Auchinvole Chris: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Auchinvole Chris: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:665;Page:12725] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 In listening to the speeches that are being made I take comfort as will the public in reading the recommendation of the Local Government and Environment Committee on the estimates for Vote Environment. The committee’s report states: “The Local Government and Environment Committee recommends that the appropriations for the year ending 30 June 2011 for Vote Environment administered by the Ministry for the Environment as set out in Parliamentary Paper B.5 be accepted.” Therefore what we are hearing from the other side is well-intentioned rhetoric and I think the public can take confidence from the fact that the estimates are well-thought-out and have true purpose that is generally supported widely by the whole Parliament. 
It is my pleasure to stand and talk on the 2010 Vote Environment estimates. The total funding sought for Vote Environment this year is $138.893 million which is approximately $29 million more than the estimated actual expenditure of $109.76 million in the previous financial year. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Who wrote this? 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Perhaps I should break to reassure the member if he has difficulty with comprehension that I am prepared to speak a little more slowly for him. I am sure he will catch up in the long term. 
Baseline funding for the Ministry for the Environment’s departmental activities has increased and this is mainly due to an appropriation of $16.8 million for the proposed new Environmental Protection Authority to process ministerial call-ins and applications under the Resource Management Act 1991. 
The main area I wish to focus on in my speech concerns the vastly significant phase two of the environmental reforms and two of the major aspects in relation to this: the Environmental Protection Authority and improving freshwater management. At the end of phase two we expect to see improved approval times for major infrastructure projects better performance from local authorities enhanced Maori participation and an increase in confidence from the general public in the framework of the Resource Management Act as they see the benefits of these changes. During question time today I think the Minister for the Environment my colleague Dr Nick Smith outlined for the public some of the remarkable achievements that are already being experienced. 
Dr Smith has outlined to the select committee the Government’s priority of ensuring that a stand-alone Environmental Protection Authority will become operative by the beginning of July 2011. I am wholeheartedly behind this. It is imperative that we put great emphasis on getting the structure of that authority right and on getting it up and running as soon as it can sensibly be up and running. 
The Environmental Protection Authority will take a greater role in setting stronger standards for water and for our other precious environmental resources. The intention of improving freshwater management so that it contributes to economic growth and environmental integrity is very very important. Vote Environment includes non-departmental appropriations of around $20 million for specific water management initiatives and water-quality improvement initiatives for Lake Taupo the Waikato River and the Rotorua Lakes. 
Work on water management will be a significant policy area for the Ministry for the Environment and one of the highest Government priorities. Last year we initiated a nationwide collaborative dialogue with farmers iwi conservationists power companies irrigators and recreational groups on water reform through the Land and Water Forum. The Government is expecting to receive that report later this month. 
It is worth observing that to have success in the environment it is necessary to be in step with the equal demands of the economy the community and corporate culture. All must move at the same pace if success is going to be achieved in any single one of them. There are many examples of this on the West Coast particularly with mining. 
Of course there is the other example of Environment Canterbury which is a real example of the demands of the environment the economy the community and corporate culture being completely out of step with one another and nothing being aligned. The Government did step in and it took action where others had not done so. Regional councils have been replaced by appointed commissioners. The new temporary structure allows the fast-track completion of a water storage and water-use plan for Canterbury. 
Recent legislative and regulatory changes will improve water management in New Zealand. For example fines for breaches of water-quality resource consent conditions were increased through the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Act and this appears to have led to an increase in prosecutions by regional authorities. 
I have enjoyed the discussions we had on Vote Environment at the Local Government and Environment Committee. My views are consistent with National’s blue-green approach to environmental governance such as fostering sustainable development long-term consistency reducing delay and costs and the use of better technical information. I could go on at length— 
Aaron Gilmore 
: And you can—you can go for another 3 or 4 minutes now. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Well I think I should. What for instance did the previous Government do that would equal what is being intended in this programme here? It did very very little. We could look at the waste minimisation programmes that this Government is proposing. These appropriations are funded by levies that are payable under the Act and the Minister has informed us that a statutory review of these levies will take place in 2011. Waste is a singularly important feature of our lives. 
Hon Lianne Dalziel 
: Why are you wasting time then? 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Well I do not know that we are wasting time on environmental issues. I do not think we are wasting time at all. Indeed we are seeing a huge increase in the amount of work that is being done on environmental issues. 
A particular concern is environmental reporting because that has been proven to be considerably wanting. So we have a proposal for environmental reporting to be considerably improved. The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment who appears before the select committee regularly produced a report called  
How clean is New Zealand? Measuring and reporting on the health of our environment 
. The report notes that New Zealand is the only country in the OECD without a statutory requirement for environmental reporting and it proposes measures to improve the way that data on the state of our environment is gathered and interpreted. 
This brings into question what has been happening in the last 9 years when we have heard these constant claims of “100% Pure New Zealand”. How has it been measured? Not very satisfactorily. The Minister has told us that he shares the commissioner’s concern—probably the first Minister to do so in the last 10½ years—about the inadequacy of New Zealand’s environmental reporting and that a national environment reporting Act is one of his highest legislative priorities. Policy questions to be investigated include the allocation of responsibility for collecting auditing and interpreting data and for paying for these functions. This ain’t a simple matter but it is an important one. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: It is. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: The member opposite the chief Labour whip thinks it is a simple matter. But Labour did nothing while it was in Government. It has rendered our environmental reports to be inept and that member thinks it does not really matter. Well it does matters. It matters not just to New Zealanders; it matters on a comparative basis with countries throughout the world. 
We have to have a system of environmental reporting that matches our environment and also has a comparative feature. We need a system that is not a piecemeal product in the way that information is collected in New Zealand with different data sets being managed by organisations such as regional councils the Ministry for the Environment and the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research. Although these organisations may continue to be responsible for collecting data it is clear that effective guidelines on the management and systematic use of this material are required. These are some of the many steps forward that will be continued on during this period of Government with this environmental control being executed. Thank you. 
Vote agreed to.