Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:620;Page:15667] 
10.  
DAVID PARKER (Labour—Otago) 
 to the  
Associate Minister for the Environment 
: What is the purpose of the Government’s proposed changes to the Resource Management Act 1991? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE (Associate Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 The focus of this review is to improve both the legislation and the way the Act operates in practice. The improvements will increase certainty and reduce delays costs and abuse of processes while not compromising good environmental outcomes or sacrificing public participation. 
David Parker 
: What is being proposed by the Government? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: The Government is proposing a comprehensive package of solutions that will enable central government to better express the national interest and provide decision makers with clear guidance on how to take such matters into account and to enable consent processes to be undertaken in a manner that provides certainty of process for applicants while ensuring appropriate public participation and the meeting of environmental objectives. It will improve the effectiveness of planning documents and enable their timely development provide certainty over the allocation of natural resources ensure that decision making is of high quality and improve public and user awareness of the Resource Management Act and its processes. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Noting that the so-called comprehensive package now provides for Environment Court appeals on the 48000 consents dealt with on a non-notified basis will the Minister tell the House how this can possibly help avoid the delays and uncertainty that are at the heart of the concern about the Resource Management Act? It will take us backwards. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: It is hard to reconcile a statement like that with last week’s World Bank report about the ease of doing business in New Zealand but I must say that the member must be out of touch because his views do not reflect the view of business. If I could quote Mr Michael Barnett from the Auckland Regional Chamber of Commerce who recently stated: “The issue with the Resource Management Act is not so much the content of the Act preventing developments proceeding but it is how it is administered by local authorities.” 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Yes I know what the member is going to say. Now I would like the Minister to come to the member’s specific question. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I do not believe that the member accurately represents the situation. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member was perfectly entitled to give that answer. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: My question was quite specific in respect of the issue of appeals to the Environment Court regarding non-notification as provided for in the Minister’s package today. It was in the Minister’s press release. It is perfectly reasonable for me to ask how that will help. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: And it is perfectly reasonable for a Minister to give a reply using the words that he did within the Standing Orders. [ 
Interruption 
] Just a minute was the Minister going to give an answer? Carry on. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Unfortunately Dr Smith would appear not to have read the package. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Could we just let the Minister give the answer and then have a point of order. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: The point is that the Minister was asked a question about his own press statement and his answer was that the member had not represented it properly. I hope we will not see the Minister dive off into all sorts of other strange burrows as he might be wont in this part of the answer. He simply needs to stand by what is in his press statement or not do so. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is for the Minister to do. That is not my job. 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: Dr Smith’s representation is not accurate. Whether that is because he does not understand or has not read the package I do not know. The fact of the matter is that the capacity of the Minister for the Environment to refer the issue of non-notification contestability to the Environment Court is an option that she can exercise at such time as the court reaches equilibrium point. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: How exactly does the proposal for expanded ministerial call-in of a resource consent followed by a formal hearing by a board whose decision can be appealed only to the High Court differ in substance from direct referral to the Environment Court which Labour has opposed for the last 5 years? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: It differs very substantially because it is a process that can be triggered not only by the Minister but also by local community groups and applicants. 
Hon Peter Dunne 
: Now that the Government has announced its package can the Minister indicate what steps he has in mind both to get buy-in to the proposals and also to pass them into law? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: I thank the member for the opportunity to say that the Government has had very good support from United Future in developing these proposals. I am sure that that will continue. I will continue to discuss these very wide-ranging proposals both with his spokesperson on this issue and the wider community. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Why are ordinary people or community groups with no resources who want a say on matters affecting them to be forced to provide all their evidence witness statements and supporting information in writing before the council hearing starts and does that not make it even harder for them to take part than it is now? 
Hon DAVID BENSON-POPE 
: No I do not think so. I think it is a not unreasonable expectation of a process needing to be more robust at the initial level that that should be the case.