Smith Nick: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Nick: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 23 September 2008. Volume:650;Page:19088. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 Part 1 of the Walking Access Bill establishes the New Zealand Walking Access Commission. I think the first thing to do is to give some context to the broader debate that has occurred in the development of this legislation. 
At the core of New Zealanders’ unique sense of being Kiwis is having access to the outdoors and increasingly having access to the unique lakes rivers and mountains that make up this beautiful country. Alongside that is a tourism industry that has become increasingly dependent on those overseas visitors who contribute over $8 billion a year to our economy also being able to have access to our wild places. In this Walking Access Bill Parliament is seeking to set up a commission that will provide leadership on and have the capacity to negotiate the facilitation of walking access. I think it is also proper that in this health-conscious age we acknowledge that more and more New Zealanders want to get outside go outdoors and have the opportunity to walk this stunning country of ours. 
I think it is also important to recite the history. New Zealand had a body very similar to the Walking Access Commission that was abolished in 1990 by the previous Labour Government. When the Department of Conservation was established it was intended that this role would be a function of that department and a decision was made then to get rid of what was seen as an ineffectual body. 
National members at the Local Government and Environment Committee—and I am talking specifically on the purpose clause—are of the view that we need to do more to improve public access. However that requires a careful balancing of private property rights—people purchasing freehold property and having a reasonable expectation of being able to have the enjoyment of that property—versus the tension that exists in spots around New Zealand where people who own property can effectively gain a monopoly right to access to a public good such as a lake river or mountain as a consequence of other people not being able to have access to it. We believe that this commission will have a useful function in terms of negotiating solutions. 
I have dealt with a vast number of these examples as a constituency MP. I have to say that this issue is quite regionally based. If we go right back to when Queen Victoria gave her instructions for a Queen’s Chain to be set aside alongside water bodies—lakes rivers the ocean—we see that there was quite a lot of variance in the degree to which the Queen’s Chain was provided. Quite a narrow view was taken in my own area of Nelson about the areas where the Queen’s Chain would apply and as a consequence I have large amounts of riparian rights adjacent to many streams much of the coastline and a few of the lakes in the Nelson region. 
The view of National members is that providing for a commission that does not override the right of private landowners but can negotiate is the right way forward. When the Government first proposed its more radical proposals under Jim Sutton National opposed them. We said that they went too far we said that they had lost balance and we said that negotiation was the right answer. We are pleased that what we see in the purpose of this bill is a reflection of that approach of negotiation. We believe that in relation to the vast bulk of access problems that develop in corners of New Zealand with good faith and some sensible resourcing from the Government the negotiated approach proposed in the purpose of this Walking Access Bill will take us forward. 
I would be interested in getting from the Minister in the chair the Hon Damien O’Connor some feel for the resources that will be made available to back up this commission. It seems a little bit strange that the administration of this bill will fall under the responsibility of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. Previously this issue has been a responsibility of the Department of Conservation. If we look back to the commission that was abolished by Labour in 1990 under the Lange-Palmer-Moore Government we see that one of the key reasons that it failed was that it did not get the resources it required. So I am very interested to hear from the Minister what sorts of resources will back up this bill in order to make the commission worthwhile. The truth is there will be practical issues like providing fences stiles and signage and if we are going to make some practical progress on these issues of access then providing some budgetary allocation for this new commission will be critical to its success. 
The National Party is saying that the bill takes a good approach—far better than that previously put forward. We have got rid of compulsory acquisition and got rid of the “walk at will” ideas that had been advanced and that caused such furore amongst the farming and rural communities. But if this voluntary approach is going to work then we need to provide some cash to pay for the practical fencing practical stiles and signage that will make this bill workable. I would be very interested in a contribution from the Minister to outline what commitments the Government has made in that respect.