Smith Nick: Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill — First Reading 
Smith Nick: Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:3580] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 I thank the House for its indulgence for giving leave for me to resume my speech given the difficulty I am having with the flu. The point I was making in my speech in response to the Waste Minimisation (Solids) Bill is that it will do exactly the opposite of what it seeks to achieve in minimising waste. The bill would frankly be far better termed the “Waste Maximisation Bill” and I will refer to some of its specific provisions to explain why I hold that view. 
The most cumbersome of the provisions in the bill is the requirement that every business—every organisation in New Zealand—have a waste management plan that must be approved by its local authority. That will amount to over 200000 waste plans. Even if we were to assume that it would take only a couple of hours to write such a plan—and the bill is very prescriptive about what must be in it—we would be looking at tens of millions of dollars of wasted money and wasted time in terms of that bureaucracy. There is enough concern in the community right now about the processing of 50000 resource consents a year through councils under the Resource Management Act let alone about the processing of the 200000 waste management plans that would be required. This bill states that if a business does not have a waste plan then it will be fined $10000 and banned from operating. I ask the House to reflect on the fact that we are a nation of small businesses and also on the sort of compliance cost requirement that that will impose. 
I also point out the nonsense requirements that are provided for in clause 59 of the bill with regard to consumer information. It requires that at every place of sale an A3-sized poster—41 centimetres by 29 centimetres—be provided on every product sold at that store. The practical effect of that provision for a supermarket with a typical range of goods is a poster sign 6.6 kilometres long. Why would anybody in this House want to vote for a bill that contains such ridiculous provisions? It is a nonsense; it is a waste. 
I listened with interest to the weak politically correct nonsense from the Labour member Steve Chadwick who said Labour would support the bill. That position contrasts so sharply with Labour’s weasel words about reducing compliance costs for business. This bill will do more to add to the compliance costs of businesses in New Zealand than any other issue before Parliament at this time. 
The Labour member also made reference to the Government’s waste plan. The plan is a joke it has not succeeded and many of its recommendations have gone nowhere. For the Government to somehow believe that having a strategy will solve a problem says so much about what is wrong with this Government and its left-wing views on how we approach issues of this sort. 
I could agree with one area only of Nandor Tanczos’ contribution and that was in respect of the stupid way in which councils subsidise waste; that is they use money from rates to subsidise their landfills thereby providing an incentive for us to produce more waste. I would absolutely support this bill if it had a legal requirement that all waste services be fully costed so that the right economic signals go through the system. 
I am also concerned about the bill’s provisions in respect of the waste levy. The bill states that that levy will increase by 50 percent compounded each year if the waste minimisation targets are not met. That levy will snowball into huge costs for families and businesses and I really do wonder where the benefits are. 
Every time I go around New Zealand I hear people saying they have had enough of ridiculous red tape they have had enough of stupid political correctness and they have had enough of increased bureaucratic requirements. The bill has stupid provisions like a 6.5-kilometre poster board at the local supermarket and a waste plan that may consist of someone stating: “I have a round tin in the corner of my office. I throw the paper in it. I take it to the tip.” That could amount to the plan that every single small business in New Zealand may have to write get approved by the council and ensure is consistent with some bureaucratic central government waste minimisation strategy. 
This bill is garbage and this House should reject it. There are far more sensible things we can do to ensure that we properly manage waste in this country. The bill will achieve exactly the opposite of what it sets out to achieve. It will waste money it will waste paper it will waste energy and it will waste time. We should not waste further time on it.