Smith Nick: Freedom Camping Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Smith Nick: Freedom Camping Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 11 August 2011. Volume:674;Page:20570. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 Not only is the Freedom Camping Bill important in protecting New Zealand’s environment but it has served another very useful purpose. It has flushed out in this Parliament those who are the practical greens as distinct from those who are just the political greens. We have people on the Opposition benches who have raved on about water quality during their entire political careers and who cannot give a speech without mentioning the words “clean green New Zealand” but when they are given the opportunity to actually do something practical about it they want New Zealand to be the polluters’ paradise. 
The Government says we need simply to give councils the practical laws to be able to control freedom camping. The Labour and Green Party Opposition members say they want to let it be free to continue. I wish members opposite would get out of the comfort of their offices and get out to real New Zealand where some of our most precious spots are being used and abused. [ 
Interruption 
] My question for the member who interjects Sue Moroney is what is “100% Pure” about the experience of stopping at a beautiful picnic spot on the banks of Lake Wakatipu becoming overwhelmed with the smell of human sewage and seeing toilet paper and human effluent all over the place and published from one end of the reserve to the other? Wake up guys! That is not good for the New Zealand brand. 
All this bill does is let our councils and the Department of Conservation define where people can freedom camp where they can camp subject to self-containment and where they cannot. [ 
Interruption 
] They cannot ban camping everywhere I say to Mr Mallard. He is a former Minister for the Environment. He did not do anything about it. He received dozens of letters from councils asking him to move on this issue but he did not do a thing. 
Secondly the presumption in this bill is that people can camp unless it is specifically restricted. The really crunchy provision in this bill is simply to introduce an instant fine so that if someone is camping where they are specifically prohibited by the council from doing so they can be subject to a fine. At the moment if a council wants to prosecute it costs the ratepayer or the taxpayer over $10000 to initiate a prosecution. The part I cannot believe about the naivety of the Labour and Greens’ opposition is this: they say the answer is just to build more public toilets. Well I guess we can and we should. But we will never be able to provide them everywhere. It is the ongoing view of the left that there is a bottomless pit of public money. The Government is simply saying we need to be practical. Councils need to be able to say that people cannot camp in some areas and councils need the practical measures in order to be able to enforce it. 
The part I find most galling about Labour’s and the Greens’ opposition to this legislation is that they are simultaneously running campaigns demanding tougher rules on farmers and industry in relation to water quality. We have just adopted a national policy statement on water quality and both parties opposite have said it is not nearly tough enough. This Government’s view is that farmers will need to step up and improve their management of fresh water. That is why we have toughened compliance and doubled the fines for breaches of resource consents. But how will we get farmers to take on board this important message when they see the Government and councils ignoring overseas tourists dumping raw sewage in their backyard? The truth is that we cannot. We have to be consistent. We need to be equally firm in our measures to protect the Kiwi environment. The $200 instant fine is not at all out of proportion when a farmer now faces up to a $200000 fine for breaching their resource consents. 
The last contradiction from members opposite that I must expose is the lack of trust they have in councils and the Department of Conservation. This is an empowering bill. The Department of Conservation and councils have good practical people running them. They do not wish to kill off legitimate recreation any more than anyone else does. This is a practical Bluegreens bill that addresses a growing problem. It is needed in order to protect public health protect iconic spots and protect New Zealand’s “clean green” brand. It poses no threat to the responsible freedom camper. 
I say to all members of this House that if they are serious about environment protection and if they do not think it is acceptable to dump raw sewage in some of our most iconic picnic spots then they should do the right thing and support this practical bill.