Dean Jacqui; Simpson Scott; Parker DavidPart 6 Management of particular resources and areas CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Members we come now to Part 6. This is the debate on clauses 378 to 427Y Management of particular resources and areas" including Schedules 3 and 5. The question is that Part 6 stand part.Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Chair. Well this is another part of the proposed legislation that has quite a lot of meat and detail in it. Subpart 1 relates to water conservation orders and there's quite a bit of detail in there. Much of it is carried over from existing legislation.But when we come to clause 402 the requirement for farms to have a certified freshwater farm plan if it meets land threshold use there are a range of matters there. It has to be 20 or more hectares 5 or more hectares of the land is under horticulture 20 or more hectares of the farm is under pastoral land use a prescribed area of the farm under agricultural use prescribed in regulations made under section 411 or 20 or more hectares of the farm is under a combination of any two or more of the land uses described above.So this requirement to have essentially freshwater farm plans is one of the issues that is foremost in the minds of many farmers up and down the countryside. Farming is an area that has been the focus of an awful lot of red tape rules and regulations under this current Government and the requirement for freshwater farm plans is just another piece of red tape that farmers have to comply with under this.Now I don't think that there are any farmers that would say they want worse fresh water in their catchment area that they want the water quality to be worse but it's a question of balance. Much of this part particularly in relation to freshwater farm plans goes into the detail of what the plan must include. So clause 404 "Contents of freshwater farm plan (1) A freshwater farm plan must (a) identify any"—any—"adverse effects of activities carried out on the farm on freshwater and freshwater ecosystems". And further it must "specify requirements that (i) are appropriate for the purpose of avoiding [minimising or] remedying … adverse effects of those activities on freshwater and freshwater ecosystems; and (ii) are clear and measurable; and (c) demonstrate how any freshwater farm plan outcomes prescribed in the regulations are to be achieved; and (d) comply with any other requirements in the regulations [made under clause 411]."So therein lies the rub that those thresholds in terms of identifying any adverse effects of activities carried out on the farm on fresh water; it's actually a very high threshold. It's arguable that just about any human activity and just about any farming activity will have an effect. It's debateable whether that effect will be adverse and what the impact of the adverse effect will be in terms of quantum and what the cost and mitigating impacts will be should that adverse effect have to be nullified removed or remediated.So my question to the Minister in relation to freshwater farm plans is: is he confident that he has the settings right in terms of a sector that is already under intense regulatory control but has seen a massive increase in requirements for compliance in a whole range of areas of which this is just another? What assurance can he give farmers that that the work effort and time associated with complying with freshwater farm plans is going to be commensurate with the environmental outcomes? I'm keen to know how the farm plans are going to be monitored. So if the Minister could address issues relating specifically to the freshwater farm plans I'd appreciate his discussion on those matters please.Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Thank you Madam Chair. In the process that the country has gone through to try and arrest the decline in our freshwater bodies particularly our rivers and streams the agricultural sector and councils came to central government and said "Look you can overregulate this space. Rules-based regulation through national policy statements and national environment standards can get too specific and unwieldy." They said "We would prefer a farm planning regime." which is why the amendments made to the Resource Management Act (RMA) to enable a freshwater farm plan regime are to effectively in the future be a substitute for some of the rules that you'd otherwise need in district plans or national direction. So that was inserted into the RMA about three years ago now and this is largely a carry-over of it. It has actually broad support from regional councils and many agricultural bodies. The agricultural bodies like Fonterra some of the industry good organisations that work in the horticultural sector and Beef + Lamb for example wanted to ensure that the existing freshwater farm plan components that they have in their plans—already required of their suppliers in the case of Fonterra—could be transitioned into the new system and they are being.The only real change here in the Supplementary Order Paper is shown on page 278 to the clause that the member identified clause 402 at new subclause (1)(a). That's actually as a consequence of a request that Federated Farmers made of me. The arable sector came to me and said "Look the example where this is already working really well is in Canterbury." and this is largely modelled on what's happening in Canterbury where freshwater farm plans are already in place. He said that in Canterbury they started with the larger farms and then moved to the smaller ones and that if they had started with all farms at once they would have suffered a backlash against the system and they would have also lacked capacity in the service sector to service the needs of all of the farmers.So they recommended that further discretion be allowed in the system to change the land area thresholds pursuant to which you need to have a freshwater farm plan. So what that does is effectively allow regulations to be made by the Government to change those thresholds if a regional council for example comes to us and says "Look this is just going a bit fast. We actually want to start with the bigger ones first like they did in Canterbury." So this is actually a provision that has the support of Federated Farmers. Not a lot of this legislation does but that particular provision is supported."