Kedgley Sue: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
Kedgley Sue: Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:664;Page:11774] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party is very very happy to support the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Bill. We recognise that Stewart Island / Rakiura is obviously one of the jewels the treasures in New Zealand’s landscape. Regrettably I have not been to Stewart Island myself but I am looking forward to doing so. It is one of the great tourism gems of New Zealand and it is little wonder that it attracts 36000 or more visitors. I ask why on earth should all these visitors who come to Stewart Island not contribute in some way to the upkeep of that magnificent part of New Zealand and why it should be left to 300 or 400 local Stewart Islanders to bear the burden of trying to keep up the tourism infrastructure for 36000 or more tourists. 
We can see no reason why we should not be charging tourists a very small levy of $5. Some of the previous Labour speakers talked about how a $5 levy which the member Eric Roy has said would be the maximum that would be envisaged could detract or divert tourists from going to Stewart Island. I think that is totally untrue for a $5 levy. I think tourists would be surprised that they are able to enjoy such magnificent treasures in our world without contributing in some small way to the upkeep of that tourism treasure. It is absurd to suggest that that levy will somehow keep visitors away. 
As I said the principle that tourists should contribute to the upkeep of a great tourism attraction is one we strongly support. It is interesting to note that there are precedents. For example Bhutan used to—and I think it still does—look at the debt it has for the year then divide up that debt according to how many tourists it wanted to allow into the country. Every tourist had to pay quite a substantial fee to go to Bhutan and that contributed to Bhutan’s national debt. That certainly has not detracted tourists from going to Bhutan as they are clamouring to go there. I am sure there will always be tourists clamouring to go to Stewart Island whether or not there is a $5 levy to pay when they fly in or catch the boat. It is a very sensible provision. 
I notice that the people on the Southland District Council are fortunate. Before they would introduce such a levy under this bill they will be able to have a special consultative procedure. There will be a special consultation in the area to discuss whether there should be a by-law and this levy should be introduced. I say that this is interesting and that they are fortunate indeed because for most of the rest of New Zealand under some legislation that Rodney Hide and the National Government have just introduced into this Parliament the ability to have a special consultative procedure even for something like privatising our water supplies for 35 years is being removed. They are not allowing even that basic consultation so it is very fortunate that this bill allows for that. 
One last point I would like to make is we have a real worry that Stewart Island could still be on the Government’s hit list for mining. The island was on one of the original lists for mining. Obviously it is not on schedule 4 but in our view it is still under threat because the Government is now taking a stocktake of the entire conservation estate which includes Stewart Island. We sincerely hope that Stewart Island’s magnificence will be protected from mining and we welcome this bill as a way— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: I am sorry to interrupt the member but her time has expired.