Adams Amy: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Adams Amy: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4779. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I move  
That the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill be now read a third time 
. This is a bill that is long overdue. It will plug a regulatory gap so that for the first time New Zealand will have a comprehensive environmental management regime in place to protect our oceans. If New Zealanders are to have jobs a strong economy and a high standard of living we cannot afford to ignore the vast untapped economic potential that lies beneath our seas. However this Government is committed to ensuring that this is done in a way that is environmentally responsible and this bill gives us the opportunity to look at planned developments to decide whether the environmental effects are acceptable and how they should be dealt with. That there is currently no such process on our statute book is unacceptable and is to be corrected here today. The Environmental Protection Authority will be the decision maker under the framework running the nationally notified marine consent process for discretionary activities which provides the opportunity for public and iwi to submit on any proposed activity of this type and to be heard at a public hearing. 
 New Zealand has international rights but also obligations around the way we use the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf and the marine environment that surrounds us. Those rights specifically refer to and protect our sovereign right to explore and exploit our offshore and undersea resources and call on us to ensure that development is undertaken in a way that balances economic return with environmental safeguards. This bill recognises and has been demonstrated to be consistent with those international rights and obligations and the decision-making framework requires the consenting authority to undertake just such an exercise. 
Through the Committee of the whole House we made some significant changes to this bill which have improved stakeholder certainty around the purpose strengthened penalties for non-compliance and ensured workable transitional arrangements for industry. I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of this House who have approached the bill with an open mind and after due consideration of the changes we have proposed are now prepared to support this much-needed legislation recognising quite rightly that the bottom line is that New Zealand is in a better position with this legislation than without it. It is disappointing to me that some parties are still taking the view that they would prefer to have no framework at all in place which after all is the option before this House today. For my part I am proud that we have produced a strong and effective piece of environmental legislation that will provide certainty for industry and investors in development activity in our oceans while protecting this special and vulnerable marine environment. 
I want to turn now to some of the key changes that have been made to the bill starting with the purpose clause. There is a natural comparison to be drawn between the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill process and that under the Resource Management Act. Both are consenting regimes addressing the blending of economic and environmental objectives and both leave broad discretion to the consenting authority as to the way in which that overall broad judgment should be exercised. In addition in respect of offshore activities it is not hard to envisage applications that cross or could have impact on both sides of the 12 nautical mile limit and therefore fall for consideration under both the Resource Management Act and the exclusive economic zone frameworks. With this in mind and the issues of clarity raised by stakeholders around the original drafting of the purpose clause we saw merit in aligning the purpose of the exclusive economic zone bill more closely with that of the Resource Management Act by incorporating explicit reference to “sustainable management”. 
In making this change I reflected in particular on the use of the word “balance”. Although balance is an easily understood expression conversationally as a legislative provision of such import however I saw it as less than ideal. The use of “sustainable management” relating to the use and development of our resources in conjunction with the detailed information principles within the bill is designed to provide for fundamentally the same process but directed through better-understood legal mechanisms. Certainty of how the purpose will be interpreted was a key issue for industry and NGOs alike which were concerned that the balancing purpose considered at the select committee could result in extensive litigation to clarify its interpretation. The concept of sustainable management on the other hand is well defined in domestic legislation through more than 20 years of resource management case law. 
The Government has also been listening to stakeholders who were concerned that the enforcement tools in the bill lacked the teeth to incentivise compliance. This along with greater clarity in the purpose statement was one of the key issues that Opposition members and stakeholders raised with me in respect of the bill. It is our intention to send a very clear message to businesses operating in our exclusive economic zone: although we welcome investment in New Zealand we absolutely expect you to follow the rules and if you do not you can expect to face serious consequences. For this reason Supplementary Order Paper 100 which I introduced at the Committee stage increased the maximum criminal penalty for corporate entities under the bill from $600000 in the bill as introduced to $10 million in addition to the daily rate for ongoing non-compliance. 
The final change of substance we have made through the Committee of the whole House is to the transitional provisions. The Government has clarified that planned petroleum activities permitted under a petroleum permit will be able to commence for a period of 12 months following the commencement of the legislation. This is simply a pragmatic change required for these activities to adapt to the new regime. Unlike other activities planned petroleum activities have to commit to a drilling rig a huge expense up to a year in advance of exploration. The bill as introduced allowed for a 6-month transition within which the consent was to be applied for and made clear that the activity could proceed and continue during the processing time. Given that planned petroleum activities occur only during the summer season the net effect in terms of operations is unchanged. However it means there will not be the potentially farcical situation of a consent being processed and by the time it is determined one way or the other the activity in question would have ceased in any event. To manage environmental concerns in the short term operators remain obliged to prepare and lodge an impact assessment with the Environmental Protection Authority prior to commencing their activity. 
In conclusion I am very pleased that through helpful feedback from stakeholders and parliamentary colleagues I believe we have crafted and refined this bill into a high-quality and workable piece of legislation. I want to take a moment to particularly acknowledge and thank the team of officials from the Ministry for the Environment and others seconded into the work programme. They have worked tirelessly on this legislation with an unwavering commitment to improving the management of our exclusive economic zone and continental shelf for the past 2 years and I am deeply grateful to them for their efforts. Can I also thank members of the Local Government and Environment Committee chaired exceedingly well by the MP for Christchurch Central Nicky Wagner for its detailed and helpful consideration of the bill and for refinements it made to it. Finally can I acknowledge and thank my predecessor the Hon Dr Nick Smith for his commitment to the shaping of this legislation and for taking charge of seeing it into this House. 
This bill will help us unlock the enormous economic potential that lies in our oceans in an environmentally responsible way that supports our clean green reputation. With the passing of this legislation New Zealand will finally have a comprehensive environmental management regime in place for our exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. It gives me great pleasure to commend this bill to the House.