Groser Tim: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
Groser Tim: Estimates Debate — In Committee 
[Volume:656;Page:5636] 
Hon TIM GROSER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I make just a few comments on the issues that the member Metiria Turei has raised. First of all I will put the so-called cuts into some perspective. The so-called cuts—the savings that we have asked for some $13.5 million each year over a period of 4 years—are to be compared with a total spend of the best part of $1.6 billion. No matter how one makes the comparison if one takes the narrowest comparison of spend as a Government we will still be spending $57 million more in Vote Conservation than was spent as recently as 2007-08. The idea that there are great swingeing cuts simply does not stand up to any serious scrutiny. 
I have said before and I will repeat now that such is the scale of the problem facing our country in terms of our responsibilities in biodiversity that as a country we could probably spend three or four times the amount we do—I do not know what figure—and there would still be biodiversity jobs that could be done to the benefit of New Zealanders. We are in a general situation where we are trying to fight our way through a recession. We believe we have taken a responsible fiscal position. The very modest savings at the Department of Conservation—I have a great deal of respect for the men and women who work there—are extremely moderate and will provide the basis for maintaining the position with regard to its core functions. At the end of the day the argumentation that the member has used is correct: the pest weed and fire control is part of the sequestration equation. 
I just say to the member that one of the frustrations I have among many frustrations with the current Kyoto Protocol accounting framework is that we are not properly incentivised under the rules to deal adequately with the 6.8 million hectares of mature forest; I appreciate that the member was talking about young forest for the most part. I am actively looking at our options on that issue as a small net increase in sequestration over the magnificent resource that we have in our indigenous historical forests would be an absolutely enormous potential sequestration. Unfortunately we are not clear as to what the net picture is in terms of loss and gains but I assure the member that I am actively considering this in the context of wearing my other hat as Associate Minister for Climate Change Issues (International Negotiations). 
But I very much take the point the member has made with regard to pest control being part of the climate change picture. As a matter of principle we as a Government give the department the director-general and his senior staff a target to meet. We do not interfere politically with the specific decisions that the director-general and his senior staff make in respect of weed and pest control. 
Just to indicate how this is played out I say that I went through the figures and I think they are quite interesting. These are the figures that the department has supplied to me as the Minister as to how it will meet its targets. I will first of all read out some figures expressed in terms of hectares and then I will make a comment or two about value. The figures are for 2008-09 and draw a comparison with the year to come 2009-10. With regard to weed control we will increase the number of hectares this coming year from 481000 to 531000. So the department will actually increase the total volume of hectares of weed control under this so-called budget cut regime. The amount of money will go fractionally down in respect of weed control from $22 million to $21 million. 
With regard to possums we will increase the number of hectares where we will try to reduce possum numbers or try to eliminate possums if at all possible. The total number of hectares that will be processed next year is going up—I repeat going up—from 244000 to 310000. In deer control it is the same picture. We will increase the number of hectares where deer control will be in operation. The precise figure is 339000 going up to 360000. There will be a reduction in goat control in terms of hectare coverage by a considerable margin for the simple reason— 
Hon David Carter 
: The job’s done. 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: —that the job has been done in certain areas of New Zealand. 
Hon David Carter 
: What a good Minister. 
Hon TIM GROSER 
: Actually it is quite wrong to say “What a good Minister.” I say to Mr Carter because those are the decisions of the director-general and his senior staff. A good Minister does not make those decisions of an operational nature so I suppose in that sense I could perhaps agree with Mr Carter. 
This is a very well run department. We have outstanding senior staff. I have the great privilege of working with them on a daily basis. They have made some very serious and sensible decisions and I think we should all be proud of the job that they are doing. As always when we dig down into the detail we find that life goes on. 
Vote agreed to.