Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Fitzsimons Jeanette: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:614;Page:10661] 
7.  
JEANETTE FITZSIMONS (Co-Leader—Green) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Is the proposed national environmental standard on air quality intended to protect and promote public health? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Yes. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Why does the standard allow peak concentrations of fine particulates 2½ times higher than the current guidelines given that the World Health Organization says there is no safe level and that they are believed to contribute to 400 deaths and 750000 restricted activity days a year in Auckland alone? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I agree that research including World Health Organization research has not identified a threshold below which health effects do not occur and that there is some risk with inhaling at proposed standards. However given that many of our towns at the moment significantly breach the proposed concentration on many days a year achieving that standard should bring about considerable health benefits. 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: What are the likely health benefits from the proposed air quality standards? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: Poor air quality causes severe health problems as was noted by the previous questioner. Modelling by the Ministry for the Environment indicates that achieving the proposed standards will prevent annually around 40 premature deaths 40 hospitalisations and 75000 person-days of restricted activity. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Given that motor vehicles are the main source of fine particulates particularly in Auckland is not this standard just designed not to get in the way of Mayor Banks’ extreme road-building plans for Auckland and has she seen the recent UK study in which children’s coughing was directly related to the distance they lived from a road? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I am very much aware that in certain areas around Auckland—and I have seen the studies—vehicle congestion adds very much so to the poor air quality. There is a distinction between congestion and slow traffic and moving traffic. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Why does the Minister think it is appropriate to set a national minimum standard at a level that is known to kill people especially when regional councils which have the power to set higher standards than this will face huge business lobbies if they try to go beyond the national standard in order to protect their communities? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: I would beg to suggest that any standard is better than the current no-standard and that the case of the difference between proposed standards in Christchurch or Canterbury regional standards and this one are to be debated between them. It is accepted by me—and in working with the mayor and people of Christchurch at this very moment—that the cause there is more to do with housing than vehicles. The room for movement at the moment seems only to be on industry and that is where the tension lies. 
Jeanette Fitzsimons 
: Would not Environment Canterbury’s current air plan also produce higher air quality than the Government’s proposed minimum standard and is not Environment Canterbury’s main concern simply the rate of implementation in order to give industry time to adapt? 
Hon MARIAN HOBBS 
: From my understanding the problem in Canterbury has more to do with the poverty of households impacting on their ability to lower domestic emissions which are by far the greatest problem in air pollution in Canterbury. That is why there is some tension at the moment between the flexibility that comes with industry lowering emissions versus some support for domestic lowering of emissions.