Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 2 – Part 4
Articles,  Blog

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 2 – Part 4


that are 20 working days or putting it to 40 working days I’m going to call them using sage mr. chair just following on from the Honorable David Parker will certainly be supporting that supplementary order paper because mr. chair there has been a 40 day period for the public to make submissions on concession applications since the Conservation Act was introduced in passed in 1987 so it’s got a 30 year track record of working and mr. Parker makes very valid points conservation land is public land all New Zealanders have an interest and how it has managed and I take the minister back to major proposals like the one and in Fiordland for a big monorail 18,000 people made submissions and spoke out to protect Hawaii pounamu to protect few Orleans beautiful forests to protect them of oral Lakes from that monorail proposal one of the difficulties with a 20-day hour period for making submissions is that the first time the public has an opportunity to actually comment on the proposal to actually even understand it is usually when the applicant and Doc know it will the doc notifies the proposal that the applicants put in really do applicants go out and actually engage community organizations environmental organizations like fmc or forest and bird it comes to public attention when it’s notified when the assessment of effects and the supporting documents actually go into the public domain so for big complex projects like the monorail and like the bus tunnel which was an eleven kilometre bus tunnel which had its portal proposed at the start of the routeburn track which would have completely ruined that experience having the public only have 20 working days to get an understanding of that proposal is far too short if you have a longer submission period it means that submitters can go and talk to engineers as they did in the case with the bus tunnel to a college us as they did in the case of the monorail and ensure that submissions are based on good analysis of the proposal and a good understanding of the potential effects shutting it down to only a minimum of 20 working days will mean poorly crafted submissions potentially and it just totally overrides the significant public interest and how our conservation lands are managed and the number of people who want to get involved when we have these big commercial developments like the monorail so the second point is that fifty percent of international visitors come to New Zealand wanting an experience of natural landscapes and to connect with natural areas if we have poorly planned poorly cited our commercial development on our public conservation lands we undermine that experience which attracts so many visitors and which through tourism supports a lot of our local regional and national communities recognising the contribution that tourism makes to our GDP now there are some 4,000 concession operations from tourism from guided walking to grazing on conservation land all of these deserve proper scrutiny this bill through Clause 181 by cutting and half the notification period is consistent with the provisions and the rest of the bill which seek to reduce the public’s opportunities to actually engage in decision-making third point we have a major problem and I want the minister to enlighten us here in clause 182 there is because Oceania gold made a submission and they wanted the timeframes for notified access applications for mining on conservation land to be consistent with our concession applications so they wanted a having in that notification period from 40 days to 20 days as well the Department of Conservation because of the political direction of its Minister probably has gone along with that so this was not in the bill as introduced so what basis does the minister had for making this change around mining access arrangements and having the notification times for them through the consequential amendments around Clause 182 when that wasn’t in the bill is introduced and the Parliament and the Select Committee has had no opportunity to get public submissions on us and would remind the Minister of applications like the excess arrangement for by Bathurst for mining on the Denniston plateau that was the subject of huge mr. chairman you say Thank You mr. chair of huge public interest and significant ecological values thing damaged by that application and yet we are seeing a law change on which there has been no public consultation because Oceania gold in its submission and the departmental report are on page 3 84 said that they just thought to align these notification timeframes for excess Arrangements on public conservation land so it was their submission that is becoming the platform for this law change rather than it being in the bill is introduced and we object to the public not having had an opportunity to have a say because we think people like for us a bird fish and game fmc which defend the public interest in our conservation lens would have actually put in submissions opposing this and again mining applications are very complex they have a number of impacts mining companies don’t tend to consult the public before they Lodge their access application so the only time that the public actually gets to see the whole of that is when it’s notified so again it is ridiculous to have a 20-day winter working day period for that not 40 working days and I suspect that the minister will say well it can be more than 20 working days it doesn’t require just 20 working days but it’s still giving the minister the power to reduce it to that limited period it is public land the public should the maximum opportunity to make submissions on development applications and mining applications which are going to damage conservation values ecological values and recreational values so this is a bad bit of the bill it overrides the public interest in conservation lands and it’s consistent with other provisions in the bill which seek to reduce the opportunities for public participation we oppose it I call what Dennis O’Rourke mr. chairman

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *