Shirley Ken: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Shirley Ken: Crown Minerals Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:610;Page:7532] 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY (Deputy Leader—ACT NZ) 
: 
 I would like to commend the member who has just resumed his seat Mr Copeland for a very good speech. He made some excellent points. In assessing the situation here I declare ACT strongly opposes this bill. National also opposes it—and we had a very good speech from Lockwood Smith—as does New Zealand First. It appears that the minority Labour - Jim Anderton coalition Government is dependent on the Greens to pass this legislation. It is green legislation. It is anti-mining legislation as the previous speaker so eloquently reminded us. 
Many people do not realise the size and importance of the mineral mining industry in New Zealand. I believe it is the quiet achiever of the New Zealand economy. The Minister whose name appeared on the bill Harry Duynhoven put out a press release just last week stating that for the first time mining export receipts have surpassed $500 million in a single 12-month period. That is fantastic but the untapped potential is enormous. The Institute of Geological Survey and Nuclear Sciences put out a very good report in 1999 which I am sure Mr Copeland is very familiar with. It estimated that at today’s prices there is $86 billion worth of mineral wealth in 16 minerals alone in New Zealand. We know about the GRD Macraes mine at Macraes Flat. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: Have you been there? 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: Yes I have and I hope the member has too. It is a very good enterprise. 
Clayton Cosgrove 
: I worked for them. 
Hon KEN SHIRLEY 
: I know the member used to work for that company; he used to be based in Perth and worked for it. He used to come and lobby me when I was in the forestry industry. But what is he doing? He is sitting on the fence here and trying to have a bob each way. If he went back to the mining industry and told it he was supporting this bill he would be kicked out of the office. There is no doubt about that. 
The mining industry has a huge potential in this country. It is estimated that there is $30 billion worth of gold alone in the Hauraki field. And what has this Government and also the previous Government done? It has closed down the whole of the Hauraki field to mining. The problem we have in this country is that 70 percent of our mineral wealth is within the Department of Conservation estate. That department is meant to be the Department of Conservation not the “Department of Preservation”. It is meant to be the steward of the conservation lands that we hold. Modern mining techniques can have a minimal impact on the environment and the wealth generated can give a net conservation benefit many times greater than any impact that mining may have. We are not a rich country and we cannot afford to turn our back on $86 billion of potential wealth but that is the curious situation we have got into. 
I note from the Commerce Committee’s report that the committee actually asked the officials whether they could give it one example of a case where the Minister of Conservation in exercising his powers under the Crown Minerals Act—in which essentially he is given veto rights without any right of appeal—has since 1991 granted access to the conservation estate to a mining operation in New Zealand. They could not find one example of a case where the Department of Conservation through its Minister had allowed access for mining. 
Of course we have the Pike River coalfield which has all its resource consents. But what is the problem? The Department of Conservation will not grant access for mining and the Minister of Conservation Chris Carter sits on his chuff drags his feet and tries to wait it out when there is a tremendous amount of wealth and jobs to be created by that coalfield alone. Hopefully he will be forced into making a positive decision on that issue. It is overdue already and I hope he is listening—wherever he might be—because that is certainly one project that should go ahead. 
I come back to the minority report of the select committee. I was not a member of the committee but an excellent minority view is presented in the commentary on the bill. The High Court decision of Justice Heron made the outcome quite clear. Then there was the case of  
Glenharrow Holdings Ltd v Attorney-General 
 and the decision in that case upheld the property rights held by miners who had gained licences under the Mining Act. It further made it clear that those licensees were able to continue to apply for extensions to their licences gained under that Act. Then what happened? It is recognised that the bill does protect the court-won gains of Glenharrow Holdings specifically protecting its licences and those of a number of other people who had applied for an extension to their licences prior to the decree that was issued by the Hon Harry Duynhoven on 19 September 2002. 
I put it to the House that that decree was ultra vires. The Minister made a decree that effectively retrospectively stripped away property rights. We know that the Hon Harry Duynhoven is the Associate Minister of Energy with delegated responsibility for mining and I know that when he got that appointment the Hon Pete Hodgson made the point that Harry Duynhoven was in charge of everything under the ground. The question now is whether Harry Duynhoven has a right to sit in this House. Therefore what is the date on those proclamations and decrees issued by Harry Duynhoven? Are they legal in law? What is their standing? I would like someone from the Government side of the House to clarify that point. This issue must be a huge embarrassment to the Government. Not only was there a retrospective decree by the Minister stripping away property rights that had been protected by the courts but we now have the spectre of a question of whether that Minister was eligible to hold a ministerial warrant by virtue of the fact that under the Electoral Act Harry Duynhoven is probably not entitled to be a member of Parliament. 
Section 55 of the Electoral Act is very clear. It has been reviewed by Parliament about four times and this House has deliberately and consciously retained sections 55(1)(b) and (c) of that Act in all of those reviews. The Act states quite clearly—spells it out quite clearly—that a member cannot swear allegiance to a foreign principal State. That is the situation and Mr Duynhoven fails that test. Quite frankly I do not think this is a matter for the Privileges Committee to determine; I think that is what the Act states. The law cannot just be changed as a convenience to a member. The law is the law. We might not like it. Certainly we concede it is unfair—and I do that—but the law is the law. If Parliament—the body that passes the laws—does not uphold the law how can we expect the public to have faith in our courts and our lawmaking institutions? This issue is an inconvenience and an embarrassment—it is—and Mr Duynhoven is a good colleague. We all acknowledge that but that is the law and we cannot just change the law in that way. Clearly this legislation is bad. I believe the decree made by Harry Duynhoven is ultra vires and I would like someone from the Government side of the House to try to clarify that point. 
In conclusion I make the point again that we should encourage mining in this country. In the early days of our pioneering era following European settlement mining gave a huge boost to this country’s economy. Sure a lot of damage was done; it was very rough. But if one goes to the countryside today one finds those scars cannot be seen; in many places they have been totally healed. With modern techniques mining can be carried out in a very very environmentally responsible manner. I repeat again that there is $86 billion worth of wealth in this country in 16 minerals alone 70 percent of which is in the Department of Conservation estate—and the Minister of Conservation under successive Governments has denied access for mining every time it has been sought. We could not be given one example of a case where the department has allowed access to the public conservation estate for mining.