Dyson Ruth: Resource Management (Restricted Duration of Certain Discharge and Coastal Permits) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDyson Ruth: Resource Management (Restricted Duration of Certain Discharge and Coastal Permits) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 07 May 2014. Volume:698;Page:17631. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): I have seen a lot of people saying on social media this evening: “Why is the National Party filibustering? Why did those members all speak for 10 minutes on the Electronic Transactions (Contract Formation) Amendment Bill?”. The reason is very simple. It is that National Party members do not want to get to SueMoroney’s bill that extends paid parental leave. It is extraordinary that they are not prepared to do that because I think they are going to lose the vote when it gets to that bill and it would be a fantastic thing particularly for the parents of young children.Tim Macindoe: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Members opposite were very concerned to bring the previous speaker back to the purpose of the bill. This member has not even begun to mention the bill and the point she has just made is totally incorrect.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson): Can I just advise the House that whenever there is any debate it is generally the convention that the Speaker willallow the person a minute or a couple of minutes just to respond to the previous speaker. I think that is what the member was doing. And then she will be coming to order.Hon RUTH DYSON: I will come immediately to the bill at hand because I want to commend the member Catherine Delahunty for her work on the Resource Management (Restricted Duration of Certain Discharge and Coastal Permits) Amendment Bill which has a very snappy title. I commend her not just for the work that she has done in bringing this bill to the House but for the work that she has done over decades to promote conservation and environmental values not just in her own community but throughout the country.Labour supported this bill going to the Local Government and Environment Committee and unfortunately as my colleague Moana Mackey said we were unable to participate in a critical part of the hearings that were held inWhakatāne because they were during the tangi of our colleague Parekura Horomia which means it was a year ago. It has been almost exactly a year since this bill was at the select committee for those hearings. We had some difficulties with some parts of the bill most particularly a very important part and that is the length of time that you might allow for a discharge to be permitted. It is on that particular issue that our support hangs or falls and that is why my colleague Moana Mackey has introduced Supplementary Order Paper 422 which extends the time to 15 years. If that Supplementary Order Paper is supported then Labour will be able to support the bill and hopefully further progress it. I certainly hope that that Supplementary Order Paper is passed and we are able to continue our support.Another point that was made earlier in the evening was again from my colleague Moana Mackey when she talked about the broader issue of water quality. One of the hot topics of debate over recent months has been that of Plan Change 6 by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council in relation to theRuataniwha Dam on the Tukituki River. One of the rumours that is running rampant around Wellington is that there have been significant lobbying efforts made to National Ministers for them to change the law to overturn the determination of the board of inquiry that considered that Plan Change 6 in Hawke’s Bay. I just want to put it on the record that it would be an outrage if this Parliament considered in the dying days of the current Government a change to the law that overturned a determination of a board of inquiry. The board of inquiry was really concerned about water quality which is the whole point of this bill and to have a process that is being undertaken in another part of the country but completely parallel to the intentions of this bill that some National Ministers are considering overturning by law would I think be a breach of the morality if not the process of the Environmental Protection Authority and the board of inquiry.I just want to conclude by again commending Catherine Delahunty. She has consistently progressed matters such as are outlined in this bill. I hope that Supplementary Order Paper 422 which has been proposed is passed and we are therefore able to continue our support for this bill.