Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:613;Page:10148] 
10.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Does she stand by her statement that “When I say all bets are off [on the lower Waitaki] I am not saying I am against Project Aqua or I am for irrigation or I’m for the status quo on the river” and what exactly does that statement mean? 
Hon PETE HODGSON (Acting Minister for the Environment) 
: 
Yes. What it means is that applicants wanting to use the Waitaki River water will have to await the development of a water allocation framework by an independent statutory body under legislation to be considered by Parliament shortly. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The Minister’s statement that “all bets are off” came after her statements earlier in the year that the Resource Management Act was quite adequate as it was for dealing with Project Aqua. She later said that she would be calling in Project Aqua under the Resource Management Act and in September she stated that we would have special legislation that Parliament has not yet seen so how many more different positions will the Government take in respect of Project Aqua? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: A water allocation plan is proposed by legislation because a regional water plan for Canterbury does not exist. As far as the issue of different positions is concerned I am happy to report that the person who is currently the deputy leader of the National Party said—when he was not the deputy leader—that he was in favour of Project Aqua. The person who was the leader of the National Party said—when he was the leader although he is not now—that he was cautious about Project Aqua whereas the person who was—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will not have interjections made in the second person because they refer to me. Although I am a little older than some I am still younger than many and I suggest that the member tells that to senior citizens’ groups. The member will interject properly but from now until the end of the answer to this question he will not interject at all. Before I call the Hon Pete Hodgson again I say that while he was attempting to answer the question I thought the interjections had reached an inane number.  
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The last four sentences of the Minister’s answer have been about the positions of various National MPs. Under the Standing Orders it is not for him to talk about other parties’ positions but only those of the Government.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: No if that were in the Standing Orders then there would be very few questions or answers. A member can refer briefly to other people but he cannot go on at excessive length. I think he had just about finished his answer. [ 
Interruption 
] If I find that person’s telephone it will be confiscated. 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: In conclusion I point out that this Government has one position—unlike other parties in the House. 
Hon David Parker 
: Why is the completion of a water allocation plan necessary for the Waitaki catchment? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: In the absence of a water allocation plan resource consent applications were being considered in a policy vacuum. Applications need to be considered in a way that will look at the relative merits of the different uses of water. Under the current system there is no certainty that the national regional or local benefits of using Waitaki water will be considered. 
Hon Ken Shirley 
: Has the Minister consulted with her colleague the Minister of Energy with regard to Project Aqua and has the Minister of Energy conveyed his support for Project Aqua to the Minister for the Environment? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: The Minister for the Environment consults with the Minister of Energy on a regular almost daily basis on many matters and the Minister of Energy is very supportive of the Government’s approach in respect of the Waitaki allocation wanting to be sure that the issues of Project Aqua are treated on a proper Resource Management Act – principled basis. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Noting that Meridian Energy chief executive officer Dr Keith Turner Otago University physics professor Gerry Carrington and the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority all agree that between 20 and 30 percent of electricity is currently wasted in inefficient use does the Minister agree that Project Aqua’s $1.2 billion investment in the destruction of the Waitaki River is driven more by the revenue aspirations of a State-owned enterprise than because it is the best route to electricity security? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: No I do not. Whichever way energy efficiency and good use of electricity is cut no one no model and no reasonable person has ever suggested to me that this country does not need more generation. It does. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Government reject National’s substantial 1999 Resource Management Act reform bill and resist any substantial amendment to the Act for 4 years but will now advance special legislation when its own company suddenly wants to advance a particular project and why does the Government not adopt National’s policy instead which is to fix the Resource Management Act for all projects and not just Government company projects? 
Hon PETE HODGSON 
: Among the many things that the National Party’s 1999 propositions failed to achieve was a regional water plan for Canterbury. It is a pity that the National Party on the passage of the 1991 Resource Management Act then failed to resource the implementation of that Act right through the 1990s which means that whilst there are regional water plans in some parts of the country there are not in others—even after 12 years. That is an outrage. 
Peter Brown 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. As worthy as the cause might be I notice that Jeanette Fitzsimons and I think another Green member have logos on their fronts. Is it appropriate and acceptable to come to this House dressed like that? If it is can I come down here with the Arsenal Football Club logo on my clothing? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: As an Arsenal supporter myself over many years let me just say that I would prefer that the issue not be raised. As long as it is a fashion accessory it is OK but I will look at the matter.