Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Parker David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9839] 
5. 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does she intend to amend the National Parks Act 1980 to enable mining? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Conservation 
: The National Parks Act does not prohibit mining but sets very high environmental tests for mining to be allowed. The Government will not be changing these tests or the Act. 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Minister now agree with the Prime Minister’s statement on Tuesday that there will be no open-cast mining in current schedule 4 areas in Coromandel and on Great Barrier Island? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The Minister agrees with the very wise statement of the Prime Minister. 
Hon David Parker 
: Does the Minister understand that the economic case in the Ministry of Economic Development papers for mining conservation land in Coromandel used figures based on open-cast mining? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Of course the Minister of Conservation has responsibility for assessing the conservation values as part of the review of schedule 4. The economic issues are for others. However in respect of those economic issues the information is poor and one of the reasons the Minister of Energy and Resources is committed to a substantive investment by GNS Science is so that we can provide more accurate information on New Zealand’s mineral resources. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Have any access consents been granted for mining in national parks; if so when and by whom? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Yes Minister Chris Carter granted approval for the Hart Creek mine in the Paparoa National Park in 2006. For clarity this mine is not underground like Pike River coalfield which was also approved by Labour. It is on the surface and it is for gold and gemstones. The approval of this mine in May— 
Hon David Parker 
: That mine is not in the park. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member says that it is not in the park; it is. The approval of this mine in May 2006— 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Just make it up Nick. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Two members opposite continue to interject that I am incorrect. I seek the leave of the House to table the access agreement for mining in a national park by Chris Carter on 25 May 2006. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I have a question as to whether a Minister can answer with a point of order seeking leave to table documents. You have been very clear on that and I think it is a good ruling you have made. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I assumed the Minister had finished his answer. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: But he didn’t. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I took it as that. The Minister will not be given any further time to answer after his seeking leave to table a document. Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection. 
Hon David Parker 
: Is the Minister aware that at the Commerce Committee today the head of the New Zealand Tourism Board was surprised to learn for the first time that the 70 or so mining licences on conservation areas are not in national parks as his Government’s spin would have everyone believe? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: It is very clear that some of those mines are in national parks including ones approved by the previous Government. Phil Goff said on National Radio this morning that “Labour never ever allowed mining in national parks.” but I say that that statement is false. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Can the Minister— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have called the members’ colleague. National front-bench members are asked to show some courtesy for Chris Auchinvole. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Can the Minister advise the House that the only areas of national park being considered for removal from schedule 4 are those in the Inangahua sector of the Paparoa National Park; if so what advice did the Department of Conservation give to the Government in 2008 when these areas were added to schedule 4? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member is correct. The only areas of national parks nationwide being considered for removal from schedule 4 are those in the Inangahua sector of the Paparoa National Park. The House will be interested to know that the Department of Conservation advised against those areas being added to schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act in 2008 saying that the addition was not justified. The previous Government ignored that advice. It is perfectly proper given that Labour went against the Department of Conservation’s own advice that this Government is reconsidering the status of that area. 
Hon David Parker 
: Is the Minister aware that it would have been illegal for the Minister of Conservation in the last Government to issue a mining licence or to agree to a mining licence being issued for more than 100 square metres of any schedule 4 land? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The mine in the Paparoa National Park I drew members’ attention to which Chris Carter approved in May 2006 is in an area that at that time was not included in schedule 4. That is why it is true that if an area is in schedule 4 it cannot be mined. But the point being made by Labour members—that they never approved mining in national parks—is false. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: What policy governs mining activities in national parks; and when was this policy most recently approved? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: National parks are governed by the general national parks policy as set out in section 44 of the Act. The 1983 general policy for national parks was revised in 2001 and the new general policy was approved by the previous Government in April 2005. The policy approved and endorsed at that time by Cabinet including Phil Goff states in policy 10.8(b): “access arrangements to prospect explore or mine in national parks will be considered on a case-by-case basis”. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I seek leave of the House to table the general policy statement in which in 2005 the Labour Cabinet approved mining in national parks on a case by case basis. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.