Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Goff Phil: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:662;Page:10654] 
2. 
Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Does he stand by his recommendation in his Cabinet paper of 10 February 2010 that 467517 hectares of national park land and protected conservation land be considered for opening up to exploration and mining? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 I stand by the subsequent Cabinet decision of 22 March 2010 which proposed a net addition of 5000 hectares to schedule 4 land. So quite patently my answer is no. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is it correct that in the paper he and the Minister of Conservation signed off he proposed removing protection from mining in nearly half of Kahurangi National Park near Nelson and that he proposed mining in most of Rakiura National Park covering almost all of Stewart Island and also a big part of Mount Aspiring National Park; and why was he advocating in that paper that those areas be opened up for mining? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I am quite sure that if the member read the paper he would see that we were proposing that those areas might be better prospected which is prevented at the present time. We had previously made it very clear that we were conducting a stocktake of minerals in the conservation estate. Those areas are minerally prospective and that is why the recommendation was there. But of course Cabinet rejected that. Cabinet has said no to mining in those areas and that is the end of the story. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Did Cabinet reject the recommendations that he and the Minister of Conservation made because they were ill-considered and totally unrealistic or did Cabinet actually decide that it was better to take the first 7000 hectares leading up to the full implementation of what he recommended? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The discussion centred on the stocktake of minerals in the Crown conservation estate—in particular on minerals that were known to be deposited in schedule 4 land. Cabinet made— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: How does that add to an answer? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Through historic information that was available. There was not sufficient information to back that quite frankly so there was a decision which stands that we will not be mining in those national park areas or in the conservation areas. I cannot bind the Labour Party in terms of what it may do in the future. All I can do is look to the past and look at Labour’s record—and Labour was the only Government in history to allow mining on schedule 4 land. 
Chris Auchinvole 
: Has he seen any statements of support for mining in areas of high conservation value by members of this House? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I have seen some very visual statements of support from members of this House. The picture I am holding shows a number of Labour Party members visiting the Pike River coalmine on the West Coast. I can only assume that they were there to tell the workers that if Labour ever becomes Government again it will be shutting them down. This mine is underneath schedule 4 land; one accesses conservation land to get there. Does Phil Goff support this or not? 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Contrary to what the Minister has just alleged can he confirm that the Labour Government never mined in protected schedule 4 land that there was a consensus between National and Labour for more than a decade that these areas were too important to be mined and desecrated in that way and that it is this Minister and the so-called Minister of Conservation who recommended breaking that consensus? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: No I cannot confirm that. I refer the member to a parliamentary question I answered from Mr David Garrett. The question listed two permits on schedule 4 land that were granted by the previous Labour Government in its term of office. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: When does the Government intend to bail out from its proposal to mine Great Barrier Island and the Coromandel or does it intend to ignore public opinion which is running at three to one against mining those very important areas for Aucklanders and people in the Waikato Bay of Plenty? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I make the simple point that the Labour Party has been ignoring public opinion running three to one against it for a very long time. However we are engaged in a process of consultation at the moment and we will see that through to the end. I will not prejudice that result today much as the Leader of the Opposition may want to. But I do ask this question: why is it that the Labour Party can go to Blackball one year to celebrate May Day with the miners and can march against them down Queen Street the following year? That is a confused position. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Does he intend to ignore the 40000 people who marched down Queen Street in the biggest protest in a generation who tried to tell him that his proposal to mine the most precious areas of New Zealand is wrong? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I would argue that the biggest protest in a generation was the hikoi out the front of Parliament over the foreshore and seabed. That did not stop Labour from doing exactly what it wanted and leaving this country with an absolute mess. 
Hon Phil Goff 
: Is it correct that the mining industry was in discussion with the National Party long before National declared that it was intending to mine protected areas; if so why was that kept a secret rather than trying to seek a mandate from the public before the election and not imposing National’s views on it after the election against public opinion? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That is a completely untrue statement but it is typical of the conspiratorial approach that Labour takes to most things when it does not have any decent facts to mount an argument on.