Smith NickHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): I firstly want to respond to the naivety of the Minister Megan Woods in her assessment of the impacts of Part 1 on the oil and gas industry. What the Minister said is Hey don't worry that we have arbitrarily cut off at the knees any exploration because we are still going to allow the development of petroleum through mining and through development petroleum permits." Minister here's the problem: if the Government can wake up one day without any Cabinet process and just arbitrarily cut off exploration—why would any business invest tens of millions of dollars in a permit when the Government could wake up tomorrow and decide to do with petroleum permits what it's done with exploration permits? They just don't get it. They don't get the idea that when you make arbitrary decisions you completely undermine business confidence—not just Minister in the area of the oil and gas sector but actually right across the economy. On that you are wrong you are naive and you are doing enormous damage to jobs—Hon Shane Jones: Fake news! Fake news!Hon Dr NICK SMITH: —and the New Zealand economy.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Order! Order! Just—Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The Minister.CHAIRPERSON (Poto Williams): Thank you.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The second point is so relevant in hearing Mr Jones chip in. He said that this was a democratic decision. Well let's test that. Can I ask Mr Jones: did he campaign in the 2017 election on ending oil and gas? Do any of my colleagues recall that? Mr Jones was that your position at the last election? In fact I remember Shane Jones saying "New Zealand First will stand shoulder to shoulder with the oil and gas industry." That's what they said. Well can the member opposite count? Actually with the Opposition and the party policy positions of the National Party and when New Zealand First was being true to its word—actually a majority of people voted for parties that are opposed to the very policy that is here in Part 1 and it is anything but democratic for the dodgy deal that's been stitched up with the Greens. Let's be upfront here: there was a quid pro quo. New Zealand First got the waka-hopping and the Green Party got the ban on the oil and gas industry and that was anything but democratic.Now the third part of Part 1 that I want to refer to is just for the Minister in the chair to acknowledge the scale of what is being done. Does she agree with my assessment that clause 6 effectively is going to ban exploration in 4.3 million square kilometres of New Zealand—4.3 million square kilometres? Now I know the Government's trying to shut down this debate but we should be very clear in this committee that we are talking about banning any exploration in an area that's 20 times the size of the land area of New Zealand. We're talking about the fourth-largest exclusive economic zone in the world. This isn't tiddlywinks. This is truly massive and the exemption provides for only 7300 square kilometres. It's not 1 percent. Effectively the Minister in the chair is banning any oil or gas exploration in 99.9 percent of the realm of this country. That comes with an economic cost of nearly $24 billion and I want to see some acknowledgment from the Minister of the scale of what is being done in Part 1 because I haven't seen any of that in her contribution. I hear naivety. It reminds me that the last Labour Government promised to reduce emissions. They went up by 20 percent. They promised to be carbon-neutral. I compare that with our own record in Government where renewable electricity increased from 65—[Time expired]"