Woods MeganHon Dr MEGAN WOODS (Minister of Energy and Resources): With some trepidation! I'm not going to continue the puns but well done to that member. Look there are a couple of questions that have been raised in this part of the bill that I want to address. I'm going to start with one of the last ones that was raised by the previous speaker that just sat down Chris Penk which was around new section 26 in terms of whether another Minister could be substituted into there. I'd like to reassure that member that that's a very specific clause that is actually about proceedings that are currently under way. So it's related to one very particular set of circumstances.Some other questions have been asked about what a just transition" is. Well I think that it is actually worth spending a bit of time talking about that and how it relates to this part of the bill because a just transition is a transition where a Government is taking a long-term managed approach; it's not waiting for things to magically happen. It's seeing that there is change coming down the economic line. We can see that fossil fuels are coming to an end in our economies around the world and Governments all around the world are grappling with these questions. We have the opportunity here in New Zealand to get on the ground along with our regional economic development programme and plan for what the future industries are that need to replace those fossil fuel industries that are going to be displaced.Not only can we think about what the regional economic development is that we have to do in that area—what are the businesses that we need to encourage what does the Government need to stand alongside what does it need to do to help and we've already seen some small investments through the Provincial Growth Fund in this area—but we also can think very carefully and in a very managed way around what skills training requirements are going to be in that area. Although just about everybody who currently works in the oil and gas industry will be able to finish their careers working in the oil and gas industry we are planning for future generations and the fact that we need to make sure that new industries—that we are planning for in that area so that Taranaki can continue to be an energy leader for New Zealand and that we have a population that is well placed to take advantage of the opportunities that are coming down the line.I'm very pleased to say that this Government has already established a Just Transitions Unit. It's on the ground it's working away it's doing some incredible work and we're seeing some really positive things come out of there.I'd like to also address the question that was asked by a couple of members but by Jonathan Young firstly around clause 23(2)—and I think David Seymour also asked that—asking whether existing permits would be able to apply for applications. Now it's existing permits as they exist—that's exactly what the clause says. So it's very explicit there. I mean new permits obviously will be treated differently. So the current conditions are that an application has to be made on very tight very specific grounds in terms of applying for an extension of a permit. We set out in terms of this tranche one of the changes to do the bare necessities to put into effect the announcement we made. One of those was that existing permits would be honoured. So the member is correct in his assessment of that.So just to clear up any discrepancies that might be there: under the current work existing onshore permits can extend offshore and onshore —that's under the law as it stands before the amendments are made. An existing offshore permit can extend offshore and onshore. But under the amended legislation that we're debating here today a new permit cannot extend offshore but a new permit can extend within the onshore area as per the clause in Part 1 of the legislation.Now we had some members say that this meant we were talking out of both sides of our mouths. This was saying that we were talking big but we weren't actually doing what we were. I thought David Seymour was about to table an amendment for us to go further as many of the submitters who came ahead of this this bill did. But we made an absolute commitment to permit holders at the time of the April announcement—and actually before the April announcement when the Prime Minister was talking publicly about this and I gave a speech to the Petroleum Exploration and Production Association of New Zealand conference prior to that announcement—where we talked about change coming but that existing permits would be respected. That is exactly what we're doing here with this legislation today. What we've also said is that there is tranche two of changes where there does need to be a conversation within the new environment that we can manage permits. That's a conversation that we've talked a lot with industry about and that we're willing to have under tranche two.Now Andrew Falloon being a local member of Parliament also raised a very local issue for him about some concerns that were raised around further investment in some of the exploration prospects and the ability of investors to invest in them. Well I'd like to reassure that member and other members that I have met with many of the current permit holders. They have told me that they are getting some signals from the international investor community that they'd like to get some clarity. The Prime Minister and I both agreed that we would write to individual permit holders spelling out exactly what the decision was and the fact that existing permits were to be honoured. This was appreciated by the industry and it has been proven useful.What Andrew Falloon was also addressing in there was something that I have talked about with a number of permit holders in the industry body now and it's the reason why I've agreed to—on a case by case basis—consider a two-year-type pause on the drill or drop provisions so that there is more time for people to consider their options and to reconfigure the way in which they do things. That is something I have invited permit holders that would like to consider that to do—to come in and make a case and we can see if there is anything we can do. This is not about an indefinite extension. This is about a two-year - type extension where a business can reorganise itself for that smooth transition. We know that in order for this to be a smooth transition we need to be making sure that we are working with not only the industry but also communities and wider stakeholders.One of the things in this debate that I think is a bit regrettable is that there seems to be a perception that industry is the only stakeholder. I think we saw from the number of submissions to select committee the thousands of submissions overwhelmingly in support—with a majority in support—of the legislation that there's a very wide range of people who feel they are a stakeholder in this issue and that is something we need to consider. So they're the questions that have been raised within this part of the bill and I look forward to the debate continuing."