Wilkinson Kate: General Debate 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Wilkinson Kate: General Debate 
[Sitting date: 24 March 2010. Volume:661;Page:9773. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon KATE WILKINSON (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 What is it about the Labour Opposition that does not want New Zealanders and New Zealand to succeed? What is it about the Labour Opposition that seems so anti economic growth and does not want us to make the most of our economic opportunities? What is it about the Labour Opposition that does not seem to realise that if we encourage economic growth in a sensible and rational way then we are better placed to have better health better education and better welfare? 
What is it about the Labour Opposition that has such a dislike of our mining industry; an industry that can contribute sensibly significantly reasonably and responsibly to our economic growth and can actually contribute to jobs? Finally what is it about the Labour Opposition that wants to so deliberately damage our international reputation and our “100% Pure New Zealand” image with mischievous and irresponsible scaremongering? 
The Government released a discussion document—and look at the reaction. It is a discussion document; it is not policy. It is not a decision; it is a discussion document. Immediately after we released that document the mischievous Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society went on a membership drive. After the release of the document the society said the Government was going to target Tongariro National Park Mount Aspiring National Park and Kahurangi National Park. Yet the discussion document is specific. It states that there will be no change to Tongariro National Park no change to Kahurangi National Park no change to Mount Aspiring National Park. 
It is possible to mine responsibly on conservation land and there are examples of it now. As the Minister of Conservation I am more than aware of the need to protect our iconic conservation land. I saw a quote this week from Jane Clifton in the 
 Listener 
 and it sums up the reaction to a T. She said: “It has been the accepted convention that when Labour grants a mining licence it is a sensitively handled best-practice maximising of opportunities and when National grants a mining licence it is a barbaric exploitation of our priceless heritage to the benefit of its big-business mates.” I have to say that there is a word for that and I am not allowed to use it in this House. We already have sensible mining. 
I quote Chris Carter the previous Minister of Conservation. He said: “the Pike River coal company had to come up with a host of environmental protections and meet very stringent safeguards.” That is a good quote; we like that. We will be doing the same. We will have the same protections and the same safeguards. Even Mr Goff has said: “I think most New Zealanders want to see a balance. They want to see some areas that are less sensitive in the conversation estate available to environmentally sensitive mining.” We agree. Annette King has said that if mining was done in areas that are not key conservation areas on the conservation estate and if it is done well she does not think that people would have a lot of difficulty with it. Well we will do it and we will do it well and we agree with what Annette King said. 
Chris Carter the previous Minister of Conservation said in relation to Pike River Coal: “This mine does represent an intrusion into an area of high conservation values”—in fact it is a national park—“and a decision on whether to allow it to go ahead has been a very difficult one to make because of this.” We agree; some of these decisions are difficult but they are balancing economic opportunities very seriously with our environmental responsibilities. 
Even the Greens have been mischievous on this. Metiria Turei said: “This case clearly shows that it is possible to balance the economic concerns of miners and the conservation concerns of protecting endangered species”. But what do the Greens say now? They say it is different when National wants to be responsible; it is different when we want to make the most of New Zealand’s economic opportunities for the betterment of New Zealand and it is different when we want to be responsible with the conservation estate. It is totally different than under Labour! As I have said there is a word for that. 
What annoys me is the damning of the mining companies. Yes Pike River Coal is in Paparoa National Park—and it contributes to the endangered blue duck programme. It contributes to pest control and it has paid over $100000 for conservation work. It paid for a public road in a national park. Mining and conservation can go hand in hand responsibly.