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