Smith Nick: Environmental Reporting Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Environmental Reporting Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 23 June 2015. Volume:706;Page:4678. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment):This bill and this part are an important part of this Government’s agenda for improving New Zealand’s environmental architecture around the Environmental Protection Authority which we created when we first came into Government and now with the Environmental Reporting Bill. I do note that we are the only OECD country to not have a formal system of environmental reporting and I think there is broad consensus across the Parliament that that is an anomaly that we must address. The Government has agreed to quite extensive amendments through the select committee process to improve this bill but in those speeches I have heard from Ruth Dyson and from Megan Woods I am reminded of a column I read a couple of days ago about the difficulty for the Opposition—that it has become the “no party” that it is always seeking to find some excuse—The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: They were very broad speeches.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I think if the member was listening to the Speaker at 2 o’clock today he would have learnt a couple of things. One of them is that the member does not interject when the Chair is on his feet as he just did and also that the question of relevance is a question for the Chair. The member has had a minute and he will remember that he has had predecessors in the chair who have been replied to. But as many members in the Chamber are aware this debate is one that after a period of time on each part gets tighter. I think it is now time for the member to start addressing this part and how it fits with what has been accepted at the second reading.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Members of the Opposition have gunned in on clause 18 of the bill and they are effectively saying that is why they are opposing the bill and will not be supporting it. What clause 18 does is it gives the Government the requirement to pass regulations around the topics that are covered by environmental reporting. It requires that there is a formal process of consultation with the public with the Government Statistician with the commissioner with local authorities and with iwi. I would also point out that there is a further check. When the environmental reporting is produced the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment also gets to report and to comment on the report.In terms of where I think members of the Opposition are wildly exaggerating clause 18 I want to draw to their attention their claim that that brings into question the whole integrity of this Environmental Reporting Bill. I want to make the comparison with section 15 of the Statistics Act which was passed by a Labour Government. It says: “at the direction of the Minister the Statistician is required to collect or cease collection of statistics of any kind [at] the direction of the Minister.” As a consequence are members opposite saying that the statistics that are produced by that department have absolutely no integrity? Here is a provision in the law passed by them that has a far more powerful veto than clause 18 and I have not heard a whimper; I have not heard a question. I think that shows just how partisan their response is to clause 18.I was also interested to compare clause 18 of this part with what is in the Australian state of the environment reporting. I have not heard any member from either side of the Chamber say that the Australian state of the environment reporting is a nonsense yet it is done by prescription by regulations set down by the Minister. There is no requirement even in the Australian legislation for any consultation prior to such regulations being gazetted nor is there any requirement in Australia for the commissioner for the environment to provide an audit on those topics that are provided.So the comparison with our own Statistics Act and the comparison with other OECD countries’ systems for state of the environment reporting shows that what the Government is doing in clause 18 as amended by the select committee is absolutely proper and responsive. It means that the Minister of the day will be accountable for those regulations that there is an open transparent process around how those topics are selected and in my view—Denis O’Rourke: No there’s not.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well the member says there is not. Well I would refer the member specifically to clause 18 where they have to be published where there has to be consultation with a whole range of players in terms of the Government Statistician the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment the public iwi authorities and local authorities. That is why the Government says that clause 18 is robust and sound and should be supported.