Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill

I am very pleased to take a call on the title and commencement clauses of the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill. I will come to the title soon, but I think the commencement is a good place to start. Clause 2 says: “Commencement—This Act comes into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.” My question would be this: will it? Will it, or will it be something else that we have had to pass in the meantime because of all the mistakes in this piece of legislation? I do not think we can have any confidence that this legislation will, in fact, come into force on the day after the date on which it receives the Royal assent, because I suspect we may have to pass yet another amendment bill before the original amendment Act comes into force, because, of course, we passed the original amendment Act only 6 weeks ago. The body is not yet cold, it is still warm, and here we are having to amend it substantially again.

This is a record for National Government Ministers, I think. I do not think we have ever had to see a bill come back to Parliament so quickly to be amended under urgency through all stages because there were so many mistakes and errors in the original bill, including a significant error where the Minister of Energy and Resources forgot 1.7 million square kilometres of water—1.7 million square kilometres of water he just forgot to include in the original bill. That was, of course, in a Supplementary Order Paper that did not go to a select committee. It did not go to a select committee at all, and no member of the public got to submit on it. There was no chance for public scrutiny, no chance for select committee scrutiny, and no chance for officials to give us the information that we need. So we are here passing this amendment bill to the amendment Act. When it comes to the commencement, I do not think that the Minister can have any faith that this is the actual legislation that will come into law, and that is an indictment upon him as a Minister.

When it comes to the title, I could suggest that perhaps—pre-empting what is certainly likely to happen in the next few months—instead of the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill, we could just call it the “Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment to the Amendment to the Amendment to the Amendment Bill”, and that might be somewhat closer to what we are actually going to end up with, thanks to the absolutely shambolic process that this has gone through.

There are more questions than answers—in fact, no answers have been provided. The Minister sits there on a quarter-million-dollar salary and will not even do his job, which is answering very basic questions—and very serious questions—about the legality of the law he is passing and about the rights of New Zealanders that are being taken away, stripped away, under this legislation. The Minister sits there like a dried arrangement, pretending to read his magazine because he does not know the answers or he is too arrogant to provide the answers. Frankly, it is an absolute outrage. The Minister is simply not up to it. That is what has become quite clear from this process tonight.

Maybe another potential title for the bill could be the “Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 (Passing Laws in Jurisdictions We Have No Right to Pass Laws in) Amendment Bill”, because there was a very serious question raised with the Minister in Part 2 of this debate—a question that he has refused to answer, and that is absolutely extraordinary. I know he is trying very hard to pretend that he is reading right now, but I know that he is listening. He should feel ashamed of himself. The question was, Mr Bridges, why the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade is telling us on its website—confirming what happens under the Continental Shelf Act, the relevant provisions of which my colleague Jacinda Ardern read out in full—that international law states quite clearly that New Zealand has no right to pass laws in the water column above the continental shelf in the high seas. It has no right. Why, when the example that the ministry gives is that we have no right to regulate activities like shipping, is it that the Minister is telling us that we are able to pass laws that restrict the activities of vessels above the continental shelf? Those two things do not match up.

Either we do have the right to pass laws in the water column above the continental shelf or we do not. The United Nations and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade tell us that we do not. Minister Bridges, in this legislation, tells us that we do. He has not actually said it in person, because he has been too busy pretending to read and trying to avoid answering questions. So which of those two is correct, Minister? Is it the United Nations and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, or is it you? It is simple. Is there any acknowledgment? No. Take a drink of water, that will chew up some time. It is simply—

There are two matters to deal with here: the title and, obviously, the commencement date of the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill. I shall begin with the title, because it really does sum up what an absolute shambles of a portfolio Simon Bridges has: the Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill. The Act is not even in force yet, and my colleague Maryan Street will tell me—24 May, is that right—that 24 May is when the Crown Minerals Amendment Act will come into force. We now have an amendment bill. As has been noted, despite the fact that the rest of the world has moved on to Friday, 17 May, in this Chamber it is still 16 May. It is still possible for the Hurricanes to beat the Chiefs, because it is still Thursday and not Friday, which is when they lose—that is for Sue Moroney. It is possible that this bill will, in fact, manage to pass before the bill that it amends actually comes into force. That is an extraordinary stuff-up. So if I was giving this bill a title, it would actually be called the “Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Simon Bridges’ Stuff-up Amendment Bill”, because that is the honest truth. We do not want to have a go at Simon Bridges. He is such a friendly chap. He is always saying nice things about the Labour Party. But today is the opportunity to tell the truth, and the truth is that Simon Bridges has stuffed up, and that should be included in the title. Simon Bridges should actually take some responsibility for the fact that this legislation has gone wrong.

There is an alternative title for it here. That could be the “Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Golden Age of Government Amendment Bill”, in honour of the Attorney-General, because it is the golden age of Government to come to this House and push legislation through. That is this Government’s golden age—pushing legislation through under urgency, selling off laws to corporates. That is the golden age of this Government, the golden age of democracy, brought to you by an Attorney-General who will not even stand up in this Chamber and take a call about a bill that limits the right of New Zealanders to protest. That is the Attorney-General’s responsibility to this House. It is to come to this House and actually defend the rights of New Zealanders, but he fails—he fails. Chris Finlayson has failed, and we could include Simon Bridges’ and Chris Finlayson’s failure in the title of this bill.

But if we look at the commencement issue, we really do have a major issue—[Interruption] Sorry? What was that?

💬 Hon Christopher Finlayson: Grow up. Don’t be such a juvenile.

A juvenile. Right, apparently, I am a juvenile. That is an interesting statement to come from a man who spent all day on Twitter making ridiculous comments, trying to match Judith Collins for the verbosity and irrelevance of his tweets. He calls me juvenile. He should actually take a look at the Minister in the chair, the Minister of Energy and Resources—a boy doing a woman’s job, as Maryan Street said before—because if it was being done by this side, the Minister of Energy and Resources would be Moana Mackey and we would not have these problems. Instead, we have the boy wonder in the chair unable to speak, it would seem, this evening. He has lost the power of speech. He has to turn it over to Chris Finlayson to talk about stiff cheese for the evening. That is the best we have had from the National Party tonight. The only intervention on the Hansard tonight on this bill from the National Party is Mr Finlayson saying “Stiff cheese.” He has not even identified what kind of cheese yet—that is all it is.

This bill is an absolute disaster for democracy. That could be in the title as well. We could call it the “Disaster for Democracy Bill”. We could certainly call it the “Simon Bridges’ Stuff-up Bill”. We could certainly call it the “Chris Finlayson’s Golden Age of Democracy Bill”. But what it should not be called is a bill that amends an Act that has not even come into force yet. [Interruption] Sorry, Mr Coleman—a contribution?

💬 Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I said it’s 3 minutes till your midnight feast.

Jonathan Coleman makes it. The National Party now has two contributions. He will be able to blow cigar smoke into someone’s face in 3 minutes’ time. That is what we will get from Jonathan Coleman. His greatest contribution to New Zealand politics is to stand up there, “The Maestro”, the man who delivered Mt Albert to Labour with every single thing he did—

💬 Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. It is now 2 minutes until his midnight feast.

Jonathan Coleman thinks that if he tells a joke again, it will be funny, but it is not. He is the man who led Melissa Lee on her triumphant march through Mt Albert—magnificent strategist that Jonathan Coleman is for the National Party. He has got himself on the Hansard tonight, along with Chris Finlayson, and still no member of the National Party has got up—

The commencement date is one of the two clauses under discussion right now for this Crown Minerals Amendment Act 2013 Amendment Bill. Anybody could be forgiven for thinking that the title of it is, in fact, a misprint, but, no, it is just a mistake. It is not a misprint; it is a ministerial mistake.

Can I just ask that the Minister of Energy and Resources, if he wishes the commencement clause to mean what it says, to take away this piece of legislation after the requisite period of time—and it gets passed tomorrow—and if he is going to stuff it under his mattress, could he please put a sticky note on it to say “Bring up for 25 May.”, because the other bill is not going to be law. The other Act will not be in force until 24 May, so the Minister has to take this amendment bill away and put a little sticky note on it, or please—

I am sorry to interrupt the honourable member. I was waiting for someone to call me juvenile, but it did not happen.

Debate interrupted.

Sitting suspended from 12 midnight to 9 a.m. (Saturday)