Sage EugenieEUGENIE SAGE (Green): Ha ha! Thank you the Hon Ruth Dyson. It is incredibly disappointing. I do not think I have heard one contribution from any Government member other than the Minister. I think that is just symbolic of the whole process for this bill which—Hon Members: Shambolic.EUGENIE SAGE: Shambolic" New Zealand First is saying and I certainly agree that that is a term I would also use because the select committee process was dominated by the Minister and obviously either backbench members have been cowed into not speaking or they are totally uninterested. I think the fact that this major bill which amends five different pieces of legislation including the Resource Management Act (RMA) the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environment Effects) Act the Conservation Act the Reserves Act and the Public Works Act is going through this Parliament with a majority of one vote and yet the principal Act—the RMA—went through this Parliament unanimously in 1991. It is shameful that the Minister has pursued such a divisive course with this bill has totally failed to engage with Opposition parties on the concerns that we had and the suggestions that we made for changes and has just simply steamrollered ahead with a whole lot of changes that I suspect the Property Council and its members will be very happy with because of the very permissive provisions around subdivision—which meet its interests—and the provisions that undermine the public's right to actually have a say and to help contribute to well-informed decisions.The Government is passing this legislation by one vote and the risk there—and the very palpable risk—is that the new Government come September will pass legislation that completely overturns this bill. So we have flip-flop lawmaking because the Minister—even though he talks all the time about collaborative processes—fails to engage in any collaboration around our major environmental laws. Schedule 1 of this bill has a whole prescriptive process around how councils should engage in collaborative processes yet the Minister does not seem to have read that and has certainly not applied it to one section of the development of this bill—just completely steamrollering it through.I endorse the comments of Kris Faafoi in terms of the Māori Party. It has given the Minister and the Government the numbers they need to pass this legislation and yet it has failed to recognise that other than through the iwi participation arrangements the opportunities for iwi and hapū to participate in normal resource consent decisions have been shafted by this bill. The Māori Party has failed to recognise that Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 281 in Marama Fox's name deals only with crops and that that does not cover ryegrass and potentially it may not cover trees on which Scion has been experimenting with the genetic modification of pine trees. There is no assurance that councils will be able to continue to prevent areas having GMOs established in them through things like ryegrass and tree crops because the bill has got a requirement around constraining the Minister's regulation-making powers only around GMO crops not around GMO pasture or GMO trees. So the Māori Party has given up a huge amount and is claiming that its SOP justifies that.Minister this legislation will be unwound. It is a bad bill that goes to the heart of the principles of the RMA and the EEZ legislation. We are campaigning in the next few months to get into Government and to ensure that we have a major review of the RMA so that we continue with the principles that are there in Part 2 but that we do not have all this undermining of good decision-making by cutting out the public and increasing the Minister's powers to dictate to councils and to override local democracy."