Hughes Gareth: Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill — Referral to Commerce Committee In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHughes Gareth: Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill — Referral to Commerce Committee In Committee[Sitting date: 10 April 2013. Volume:689;Page:9273. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GARETH HUGHES (Green): Just to continue my call from before in the first section I talked about the first reason that I am opposed to Supplementary Order Paper205 which is because of the substance. It is bad law. Eminent legal professionals have said that it breaches international law.In this short slot I want to talk about the process because that has been equally shocking. What we are seeing is lawmaking at its worst by a new Minister of Energy and Resources and started by the previous Minister Phil Heatley. Supplementary Order Paper 205—the “Petrobras amendment” the “Anadarko amendment”—was announced on Easter Sunday on the television. This got absolutely no select committee scrutiny because it has been introduced as a Supplementary Order Paper. Even this afternoon when I put to the House a motion that we recommit this Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill to the Commerce Committee to consider just this specific amendment—it could have had a constrained time—this Government refused to grant leave. It does not want to have select committee scrutiny. It does not want to put the detail in front of the public.Denis O’Rourke: They’re ashamed of it.GARETH HUGHES: The Government is ashamed of it Mr O’Rourke. It does not want to hear from the legal experts. It would rather keep its hands over its eyes and its fingers in its ears—blind to international legalities and law and blind to the experts—because it does not want to have the questions answered. So we have not seen any select committee process which is traditional with something with such far-ranging constitutional democratic and human rights significance and implications. Of course because it is an amendment we have seen no New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet which is traditional with first readings of legislation. We are avoiding that entirely because it has been introduced as an amendment.What we saw tonight was I think shameful for a democracy. We saw the Attorney-General crack a couple of jokes with the energy Minister in the chair. He said he had a quick perusal of it and then went on to slander some of our most eminent legal professionals including former Prime Ministers. I am sure they have got thick skins and they see the politics behind it but I think it is a shameful display that the Attorney-General could treat such eminent New Zealanders including a New Zealander of the Year with such disdain. He is not even doing his job which is as Attorney-General running a Human Rights Act – New Zealand Bill of Rights Act lens over legislation. I think we should have done that. Again in the Chamber the Minister declined my invitation that he invite the Attorney-General to run a New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet across it. What we have seen instead is slander and impugning experts which I think does those members no good.What we have seen is an incredibly rushed process. This was introduced only on Easter Sunday and now we could see it passed in a matter of weeks. The Minister could not even give examples of why this is needed. He says the industry had not been complaining about it and had not been requesting it. So what is the rush? Why can we not have a select committee hearing on it? Why can this not be introduced as a stand-alone piece of legislation with the appropriate right select committee hearing and New Zealand Bill of Rights Act vet? But I guess this is the real question: what has the Minister got to fear? What is he worried about? What are the answers he is worried about hearing? Maybe that is the entire problem: he is worried about what the answers are because the eminent legal professionals say it probably breaches international law and it is an attack on our key democratic rights. I guess the question for the Minister in the chair the Minister for Courts is whether the Minister bothered getting a Crown Law Office legal opinion. Did he go to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and request its legal briefing over it? If he did he should table it—he should have nothing to hide. If he did not I think that again is a shocking abuse of a rushed process to support matesin the oil industry from afar. What it does of course is open up New Zealand to years potentially of legal cases as these dubious laws are challenged in the courts.The third point I want to touch on is the agenda—what is driving the Supplementary Order Paper and is behind this Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill. Despite the grotesque egregious nature of Supplementary Order Paper 205 you know what? I actually see this as a sign of fear from the Government benches. I see it as a sign of weakness. I see that the Government is actually losing the debate. The fact is that its oil-drilling plan for this country is in tatters. Apache Corporation is gone Anadarko has delayed Petrobras has gone and Phil Heatley has gone. The Government is losing the debate. What Supplementary Order Paper 205 does is send a very clear message to New Zealanders which is that protest is feared by the oil industry. The industry fears Kiwis standing up and exercising their democratic rights.It sends a message to New Zealanders that protest works. We have seen it in the Southern Ocean this season where Japan caught only 103 whales. It was trying for 1000 but protesters stopped it. We have seen it in New Zealand when we stood up for Pacific nuclear test - free zones. We have seen it with bottom trawling when I did what the Government refused to do to go out on the high seas and stop deep-sea bottom trawlers and now that has been banned between New Zealand and Chile. Supplementary Order Paper 205 is a challenge to protesters. Protest works the industry is fearful of it and I think protesters are not going to step aside. I think they are going to just ramp up the actions because what they love which is our beaches and our marine environment they want to protect. They are standing up for it. So despite the Government doing everything it can—