Mahuta NanaiaCROWN MINERALS AMENDMENT BILLFirst ReadingDebate resumed from 1 May.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Associate Minister for the Environment): I want to take a call on this bill and offer a few reflections having heard the debate in the House last night and also reflecting on some of the commentary around the clarifications that have been outlined. The bill amends the Crown Minerals Act and the purpose is to provide for the efficient allocation of rights to prospect for explore for and mine Crown-owned minerals and the effective management and regulation of those rights. It also provides for the carrying out of activities in respect of those rights and a fair financial return to the Crown for its minerals.The bill provides several clarifications and I thought it was useful to ensure that all of those are captured within the record of Hansard. They are indeed outlined in the explanatory note but I will outline some that were not referred to in the debate that has happened to date. The bill seeks to clarify the public notice and submissions process around changes to be made to a minerals programme that are consequential on changes made by the bill. It clarifies the applicable royalty calculations for certain permits granted before February 2008. It allows the delegation of the Minister's powers in relation to licences granted under the Mining Act 1971. It clarifies which Ministers enter into access arrangements in respect of Crown land and land in the common marine and coastal area. It clarifies that an access arrangement is needed for access to schedule 4 land for minimum impact activities. It changes the permit classification for authorisations of geophysical surveys on adjacent land. It changes the process in relation to changes of control of permit participants that are permit operators. It clarifies processes in relation to changes of control of permit participants and makes them more workable.It also clarifies time frames for notifying the revocation of permits. It clarifies that an extension of the duration of a permit cannot be denied as a result of a declaration under Section 28A of the Act but an extension to the land area of a permit can be denied as a result of a declaration. Finally it provides that the minerals programmes are not legislative instruments for the purposes of the Legislation Act 2012 and will continue to not be drafted by the Parliamentary Counsel Office. So you can see that the clarifications and the intent of the bill will be very useful. I'm sure that the sector will see this bill as a small but useful improvement to the way in which the Act is intended to function.Now I listened to the contribution actually of my colleague Deborah Russell and she made some very good points in terms of the importance of having clarity at law in the way that things are intended to operate so that the functionality of what is happening can be better improved. Now this whole area is not one that I'm familiar with but if I were to think about the issues from a legislative point of view I don't think we focus enough on just the checks and balances certainly at a select committee level of making sure that as things are reflected and written in law they are able to be implemented in a way that is functional and practical. So while we would with the best intents and purposes hope that when laws are drafted they're drafted very well and at a perfect state often we have to come back to moments like this where we have to ensure that these clarifications improving the law can happen.I didn't intend to take a long call except to say that by and large the contributions that have been made in the House have been positive and I certainly look forward to the progress of this bill through the House.