Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions 
Pettis Jill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Urgent Questions 
[Volume:638;Page:8093] 
5.  
JILL PETTIS (Labour) 
 to the  
Minister of Conservation 
: What reports has he received on the operation of the Mount Ruapehu lahar warning and containment systems? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER (Minister of Conservation) 
: 
 As members will be aware on Sunday morning the tephra dam holding back Mount Ruapehu’s crater lake collapsed and the resulting lahar safely travelled down the Whangaehu valley exactly as had been predicted and planned for. I would like to place on record the Government’s thanks to officials from the Department of Conservation civil defence the Police Transit Toll the Horizons Regional Council and the Ruapehu District Council who instituted what are regarded as world best-practice lahar warning and containment systems. 
Jill Pettis 
: Can the Minister advise us what other reports he has seen? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: I have seen reports rubbishing the Government’s investment in effective safety systems as playing “Russian roulette with people’s lives” and describing central government’s financial support for the local council’s disaster planning as guilt money. These hysterical and alarmist comments were from National’s Nick Smith. Perhaps Dr Smith could apologise to the hard-working staff of the Department of Conservation civil defence the Police Transit Toll the Horizons Regional Council and the Ruapehu District Council who laboured through his political grandstanding to create a first-class lahar response programme that kept our community safe. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Would it not have been more sensible as National proposed to remove—[ 
Interruption 
] I will start again Madam Speaker. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Please ask your question. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Well I am actually interested in the substantive issue. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please just ask his question. As he knows interjections are permitted as long as the question can be heard. The member can be heard. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Would it not have been more sensible as National proposed to remove the ash dam at the mouth of the crater lake with earth-moving machinery at an estimated cost of $180000 as recommended by geotechnical experts rather than spending $10 million on constructing bungs raising bridges and creating the alarm system to try to manage the lahar after it had broken as that option would have cost less and substantially reduced the risk both to people and to property? 
Hon CHRIS CARTER 
: Certainly not. All of the technical advice stated that slicing a trench through the wall of the crater lake would have been extremely dangerous for the staff involved was not a long-term solution and risked creating a more serious lahar in the future. I remind members of the House that the member who raised this question was once Minister of Conservation had the chance to do that did not and now is politically grandstanding. It was comments like that made before the last election that have led to his facing a $15 million lawsuit for making outrageous claims about building products. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: I seek the leave of the House to table an assessment of the environmental effects and the options that recommended the removal of the tephra dam. The assessment was from the experts— 
Madsam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.