Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cunliffe David: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Sitting date: 26 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5652. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
4. 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
 to the  
Minister for Economic Development 
: What impact has his Business Growth Agenda had on Nuplex Industries Solid Energy Kawerau and Tiwai Point and how many job cuts have been announced there in the last two months? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE (Minister for Economic Development) 
: 
 The Government’s Business Growth Agenda is undertaking initiatives in skills innovation natural resources capital infrastructure and market access to assist all New Zealand firms including those named by the member to be more competitive on the world stage after our tradable sector declined through the latter half of the last decade. Of course the impact on individual firms at any point in time depends on the international state of the industries in which they operate. Job losses at the firms mentioned by the member are of course a matter of public record. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Rather than choosing to answer what was quite a straight question of how many job cuts have been announced in specific industries or companies in the last 2 months the Minister chose instead to give an answer about a previous Government—or an allegation about a previous Government. If he had that information he might have sought advice—the question was on notice—and he could have answered the question that was actually given. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I think the member has some grievance in that the Minister was asked about how many job cuts have been announced there in the last 2 months. I do not think saying that it is on the public record is actually that informative for the House. I would ask the Minister if he has that information please to tell the House. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I do have some information to hand. My understanding is that according to media reports the numbers are 80 440 120 and 100. Of course they are contrasted with recent announcements on the positive side by companies such as Xero Orion Health Tait Communications Methanex The Warehouse— 
Hon David Parker 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This Minister is trifling with question time. He deliberately did not provide the answer despite the fact that the question was on notice. He had the information provided to him by the ministry and he had it at hand. Now he is using— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Order! The member is criticising—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! The member will resume his seat. The member is criticising the Minister. It is up to the Speaker to deal with whether or not the Minister has answered the question. I have done that. I made it clear to the Minister that I was not satisfied with the answer provided to the question on notice. The Minister did go on to put some context around the answer and the figures he was giving and that is not unreasonable lest a false impression be created. Ministers naturally have some licence to put context around answers but I think he had made his point sufficiently. 
Hon David Parker 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The way the Minister has been allowed to answer this question effectively means that he has two long-winded answers in respect of one primary question when he should have had the opportunity to answer only once and to do it properly then. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I invite the member to read the question carefully. It asks “What impact has his Business Growth Agenda had on”— 
Hon David Parker 
: Don’t patronise me. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member read the question carefully he would realise that actually it asks an opinion. There is no one who can actually establish any particular facts about the impact of the Government’s policy on those particular businesses. So the question seeks an opinion—and I invite the member to reflect on that—and the Minister gave an opinion in answer. The piece of the question that sought facts was the last part of the question and that is why I required the Minister to advise the House of that information because that was the part that sought the facts. I just invite the member to think through the question. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Given that the Minister has revealed that he does have the information to hand I would invite him if it is an official document that he is quoting from to please table that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If the member had listened he would recollect that the Minister was quoting from newspaper articles. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Why did the Minister say that the Spring Creek lay-offs are because “coal prices are on a severe roller coaster around the world” when Bathurst Resources’ Denniston mine faces exactly the same world coal prices yet he thinks that that one is economic? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I would be happy to explain that for the member. There are about two or three reasons why the cost of production is different at the Denniston field and in fact the Buller field more generally where Denniston and Stockton are both located. It is because the coal seams are close to the surface and run laterally and also because they are open-cast mines and as I understand it there is not a lot of methane gas as distinct from the Grey fields which are underground mines by definition. They have very complex geology and are quite difficult. So you have a production cost at the Denniston mine that is much lower than the production cost at the Spring Creek Mine which means that the different mines are much more economic at different prices. I understand that the private sector investors are more than ready to make their investment in Denniston provided of course they get the opportunity to do so. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: In light of the answer the Minister has just given could he please clarify whether he believes that it is more in the national interest to pursue open-cast coalmining on conservation land or to extract the maximum long-term value from an existing deep mine shaft at Spring Creek? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I think the member is actually recommending that in lieu of jobs that would be successful in the open-cast mine he would prefer the Government to subsidise an— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member’s question was fairly clear. What he was asking the Minister was whether he considers it to be more in the public interest to extract coal from an open-cast mine on conservation land if I remember correctly compared with extracting from existing deep-extraction—or whatever the correct term is—low-impact mining. It is an opinion he is seeking: which in the Minister’s opinion is preferable in the public interest? That is what the Minister should focus on. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: Yes I believe that it is preferable in the public interest to encourage companies that can have profitable operations to hire workers from the West Coast to succeed in the mining industry as an alternative to attempting to subsidise mines that have proved to be not economic at current world prices. [ 
Interruption 
] Absolutely. And if the member does not think so then he needs to take the word “economic” out of the title “economic development”— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: In light of the answer that the Minister has just given can he explain to the House why he maintains that the Spring Creek lay-offs are simply the result of market forces when Solid Energy’s own documents show that they are a deliberate part of a strategy to ready the company for sale—a privatisation process that is being driven by his own Government—and why did that Minister not do the miners and their families the courtesy of even reading the recovery proposal that they submitted to his Government? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I am a bit nonplussed here. He is basically saying that a company that has got $300 million worth of debt and has lost $100 million to $120 million on this mine should somehow keep it operating and yet Labour is not stepping up to join the Government’s proposal to say to the objectors to the other mine which is economic that they should perhaps drop their objections so that they can actually have economic jobs on the West Coast. It is just unbelievable. 
Hon Damien O’Connor 
: I seek leave to table a document called the Solid Energy  
Design Pack 
 dated 29 August 2012 which states very clearly that the key principles of the proposed structure for Solid Energy are to in summary meet the Government’s objectives of its mixed-ownership model. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is no objection. 









Document by leave laid on the Table of the House. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The Hon David Cunliffe supplementary—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! I say to both—well mainly the National Party front-bench that I want to hear the Hon David Cunliffe’s supplementary question. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Has he delayed the release date of the natural resources Business Growth Agenda report because after the public relations failure of the last two releases officials have been tasked with urgently adding new content; if he denies that the release date has been delayed then when is the scheduled release date? 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I mean I am sorry you are a trainspotter Mr Cunliffe. You really are. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Point of order Mr Speaker. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think I can anticipate the member’s point of order. I say to the Minister that that is not the way to assist with good order in the House and not the way for a Minister to answer a question. He has been asked about the release date of a certain report and the Minister should answer the question. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: The reason I referred to him in that manner is that there is nothing about that supposition that is correct. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Despite the Minister’s inimitable style the question was quite straight. It asked him whether the release date had been delayed and it asked him if not what the scheduled release date was. He has denied it was delayed. He has not addressed that part of the question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: In fairness with a supplementary question the Minister does have to answer only one part but if the Minister had the information on the release date it would be helpful. 
Hon STEVEN JOYCE 
: I am not releasing a date today. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: He is not prepared to release that date. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question on notice was what the impact of his Business Growth Agenda was on a number of entities including Solid Energy—the relevant report we are told being the natural resources chapter. It was therefore on notice for him to be asked about that. It is perhaps a surprise to the House that the Minister has no idea— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No order! Order! No no there is no reason why the Minister should have anticipated that specific question about a report given that primary question.