Hayes Joanne: Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHayes Joanne: Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9363. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JOANNE HAYES (National): Tēnā koe Mr Assistant Speaker. I rise to take a call on the Environmental Protection Authority (Protection of Environment) Amendment Bill’s second reading. Last time I stood in this House in the first reading I did reiterate that it seemed to be a wasted exercise to do this. After listening to some of the contributions tonight and especially the one from the Green member just previous Eugenie Sage I take offence to some of the things around the farming community. The waterways and protection of our waterways and fresh water—I come from a farming background and I can tell you now that we have the most stringent protection of our waterways more so than whatever happened when the previous Government was in power.I am proud to stand here to say that I am a Bluegreen. I am a Bluegreen. We are here to give good advice to the Minister for the Environment through the rest of our party members who sit outside of Parliament. And through the Bluegreens we have worked with the Minister on a number of policies especially around the Environmental Protection Authority. It was this Government in 2011 that set up the authority; we must remember that. We must remember that when we came into power there was no environmental protection anywhere in this country. It was this Government that actually put it in and started to shape it up to protect the waterways—and it was all about protection. That is what the second word in the Environmental Protection Authority is; it is “protection”. It is about protection and maintenance; that is what it does. It is in its vision it is in its policies and it is in its goals. Why try to add it again and again when we all know that it is already there? The advisers to the Local Government and Environment Committee actually said it over and over again. They said that it would be a wasted exercise and that what it would do is take away the core function of what the Environmental Protection Authority was set up to do in the first place. It is working at arm’s length to this Government—Hon Member: Oh!JOANNE HAYES: —yes it is working at arm’s length.Let us have a look at some of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s reports to the Local Government and Environment Committee. They have been challenging to our committee because that is what the commissioner’s job is. Her job is to write reports that challenge our committee and that is what she is doing. You cannot say that she has been influenced by the Minister to write x y and z because she has not. She is an independent person and writes independent reports.Iain Lees-Galloway: Should have got here earlier Bish.JOANNE HAYES: And some of the things she writes—we might not like it. He has just come through an environmental rainfall. We might not like what the commissioner says but hey we respect what she says and it is all about protecting the environment.I hear things like “this National Party digs it and drills it”. When we came into Government on drilling it there was no consent process in place for drilling I can tell you that now. It was this Government that stuck in consent processes—licensing for companies to go and drill in our waters. Let us have a look at our marine reserves. Hey marine reserves—were there marine reserves when the previous Government was in? No there were not. This Government actually set up marine reserves. That is protecting our marine environment. I remember going to the conference in Kaikōura when we launched the Kaikōura marine reserve—that is a plus. That is history for this country and you have got to admit that. Did the Labour-Greens Government set up marine reserves? No it did not. Did it have marine reserves? Did it set up anything like that to protect us? Did the Opposition parties go out and drill merrily away and not even tell the New Zealand public about the 30-odd wells that were drilled out in the sea without telling anybody? At least this Government has put it on the table. We have put it on the table and we are very proud that we have done that.I just want to restate that this is not a lacklustre Government when it comes to green things. Many times I have heard that unless you are a Green—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! I am a bit reluctant to interrupt the member but I would like her now—we have had a good exposition across quite a range of subjects but it would be good to talk about the bill.JOANNE HAYES: Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. So anyway the proposed objective is to change the authority’s mandate. So that potentially blurs the lines between the operational work and the work of other policy agencies such as the Ministry for the Environment. That is what it—Dr Megan Woods: Very blurred.JOANNE HAYES: It does. It also creates a lot of confusion out there with other Acts. These other Acts that I am talking about are the Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Act 1988 the Resource Management Act 1991 the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 the Ozone Layer Protection Act 1996 the Climate Change Response Act 2002 and the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012—I guess National did that one as well. So this is what these seven simple little words are which I understand Megan Woods said in her previous contribution—seven simple little words that really throw the cat amongst the lions.The proposed objective adds also extra financial constraints on consent applicants. Is that what we want? Do we want to add more cost to consent processes? Well I can tell you now that we do not want to add any more cost to consent processes.Iain Lees-Galloway: What sorts of pigeons did they have where you grew up?JOANNE HAYES: A much greener space than what you grew up in I can tell you right now.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Order! The member will sit down and the member will not address me in that way especially when she is suggesting cat sacrifice. Thank you.JOANNE HAYES: I am sorry Mr Assistant Speaker.Paul Foster-Bell: Didn’t they have pigeons at King’s College?Iain Lees-Galloway: I grew up on a farm you idiot.JOANNE HAYES: So did I.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well I doubt whether either of the members really did the way they are going on at the moment.JOANNE HAYES: In closing I want to reiterate that the amendment would change the purpose of the Environmental Protection Authority well beyond what it was set up to do and it would make it difficult for it to make decisions as an operational agency. And the authority could be required should this amendment go through to have a whole new set of tests for it. It introduces a whole new set of tests a whole new set of duties and increased financial constraints on the authority itself. The Environmental Protection Authority does not have the resources to be able to implement the changes—[Interruption]; it does not—should they come into force because it does a really great job with what it has at the moment. As I said before the objective does blur the lines—Hon Member: It does blur the lines.JOANNE HAYES: It does blur the lines—it does. Amending the principal Act is going to achieve nothing other than confusion. It is going to create a whole lot of uncertainty and I do not support the bill moving forward into the third reading. Thank you.