Mapua Site—Contamination Clean-up
08 Aug 2008
Spokesperson:
Green Party Environment Spokesperson
Dr RUSSEL NORMAN (Co-Leader—Green) to the Minister for the Environment: Is he confident that the Māpua clean-up has reduced risks to the health of the community and the estuary; if so, why?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for the Environment) : On balance, probably yes, but I want to read the auditor’s final report and the subsequent report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment before finalising my own view.
Dr Russel Norman: Can the Minister confirm that soil containing up to 21 tonnes of organochlorine pesticides was fed into the soil drier at Māpua while it was running at between 250 and 380 degrees Celsius, and is he comfortable with the fact that this was in breach of the resource consent that stated that the maximum temperature had to be kept at 120 degrees Celsius, because at 250 degrees Celsius organochlorine is converted into the deadly chemical dioxin?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I do not have the scientific knowledge that the member has, but clearly that is one of the questions that will be looked at when the final report is received.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: Why did the Minister both last week and today refuse to accept the conclusions of the report of the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment and to say it was only an interim report, when the parliamentary commissioner told the select committee this morning: “This is my final report. The future technical audit statement will not affect these conclusions.”; and will the Minister now simply state whether the Government accepts these damning conclusions of his Government’s environmental stewardship?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: I made those comments because I understood that the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment was open to looking at the final auditor’s report, to see whether that affected her decision. If the member says that her mind is closed on that, I will accept his word.
Dr Russel Norman: Can the Minister confirm that if dioxins were produced in the drier at Māpua, as seems almost certain from the evidence, those dioxins would not have been contained within the drier at Māpua, because although the air filtration system contained carbon filters designed to filter out dioxins, those carbon filters were not functional for at least 12 months; if so, is he concerned that this clean-up has spread persistent cancer-causing dioxins through the air over Māpua?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: That is certainly one of the propositions that has been put, and it is an area that, I understand, there is still debate about.
Hon Dr Nick Smith: What are the serious financial issues over the ministry’s management of the Māpua contamination site that have led to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment referring the matter to the Auditor-General?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: The fact that a final contract was never signed because there was disagreement as to who had ongoing liability.
Dr Russel Norman: With the benefit of hindsight, was the most polluted site in New Zealand, which is surrounded by estuaries and residential dwellings, the best site to trial an experimental and high-risk technology for the remediation of toxic sites?
Hon TREVOR MALLARD: Probably not. But the member will remember that the decision to start this project and to progress it was not made by the Government; it was made by the local authority.
RSS News Feed
