Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage (25) – Part 1

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage (25) – Part 1

Articles, Blog , , 0 Comments


no quicker way to support lose support for a supplementary order paper than the speech such as we saw but Mr Speaker labor will be supporting both of the following up penis O’Rourke I want to talk about the SOPs to and in particular my own and I want to say straight away and I’m a little sorry for david seymour that my sop to delete all of the most objectionable parts of the bill is longer than his and size does matter and this is my list is actually more complete than his was I’m sorry for him about that but I would remind him also there as I said in the first reading speech to this bill New Zealand first would never support what is now called the mana Wacka ho Wacka ho no a row hey provisions the Erie participation provisions in this bill and we are sticking by that commitment as stated quite clearly by right honorable Winston Peters today now the other thing that my sop does is to delete Clause 105 which inserts the objectionable section 360 d and i did want to refer to the exact words of that provision because i think it’s important what it says is the governor-general may by orderin council made on the recommendation of the minister make regulations to prohibit or remove specified rules or types of rules that would duplicate / let worth or deal with the same subject matter is as included in other legislation now the minister has sought to argue that this is quite a narrow provision that is quite limited in the way it could be applied but in fact if you look at what the what the bill actually says the meaning of those words are actually quite wide and they are available for many things not just in relation to genetically engineered crops but also would be available for number for a wide range of other things as well provided the minister considers that there is some kind of duplication or overlap or dealing with dealing with how wide could you possibly get it’s a very wide provision and not nearly as narrow as the minister argues and i also want to read section 306 td4 because what that says is regulations made under the section may require that rules inconsistent with those regulations be withdrawn or amended now the minister tried to argue that all this was about as an ability to chop things out but he can require amendment now how far could that go I’m arguing that it could actually go quite a long way here he goes again he’s shaking his head as though what I’m saying isn’t true but I just read what the bill actually says and most people Minister do understand that the word amended goes a lot further than just a power to take something out it can require something to be put in as well so I think he’s quite wrong about that and that’s why New Zealand first will certainly move the deletion of clause 105 I want to go on to talk about the SOP moved by david seymour because he very strangely in this is opie wants to add a new section 6 h this relates to methods of national importance and what is persuasion trying to persuade us to do is to is to believe that the protection of private property rights whatever that may mean in this context is a matter of national importance and he’s also trying to argue there what he calls the effective functioning of the build environment he hasn’t even got his grammar correct the build environment is also a matter of national importance and he goes on to say similarly that the efficient provision of infrastructure should be added to section 6 as a matter of national importance these things simply aren’t at that level and he ought to know that this sop should certainly not be supported for those reasons and in the last one the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources including the benefits derived from the use and development these are actually duplicated elsewhere in terms of the management of national resources in the act already so that’s an SOP which is not well thought out and should not be supported moving on mr. speaker to however David Parker’s SOP which New Zealand first will support and that’s the one relating to mr. speaker mr. chairman mr. Chairman Mao broker ago i’m going to call out skip and browning thank you sorry got a bit dizzy standing up and down so many times

Leave a Reply

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