te Heuheu Georgina: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
te Heuheu Georgina: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5489] 
Hon GEORGINA TE HEUHEU (NZ National) 
: 
 What is in a name? What is in a title? Well this legislation is called the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) and it looks and sounds so innocuous but in reality it is not at all. I first want to make some comment about the absolute delays in bringing this bill to the House. In May 2001 the Minister said that this bill would be passed in that year. It was not passed. In August of that year she said that the second reading would be in September. It was not. In October 2002 she said that the bill would be passed that month under urgency but it was not. So maybe the title of this bill should be the “Resource Management (Delayed Action) Amendment Bill.” That has been an issue for a lot of people who are wanting to proceed with development. In Auckland in particular with its infrastructure issues and its roading issues those things are holding up the economic growth of that city and of this country. Therefore we should call this bill the “Resource Management (Delayed Action) Amendment Bill (No 2)”. 
The Minister in the chair the Hon Marian Hobbs must take full responsibility for the delays. She should be ashamed of herself for signalling time and time again that this bill was coming to the House when it has only just reached us in Committee in 2003. The way that the Minister has described this bill and my colleague has already referred to it was as a beautifully written beautifully balanced piece of legislation. What sort of a description is that? This is serious serious stuff. New Zealanders should have the ability to develop resources where that is proper while ensuring the sustainability of our environment. So what on earth has that sort of comment got to do with the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2)? What on earth has that comment got to do with it? 
Then in another breath the Minister said: “Increased flexibility for business and more opportunity for public participation are the major aims of the RMA.” Has she talked to business about this? Has she been worried about the delays that have occurred? Maybe in the title there should be the word “delayed”. Has she honestly really considered whether there will be reduced costs? Because that is not what we are hearing from business and that is not what we are hearing from Maori businesses either. Are not Maori also developers? Maori are in business. They want to get on with business. They want to get on and develop and show that they are major contributors to the economy of New Zealand. Who pays for the delays and the costs that are imposed? The prescriptive nature of this legislation and the added bureaucracy which is a feature of this Government in everything that it has done results in a build-up of bureaucracy here in Wellington and at local government level. Who pays for that? It is the very people who have been wanting this bill to come through and wanting appropriate changes so that we can see development but in the context of a sustainable environmental programme. 
So hopefully the Minister will take a call and let us know how she reconciles statements about the intention that she has made comment on—the intention in the policy statement—with all of the complaints we have heard around the country and particularly the complaints about bureaucracy and added costs stifling business.