11. Oil and Gas Industry—Offshore Exploration PermitsJONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and ResourcesOil and Gas Industry—Offshore Exploration Permits11. JONATHAN YOUNG (National—New Plymouth) to the Minister of Energy and Resources: What reports has she seen on the process she is undertaking to give effect to the Government's decision to ban offshore exploration for oil and gas?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): I will take this opportunity to remind the member that there was no ban on offshore exploration; rather the Government has made the decision that no further offshore exploration permits will be issued. But regarding this decision I have seen many reports including those I have received from officials in the recent weeks with the following titles: Progressing Changes to the Crown Minerals Act Options for Consideration"; "Crown Mineral Act Changes Next Steps"; "Proposed Changes to the Crown Minerals Act for Cabinet Consideration"; "Final Policy Decisions for Tranche One of the Crown Minerals Act 1991 Review". I have also received 14 weekly reports that have addressed this but I will not occupy the House's time by reading out the title of each of these.Jonathan Young: Does she agree with Woodward Partners energy analyst John Kidd's investment note published 13 August which says "The Minister's mixing of references to the process of obtaining the Cabinet approval required to give statutory effect to the announcement speaks to the procedural and legislative difficulties the Minister will now be juggling as she navigates a route to secure the formal policy decision still required"?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No I do not agree with that assessment.Jonathan Young: Is Mr Kidd correct when he surmises: "The invitation for bids for Block Offer 2018 is being held up by Government wanting to pass enabling legislation to accommodate the policy change into the Crown Minerals Act so as to ensure the Block Offer 2018 process does not face a legal challenge on the basis of being inconsistent with the legislation in place at the time"; and if not why?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: I'm currently seeking advice on whether it would be prudent to take a precautionary approach during this transition period. I'm asking whether we need to consider a belts and braces approach to ensure that we minimise the risk for legal challenges as we want to ensure there is certainty for industries and communities. We know and note—as members opposite will know—it is not uncommon that when people don't get what they want they may like to test it in the courts.Jonathan Young: Does she agree with Mr Kidd's further contention: "If the Government was to proceed with the invitation for bids then there would appear to be a strong case for judicial review; if legislation is not able to be passed in a timely manner we think there is a material risk that Block Offer 2018 will not proceed"; if not why not?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: In answer to that first part of the question no I don't agree with that assessment. As I told the member in the answer to the previous question I am seeking some additional advice at the moment but whatever outcome we go with there will be a Block Offer 2018 that will be initiated.Jonathan Young: When the fact sheet accompanying the Prime Minister's announcement on 12 April 2018 said "Officials will review the Crown Minerals Act to ensure the Act is consistent with this announcement" does this imply that the Prime Minister's announcement was inconsistent with the Act?Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS: No. As I've answered the member previous times in the House there were two announcements that were made on 12 April. There was the area that we were beginning consultation on for the onshore block offer of 2018. There was also the longer-term announcement around future block offers and the fact that they would not contain offshore offerings. As we also said in the press statement that sat in front of the fact sheet the member is referring to we were beginning the process around what changes would need to be made to give effect to that. I also point the member to the Cabinet minute that also said that."