Davidson MaramaMARAMA DAVIDSON (Co-Leader—Green): The Green Party is opposing this bill to support the Waimea dam. We are very clear and what we're asking for—and I acknowledge all of the speeches that have just been put on the floor of this House. What we are wanting—and I want to support Deborah Russell in saying that this is not a no-brainer. At the very least we need to acknowledge that there are valid valid concerns and that this is not a no-brainer.Now I want to be very clear that we are sure that there need to be better assurances especially environmental and ecological assurances. I think it was Mr Guy who previously stood and said I want to hear what the Greens have to say about endangered species." We absolutely do have something to say about endangered species. We acknowledge the work of Forest & Bird for example who are highlighting species and plants that have not had their full day in being monitored and surveyed. We know this is not a "no-brainer" as the Minister keeps insisting and we are proud to continue to keep us all to account making sure that absolutely all assurances and guarantees have been put in place so that we understand the social environmental and economic interdependent impacts that this dam will have.I have acknowledged and I do acknowledge the arguments and the reasons that have been put forward by the members of this House to support this dam. What I am asking is that we haven't had the full guarantees particularly in the ecological and environmental monitoring. I also support Dr Deborah Russell in saying that it absolutely should go to the Environment Committee. I would be most supportive of this going to that select committee to make sure that the environmental impacts are being upheld just as much as the social and economic impacts. The Green Party has long understood that environmental social and economic impacts need to be considered together and that not one can be pulled out and looked at in isolation of the other. The Green Party has long understood that we need to understand the relationship between the causes and the outcomes of those sections of our lives and of our policies and of our laws.So yes no one would be surprised that I am standing in this House to oppose this bill. I look forward to the submissions that may come if this bill goes through its first reading. Again I want to support that this goes to the Environment Committee. I want us to consider the sentiments of Forest & Bird talking about native snails and plant species some of which will be majorly wiped out with the inundation of the land that is being proposed to be transferred to Tasman District Council. I want us to have those debates and be very very clear that we also understand the long-term benefits the long-term seven-generations-ahead benefits of this dam. While I won't pretend to align this particular project with all of the large-scale irrigation projects that I'm proud this Government has committed to winding down I want us to be very very clear about the long-term holistic aspects of this project and that we have those guarantees.The Green Party does not feel that we have those guarantees all tied up here in this legislation. We understand that there are valid needs for the Nelson and Tasman communities. We understand the difference in value between using land for horticulture and agriculture. We understand the intricacies of what is being proposed. What we cannot see—and why we cannot support this bill—is that the assurances for long-term water quality environmental quality and therefore economic outputs have been preserved. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker."