Dean Jacqui: Walking Access Bill — Second Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Walking Access Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:17946] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Otago) 
: 
 To echo the words of the previous speaker the Hon David Parker former MP for Otago this is good legislation. The reason this is good legislation is that it has come full circle over the past 6 years or so to mirror the position of the National Party on the issue of public access. I say that because in the course of my 3-year tenure as the MP for Otago—and being a constituency MP who actually gets out into the electorate and talks to my constituents—I know that many of those very same farmers have long held the view that is encapsulated in this bill. So let us get off our high horses I say to Mr Parker and stop talking about the grand scheme of the Labour Government because this bill is nothing more than the National Party’s position. The bill has come full circle. It is nothing more than what the farmers particularly of the high country have welcomed with open arms. 
Is it not ironic that the Minister for Land Information Mr David Parker is the very Minister who is closing off access during the course of his negotiations with Crown pastoral lessees? I think that is one of the greatest ironies I have seen in this House. 
Hon David Parker 
: That’s absolutely wrong. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: It is absolutely true. No wonder high country farmers to a man are implacably opposed to this Labour Government to the point where the Minister David Parker does not even venture anywhere near high country farmers because he just knows that his reception will be no more than what he deserves. Just as a point of clarification I tell Mr Parker to take off the rosy spectacles. I do not believe that the Government came to an agreement with Crown pastoral leases in order to provide security of tenure which it is now doing everything it can to erode. Rather it was because the high country land was so infested with rabbits and gorse and other introduced pests and diseases that the Government sought a way to manage that land and turned to those farmers who were prepared to take on that burden. It is interesting is it not that the lessons of history have not been learnt by this Labour Government. 
Returning to the Walking Access Bill I say again and I reiterate the position of my colleague David Carter that this bill really encapsulates something that effectively was not broken. As far as I am aware in my large electorate of Otago it can be argued and I think I can argue it very successfully some of the greatest opportunities to explore the outdoors can be found. I have not had one incidence of somebody coming into my office or stopping me in the street wherever I am in the electorate and saying: “I cannot get into the high country; I cannot get to a stream because I have been denied access.” Actually there was one gentleman who I understand did—and he was a bit of a curmudgeon who has now moved on from ownership of that land; I think he sold it—in a rather mean-spirited way deny access. 
What happens is that farmers and private landowners are incredibly proud of the land they have either stewardship over or access to. They are incredibly proud of the fact that their land may be adjoining a good fishery or hunting spot and they enjoy good relations with many of the recreational hunters fishers and trampers who wish to get out into the beauty that is the Otago electorate and the lower part of the South Island and indeed all of New Zealand. 
The New Zealand Walking Access Commission has many roles and responsibilities but I think it is important to note that its role is to negotiate with private landowners. It does not have powers other than that and that is the way it should be. It reinforces yet again that this Walking Access Bill very neatly comes round to National’s position as it has always been on this issue. 
The Local Government and Environment Committee had a number of excellent submissions on this bill but there was one that to me was the most telling. I will paint the picture for members. We heard submissions from a number of interest groups: the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society; the New Zealand Fish and Game Council which gave good submissions; four-wheel drive enthusiasts; and tramping and mountaineering clubs. All gave their views which were accepted and welcomed by the select committee. But it was the submitter who talked about being able to have access to New Zealand’s beautiful back country because it was great for the submitter’s family—that was the submission that said to me this bill is a good bill. 
I will close there but I want to thank members of the select committee and the submitters who all brought something to the bill and whose views have all been catered for. We support this bill.