Wagner Nicky: Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Wagner Nicky: Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6148] 
NICKY WAGNER (National) 
: 
 I rise to support the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill. I am enormously pleased that the bill has finally come to the House. It has been a long haul but it has been a very important interesting and worthwhile process. I will echo others in thanking everyone including the submitters the two advisory groups officials Crown Law and the Local Government and Environment Committee members who have all worked hard on the bill and added value. The bill is very different now as it comes out of the select committee process. 
The promise to streamline and simplify the Resource Management Act was something National campaigned on before the last election. We promised to deliver a bill to the House within 100 days—and we did. The bill is phase one of a significant reform of the Resource Management Act that is ongoing. However the Resource Management Act will still be the principal statute for protecting and managing natural resources in New Zealand. There are no changes to the purposes or principles of the Act and no reductions in environmental protection. The bill provides for significant improvements to the implementation of the principles behind the legislation. 
Over the past 18 years that the Resource Management Act has been in place there has been increased criticism from all parts of the community—from environmental groups local government and businesses—about slow and expensive planning and consent processes. There are absolutely no benefits to the environment from heavy-handed bureaucracy lengthy delays and expensive legal arguments. In fact the length and expense of planning processes have often meant that the environment has suffered. The average time taken for a council to produce a full plan is over 8 years and when it requires several million dollars to be invested it is not surprising that plans are often too inflexible to deal with environmental issues as they arise. 
The bill provides a suite of amendments that will make plan-making more effective more efficient quicker and less costly but it does not compromise the intent of the Resource Management Act which is strongly supported by New Zealanders. 
The bill has now been through a very robust select committee process. As we have heard today there were over 800 submissions and we heard nearly two-thirds of submitters. We worked long hours and we worked well together as a committee. After hearing submissions we have made significant changes to the bill. The key provisions of the bill include the establishment of an environmental protection agency and improved processes for proposals of national significance. The bill provides for a one-step consenting process for resource consent applicants and notices of requirements for designations through direct referral to the Environment Court. 
The bill introduces provisions to deal with the longstanding problem of the Resource Management Act being used for trade competition purposes. The new measures include the introduction of mandatory damages rather than discretionary damages when a party seeks damages against a trade competitor. This will increase the deterrent effect. The bill also reinstates securities of costs. It is true that many community groups were concerned about this provision because they felt that it may have excluded them from participating in environmental decisions. However when we reviewed court decisions from the past when the provision was in place we felt that judges had used it with discretion and that genuine environment groups with genuine concerns were not disadvantaged. It may be that environmental groups need more information about the provision so that they can work with it. 
After listening to submitters we have several provisions that we will not be proceeding with. We will not be removing non-compliant activities and we will not be limiting appeals on plans to points of law. We have deferred changes to decision making for designation until the next phase. Again after hearing suggestions from submitters we have also amended several of the provisions of the original bill in order to improve their outcome. 
The bill is better as a result of there being much debate and a robust select committee process. The major areas of contention have been worked through successfully by the committee and modifications have been made. Only a very small number of differences of opinion now remain. The bill will streamline and simplify the Resource Management Act but let me make it very clear that it does not compromise the intent of the Act or reduce the level of protection of our magnificent national environment and natural resources. Thank you.