Kedgley Sue: Environmental Protection Authority Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Kedgley Sue: Environmental Protection Authority Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 07 April 2011. Volume:671;Page:17870. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 George Orwell when he wrote his book  
Nineteen Eighty-Four 
 coined what he called the language of newspeak or double-speak. It was a language that made the bad seem good and the inappropriate seem appropriate. So it was really a language where one pretended that one was doing something wonderful when one was actually doing something to sabotage things. This double-speak would apply extraordinarily well here. In fact the whole Environmental Protection Authority Bill is a classic example of George Orwell’s double-speak. We can see from the title that we will have an Environmental Protection Agency. How fantastic! 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Authority. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: I am sorry; the bill is called the Environmental Protection Authority Bill. Wonderful! But when we flick through the bill to find the objectives we see that there is no objective to protect the environment. It is all about the efficient and effective management of the New Zealand environment. That is a code as Charles said for saying: “Let us give an agency powers to ram through to fast track projects—controversial projects—so we do not have to have long prolonged battles as the Minister for the Environment said. He cited various prolonged battles we had had— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The Wellington city bypass. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: —like the Wellington city bypass. He said he wanted to be able to ram these through in a short period of time. 
No one should be deceived about what the Environmental Protection Authority Bill is about. There are two reasons alone I believe why the Government is getting rid of the Environmental Risk Management Authority and setting up this authority. The first is that it wants to remove the autonomy the Environmental Risk Management Authority has. It has a degree of autonomy and the Government wanted instead to set up an agency that lacked autonomy—one the Government could give directions to. That is what the bill does. It states that the Environmental Protection Authority must give effect to Government policy when directed by the responsible Minister.  
In other words the legislation will enable the Environmental Protection Authority to act as a rubber stamp for the Government. The Government was annoyed that Environmental Risk Management Authority had a degree of autonomy a degree of independence which prevented the Government from giving it directions. So that is the first purpose of this bill.  
The second purpose is as Charles Chauvel said effectively to turn it into a national development agency to enable it to fast track controversial projects. The project it is most keen to fast track and is doing so at the moment ramming through— 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Ramming? 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: Yes. I am talking about the so-called roads of national significance—the motorways all around New Zealand. We are spending $2 billion on motorways at the very time when oil prices are escalating. The Government is raiding the transport budgets for walking public transport and so on to build motorways around New Zealand. It was worried it would face opposition and it needed a mechanism to ram through these projects like a great big juggernaut. 
It was interesting that just a few nights ago in Hataitai there was a public meeting to discuss the fact that part of the huge great motorway coming from Levin right through to the airport will be a four-lane motorway dividing the lovely suburb of Hataitai. I can tell members that when the residents of Hataitai realised that the Government’s plan—which will finally be released in May—is to have a big motorway through their community they were horrified. People from Kapiti were at the meeting and they said that that road that motorway imposed on the community and has devastated the community. 
The Minister has come up with this particular motorway. He consulted the residents. They came up with an alternative he completely ignored it and now there is a great big juggernaut ramming this road through Kapiti and causing chaos. But the problem is that under the new authority the Government will have the powers to fast track projects—and that is what this bill is all about. It is about enabling the Government to get its bulldozer through unimpeded by local communities that are implacably opposed to the Government’s plans. 
No one should be under any illusion. This bill has two purposes: to erode the independence of the Environmental Risk Management Authority and to ensure that this so-called Environmental Protection Authority will be a rubber stamp for the Government. The Government will be able to give directions and the agency will have to give effect to Government policy when directed by the responsible Minister. The Government will then be able to fast track controversial projects. 
I notice that one of the things being transferred to the new authority is the Ozone Layer Protection Act and we can only hope that the authority with its very very limited powers will be able to do a slightly better job than the Ministry for the Environment in terms of protecting the ozone layer. This is another sort of Orwellian example. In 1987 New Zealand signed the Montreal Protocol. We pledged solemnly that we would refrain from using methyl bromide and that we would use non - ozone depleting technologies wherever possible. Since we signed the protocol our usage of methyl bromide the most ozone-depleting substance that humans have ever invented has increased by more than 500 percent. In 2009 we used 271 tonnes of methyl bromide and we destroyed 136 tonnes of ozone. I repeat: 136 tonnes of ozone. 
So we signed the Montreal Protocol we made these wonderful pledges and then we proceeded to increase our use of methyl bromide steadily and we do not— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Tell the full story. 
SUE KEDGLEY 
: We have alternatives. We have recapture technology that we could be using but no the Government—the Environmental Risk Management Authority in this case—has not required us to use recapture technology. Instead for another 10 years we will be allowed to release the most ozone-depleting gas that humans have ever invented in this primitive way directly into the atmosphere. We will be able to continue to use our atmosphere as a sewer and this is all in the name of implementing our solemn pledges under the Ozone Layer Protection Act. 
So we can only hope that when these functions are transferred to the Environmental Protection Authority it will be slightly more effective than the ministry but we know that it will not be because the objectives of the authority are to be just the efficient and effective management of New Zealand’s environment. That is a code for enabling the Government to fast track large projects such as building motorways around New Zealand. 
The authority has no objective to protect the environment and of course it will be totally hamstrung because it will be required to give effect to Government policy. The authority will be under the direction of the Minister. It will be required to be a rubber stamp of the Minister. The Environmental Risk Management Authority had a degree of autonomy and that enabled the authority to try to be something of an independent protector of the environment. But this bill unfortunately makes the new authority just a rubber stamp for the Government. 
New Zealanders should be under no illusion: this is an Orwellian piece of legislation. It will not unfortunately protect the environment. We will not have as the Minister said a world-class environmental system although we wish that were the case. We will be opposing the bill for that reason and because it gives the authority such limited powers such limited objectives and no autonomy.