Mark RonHon RON MARK (NZ First): Thank you Mr Speaker. I rise to make a contribution on behalf of New Zealand First in support of the Resource Management Amendment Bill. I want to compliment the Hon David Parker for good work done. There have been some quite extensive consultations. I know he and the Hon Shane Jones worked very closely together. I have to also compliment the Environment Committee for its work and for the level of consultation that was conducted throughout New Zealand. I know that Minister Parker fronted many meetings around and I know from my own visits along with Mark Patterson down to the South Island talking to farmers and hearing their concerns that initially the bill had people very worried. Being a rural lad myself and someone who's been heavily involved in governance boards of farms farming enterprises for quite some time I am very aware and New Zealand First is very aware of the concerns that were aired by the farming community particularly around compliance particularly around costs and what would be expected of them and the extra work involved in all of that.I guess what stands out for me in listening to the contributions in both what I thought was a very constructive committee stage this afternoon and the speeches thus far in the third reading what stands out very clearly is that the Resource Management Act (RMA) is broken. I think that's the one point that everybody in the House agrees on whether it's the Hon Eugenie Sage saying that the RMA has failed the environment or whether it's been the Hon Nathan Guy himself saying that the RMA is costly complex difficult to administer and has failed consistently pointing out that in the 30-odd years—and I think two National Party speakers have pointed out; the speech notes must have been handed around by their research unit—that it's been in force for 30 years and it's had 19 amendments and still members of the previous Government are standing up in Opposition after having made major changes to it themselves in their time in Government and saying that it's broken which leads me to one simple question: why are they really voting against this amendment? Why?The only arguments I've heard have been that it's because it's tinkering so that suggests that—and then I've heard criticisms: they're saying it doesn't do enough it doesn't go far enough it should've been done earlier we should get on and do the one job we have to do and that is a major overhaul of the entire 800-page document which is the Act but we shouldn't do this. It's sort of like the old comment that we used to hear in the army a lot you know when soldiers are told to hurry up and wait.Tim van de Molen: That's right.Hon RON MARK: I'm hearing from National today—gidday Tim—that we should hurry up and wait. Hurry up and change and reform the RMA but don't do it now. Hurry up and get the Judge Randerson report here but don't make any changes now." Well if we are to address the problems that both sides of the House have acknowledged here this afternoon then starting now to fix what we now can do is a sensible option.I want to acknowledge the fact that the Government has made changes in terms of the fencing off of rivers and streams. Having being involved in doing quite a bit of that in my time involved in farming enterprises and seeing the cost of it it is also good to see that the Government is now meeting those costs. That's going to be a huge advantage and a huge incentiviser to farmers.I want to acknowledge also all of the farmers who participate in the Ballance environmental farmer of the year awards that we see regionally—I attend wherever I can in the Wairarapa—and acknowledge the huge steps that modern farmers have taken to enhance and protect the environment the way in which they have you know off their own bat fenced off vast parts of their property taken them out of production either to one protect the rivers protect the waterways or two to assist with regeneration to prevent erosion. They've borne those costs themselves and they've been justly recognised by the Ballance farm awards for a number of years and I just want to compliment those people for doing that. We've got some astonishing farmers in the Wairarapa and they need to be recognised as opposed to—as some people would do—being continually beat up on.I also want to acknowledge the comments that were made just let it be known that very mindful—and endorse the comments made by some of the Opposition members in reminding New Zealand that it's not just about the farmers. If we're talking fresh water if we're talking about waterways if we're talking about making it possible for people to go and swim safely in rivers and streams and estuaries then as someone who's been a mayor and been in local government let me assure the House: I've seen some godawful streams and rivers in metropolitan New Zealand and it doesn't take a lot when you're visiting cities to pull your phone out and take a few photos to prove that fact. This has got to be a national effort. If we are to tidy up our water to improve the quality of our rivers of our streams and of our estuaries then it's a national effort on everybody's part.I'm hopeful that on the back of COVID we are a more united nation that we now understand the value of our farming community our resilience as a nation and our ability to withstand things that hit us out of the blue such as a pandemic. Actually a lot of that resilience comes from the rural community from the farming community and it's what gives us the ability to keep our head above water survive and get up and rebuild ourselves and go forward. We need to be mindful of that as a Government when we are passing any sort of legislation.I look forward to the passing of the next tranche of legislation which will accelerate and I look forward to seeing Judge Randerson's reports come through so that we might—and I live in hope that we might remembering the conversations that have taken place over the last few hours recognising the significance and the importance to the economy and to the wellbeing of the environment and our people find space in here for some cross-party collaboration to truly take on board the report from Judge Randerson—I haven't seen it but I'm hopeful—take on board recommendations work together collectively and collaboratively.This is not going to be a one-term thing. These reforms are going to take place over two electoral cycles—let's be clear about that—that's 2020 and 2023. That's plenty of time for us as a Parliament to recognise that actually if we're to put something in place if we're to recognise that the RMA is dysfunctional recognise the need that in the long-term we have to fix this recognise that whatever fixes we make have to genuinely be to the advantage of the country as a whole and have to be sustainable we might just—we might just—with a new age of MPs coming into this House find a way of doing this together find a way of doing this collaboratively. If we don't if we continue to play political ping-pong on this issue we're going to not really get ahead and we will do our country we will do the businesses and we'll do the farming communities we'll do the communities that support the farmers places like Carterton—my town's a service town—a grave disservice. We'll be back in the House here in the Chamber again lamenting lost opportunity and giving speeches saying the RMA's broken it's failed the environment and it needs to be fixed. The difference is we'll be saying that in 2024 won't we? I think it's time actually in the interests of our mokopuna yet to come and the environment that we're all striving to protect to find a way to work collectively collaboratively together."