Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Hughes Darren: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9846] 
9. 
Hon DARREN HUGHES (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: How can New Zealanders have confidence in any of the figures in his “Stocktake of Schedule 4” discussion document when he said yesterday that “I think the numbers are always going to be all over the show until you actually get something out of the ground you simply don’t know what the story is”? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Quite apart from the fact that that is blindingly obvious New Zealanders can have confidence in the figures. They come from reputable analysis carried out by geologists and scientists many from GNS Science which is a very reputable Crown research institute that is internationally recognised for its expertise in this area. It is just common sense that until we carry out exploration all we have is potential based on the geology of any particular area. There will be contention about what that geology means. The underlying fact is that New Zealand is a mineral-rich country. That side of the House wants to lock it up and pretend it is not there. We think New Zealanders should have a say in whether they experience some of the benefits of that estate. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: What mistake with their figures were his officials admitting to when they contacted television news at 5.30 p.m. yesterday in respect of the exploration value of gold on Great Barrier Island? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The report done by Dr Richard Barker in January of this year— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: The expert. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: —yes he is an expert—was provided to the Ministry of Economic Development and it was posted on the ministry’s website. It talks about the values from two parts of Te Ahumata Plateau. The figure that was used by the ministry assessed the entire plateau. That figure has been assessed by Crown Minerals geologists and I believe it is consistent with the advice that was given to them by Dr Barker. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked the Minister what mistake they were referring to. He referred to Dr Barker’s report— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: We are not going to debate the matter by way of point of order. It seems the Minister is disputing that there was a mistake. He does not have to agree with the claimed mistake when he is answering a question. Does the Hon Darren Hughes wish to ask a further supplementary question? 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I am happy to but I thought you were going to call Mr Young. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Because there was concern over his first question I was going to come back to the honourable member to pursue his questioning. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: When he said there was a degree of hysteria around this issue was he referring to the coalition he has built of conservationists economists activists and geologists who oppose mining in the most special parts of New Zealand or was he referring to the Government’s defence of this sloppy policy? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I think the only people who have had a sloppy position on this policy are the Labour Opposition members. 
Jonathan Young 
: How many coal and mining permits were issued for Department of Conservation land by the previous Labour-led Government? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I have previously advised the House that the previous Labour Government issued 74 mining permits on Department of Conservation land. I am very happy to admit that officials have now revised those figures and the real figure is that 218 permits on Department of Conservation land were issued by the previous Government. The amount of land permitted under those 218 permits was 21961 hectares more than three times the size of the land about which the Government is asking whether it should come out of schedule 4. 
Jonathan Young 
: Has he seen any statements in support of the mining industry in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I have already shown the House the various sojourns of members from the opposite side of the House to mining sites around New Zealand but there is more. I read this quote in answer which I think perfectly sums up the current Government’s position on mining: “I say again that the industry provides an immense number of jobs and dollars for the economy … We can have business and can preserve the environment as long as there are tight rules.” That statement came from none other that the Hon Clayton Cosgrove. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Is it still his expectation that the Prime Minister will push through with these mining proposals when it increasingly looks like there is more accuracy about the volume of minerals present in the recipe for date scones than in the figures in his document? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: This Government will honour the public consultation process then there will be some decisions. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: How much longer will we see him as the caring sensitive uniting and in-control face of the Government’s mining policy for the 7000 hectares of pristine land before we are all receiving ambassadorial postcards from him eating date scones all around the world? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I guess the Minister does not need to answer a question that is more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. 
Jonathan Young 
: Has he seen any contradictory statements about where mining should be allowed in New Zealand? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes I have. The Labour Party is now campaigning against mining on any part of the conservation estate even though whilst in Government it issued 218 mining permits on that land. Just 1 month ago Phil Goff was saying that he though there was some scope for conservation— 
Hon Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you could not hear me calling out a point of order Mr Speaker; we could not hear that answer. We over here would love to hear about the contradictions that bedevil the Labour Party in 2010 and we would like to have the answer in silence. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not need any further assistance on this. The reason why I think the House was in some kind of uproar is because the Minister’s answer was not strictly within the Standing Orders. The Minister cannot allege a policy being a policy of another political party in this House. That is what members observed happening and the other political party denied that that is its policy. That is what debate is all about but it is not what question time is about and Ministers are not at liberty to give that kind of answer. The Minister can report accurately on what policies may have been inherited by the Government but he cannot allege certain policies that may not be factually correct. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The question was whether the Minister had seen any contradictory statements about mining being allowed in New Zealand. I was pointing out that there is quite a significant contradiction. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the Minister can answer such a question but he needs to be careful how he answers it. I clearly heard the Minister make claims about the Labour Party’s policy and that is not the Minister’s responsibility. Certainly if he has quotes or reports on what certain members have said then that is factual and accurate and he can report it. But to allege what the Labour Party’s policy might be is not consistent with Standing Orders. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I have seen a comment attributed to the Hon Phil Goff 1 month ago in which he said that he thought there was scope in some conservation land to extract minerals if it can be done without any damage to the environment. I have also seen a website put up by the same person’s support body saying “Yours not mines” which makes it very clear that he is now opposed to mining in the conservation estate. That is a contradiction.