2. Hon PHIL GOFF (Leader of the Opposition) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
When he told Parliament in February that “the Government will also be looking at regulations that may be preventing natural resources being used most productively” and that it would “make significant changes to schedule 4”, was his intention to allow mining in national parks and protected areas?
Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
Our intention was to explore the possibilities in this area and to see whether they were economically valuable, could be achieved in an environmentally sustainable way, and would be acceptable to the community.
When Gerry Brownlee came to him in 2009 with a proposal for a step change in the economy by allowing mining on national parks and in protected areas, did he encourage or discourage Mr Brownlee?
I encouraged Mr Brownlee to go out there and ask New Zealanders whether it could fit within that environment.
Is it not true that in his speech made the day before Mr Brownlee’s Cabinet paper went to Cabinet, he told this Parliament that actually he intended to go out and mine those national parks and that is what his message really was?
Why did the Prime Minister yesterday, and on many occasions, blame officials for the 10 February Cabinet paper that proposed mining in 467,000 hectares of national park land, when that Cabinet paper was signed by Gerry Brownlee and Kate Wilkinson, was promoted by both of them in Cabinet, and was supported by the Prime Minister himself?
If that the member wants to talk about a Government that blames officials—well, he was part of one for 9 years that won the world cup for the event!
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I can tell by your frown that you understand that it is out of—
Mr SPEAKERThe member knows he cannot seek a point of order and speak like that. I will hear his point of order, but he is lucky. Members should settle down a fraction.
You will be aware that there was no effort made in that answer to answer the specific question that was asked of the Prime Minister.
The Speaker is considering a point of order and there should be silence. Members know that—especially senior members on both sides of the House. I believe that the Prime Minister did take a part of the question very much out of context in answering it, and made no attempt, therefore, to really answer the question. So I invite the Prime Minister to answer the question, rather than just take a part of it totally out of context.
Did the Prime Minister ever personally favour mining in the Paparoa National Park, the Coromandel, and Great Barrier Island?
Does the Prime Minister still believe that mining in national parks, the initiatives in the Job Summit, the 2025 Taskforce, and plans to become an international financial service centre will achieve step change in the New Zealand economy and catch up with Australia, as he promised New Zealand?
No, I do not think mining in national parks will, because it will not be taking place. But many of the other things the member discussed are works in progress and will make a difference. But if the member wants to give me 10 minutes I am happy to list all the things the National Government has done to lift performance to take New Zealand out of the recession. They include—and I can start if he wants—reforming the labour laws, which will be going through this Parliament, cutting personal taxes instead of waiting for 9 years, reform of the Resource Management Act, dealing with the situation in Environment Canterbury—
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I know that members are not allowed to interject when you are on your feet but I think two members clapped the Prime Minister when you were. Is that allowed?