Twyford Phil: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Third ReadingText is subject to correctionTwyford Phil: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 23 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14220. Text is subject to correction.]PHIL TWYFORD (Labour—Te Atatū): It was quite something to hear Paul Goldsmith the man who has done much to protect that most endangered of political species John Banks revealing a very soft and sensitive side to his personality that he has hitherto never revealed to the House: this deep concern that he has for endangered species. I must say that it makes a nice change—it makes a nice change—from his sort of flimsy fiscal conservative face. He is the man who will surely be the future member for Epsom—who will surely be the future member for Epsom if he can just stop people running around putting up hoardings—Iain Lees-Galloway: With his own name on them.PHIL TWYFORD: —with his own name on them. It is very good to follow the future member for Epsom.It is interesting—I noticed that the last two National Party members who got up to speak in spite of warbling endlessly about what a wonderful member Jacqui Dean is and what a great bill this Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill is both appeared to be asleep when the call was available. Actually both of them—Maggie Barry and the future member for Epsom—did wonderful impersonations of Gerry Brownlee when he is having his afternoon nap and the dinner bell goes. They jumped up from their seats all kind of confused and disorientated shuffling through their papers desperately trying to work out what bill it is that they should be talking about.I thought that the member Eugenie Sage actually made a very good comment in her contribution which was that this bill really is useful tinkering. I do not think that anybody is going to disagree that consolidating the penalty provisions across half a dozen different pieces of legislation to improve the protection of our conservation and natural heritage is a good thing. That is fine. But I was sitting here listening to the earlier contributions thinking about Eugenie Sage’s comment and reflecting on what it is that really makes this National Government tick. What is it really all about?Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Money and privilege.PHIL TWYFORD: Money and privilege my colleague Clayton Cosgrove says. So when the Government members are not actually selling off publicly owned assets—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: And botching that.PHIL TWYFORD: —they are indeed botching it—when they are not rewriting our employment laws at the behest of Warner Bros when they are not handing $30 million over to Rio Tinto—Hon Clayton Cosgrove: There’s no jobs.PHIL TWYFORD: —with no job guarantees when they are not rewriting our gambling laws as part of a deal to get Skycity to build a $400 million convention centre when they are not creating Draconian new penalties at the behest of Anadarko against the right to peaceful protest on the high seas—when they are not doing all these sorts of things well what are they doing actually? What are they about?We can make some observations about what they have done in the environmental and conservation area. What we have seen under this Government since John Key became Prime Minister is a systematic undermining of the environmental protections and bottom lines. We have seen the gutting of our climate change policy and the KyotoProtocol walked away from. We have seen countless numbers of pieces of legislation that they brought to this House that weaken the protections in the Resource Management Act for the natural environment and the right of communities to have a say. We have seen the systematic weakening of local government and really a determination to tilt the playing field in favour of developers and in favour of capital and away from the environment and away from people. The recent fiasco around Nick Smith and the Ruataniwha Dam about which he gagged his own department—The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): Order! It is a third reading speech.PHIL TWYFORD: Yes. I am coming back. I am coming back to the Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill which has been described as a piece of useful tinkering. It would be remiss not to observe and remark on the difference between this bill and the Government’s record generally on conservation and the environment. Nothing reveals that more than the fiasco around the Ruataniwha Dam.This bill does some good things. It does some little practical things to actually improve the administration of the protection of our natural heritage. But there is a huge irony in the fact that the bill actually increases the penalties for things like illegal whitebaiting and fishing in marine reserves and yet this Government presides over the systematic overfishing of many many marine species in New Zealand under the quota system.Jacqui Dean: No.PHIL TWYFORD: It does. There is a huge irony in that. This bill actually increases the penalties for people who illegally fence off a slice of national park and chop down a few trees. Yet it was this National Government that recently stripped out the protection for urban forests and has deliberately hobbled the ability of local councils to use tree protection rules to preserve urban forests. If that is not an irony I do not know what is.The Local Government and Environment Committee agreed with Maryan Street’s amendment to incorporate the Marine Mammals Protection Act along with the various bits of legislation whose penalty and compliance provisions are consolidated by this bill. Yet this Government has consistently refused to do anything substantial to protect either Māui’s or Hector’s dolphins our two most endangered marine mammal species. So there is no shortage of irony in this debate.It has to be remarked that although the member is happy to bring a bill to the House that will increase the penalty for people who are cruel violent or abusive to for instance a baby seal washed up on the shore this Government has stripped out resources from the Department of Conservation. It is worth pointing out that in the 2009 Budget the Department of Conservation had $54 million cut from its budget over a 4-year period. There have been 400 jobs cut from the Department of Conservation under this Government. That is around one in six staff. In September 2011 the Government announced that it was restructuring again—cutting 96 members of staff and saving $7.5 million. So it is just not on for members on the National Party benches to get up and warble about their commitment to the conservation estate and their commitment to the natural environment when time and time again they have presided over and voted for legislation in this House that weakens our environmental protections and has cut resources from the Department of Conservation which is the very agency that New Zealanders have charged with the responsibility of protecting our natural environment and protecting endangered species.Having said that we are voting for this bill. We do think it is worthwhile to create a consistent consolidated two-tier schedule of penalties that will both act as a greater deterrent for people who are behaving in a destructive and abusive way to our natural heritage and also make it easier for the authorities to deal with the seal clubbers the people who smuggle geckos and tuatara out of the country illegally and the people whomill a stand of trees on the edge of a national park. It will make it easier for the authorities to deal with those kinds of offences. Thank you.