Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:608;Page:5252] 
8.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does he stand by his press statement of 29 April 2003 that the land to be swapped for the Dobson Dam hydro project is of “much lower value”; if so how does he reconcile that statement with a Department of Conservation report on Mount Buckley that says the land has “nationally important conservation values” “high landscape value” is a “crucial wildlife habitat link” and recommends that all of the Mount Buckley block be added to the Crown estate? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I want there to be as little background noise as possible. I find it difficult to hear too. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. There was a lot of background noise following that answer to question No. 7 because a lot of members here are totally confused as to what the Minister said. He said the present system is working; if it is why are we changing it? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That was not the background noise I was referring to at all. The member knows that too. 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 Yes Mount Buckley is of lower value. The report the member is quoting from also states that the valley floor forest in the Card Creek ecological area is the richest known site for native birdlife in the whole of north Westland. Ecologists advise me that kahikatea forest is much scarcer than steep hill-country forest as represented at Mount Buckley. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: How would the Minister know that was true when he has never visited the area concerned and when the member of Parliament for West Coast - Tasman promised in October 2002 that he would be visiting that month? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I am delighted to report that I will be visiting in a couple of weeks’ time. 
Hon Damien O'Connor 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member has stated that I promised—[ 
Interruption 
] I would like that member to table— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a point of debate. 
Nanaia Mahuta 
: Can the Minister explain why the Card Creek ecological area was extended in 1997? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: To quote from the  
Gazette 
 notice one of the key reasons for extending the reserve was to add to the size and long-term viability of the principal reserve as a significant wildlife habitat. The Minister of Conservation at the time the Hon Dr Nick Smith clearly appreciated the regionally unsurpassed wildlife values of that area. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Does he accept what most of us know—that is the Department of Conservation will claim that any piece of land has nationally important conservation values has high landscape values or is a crucial and unique wildlife link—and that that is why he as Minister is required to exercise discretionary powers and not just say no to every development proposal on Department of Conservation land; and when will he start acting as the Minister and not simply be advocate for the department in this Parliament? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: That question contained a number of erroneous implications one of which is that the Department of Conservation says no to developments on conservation land. I am sure I do not need to remind the member that the biggest hydro development extension in recent history in this country was at Manapouri in the middle of a World Heritage site and the Department of Conservation approved that development. 
Gordon Copeland 
: Is it not undesirable for him in his role as advocate for the conservation estate to have the statutory power to veto completely uncontested proposals like the Dobson scheme—a decision that other interests with different viewpoints cannot seek to appeal or arbitrate in any way—if not why not? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: As Minister of Conservation I have a statutory duty to be an advocate for conservation values but the Department of Conservation is a department that seeks dialogue with any applicant for development. Just recently I looked at the figures for mineral development under the Crown Minerals Act and the Conservation Act and 80 percent of applications were approved. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: What are the criteria for a nationally important conservation value when compared with a nationally important productive value and why should conservation values take precedence given much-improved scenario modelling for power shortages for the years ahead regardless of rainfall? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: Successive Governments of this country whether they be led by the Labour Party or the National Party have endorsed conservation as a value that is important to all New Zealanders. 
Gordon Copeland 
: How can the conflict between his desire to preserve the Dobson kahikatea trees and the needs of this nation for electricity generation for dry-year conditions be resolved in the national interest? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I have already reported to this House that hydro electricity development projects have taken place on conservation land—for example Manapouri. I could list a number of other examples as well. 
Stephen Franks 
: In view of the Minister’s response to my colleague Gerry Eckhoff is there any level of social misery or economic hardship so serious that it could persuade him to swap the Department of Conservation gorse broom and kahikatea for the Dobson scheme; and if he thinks that the Conservation Act will not let him what steps has he or any other Minister taken to change that law? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: The Card Creek ecological area was gazetted and extended—both times under National Governments—for very valid reasons because it is an area of high ecological value. 
Hon Richard Prebble 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That has to be trifling with the Chair. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member was asked a more specific question. To develop it perhaps he could add a couple of sentences to his answer. 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I thought the question related to the Dobson dam issue. Could the member repeat the question? 
Stephen Franks 
: Is there any level of social misery or economic hardship so serious that it would persuade him to swap the Department of Conservation gorse broom and kahikatea for the Dobson scheme; and if he thinks that the Conservation Act will not let him what steps is he or any other Minister taking to change that law? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: It is my duty as the Minister of Conservation to be an advocate for the environment. Each application to develop a project on conservation land must be looked at on its own merits. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek leave to table an article from the  
Nelson Evening Mail 
 of 11 October in which Mr O’Connor states: “Mr Carter is due to visit the area before the end of the month”. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.