Copeland Gordon: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12018] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 This bill is of fundamental importance to New Zealand’s electricity supply future. Contact Energy presented to me last year a graph indicating that New Zealand could face a significant primary energy gap from around 2007—now just 3 years away—because of the rundown in gas from Maui and problems associated with the use of Waikato coal for electricity generation. The graph that was presented to me is truly frightening. It illustrates that without Project Aqua there may be a gap between electricity supply and demand beginning in 2007 and rising to a massive 11000 gigawatts by 2017 just 10 years later. Those forecasts should be of concern to all New Zealanders since they clearly indicate that unless we can bring additional generating capacity on stream within the next 3 years we will be facing an electricity shortage. Simply stated this is an issue of critical importance to the future success of the New Zealand economy. The mere existence of the graphs themselves is already putting upward pressure on electricity prices. As we get nearer to the beginning of the shortage itself prices will go yet higher so that as the shortages loom the ongoing viability of many New Zealand businesses will be threatened. At the same time residential customers will face increased costs and perhaps even shortages as they endeavour to heat their homes heat their water cook their meals and use their computers cellphones etc. 
Meridian Energy with its Project Aqua on the Waitaki River in the South Island has appeared as a kind of white knight to avoid this catastrophe. Its environmentally sustainable hydroelectricity scheme has the potential to reduce the gap I have outlined by a significant extent and at a price of around 4.5c to 5c per kilowatt-hour which is significantly cheaper than the known alternatives. It is clear to me therefore viewed against the background of the nation’s acute need for new electricity-generating capacity that Project Aqua is a scheme that should proceed in the national interest. I say “the national interest” because all New Zealand businesses and households will be beneficiaries. To me those realities are clear-cut. 
However as is frequently the case in the real world life is not as straightforward as that. Indeed in relation to water from the Waitaki River it could hardly be more complex. When it comes to water allocation consents Meridian Energy and Project Aqua are in direct head-to-head competition with a number of farming groups who are desperate for water consents so that they can irrigate farms. Taken together the potential of the irrigation schemes is in the hundreds of thousands of hectares. They therefore also have the potential to greatly boost—or make a significant contribution to—New Zealand’s agricultural exports. Accordingly the irrigation schemes are also of critical importance. To make life really complex the total volume of water sought from the Waitaki catchment by the applicants exceeds the quantity of water available even if we used all the water in the river—something by the way that is not intended. A minimum irreducible level of water must be maintained in the river so that its botanical fish and bird life can flourish. The environment comes first and only when all are satisfied in that regard can we move on to human recreational and commercial considerations—in that order. Therefore the second priority use of the river which is for human recreation in terms of fishing and jet boating etc. must always be assured. 
It is only after we have cleared those two hurdles that we come to the subject of this bill which is sorting out a means whereby the competing commercial interests can then be taken into account and decisions concerning water allocation made. It establishes a process specifically to determine and then to allocate water usage. It appoints both a board to develop a water-allocation framework and a panel of commissioners to consider consent applications within that framework and most important to allocate the water. In terms of the water allocation time is of the essence. The bill provides therefore for the framework to be completed within 9 months so that the allocation process can then proceed. Should Meridian Energy successfully gain consents for the water required for Project Aqua it will then be able to proceed with its scheme. If not it will be necessary for it to rework and downscale or possibly even to abandon the project. 
I fervently hope for the sake of New Zealand’s electricity supply that Project Aqua or at the very least a modified form of the scheme will go ahead. However if Project Aqua cannot proceed we need to know that quickly so that other probably higher-cost less sustainable and less environmentally friendly electricity-generation alternatives such as coal can then be speedily advanced. We are in a race against time. The clock will not stop and I have seen nothing yet to indicate that the graph is wrong that indicates clearly a gap in our electricity supply from 2007. 
United Future’s concern has been to ensure that the processes outlined in this bill will do a number of things including providing a level playing field on which the competing commercial consent applications can be fairly and objectively assessed. I say at this point that I agree with some of the points that Ken Shirley has made about moving to a market allocation system. However given the time frame we have had in front of us I believe that a lot of further work needs to be done on that perhaps tapping into the international models he mentioned before New Zealand is in a position to move to such an alternative. I think we should be open to it for the future but on this occasion sadly time is not on our side. This bill is also intended to ensure that the people appointed to the board and the panel have the requisite expertise and that the system of appointments is clear transparent and non-politicised. It is also intended to ensure that the end point the all-important allocation of the water between the various parties is reached as speedily as possible. 
It is United Future’s view that the provisions of this bill will meet those criteria and on that basis we give it our support and commend it to the House.