6. METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Is he confident that his Government’s Budget will protect New Zealand’s environment, which he recently described as “a huge part of our brand.”?
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
Firstly, I congratulate the member on her elevation to co-leader of the Greens. Secondly, the answer is yes.
Can the Prime Minister identify the species that he thinks can become extinct in light of his $54 million cut in the budget of the Department of Conservation, and are those extinctions part of his vision for our brand?
The Department of Conservation, like every other Government department, will have to learn to live with the more difficult economic times that we find ourselves in. The member quoted a number that spanned a 4-year period. On the predictions that I have, in those 4 years the Department of Conservation will spend roughly $1.7 billion. That is a lot of money going into conservation.
How will reducing the biosecurity surveillance budget by 11 percent help to safeguard both the farm and forestry economies, or are more introduced pests and diseases part of his vision for our brand?
Hon David ParkerCan the Prime Minister guarantee that the cut of $9 million to the Department of Conservation output class for the management of national heritage—covering weed and pest control of national parks and other Department of Conservation land—will not result in significant job losses and unemployment for those who carry out pest and weed eradication?
All I can say is that $419 million is going into conservation over the next 12 months. Yes, the Department of Conservation will have to learn to live with more difficult economic conditions. That fact is not lost on every other New Zealander, except members of the Labour Party who still think they are back in power with massive surpluses, spending whatever they like, and just whacking it on the bill. [ Interruption]
Mr SPEAKERThe Leader of the Opposition and his front-bench colleagues should show a little courtesy to the co-leader of the Greens. They are interjecting so loudly across the House I had no chance of hearing Metiria Turei, who has the floor.
Hon David Cunliffe Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. You have previously enjoined the House to respect the use of parliamentary questions to give straight answers. It is quite clear that in his response the Prime Minister, by his use of the latest Crosby/Textor phrase, has sought to bring disrepute on the Opposition.
The member cannot use a point of order to debate the quality of an answer given by the Prime Minister. [ Interruption] The Hon Annette King should not keep interjecting while I am trying to rule on a matter. I just ask members to be reasonable. It is not unreasonable to show a little courtesy, and I ask for courtesy for Metiria Turei.
Can the Prime Minister describe how cutting back the Community Conservation Fund will “encourage the initiatives of thousands of volunteers and dozens of organisations [to participate] in community conservation projects.”, a stated goal of the National Party’s 2008 election policy?
The Community Conservation Fund was to have funding of $4 million; it now has funding of $2 million. All of the 46 community projects that have been started will continue to be funded. There are other options for funding community projects, from the Lotteries Commission right through to regional councils. But, as I say, everyone will have to live with more difficult economic conditions.
Does the Prime Minister consider our conservation estate a vital attraction for tourists; if so, how does he consider that funding cuts to those who track the pests, to those who cuts the tracks, and to those who pull the weeds will affect our indigenous flora and fauna upon which much of our tourism industry is based?
In answer to the first question: yes. In answer to the latter: because I expect the Department of Conservation to learn to live with $419 million, not $431 million. I do not think that that is a big ask.
How does cutting the budget for education for sustainability on, for example, the Mātauranga Kura Taiao programme, Education for Sustainability advisers, and Enviroschools enhance our brand; or are eco-literate children not part of the Prime Minister’s vision of New Zealand’s future brand?
Does the Prime Minister agree that New Zealand’s clean, green reputation—indeed, New Zealand’s “clean, green” brand—is worth billions of dollars to the New Zealand economy and to thousands of struggling New Zealand businesses, and that during a recession we should be doing more, not less, to protect our environment on which our economy is based?
I certainly agree that part of New Zealand’s important brand is the “clean, green” image, and that is one of the reasons why funding in the Budget has been as excessive as it has; it is very important we maintain that brand. But it is equally important that we realise we have to live within our economic means, and I do not think that a very modest reduction in expenditure is out of the question for any Government department at the moment.
I seek leave to table the National Party’s 2008 conservation policy, which encouraged community conservation.
I seek the leave of the House to table a press release describing a report from the PA Consulting group, which identifies the extent of the effect of, and the dollar value of, New Zealand’s environment on our economy.