3. METIRIA TUREI (Co-Leader—Green) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
Does he stand by his reported statement on Breakfast TV yesterday regarding mining on schedule 4 land that “we are not environmental vandals, that’s for sure”?
Hon JOHN KEYDoes he agree that today’s decision not to mine in schedule 4 land is a victory for our “clean, green” brand, which will be better off because New Zealanders fought his Government’s plan to mine in their most precious places?
Does the Prime Minister agree that New Zealanders are not hysterical but are incredibly proud of these precious wilderness places and their rich biodiversity, and that New Zealanders love them for their intrinsic value?
What I think came through in the submission process were two clear streams of thought. One was that New Zealanders do not want mining on national parks, and Government has accepted that. But New Zealanders also espoused the clear view that they do want to see an expansion of our mineral and exploration activities in New Zealand. The Government will now be doing that, and that is why we have commissioned, amongst other things, the aerial magnetic surveys in Northland and the West Coast of the South Island.
Can the Prime Minister confirm that our “100% Pure New Zealand” brand and our tourism industries are worth far more than mining in our national parks and precious places could ever be?
One of the factors why the Government originally scaled back the large recommendation from the officials from 467,000 hectares to 7,000 hectares was recognition that there is natural tension there. But it is worth looking at the indications that came from the Tourism Industry Association and its members, because they were fifty-fifty, actually, on the issue of mining in national parks.
Will the Government consider adopting my member’s bill, currently before the House, which will increase the protections that schedule 4 provides for our national parks, our marine reserves, and our other most precious places?
We have not had an opportunity to consider it, but the Government will come and speak to the member about it and see whether we can lend our support.
Does the Prime Minister agree that the protection of the schedule 4 land, our national parks, the Coromandel, and Great Barrier Island is a victory for the New Zealand community and the green movement, who have made sure that his children and future generations of New Zealanders will be able to enjoy these wild places just as we do today?
I think it is a clear demonstration that this is a pragmatic Government that listens to the people of New Zealand.
David GarrettHow does he explain shutting down all possibility of mining schedule 4 land while simultaneously preparing to give away billions of dollars of ironsand, manganese, and other resources from the foreshore and seabed in perpetuity to select iwi?
Is his mind made up regarding alienation of the foreshore and seabed from Crown ownership; if not, if it took 30,000 protesters to change the Government’s position on schedule 4 land, how many protesters would it take to stop the Government from giving away billions of dollars of resources to select iwi?
Any good Government listens to the people of New Zealand. The feedback I have been getting on the foreshore and seabed recommendations made by this Government has been that they are, again, pragmatic and are seen to address the issues of access to justice and the concerns that New Zealanders had about solely having Crown ownership of the foreshore and seabed. On that basis, the Government, with the support of the Māori Party and others, will be progressing with legislation.