Swarbrick Chlöe; Bishop ChrisCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Co-Leader—Green): I get the kind of theatre of the House but I am I must say a little bit gutted to see in some of that theatre from the Minister of Finance the personal attacks that were veiled in that contribution just then with regard to myself. I would just remind the Minister of Finance that in the Finance and Expenditure Committee we worked quite constructively across the aisle and quite collaboratively on a number of issues.If I may continue on the issue of climate change in particular we have here on page 6 a quote—and I will quote from this—Treasury thinks that there is a larger question about the system for assessing infrastructure and climate resilience. It wants to ensure that all agencies understand the risks to their assets from climate change and that any new Budget bids for infrastructure consider the likelihood of more severe and more frequent weather events." The Minister herself in her contributions raised the fast-track legislation and to that I would say that we have put a number of parliamentary written questions particularly to the Minister of Climate Change in which he has said explicitly and on the record that he has not taken any specific advice whatsoever on climate change impacts of the fast-track legislation. As far as that goes it would seem that the Government is completely at odds with regards to the advice that it is getting and the things that it's saying and the things that it's doing on the other hand.Hon CHRIS BISHOP (Associate Minister of Finance): I'm happy to respond—I mean we're slightly outside the realms of the annual review on finance but given the member's finally asked a question around something I'm responsible for I'm happy to deal with it. In relation to fast-track—well firstly just go up a level. We are a Government that is interested in building infrastructure that builds resilience into the economy and deals with the effect of climate change. That is very important and that is going to be something that we have to view with an intergenerational lens on because the investments we make now will go for 30 to 50 to 100 years and we want to get that framework right and the Minister of Climate Change is of course involved in those discussions.Part of building infrastructure for the future and building resilient infrastructure for the future is not spending a decade consenting the infrastructure and that's why fast-track consenting is actually really important. Take a wind farm for example: two years to build it; 7-10 years to consent it. There are electricity generators out there today using renewable electricity like geothermal and hydro that have been clogged up in the courts for year after year after year just to reconsent an existing power station. Our ports for example—and this is why the Government is moving to extend out port consents—which are very important to the resilient infrastructure we want to build in New Zealand many of those ports are going to struggle to get their consents away by 2026 when they automatically expire. Port of Tauranga for example is right now engaged in a lengthy battle to add another berth to its existing port infrastructure when 60 percent of New Zealand's exports by value go through the Port of Tauranga. Now it's not as if the Port of Tauranga is going to be lifted up tomorrow and moved. I think I can safely say that Tauranga's not going anywhere and so endless time and money.We know for example that $1.3 billion per year is spent consenting alone on infrastructure—$1.3 billion. The amount of time it takes to get a consent doubled in a five-year period from 2014 to 2019. So this is why we are doing the fast-track regime and I just make the point to the member that it is possible to protect the environment and the values that underpin the environment at the same time as expediting the consent of projects that we need.The other point I'd make to the member is that if we are serious about our climate goals—and we are a Government that is committed to that—we are going to need the fast-track consenting. It should not take eight years to consent a wind farm. It should not be that hard to reconsent a hydro power station. It should not be that difficult to get solar farms up and running in New Zealand. It shouldn't take so much time and money to build the transmission lines around the country that we need for the electrification and the distribution network that we need to make sure that electric vehicle chargers for example are able to be installed expeditiously and very quickly around the country so we can make that great transition away from a system that is buttressed by coal and gas towards a more electrified system and towards an electricity system that supports the great transition towards the electrification of the economy.All of that is too hard right now. It's not just me it's not just rhetoric that I'm saying; every electricity generator in the country will tell you that unless you do planning reform none of those decarbonisation goals are achievable. So it is very important that we sort out our planning regime. The member talks about productivity. That is the great thing that this country has to tackle because for 30 years we've had a woeful lack of productivity in this country and I know the member is concerned about it. Efficient reliable infrastructure that makes it easier to get around our cities that makes it easier for electricity to get around the network that makes it easier for us to export our goods overseas—those are all contributors to productivity. One thing in and of itself won't fix our productivity disease. One thing by itself won't but 50 things cumulatively and collectively will make a difference. That's why fast-track and planning reform is so important and that's why we're going to advance it and that's why the Budget coming up is so important."