Shirley Ken: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Shirley Ken: Resource Management (Waitaki Catchment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:614;Page:10609] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 In addressing this bill I have to make the observation that we have heard it all now. We have had an extraordinary speech from the co-leader of the Greens saying that they are opposed to Project Aqua yet they come to Parliament and want to pass legislation that fast tracks it. They want to fast track something that they are opposed to. I cannot see a lot of logic in that. The ACT party has a much clearer position. We recognise the need for Project Aqua—the energy supply for this country is in a looming crisis situation and getting worse by the week—but we oppose this appalling process. This is a national development Act equivalent. Moreover it is an admission by this Government that the Resource Management Act has failed. What did the Minister say? She said that the Resource Management Act is beautifully written and beautifully balanced. I put it to the House it is about as beautifully balanced as that member the Minister for the Environment. [ 
Interruption 
] Some may regard her as Tinkerbell but I personally think that would be stretching it a bit far. 
The Government is saying that the Resource Management Act is fine it is not holding up investment in this country and it is beautifully balanced and beautifully written yet when its State-owned enterprise comes up against it potentially—this Project Aqua in the Waitaki—what does it do? It rams through a Clyde Dam equivalent to fast track it. Is that not an admission that the Resource Management Act does not work? The Government says: “Oh one can tender for the private sector and others; the Act is balanced and beautifully written.” But instead of being balanced and neutral and fixing it for the whole of the country so that all development projects can compete on equal terms the Government when it has to confront the Act and run the gauntlet—knowing that it would take 10 years to get its resource consents through—brings this legislation to the House. It is an outrage of process. That is very arrogant of this Government. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Could we add the Auckland motorway completion as an appendix? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: My colleague Richard Prebble suggests that if the Government is of this frame of mind it could make a full list and add the Auckland motorway projects to get them through the Resource Management Act. And it could add all those other things that are held up and are costing jobs costing potential investment in this country and leading to our people—our best and our brightest—leaving through lack of opportunities. But the situation is actually worse than that because the Government is turning the clock back about 15 years. It is effectively setting up a Waitaki catchment commission. Until the Resource Management Act came in and local government reforms we had 18 catchment boards and water resource boards around this country to do the very job that has been proposed here—that is allocate water in an administrative local government “picking-winners” type model. What has the Government done? It has set up another Waitaki catchment commission. This one is a bit different. The old Waitaki catchment commission was elected by local people with local interest. Not any more! There will be ministerial appointment of the chairman the deputy chairman and the whole board. Those board members hold their position at the pleasure of—guess who—the Minister for the Environment. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Labour Party hacks. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: Labour Party hacks held there at the pleasure of the Minister for the Environment. It is an outrage as other speakers have observed. The other interesting aspect is that one cannot take appeal. The decision of this new catchment commission cannot be appealed to the Environment Court—only on very narrow points of law. So all other investment and all other potential developers in the country who want to create wealth and prosperity will run the gauntlet of the application process and they are inevitably confronted with an appeal to the Environment Court. That takes a lot of time and money and delays investment in this country. The Government has fast tracked it in the process initially but also precluded it from going to the Environment Court on appeal on anything other than narrow points of law. The issue is to go back to that administrative public sector “picking winners” in the allocation of any resource. The allocation of water is very important but we gave up on the administrative allocation decades ago and pricing mechanisms is the only way to allocate a resource like water. But because of the philosophy of this socialist Government it is not prepared to consider pricing mechanisms to ensure the proper use of what are scarce resources like water. 
 This situation is not unique to Waitaki—the same is true of Nelson Hawke’s Bay Canterbury or Auckland. Water will be in increasingly tight supply at various times throughout the country so why specific legislation for Waitaki only? The only reason can be that it is the Government’s pet project to buy it time in the energy sector. Project Aqua is major. It is a $1.2 billion development which is very significant and ACT observes that it is actually needed. We have had a fourfold increase in our electricity demand over the last 40 years and our demand is continuing to expand at 800 gigawatt hours per year. Project Aqua would deliver 3000 gigawatt hours so we actually need a Project Aqua equivalent every 4 years. Every 4 years we should be thinking of a Project Aqua equivalent. What is this Government doing? It has locked up our coal reserves. Most energy planners recognise that the only realistic option for us in the medium term—the next 20 years—is coal but oh no we have signed up to the fundamentally flawed Kyoto Protocol so we have to pretend that our coal is not in the ground. 
We have at least 1000 years of coal in the ground in this country but this Government because of its political arrogance and ignorance says that we cannot use it. It will not consider the nuclear option because that is against Labour Party mantras. It will not allow smaller hydro schemes on the West Coast like the Dobson dam which is a very sensible scheme. It would deliver 65 megawatts in a water-rich area. But oh no that would have created a little lake on Department of Conservation land so we could not have that. The Minister of Conservation turned it down and now the Government is having to bite the hard choice which is the modification of the lower Waitaki flow below Kurow with a channel taking about 70 percent of the low flow and passing it through some six power generation stations. It is little wonder that the Government will have a huge problem on its hands. Potentially it will be another Manapouri which is what the Government is desperately trying to avoid by this grubby little bill that it has brought to the House. The  
Otago Daily Times 
 editor summed it up rather well this week in some rather harsh words against the Government when he said: “This is an outrageous piece of legislation. It cannot be condoned. The Government is on notice that any attempt to fast-track the draining of the Waitaki River will not be tolerated.” Those are the sentiments of the editor of the  
Otago Daily Times 
. The Government knows that but it is not prepared to subject itself to the gauntlet of our appalling planning procedures in this country which have remained unmodified for far too long and instead has the temerity and the gall to bring fast-track legislation to this House with the sole purpose of easing the way for its own State-owned enterprise Meridian Energy. Who gets all the profits from Meridian Energy? Guess who gets all the dividend payments from Meridian Energy! 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: Dr Cullen. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: Dr Cullen brings in all those dividends. The Government is completely dominating the energy sector both generation and transmission and now it wants to bring all those dividends back in. It is just another form of taxation so that the Government can spend—and waste—the money in the unproductive sector of this country. ACT will be opposing this bill through all its stages. We recognise the need for Project Aqua but we say to this Government that if it is to bring in fast-track legislation like this it should do it on a neutral basis across the economy so that we can start to generate wealth and create some prosperity for this country.