Dyson Ruth: Freedom Camping Bill — First Reading 
Dyson Ruth: Freedom Camping Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:673;Page:19264] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 Conservation is one of those areas that arouse a huge amount of passion and pride from all New Zealanders. What is most disappointing about the debate that has commenced is the total lack of passion vision support or understanding that the Minister of Conservation demonstrated in her speech. That will be a big disappointment as has been this Government’s contribution to conservation over the last 2½ years. 
The Freedom Camping Bill has been warmly welcomed by many groups around this country and Labour will certainly support its progress to the Local Government and Environment Committee. I am disappointed that we will have such little time at the select committee as indicated by the Minister to consider the concerns that have already been expressed publicly. As with many legislative provisions the devil is in the detail. If we do not get it right at the select committee and report it back to the House we are likely to cause problems. The rush I understand is to make sure the provisions are enabled before the Rugby World Cup. I personally do not think that is a good enough reason to rush legislation and possibly get it wrong. 
As the Minister outlined this provision is really an empowering one so that local councils can determine areas where they say freedom camping is not allowed. That is quite a big step for New Zealand to take. We have often prided ourselves on our welcoming attitude to people who want to get out and about and see the best of our country. We do not welcome people who pollute it. We do not welcome people who abuse the beauty we are so proud of and destroy it for other people. It is important to have that protection but whether this bill is the right mechanism for doing it is certainly part of the debate we will have. 
I am not sure I agree with the Minister that the instant fine regime is the most appropriate and I do think that there will be more difficulty with enforcement than the Minister has outlined. For example if a freedom camper gets a fine and then gets in his or her car and drives to the airport to leave the country as previously planned what happens? Do we just say that that is bad luck? I am not sure we do. The legislation reads to me as if the vehicle owner has the responsibility but it could be a rental car company—more likely than not it will be a rental car company. Then what happens? Does the rental car company have the onus of passing on the fine that has been incurred—unfairly in my view? Does Hertz for example have the responsibility of chasing that person around the other side of the world in order to get that $200? That detail would be quite important particularly to rental car companies. 
Another concern I have is that there could be some relationship between motor camps and a council. The council will determine the zones where freedom camping is or is not allowed. If there is some relationship between a camping ground and a council the council might say that it is to their benefit to exclude freedom camping in a large part of that area for the benefit of the motor camp. That would not be fair on freedom campers. They would be unfairly punished because of that relationship. That is something we also might need to protect against. 
Another area of concern that has been drawn to my attention through quite considerable publicity around this bill is the issue of trampers. It is very common in New Zealand for trampers to sleep the night at the start of the track or at the end of the track and then start their journey the next day either on foot or by driving home. If that area is not allowed to be used as a freedom camping area then those trampers might have to stay some distance away and ruin what is a very important part of tramping tradition of being able to get to the start of the track the night before and then start walking very very early the next morning. Those are areas that I think deserve the rigour of attention. 
I am sure Chris Auchinvole will guide the bill very well through the Local Government and Environment Committee which in my view has developed a reputation—and a fair reputation—of paying considerable attention to detail in legislation. Our deliberations today were significantly enhanced by the presence of Aaron Gilmore who contributed very well. It was fortunate he was there because otherwise we may well have floundered on some of the detail particularly in the local government provisions. It was extraordinarily helpful and I hope he is able to sub in for some of the members as we consider this bill. 
This bill has arisen because of the Government’s desire which I certainly support to ensure that precious areas of our country—areas where people want to visit see and enjoy—are protected against anything unpleasant are damaged or are destroyed by people who are not as respectful as we want them to be. We do not know whether that happens a lot or is quite rare but we know that some councils have been particularly upset about it. I know that other colleagues will add to that. 
Rural Women New Zealand is not a group that complains lightly. It has put on public record its concerns about the damage to specific environments that is being done by freedom campers. Mount Maunganui locals have complained of behaviour in their area. I am sure they were not referring to Simon Bridges or to any other local members of Parliament; they were referring to freedom campers. That area is a magnificent part of the country and I am sure Simon Bridges wants to make sure it is protected as well. 
The same has happened in Queenstown and in Picton. Those are areas where we want to make sure that as we parade around the world inviting people to come here and saying to people that our country is the best in the world and that it is 100% Pure New Zealand we want to be able to back that up. When those people come to visit we want to show them the pristine areas we so enjoy. 
I find it frustrating though that the Minister supports this sort of legislation as she did in her introductory speech but at the same time has significantly undermined the ability of her own department—the Department of Conservation—to progress the very issues that this Freedom Camping Bill is designed to protect. Basically instead of charging the Department of Conservation with protecting our waterways protecting our land and enhancing it for the betterment of all New Zealanders and visitors to enjoy she has handed it over to Minister Brownlee and said he should have a look at the national park areas in schedule 4 to see whether there is anything there worth mining. In the most precious parts of New Zealand she has said we should have a little surgical mining as the Prime Minister described it. 
I was stunned that the Minister of Conservation was prepared to hand over that part of her portfolio which should be the area she defends most to something as outrageous as mining in those protected areas. Members of the public were outraged as well and I was very proud that we had thousands and thousands of New Zealanders marching on the street and saying they want to protect the most precious parts of our country. These are the parts of the country that we also want this legislation to protect from freedom campers who are damaging it. 
I will return to the actions the Minister has taken in terms of the Department of Conservation. The department is now required to be a profit-making organisation. That is not what the Department of Conservation was set up to do. It was designed to be the advocacy group the lobby group and the brains behind the passion that New Zealanders feel about their most important areas. 
The Minister has led a huge and negative step backwards in her own portfolio. It is a big disappointment to many New Zealanders who care about our environment more than they care about anything else. I was surprised the Minister did not take the lead when this bill was originally publicised. In fact it was the Minister for the Environment who took the lead in all of the media. I was quite surprised that the Minister of Conservation introduced the bill today. I thought it had perhaps been transferred to the Minister for the Environment for some reason because all of the publicity had Nick Smith’s name attached to it rather than that of the Hon Kate Wilkinson. That is a puzzle but I am sure it is something I will spend more time discussing at the select committee and I will see whether we can get to the bottom of it. 
As I said the principle of the legislation to protect our areas that are currently being damaged by freedom campers is supported by Labour. We will support this bill going to the select committee. I want the concerns I have raised—and others I am sure submitters will raise—to be addressed in the select committee process. I am sorry that it will be so truncated because of the Rugby World Cup. I think our rights to enjoy our country are worth protecting and I will be ensuring that that happens.