Crown Minerals Amendment Bill

I’ll make a short contribution, really just to say that this bill is about creating more flexibility in managing Crown-owned minerals for the benefit of New Zealand. There’s two notable things, really. One is that it replaces the word “promote” in the bill with “manage”, in the context of managing this resource in a climate change environment, and that’s fairly self-explanatory.

The second one is just around the duty to consult with iwi and hapū. Instead of making it a “may”, consulting is now a “must”, and actually the way the permit holder applicants consult with Māori can be taken into account in terms of whether that permit is granted and the conditions. So quite a bit of strengthening there and an updating of legislation that was passed in 1991. I commend it to the House.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I rise to speak on the Crown Minerals Amendment Bill. The National Party is opposed to this bill. We have stringent environmental considerations which all extractive mining companies in New Zealand must meet in order to gain consent. Unfortunately, this legislation adds more bureaucracy, more layers of consultation, which ultimately will make it more expensive to do business in New Zealand.

Somewhat ironically, green technologies—or what people think of as a green technology such as electric vehicles, wind turbines, and solar panels, etc.—require metals; they require minerals for wiring, batteries, and other components, including copper, lithium, cobalt, manganese, nickel, graphite. Mobile phones, which everyone has, require a number of things: copper, lithium, cobalt, manganese, tungsten, etc. Solar panels need metals such as tellurium—might have pronounced that incorrectly—and silicon for the solar cells that turn sunlight into electricity. I mean, all of these technologies that people think as green technologies require minerals.

There’s increasing discussion that people are talking about—particularly in the green economy discussion—about a circular economy and trying to reduce the distance that goods have to be transported. With the focus of Labour, it’s quite ironic that they are focusing more on extracting minerals from other nations, where we have no control over what’s happening in terms of the environmental considerations, and transporting a very long distance to New Zealand rather than doing it in a sensible, managed way right here in New Zealand.

In terms of protecting our environment and making sure the environment, where it is disturbed, is restored, we have very stringent conditions here in New Zealand. It’s, frankly, a bit of an own goal that Labour is bringing this bill in to take away the promotion of the use of Government-owned minerals right here in New Zealand, which we need for the technologies that we are going to have to build if we are to transition to what people call the “green economy”.

So, unfortunately, it’s a bill that we cannot support as we think that although it might be wellmeaning, it is not going to achieve the outcomes that the Labour Government is seeking to make. So with that, I will end my contribution.

Members, the time has come for me to wish you a safe and relaxing recess. The House stands adjourned until 2 p.m. on Tuesday, 18 July 2023. Pō mārie.

The House adjourned at 5.57 p.m.