Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:627;Page:22176] 
7.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for the Environment 
: Does the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill create a “backdoor for pet projects”; if not why not? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Associate Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 No the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill is about getting better decisions on resource consents and getting them faster; about improved processes for working with councils especially on cross-boundary or complex resource consents; and New Zealand - wide consistency in consenting planning and environmental standards. It is certainly not about favouring special interests over and above the interests of all New Zealanders. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: In light of the Minister’s statement last week that: “In essence National’s plan would allow a Government of the day to specify minimum standards for any development project pylons prisons or motorways and would give a developer an unstoppable green light to go ahead.” what is the difference between National’s policy and Labour’s leaked list of 39 fast-tracked major projects including pylons prisons and motorways? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I cannot answer that better than in the words of the  
Otago Daily Times 
 editorial on 29 July this year part of which reads as follows: “The Government wants faster decision-making for resource consents more power for local councils to work with developers to speed things along and national guidelines to avoid the conflicting standards between regions. National wants to go much further—too far in fact. … Under National’s proposals we very much doubt whether for example the campaigns which succeeded in Lake Manapouri being saved from destruction or Aramoana from smelter construction would have been more than pipe dreams. National’s proposals to scrap the inexpensive provision of legal aid for objectors and reintroduce security for costs from objectors are a bare-faced attempt to erase basic rights of dissent while its measures intended to diminish the rights of local government in resource consent matters would actually extinguish a basic premise of the Act which is that communities most affected by applications should have the principal say in decision-making.” 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That answer was too long. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: How many flip-flops has the Minister’s Government done on the Resource Management Act noting that in 1998 it described direct referral to the Environment Court as “evil and dangerous” but it is now included in its bill; noting that he claimed in February that removing de novo hearings in the Environment Court would reduce costs and delays but now that has been abandoned; and noting that in 2000 the party opposed limited notification but later adopted it; and is it not the truth that Labour has no idea how to try to reduce the costs the uncertainties and the delays of the Resource Management Act? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The ministerial referral included in the bill reported back is quite different from the developer-driven referral that Dr Smith has always advocated. 
David Parker 
: What reports has the Minister seen with regard to community consultation? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I have seen a report that National will scrap the environmental legal aid fund. That was Dr Donald Brash at the Local Government New Zealand annual conference. We know that that view is not shared by the Port Levy Environmental Protection Society which received $29565 last year from the environmental legal aid fund. Of course the leader of the Port Levy Environmental Protection Society is none other than David Round National’s candidate for Christchurch East. 
Larry Baldock 
: Can the Minister confirm that proposals to reduce delays in the Resource Management Act such as by enabling resource consent applicants to refuse further information requests from councils and having their consent accepted or rejected on the information provided expanding the capacity of the Environment Court and councils to reject vexatious and frivolous objectors and enabling an applicant to seek direct referral to the Environment Court for major consents that are likely to be appealed regardless of income are by and large in major part dealt with in the bill before the House this week and will be fixed by about lunchtime Thursday and that those come from the National Party policy to change the Resource Management Act? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Yes I can confirm those statements. I would like to take the opportunity to thank that member for his very positive contribution in the select committee and in this very good policy development that I consider is evolutionary rather than revolutionary. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Why did he exclude any representation of community conservation Maori or recreational groups on the six reference groups set up to develop national infrastructure standards on pylons power stations roads stormwater telecommunications and gas facilities choosing instead to leave the job to the industries that want to build them and to Government officials? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: As I think the member is aware from the news release from my colleague Minister Hobbs at 11.58 this morning the status of those proposals is as scoping studies only. Those non-governmental organisations and the full community will have every opportunity to be involved in the development of any such national environmental standards or national policy statements should a decision be made to proceed with them in due course. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Is it not true though that once the reference groups have developed drafts written submissions from the community will make little difference given that there is no provision for public hearings or debate and that the judges of the submissions will be the officials who wrote the first draft? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: No. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Is not the only difference between National and the “Labour-Progressive-United” Government on the Resource Management Act the fact that National is upfront about shutting out environment and the community and that the Government wants to maintain a facade of consultation? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: No. I am sure that member is aware that these consultations have taken place within industry with local government with organisations such as the Law Society and the Business Council for Sustainable Development and are widely supported and greeted by them. [ 
Interruption 
] If the member had read their letter he would find quite the contrary. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House to table the press release of Mr David Benson-Pope on 14 February this year saying that the de novo hearings would reduce costs and delays but that he subsequently had to abandon them. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I seek leave to table a number of documents. The first one is the incorporation document of the Port Levy Coastal and Marine Protection Society. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The second is a report from the  
Otago Daily Times 
 editorial of 29 July 2005 entitled: “It’s our environment”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The third document is a column from the  
Nelson Mail 
 dated 26 July entitled: “RMA shake-up would limit local input”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The next is an article from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 under the name of Raewyn Peart entitled: “RMA plans an attack on rights. National’s proposals to change the Act will cut people out of decision making”. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I have two more documents. The first is a letter from the New Zealand Law Society dated 1 August in support of the changes proposed in the draft bill. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The second document is a letter from the Business Council for Sustainable Development which is generally very supportive of the same bill. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.