Ardern Shane: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
Ardern Shane: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5585] 
SHANE ARDERN (NZ National—Taranaki - King Country) 
: 
 I remind the Minister in the chair Marian Hobbs—whom I hope will respond to our pleas to take a call—that in October 2001 she promised the wider community that this legislation would soon be passed. In August 2002 she promised the wider community again that because of its importance this legislation would be passed within the near future. Here we are in May 2003 in the forty-seventh Parliament still debating Part 2 of what was an 18-part bill. 
It is interesting to note that United Future has gone through a major learning curve in how MMP works. I took great interest in Larry Baldock’s speech yesterday when he said that his party had learnt a lot through the process. They certainly learnt a lot through the process—that much we can see from over here. In fact Larry Baldock quoted the Good Book saying: “He who gives shall receive.” Well United Future certainly gave—there is no question about that. It learnt what happens when the Christians are put into the centre of the ring with the lions—they get consumed. It gave and the hand that fed it was chewed off. Never before unless one goes back to Roman times has there been an example in a Parliament or governance where that has been more evident than it has in this debate today. 
The clause being amended is a Clayton’s clause. It does not represent the original suggestion in any shape or form. In fact it is probably contrary to the original suggestion but United Future feels that it has achieved something through that process. I suggest that it sits down with the Green Party and learns how to do some real horse-trading. In the forty-sixth Parliament under a Labour Government the Green Party really did achieve some of the things it set out to achieve. Most of them were negative—not many people in society were pleased about it—but at least the party achieved what it set out to achieve. 
I notice that the Minister who was in charge of the Government’s own regulatory committee the Hon Paul Swain is here today. That is very good because his committee made a recommendation to the Government that stated that the Resource Management Act was the single biggest piece of legislation now adding to the cost of doing business in this country. This bill in no way addresses the concerns that that committee chaired by the Hon Paul Swain brought back to this Government. In fact the article I have here states that a collective of the mayors of Auckland are saying that dollars are not holding up the major developments necessary to address traffic congestion in Auckland; the problem is with the Resource Management Act. That is the single biggest problem in terms of solving traffic congestion in Auckland. 
Mayor Bob Harvey the former Labour Party president was part of a team that told the Government that it was not dollars as we have been led believe that were stopping the development of major roading in Auckland but the Resource Management Act. The Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) does absolutely nothing to address those concerns. What we have here is a former Labour Party president—a person who saw fit to give $10000 of ratepayers’ money to stop the Ministry of Agriculture eradicating the painted apple moth in Auckland—coming out in a collective with other mayors such as John Banks Sir Barry Curtis and the like and saying that the single biggest barrier to solving Auckland’s roading problems is the Resource Management Act. 
What is the response of the Minister the Hon Marian Hobbs to that? Absolutely nothing! Even in the Minister’s own city of Wellington where major roading extensions are necessary and there are roading problems to be overcome the Resource Management Act is cited time and time again as the biggest barrier to achieving those outcomes.