Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Minister thank you for being so fulsome in your explanations and for giving your time so generously to explain this bill to the committee and to New Zealanders who might be listening: the Natural and Built Environment Bill which we know you have heavily invested your time in and also directed officials and others to heavily invest their time in and of course the taxpayer's dollar to fund this development of this legislation.Minister before I come to some questions I just want to make it clear what ACT believes the issue is to solve with resource management law. We have environmental protection on one hand; we have urban development and infrastructure needed to deliver social and economic benefits to communities on the other. How do we balance our desire our passion as New Zealanders to protect those special places those special parts of the environment those iconic places which feature in our tourist promotions—the places where we go tramping and camping those places where we go fishing and diving and those unique wetlands for example where endangered birds like the kōtuku the white heron live? How do we balance up the need to protect these very very unique and special places with our need to occupy develop and use resources for our economic and social wellbeing?Well Minister unfortunately ACT opposes this bill because we do not believe that it efficiently resolves the obvious clash between those two outcomes. And that's because it retains an integrated approach to land use planning and environmental management—that was the original flaw of the Resource Management Act (RMA) rather than separating them into two separate regulatory systems: one to protect the special places which we could do if we had a piece of legislation such as an environmental protection Act that said where the special places are how we know that they're special and what the criteria are—is it water quality is it ecology or is it a threatened species is it a national park somewhere with our tallest mountain on it? Let everybody chip in and identify—through consultation through legislative process and through select committee submission—what the special places are that they want to protect and why.You might have to also identify where these might be on private land because of course if the Government intends to restrict the use of private land and say it's special to other people they should have very very very good reasons as to why to do it and be prepared to pay for the privilege because that's not Government land that's not public land that's private land. But of course if the Government wants to protect public land and say that these are special places then it should have the right to do that by the means of an environmental protection piece of legislation.Alternatively when it comes to urban development and infrastructure development having carried out spatial planning activities—which are pretty common across New Zealand although not to the same level of detail; I mean why would you do it to the same level of detail in Kaitāia as you would for an urban metro like Auckland or Hamilton or Christchurch? It's absolutely vital that where that planning shows people will live and where business land is zoned for business activities—manufacturing production and so on—we need a piece of legislation that identifies how infrastructure corridors are protected and then how that infrastructure should be delivered funded and financed and which entities might have responsibilities in that sector and of course when it comes to urban development where people want to build in existing urban areas or in new urban areas that there is legislation that provides for affordable housing development and also linked to the provision of services. Two pieces of legislation Minister that if separated would be a much more efficient way in ACT's opinion of giving effect to the laudable objectives expressed in this bill—essentially to protect the environment the special places while making it easier to build and get on with delivering infrastructure that has social and economic wellbeing outcomes.But Minister I just have a few questions for you now because if we are intending to solve that problem this evening or tomorrow morning if we continue—Madam Chair? [Bell rung]CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jenny Salesa): I call on Simon Court. And can I actually ask the member to get to his questions. It's a wide-ranging debate but you've had five minutes of really wide-ranging speech. Please ask the Minister your questions.SIMON COURT: Thank you Madam Chair. So the issues to solve appear to be complicated by the purpose clause—in particular the purpose of the Act is achieved in a way that enables use and development and promotes the wellbeing of not just present but future generations.So question one Minister: how are we to value resources for future generations when we might want to use them now to build stuff? We might say there's a piece of land that somebody owns whether publicly or privately which might have quarry resources on it valuable minerals or rare-earth minerals that might be used for electronics or batteries or to help achieve a low-carbon future for some technology; how do we balance the needs of present generations against future generations when it's the people who are here now our children who are with us now whose economic and social wellbeing we must surely give primacy to Minister?Second question: te Oranga o te Taiao—and I have been listening to the debate and I know you have answered some questions Minister. Will you please describe what interconnectedness with all parts of the environment" means? Because if you think about electrons if you think about physics if you think about atoms or neutrons they're all buzzing around they're all connected. How does that help a decision maker—either looking at a resource consent application or a judge looking at an appeal—decide whether an applicant is upholding te Oranga o te Taiao? Should they have knowledge of physics and potentially advanced physics or is this something that is intrinsic knowledge? And if it's intrinsic knowledge Minister that a judge or a decision maker will need how do they get this knowledge? Is it absorbed somehow through life experience? Is it learnt at university? Are they born with it? Is it an ethnic thing? Minister explain how on earth somebody is supposed to understand that as a decision maker? Because Ernest Rutherford said Minister "If you can't explain physics to a barman it's not good physics." But if you could explain the interconnectedness of all parts of the environment to the House this evening maybe it is good policy after all.Minister I would like to get to the changes that this bill makes with regard to the Treaty of Waitangi obligations on all persons exercising functions and duties under the Act which now requires quite differently from the Resource Management Act decision makers to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi whereas the RMA sought to have decision makers—those exercising powers—to have regard to the principles. That's quite different because Minister in a reply that you've kindly given to me in another portfolio area today your transport portfolio you outline what those principles are—they're expressed by the courts and the Waitangi Tribunal.The principle of partnership: well I mean anyone who's been in business would appreciate how important it is to respect your partners in any business activity or undertaking in the community.The principle of mutual benefit: well every deal has some kind of trade-off in it Minister. There is not always a mutual benefit. There's not always an equivalent benefit. There's not always a balancing of benefits. Somebody is doing something next door to your land. The person who's receiving the effects of an activity whether it's a house being built or a quarry being developed or a cell tower going up—there's no mutual benefits for somebody who doesn't like the shading doesn't like the noise doesn't like the dust and doesn't like looking at a cellphone tower. Then of course is the principle of active protection.So Minister would you please explain to us how on earth the interconnectedness of all parts of the environment is to be understood by decision makers? And how are decision makers—those exercising powers and duties—meant to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi principles: partnership mutual benefit and the principle of active protection? Minister if you could give us some examples that would be a great start to the evening. Thank you."