3. Hon ANNETTE KING (Deputy Leader—Labour) Link to this
to the Prime Minister
What advice did he rely on when commenting in Australia on the safety of the Pike River coalmine?
Rt Hon JOHN KEY (Prime Minister) Link to this
I did not provide a view on the safety of the Pike River coalmine; I pointed out its design and the differences I understood there were with Australian mines. For the purposes of clarification, let me read out the actual transcript of what I said. The question asked by Dennis Shanahan from the Australian was the following: “The issue of mining safety in New Zealand seems to be behind Australia’s. Do you accept that?”. My answer was: “I don’t think I’m in a position to fully give you a view on that, but what I can say is that there’s a royal commission of inquiry into the Pike River mine disaster. On that commission is Stuart Bell from Australia, who’s one of the major mine experts here in Australia. I do think, rightfully so, we need to ask some questions whether mine safety standards are high enough. What is true is that the Pike River mine couldn’t have been constructed in that way in Australia. The single entry, 2.4km, upwards-sloping mine shaft, I don’t believe, is legal in Australia and so from New Zealand’s point of view we have to ensure we have the world’s best practice. I have no doubt that there will be changes actually recommended in New Zealand. We’ve taken an interim review of our mines to check the safety, but long term there’ll need to be other changes, I suspect.”
Why did he criticise a union delegate for talking about the safety of the Pike River mine before the royal commission of inquiry was completed, but he felt able to answer a question by an Australian media person about mines and mine safety in New Zealand?
Because if I had done that and had talked about mine safety, I would have been hypocritical, but I did not; I talked about the construction of the mine and the differences between New Zealand and Australia. I would add that it was a mine that was consented under a Labour Government.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. I think you need to tell that member that 1998 was a National—
Mr SPEAKERThe member will resume his seat immediately. That is an outright abuse of the point of order process. The shadow Leader of the House should set a better example. He may not agree with the Prime Minister’s answer, but he should not use the point of order process to voice his disagreement. He should be careful of doing that.
No, the member cannot. The Prime Minister has answered two questions in the way he sees fit. As long as the question has been answered and nothing unparliamentary has been said, it is not up to the Speaker to adjudicate on the accuracy or otherwise of any answer. That is not the way question time is conducted.
Hon Trevor Mallard Link to this
Which answer was correct: his answer to Annette King’s supplementary question or his answer to mine?
If he is now saying that mine safety standards need to be changed, why wait until after the royal commission has reported to make the changes, or is he prepared to guarantee that no further mining accidents will happen in the next 2 years under the current mining regulations?
I am not saying that they need to change; I have said, exactly, that the royal commission of inquiry needs to look at that matter. I have simply made the point that a particular mine that was constructed in New Zealand would not be legal to be constructed in Australia.
As an interim measure until the royal commission reports, will he implement the Queensland regulatory standards for mine safety, which are considered world best practice, and will he contract experts from Queensland to come to New Zealand to oversee their implementation; if not, why not?
No, because an audit was taken of the safety of mines. We are now working our way through the royal commission of inquiry, and we will see what recommendations it makes.
Is he aware that family members of Pike River miners are now calling for increased mine inspection to occur now; if not, why not listen to what they have to say, rather than wait?
Because we have undertaken a safety audit of New Zealand mines and we are now waiting for the royal commission to make recommendations.
The member would have to direct that question to the appropriate Minister, who is the best person to answer that question. I can say, from the top of my head, that there were a number of factors in relation to smaller mines.