Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Robertson Grant: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 08 February 2012. Volume:677;Page:175. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
6. 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Deputy Leader—Labour) 
 to the  
Minister for the Environment 
: Does he stand by his statement made in the House yesterday in relation to the grounding of the  
Rena 
 that “the statute sets down very clearly that I as Minister for the Environment should not be encouraging or discouraging a proper independent decision by Environment Bay of Plenty as to whether they should or should not take a prosecution”? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Yes although it would be useful to clarify that the prosecutions over the  
Rena 
 grounding involve both the Maritime Transport Act as well as the Resource Management Act and involve both Maritime New Zealand and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Charges have been laid before the courts under both the Maritime Transport Act and the Resource Management Act and also under the Crimes Act. 
Grant Robertson 
: Why then did the Minister tell the  
New Zealand Herald 
 on 2 November in relation to the Resource Management Act: “In fact it would be remiss given that it is New Zealand’s worst maritime environmental disaster if there was not a prosecution under the RMA.” which is clearly an encouragement for a decision from Environment Bay of Plenty and is a breach of the statute? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member completely misses the point that the decision to prosecute under the Resource Management Act had already been made. 
Grant Robertson 
: No no it hadn’t. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Yes it had. In fact if the member checks the record on 2 November when I made that comment he will see it was in response to a question by a journalist in response to the fact that charges had been laid under the Resource Management Act and was perfectly proper—perfectly proper—for me to say as Minister. As—[ 
Interruption 
] Yes that is entirely appropriate. In fact I think every member of this House would say it would be remiss if charges were not laid under the Resource Management Act given that this is New Zealand’s worst maritime environmental disaster. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does the Minister recall on 2 November 2011— [ 
Interruption 
]  
Mr SPEAKER 
: I apologise to the member. I say to the National Party backbenchers that the noise is unreasonable there. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does the Minister recall on 2 November 2011 making the statement in the primary question after being asked about a prosecution against the company that had not been laid? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: On 2 November the captain and navigation officer appeared before the Tauranga District Court under charges under the Resource Management Act. The comments I made were I think made in an interview at the press conference at the control centre on that afternoon. The idea that I made those comments and then very quickly the agencies whipped around the back door and suddenly put the documents together—I was advised the night before that charges were being lodged under the Resource Management Act and my comments were in respect of that and were entirely appropriate. 
Grant Robertson 
: Does the Minister accept that the comments he made directly encouraging Environment Bay of Plenty to lay charges were in relation to laying charges against the company—not against the skipper but against the company—which is an encouragement to Environment Bay of Plenty and which is a breach of the statute? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I point out that the very day—2 November—that I made those comments was the day on which the ship’s captain and navigation officer were facing charges under the Resource Management Act. To somehow pretend that there is some other story which the member is now trying to make up is entirely inconsistent.