Dyson Ruth: Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDyson Ruth: Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee[Sitting date: 16 May 2013. Volume:690;Page:10227. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills): Correct. Can I say that of all the excuses that I have heard this evening the ones I have just heard from the member Jian Yang who has just resumed his seat were the best. They were the most innovative and the least related to the research unit notes of the National Party and I want to commend the member for that.We have heard some extraordinary stories about why this bill the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill is here. Jonathan Young stood up and said with an absolutely dead-straight face: “We now know more about the industry.” This bill is amending a bill that has not even come into force yet Mr Young. We have not learnt a huge amount more about the industry in the last 3 weeks. Well perhaps the member might have but the rest of the world has not—certainly not enough to bring in an amendment to the legislation. Another one of the National Party said that this bill is to correct minor omissions in the transitional provisions and that it was prudent responsible and the right thing to do. This is just amazing. That was clearly in the research unit notes. And somebody else said that it was a tidy-up. Well it certainly is a tidy-up and the reason that it is a tidy-up is that the Minister of Energy and Resources Simon Bridges made a mess of the last attempt at a bill.It is quite clear that even though Jonathan Young has learnt a huge amount about the oil industry over the last 3 weeks the Minister has not. If he had learnt anything about parliamentary process he would know that ramming a bill through all stages with no scrutiny by a select committee and with no submissions from the public is begging for problems. I predict that we will have the “Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Act (Later On in 2013) Amendment Bill 2013” coming before the House before the end of the year because the Minister just cannot help it. He is in such a desperate hurry to get his name on the statute records that he just makes a muck-up of it. He is going to be known as the Minister who has made more mistakes in his tenure as a Minister than any other in history.We should not have to do this. We should send the bill to a select committee where people like Jonathan Young who is actually a competent and good chair—he is a competent chair—could make sure that submitters came in and told us about the issues of concern could alert us to potential fish-hooks and could explain to us that there could be unintended consequences from legislation and the committee could say: “Well we’re prepared to take the risk.” or “No we want to avoid that and we’ll changeit.” But no Minister Simon Bridges knows it all and barrels the whole lot through under urgency without any scrutiny. That is just a recipe for disaster.What this actually is is a developer’s charter. It is clear that the changes that separate the consideration of the standards from the granting of the application are going to be a problem so with health and safety standards with environmental standards and with the financial standards that the Government itself has set it does not matter whether the application says no it does not meet any of those standards; it can still be granted a licence to go ahead. That is a major mistake. Those standards are there for a reason. The Government put them in place and I think it should make sure that they are adhered to.The final point I want to make is in relation to something that clearly is not a tidy-up or correcting some omission or sudden change because we have learnt so much more about the industry and that is the extension of the no-protest zone to cover the continental shelf. What arrogance of the Government. Whose space is the continental shelf? Is it ours to suddenly say that this new no-protest regime will be in place there as well? Well that is what this legislation does. I know that tomorrow the country will wake to news of this that this provision—which was justifiably lambasted when it first came before the Parliament just a little while ago—is now being extended. It is being extended by a significant amount; I think it is 1.7 million square kilometres. That is a huge area of continental shelf outside the exclusive economic zone where this new no-protest regime will come into place. It is ruining New Zealand’s international reputation it is ruining our own democratic rights and protections and I think this bill should be opposed.