Strange JamieJAMIE STRANGE (Labour): I nominate Erica Stanford for Mayor of Auckland. She could stand on an Increasing fines" platform or something like "I'll do a fine job." You do need to work on your impersonation skills—she needs to work on her impersonation skills—but that's just a thought to put out there. I know the right are looking for a candidate. I know there are some issues there and I appreciate that.It's an honour to talk about this bill. I'd like to begin by acknowledging Dr Deborah Russell the chair of the Environment Committee. I'd like to acknowledge the members on the committee who have shepherded this bill to this point. I'd like to acknowledge all of those who submitted on this bill.New Zealanders care about litter—they care a lot about litter. As a Government we get a lot of letters coming in saying "We're concerned about litter." so there's certainly agreement right across the board. Ninety-three percent of New Zealanders believe it's important not to litter and 99 percent—so almost all New Zealanders—believe it's very important for New Zealand to maintain its clean green image. So we've got agreement there. The question is how do we reduce the littering? That's the key point tonight. The Opposition are playing politics. I'll just put it out there because we haven't heard that tonight but I believe that's what it is. The Opposition have this view a punitive view that if we increase fines everything will be all right—lock 'em up throw away the key increase the fines. I don't believe this is about litter; this is about politics. The right are reaching out for voters around punitive measures. It is quite clear that New Zealanders care about litter. And there is an issue there. Habits are not always good. We often see this after sports events. I was recently at the cricket at Seddon Park and after the game the bank was full of litter. We see this often.Melissa Lee: Yeah so fine them. JAMIE STRANGE: We could fine them $1000 for each cup maybe and they could bring in—how much would that bring in? A lot. We had a concert here recently Eminem which I may or may not have attended—50000 plastic cups after the event. So yes there is an issue. If we had one shot one opportunity to seize everything the Hon Scott Simpson wanted would we capture it or would we let it slip? The way we capture it and the key point I'd like to focus on tonight is pride in our communities—a sense of pride that we have as New Zealanders. If you have pride in your country and you have a sense of community you'll be a lot less likely to litter. As humans we share this planet and this is the only planet we got so we need to work together. We need to understand how we look after this planet. The key thing is—[Interruption]—around this issue—I'm pleased the Opposition are awake. The key point here is community. If we look back into the early-1900s mid-1900s—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Order! Let's settle members. JAMIE STRANGE: If we go back a few years as a society we relied on community for our very survival. We think of a time before refrigeration when you had farms and you couldn't freeze an animal. An animal would get killed and it would get shared out among people. Haymaking time—we'd work together. We literally relied on community for our survival. In today's society with the rise of technology we can survive on our own without community but we can't thrive without community and the sense of community is the key. It's the sense of connection knowing our neighbours working together and that is the key—not increasing fines. There were 13 submissions on this bill and I'd just like to touch on a couple of them.Melissa Lee: Hamilton council wants it. You should vote for it.JAMIE STRANGE: We might get to that one but I'll start on Kay Jones. So Kay Jones she said "While I deplore litter in our streets I am a realist. Increasing the fine for people littering does nothing to deter them from casually dropping rubbish." Kay goes on "This Bill does not provide any means for monitoring or enforcing the punishment." That's a key point and we've heard that from a number of speakers tonight. There's no point increasing fines if you can't enforce them. The reality is that if I went out on to the street and asked people "What's the current fine for littering?" most people would not know. So if it increased from $400 to $1000 the people wouldn't even know anyway. It would not make a difference—they would not make a difference. It's about people taking a sense of pride in their community. Another submission from Graeme Edgeler and Graeme talks a little bit here about the dumping of rubbish. This is a key point that I haven't heard spoken about in this debate and I would like to touch on that. In most of our cities—and I'm sure across the countryside at times but certainly in our urban areas—we often have large amounts of rubbish dumped. There was an example last year over the road from our house. There was a couch; there was—I don't know. There was a massive pile. There was a trailer load of rubbish basically—basically just dumped. So we do have to look at why people are dumping and it is important that we look at things like the cost of going to the dump. It is important that we incentivise people in the right way. You know we don't always have to use the stick; sometimes the carrot works as well—or a lolly Mr McAnulty. "If there are concerns with dumping"—this is what the submitter said—"or other serious examples of littering then amendments to the maximum fine for littering (currently $20000 or $30000 for dangerous refuse) and not changes to the infringement fee would be more appropriate. Of course particularly serious dumping abuses are likely dealt with under other legislation: either as criminal nuisances under the Crimes Act or under the Resource Management Act and not the Litter Act at all." But this is an important point this aspect around dumping—but that point is covered. The current legislation allows for that. But in terms of raising the cost of dropping a piece of litter from $400 to a $1000 we obviously don't support that. Another key point is around education and as a former school teacher I've spent a number of years encouraging students to pick up their litter. If you can create a culture in the young people—Kieran McAnulty: Did you fine them?JAMIE STRANGE: —then that's how you change. Oh no I didn't think of fining them $1000. Maybe I should have. It's about a culture and the education point—I haven't heard this spoken in this debate but it is a very important point here because if you want to change a society you start with the young people. You start as young as you possibly can. I believe that good work is being made in this area. Social change always starts with the youth. As a great man once said "People litter because they don't value their environment." That was spoken by Todd Muller earlier in this debate. He said people litter because they don't value their environment and I agree with that—absolutely agree. A wonderful speech he gave tonight. The key point here is about valuing the environment. I've spoken about community I've spoken about the importance of taking a sense of pride in your community I've talked about building community I've talked about valuing community and I've spoken about education. The Government are doing a lot of a lot of things in this area. I'd just like to touch on a couple of them. There are four projects funded under the Waste Minimisation Fund that the Government are funding. So the first one is Keep New Zealand Beautiful and it has been mentioned before by my colleague Kieran McAnulty. This has a very strong branding and it is making a difference. The "Do the right thing" project is the key there. There's is another one the Packaging Forum: "Litter less recycle more". We often hear about reduce reuse recycle—the three Rs. But there's another R that we don't hear about much: refuse. And that should come first. Refuse reduce reuse recycle.Priyanca Radhakrishnan: Refuse or refuse?JAMIE STRANGE: Refuse rather than refuse.Kieran McAnulty: Refuse refuse.JAMIE STRANGE: Well there we go. We've got the slogans coming thick and fast for those members at home there. But we can all do better around refusing particularly around plastic and there's lots of work being done on plastic—lots of work being done on bioplastics. In fact the members might be interested in knowing that 40 percent of a car can be made with bioplastic now. Priyanca Radhakrishnan: How many percent?JAMIE STRANGE: Forty percent—isn't that incredible? Kieran McAnulty: Get out of here!JAMIE STRANGE: I know. So there's a lot of work being done around plastic. As a Government we've banned single-use plastic bags. The previous Government knew about this issue and they wouldn't act. We've just done it. We've banned it and that's been very well received particularly among young people. So as my time is coming to an end I'd just like to reiterate that raising the fine to $1000 will make no difference but community and education is the key. Thank you."