2. Question No. 2—ResourcesHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram) to the Minister for ResourcesQuestion No. 2—Resources2. Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Labour—Wigram) to the Minister for Resources: What advice if any has he sought or received on the implications of bonds for oil and gas companies and/or changes to oil and gas decommissioning legislation that he has indicated he is considering?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS (Deputy Prime Minister) on behalf of the Minister for Resources: I've heard time and time again from ministry that sovereign risk is a major barrier to investment in oil and gas in New Zealand. This sovereign risk is a result of the economic vandalism threatened by some and their woke fellow travellers who have no comprehension at all of international business and investment. I have therefore sought advice on how to improve investor confidence including the best way to reduce the sovereign risk and ensure that changes to the cumbersome decommissioning regime balances regulatory burden and Crown risk. I'm advised that under a former administration gas supply could run out within the next five years. It's not because of a shortage of gas but a shortage of investment and political wisdom.Hon Dr Megan Woods: What people organisations groups or lobbyists has he discussed the potential for compensation bonds for multinational oil and gas companies and/or changes to oil and gas decommissioning that puts the New Zealand taxpayer in the liable seat?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Quite extraordinary. This is a case where I'm assumed to have been here for a long time and learnt nothing. I've heard from ministry that the decommissioning provisions introduced by the previous Government are onerous. They are discouraging investment and the long-term security of our gas supply is now in question. And if I was responsible for the closure of Marsden Point thereby imperilling our very critical supply in a time of a supply emergency I'd be keeping my mouth shut. I have asked officials to look into any changes that will encourage operators to continue to invest in New Zealand's energy security while continuing to protect taxpayers. The number of people are all those who are interested in making an investment in New Zealand but are too threatened by the regime that the previous Government left here.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Point of order Madam Speaker. That was a very specific question that asked the Minister what people organisations groups or lobbyists this idea had been discussed with. It was a very full answer but it in no way addressed that very specific question.Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Speaking to the point of order if that member wanted that answer then an Official Information Act (OIA) request would've satisfied them. But if someone turned up here as a Minister and said I've got five pages I want to read out." madam you'd be stopping me.Hon Dr Megan Woods: What was the cost to the New Zealand taxpayer of having to clean up the mess of Tamarind when the company left New Zealand because we had lax decommissioning laws that that Minister is now looking to bring back?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: With respect I am not going to answer a question which was in the purview of the previous administration and Minister. It has got nothing to do with this Government whatsoever. And it's unbelievable that we have Standing Orders and Speakers' rulings and some people have been here for all those years and seemingly have learnt nothing.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Has he sought advice as to whether the issuing of compensation bonds to multinational oil and gas companies would be in contravention of our international commitments to abolish fossil fuel subsidies?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Can I make it very clear that New Zealand is dedicated to a clean energy transition and meeting our emissions targets. This Government is committed to deliver net zero by 2050 including by doubling New Zealand's renewable electricity and removing consenting barriers. On the question of the cost of bonds being somehow illegal again if that was the allegation by way of question why wasn't it supported here by some evidentiary fact rather than just a suspicion? This is not complex. Other countries have done that already which is the reason why those countries have investment and we have lost all of it.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Has he sought advice on whether compensation bonds to multinational oil and gas companies would contravene New Zealand's free-trade agreement with the EU?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The answer to that question is that the Minister has made it clear—this person I'm standing in for today—that he's merely written to these people for their views and their ideas. This should not be constructed as a decision which some in the press gallery are loathe to do. Any statement of open consultation these days is construed as a final outcome. No it's not—it's called a new administration that has come to this position in Government where we think that consultation and listening is very important.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Which people has he written to?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: Again if that member wanted that then they should've put in a request under the Official Information Act. If I'd come down here with five pages of names and addresses of those people we've written to I'd be stopped in the House for wasting the House's time. Now please catch up. I know it's early 2024 but this is serious and there could be many decades waiting around to be a good Opposition.Hon Dr Megan Woods: Point of order Madam Speaker. I'm just seeking some guidance from you. This is parliamentary oral question time where it is the role of Parliament to hold Ministers to account by way of questions both on notice and supplementary. Am I correct in understanding the Minister answering on behalf of the Minister for Resources is saying they will no longer be doing that; instead only the Official Information Act will be the way in which Parliament can hold the executive to account?DEPUTY SPEAKER: OK so the OIA doesn't replace oral questions; members are entitled to seek information through questions. But what I will note in this situation is that the Minister is answering on behalf of another Minister and it would be appropriate if the Minister doesn't have the answer to that question—it would be best to say so.Hon Dr Megan Woods: How is it fair to New Zealand taxpayers to ask them to underwrite multibillion multinational oil and gas companies' return to New Zealand and then shoulder the clean-up and decommissioning costs when they leave without paying their bills?Rt Hon WINSTON PETERS: The answer to that is that this country's supply of gas is imperilled for the next five years now and no planning forward has been admitted—worse still it's been stopped. And we have at the same time Marsden Point which right now has been allowed to close down in supply when in a critical phrase of non-supply to this country by tankers we could've supplied 50 percent of the country's critical needs. So here's a country in desperate need of a forward plan and what we've got here is someone trying to say "The poor taxpayer's going to pay." I tell you what the taxpayer's going to be paying for: they'll be paying for a shutdown economy brought about by people who came to Parliament with no idea how business works."