Twyford Phil: Third Readings — 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Twyford Phil: Third Readings — 
[Sitting date: 11 May 2011. Volume:672;Page:18594. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 Well there goes the next generation of the Bluegreens. My advice to Nikki Kaye is that if she wants to burnish her credentials in Auckland Central with the liberal voters of that electorate she should not go around claiming to be a member of the Bluegreens too much because after this legislation passes her reputation as an environmentalist and as a liberal will not be looking all that crash hot. If I were here I would not go around admitting to the fact that I was a member of the Bluegreens.  
In 1970 that great American liberal Richard Milhous Nixon set up the American Environmental Protection Agency in response to the growing concern about the pressures on America’s natural environment. For many years the American Environmental Protection Agency has been the standard-bearer for active Government in the protection of the environment. The Environmental Protection Agency is not perfect but at least it knows what it is there for. At least it has clear goals and objectives.  
I will read to the House the goals of the American Environmental Protection Agency which are set out in its empowering legislation. Goal No. 1 concerns clean air and global climate change. The goal is to protect and improve the air so it is healthy to breathe and so that risks to human health and the environment are reduced. Goal No. 2 which concerns clean and safe water is to ensure that drinking water is safe and to restore and maintain the oceans the watersheds and their ecosystems. Goal No. 3 deals with land preservation and restoration. Goal No. 4 is to have healthy communities and ecosystems and Goal No. 5 is compliance and environmental stewardship. It is all there.  
The American Environmental Protection Agency which is a real environmental protection agency knows what its job is. It has clear tasks and clear goals. By contrast the Environmental Protection Authority that is being established by the Hon Nick Smith is a sham. I do not know why he wants it to be called the Environmental Protection Authority because it is not fundamentally about environmental protection.  
As the legislation is currently worded the objective of the Environmental Protection Authority is to undertake its functions in a way that firstly contributes to the efficient effective and transparent management of New Zealand’s environment and natural resources and secondly enables New Zealand to meet its international obligations. There is nothing in the fundamentals of this bill that makes it clear to the public and to the nation that the purpose of the Environmental Protection Authority is environmental protection. It is a sham. I say to Minister Smith that there is something missing in the heart of this bill and it is called environmental protection and integrity.  
I will comment on Rahui Katene’s speech. She talked about a triumph for the Maori Party and a triumph for environmental protection. She claimed that she had successfully negotiated the Treaty clause—inserted into the bill by amendment—that we see on the Table. I contend that it is not in fact a Treaty clause. It does not deserve to be called a Treaty clause. In fact it diminishes the Treaty because it states that the advisory body that the clause sets up which is a sham is meeting the Crown’s Treaty obligations. Ms Katene told the House that she had been overwhelmed by congratulatory emails. Well I suggest that she checks her email filter because when she gets back to her office she will probably find in her junk folder dozens and dozens of emails telling her what a sell out this Treaty clause is.  
It is very clear that the Maori Party has become the party of advisory committees. Members of the Maori Party got done over by Rodney Hide and ACT on the Auckland Council when they were denied democratically elected Maori seats. What did they get? An unelected statutory board which has brought into contempt in Auckland the whole notion of special governance provisions for Maori. The Maori Party claimed credit for that. I suppose that is a triumph too is it? The so-called Treaty clause waters down the Treaty obligation and devalues the currency. The Maori Party is so keen to claim victory and to claim credit that it is willing to devalue the currency of Treaty obligations in New Zealand law.  
The second part of that clause which is about complying with the Treaty clauses in other environmental legislation is hardly a triumph either. Parties were always bound by Treaty clauses in other legislation. This particular clause adds nothing to that situation. That is a sham and the fact that the Maori Party is claiming credit and claiming that this is a triumph shows that there is a lot of chutzpah in that party. They should be in fact embarrassed by it.  
Labour members voted for the Environmental Protection Authority Bill at the first reading because we thought that the stated intent of the Environmental Protection Authority would be to provide leadership in the whole area of environmental regulation. We thought that was worth supporting. But even then we had suspicions that it was a kind of Trojan Horse dressed up for all the world like a comprehensive environmental regulator. A closer look reveals that it is designed mainly to fast track existing controversial projects.  
Even during the gestation period of the Environmental Protection Authority although there is a handful of staff from the Ministry for the Environment the authority has already been used to fast track controversial projects. That is the real purpose the real agenda of the so-called balanced-growth philosophy of this Government. The Government has already used the Environmental Protection Authority to fast track the Waterview Connection and as we have pointed out in this debate time and time again the time frames were compressed local communities have been denied a fair say in the process and the Environmental Protection Authority has deliberately ignored the requests of both the Auckland Council and the local board to extend submission deadlines.  
We are seeing the same thing happen with regard to Transmission Gully where the Environmental Protection Authority is being used to circumvent the regional freshwater plan. Now the whole fast-tracking agenda is under way with regard to the private prison at Wiri in South Auckland. The Environmental Protection Authority is consistent with the environmental record of this Government. There are too many examples to name in this debate but I will give members a few of them.  
The Government has watered down Labour’s world-leading emissions trading scheme. It has added billions to the taxpayers’ bill for carbon emissions and let big polluters off the hook. That is a fact. The Government has failed to adopt real environmental standards. We have seen that as Brendon Burns pointed out earlier with regard to the national policy statement on water. It has watered that down and failed to provide proper accountability for polluters.  
I will summarise in closing the key objections that Labour has in respect of this legislation. The objectives of the legislation do not even include environmental protection the functions are too narrow and are piecemeal the legislation actually confuses the environmental legislation and finally the Environmental Protection Authority’s decision making is not sufficiently independent it lacks credibility and far too much power is put in the hands of the Minister.  
The Maori name for the Environmental Protection Authority is Te Mana Rauhi Taiao which translates as “to protect the mana of the environment”. This legislation and its provisions most certainly do not protect the mana of the environment. The name is a sham and it should be replaced. This legislation is the spawn of the Bluegreens National’s in-house environmental lobby which Nick Smith has so keenly fostered. What a disappointment this legislation must be to that Minister! What a disappointment the Bluegreens must be as his great political project! The legislation is a profound disappointment for anyone who cares about cleaning up and protecting our natural environment for future generations. It is final proof that the Bluegreens are an oxymoron. 
Debate interrupted.