8. Question No. 8—RMA ReformHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram) to the Minister responsible for RMA ReformQuestion No. 8—RMA Reform8. Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram) to the Minister responsible for RMA Reform: Does he agree with the Prime Minister's statement on 8 May referring to West Wind: Well what I am very well aware of is it took eight years to consent a simple wind farm not very far from this place here in Wellington"?Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Minister responsible for RMA Reform): Yes. Preparatory work started on this consent in 1999. A range of assessments had to be undertaken so they could submit a consent application; have a reasonable chance if granted a workable consent. The work was not optional. The final decision to grant the consent was made by the Environment Court in July 2007—eight years after the work began on the consent from the applicant. West Wind took two years to construct so the total time end-to-end in developing it into a wind farm was 10 years. As the Prime Minister has outlined it takes too long and costs too much to get resource consents in New Zealand to build the infrastructure New Zealand needs including renewable energy. It's one of the reasons why we're committed to a fast-track one-stop-shop piece of legislation.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Is it not correct that although the land was purchased in the 1990s as the Minister said no consent was lodged for building a wind farm on that land till it was transferred to Meridian—in fact it was lodged 1 July 2005; a final decision was made on 20 July 2007—and if this is what this party is hanging its Resource Management Act reform on it's pretty thin?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: We're nine days out from the Budget and apparently we're litigating on exactly what time frame an energy company submitted a resource consent application. But regardless the information that I have is that preparatory work on the resource consent for West Wind started in 1999. It is true that Meridian applied for it in 2005 but of course—Hon Dr Megan Woods: Two years.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: —that member neglects—yes but the member neglects all of the preparatory work that goes into actually preparing a resource consent because of the strictures of the Resource Management Act. I just point the member further—without litigating something that happened in the early 2000s I would just point the member to the comments from almost every major electricity generator in the last few months in the last couple of years when it comes to the Resource Management Act. I quote Contact Energy for example: the single biggest barrier to the decarbonisation of the New Zealand economy is our planning system—which is the Resource Management Act. It costs too much and takes too long to get consent to build renewables.Rt Hon Winston Peters: Does the Minister recall the supermarket look-in that took 28 years to get consent and is his fast-track aligned—to use the Prime Minister's words—with the 17 precedent set by the Labour Party when last in Government?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well yes indeed I do remember that. I also—Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Point of order Mr Speaker. The question had a swipe of the Labour Party at the end. It's clearly out of order.SPEAKER: Well it did. But it also asked if the Minister recalled and you've just had members from your party indicating that members should have very long memories about past ministerial understandings. So it can't go both ways.Hon Dr Duncan Webb: Speaking to the point of order. If your ruling is that it is now OK in a question to make a swipe at the Opposition that's a significant change from the position you've taken today.SPEAKER: No it is not. But I've also said to the House that it's not unreasonable for a Government to reflect on actions of a previous Government. It's not necessarily a flick and Speakers' rulings—if I go through them there are a number in there that will confirm that.Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Yes I do remember that and I could also point the member to other examples. The Lake Hayes wind farm sought consent for six years to build a wind farm. The classic that I like—which I've got to admit I was unaware about until about half an hour ago—is the reconsenting of the 100-year-old 0.5 megawatt Raetihi hydro power station which took 19 years. This is the kind of red tape that we need to reduce in this country.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Has the Minister received advice that under the COVID fast-track consenting process where Ministers referred projects and independent experts made the decisions the renewable energy projects referred had a combined generating capacity of 1630 megawatts—that's the equivalent of nearly four Clyde Dams' worth of electricity—and that one of those was Te Rere Hau Wind Farm which obtained approval in way under 18 months?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Oh yes yes. I'm a big fan of the COVID-19 fast-track legislation which is why we have lifted and shifted the vast architecture of the legislation into a new fast-track regime designed to make it easier to build things in this country.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Under his Government's bill that is before select committee has he lifted and shifted the fact that it is independent experts who make decisions and not three wise men of Ministers?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Oh well the member is surprisingly complimentary about the Troika of Ministers alongside Matua Shane and Mr Brown. As the member knows the bill is before select committee. We are committed to a one-stop-shop fast-track regime which as the record of the previous Government acknowledges every party—with the exception of the Luddites and the Green Party—every mainstream political party recognises this as a problem holding New Zealand back. We are also open to sensible changes to the bill.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Will the Minister commit to changing the bill given the majority of the major electricity generators—under the Electricity Sector Environment Group—in their submission to the select committee have recommended that decisions on whether to approve or decline approvals for eligible projects are made by independent expert panels rather than by the joint Ministers as proposed under the bill as is currently drafted—i.e. they are proposing a very similar scheme to the regime that Labour had?Hon CHRIS BISHOP: Well the bill is before the select committee so I don't want to get ahead of the deliberations of the select committee. All I can say is that we are carefully reading the submissions to the committee and the officials are analysing that. There are very few bills that go to Parliament that go to a select committee that don't come back with sensible refinements to improve the legislation. I'm sure that will be true of the fast-track bill."