Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5177] 
7.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: What submissions or consultations has she sought or received from the electricity and energy sector regarding amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991 and the impacts these amendments may have on addressing New Zealand’s energy shortages? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Acting Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 In relation to the energy and climate change amendments to the Resource Management Act which have been announced but not tabled consultation meetings were held with six renewable energy developers Transpower New Zealand the Electricity Networks Association the Major Electricity Users Group Business New Zealand and a number of people working with Maori on energy issues. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Noting that the Petroleum Exploration Association of New Zealand—representing 39 energy companies including such significant players as Shell Petroleum Mining Co. Todd Energy and the Government’s own Genesis Power—has stated in its written submission on the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2): “The bill will impede the speedy exploration for and the production of this country’s petroleum resources—in particular natural gas—at a time when a looming energy supply crisis would logically drive in the opposite direction.” how will this bill help address the major energy crisis facing New Zealand? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I simply disagree. This Government is committed to improving the implementation of the Resource Management Act without undermining the Act’s objective of delivering a healthy environment. The Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) will reduce costs and delays. As I said in my answer to the substantive question we are soon to introduce legislation to smooth the path for renewable energy developments under the Resource Management Act. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: What measures has the Government undertaken to reduce Environment Court delays for approval of energy projects? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: There will be more money more judges and more commissioners for the Environment Court. Therefore that backlog is shortening week by week. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Can the Minister for the Environment confirm that the Resource Management Act allows community groups recreational interests and individuals who have already expressed substantial opposition to Project Aqua to hold up that development for years; will any amendment to the Act disenfranchise those people from expressing their legitimate opposition? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I refer the member to his own press statement. On 7 October 2002 he said that the Resource Management Act would cause a 4-year delay for Project Aqua and then on 11 February this year—when there was an indication that the Government would proceed with network utility status—he said that the Government was resurrecting the Muldoon era. On which side of this debate would the member like to find himself? At the moment he is on both. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Can the Minister confirm that two new thermal power stations currently have resource consents—and got them very quickly—but have no gas; has he seen any proposals as to how amendments to the Resource Management Act will refill the Maui gas field or make it rain or even persuade Genesis Power to order its coal earlier? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Yes and no and that is precisely the point. The Resource Management Act is being trotted out by people who decide that they will take any opportunity to further originating prejudices that in my view they ought to leave behind. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: In the Minister’s answer in which he referred to people who were prejudiced would he include Meridian Energy—the Government’s own company and the single largest generator of electricity—which said of the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) that sections 7 11 18 41 54 61 63 67 75 76 and 80 will “create additional obstacles to the granting of the necessary approvals for the construction or operation of power projects and the bill should not be enacted at this time”; and can the Minister explain to the House why he has ignored this country’s biggest electricity generator and his own company? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: I happen to know the views of Meridian Energy very well. Meridian Energy wishes to have planning rules that are easier than they are as does anyone who wants to get on with big projects. The problem that Meridian Energy needs to face is that this Government will always go for a balance and the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) reduces costs on the legislation as it is currently in the books. 
Stephen Franks 
: Does the Minister for the Environment agree with the Minister of Conservation that the only concern and consideration of the Minister of Conservation in relation to the application of resource management law over Department of Conservation estate and the Conservation Act should be to freeze hydro generation out of the Department of Conservation estate; if so has she made any representations to change a result that has us importing Indonesian coal to burn? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: If I can get the two parts of the question right the answers are yes and no. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Can the Minister for the Environment explain to the House how the provisions in her bill which require the protection of ancestral landscapes cultural landscapes and spiritual values such as taniwha will help to get consents for new hydroelectric wind or geothermal power stations? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The House may be interested to learn of the history of this matter. There was a review into historic heritage in 1998. The review recommended the inclusion of historic heritage as a matter of national importance into section 6 of the Resource Management Act. It was included in the 1999 legislation introduced by a National Government. The really interesting thing is that that review— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: That’s a lie! 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: It is not a lie. That review into historic heritage— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member will stand withdraw and apologise for that comment. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member may raise a point of order if it is not in relation to that matter. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The Minister has alleged that the issues I raised of ancestral landscapes cultural landscapes and spiritual values were in a bill that was introduced by National in 1999. That is not true. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I cannot arbitrate on that. My job is to see that question time— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Would you like me to table the bill? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There are many other ways in which the member can seek to redress that matter. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: May I continue my answer which was limited to the issue of historic heritage and say that the review into historic heritage was begun by none other than the Minister of Conservation when National was in office—the same person who asks that question now. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House to table the submission by Meridian Energy in opposition to the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2). 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House to table the submission of the Petroleum Exploration Association of New Zealand with its opposition to the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2). 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.