Simpson Scott; Brooking RachelHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Mr Chair. Now Part 2 is actually quite a long part and there are lots of clauses that take us right through to clause 57 so I'm anticipating that there will be quite a lot of debate yet on the clauses that go beyond 17—which is the one I want to come back to and focus on now. Because this is the really nitty-gritty part of what is going to be included as key matters in a regional spatial strategy. So we've already had a talk about the areas of land that may or may not be included but then we get to clause 17(1)(c) which says areas that are appropriate for urban development and change including existing planned or potential urban centres of scale"—so that's cities—and then paragraph (d) refers to "areas that are appropriate for developing using or extracting natural resources including generating energy:". So that's energy electricity generation and of course mining mineral extraction as well. And then paragraph (e) covers "areas that are appropriate to be reserved for rural use"—so that's farming agriculture horticulture. And then paragraph (f) relates to "areas of the coastal marine area that are appropriate for development or change in use." So the marine environment as well. Those are very broad-ranging definitions in the regional spatial strategies that are going to define for periods of time of not less than 30 years—but maybe a lot longer than 30 years—where urban development in cities will go to what extent their boundaries will be moved outward or inward from where those boundaries of urban development are right now; where areas of mining and mineral extraction can occur; where farming horticultural and other primary production activity can occur; and what can be done in the marine coastal area and what can't be done.Now if we go down to clause 17(h)(iaaa) it says "existing planned and potential infrastructure that that is or may be required to meet current and future needs:". So to have the crystal ball that is required the foresight the vision the imagination to know where cities mineral extraction farming marine activity—all those things—are going to be 30 years out is going to require I suspect the wisdom of Solomon and almost certainly some of that is going to be wrong. Some of it's not going to be accurate. Some of it's going to over the period of that 30 years be proved to be inappropriate or changed or whatever. And it may be as a result of things like for instance the Canterbury earthquakes where big swathes of what we now know as the red zone around urban Christchurch were prior to the Canterbury earthquakes areas which were considered perfectly suitable and adequate for residential development but are suddenly because of an intervention or of an act of God like an earthquake rendered not appropriate for residential urban development any more.So Minister notwithstanding the broad depth of the vision and the aspirational goals of this mighty planning for 30 years—and what to include in a spatial strategy—my concern is that there's going to be an awful lot of crystal ball gazing that may or may not prove accurate. And the reason that the crystal ball gazing is important is because it's 30 years at a time maybe longer and that then has an impact on property values on human activity business activity and commercial activity. And that can have wide-ranging impacts on the lives and wellbeing of citizens up and down the countryside. So I'm interested to know what it is that gives the Minister confidence that the insightful people who will be creating the spatial strategies and then are given a brief to include these key matters that are so broad so wide and so important for the wellbeing of individuals—and actually so potentially beneficial or potentially devastating depending on where lines are drawn and whether key matters are included or not included. How can the Minister be sure that those people are going to have wisdom of Solomon and the ability to look into a crystal ball?Hon RACHEL BROOKING (Associate Minister for the Environment): Yes the point of this legislation is for better long-term planning and of course as I've noted in other answers it can be reviewed where it needs to be. We want integrated planning."