Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:661;Page:9678] 
9. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Energy and Resources 
: Does he stand by his statement that “I have made it clear that the Government has no intention of mining high-value conservation land.”? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE (Minister of Energy and Resources) 
: 
 Yes. In relation to the Coromandel the Government is proposing to release 2574 hectares from schedule 4 which is 3.7 percent of public conservation land on the peninsula because in those nominated areas it assessed that the mineral value could outweigh the conservation value. The actual area of land affected would be considerably less than 2500 hectares. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: Does he agree that the Parakiwai and Otahu reserves on the Coromandel which include critically endangered species have high conservation values? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I can tell the House that regardless of what I think those seven locations on the Coromandel are in the document because it was agreed by the two departments that came up with the document that they were suitable for inclusion. On that basis they are out for public consultation. These matters clearly will come to the fore. 
Hon David Parker 
: How did the Minister of Energy and Resources manage to convince the Minister of Conservation that the conservation areas in the Coromandel to be removed from schedule 4 are not high-value conservation lands? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I suspect that when the Minister of Conservation read some of the reports on the areas which included statements about the noxious weed population polluting some of those areas the conclusion might have been reached to accept the advice that these areas were suitable for removal from schedule 4. 
Jonathan Young 
: Has the Minister seen any reports that advocate balancing economic concerns with conservation concerns? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: Yes. The member may be interested to know that the Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei advocates that as a policy. As was suggested by the Prime Minister before I suggest that the comment made by Miss Turei is a perfect example of where we should be going. She said: “This case clearly shows that it is possible to balance the economic concerns of miners and the conservation concerns of protecting endangered species in such a way that all parties are happy”. That comment indicates acceptance in this House that the two competing goals of environmental sensitivity and economic development can be complementary. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: How is mining kiwi habitat on the Coromandel in the national interest? 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: I think that the member needs to read the whole document and make a submission on it. Quite clearly—[ 
Interruption 
] Oh she is not going to make a submission. That is probably what will happen. There will be just a whole lot of political tub-thumping and then nothing of any great substance. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The member asked a pretty simple question about how a particular proposal was in the national interest. In response she was told to read some document and then was accused of political bluster while we were being subjected to quite an example of it. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member is starting to part a little from his point of order. He may recollect that the Minister responded to some interjections from the member’s own party which Ministers are perfectly entitled to do. If the member goes back to the supplementary question asked he will see that a question like that will get any range of answers. The answer to a question asking how the Minister can do something could be: “Easily.” The Minister was probably being a bit more helpful. I think we have heard a reasonable answer. 
Hon GERRY BROWNLEE 
: There are 300000 hectares on the Coromandel Peninsula. Some 2500 hectares 3.7 percent of the protected land is proposed for removal from schedule 4. I am sure that kiwi populations live throughout those 300000 hectares and not exclusively in small parts of the 2500 hectares that are proposed for removal. If the member knows better she should send in a submission for consideration.