Kaye Nikki: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Kaye Nikki: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4794. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to be speaking at the third reading of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill. I am very pleased because I think that this bill is an example whereby not only have members of the Local Government and Environment Committee worked very hard but also we have seen changes both throughout the select committee process and that have come from the Minister for the Environment that I think are going to ensure that we get good environmental protection in the exclusive economic zone. We are also able to look at those economic opportunities and lift the standard of living for New Zealanders. 
I want to just cover off a couple of things from an overall perspective as to how this fits into National’s environmental reform package. If we look at what we have done in terms of the Resource Management Act reform we have passed over 150 amendments of the Resource Management Act in our first phase. That is the biggest reform since 1991. The purpose of those amendments was to reduce delays uncertainties and costs improve plan development and resource consent processes and strengthen compliance by providing a wider range of enforcement provisions and we have actually seen some real progress there. In my electorate Auckland Central I have had many constituents who have actually physically come to me and said: “Look we think you have got the balance right. We think we are getting quicker decisions and we think we’re getting them at a reduced cost.” If we look at the issues around for instance fresh water we have invested significantly in cleaning up some of our most polluted rivers. Also in the area of oceans reform we have progressed nine marine reserves—well we have announced nine marine reserves. That will increase the area of marine reserves in New Zealand by 36 percent. 
But the area that I think everyone is aware of and has been aware of for a long period of time where there has been a gap has been further reform in terms of our oceans. That is what this bill is about. This bill is about ensuring that we address that regulatory gap that currently exists in terms of managing our environmental effects from offshore activities. I think the point has been made by a number of speakers that currently there is a gap and I believe that from 1998 there were 46 wells that have been drilled without having an effective management regime. So what this bill does is provide a strong framework focused on four things to assess and manage adverse environmental effects in our oceans and also to provide greater certainty to investors and existing interests. If you listened to the Hon Nick Smith’s speech I think he talked very eloquently about the issue of rights of appeal and what that would actually do in terms of the process—the added time and delays in terms of process. The bill also does meet New Zealand’s international obligations. There has been a huge debate in terms of that at the select committee and throughout the speeches in the House as well. We are confident—and we have had a range of advice on that—that it does meet New Zealand’s obligations. 
But I think what has also been important is that there was some criticism after the select committee process and we have seen the Minister move via Supplementary Order Paper 100 to significantly improve the legislation. I want to touch on those issues. I do acknowledge that there have been a number of organisations including the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment that have commented on these areas. I just want to touch on those key areas now. There was a concern by some members around the purpose definition. We have moved and changed the purpose definition to focus on sustainable management. That brings it in line with the Resource Management Act. There was significant concern from some members in terms of penalties and we have also moved to increase the maximum penalty from $600000 to $10 million. I think that sends a very strong message regarding how New Zealand values our oceans. We have clarified the transition period. We have also provided a statutory time frame of about 6 months for marine consent processes. So from my perspective—and we saw as well the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment coming out very clearly to say that she supports this bill and that she wants it passed—we have made significant improvements not just through the select committee process but also post the select committee process. 
I feel that we are in a position with this legislation—and I acknowledge the support of some parties in this House; I believe New Zealand First and the Maori Party—to say that not only is the definition focused on sustainable management which is more in line with the Resource Management Act and not only have we sent some very clear messages around penalties but also we have clarified things like transitional provisions. When you actually look at some of those enforcement provisions particularly around the powers of enforcement officers I think we have got that balance right. That is why it has been personally a little bit disappointing that Labour and the Greens could not support this bill because we know that currently there is no environmental protection regime. 
Also the final couple of points that I would make are that we do have a strong obligation in this country to have sound environmental policies and with the largest exclusive economic zone in the world this legislation is incredibly important for our country. From my perspective I think that too often sometimes our environmental debates are at the extremes. You know you have those people who are absolutely focused on the economy; you have other people who may be very emotional from the environmental perspective. If we look to the future I do believe in the Bluegreens principles in terms of having a very scientific and evidence-based approach but also having an approach that is about good risk management. I think the Supplementary Order Paper that was tabled by the Minister has significantly improved this legislation as has the select committee process. I am very pleased to be supporting this legislation to the House. This is part of what needs to be significant reform in terms of our oceans. I am very pleased to support this bill to the House.