Hughes Gareth: Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hughes Gareth: Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 21 March 2013. Volume:688;Page:8859. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Assistant Speaker. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou. Kia ora. One of my proudest moments as a New Zealander was when I was marching with 30000 other Kiwis. It was great. I was at the front holding the banner marching down Queen Street. What we and tens of thousands of New Zealanders were marching for was a value—that we love and want to protect our environment. It is not something that we balance off as the National members say it is. It is a core Kiwi value. 
We love the environment. We love that we can go tramping or hunting or even just for a bush walk and we do not want to put it at risk. We are not going to trade it off. In fact it is the heart of our economy. It has been since time immemorial and it always will be. So Kiwis stood up. They told the Government that its plan to mine our most treasured places was not on. They were not going to stand for it. The Government backed down—rightfully so—and we congratulate the Government on backing down. 
But now the Government has adopted a different strategy which my colleague Catherine Delahunty touched on—a slow methodical grinding bulldozer approach using the powers of finance legislation regulation and the signals Government Ministers can put into their speeches and directions to Government departments. The Government is slowly grinding down our treasured places and for what? A strategy that is in tatters—a strategy that was never going to deliver the type of prosperity Kiwis deserve or want. It is a strategy that is a lazy risky gamble. 
It is lazy because it hopes that someone else will do the work or someone else will find some oil or gas. There is no vision. There is no plan. There is no method to get there. There is no innovation. It is a gamble because we know that risking our environment risks the rest of our economy. It puts at risk our valuable “clean green” brand which has been valued at over $20 billion. It puts at risk our tourism and our aquaculture. 
It is risky for our environment. We do not want to put our environment at risk of deep-sea drilling and a massive oil spill or the types of tragedies we have seen. It is a risky lazy gamble and the benefits are overstated. We have got the fourth-lowest royalty and tax rate in the world. We know that there will be hardly any jobs for New Zealanders. This sector has got the lowest job-creating potential of any sector of the Taranaki economy. Of course we know that when it comes to the likes of deep-sea oil drilling—your TAG Oil—all of the profit is going to go overseas. So we think there are better ways and we wish the Government would get off picking the one horse—this sector—that is going to deliver the least of any other potential sectors and do something about it. 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: What do you say we should do? 
GARETH HUGHES 
: What would we do? We would prioritise the clean green economy. This is something that PricewaterhouseCoopers has said is worth $22 billion to our economy. The Greenpeace report said we could be saving $600 million a year in electricity. The Pure Advantage report said we could see 50000 jobs in clean energy. What is the Government focusing on? A handful of jobs mostly for foreigners with all the profits going offshore. The Government is picking the wrong horse. 
You can see in this bill the Crown Minerals (Permitting and Crown Land) Bill what the Government is doing. The whole purpose is about picking winners in the oil gas and fracking sectors. It is about disempowering communities. It is about the function of the Minister and this is one of the key clauses in the legislation. The function of the Minister is not to be independent oversight with the best interests of the country at heart; the function of the Minister under this legislation is to attract permit applications. 
 I do not know whether any other members felt a bit embarrassed that our Prime Minister was off in Brazil grovelling to the Brazilians and hoping that Petrobras would come back. This is what we are doing—an embarrassing strategy. You can see it with the schedule 4 decisions in which we are seeing a weakening of these protected— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think a number of us were just tolerating the abusive comments from the Hon Simon Bridges when we thought they were directed to the member but the last three of the comments he has directed to you. Calling you a loser or an empty vessel Mr Assistant Speaker is not appropriate. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch) 
: Well at this hour of the day that is correct. I just ask members to calm it down. I did have to indicate earlier that this dialogue and interjections across the benches mean I sometimes cannot hear what the member is saying so please cut it down. 
GARETH HUGHES 
: I think the honourable Minister is embarrassed. The plan is in tatters. You have got Petrobras walking out you have got Apache Corporation walking out and amongst other things mining prices have collapsed so much that Solid Energy is in strife. Coal companies are leaving the country. The whole plan is in tatters. That is why it is ridiculous that we are passing this legislation just to facilitate more mining and gas. We are seeing the weakening of the power of the conservation Minister which was slightly improved in the select committee but not enough and not in actuality. We have got tokenism in iwi consultations. There are a couple of improvements—the ability to put a moratorium into effect or ban specific mining types—and we have Supplementary Order Paper 152 which effects the recommendations of the Royal Commission on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy but the fact is that there are better options for this country. 
I was at a wind energy conference last night and I asked them to imagine what they could do and how we could get some of those 50000 jobs Pure Advantage talked about or the $22 billion PricewaterhouseCoopers talked about if we had a level playing field. If the Government was giving the clean energy sector the type of support—not subsidies just support—it is giving to the oil and gas industry we could do wonderful things with our clean energy sector. That is the hope and the vision the Green Party brings.