Sage Eugenie; Parker DavidHon EUGENIE SAGE (Green): Thank you very much Mr Chair. Last night the Minister explained the national planning framework and I want to go to clause58 because urban trees have been a major point of public concern with this legislation. In the inquiry on the Natural and Built Environment Bill that the Environment Committee undertook we got thousands of submissions seeking the protection of urban trees and then the bill as introduced included a clause which was very limited and caused quite a lot of opposition amongst submitters because it was really restricting the rules to specifying single trees and groups of trees. And through the select committee process and taking account of those submissions the select committee—and the Green Party—was very pleased that the committee agreed to include another matter which should be included in the national planning framework so that you get that national direction and that is urban trees. And then in the Minister's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) green spaces have been added to that which we hope will also increase the direction on how green spaces are used for stormwater retention. We saw in the Auckland floods the value of wetlands and green spaces in reducing flooding. Urban trees have got so many benefits particularly as urban heat islands for reducing the temperatures providing shade providing amenity providing a place for children to play harvesting rainwater reducing those stormwater flows and preventing erosion. So now we have the national planning framework providing direction on urban trees and green spaces but there's a Supplementary Order Paper in my name SOP 393 and I just ask if the Minister can confirm that his Supplementary Order Paper dated 25 July at 3.56 p.m. which makes a change to Schedule 6 and ensures—because there was a provision in Schedule 6 clause 30B(3) which meant that the transitional national planning framework would not include direction on urban trees. Is the intent could he confirm of his Supplementary Order Paper—which makes that change in Schedule 6 in clause 30B(3)—to ensure like my Supplementary Order Paper 393 that the transitional national planning framework will indeed provide direction on the urban trees and green spaces? Because being in Auckland recently I walked around a suburb where I grew up and two large pōhutukawa that I remember from my childhood and a huge camphor tree had just been completely felled. And there was probably no need for a consent for that because they weren't in a special ecological area. That's why we need protection for urban trees; that's why this clause is so important. Could the Minister confirm that his Supplementary Order Paper like mine ensures that there will be direction on urban trees in the transitional national planning framework?Hon DAVID PARKER (Minister for the Environment): In respect to the Minister's question about the amendment to Schedule 6 deleting (f) yes that will come up in the schedules but the member is correct that that is in the Supplementary Order Paper tabled at 3.56 p.m. and that clause 58(f) includes urban trees and green spaces. That is not to say that every tree can be protected. If a city is intensifying as its population grows trees do get cut down in order to build houses and that's unavoidable sometimes. But it does mean that if you have a loss of tree canopy on private land you actually have to do better in respect of public land sometime and make sure that you have a good plan for the urban tree canopy and open green spaces.