Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Jones Shane: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 24 March 2010. Volume:661;Page:9760. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
7. 
Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Why should New Zealanders have confidence in his handling of the minerals stocktake given reported concerns from mining industry leaders about his handling of the issue especially the proposal to remove protection from parts of Great Barrier Island which those same mining industry figures reportedly described as a “blunder”? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
 on behalf of the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: New Zealanders can have confidence because for the first time the industry has a Minister who is committed to growing the contribution of the minerals sector to the New Zealand economy. This commitment is reflected in the strong positive statements of support from Straterra the mining industry’s group; from the Petroleum Exploration and Production Association of New Zealand; and from many of our mining companies which have made very complimentary remarks about the Government’s policies. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Has the Minister seen the comments of Minerals West Coast West Coast mayors and other elected representatives supporting the Government’s balanced approach to minerals and the conservation estate? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Yes. The support in the member’s electorate has been very strong. That region was founded on mining and feels betrayed both by Labour and by Damien O’Connor. This Government is committed to growing the West Coast mining industry. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Which of the following figures is correct for the potential value of minerals on Te Ahumata Plateau: the figure on page 21 of  
Maximising our Mineral Potential: Stocktake of Schedule 4 of the Crown Minerals Act and beyond 
 which values it at $4.3 billion; or the figure in the geologist’s report that says it is about $1.28 billion? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The information about the value of New Zealand mineral resources is not well known and that is why the Minister of Energy and Resources has committed $4 million for GNS Science to go and find out the detail. My worry is that members opposite refuse to know—and do not want to know—the value of New Zealand’s mineral resources. 
Hon Jim Anderton 
: Does the Minister stand by his claim that the mining of pristine conservation park areas is the equivalent of one postcard on the whole of Eden Park or does he agree with the well-regarded mathematician on Television One last night who said that his own calculation shows that the correct comparison is not one postcard but 121 postcards; if so is the mining contemplated 121 times worse than the Minister has been telling the public? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The analogy that the Minister gave was intended to give New Zealanders an idea of the scale and of how infinitesimally small the area that is proposed to be mined is. It depends on whether the area is the area of the field or of the entire stadium grounds and it also depends on whether we take the area where the mining will actually occur as compared with the area that is explored. Depending on which approach one takes the numbers can be different. However I have to say that the number will be a whole lot bigger than the infinitesimal amount of economic growth that occurred under the previous Government. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: How was the $1.5 billion figure on page 27 of the discussion document for the value of minerals in the Otahu Ecological Area and the Parakawai Ecological Area reached given that the geologist’s report on the two areas says that there is no reliable basis for determining a dollar value for the Crown minerals within the Otahu Ecological Area and that the Parakawai Ecological Area has a potential value of several tens of millions of dollars? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I do not have that specific detail. But I point out to the member opposite that we are unlikely to know what the value of those mineral resources is while they are included in schedule 4 as there is no incentive to even find out. Members on this side of the House are saying that we need to get a better understanding of the value of this country’s mineral resources and leverage off them so that we can be a prosperous country. 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Why should New Zealanders have any confidence in the Minister’s handling of the mineral stocktake when there are billion-dollar inconsistencies in the figures he is using and when after having spent about 8 months and having made some supposedly important changes in the terms of reference the discussion document was released with tracked changes still included? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: In terms of having an exact figure for the value of New Zealand’s mineral resources the honest answer is that we do not know. Perhaps if the previous Government had actually made a wise investment in GNS Science to find out some of that information it would be more reliable. The Minister is committed to making a smart investment in getting additional information so that we can have a more accurate estimate of New Zealand’s mineral resources. 
Dr Russel Norman 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If the Minister was referring to an official document could he table the official postcard from which his estimates have come? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is not a point of order.