Second Reading of the Environmental Protection Authority Bill

Mr Speaker, I move that the Environmental Protection Authority Bill be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, the establishment of the Environmental Protection Authority marks an exciting new era of environmental management in our country.

New Zealand deserves no less than a world class regulatory system that reflects our environmental values in conjunction with our economic interests.  We need to be smarter in developing ways to grow our economy while lifting our environmental management.

The Environmental Protection Authority, which this Bill establishes, does just that.

I’d like to acknowledge the hard work of the Local Government and Environment Committee in their scrutiny and report on this Bill.

I’m pleased to note the Committee has recommended that this Bill be passed.

I want to signal now that the Government will be supporting the amendment the Committee has recommended which improve the Bill.

This amendment transfers the permitting and enforcement functions under the Ozone Layer Protection Act and the Imports and Exports (Restrictions) Act currently administered by the Ministry for Economic Development to the EPA.

These functions relate to New Zealand’s international obligations under a number of conventions and protocols in protecting the ozone layer and the management and trans-boundary transport of hazardous wastes and chemicals.

It makes sense that these functions should move to the EPA as they align well with the Authority’s new role in undertaking the functions of Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act.

I’d like to also thank all of the submitters who took the time to offer their analysis and opinion on the Bill.

I’m pleased that out of the 38 submissions received on the Bill, a majority supported the establishment of an EPA, albeit differing at times from the Government on exactly what form and function this new Authority should take.

Indeed, some submitters wanted the EPA to undertake a number of other environmental functions not provided for in this Bill. 

I would say to them, as the Government has already demonstrated, the building of the EPA is an iterative process.

For example, we have already had a transitional EPA in place handling proposals of national significance, while the Government considered what other functions an expanded EPA should undertake.

And this is not the end of the journey – the EPA that we are establishing today has been designed to be as flexible as possible to receive extra functions and responsibilities.

For example, it has been my widely stated intention that the EPA should become responsible for the permitting functions under the proposed Exclusive Economic Zone legislation that I hope to bring before the House later in the year.

So in future, the EPA may look more like what some of these submitters envisioned, but for today the Government is confident that the functions and powers we are bestowing on this new authority are a good starting point.

And on the flip side of my last point, I know some in the Committee process expressed concern about the EPA’s ability to adopt new functions, in particular under whose authority this would occur.

I’m pleased that the Committee has clarified this process in that substantive new functions will only able to be added to the EPA upon the scrutiny and agreement of this House though legislation. 

While it is the Government’s intention for the EPA’s design to be remain flexible enough to adopt new functions, it was not our intention that the new Authority should assume these by Ministerial fiat.

I’d like to take the opportunity to also address the criticism of some that the protection element of the Environmental Protection Authority is not explicit enough or that it is missing from the purpose of the Act.

I find this accusation perplexing   - as all the pieces of legislation that sit behind the EPA have the protection of the environment at their core.

For example, the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms legislation the EPA will now be responsible for, has as its purpose to protect the environment and the health and safety of people.

The RMA’s purpose is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources, - sustainable defined in the Act as the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources.  

The Climate Change Response Act’s purpose is to reduce dangerous levels of climate changing greenhouse gas emissions thus protecting people and the environment.

Also some allege the EPA is running contrary to the protection of the environment in its role in administering consents for projects of national significance.

Yet, I would ask how is expecting some of our smaller and less resourced councils to decide on complex nationally significant resource consents, promoting greater environmental protection than what the EPA can offer?

The EPA and the Board of Inquiry process brings the technical expertise needed to scrutinise and pass judgement on the environmental impacts of these proposals. This process ensures more robust decision making which can only mean better environmental outcomes for New Zealand.

And the requirement that a decision must be reached in nine months brings certainty to investment and to those communities potentially impacted by a project.

I contrast the 15-year-long battle over the Wellington inner-city pass and the 12-year- long fiasco over the Whangamata Marina against the eight months it has taken the EPA administered Board of Inquiry to hear, consider and issue a decision on the Tauhara geothermal project.

Mr Speaker, this Government’s Bluegreen vision for New Zealand promotes the effective management of resources, supported by efficient environmental regulation. 

This Bill does just that, by establishing a new Environmental Protection Authority as a one-stop-shop for environmental regulatory functions – consenting, monitoring and providing technical advice.  

The EPA will provide the national leadership on the administration of the environment that has been missing, as well as greater Government direction.

This Bill is a balanced environmental approach. It reinforces the importance of scientific skills to environmental regulation. It recognises the importance of efficient environmental regulation to our economy.

Mr Speaker, the creation of the standalone EPA marks a major milestone in the Government's environmental reforms. I commend the Bill to the House.