King Colin: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:650;Page:18857] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to follow my learned colleague Eric Roy who very clearly articulated the basis of National’s support for the Walking Access Bill. In dealing with Part 1 I just make the comment that I can remember being at Meat and Wool New Zealand’s office when I heard that John Acland was asked by Jim Sutton to conduct a process that would take walking access within New Zealand one step further forward. I can remember talking to the chief executive officer Mr Taylor and we both agreed then that there would not be an easy way to go forward. It is interesting that we have now had a pretty torrid sort of a journey but we have got to this Committee stage where we are looking at Part 1 of the bill which includes the purpose and interpretation clauses. 
I will dwell for a moment on the code of responsible conduct because there is still the need for the Walking Access Commission when it is set up to develop a code of conduct. That is effectively what clause 4 the interpretation clause deals primarily with. It takes us right through a whole range of things and gives us the meaning of what is referred to by way of interpretation under the bill. It talks about the administering authority it talks about the Crown and then it talks about the code of responsible conduct. That code is very important because although we hear very often in New Zealand about people’s rights we do not often hear enough about people’s responsibilities. There is no doubt about the fact that this code of responsible conduct will talk about those responsibilities. At the end of the day it is best to treat these things with respect and as a privilege because that denotes a responsible standard of behaviour. 
I will concentrate for a moment on the minority report from the Green Party. I believe that that report represents the remnants of what caused so much grief regarding the previous bills around the right to roam that were introduced into this House. The Green Party talks about enshrining the right of public access to land and it talks in such a way as to suggest that this bill does not give the Walking Access Commission sufficient teeth. That enshrining in the law of a right of access is something that has to be balanced against other people’s rights and that is why it is very important that we talk in terms of privilege and responsibility. We look forward to those concepts being developed within the code of responsible conduct the development of which will be one of the fundamental responsibilities of the commission. 
Another aspect of the interpretation clause that has come about through the progress of this bill through its second reading concerns firearms. Once upon a time it would have been inconceivable that we would have a negotiated outcome around access and the use of firearms. However we see that clause 4 talks about the use of firearms. It also defines an honorary enforcement officer as being “an honorary enforcement officer appointed under section 48 and warranted under section 49;”. Those officers will have responsibility for ensuring that the code of conduct is adhered to and if there are any issues those people are the ones with whom someone can make first contact in order to sort the issues out. 
There is a fair amount of information in Part 1. Comments about the landowner would have come up but during the second reading and in the select committee process that term was changed to “landholder”. That seems to be quite sensible to me because largely speaking there is a whole range of tenure of land. One can have leasehold land and one can have freehold land. Basically the term refers to the person who occupies the land. In this case it is very appropriate that we refer to “landholder” because not all land is freehold. From that point of view we can move forward and actually keep the interpretation of the bill quite clear. 
The interpretation clause refers to the Minister who is ultimately to be in control and accountable under the legislation. That Minister will be the Minister for Rural Affairs and that raises a point that concerned many of us on this side of the Chamber originally. This bill went to the Local Government and Environment Committee. It is interesting to see that the advice that was given to the select committee came from the Department of Conservation and the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry. That still leaves me wondering why the bill was not originally sent to the Primary Production Committee. 
Of significance too are the efforts to accommodate as many people as possible in having access to the outdoors. Of course the interpretation clause refers to personal mobility devices. That pertains explicitly to people with disabilities and to the fact that they should have the opportunity to be able to access walkways whether on unformed roads or on formed roads. 
There is a lot of work to be done by the commission and that will be quite an exercise because the commission has to look after aspects of structure and maintenance. It has to be able to manage the walkways in a constructive way over private land and over public land and it has to constantly be aware that there is a high level of accountability back to the Occupational Safety and Health Service and to other such organisations. The maintenance of tracks will need to be kept up. When we stop and think about the structures involved we realise that we are talking about bridges fences gates shelters stiles boundary markers hoarding markers and notices. That being the case there will be a restraint on the commission in the sense that it will not want walkways to fall into disrepair. 
The maintenance issue was highlighted quite early on when the bill went to the select committee. The comment was made that effectively the Department of Conservation because of its huge landholding was actually starting to lose its focus on as well as its funding for the maintenance of tracks appropriately. When we look at Part 1 we see that the responsibility for access to public land will be transferred across to the Walking Access Commission. On that basis we will be looking forward to a much better performance. We will be looking forward to having much better public access to public land held by the Department of Conservation and we will be looking forward to seeing a higher standard of maintenance signposting and mapping of walkways. 
When we look at Part 1 we see that things are very positive. It is important that we do not lose sight of the purpose of this bill and of the fact that we are pleased to be able to support it. It has been a long journey. The interpretation of aspects within the bill relating to the landholder and the responsibilities and privileges of access is borne out in clause 16 “Contents of code”. We look forward to seeing that code come to fruition. It will be advertised publicly and will be out for consultation. No doubt that in itself will bring about the expression of a certain level of ire and there will be a lot more input made into the code. It is a pleasure to speak in support of this bill. Thank you very much Mr Chairperson.