Simpson ScottHon SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Thank you Madam Speaker. I'm the member of Parliament for Coromandel and in pre-COVID times—and indeed in times before our roading infrastructure was so decimated by weather events—freedom camping and mobile homes were a very big part of the tourist industry in the Coromandel part of the infrastructure and very much part of what made the Coromandel the Coromandel. Sadly occasionally there were some people who didn't act appropriately and decided to use our beautiful natural environment as their personal toilet facilities. And so we in the Coromandel have been very concerned about some of the actions of a minority I have to say—of a small minority—of freedom campers who have in the past abused the hospitality and the natural environment afforded to parts of the country like mine in the Coromandel.We of course on this side of the House do agree that there needs to be tighter controls and better behaviour but this bill actually focuses on the wrong issue. This is a bill that focuses on hardware rather than behaviour. And it's the behaviour of the campers rather than the facilities that might be fixed or not fixed to the vehicles in which they traverse regions like mine around the countryside. So I am inclined to agree with the previous speaker Jamie Strange who said that the focus should really be on behaviour on human behaviour rather more than the hardware that goes in the mobile homes and the freedom camping vehicles. Now what's worse about this bill is that in typical Labour Party fashion it focuses on a centralised ideological approach that doesn't take into account human nature and sets in place a heavy-handed regulatory system that is going to be administered by none other than the Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board. A worthy organisation I'm sure and members will know from past debates in this House relating to the administration of that board that it's not been without its problems. I just don't think and nor do my colleagues on this side of the House think that this is an appropriate regulatory authority to be basically monitoring these new statutory requirements that this Act will bring to bear. So we are opposed to this piece of legislation essentially for three main reasons. Firstly we think that the definition of self-contained" is too restrictive and we think that Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Board is fundamentally unsuited as an entity to run the certification process that will be required by this piece of legislation. And then thirdly we think that this piece of legislation will impose unnecessary and prohibitive costs on the vast majority of responsible freedom campers. In my part of the world we're looking forward to welcoming them back. We are looking forward to having international tourists in particular come to see us but we want to see domestic tourists as well. The vast majority of those people are responsible they do respect the natural environment and they are responsible for a very careful use of facilities whether those are in-vehicle or publicly available in terms of their own convenience needs. But it's the small number who don't that we want to focus on. And I'd go so far as to say that actually this piece of legislation needs to be rethought reconsidered. Now on that note I didn't sit on the Economic Development Science and Innovation Committee but the select committee clearly went through some kind of metamorphosis as it was considering this bill because initially it seemed that the Labour Party was going to use its absolute majority and just push through a select committee recommendation on the legislation. They were going to do it quickly get down and get dirty and do it fast. Well the make-up of the committee changed during the process and the net result was that the committee reported back with no change no report. So this is a rushed piece of legislation. It doesn't do the job that I think it's intended to do. And it's a good example of ideology versus good practical environmentalism of the sort that we have here in the National Party. We in the National Party are opposing this legislation at second reading."