Potaka TamaTAMA POTAKA (National—Hamilton West): Tēnā tātou i tēnei whiro marama.[Greetings to us during this time of whiro marama.]A whiro moon is upon us and for some of us that actually gives us great energy—it's those on the dark side of the moon.Thank you for the opportunity to speak to the Spatial Planning Bill at the second reading. And again a big shout-out to those committee members left—left the House already—in fostering this bill through the process and the leadership of the Hon David Parker and others. It's been pleasurable listening this evening whānau—the wild and aspirational musings of my Labour and Green colleagues who have spoken to the bills that underpin the proposed Resource Management Act (RMA) reform. But given the complexity of the reform and my fanatic appetite for finding solutions of unresolved issues that confront our country I contemplated whether or not a career in resource management law was a better risk-adjusted return for my time. Alas I'm committed to spending more quality time with you all in this House. As mentioned National supports reform of the RMA but respectfully opposes this bill. The bill's purpose around regional spatial strategies to promote integration of the performance of functions under other legislation is noted. But one of the themes of this Government is the feverish compulsion to grow kāwanatanga or Government bigger than it needs to be or should be—an absolute imbalance in favour of article 1 of te Tiriti o Waitangi / the Treaty of Waitangi rather than a careful positioning of articles 1 2 and 3 across the legislative rubric. This imbalance has pervaded legislative drafting in the short time I've spent here particularly in relation to prescribing Māori initiatives or participation to the detriment of more deliberate exercises of rangatiratanga.Te Oranga o te Taiao is yet again another interesting noble but ultimately misguided effort to envelope and restrict the innovation and creativity that goes with rangatiratanga. Adding an additional layer of bureaucracy through the formation and the naming of the regional planning committees over and above city district and regional councils convolutes our planning processes even further and compromises the very rangatiratanga that the Labour Government seeks to actively protect. Appointing members to these committees rather than having elected officials reinforces a democratic shortfall or deficiency which is becoming unfortunately and intentionally the modus operandi of this Labour Government. The National Party this great fine party of ours the blue party te pāti kahurangi welcomes election of officials who make major decisions for big regions. However where we have a loss of local democracy an increase of Molesworth Street bureaucracy I grimace and shudder. This is what is keeping me awake sometimes on a Whiro moon sometimes on a Rākaunui moon and cold at night: the thought of poor drafting across legislative platforms and drafting on the hoof. My wise colleagues Bishop and Simpson have opined on the undemocratic nature of the regional planning committees proposed particularly Hamiltonians trying to control people in Coromandel. These will be costly. They will be time consuming. They will be unwieldy and faceless and unreflective of communities of interest. These committees will lack political accountability and basically add more costs to an already expensive process. My own Hamilton City Council home of the Chiefs—mana—has submitted that the decision-making processes which are ultimately accountable to the residents of Kirikiriroa and sometimes answerable to Waikato-Tainui will be severely compromised.In clause 100(5) for example the proposal is to entrench such committees into legislation. Wow! Another undemocratic body requiring legislation to dismantle. We should call it an agency rather than a committee. Clause 5—it's a beautiful section—mirrors clause 4 of the Natural and Built Environment Bill. We have yet another powerful reference to te Tiriti o Waitangi". That's right. Not "the Treaty of Waitangi" nor the double banger "te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi" but "te Tiriti o Waitangi". I'm nervous about having this provision without context. The elevation of te Tiriti o Waitangi without reference to the Treaty of Waitangi creates some further ambiguity given the interpretation differences that we've had for years nearly two centuries for the English version of that fine covenant. My experiences in law over the past 30 years have seen a marked evolution in Treaty jurisprudence often ignited by poorly drafted legislation. This is one area for the entire reform package if it continues that I would recommend further consideration be given to the nuanced wording. Perhaps the double banger is more suitable or even the parentheses version where "Treaty of Waitangi" is followed by "te Tiriti o Waitangi" in parentheses or vice versa. But "te Tiriti o Waitangi" by itself represents a risk space that is better located within the He Puapua thought document than the key RMA legislation.Clause 7: that's another provision which provokes a range of political PhD and Masters' thesis projects across our academic fraternity. It reads: "Iwi and hapū responsibilities … [To assist in achieving the purpose of the Act] All persons exercising powers and performing duties and functions under this Act must recognise and provide for the responsibility and mana of each iwi and hapū to protect and sustain the health and well-being of te taiao in accordance with the kawa tikanga (including kaitiakitanga) and mātauranga in their [area of interest] rohe or takiwā." What mana are we talking about? Are we talking about mana wāhine? Are we talking about mana whenua? Are we talking about mana tūpuna? Are we talking about mana atua? It's this lack of legislative clarity and certainty that gives rise to an absolute anxiety beating into the heart of a Capricorn.The proposed legislation does nothing to define what mana mātauranga and kawa actually mean. In fact these terms randomly turn up into an already complex framework. How in the world will decision makers make timely acquaintance and timely location of themselves in this space? Many of them cannot even pronounce tikanga and mātauranga let alone make decisions based on them. Noble objectives maybe; ahead of their time definitely.As one of possibly only two people in this Whare tonight who whilst serving an iwi has had to run a resource management team—people who actually go out and make—Arena Williams: Me.TAMA POTAKA: There you go—maybe Soraya over there my sister over there. People who've actually run a resource management team inside an iwi know how hard it is to not only find the capacity but also to fund the capacity to deliver meaningful engagement. The ability of iwi and Māori organisations to actually deliver meaningful capacity to engage to consult or if possible make decisions is something that confronts iwi on an absolute daily basis. The unintended consequences of this poor legislative drafting actually make it harder for iwi to participate in the resource management decision-making process. But no we've had a whole bunch of drafters Ministers and committee members say it's the right thing to do without actually interrogating whether or not we've got the capacity or the funding within these organisations to deliver that capacity.It assumes that there is enough RMA expertise out there and I question that with a big 42-size font in bold and underlined. It is here where I can calmly refer to the wisdom of Laws 213 Public Law lecturer and former Labour leader and Prime Minister Sir Geoffrey Palmer who noted that we do have the fastest law in the West in his seminal text Unbridled Power. A respectful architect of much fine legislation it was Sir Geoffrey that formulated section 9 of the State-Owned Enterprises Act—the godfather godmother of what you're talking about here in section 5 of the spatial bill—that ignited much deliberation political judicial academic executive iwi Māori and bureaucratic of what the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi / te Tiriti o Waitangi constituted. That deliberation continues. But now we have a bunch of new terms—te Oranga o te Taiao kawa and mātauranga. Nōu tō piki amokura nōku tōku piki amokura. [Mutual respect for different teachings or schools of thought.] How are you going to get consistency across all iwi I do not know. The only way iwi have been together over the last 40 years is when they were forced in the Māori commercial fisheries legislation because people have different views around what mātauranga tikanga and kawa mean. Sir Geoffrey has more recently referred to New Zealand lacking the checks to prevent constitutional slippage Toni. His comments could not be more prescient here. Constitutional slippage and ambiguity is where we are heading with the uncertainty proffered curated and created by people who have never been involved in RMA at iwi level apart from one or two people in this House. If we can't get these terms clear how do we expect the judiciary will be able to interpret them let alone decision makers in far-flung utopic rural electorates like the Bay of Plenty Rangitīkei Selwyn and Tauranga? This legislation—Hon Kiritapu Allan: Cuzzie you can't believe this rubbish you're saying.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order!TAMA POTAKA: We've got to build the road—build the road to Gisborne—build that road. This legislation should give clear guidance to decision makers around planning for the future for our communities not the clear runway for fiscal futures of law and planning firms. At this stage I am unconvinced unpersuaded that the wording is either durable or dependable for the tamariki mokopuna generations who will inherit this messy wording but also the environment we heartily proclaim to protect by way of this and other bills. Madam Speaker kia tātou Whiro moon."