Hodgson Pete: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Hodgson Pete: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7524] 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Minister of Energy) 
: 
 I move  
That the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill be now read a second time 
. I would like to thank the Commerce Committee for its detailed consideration of the bill and also all those people who made submissions to and appeared before the select committee. The bill has raised difficult issues and the committee’s careful consideration has resulted in a number of improvements to the bill as introduced. I will look at them in some detail. 
Clauses 22 to 24 of the bill remove the right to apply for a new mining licence and to vary the term of a mining licence under the now-repealed Mining Act and Coal Mines Act. Licence holders will not be entitled to compensation for the loss of those rights. The Government believes that those amendments are needed to ensure that the repealed legislation is not perpetuated and that mining licence holders who want to continue to mine after their mining licences expire move to the new regime under the Crown Minerals Act as was always intended. In 2000 the High Court held in  
Glenharrow Holdings Ltd 
 v  
Attorney-General 
 that the right of mining licence holders to apply for a new mining licence had not been extinguished. There were plenty of proceedings that followed. There were more in the High Court and further proceedings in the Court of Appeal which has now confirmed what the Government has consistently maintained—that the Minister has neither the power to grant a new licence nor to consider an application to vary the terms of a licence. 
Glenharrow Holdings Ltd has been granted conditional leave to appeal to the Privy Council. In response to issues raised at the select committee on 19 September 2002 I announced that the Government intended to propose amendments to the bill so that the removal of the right to apply for a new licence would take effect as from 5 p.m. on 19 September 2002. After careful consideration the select committee has agreed to make those recommended changes. Special provisions have also been added to ensure that the court’s final judgment in the ongoing Glenharrow Holdings proceedings is protected and that the decisions in that litigation are applied to any applications received prior to 5 p.m. on 19 September 2002 including applications by Glenharrow Holdings. 
As Minister I am well aware that the minerals industry makes a significant contribution to New Zealand and especially to certain regional economies. I am also aware that aspects of the bill have been contentious particularly with the holders of current mining licences. However it is important to note that the bill does not extinguish current mining licences. All current mining licences will continue in force until they expire. The bill will not deny mining licence holders continuing opportunities to mine Crown-owned minerals. Mining licence holders will still be able to apply for a mining permit under the Crown Minerals Act. 
Clause 5 of the bill also clarifies what the requirements are when the holder of an exploration permit wants to extend its duration. An exploration permit that had been initially granted for a term of up to 5 years will be able to be extended for a further 5 years subject to certain requirements including the requirement to give up at least half the original permit area. That “use it or lose it” requirement has been part of the regime in New Zealand for over 20 years and it is common overseas. It has become apparent that with the way the Act is currently written exploration permit holders may be able to avoid the relinquishment requirements of section 37 in a way that was not intended. They may do that by applying under section 36 instead where the terms upon which the extension are granted are entirely at the Minister’s discretion. The bill amends those provisions to ensure that exploration permit holders who have not made a discovery and who want to undertake continued basic exploration beyond the first 5 years must relinquish at least 50 percent of the permit area on renewal of the permit. 
The bill also removes the requirement for permit details to be lodged with the district land registrar because that is unnecessary and confusing. Those lodgement requirements are a throwback to the old regime under the Mining Act and Coal Mines Act under which licences included an automatic right of access to land. A fundamental difference between the Crown Minerals Act and the Mining Act and Coal Mines Act is that the Crown Minerals Act does not give a person an automatic right of access to land when he or she is granted a permit. Before a permit holder can enter land to carry out anything other than minimum impact activities he or she must reach an appropriate land access arrangement with each landowner and/or occupier. Permit holders who enter into an access arrangement lasting for 6 months or more must lodge details of the access arrangement with the district land registrar so that it can be recorded against the affected land titles. That alerts any prospective purchaser that the land is subject to a binding access arrangement. The requirement to lodge access arrangements will continue. 
I commend this bill to the House.