The Otago fishing licence I bought last week for the 25-26 season is likely to be my last.
Not for any reason of age or infirmity, but because of impending new legislation that will likely have all licences purchased nationally. It is expected legislation will be introduced to Parliament later this year by Minister of Hunting and Fishing James Meager.
What has brought Fish & Game administration to this point? A review began in 2020 with an exhaustive process of interviewing licence holders and administrators. Following a report, an implementation group (which I chaired) was appointed to advise then minister Kiritapu Allan on administrative and legislative change.
The key finding of the report was that the overall standard of governance was at an extraordinarily low level and the level of tension between the regions and the national council was unacceptable and handicapped performance.
It also found that the role of the national council was as the current law required but it had not been acted on correctly for many years — to co-ordinate and support the regional delivery of services to licence holders, and to advocate nationally in the interests of the sport.
In addition, relationships with the farming sector were possibly at their lowest ever ebb, and that had a direct impact on licence-holders’ access to their sport.
It is clear from papers released by the minister that he agrees with these findings. The question is the solution.
The advice he has received from visiting all the Fish & Game regions is incremental change. That means keeping the current 12 regions and 100 elected councillors and having regional appointees to the 12-member National Council, meaning the whole structure will continue to be the cumbersome and unworkable structure the reviews suggest it is now.
The alternative for change is to be visionary, looking 20 years ahead, and follows the report and my implementation group’s recommendations.
That would be to reduce the number of regions to seven (three North Island and four South Island); have five elected councillors in each region and two ministerial appointees, selected for governance skills required to complement the elected members’ skill sets; at the national level, the regions nominate a maximum of five licence-holders to form the national council and add three ministerial appointees, again selected for complementary management and governance skills.
There will be reaction to the idea of ministerial appointees. However, Fish & Game can use the New Zealand Game Animal Council criteria that ensure the appointees are not political appointees as such but have qualifications that demonstrate they are long-term effective supporters of the sport. That works well.
Further essential change will ensure the role and responsibilities of the national council are defined, to ensure it provides support and co-ordination rather than centralised direction and control, which some are advocating. After all, national council is not accountable for delivering services to licence-holders.
That happens in the regions: that is where accountability lies, and that is very clearly what licence-holders have indicated they require.
The last question is funding. Fish & Game is the only body, operating under legislation, that is completely self-funded without any government support. That will continue. Our independence is sacrosanct.
However, the method for distributing licence money to where it is most needed has proved both controversial and ineffective. Clear statements within the new legislation are required to ensure the money is directed to the regions, where it is needed.
The quality of governance will determine how well that is done, and effective governance is the essential change for Fish & Game.
— Ray Grubb is a former chairman of Fish & Game.
