O'Connor Damien: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
O'Connor Damien: Electricity Industry Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:667;Page:14155] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour) 
: 
 If the previous speaker Aaron Gilmore insists on getting up and making a contribution on the Electricity Industry Bill I wish he would keep it accurate. He made two assertions. One was that the Resource Management Act hindered and stopped development of electricity projects but he could not name one example. He was wrong. He then got up and said that the previous Government’s Ministers were interfering in the electricity market but he could not name one incident. In fact there are many of us who wished we had interfered a hell of a lot more because that is probably what it needed. He went on about bureaucracy reducing compliance costs blah-blah-blah. I tell that member to look at what is in this bill. It sets up an authority then a code then it says that companies can be exempt from the code if they can prove that it will cost the authority less to implement which pretty much means anyone. 
Part 2 which we are discussing here sets up a rulings panel. What does the rulings panel do? This is from the Government that has made so much noise and such a song and dance about reducing compliance and regulation yet it will set up an authority and a rulings panel. What does the rulings panel do? It will “assist in the enforcement of the Code by—(i) hearing and determining complaints about breaches and possible breaches of the code;”. Let us ask why we should have this. Firstly a company can be exempt from the code. If a company is exempt from the code is it subject to the rulings panel? Does it have access to the rulings panel to take a complaint? There is no answer. The Government does not know. 
Then there is the issue of whether the Commerce Commission or the rulings panel has priority in terms of a ruling over commercial negotiations or failure in commercial negotiations. Will the Securities Commission have a part to play in this or will the rulings panel override all of that? Mr Gilmore does not know and he cannot explain that because the Government does not know either. It is setting up a bureaucracy a level of compliance and a nightmare that will just further exacerbate the failings of the market structure that National set up in the late 1990s. This is just piling bad practice after bad practice—that is the underlying belief that the market will deliver but we need all of these other institutions and structures such as the authority for a start. Never mind that National thought the commission was unnecessary; it now needs an authority then it needs a rulings panel. I ask Mr Gilmore whether if he gets up and explains what the rulings panel will do he can be more accurate than his assertion that previous Labour Ministers were interfering in the market or that the Resource Management Act was stopping or hindering the development of energy projects. 
The facts are that there were some energy projects that were subject to the Minister of Conservation’s approval and that is the way it should be. I know the National Government has indicated that it wants to take the Environmental Protection Agency’s projects of national significance and just run them through which puts at risk a whole lot of rivers in this country. Maybe that member should go to the Wild Rivers presentation at Parliament tomorrow night. We are in favour of sustainable hydro generation but if that National Government as indicated will railroad straight through all the processes for any big projects then we may see the demise of many many wild rivers in this country. That is not what the majority of New Zealanders want. We want good sustainable hydro generation geothermal wind power—renewable sources of energy. 
I come back to the bill. Having set up and got some generation we now have a belief that many generators many players in the market will deliver the most efficient and effective electricity for consumers be they big or small. I say that this legislation is basically flawed. That is why we do not support it. That is why we will continue to object and point out its failings and point out the inaccuracies when those members get up and speak on this bill.