Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:612;Page:8968] 
8.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Is she satisfied with the way that the new limited notification provisions of the Resource Management Act are working; if so why? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Yes I am because affected parties are getting a say in consent applications that affect them. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does that mean that the Minister agrees with the recent judgment of Environment Waikato that the environmental effects are less than minor of an open-cast coal mine that is 225 hectares by 100 metres deep diverts a stream dumps 113 million tonnes of spoil and discharges into the Waikato River? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The question of limited notification comes in two stages. First of all the council has to decide whether the activity will have major or minor effects and it is that primary decision that triggers the amount of notification. It is not for me to agree whether activities have major or minor effects; that is the job of the local authority and always has been. 
Jim Peters 
: Does that particular example of a limited notification provision under the Resource Management Act not indicate inconsistency with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002—specifically sections 77 and 78 which are required to make judgments under section 79—and when will those Acts be amended? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Because I do not actually know what those sections in the Local Government Act 2002 are referring to I would need to have that spelt out better in a question. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: When is the Government proposing to introduce special fast-track provisions for the Resource Management Act as announced by Jim Anderton; and do those changes that propose a “think big” - type approach to Government projects only have her support? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Can I respectfully suggest that the member is making assertions that are based on speculation and on comment in the papers. Work on improving the Resource Management Act and its processes is I stress permanently ongoing. There is no proposal on the executive table. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Which environmental organisations will be consulted in accordance with the limited notification provisions of the Resource Management Act in relation to Solid Energy New Zealand’s recent application to expand the Rotowaro coal mine; how many of them have objected to the proposed expansion? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: As I understand it 22 parties are affected including the New Zealand Fish and Game Council—which is a pretty strong environmental organisation—the Department of Conservation Tainui and neighbours all of whom have been asked for comment and all of whom have consented except Tainui. Environment Waikato is holding a hearing tomorrow at which Tainui and the other affected parties can present their concerns. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister see any difference between the environmental effects of an opencast coal mine and the example she gave of “minor” in her third reading speech on the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) which was of a minor extension on a building; if so will she instruct her department to investigate how councils are interpreting “minor” effects with a view to publishing some guidelines for them? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The question comes back to the primary answer I gave which was that there are two parts to the issue. The first is to decide whether something has major or minor effects. That decision has always been made by the courts and as we know from the debate that we had on the amendments to the Resource Management Act it is determined by case law as defining “minor” has been far too difficult to do by legislation in the House. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister still agree with her statement in the second reading debate on the Resource Management Amendment Bill (No 2) that: “For the purposes of limited notification groups representing relevant aspects of the public interest must still be considered affected parties by consent authorities”; if so will she advise Environment Waikato of her disappointment at its approach which excluded interested groups such as the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society of New Zealand and Greenpeace? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The people who were approached by Environment Waikato and by the applicant the mining company included the New Zealand Fish and Game Council which is an environmental group Tainui the Waahi Whanui Trust; the Department of Conservation the Bush Tramway Club and others. If Forest and Bird had a local group I would have expected it to be consulted. If Greenpeace had a local group I would have expected it to be consult. I mean a local group. I do not believe as the member does I presume from the first Earth Summit that acting locally is the most important and that decisions at local levels are the most important.