Court Simon; Parker DavidSIMON COURT (ACT): Madam Chair thank you. I just want to explore with the Minister the implications of clause 40 which is the form of environmental limits and in particular where it says that An environmental limit must be expressed as relating to the ecological integrity of an aspect of the natural environment"—so for example in clause 40(2)(b) "the amount of harm or stress to the natural environment that may be permitted in a management unit."Minister I'm really interested as to how that may be determined because if I'm thinking about say the conditions in a period of warm dry weather or a warmer dry cycle like say El Nino it might affect the East Coast of the North Island as opposed to the La Nina weather pattern which has been much much wetter. How would it be possible to set an environmental limit that would allow for natural variation in climate conditions for example when we're looking at water abstraction from rivers or aquifers for production or we may be looking at other matters like for example carrying out soil-disturbing activities or earthworks which create a risk if they're not well managed of allowing soil to discharge to waterways or of allowing erosion generating sediment.So Minister I'm interested as to how the form of environmental limit will be set with respect to the amount of harm or stress to the natural environment that may be permitted in a management unit thinking about climate change weather patterns and the specific example around earthworks and the amount of disturbance that might be allowed. Is that envisaged as part of setting this limit?Minister I also want to just ask you to comment on clause 40C "Lack of scientific certainty no reason to delay or not set limits". Now that seems like a remarkable clause to include in a bill which purports to be about managing natural and built environments. I mean how is it possible? On what basis could a limit be set on potentially the condition of a waterway or the condition of a wetland or air quality if you don't have the data and if you don't know whether you are making a decision?If you can't quantify the costs and benefits when you're making a decision that may have quite significant impacts for businesses that are manufacturing for organisations that depend on being able to take water from groundwater from surface water or from impoundments for their own use. How on earth in the 21st century—in 2023—are we making decisions about setting limits in the absence of scientific certainty Minister?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): Dealing with the earlier question about clause 38(2) I'm advised that for an example of what an area that you could have environmental limits would be an example could be non-indigenous biodiversity—no plans to do that at the moment but you could do that in the future. In respect of the question about environmental limits if it were related to human health you'd get advice from the Ministry of Health and that's set out at clause 40(3A). In respect of other environmental limits it will be developed by central government agencies if it is an environmental limit for national direction and then there's a process through which that is tested by a board of inquiry process. In respect of clause 40C that's not intended to mean that you don't need any scientific basis; that's just saying that the fact that your science isn't perfect shouldn't stop you acting. For example you might have uncertainties as to what's an exact population but you might need to protect what's left before you know the exact numbers."