12. Environment—Waste Management and Pest ControlDENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First) to the Minister for the EnvironmentEnvironment—Waste Management and Pest Control12. DENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First) to the Minister for the Environment: Does he stand by all his statements?Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): Yes and I particularly stand by my statement that New Zealand First voted for the emissions trading scheme legislation and the addition of joint-iwi management agreements through the Resource Management Act but now pretends that it opposed both these environmental laws.Denis O'Rourke: Why did he announce a grant of $3.8 million out of the Waste Minimisation Fund to Waste Management NZ for a nationwide tyre collection network when that company's last recorded profit after tax was $30 million and when there has been no request for proposals to allow Kiwi companies to propose solutions for the disposal of tyres?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The bid was awarded to Waste Management NZ after a contestable process in which it proved that it is possible to be both profitable and to do good environmental things. It has a network of 70 depots across New Zealand and 800 trucks. It makes great sense. I am very proud that this Government is taking action against waste tyres which cause problems with leachates with the risk of burning for which local government has long asked for a solution which this Government has provided.Denis O'Rourke: In making his decision to subsidise Waste Management was he concerned that Beijing Capital Group the owner of Waste Management NZ has failed its obligation to lodge financial statements with the Companies Office since 3 January 2014; if not why not?Mr SPEAKER: And again in so far as there may be ministerial responsibility the Hon Dr Nick Smith.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: It is not my concern whether Waste Management might have shareholders with Chinese-sounding names. I am not concerned that it might be profitable. What I am concerned about is whether it put up the best proposal to the independent panel for addressing the longstanding tyre problem and the answer to that was yes it did and both the combination of that bid and the other nine selected bids finds a solution for the 5 million waste tyres that we have each year. Denis O'Rourke: What confidence can taxpayers have anyway in Beijing Capital Group—Waste Management's owner—when Moody's has recently downgraded its creditworthiness to just one step above junk bonds?Mr SPEAKER: Again in so far as there may be ministerial responsibility the Hon Dr Nick Smith.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Waste Management NZ is one of New Zealand's largest waste companies and I actually do not mind whether its investors happen to have Chinese-sounding names. What I do care about is actually that we both collect shred and properly dispose of New Zealand's 5 million waste tyres each year and in that respect Waste Management's bid was the best bid that the Ministry for the Environment assessed.Richard Prosser: Does he stand by his statement in response to the court filing of the Brook Waimarama Sanctuary proceedings that The national pest control regulations for the use of 1080 and brodifacoum were introduced on the recommendations of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment." when in fact the parliamentary commissioner was very clear that she supported only 1080 and not brodifacoum on pages 58 and 59 of her report stating the "By-kill of native species is a significant risk from the use of … anticoagulants."?Hon Dr NICK SMITH: The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment recommended that it was more sensible to have one set of pest control regulations for New Zealand rather than us having 86 different rules with different councils. As a consequence this Government adopted those national pest control regulations they were consulted on three-quarters of the people who submitted supported them including the inclusion of brodifacoum and in my view if we are serious about creating sanctuaries and meeting my colleague Maggie Barry's ambitious plans for predator-free New Zealand by 2050 then those poisons are required.Richard Prosser: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My point of order is that my question was specifically why the Minister referred to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment endorsing the use of brodifacoum when she specifically did not.Mr SPEAKER: The member is spending a lot of time studying Speakers' rulings so I would be grateful if he would consider the ones that refer to the generality of the primary question. When a primary question like that is asked you cannot expect specific answers no matter how specific the supplementary question may be."