Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:648;Page:17546] 
10.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Is he satisfied with the Government’s management of the chemically contaminated site at Mapua noting yesterday’s critical report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 As the House is aware I have very high standards and there is always room for improvement in the ministry’s performance. However if we look at the “before” picture and the “after” picture I think people would agree that significant progress was made at Mapua. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does the Government accept responsibility for this botched clean-up at Mapua noting that it was meant to take 18 months but took over 3 years that it was meant to cost $6 million but ended up costing over $12 million that the consents held by the Ministry for the Environment were breached and that there are ongoing pollution issues around contamination by both mercury and copper? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: In answering that question I think one has to point to Dr Smith and ask him whether he supports the clean-up because he voted against the funding for it just as he voted against the funding to clean up the Tui mine and the Waiwhetu Stream. One has to ask whether the National Party has a secret agenda on contamination as well and that it is just to keep it all dirty. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I thought that this was question time where we asked questions of Ministers. The Minister chose to ask questions back and not to address the fundamental question which was very simple and asked whether the Government accepts responsibility for the failings identified by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Yes. Would the Minister like to address the question. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I think there are at least four reports yet to come: one Occupational Safety and Health Service report one report from the Ministry of Health a final validation report and a final report from the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment which has not yet been received. When those reports are received they will be considered by the Government and we will consider action as a result. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: Could the Minister explain why the Mapua toxic site was left to contaminate the local environment without any attempt to remediate the problem under 9 years of a National Government while Nick Smith was MP for Tasman was Minister of Conservation and did nothing about it? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek leave to table the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s report which states the decision to proceed with the clean-up was made in 1999 by me as a member of Cabinet. 
Document not tabled. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I entirely agree with the member. There was a useless member for Tasman who could not convince the Government to spend the money— 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The member knows the Standing Orders and in future would he please just address the question without his superfluous comments particularly adjectives. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Minister’s ministry allow releases of DDT Lindane nitrate and ammonia nitrogen in excess of the limits in the resource consent? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There is some validation work to occur to see whether that happened at all and I think— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The parliamentary commissioner said yes it did. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well the parliamentary commissioner suggested that it might have happened. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Does the Minister think that the Ministry for the Environment should have advised that there was a conflict of interest in that the council that owned the land and stood to benefit from maximising the value of the land by cleaning it up to residential standards was also a decision maker as to whether it should be cleaned up to those standards—a process that increased the risk that the toxins would simply be transferred from the soil to the air and the water as it appears they probably were? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I understand that it is even more complicated than that in that the local authority was the original applicant for the original consent. It is fair to say that this was more of a rescue mission on the part of the Ministry for the Environment. I think that it is something that could have been better managed right from the beginning. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: What is his response to the president of the Mapua and Districts Community Association which accuses the Government of using residents as guinea pigs and a concerned neighbour of the contaminated site Annette Walker who trusted the Government to carry out the clean-up properly but says they have been betrayed? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I will supply both those people with the final reports when they are available. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: To the—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh I know that Minister has gone. This is the death of him. He is gone. Chris will be happy to take Damien’s job; this is the final nail in Damien’s coffin! What action will be taken in respect of the breach by the Ministry for the Environment of the resource consent by the adding of over 13 tonnes of copper sulphate to this fragile estuarine environment; if no action is taken what signal does this send regarding compliance with resource consents? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: That is an allegation that has been made and it is something that will be considered— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: The PCE concluded. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has a report that is effectively an interim one which will be considered when it is finalised. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Minister approve of the resource consent being held by the ministry— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Because you’re hopeless. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: You did nothing. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: We know that those guys have goofed. We know the community is angry. [ 
Interruption 
] Yes that is right. Oh so the Government is proud of Mapua? 
Hon Members 
: Yes. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Yes? My question to the Minister— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I think he’s going to blow. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Is there a question? They are so embarrassed. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I think they are a bit sensitive. Why did the Minister approve of the resource consent being held by the ministry when as the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment concludes this resulted in a clear conflict of interest and put the local council into the impossible position of not being able to take enforcement action against breaches of the resource consent? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I submit to the House that it is less of a conflict than it was originally when the local council was the organisation that held the consent. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Can the Minister confirm that the outgoing Minister of Conservation in 1999 made a beeline to the incoming Labour Minister for the Environment in that year and advised her to halve the costs of the funding that was available in order to make sure the clean-up of Mapua could take place and that that former Minister was Dr Nick Smith? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I was right. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Dr Nick Smith claims that he was right. I find it hard to believe that any member of Parliament would be that stupid.