The Environment Committee has examined the Environment (Disestablishment of Ministry for the Environment) Amendment Bill and recommends by majority that it be passed. We recommend all amendments unanimously.

This bill is intended to facilitate the Government’s plan to combine the functions of four government agencies into a new Ministry of Cities, Environment, Regions and Transport (MCERT):

• the Ministry for the Environment

• the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development

• the Ministry of Transport

• local government functions of the Department of Internal Affairs.

The Ministry for the Environment is the only one of these agencies created by statute; it therefore requires legislative amendments before changing its structure. The Ministry was established as a “department of State” by the Environment Act 1986. Later, the Public Service Act 2020 listed the Ministry as a department in Schedule 2, which means it is treated as a public service agency. The Environment Act assigns the Ministry for the Environment a range of advisory functions.

The bill would amend the Environment Act. It would disestablish the Ministry for the Environment and transfer the Ministry’s existing functions to the statutory office of the Secretary for the Environment. The Government has stated that it intends the chief executive of the new MCERT to fulfil the role of Secretary for the Environment.

The bill would also make limited updates to terminology, and clarify how the transfer of functions would work.

This commentary covers the main amendments we recommend to the bill as introduced. We do not discuss minor or technical amendments.

We received written submissions from 588 individuals and groups. All but five submissions were overtly opposed to the bill. In this section, we discuss the common themes that emerged in submissions and why we do not consider any further amendments to the bill necessary.

The Green Party strongly opposes this bill. We agree with the 99 percent of submitters who voiced their opposition, including resounding opposition in public hearings. We heard from iwi, hapū, academic experts, environmental organisations, civil society institutes, and everyday kiwis. Of the 588 submissions, only one individual noted support for the disestablishment.

The Ministry for the Environment exists because in 1986 New Zealanders decided that protecting our natural world needed a dedicated voice at the heart of government. Forty years on, rather than strengthening that voice, this committee is recommending burying it inside a mega-ministry designed to drive growth and development.

We are extremely disappointed and concerned that the National Party and ACT Party members want to proceed with this bill despite:

• no clear justification for such a rushed process

• no evidence or Regulatory Impact Statement to support any clear rationale

• no sound understanding of the implications for Māori and Te Tiriti obligations

• no regard for the near-complete lack of support for it, nor the expert submission which showed that Cabinet was provided with incorrect or misleading information about the failure of similar mergers undertaken overseas.

Further, it is worth noting that this select committee is progressing the bill despite having had no assurance that ongoing transparency and reporting will be maintained—for example through clear appropriations in the Government’s budget—or even assurance that there will be an ongoing role for the Minister for the Environment.

This bill is yet another action by the most anti-environment Government that Aotearoa New Zealand has ever had. We oppose this bill in its entirety.

The Ministry for the Environment (the Ministry) was created through statute to be the lead adviser on the environment and climate as part of a suite of environmental reform that responded to the degradation of our environment and the need to do better. Disestablishing the Ministry dedicated to oversight of environmental issues and land-use planning is a backwards move and appears to be one more step in the coalition Government’s broader agenda to dilute environmental protections.

Labour is appalled by the constant attacks on the environment by this Government. New Zealand prides itself on its “100% pure” and “clean, green” image. New Zealanders treasure our deep connection to nature; it is recognised as being an integral part of personal and collective identities.

Yet, we are facing a biodiversity crisis and have the highest proportion of threatened species, and much of our freshwater is polluted.

Labour views this bill, that will disestablish the Ministry, through the lens of this Government’s inaction to protect the natural environment and its view that the pendulum had swung too far towards environmental protection. Our environment is the foundation of our economy and the two cannot be separated. It creates jobs, improves health and wellbeing, and particular sectors like tourism are reliant on a thriving environment. The creation of a mega Ministry has the risk of diminishing the role currently undertaken by the Ministry and for the focus to simply be on urban areas and planning. This risk is exacerbated by concurrent talk by Government ministers of the disestablishment of regional councils and environmental management at the catchment level.

In addition, the Government is currently attempting to undo integrated environmental management by splitting the Resource Management Act into urban environments (the Planning Bill) and “other” environment (the Natural Environment Bill). Labour’s view is that for New Zealand’s environment to be protected and managed there needs to be an integrated approach that considers issues such as sediment runoff from both rural and urban environments into our rivers and coastal environment. This bill will minimise the voice for the environment and looks to only value regulations only for our urban environment leaving our “other” environment ripe for more pollution.

Labour also wishes to highlight the key points made by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment in his submission to the bill, especially that he recommends excluding the Ministry for the Environment from the merger and points to protecting contestable advice in the new resource management system.

Labour notes that collaboration between government agencies and departments can already occur and there should be incentives for more collaboration. Currently the Minister for the Environment has a defined “vote” and any trade-offs between what the Ministry advises that is different from other ministries should be clear. Merging numerous entities will make these trade-off decisions less clear and is fertile ground for capture and (as submitted by Dr Marie Doole) by those who advocate for economic growth (for some) at the expense of the environment (that benefits all of us). Contestable advice and transparent funding is required. There is also a need to ensure that Treaty settlements are upheld and we note Piriākau Tribal Authority Incorporated submission that a strong and independent Ministry for the Environment is needed for agreements to be upheld.

In addition, this bill has not had a regulatory impact statement, was not foreshadowed in Manifestos of the Government Parties and has had a shortened select committee. And it is being rushed through at a time when the committee is struggling to find time to consider the wider Resource Management Act reforms with continued extended sittings and urgency. Despite the short timeframe the chief executive officer of the mega Ministry has already been appointed, even before this legislation has been reported back to Parliament. This is clear demonstration of the scant regard this Government has for robust Parliamentary processes.