Resource Management Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill (No 2) Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill — Third ReadingsText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeResource Management Amendment Bill Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill (No 2) Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill — Third Readings[Sitting date: 27 August 2013. Volume:693;Page:12851. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Resource Management Amendment BillLocal Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill (No 2)Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment BillThird ReadingsHon AMY ADAMS (Minister for the Environment): I moveThat the Resource Management Amendment Bill the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill (No 2) and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Amendment Bill be now read a third time. This legislation makes a number of changes to the Resource Management Act that are designed to improve efficiency enable growth provide good environmental outcomes and ensure decisions about resource management are reached in a timely and cost-effective way. The proposals in this legislation build on the positive results that have already been achieved by the Government’s resource management reforms to date.When National became the Government in 2008 we began a programme of reform to ensure that our planning law was about the sustainable management of our resources and timely high-quality decisions for New Zealanders and our job-creating businesses. The first stage of reform in 2009 involved 150 amendments to simplify and streamline the Resource Management Act in order to reduce costs uncertainties and delays. This has improved outcomes for the environment supported business investment and encouraged stronger economic growth. These reforms reduced late consents from 31 percent in 2008 to just 5 percent in 2011. That is a great achievement.The 2009 reforms created the Environmental Protection Authority which enables the efficient processing of major urban and infrastructure projects that are crucially important to New Zealanders. This process has led to theWaterview and Transmission Gully projects both being consented within 9 months. Previously these critical transport projects could have been deadlocked for years. The trade protection provisions introduced by the 2009 reforms have also helped tackle the so-called supermarket wars where supermarket groups and other big retailers spent years and years and millions of dollars fighting each other in the courts over their respective expansion plans.This legislation builds on those successes and makes several new and important contributions to improving the resource management system in a number of key areas. Firstly the legislation enacts a 6-month time limit for the processing of resource consent applications for medium-sized projects. This policy is an election manifesto commitment and will mean that applicants and communities will have greater certainty about the development of regionally significant projects. Currently it takes an average of 9 months to process applications for medium-sized projects and there is no prescribed time limit at the moment for the overall process under the Resource Management Act. These sorts of applications are typically for new industrial developments subdivisions retail developments and regional infrastructure. Collectively annual investment in these sorts of projects represents hundreds of millions of dollars in infrastructure and capital costs. Reducing the time it takes to process these consents by about a third will provide increased certainty and economic benefits to communities and applicants.The legislation also contains provisions to develop a one-off hearings process for Auckland’s first unitary plan. This streamlined process is essential for developing and implementing a consistent planning framework for New Zealand’s largest city. Thanks to this process it is estimated that the Auckland Unitary Plan will be in place within 3 years from notification rather than the 10 years it would take without theseimprovements. Auckland’s economy is simply too important to wait 10 years for the plan to become operational. Ensuring that a high-quality plan is delivered swiftly will allow work on pressing Auckland issues such as housing affordability to take place sooner rather than later. These significant time savings will provide certainty and have real benefits for both Aucklanders and the country as a whole.Another significant change introduced in this bill is a specific requirement for local decision makers to undertake more robust cost-benefit analyses under section 32 of the Resource Management Act when considering plan changes and proposals. A requirement for decision makers to consider both the positive and negative impacts on employment and economic growth reflects the far-reaching impact that plan changes and proposals can have on the wider economy. The scale and scope of the analyses will depend on the size of the plan change or proposal which will mean that although changes of significant impact will require in-depth scrutiny decision makers will not have to spend large amounts of time on minor requests and proposals.The legislation also makes important changes to facilitate the Government’s programme to deliver high-quality independent environmental reporting in New Zealand. This change will ensure that decision makers and the public will have access to high-quality environmental monitoring and data. This is an important first step for improving the quality of local government planning and decision making. At present our councils collect their data independently of each other and use their own methodologies to collect the data. There is no common national framework for best practice in how environmental data should be collected either in terms of methodologies or standards. The Government is currently working collaboratively with councils to develop a consistent framework so that the results of environmental monitoring can be accurately compared across different areas and provide a true representative picture of our core environmental domains. If this voluntary approach is not adequately implemented on a collaborative basis the legislation provides a new regulation-making power for the Minister for the Environment to develop a common monitoring framework across the country.The overall purpose of the changes in this legislation is for decisions about resource management to be processed more swiftly providing certainty for applicants and communities as opposed to necessarily changing what the final outcome will be. The legislation also makes changes that will help make our system more workable fair and accountable in order to facilitate better economic outcomes for our communities.The legislation in turn also clarifies how councils may make rules in relation to tree protection. A rule in a district plan may only restrict the felling trimming removal or damaging of trees on private property in an urban environment if the allotments have been identified by street address or legal description of the land and the trees are described in a schedule to the plan. Groups of trees that cover adjacent allotments may be identified if they form a cluster grove or line. Let me be clear: this does not affect the ability for regional councils or district councils to identify areas of significant vegetation or to create and use bush protection zones. However if the trees within these areas in urban environment allotments are identified in a district plan the rules will need to comply with the requirements of this amendment. Most councils around New Zealand already operate in this way but for those that do not the provision will come into force after 2 years to allow those that have used blanket rules to update their schedules if they wish.In addition to the changes outlined in this legislation I intend to introduce a further resource management reform bill later this year. This next bill will make our planning system much more efficient and effective. Making our planning system more proactive instead of reactive is also a key goal of the next stage of resource management reform.Ensuring that more planning decisions are made up front in the plan-making stage as opposed to being continually relitigated through the consenting process will make our planning system more efficient and provide greater certainty to communities and to applicants. Reforming our freshwater management system will also bring positive environmental and community benefits. Introducing collaborative freshwater planning will mean that communities resource users and councils can work together to set limits and objectives for their local freshwater resources that will be more durable and less likely to be prone to expensive untimely litigation. In the meantime however the current legislation before the House will make discreet and welcome improvements to the Resource Management Act.The Government’s comprehensive Resource Management Act reforms will deliver a system that meets the needs of our communities and our regions by enabling jobs and growth while also providing for the strong environmental protections that we expect in a timely and cost-effective way. The reforms are about breaking the cycle of delay after delay and delivering timely decisions that provide greater certainty to all those involved.Despite what our opponents say these reforms are not about growth at any cost. I have always said that we have to balance our economic opportunities along with our environmental responsibilities. That is at the heart of our Government’s approach to planning law. It gives me great pleasure to commend the bills to the House.Debate interrupted.