Brownlee GerryThird ReadingHon GERRY BROWNLEE (Acting Minister of Civil Defence): I move That the Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill be now read a third time. The Hurunui/Kaikōura Earthquakes Emergency Relief Bill addresses immediate challenges faced by the people of Kaikōura Marlborough and Hurunui enabling them to focus on getting their lives and livelihoods back on track. The earthquakes have resulted in numerous emergency works being undertaken including roads bridges and water pipes across farms in the Kaikōura Hurunui and Marlborough areas. There have been effects that will need to be put right fairly quickly in order to move forward. The geographical isolation caused by the earthquake makes it particularly difficult to prepare resource consent applications and for council staff and consultants to conduct site visits. We do not want the standard time frames in the Resource Management Act (RMA) to distract from that recovery effort. The provisions of this bill will help ease regulatory requirements under the Resource Management Act while still maintaining safeguards for the environment. Currently agencies and operators undertaking emergency work must within 7 days give notice to the appropriate consent authority that works have been undertaken and within 20 days they must apply for resource consent requiring activities. The bill extends those time frames and from the draft bill to what is in front of the house today the select committee has further extended it from 40 to 60 working days for the notification and for the retrospective application if it is required 120 working days.The bill enables farmers whose properties have been damaged by earthquakes to undertake emergency works to continue their farming practices for the purpose of life safety health and well-being of animals or addressing serious damage to property. These emergency works are regulated under the RMA; the bill makes them a permitted activity meaning they will not need to apply for a resource consent. Farmers will be required to notify councils as I said within the period of time that is now set down as 60 days even if it is to be effectively a deemed consent.Finally the bill supports the council's efforts to restore the damaged Kaikōura harbours which need to be restored so that critical supplies can be brought in by sea. One of the issues that was faced early on was the fact that the barges located on the Canterbury were unable to come ashore because of the shallowness of that particular channel. It is also very important that the fisheries and associated tourism activities that require those harbours can be put back into operation as soon as possible.To facilitate the timely restoration of the harbour the bill changes the status of the activity needed to restore the harbour to controlled" unless already permitted in the relevant plan. It also provides for the streamlined resource consenting process which includes consultation with specified parties. This will enable Environment Canterbury and the Kaikōura District Council to apply for retrospective consent after they have begun the harbour restoration which it is hoped will begin by the middle of next week.The bill requires the environmental effects including effects of any activity on the marine mammals fish and seabirds to be considered before the activity is undertaken including how they may be avoided remedied or mitigated if there are seen to be adverse effects possible. The bill is one of a number of measures to support communities across the affected area. I think the select committee process although only short has been well used by the various political parties who were already supporting this bill but have been able to make some changes that are necessary. I do want to make a comment here about clauses 13 and 22 which were subject to Supplementary Order Papers this afternoon. I can sort of see the point of doing those things but I was concerned in the end that if we were to go down that track we might actually defeat the purpose of what we are trying to set out here in the first place.The bill does have some constraints around what people can do in emergency situations. We would expect those to be followed appropriately. Further to those it is also a time-limited provision that is in place. Although we might want to have some of the arrangements that were proposed—third-party action against regional councils etc. or the council for not taking any particular action or care—I think that in the circumstances that is an undue encumbrance upon them and in due course we will be able to see exactly how responsibly this bill is exercised. I would encourage people to see it not as carte blanche but very much as a bill that enables them to do the things they most need to do to get their lives back on track and not to enhance circumstances that were already existing in those properties. I commend the bill to the House."