Chauvel Charles: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Chauvel Charles: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 September 2011. Volume:675;Page:21216. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
CHARLES CHAUVEL (Labour) 
: 
 As we heard from the Minister for the Environment the exclusive economic zone extends 12 nautical miles out from the coast to 200 nautical miles out and the continental shelf under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea extends to an area of about 1.7 million square kilometres round the New Zealand coastline. It is about 20 times New Zealand’s land area and it contains as we know some of the wildest seas and marine conditions in the world. 
Over the last 3 years we have seen an absolute failure on the part of this Government to regulate New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: You had 9 years. 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: Well we hear a cry from the benches opposite that nothing was done by the previous Labour Government. As far as the extent of the continental shelf was concerned that was confirmed only in 2008 so the Minister needs to get his facts right before he shouts abuse across the Chamber. 
The reality is that this Government has had 3 years at a time in which it has rapidly and massively expanded marine exploration activity including offshore drilling but nothing has been done—nothing whatsoever—to provide any sort of protections for the marine environment. So I do not want to hear too many pious words from the Minister about the so-called blue-green agenda and its triumphs. We will say a little more about that so-called agenda a little later. 
But let us just be very clear for the record that for the past 3 years there has been no adequate oversight of the safety of offshore drilling despite its massive expansion; no requirement for consultation with affected communities as Te Whanau-a-Apanui would tell the Associate Minister of Energy and Resources the Hon Hekia Parata if she actually fronted up to one of their meetings rather than hiding from them; and no adequate monitoring of the activity that has been undertaken over this time. We are just lucky given the wild seas the difficult marine environments and the lack of oversight and safety conditions that we have not had a problem. 
I am glad we have not had a problem but it is a matter of luck. It is not a matter of regulation and it is not a matter of oversight. Let us not kid ourselves: nothing this Government has done as it has overseen that massive expansion of drilling activity offshore has shown the slightest concern for offshore safety or for the environmental considerations that ought to have been taken into account. 
Worse than that though and worse than the fact it has taken the Minister all of his term in office as Minister for the Environment to finally get around to regulating the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf—despite having promised that it would be a priority for him; he has said time and time again on the record that his new Environmental Protection Authority would have the task as a matter of priority of regulating the exclusive economic zone—it has taken until the end of his tenure in office to be able to do anything about it. 
What is he doing? He is not proposing passing legislation and he is not proposing to the House that we take urgent action to remedy the scandalous situation that I have outlined. He is introducing the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill which has a prospective passage date of 1 July next year. Even with the best course of action available if the Government manages to get re-elected and if the select committee process does not take longer than anticipated this bill might become law in about 10 months’ time. Not only will we have had 3 long years of inaction but we could add another good part of a year to that before the Minister was able to do anything in the legislative field to remedy the lack of any standards in our offshore drilling industry for environmental safety. 
If that were not bad enough let us have a look at what the bill does. The Minister said “Oh well we don’t think we should apply the RMA standards to our exclusive economic zone and our continental shelf.” But let us look at what the bill actually does. The explanatory note states that the bill seeks “a balance between the protection of the environment and economic development.” in the exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf. 
It is the Minister’s rhetoric continuing. He pretends to be blue-green but there is nothing green about his agenda. He pretends that a balancing act needs to go on between our economy and our environment whereas those who have actually thought about these questions know that it is exactly the same question representing two different sides of the coin. To pretend that we can have only as much environmental protection as our economic development priorities will allow us is the fallacy that lies at the heart of that Minister’s so-called blue-green agenda. 
The legislation itself is deficient because of the test I just mentioned—the so-called balancing test. It would be much better even if the Minister would not apply Resource Management Act standards to look at the sort of exercise that the Resource Management Act requires to be carried out when assessing any sort of activity. That is what the Environmental Defence Society asked the Minister to do. He should be very careful before he claims the society’s support because the Resource Management Act calls for the promotion of the sustainable management of natural and physical resources. 
The Minister asked earlier what Labour’s policy is on this issue. Well I tell him that that is our policy—the sustainable management of natural and physical resources in the exclusive economic zone and on the continental shelf. 
What is wrong with applying that settled test that well-known legal test to what ought to happen between 12 miles out and the end of the continental shelf? That is the question that has to be asked instead of introducing this developers charter by stealth which will simply lead to the economic— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What’s “by stealth”? 
CHARLES CHAUVEL 
: I will tell the Minister what is happening by stealth in a moment but let us not be under any illusions. All that this bill will do is act as a new National Development Act just as in the Muldoon days for offshore drilling activity. That will be this Minister for the Environment’s legacy. 
What is stealthy about the legislation is that the standards it is to set into place are all to be developed by regulation by the Minister himself. We do not know what sorts of environmental protections if any will be enjoyed under this legislation. We do not know the substance of the sorts of protections that are intended for the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf because—guess what—the Minister gets to make them up under this legislation. 
It is just a repeat of what we saw with the Environmental Protection Authority legislation earlier in the year. We hear grand promises and great rhetoric about the blue-green agenda and then we see the tawdry reality of what actually will occur: a weak legislative framework no proper guiding principles and no following of settled law. Then it will be all up to the Minister to fill in the detail when it suits him. 
Well I tell the Minister that that is not good enough; it is not the sort of protection that most New Zealanders want to see for the exclusive economic zone and the continental shelf. It will be on the Minister’s head I tell him if we are unlucky enough to experience difficulties in an offshore drilling or exploration activity in the interim because he has tarried for the best part of 3 years now and it will be the best part of another year before we see any sort of legislation on the books. Even then it will be inadequate and it will be up to the Minister to decide how to fill in the detail of the legislation by regulation. 
This is not environmental legislation; it is a developer’s charter. It is an exercise in cynicism because it involves introduction and first reading with 8 days of this Parliament left to sit. There will be no time to debate it further than what we have today and it cannot possibly become law until the middle of 2012 at the earliest. This is an attempt by the Minister and the Government to look as if they are doing something but it is just an exercise in cynicism and Labour will not support this sort of duplicity in any way.