NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) : I rise to support the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill. Firstly, I commend the Hon Nick Smith for bringing this legislation to the House. It is great legislation that has been a long time coming. The great thing about this legislation is that we are seeing a redress of the balance of good environmental protection and of economic growth.
I am passionate about the environment, but many people who come through my door in Auckland Central have had their lives ruined in terms of the amount of money they have spent on resource management consents and the frustration they have been put through in the process. It is a great day for the people of Auckland, as they will have an opportunity to have quick decisions made in this area for their businesses, for community organisations, and for individuals. I acknowledge the support from all sides of the House today. I acknowledge that Labour is supporting this legislation; that is great, because it is important legislation for New Zealand in terms of our environmental future and our future economic growth.
I would like to deal with the process around this legislation moving forward. As a member of the Local Government and Environment Committee, I have spoken to the chairperson and we are very committed to working hard to ensure we meet the deadline for bringing this bill back to the House because of the urgency in terms of economic recovery. Much has been talked about in this House as to the impact of the Resource Management Act on the New Zealand economy. As a member of that committee, I am committed to ensuring that we try to meet the deadline we have been set. As part of that select committee process, I am also very committed to ensuring that we have as many people as possible make submissions on the legislation during this process. I am very aware that the people of Waiheke have communicated to me that they will be making many submissions, and I look forward to hearing them.
The second point is that part of this legislation is really about getting Auckland and the rest of the country moving in terms of projects of national significance. I want to talk a little bit about that. I acknowledge the work that has been done by the technical advisory group in this area, and the new criterion in relation to recognising the operational infrastructure needs of a nationwide network and utility operator will be very important. That is because it will cover those projects that may not have been considered individually to be of national importance in the past. I think, as well, it is probably important to mention at this point that if the Environmental Protection Authority decides that an application meets the criteria, the proposal will be referred to a board of inquiry for consideration. In the event that the authority decides that the application does not meet the criteria, the Minister for the Environment will have the powers to refer the application back to the relevant local authority to be processed under normal processes. The board of inquiry will be chaired by a current, former, or retired Environment Court judge. These projects of national significance will be very important when we move forward with our infrastructure package. I note that these decisions will have to be made within 9 months, unless an extension is accounted for. For a city like Auckland, this is a very important aspect of the bill and I look forward to it going through the House.
The third area I would like to pick up is around frivolous, vexatious, and anti-competitive objections. This is also very important for Auckland. There are people in New Zealand—and we have seen it in Auckland—who are missing out on cheaper groceries because of the way the legislation is currently used for anti-competitive measures. We should not have a situation whereby the Resource Management Act is being used as a weapon against competitors in other businesses. I am very pleased that the technical advisory group and the Minister have chosen to deal with this issue. The major purpose of the reforms in this area is to discourage submitters and appellants who are seeking to delay proceedings by bringing cases with little or no merit, and also to reduce the attractiveness for trade competitors to use the Resource Management Act, as I said before, as a weapon to delay or thwart projects through providing a disincentive to such behaviour. That is a very important part of the legislation that the Minister has put before the House.
When I started my speech, I mentioned the balance between environmental protection and economic growth. The couple of provisions I have mentioned will go some way in terms of assisting New Zealand with our economic recovery moving forward. As I said before, as a passionate New Zealander and as someone who cares about the environment—and I think Steve Chadwick mentioned this quite well when she said that there are many New Zealanders who are passionate about the environment—what this legislation does, and why I think the Minister has done such a good job on it, is that it provides that balance. We are reducing the amount of money people are spending putting consents forward and we are reducing the time taken for consents, which is important in terms of economic recovery, but we are retaining the principles of the Resource Management Act.
The fourth point is that we have signalled that there will be a second stage in terms of the Government’s reform, where we will flesh out the Environmental Protection Authority. I believe that the authority, for which I commend the Minister as well, will be one of the most important environmental institutions that we look at in New Zealand. When we take this legislation forward, we must think about the roles and functions of the agency or what those may be in the future.
I commend the Minister for bringing the bill to the House. I believe it is very important legislation—particularly for Auckland—for focusing on those projects of national significance, and for removing the Resource Management Act as a weapon of anti-competitiveness. It is also a great day for those many New Zealanders who have been frustrated, whose businesses have been ruined because of the costs they have had to spend, and for those community organisations that do not have extra money in their pockets—particularly at this time—and have had to spend endless amounts of money in a lengthy process when they should be helping their communities. Businesses should be spending money on employing people at a time like this, rather than being involved in costly processes that take unnecessary periods of time. This is a great day for Auckland, and a great day for New Zealand. It is nearly 18 years since the passing of the original legislation, and people have had a problem with it. It is my understanding that they have been talking about reforms for the past 14 years, so it is a long time coming. I commend the Minister, I commend the technical advisory group for its work on this legislation, and I look forward to doing everything that I can as a member of the select committee to ensure that New Zealanders are heard and this legislation is passed for the betterment of New Zealanders.
