Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Smith Nick: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:650;Page:18691] 
8.  
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: Does she support the re-branding project for the Department of Conservation to contract an agency as per the request for proposal that sets out the key elements of the project as a brand audit research review brand strategy brand communication strategy and an implementation plan? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 I support the project by the department in so far as its goal is to promote the message that conservation is a must for New Zealand’s economic future not a nice add-on. I was unhappy at supposed leaks within the Department of Conservation that circulated false information about the costs of the project. But Nick Smith should understand about leaks having had his limp conservation policy announced by Trevor Mallard last week. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why has the department in the last year abolished the marine conservation group and laid off marine scientists and at the same time established a marketing and communications group at a cost of $610000 per year and why are marketing and re-branding more important than marine conservation? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: That is absolute hypocrisy actually. National does not even have a policy. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the Minister please withdraw the comment— 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I withdraw and apologise. I just want to add that the Department of Conservation’s marine science capacity has been retained. It is focused on implementing a network of marine-protected areas around the coastline and it is working with local communities and iwi to achieve that. We have that in our strategy as opposed to the conservation policy of the Opposition with no mention of marine conservation. 
Moana Mackey 
: What other proposals has the Minister seen to reposition the valuable species recovery and land protection work done by the Department of Conservation? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I have seen a proposal misleadingly entitled “Net conservation benefit” that would instruct the Department of Conservation to trade off New Zealand’s national parks and heritage instead of protecting them. This was in National’s blue-green policy. It will still not deny that this is its real agenda for conservation instead of the collection of copycat Labour policies released last week. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Would you consider whether the answer is in line with the frame of the original question in my name? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: It was about branding. It was a general question so I ask the Minister that in future when she addresses questions she does stick to that theme. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: How does the Minister justify the additional cost of the re-branding of her department and the setting up of a new marketing and communications group when at the same time it is closing Department of Conservation offices like the Murupara office in her own Rotorua electorate; and does she support that choice of priorities? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: As to the first aspect of that question conservation is fundamental to the economic future of our country; it is about the quality of our water the air our wildlife and our land. My department is committed to both its advocacy and protection roles. This is not about changing our signs or our letterheads. And in regard to the second aspect of the member’s question it is actually the Opotiki office to clarify. [ 
Interruption 
] No Murupara is not. The Opotiki office is an operational matter that the department is considering. However the proposed reorganisation is not about removing resources on the ground. It is about improving the Department of Conservation’s effectiveness right across the country. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Can the Minister confirm that she supports the funding and the contract for an advertising agency for a branding project; that she supports the establishment of a new marketing and communications unit within the Department of Conservation; and that she also supports closing of local offices including Opotiki and Murupara? 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I just remind members that there are three questions within that supplementary question. 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: As to the advertising agency this is specialised work; it is standard practice for Government organisations to contract agencies from time to time instead of permanently tying up valuable resources for one-off projects. Specialist advice helps to ensure that communications are effective and targeted. With regard to the communication staff this is not just about conservation staff doing advertising campaigns. Most staff in fact are working on the very things that National said that it wanted more of—corporate support for conservation-led projects and community-led projects on private conservation land. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Does the Minister agree with marketing consultant Owen Scott who wrote in the Christchurch  
Press 
 yesterday: “Government departments too often get carried away with ‘branding’ projects when the value they deliver is only marginal … DOC shouldn’t obscure the great work it does with this sort of muddled marketing thinking.”; if not why not? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I have not seen the article but this is an outcome of the operational review the department has just undertaken that made sure the department’s resources match its strategic direction including its commitment to advocate for conservation and to protect our conservation land. National on the other hand has made clear that it will water this down even further. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek leave to table the brand refreshment project for the Department of Conservation. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: As the Minister has not had time to read it I seek leave to table the criticism of the department’s re-branding project by Owen Scott marketing consultant. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.