner.
What appeared straightforward last September – when New Zealand submitted a proposal to the South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation about a deep-sea conservation measure it had agreed with the US, China, Australia, Chile, the EU, and others earlier in the year – suddenly became uncertain in November. New Zealand failed to take the proposal forward, leaving it up to Australia to scramble at the last minute to table it.
Nothing changed during that period – except the Government. Now, our partners in the Pacific are worried by a sudden shift in position, a disturbing potential signal that New Zealand cannot be relied on to stand by its international commitments.
This shift is surprising and deeply concerning for several reasons. First, because this organisation, which makes decisions about deep water fish stocks across the southern Pacific, has been strongly supported by New Zealand since its establishment. We were one of its founding members in 2012, and we host its Secretariat in Wellington.
Second, because New Zealand was the leading proponent of the conservation measure in question, which would protect at least 70 percent of vulnerable ecosystems, such as seamounts, from bottom trawling in the region’s international waters.
It was a compromise solution which took years to be agreed, yet offers less protection than many South Pacific member countries wanted. New Zealand, the sole member state still engaged in high seas bottom-trawling, argued hard to keep 30 percent of the area open to trawling.
And yet now, after convincing the other states to collectively move forward on this compromise, and presenting scientific arguments in support of its proposal, it appears New Zealand will be actively opposing its own work, severely undermining our credibility with our international allies.
This leads to the third reason why this behaviour is ringing alarm bells. If the new Government does abandon New Zealand’s own proposal, it would not only be turning its back on agreements made with partners in the South Pacific, but it would also show New Zealand is drifting towards choosing self-interest over the collective protection of the global commons.
“A few tonnes of export seafood is not worth a fraction of the price New Zealand will pay for abandoning Pacific multilateralism, dragging down the performance of a commission it helped establish, and setting a precedent for disregarding international agreements which could be followed by others at great risk to the entire region.“
Helen Clark
Most starkly, this about-face would signal New Zealand intends to continue to shirk the commitments it made in 2006 when it signed up to a United Nations General Assembly Resolution calling for all seamounts and vulnerable marine ecosystems to be protected from bottom trawling.
Most countries have already stopped bottom trawling on seamounts on the high seas. As long as New Zealand and a handful of other oceanic outliers continue to drag their heavy weighted nets over deep sea corals, the UN resolution will remain unimplemented and bottom trawlers will continue damaging precious deep-sea habitats.
What could possibly justify the New Zealand Government’s apparent reneging on its international responsibilities and agreements made in good faith with some of our closest allies?
The official explanation for not submitting the paper was that officials didn’t have a mandate from the new Government. That simply doesn’t hold water.
Sadly what is more likely is the newfound hesitancy is because the New Zealand high seas fishing industry is fiercely opposed to those closures, arguing that they would spell the end of its high seas bottom trawl fishery. Coincidentally, the new Minister for Oceans and Fisheries, Shane Jones, is known to hold similar views and has said as much.
Such ‘country first’ politics have no place in deep sea conservation, one of the frontiers of the global fight against climate change and biodiversity loss. Pacific countries have traditionally been the vanguard of ocean protection – indeed last week Palau became the first country to ratify the new high seas treaty, and Tonga is one of the latest to sign it.
Could the New Zealand Government seriously be planning to allow the short-sighted self-interest of an already dwindling high seas fishing industry and the two companies that own large bottom trawling vessels to trump collective decision-making?
A few tonnes of export seafood is not worth a fraction of the price New Zealand will pay for abandoning Pacific multilateralism, dragging down the performance of a commission it helped establish, and setting a precedent for disregarding international agreements which could be followed by others at great risk to the entire region.
If New Zealand does indeed renege on its commitments, we can only assume the Government is turning its back on decades of New Zealand’s credibility in the multilateral architecture of ocean conservation.
It’s not a decision New Zealand’s people or the international community should welcome or indulge.
It’s high time we protect these biodiversity hotspots which act as stepping stones for whales, sharks, turtles and tuna.
The world agreed to do so in 2006. Let’s make it happen before the United Nations Ocean Conference in June 2025.
We can only hope that this sort of irresponsible attitude by the three-headed monster is what will help bring about its own demise. It’s important that during these next few years our reformist ideals are kept to the forefront by opposition parties and citizen movements and that we are prepared to take them up again when it becomes apparent that the neoliberal economic order has become untenable. That’s surely not far away. A significant issue at stake here is for the Labour Party to get to grips with what is happening and to decide whether it’s going to become part of the solution.
The oceans make up 70% of the planet’s surface, with a volume 1,335,000,000 cubic of kilometres. Healthy marine ecosystems are critical. Oceans act as a key regulator of climate, absorbing vast amounts of carbon dioxide and heat, thus mitigating the impacts of climate change. Furthermore, marine ecosystems support biodiversity, providing habitat and food for millions of species. The continued abuse of marine biota by purely commercial activities will destroy the heritage of future generations and biodiversity.
Jim Salinger
“A few tonnes of export seafood is not worth a fraction of the price New Zealand will pay for abandoning Pacific multilateralism”
Well said, Ms Clark. The government’s desperation is palpable. But we must keep in mind that we are living in desperate times; the Post Truth Era where denial has become mainstream. This voting public is not ignorant of this; they know that only massive change in the way our country organises itself, and around the globe, is necessary in order to realistically address the existential threats of climate change, and that is terrifying to them.
I recall watching recorded live The Deep Sea Conservation Coalition in August 2021. It was made up of organisations such as Greenpeace, Forest and Bird, WWF etc presenting to the Environment Select Committee in Wellington. It was to stop bottom trawling on seamount ecosystems. New Zealand was the only country still trawling seamount in the South Pacific high seas. AND still is! It doesn’t seem to matter which government is ‘in’ as business interests seem to take precedence over the future of our environment.
Absolutely agree. It’s because of the failure of any government to tackle the horror story of corporate dominance over our affairs. Somehow we need to win back our democracy because that’s what’s at stake.
Well said Helen. There is so much more to our little country’s future than the selfish interests of a few.