Smith Nick: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Smith Nick: Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) — Instruction to CommitteeCWH In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:608;Page:5501] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
: 
 What we see with this clause is so typical of the fiasco that the Minister and the Government have brought about in terms of resource management law. I need to remind the Committee of just how long the history is in respect of this commencement date and of just how often this Minister has broken her word. The Local Government and Environment Committee in considering the Simon Upton bill that was introduced in May 1999 set about listening to 400 submissions all around New Zealand. The committee worked its little butt off. It heard long submissions. It spent 6 weeks on deliberation. A huge amount of work went into that part of the process. Then in May 2001 that bill was reported back to the House. National members did not necessarily agree with all the amendments adopted by the select committee. The report sets out what we agreed and disagreed on. We have never been given the opportunity by the arrogant Minister in the chair Marian Hobbs to debate that work of the committee. Never has she given this House the opportunity to debate that select committee report back. What does that say about this Minister’s respect for the institution of Parliament and its select committees? It says that she has no respect at all for her fellow parliamentarians and the work that they put in to that sort of process. 
The Minister in the chair promised that the bill would be passed by October 2001. She went on the public record when speaking at the Resource Management Law Association and said that the bill would be law by October 2001. And was it? Has the Minister ever provided an explanation to those thousands of people who work in the resource management area to the members of this House or to anybody? Or is it that we cannot take her word on anything? Is she a Minister who just says things then provides no explanation when she moves away from them? My first question to the Minister is this: why did she not keep her word and pass that bill by October 2001 as she said at that time? Then more recently—in August last year—the Minister said: “The bill will be passed next month.” Was that commitment by this Minister followed? Was the bill advanced? I myself and others who were on the select committee said “Good! At long last we’re going to have the opportunity to debate the work of the select committee.” But no that did not happen. It was not dealt with before Christmas even. Then there was the sneaky dirty trick of introducing a bill that even the mover says is near identical. Rather than have separate parts whereby members on this side of the Chamber can debate those issues part by part she put them all into one part of the bill. I say to the Minister that I have never seen such a devious trick in all my years in this Parliament. 
Dr Lynda Scott 
: And he’s seen a few. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I probably have seen a few but I have never ever seen a trick as dirty as that one. Why is the Minister not prepared to debate this bill part by part? I shall tell members what the Minister did do—and this is unheard of. The Minister gave a directive to parliamentary counsel that the bill was to be in only two parts. I thought that we had respect for the institutions of this House and that when parliamentary counsel draft a bill they would determine the parts on the basis of the content. That is a pretty fair judgment. So how far are we going to go? Does this situation mean that we will now have Ministers who will always instruct parliamentary counsel so they do not have to front up for their dopey decisions? Is that what this Minister is on about? I have to say that her predecessor Simon Upton was a person of integrity. It was not particularly convenient for the previous Government that there were 18 parts in the resource management intermediate bill. 
Jill Pettis 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Are we not discussing the commencement clause? 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: Yes we are discussing clause 2 the commencement. 
Jill Pettis 
: It would be useful to have some reference to the commencement. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The issue of commencement is absolutely relevant to this. The Minister in the chair promised that the bill would commence in October 2001 but it did not. She promised that it would commence in October 2002 but it did not. What is more the dirty trick the Minister has pulled by putting this bill into just two parts rather than 18 parts is a disgrace. It is a disgrace to this Parliament and to the Local Government and Environment Committee. The really ironic part is that this Minister is passing legislation that is purer than pure in respect of process. If poor old Joe Average wants to build a cow shed he has to go through all the processes—but not the Minister.