Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:634;Page:6165] 
8.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does he stand by his answers to questions in the House on 14 March 2006 in regard to the Whangamata marina in which he stated “I followed due process” and “I followed the legal process under the Resource Management Act”? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 In general yes but I accept the court’s advice. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: How can the Minister possibly tell the House that “In general yes” he did follow the law and due process when the High Court found his decision “unfair” and “in breach of the common law standards of natural justice” and that there was more than one error of law; will he now apologise to the Whangamata Marina Society for his repeated breaches of the law? [ 
Interruption 
] 
Madam SPEAKER 
: If members wish to hear the Minister’s answer would they please enable him to be heard in silence. 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I too would like to quote the court. Justice Fogarty stated: “There are no findings in this judgment which would warrant an extraordinary direction by this Court that the present Minister of Conservation should not continue to be seized of this case. The errors identified can be corrected … clearing a way for reconsideration by this Minister.” 
Charles Chauvel 
: Who will make the final decision about whether to grant the two restricted coastal activity permits required under the Resource Management Act for the Whangamata marina? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I would note that Judge Fogarty said in his judgment that my decision was not biased predetermined or irrational and he directed me to remake my decision using a better process. After careful thought I decided it was important to remove any suggestion of predetermination in a new decision taken by me. Accordingly I have delegated the authority to make a new decision to my colleague David Benson-Pope the Minister for the Environment who is in charge of the Resource Management Act. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why did the Minister in his statement on 19 September following the High Court decision say that he would be making the final decision on Whangamata but then on 12 October in the exact hour in which the Auditor-General dropped his explosive report on Labour’s illegal campaign spending announce he would pass the decision to David Benson-Pope; why did he hide the decision that way—was it that he was so embarrassed that he had been rolled by Dover Samuels and his caucus? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: At no point during the period before I delegated the decision did I say I had come to a decision. I said I was considering it. And of course unlike that member I do not have a contempt of court ruling against me. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why should mum and dad taxpayers have to foot the bill of up to $250000 awarded by the High Court in costs to the Whangamata Marina Society on top of the $150000 his unlawful decision has cost Crown Law in its defence; and if the taxpayer is to foot this $400000 total bill for his illegal conduct is not resigning the honourable thing to do? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: Once again that member illustrates his freedom with terminology. At no point did Justice Fogarty say my decision was unlawful. I guess that is why that member is currently before the courts being sued for $15 million for libel. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: How can he tell the House that the court did not find he had acted unlawfully when it said that he had made an error of law; what is the difference? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I repeat that Justice Fogarty said that I was still able to make the decision and that I had not acted unlawfully. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Will his Government support National’s proposition to remove the Minister of Conservation’s veto over such consents noting that in over 400-plus consents considered by Ministers since 1991 only once has a Minister overturned a decision of the Environment Court—and that was subsequently overturned by the High Court—and further that this High Court decision makes the Minister’s discretion very narrow and that this additional ministerial step just adds delay to the consenting process; would it not be better just to respect the decisions of the Environment Court? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: What an extraordinary question that is from a member of a previous National Government that brought in the Resource Management Act and put these very provisions in it. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House—noting that the Minister has tried to tell the House that he did not act unlawfully—to table in order that members may read it Judge Fogarty’s report in which he found the Minister of Conservation breached the law on three different counts. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.