Govt may not abide by Clyde decision

Press, 28 November 1980, Page 4

Govt may not abide by Clyde decision

Parliamentary reporter The Government will not necessarily abide by the decision of the Planning Tribunal Appeal Board on the proposed high dam at Clyde. The Minister of Works and Development (Mr W. L. Young) was asked in Parliament yesterday to give an assurance that the Government would not seek special empowering legislation to nullify the effect of the board’s decision, if the decision proves to be against the Government’s preference for a high dam. He declined to give any such assurance. The decision of toe board —beyond which there is no further appeal except on points of law — is due soon and is widely believed to be against a high dam. This belief prompted a question in the House yesterday by the member for Papanui (Mr M. K. Moore), who asked if toe Government intended to abide by the decision. Mr Young replied that toe decision had yet to be released and was therefore still sub judice. “It would therefore be quite improper for me to speculate or comment on the

possible outcome," he said. Mr Moore then asked Mr Young to give an assurance that the Government would not seek empowering or specific legislation to cover the issue at some later date. Mr Young: I would say this: that we cannot make any decision on the matter until we know what the tribunal’s decision is. If it is a favourable one, no action is called for. If it is an adverse one, the Government naturally will have to study the terms and decide what course of action is necessary. He said that the board could make one of several decisions and that it was not simply a, “yes” or “no" issue. i The board could approve a high dam, but subject to specific conditions and provisions. These, too, would require study after the decision was released, to determine if any Government action was needed. At this, the member for Auckland Central (Mr R- W. Prebble) asked Mr Young if he was telling toe House that the Government was prepared •to follow the planning taws of New Zea-

land only if decisions made! under those laws were i» ■ toe Government’s favour. ; Mr Young said such an assertion was hypothetical, “When the tribunal’s deci*, sion comes forward, the Government is going to have to consider it. If it is favourable, no action is called for. If it is unfavourable, or qua* lifted, the Government -will, have to consider the qualifi*: cations or the decision as a whole,” he said.