Adams Amy: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Adams Amy: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 30 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2733. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon AMY ADAMS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 I move  
That the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Bill be now read a second time 
. This bill responds to a regulatory gap that has meant New Zealand does not currently have a comprehensive regime in place to manage and mitigate the environmental effects of development activities in our oceans. New Zealand’s exclusive economic zone and continental shelf hold significant economic potential. The Government wants to unlock this economic potential in an environmentally responsible way. Environmental organisations and industries are agreed on the need for legislation to do this and most submitters supported the bill with amendments.  
The bill as reported back reflects the Local Government and Environment Committee’s agreement on the majority of amendments proposed and its response to issues raised by a wide range of submitters. I wish to stress from the outset that this bill will not duplicate or extend existing legislation. The bill is not about oil spill response mineral allocation marine reserves fishing or shipping. These are all addressed under other existing legislation. Activities covered by the bill include seabed mining the building of construction platforms for oil and gas exploration and drilling marine farming energy generation carbon capture and storage seismic surveying and cable laying. The Environmental Protection Authority will make independent decisions on marine consent applications balancing the environment and economy with input from the public and from iwi.  
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the chair and members of the Local Government and Environment Committee for their work in considering this piece of legislation. I also greatly appreciate the in-depth knowledge and support to the committee provided by my officials in the Ministry for the Environment and the Environmental Protection Authority. My thanks also go to the submitters for the efforts and thought that went into their submissions.  
This is a multifaceted piece of legislation but the contributions made at the select committee have been vital in making it a more workable and high-quality piece of legislation. Altogether the select committee received 125 submissions and a number of positive changes have been recommended for the bill including clarification of what decision makers must consider stronger recognition of the Treaty of Waitangi wider reference to international obligations increased enforcement powers and more workable transition provisions. I would now like to take a moment to elaborate on these improvements in more detail. 
 So when read as a whole the bill is clearly environmental legislation and requires far more than a cost-benefit analysis. The select committee has recommended strengthening the requirements in the bill that outline the matters decision makers must take into account and to favour caution and environmental protection where information is unknown or uncertain. To do this the committee has recommended structural changes to the bill and amendments to ensure that decision makers consider a range of relevant matters.  
This is not about pitting the economy against the environment. It is about balance and responsible management of our oceans. The select committee has recommended amending the reference to the Treaty of Waitangi in clause 14 to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi through the listed provisions. This is a stronger requirement than the previous wording that the Treaty be taken into account. Let me be also clear that this bill fully complies with our international obligations. This has been confirmed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s own legal team and confirmed by a number of legally qualified submissions to the select committee including that from the New Zealand Law Society.  
The international law of the sea gives New Zealand the right to explore and exploit marine resources in our exclusive economic zone and continental shelf but it also provides the obligation to preserve and protect the environment. The point here is that the law of the sea must be looked at holistically. No single provision should be read in isolation. The juxtaposition of competing rights and obligations in the convention assumes that States will attempt to strike an appropriate and reasonable balance between interests before undertaking an activity. However the bill also seeks to give effect to international obligations other than the law of the sea such as the Convention on Biological Diversity. To clarify this intention clause 11 of the bill has been amended to refer more generally to New Zealand’s international obligations in the marine environment.  
The select committee has recommended that a wider range of enforcement tools be available to the public as well as to the Environmental Protection Authority. The committee has recommended that any person be able to apply to the Environment Court for an enforcement order to remedy or address any breach of the legislation. The committee has also recommended that the Environmental Protection Authority’s enforcement officers be able to issue abatement notices for minor breaches of the legislation. I commend these recommendations and I do believe that they will achieve greater compliance with the proposed law.  
Finally in terms of substantive amendments the committee has recommended new transitional provisions for the bill. Submitters made us aware that there may be some activities that will already have made significant investments prior to the bill coming into force that were not covered by the original transitional provisions. The Government is committed to making this legislation workable. The select committee’s recommended amendments will enable a smooth transition to the new regime. But to make sure that there are adequate environmental protections in place in the short term the bill has also been amended to require an impact assessment be prepared by oil and gas companies during that transitional period. This will mirror the requirements once the legislation is in place and in fact is part of best practice employed by most modern petroleum operators already. Once the transitional period has ended all new activities will need to fully comply with the new regime.  
I would like to conclude by addressing an issue that has been raised at the select committee and repeatedly in the media. A number of people have asked why we do not just extend the Resource Management Act to include the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. It is the Government’s view that the complexity and planning framework of the Resource Management Act would be overkill in our relatively uncrowded offshore marine environment. Furthermore under the law of the sea New Zealand does not enjoy the full sovereign rights that we have on land. It would be very difficult therefore to apply the Resource Management Act in light of the rights duties and responsibilities other countries have in our exclusive economic zone and continental shelf. It is our view that this bill provides an appropriate balance not only of environmental and economic interests but also of public participation and streamlined cost-effective processes.  
I am grateful to the submitters and the select committee whose changes have served to further improve this long-overdue piece of legislation. This bill reflects the Government’s balanced approach to environmental management. It provides a strong and effective framework to ensure that processes are in place to assess and manage adverse environmental effects in our oceans to provide greater certainty to investors and existing interests to meet New Zealand’s international obligations and to do this in the most efficient and effective way possible without further delay. I am very pleased to commend the bill to the House.