Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Kedgley Sue: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:622;Page:17433] 
12.  
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Will she be heeding the call of the Sustainability Council for a greatly expanded national fund to pay for the clean-up of historic contaminated sites as well as a national register of sites and definitions of standards; if not why not? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 We are already working towards putting standards in place local government holds registers of contaminated sites and we will continue to review the adequacy of the Contaminated Sites Remediation Fund. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does she accept the Ministry for the Environment’s estimate that the clean-up of historic contaminated sites around New Zealand will cost around $1 billion and does she accept that the present annual allocation of only $2 million a year is not only woefully inadequate but will take at this rate about 500 years to clean up? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: No I do not accept the ministry’s estimate made in 1992 and 1995. 
David Parker 
: How has the Government demonstrated its commitment to dealing with contaminated sites? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: We have funded 13 projects to identify and remediate contaminated sites including $10 million to clean up Mapua and the Tui mine sites but the potential risks are not so threatening that the clean-up on all sites has to start tomorrow. I agree with what Jeanette Fitzsimons said when we allocated money towards contaminated sites in 2002: “Both the Green Party and the Government are passionate about starting the hard work on contaminated sites. This Budget project will not clean up all our problem sites but it will get us underway.” 
Peter Brown 
: Will the Minister be precise: how much will it cost when will it be started and when will it finish? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: The cost is not known because the amount is not known. The work has started. That is the work being done by local government with support from the Ministry for the Environment. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Is the Minister aware and concerned that the alleged copper contamination of residential properties in Auckland and elsewhere is based on concentrations that are regarded as safe and natural background levels elsewhere in the world particularly with volcanic soils; and what if anything is she doing to defuse the emotive nonsense without committing the taxpayer and the ratepayer to massive unnecessary costs? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I am very well aware that copper used at certain levels can be nasty and it can persist in the environment particularly when it is used for instance as an organic fungicide. But as such I am not aware necessarily of the international controls on it. Our Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act works in detail with the international organisations on this and other issues. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Government accept that companies like Dow Chemical should be held accountable for any toxic legacy that they create and when will the Government hold Dow Chemical to account for poisoning some of the people of Paritutu and the environment? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I cannot comment on whether the Government would hold Dow Chemical to account and I do not believe that such financial barriers as Simon Terry proposes are the way to go to prevent chemical mistakes or disasters in the future. It is far better to do that by regulation advice and education than by putting up a financial barrier to any development. 
Sue Kedgley 
: Does the Government agree given its repeated support for the “polluter pays” principle in international organisations that if companies like Dow Chemical are not held to account and required to pay for the pollution they create they will simply carry on polluting our land and our people and expecting taxpayers to foot the bill? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: There is always a problem when people like Simon Terry and the Green Party ask for a “polluter pays” system based on a hazardous substance. Petrol is a potentially hazardous substance and I believe that what the member is therefore asking for is a rise in the cost of petrol. My mother put chemicals on the roses. I do not think that putting a price or a liability on my mother for what she did to the roses would have prevented what she continues doing. 
Sue Kedgley 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was interesting to hear about the roses of the Minister’s mother but my question was whether she agreed that if companies like Dow Chemical—I was very specific—are not held to account they will continue to pollute our environment. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No the Minister did address that question.