Connell Brian: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Connell Brian: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12008] 
BRIAN CONNELL (National—Rakaia) 
: 
 The Minister was right. National does not support this legislation. We strongly oppose it because it is some of the most appalling legislation that has been written since I have been in this House. Let us be absolutely clear about it—this legislation is being designed essentially to fast track Project Aqua. We agree with the Minister on that; that is what it is about. And she is right—we are going to scream about it because it is absolutely wrong. This legislation would not be happening if Meridian Energy the architect of Project Aqua were not a wholly owned subsidiary of the Government. What is happening is deplorable and it needs to be exposed for what it is. It is a sham; an absolute sham. 
Rather than rewrite the rules for its own narrow purposes the Government should take heed of what most New Zealanders are telling it. They are telling the Government that the Resource Management Act is appalling legislation. Yes it is well intended. I accept that its authors set out with good intentions but the actuality is that the Resource Management Act is the biggest handbrake on growth in living memory. So instead of fast tracking legislation for its own company the Government should be doing what most New Zealanders want and that is a total rewrite of the Resource Management Act instead of cherry-picking it.In fact it should take an axe to it. That is what the next National Government will do. We will fix it once and for all. 
Lindsay Tisch 
: That’s for sure. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Absolutely that is for sure because that is exactly what we intend. There is no doubt that this country needs more electricity generation. That is not in dispute. But we are dealing with a complex issue and this Government cherry-picking the Resource Management Act is not the way to deal with it. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: It’s not cherry picking. It’s more like rotten-fruit picking. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Rotten-fruit picking—I will take that. It is probably just as good an example. 
Back in 1990 Geoffrey Palmer sounded this warning when he was talking about the Resource Management Act: “In Part 5 there is provision for statements of Government policy to influence directly the way in which local government will undertake its functions. However these are not statements for particular projects and they are not the National Development Act in disguise.” Clearly the Government was keen to distance the Resource Management Act from policy making in respect of particular projects then but the inherent contradiction in what is happening now is not lost on me. The special legislation as I have said is to fast track Project Aqua and skew decision making in favour of that particular development. 
This is the worst kind of political expediency. I favour development—yes—but that development smacks of a Government picking winners just as the Government of the Muldoon era did. Some members of the Government who are in the House now were around in that era and they were the ones who cried “Foul!” the loudest. Where are they now? Why do they not get up now and say: “If it was wrong then it is wrong now.”? In fact I am looking forward to the mystery man Mr Parker getting up and taking a call to explain his position on this issue as it relates to Otago because down in Otago they wonder where he is. They can never find him when they want him. In fact I do not think he even lives in that electorate does he? This will be the real test of whether he will show some leadership around this issue or whether he will just do the Government’s bidding. He knows that what is being proposed is wrong. 
The next question I pose is: why are appeal rights to the Environment Court on Project Aqua not the same as they are for other resource consents? We are told that this special legislation will truncate appeal rights on the basis of saving time. Who believes that garbage? Who believes when one is dealing with the Resource Management Act that whatever one does will save time? That Act is the biggest handbrake on growth. Mr Parker should stand and take a call and tell the House exactly what the Government is going to do about it. 
This would not be happening if Meridian Energy were not the Government’s pet. Let us be absolutely clear about that. Farmers and small-business people have to comply with every step of the Resource Management Act but not the Government’s favourite State-owned enterprise. The Government is prepared to make exemptions and exceptions for that enterprise. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. The member appears to be alleging an inappropriate conflict of interest on behalf of the Government and implicitly of shareholding Ministers. He will be aware that the  
Cabinet Manual  
provides appropriate processes for dealing with those matters. If he has a privilege matter to raise he can raise it in the normal way but it is absolutely inappropriate during debate in the House. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Speaking to the point of order I say that that is clearly a debating issue and the member knows it. 
Madam DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I agree with the member that it is a debating matter. 
BRIAN CONNELL 
: Meridian Energy is sounding all sorts of warnings. It tells us: “We have consents on the Waitaki River and we are concerned for our rights.”—but how easily the company has forgotten about the rights of some of the local farmers. Meridian has objected to small applications for water rights in the Upper Waitaki Valley and that reflects poorly on the company and on a Government that allows it to happen time and time again. 
I can tell this House that I have seen a legal opinion from one of New Zealand’s leading legal firms that says the Upper Waitaki farmers are entitled to 15 cumecs of water—as guaranteed and protected by Order in Council in 1969. What is more the same Order in Council provided for more water as irrigation development in the area was warranted. The Electricity Corporation as it was called at the time in 1990 chose another route. Although I am not suggesting that it acted illegally I am saying that it acted immorally when it ignored the Order in Council and in doing so defeated the clear intention of the Parliament at the time. 
I have seen headlines from the time when the Minister—and I cannot recall his or her name—said there would be water available for everyone including water for irrigation. The person in charge of the Electricity Corporation at the time—the person who defeated the intention of Parliament—was Keith Turner. He knows he deliberately disenfranchised farmers—and they have long memories. They also now have a quality legal opinion to back that up. They will not be steamrolled twice. 
This Government is under pressure and when it is it reverts to type. Government members just could not help themselves. Inserted in this bill is a provision for special treatment of Maori. Clauses 8(1A)(d) and 36(2A)(d) deal with that. They state that in appointing the board the Minister must give special consideration to members who understand Maori customary values and practice. No other ethnic group gets that type of special consideration. I can tell this House that when we have a new National-led Government this crowd will not get that type of preferential treatment either. 
There is no doubt in my mind that we have to solve our electricity generation problems if we are to develop as a nation. In my opinion the use of coal of which we have nearly unlimited resources is just a matter of time. Burning brown coal using new technologies is effective and environmentally acceptable. And of course it is sustainable. 
 We need to think longer term about how we can generate electricity rather than the short-term projects that are on offer at the moment. The argument that will be offered by some is that coal is too expensive vis-à-vis water. Of course all that does is underline the Government’s stupidity in rushing to sign and ratify the Kyoto Protocol because if we do not have a carbon tax it is pretty much a line ball—a National Government will fix that. 
I will finish by inviting Mr Parker to get on his feet take a call and explain exactly how he will position what the Government is trying to ram through this Parliament with undue haste with the wishes and concerns of the people living in the Waitaki valley. He knows—or he should know—that there are people there who are deeply concerned about the use of water and all they are asking from this Government is to get a fair shake. At the moment it is clearly not happening. This legislation—it does not matter what the Minister says—will simply drive this matter through the House with undue haste. I say to Mr Parker that this is the real hallmark of whether he has 60 more flights coming back to this place or whether he may be coming back longer term. This is his moment of glory because it is now his opportunity to stand up and take a leadership role.