Korako Nuk: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) (Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeKorako Nuk: Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) (Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 16 June 2015. Volume:706;Page:4440. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]NUK KORAKO (National): Kia ora e te Mana Whakawā. I am pleased to be the final speaker in the second reading of the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) (Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill 2015. I want to thank the submitters I want to thank the officials and I want to thank the Local Government and Environment Committee members in particular our chair Scott Simpson and his able deputy chair Todd Muller.Over the last two readings there has been a lot of discussion a lot of toing and froing. The Opposition has its role; the Government has its role. Out of that we have heard words like “flexibility” “consequences” “specified time frames” “world-leading legislation”—all of that. That is where I want to start. The original legislation we are proposing to amend is the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012. This is a very very significant piece of legislation in the history of New Zealand’s environmental management. Quite simply the passing of that Act marked the first time we had ever had legislation requiring that the environmental effects of economic activities in our exclusive economic zone be actually monitored.I have heard speeches from members on that side of the House particularly from the last speaker Adrian Rurawhe denigrating that particular legislation. He is quite wrong. The members opposite have tried to claim throughout the readings of this bill that this is not true. They have tried to claim that it is not true. It is obviously quite difficult for them to accept that we have a better record on the environment than they do. They like to claim the moral high ground—the moral high ground—when it comes to the environment and they do not like it when the evidence tells a completely different story. That original legislation which I have just given an overview of is very very significant.For my next point I want to come to the actual amendments of the bill. My learned colleague from Waimakariri Matt Doocey has actually presented a great overview of what the amendments are. Basically in the end though looking at the amendments they are quite minor but very very important. We all agree it is somewhat disappointing that Shell Todd Oil Services did not apply earlier to prevent this ever being an issue. We accept that. Some of the submitters to the bill suggested that Shell Todd Oil Services should bear the natural consequences of this. But I am pleased and I think we should all be pleased with the fact that Shell Todd Oil Services has been granted the consent but is subject to a period for appeals to be lodged on points of law. But this bill makes it absolutely clear that operations can continue while any such appeals are heard and that again is very significant.There is more than just a company to think of here. Shutting down the Māui gasfield would interrupt 26 percent of the gas supply to New Zealand families and businesses and it would have a major detrimental effect on our economy. In saying that I think that most reasonable New Zealanders would agree that this is sufficient reason for us to act and that is exactly what we are doing here. We cannot and will not let a technical correction such as this stand in the way of households and businesses that need the resources so they can carry out their normal daily and business activities.I am not only a “brown blue”; I am also very proud to be a Bluegreen.Hon Member: A what?NUK KORAKO: I am very proud to be a Bluegreen because the Bluegreen team supports—we have supported and we are supporting—the first Government to properly manage the oceans that make our exclusive economic zone happen. This again is a significantly vital asset to New Zealand both an environmental asset and an economic one.It is shameful that that party opposite promised to introduce a proper regulatory regime in 1999 and did absolutely nothing. It did nothing to act on that promise for 9 years. It is understandable that members opposite have tried to claim that they have a regulatory regime in place for our oceans. They are desperate to try to paint the previous Government with some kind of environmental credibility. But here is a lesson for that side of the House. It is fine to talk about something a lot but when you look back on 9 long years and see no actual achievements you realise—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! Come back to the bill.NUK KORAKO: —that the doing does count. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker. This Government promised to improve the management of our oceans and we followed it up with the introduction of the exclusive economic zone and continental shelf environmental legislation in our first term. The legislation has been a huge step forward in our environmental management and a first for New Zealand. It brought us into line with international best practice and ensured that we can continue to benefit economically from the exclusive economic zone while preserving our environment for future generations.I come back to this bill and the reflection on what this Government is doing. We all know—and that is why we have cross-party kotahitaka togetherness on this bill—and we all understand particularly this Government that our natural environment is our greatest asset. National leads the way by saying that successful economic and environmental policies must go hand in hand. This truly reflects the essence of why we need to amend this legislation. I have no hesitation in commending this bill to the House. Kia ora.Bill read a second time.