Catchpole Brent: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Catchpole Brent: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7529] 
BRENT CATCHPOLE (NZ First) 
: 
 I would like to start by acknowledging Lockwood Smith’s comments. He is absolutely right; this particular bill expunges property rights. It not only does that but it also does it in a rather peculiar way based on one particular case and one particular issue—that is the case of the greenstone mining company  
Glenharrow Holdings Ltd v Attorney-General and Te Runanga O Ngai Tahu 
. Ngai Tahu received the land and the resources from the Crown under the Ngai Tahu (Pounamu Vesting) Act. That particular Act was fair enough but the Government forgot to include some very important clauses. The case arose out of the Crown Minerals Act that repealed the old 1971 mining Act and the different treatments of mining licences and permits. The transition period between the two Acts did not successfully deal with the change of ownership of land from the Crown to Ngai Tahu. 
The trouble was that the rights that existed for greenstone miners were not extinguished by the Ngai Tahu (Pounamu Vesting) Act. A grandfather clause in that Act stated that the Act was not to affect an existing privilege as defined in the Crown Minerals Act. The Crown Minerals Act also contained a grandfather clause stating “… every existing privilege shall continue to have effect after the date of commencement of this Act as if the Act which applied to the privilege before that date continued in force …”. 
The problems arose as a result of the court case which was in front of Acting Chief Justice Heron one of the top men in the legal system. He found in favour of Glenharrow Holdings in supporting an application for the renewal and variations of its mining rights. It was not a case of renewing them but the rights to apply. I believe the select committee got it wrong in the paragraphs that Lockwood Smith read out. He was absolutely correct—it was not a case of Justice Heron getting it wrong but of the select committee getting it wrong. 
The Crown Minerals Act is essentially anti-mining and anti-private enterprise. It does not recognise miners’ needs for security. Mining industry leaders say that the effect of the appeal court judgment will be to close mines and effectively it will be a disincentive to invest in mines. The mining industry will have less capital to be able to explore. It will also affect the Government-owned coal mine Solid Energy. Its rights will come up for renewal and this particular bill will affect it. When that issue arises the Government will have to deal with it as well. 
Shane Ardern 
: It will simply introduce its own legislation for that. 
BRENT CATCHPOLE 
: Yes it probably will. It is interesting to note that as the appeal court decision stands the Government will not have to pass this retrospective legislation—Associate Minister Harry Duynhoven ensured that. He issued a press statement—and I have a copy of it here—that basically took away all rights for miners to reapply for their licences and extension of their licences. He did so by issuing the statement around midday on the day and giving them 5 hours to apply. It states: “Anyone who applies for a new licence or a variation to the terms of an existing licence after 5 p.m. today”—that is 19 September 2002—“will no longer be covered by the Acts that were repealed in 1991.” Does that not sound very familiar? It is basically a parallel to the late Rob Muldoon’s Government by press release—in which case he was taken to court. 
 Governing by press release is a great example of this Government’s contempt for our parliamentary process. The Government is very fortunate that the appeal court decision has saved Mr Duynhoven and his Government from a very embarrassing court case because there would have been one for sure. 
In summary I would like to reiterate Lockwood Smith’s comments about the select committee getting it wrong—that is absolutely right. The fact is that this legislation is no longer necessary because Harry Duynhoven’s press release basically stopped everybody from reapplying and reasserting the property rights they had prior to that press release. Unfortunately this Government does not care about people’s property rights. All it cares about is trying to close gaps in the legislation that it had created and left simply to avoid its responsibilities. For us sadly this bill is a shambles. New Zealand First cannot and will not support it at this stage.