Williams Poto; Woods MeganPart 2 Further provisionsCHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Members we now come to Part 2 the debate on clause 9 and the schedule. Hon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): Thank you Madam Chair. Like I did with Part 1 just with Part 2 of this bill I want to go through some of the changes that were made to this legislation by the select committee. In this part which is a new clause 22 being inserted into schedule 1 of the Crown Minerals Act—if we look at that first it is new clause 22 Interpretation" new clause 23 "Existing permits unaffected" new clause 23A "Applications for subsequent permits unaffected" and new clause 23B "Subsequent permits unaffected". The Environment Committee made a number of very technical changes to the new clauses 22 and 23 and these changes were to further clarify the Government's policy position that the changes in the bill are only intended to apply to new petroleum permits and not existing permits. The policy intention of the bill as we traversed in the debate on the last part of the bill is to ensure that those with existing petroleum permits with subsequent permits to their existing permits and with applications relating to either are unaffected by this bill. I think that's something really important that we spelt out as explicitly as possible in these provisions in the bill. As such new clause 23 was amended and new clauses 23A and 23B were inserted to make that even clearer and I thank the committee for that work.This is incredibly important because what we have to realise is that this bill does not signal an abrupt end to petroleum exploration in New Zealand. What it does is signal a managed and long-term transition to the end of petroleum exploration in New Zealand and when we say "managed and long-term" we are talking 20 30 40 years down the track. Indeed there are a number of exploration wells that are to be drilled in the coming years and one is currently being drilled. If these are successful permit holders will have the same rights and privileges as they do now before this legislation has passed. The other change that was made here was new clause 24 where existing applications for permits for petroleum were determined in accordance with the Act as amended. Some submitters raised a very valid issue around the retrospective application of this new provision and I think it is important to be clear about what this provision does and why. The provision does not affect existing rights but rather affects the outcome of any application process that might already be under way. I'm advised by my officials that there are currently no such applications but there is always potential for an application to be lodged at any time. Should an application for a new permit be made today for example it would have been made with awareness of this bill and as such it would be considered under the Crown Minerals Act as amended by this bill. The provision reduces the potential for the policy intent and objectives of this bill to be undermined by people rushing before the new provisions commence to make applications on the basis that the old law would apply to those applications. New clause 26 is a very specific provision and this clause allows current proceedings in the High Court between Greymouth Gas Turangi Ltd and the Minister of Energy and Resources to continue as if the amended Act had not been enacted. The bill as introduced included an incorrect reference to these proceedings which was helpfully corrected by the Environment Committee—so thank you very much for that. New clause 27 "Changes to the minerals programme"—the minerals programme set out of course how a Government will exercise specific powers or discretions and will interpret and apply specific provisions in the Crown Minerals Act and the associated regulations. They are intended to provide guidance and support the implementation of the Act. The intention of this new provision is to enable a minerals programme to be updated with only those changes necessary to give effect to the bill without triggering the obligation to provide the notice and consult provisions under sections 17 and 18 of the Act. It was never intended to enable the introduction of new policy; it is simply around the provisions in this legislation. However some submitters raised issues with the way the provision was worded and whether the word "Consequential" might lead to new policy changes being made as a consequence of the bill. The Environment Committee tightened the wording around this provision to ensure that it can be used only in the way that was originally intended—that is around the provisions of this bill and not further policies. Under the revised bill the only changes affected by this provisions are those that insert information into the programme to explain the effects of the amendments made to the Act by this bill. So I thank the committee for the work that they did around these very technical clauses that we're going through—very technical and very specific clauses—in Part 2 of the bill. Thank you Madam Chair."