Norman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to MembersText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNorman Russel: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members[Sitting date: 25 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13688. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]5.Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) to theMinister of Conservation: What did he say in his meeting with officials on 29 July that led Department of Conservation Deputy Director-General Doris Johnston to write in an email later that day that he is “… likely to query whether we leave it all to the EPA to consider”?Hon TONY RYALL (Minister of Health) on behalf of theMinister of Conservation: Nothing. The Minister did express concern that he did not have enough information about the submission which was due to be lodged on Friday 2 August and asked to see a copy of the submission before it was lodged.Dr Russel Norman: So are we to understand that Deputy Director-General Doris Johnston wrote in an email to other senior Department—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! Will the member carry on.Dr Russel Norman: So are we to understand that Deputy Director-General Doris Johnston wrote an email to other senior managers within the Department of Conservation saying that the Hon Dr Nick Smith is “likely to query whether we leave it all to the EPA to consider.”? Did she write that email in response to Mr Smith’s saying nothing?Hon TONY RYALL: Yes. As Doris Johnston has said herself: “The concern was that he did not have enough information. We didn’t have a long discussion on the insand outs that might be in it. We just talked about him wanting some more information and he gave no direction.”Dr Russel Norman: So when Deputy Director-General Doris Johnston wrote this email to all these other senior managers within the Department of Conservation saying that Nick Smith was “likely to query whether we leave it all to the EPA to consider.”—that is that they drop their submission—did she write that email for random reasons no reason at all or just because she felt like writing the email?Hon TONY RYALL: You would have to ask Mrs Johnston to explain her motivations for those emails other than the fact that I could say that what she has said is “the Minister did not play any role in my decision-making”. And in respect of matters in that note she has made it clear that “the concern was that the Minister did not have enough information. We did not have a long discussion on the ins and outs that might be in it. We just talked about him wanting some more information and he gave no direction.”Dr Russel Norman: Is it standard practice for senior officials within the Department of Conservation to write emails talking about the Minister of Conservation and saying that the Minister of Conservation is likely to query whether the department should just leave it all up to the Environmental Protection Authority and not make a submission—is it standard practice in the Department of Conservation for senior officials to write such emails in response to the Minister saying nothing?Hon TONY RYALL: Look I would not be in a position to be able to answer that question particularly as a Minister in Nick Smith’s stead today. But what I would point to are the comments that Doris Johnston herself has made publicly where she refers to that line in the email as saying that “the concern was that he did not have enough information. We did not have a long discussion on the ins and outs that might be in it. We just talked about him wanting some more information and he gave no direction.” But more important is the comment that she made: “The Minister did not play any role in my decision-making.”Dr Russel Norman: Did Nick Smith find it difficult to have the conversation with Doris Johnston about the draft submission that the department was about to submit when Mr Smith says that he did not even know that this submission existed until 6 weeks later? How do you have a conversation about a submission without knowing that the submission exists?Hon TONY RYALL: Because the note that he got with his weekly report is quite clear that the department was evaluating the proposed plan change and resource consents and that a submission should be lodged.Dr Russel Norman: Is the Minister aware that in the document he has just been reading from it actually says it is the department’s preliminary view that a submission should be lodged on the plan change; if so how is it possible for the Minister to claim he did not know that this draft submission existed when it is both in the briefing note and as he has just said it was mentioned in the conversation that he had with his officials?Hon TONY RYALL: It is clear that the Minister got a copy of the final submission on 31 July. He has made it publicly clear that he was unaware that there was an earlier draft which he became aware of after a Radio New Zealand National report this month.Dr Russel Norman: Is he aware that departmental officials met about a week before 29 July or thereabouts and had a significant discussion as to whether they should lodge the submission because they knew that it would be controversial and they made a decision to continue to go ahead with the submission in spite of the fact that it would be controversial and that the submission was withdrawn only after Nick Smith intervened in the process on 29 July?Hon TONY RYALL: I am disappointed that that member thinks that Doris Johnston is a liar. She has been a loyal public servant—[Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order! That does not help answer the question. As a way forward I am going to ask Dr Russel Norman to repeat that question.Dr Russel Norman: Is the Minister aware that senior Department of Conservation officials met about a week before the 29 July meeting with the Minister and decided to proceed with the submission even though they knew it would be controversial? Is he aware of that fact and that the submission was withdrawn only after the meeting with the Minister on 29 July?Hon TONY RYALL: As the Minister in his stead today I am not able to answer specifically whether the Minister knew of that meeting. But what I do know is that the premise of that member’s question is that what Mrs Johnston has been saying is not true because that member is saying that Nick Smith influenced the decision making. Mrs Johnston says: “The Minister did not play any role in my decision making.” My understanding as Minister answering this question today is that Doris Johnston has been a thoroughly professional and loyal public servant to both sides of this House. I am disappointed that her word is being denounced by that member.