Ngarewa-Packer DebbieDEBBIE NGAREWA-PACKER (Co-Leader—Te Paati Māori): Yes. Kia ora. Tēnā koe. Tēnā koe e te Pīka. I stand to speak on behalf of Te Paati Māori in respect to the bill before us the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill and understand the purposes is implementing the findings of the 2018 review. I note the providing iwi or hapū whose rohe are included enabling annual meetings with Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment and making explicit that decision makers have regard to feedback from iwi and hapū.Look there are a couple of aspects that we want to bring up in this debate and that's starting with rangatiratanga. You know it and we know it as tangata whenua that we have rights and interests. The Crown has acknowledged this every time they've apologised for breaches of Te Tiriti and iwi settlements—the theft of resources. And like today—even those apologies are happening—we're seeing that they're trying to improve legislation that hasn't addressed some of the Tribunal findings from the Wai claim 796 where it was found that Māori had Treaty interests in petroleum arising from the loss of their land before 1937 and the expropriation of the Petroleum Act and also the Crown's royalties and 11 percent ownership in Kupe gas field which could have been included in settlements like Ngāruahine iwi—in fact Taranaki iwi katoa.So here we are today being asked to support this proposition instead of what we should be doing which is addressing the fact that there are changes to the block offer regime which are now out of date and not fit for purpose especially if no ban on onshore exploration has been proposed which iwi and hapū have been discussing with the Government now for more than two years. While annual engagement reports which iwi are supporting—that is not a fundamental change or a big enough change that we needed to see happen.There need to be legislative backstops to enshrine the best practice of engagement with iwi throughout the entire permitting process which includes a partnership approach with the Crown to agree on designated mining permit areas and collective decision making on planned work plans. We think there should have been an authentic partnership model for Taranaki specifically who everyone seems to acknowledge are experts but is way overdue. This could be a model for co-governance—Oh! Dare I say—and partnerships. There has been a complete missed opportunity to review the Crown Minerals Act in conjunction with the Resource Management Act (RMA) reform. And I know we've said this before but it could have included complexity of engagements in the artificial separation of permitting and environmental impact—if we go back and remember the original Crown Minerals Act and RMA were proposed as one Act prior to 1991.From a kaitiaki perspective I want to highlight that we should not be modernising an outdated Act but rather transitioning away from it completely. This would send a clear commitment and connection to climate change our taiao change and the overall transition agendas.We acknowledge that the Government was bold to announce a ban on new offshore permits but where is the ban on new permits onshore in Taranaki? We need to take a step back and look at a total integrated model which is ultimately about moving forward with a clear transition away from fossil fuels.In our opinion this fails to bring regulation in line with the reality that oil and gas is a sunset industry and the failure to reform the block offer system and failure to ban new onshore permits in Taranaki sit starkly in conflict with the stated commitments on climate and biodiversity. Based on those issues we oppose this bill. What we need to see is changes that are really a step in the right direction that need to be bold. Again I repeat while most of the provisions in the bill itself are sensible and should be supported overall it is lacking the ambition and vision that is needed to make the necessary transitions away from fossil fuels and towards real Crown partnerships with tangata whenua. Kia ora koutou.