Effects) Amendment Bill be considered by the Environment
Committee. Those of that opinion
will say Aye. To
the contrary, No. The Ayes have it. Madam Speaker, I
move that the... The Hon
David Parker. I move that the
Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental
Shelf (Environmental Effects) Amendment
Bill be reported to the House by 11
June 2018, and
that the committee have authority to meet at any time
while the House is
sitting, except during Oral Questions, during
any evening on a day on which there has
been a sitting of the House and on
a Friday in a week in which there
has been a sitting of the House,
and outside the Wellington order,
despite Standing Orders
outside the Wellington order, despite Standing Orders 191,
193 and 194(1)(b) and(c). Standing
Orders require there be a debate
in the House where there is a truncation
of the normal length
of select committee hearing. There's
good reasons for that.
committee hearing. There's good reasons for that. We, in New
reasons for that. We, in New Zealand, have a unicameral
parliamentary system, so we
don't have the reflective ability of
an upper house to have a look at
legislation that's passed by
the House of Representatives. There's
quite a lot of power
that rests in the New Zealand
system, effectively, in the executive. Therefore, if
the executive, like me, come
down and
a shortened select committee
House gets the opportunity to consider whether truncating
normal processes, given the
absence of other checks and balances in
the system, whether that shortened
period of referral to
select committee is justified
period of referral to select committee is justified,
the question
that you should never shorten select committee periods, and, indeed,
the rules of the House even allow things
to be done under
urgency without any reference to
reference to select committee. The judgement of the
Government in respect of this issue is that
we need to fix it within
a relatively prompt period of time. There has
been some limited consultation with
industry and affected parties
in advance of putting this legislation
into the House, and that, if I
could summarise that, the result
of that consultation is they agree that this
was a mistake and that the
underlying policy objective of
reinstating a cost recovery right
on part of the Crown
for the reasonable cost that is are incurred by the
Crown in dealing with an application
in the EEZ, that it ought to
be fixed. When the Government
had decided that this isn't an
appropriate case
appropriate case for retrospectivety so, that people who currently have
an application, there's
only one current application that is
effectively getting an exemption
from cost recovery at the moment, we
believe that there
should not be retrospective effect in respect
of that application, but we
are concerned to bring this into effect
within a reasonable period of
time so that taxpayers aren't meeting
the cost of additional boards
of inquiry. It's obviously
possible to someone
inquiry. It's obviously possible to
application before this comes into effect, and so there is some
additional risk to the Crown
in that regard.
additional risk to the Crown in that regard. That is, we think, the
appropriate balances by seeking
this to be reported back to the
House by 11 June 2018,
so that this loophole can be closed. The bill is a simple
one. It has but seven clauses, one
of which is an amendment
to the schedule in respect of
transitional provisions. The main provision is
set out in the clause, the new
proposed clause 52(a)
of the underlying legislation,
underlying legislation, inserted by clause 5 of the bill. It's
readily understood, it will be readily
understood by submitters. The
relevant select committee
actually, as the Opposition has pointed out,
actually hasn't got a
lot of existing business on its agenda, and
so it's
existing business on its agenda, and
its attention into this...
The Hon Scott Simpson, it's actually not. It's fixing a mistake of the
prior Government. But I
won't go through that again. I would
suggest to the House
that it is appropriate that we have a shortened period of
select committee consideration
to enable this to be reported
back by 11 June 2018.
The question is that
the motion be agreed to. Madam Speaker. I
call the Hon Scott Simpson. The Opposition
finds itself in an
interesting position in regard to
this motion from the Minister.
position in regard to this motion from the Minister. The Minister
has indicated that this is a small
technical, administrative
technical, administrative correction to a legislative mistake, an error,
an omission made in the
principal Act last year. And
we've heard debate during the course