11. Environmental Protection Authority—Associate Minister for the Environment's InvolvementHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Associate Minister for the EnvironmentEnvironmental Protection Authority—Associate Minister for the Environment's Involvement11. Hon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel) to the Associate Minister for the Environment: Does she accept that a Minister should not interfere in the independence of the Environmental Protection Authority particularly in its employment of its Chief Scientist; if so why did she instruct her office on 15 December to email a copy of a highly critical article about the Chief Scientist to the Chief Executive with the subject Great article"?Hon EUGENIE SAGE (Associate Minister for the Environment): In answer to the first part of the question yes. In answer to the second part of the question I simply forwarded an article to my private secretary to pass on to the chief executive for their information. To be clear I did not write the subject line of that email; it was written by a member of the public who sent the article to me.Hon Scott Simpson: What was the date of the meeting where matters relating to the employment of the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) chief scientist were discussed between the Minister and the EPA chief executive that she referred to in answer to oral question No. 7 on 22 March where she said "I was told the matter was in hand."?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: It was a status meeting my first meeting with the EPA and I think it was on 29 November and there was no substantive discussion of the work of Dr Rowarth.Hon Scott Simpson: Why did the Minister feel it necessary to involve herself in a series of emails and meetings both seeking and approving a "course of action" around the EPA's chief scientist in the emails dated 28 November?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: The email dated 28 November was from the Secretary for the Environment setting out a course of action. I simply said that I approved the course of action. There was no substantive discussion. If the member would be aware of the Crown Entities Act that gives the Minister in relation to Crown entities a responsibility to manage the risks on behalf of the Crown. If I may quote from the guidance to Ministers "Along with being answerable to the House of Representatives you are also answerable to the public for problems or controversies arising in connection with the entity by responding to questions and participating in debates and reviews." As I have said repeatedly the public needs to have confidence in the independence of the EPA; therefore it should be of interest to the chief executive—matters in the media questioning that independence.Hon James Shaw: What has Dr Rowarth herself said about why she left her post at the Environmental Protection Authority?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: Dr Rowarth has said publicly that she was not pushed out of her role and that she continues to do contract work for the EPA.Hon Scott Simpson: So does the Minister stand by her answer to my oral question last week on 22 March that it would be entirely inappropriate for her to be involved in an employment matter?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: Yes.Hon Scott Simpson: Isn't the only obvious conclusion from the emails exchanged on "a course of action" and the discussions and meetings held by the Minister with the EPA chief executive that she wanted the chief scientist gone and that the chief executive then initiated an employment conversation with the chief scientist that led to her going?Hon EUGENIE SAGE: No."