Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 30 August 2012. Volume:683;Page:4986. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that “An extension of exploration and mining activities in New Zealand would certainly create jobs”; if so why? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 Yes; because increases in economic activity generally create work for people to do and the means by which to pay them. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: How many jobs have now been lost or announced to be lost in the mining sector since National became the Government? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I do not have that to hand but if the member is interested I can tell him that there have been some job losses and some proposed job losses. There is also very significant job creation going on including just a few weeks ago when I was in Taranaki where—[ 
Interruption 
] I appreciate that members opposite do not want to hear about economic growth in the New Zealand environment. In the Methanex area Methanex has just employed more people. In fact it had 500 more people working on Methanex’s Motunui plant to actually increase and get its methanol production up. Todd Energy is also investing in Taranaki. We have also had Todd Energy building a new power station in Taranaki and if we want to look beyond the oil and gas sector— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Point of order. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Oh you do not want to hear about jobs Mr Cunliffe? 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! A point of order has been called. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: The supplementary question was a very straight and factual one and it followed directly from the primary question which was on the question of job creation. The supplementary question was specifically on job losses that have occurred or have been announced. The Minister began by saying he did not have the information and then went into a long rant about— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member was doing fine until he started using language like that. The Minister’s answer though in fairness did cover issues of employment and jobs in the mining sector. He said that he did not have exact figures on the jobs lost but he was able to identify several operations in the mining sector that had been employing more people recently. He was not attacking any other party. I do not think that that was an unreasonable answer. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Does the Minister stand by the Minister of Finance’s statement: “We are focusing on using our natural resources … and mining”; if so are the 12 percent decline in recorded employment in the mining sector and the hundreds of jobs lost in the sector the brighter future that the National Government promised? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Well as I was just laying out there is also very big investment in the mining sector. What the member needs to understand is that we are in fact in a dynamic environment at all times and every business faces challenges. In the case of the oil and gas sector his colleagues in the Greens point out that we have pretty high prices. In the case of the coal sector we currently have pretty low prices internationally. Companies actually have to react and manage that all the time and that is what is happening in what is a very dynamic economic environment. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: On what date will the natural resources chapter of the so-called Business Growth Agenda be released and can he confirm that this is now being rewritten in light of the cutbacks in Solid Energy push-back by mining companies over proposals to increase royalties cutbacks in jobs and production at BHP and the Australian resources and energy Minister declaring that the days of record commodity prices are over? Does that therefore mean that his strategy’s reliance on mining is a failure? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: No. And no it is not being written. I know that in the member’s cartoon world there is no point in investing in industries and developing industries but over here in the real world—not on “Planet Labour”—it is actually important that we encourage industry— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was a relatively straight question which asked whether the date of the— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Forgive me. Order! Order! The member will resume his seat. Please do not treat the House like that. The member’s question was not straightforward; it went on and on and on. It contained a whole lot of assertions about failures in the mining sector and the member asked a further question right at the end. The Minister has actually answered very clearly. He said the document is not being rewritten if I heard him correctly and that was one of the questions the member asked. I think it was a very fair response. If the member does not want that kind of answer sharpen up his questions. He is capable of that—of asking far sharper questions. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Hon David Cunliffe’s term “rant” is out of order then how come “cartoon world” and “Planet Labour” are acceptable in this House from the Minister? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Very simply—I am very happy to explain to the right honourable gentleman. The Minister’s answer was to a question asked that contained a whole lot of assertions about the mining industry and contained at least three questions and under those circumstances the Minister can have far more licence in answering it. The use of the word “rant” is not ruled out except under a point of order. A point of order should use absolutely objective language and not that kind of accusatory language. It is very simple. The language involved when raising points of order is very different from the language involved in debate. The member should know that because he has been in this House a very long time. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Can I just seek guidance because on that point you have ruled in the past—for instance in a question asked to this member—that the term “glossy” somehow allowed members of the Government to indulge in derogatory comments gave them licence to engage in derogatory comments about the Opposition. I like Mr Peters would like some consistency— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Let me assist the member. I just invite him to go back and look at the  
Hansard 
 as I do—as I do. Look at the context the way the words are used and what is created. It is dead simple. Members in this House have heard me require Ministers to answer when members ask straight questions. If the member thinks that his colleague’s question just then was a straight question well forgive me but we are on different planets because it was far from a straight question. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just invite you not to misinterpret my point of order. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Supplementary Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I call the Hon Damien O’Connor. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Why should miners in Huntly and on the West Coast lose jobs to save money for Solid Energy when the company has wasted millions of dollars on a biofuels project that has failed and now threatens to destroy the high-value vegetable oil industry in New Zealand? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: In terms of biofuels projects and the like I think members will find they have come from a different time and a different Government—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The House will come to order. The Leader of the House should know better than to be interjecting loudly beside an open microphone. That kind of interjection across the House is totally unnecessary. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I think the point that was being made was that the biofuels obligation was created by the previous Government— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: That’s right. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: —that is right—and it created expectations beyond obviously which was challenging for Solid Energy. To the member’s wider point I would respond that it is very tough when there is any change of jobs when a company has to change in response to the environment. The reality in the case of Solid Energy as we know is that the international coal price has affected things not just in this country but in Australasia as well. We are encouraging the board and management of Solid Energy to do the absolute right thing for their workers and for the business. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: How sustainable is an industry if assurances of capital investment mine expansion and job growth can be promoted to West Coast business leaders and 2 months later can be reversed to potential job cuts a freeze on capital expenditure and a rundown in infrastructure; or is this all about simply adding to the identifiable resource while costs are slashed so that the Government may attract investors for its asset sales programme? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The member seems to have donned Mr Mallard’s tin hat. The reality of the situation is this— 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Answer the question. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I am answering the question. I was responding to the member’s assertions at the end of his question. In terms of the first part of the member’s question it is a challenging environment that this company is operating in. International prices in a number of areas change and companies have difficult circumstances at some times and positive circumstances at others. Actually they have to work to respond to that situation. It is called being in business and it is challenging. It is difficult in the case of Solid Energy at the moment but the board and management are being encouraged to work through it. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: What does the high and volatile New Zealand dollar mean for the future of mine activities in New Zealand given yesterday’s announcement by Solid Energy concerning hundreds of Spring Creek Mine job losses? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: In terms of the challenges that the company faces the biggest challenge by far currently is the international coal price. There is an impact as the member has noted in terms of the current level of exchange rate as well but by far the biggest aspect is international coal prices. Obviously those do fluctuate from time to time and the business is dealing with that but it is no doubt challenging for all the staff involved. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If the Government admits that the high dollar is causing serious problems for the mining industry highlighted yesterday by the announcement from Solid Energy why does the Government not support a monetary policy that would allow New Zealand to have a stable and competitive exchange rate thereby helping exporters as Korea Singapore and China have done? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Firstly I did not acknowledge what the member said at the outset of his question. I said the primary aspect was in fact the international coal prices. But notwithstanding that the suggestion that New Zealand attempt to manage its exchange rate in the way the member proposes does not acknowledge the challenges that are involved and the risks to the New Zealand economy if you seek to do that. There is no ability to have a one-way bet on the New Zealand dollar. In actual fact you have to ask the member what he is seeking to achieve because although we have a high dollar relative to the US dollar currently we have a low dollar relative to the Australian dollar. In fact forcing or attempting to force the New Zealand dollar down further even if you were successful would of course exacerbate the income differences between New Zealand and Australia which would have other economic consequences. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: If the IMF says that the New Zealand dollar is inflated by as much as 20 percent is it the Government’s intention to do exactly nothing about it? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Well as I explained I think in the House last week the reality is that the value of a country’s currency is dependent over the medium term and over the cycle on what people think of the economic prospects of that country. So if you actually want to materially devalue the New Zealand dollar then you have to materially devalue the economic situation in New Zealand which I do not think and I do not think the Government believes is an appropriate way to deal with the challenges in the world today. The correct response is to help improve the competitiveness of the New Zealand economy and that means across a whole range of fronts including inviting capital investment to encourage businesses to grow inviting opportunities in the resource sector and right across a whole range of things. That is actually a more constructive and substantive response. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: What has changed in the last 2 months that reverses the outlook for West Coast mining from very positive to very negative? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Well I cannot speak for those exact 2 months but over this year we have seen a decline in the coal prices internationally which has picked up and if the member wants to review perhaps the international markets for coal and what is happening with coal companies particularly in Australia then he will see very similar challenges there as he is seeing for Solid Energy on the West Coast and around New Zealand.