Carter John: Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
Carter John: Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) — First Reading 
[Volume:644;Page:13906] 
JOHN CARTER (National—Northland) 
: 
 When Peter Brown from New Zealand First spoke he accused members in the House of sleeping. He is the only member I have found who can actually stand up and speak while still asleep! I think he is amazing how he does that. 
Simon Power 
: A talented member! 
JOHN CARTER 
: Absolutely—multitasking and a male to boot! That is saying something.  
I want to take a call on the bill before us for the very reason that yet again it is a bill about giving Labour members an opportunity next year in 2008 which is election year folks to stand up and say “Look what we’re doing! We’re doing something about dog control.” This is just a political publicity stunt.  
John Hayes 
: A gimmick! 
JOHN CARTER 
: It is a gimmick just like the bill that we had before about affordable housing. It is just another opportunity for Government members to say: “Aren’t we a good Government. We are worried about affordable housing. Look what we are doing. We have introduced this bill.” The fact is of course that bill puts huge costs on to local government and ratepayers and this bill is in exactly the same category.  
Let me put before members the reasons that the other parties in the House should be concerned about this bill. The first thing the bill does apart from giving the Government the opportunity to get out there and say “We are really concerned about dog control and dogs biting people.” is to take away from the public the right to have an input into how dog control in this country runs. When we read this bill we see that it shifts the ability of Parliament to debate legislation and changes to regulation. The consequence of that of course is that the Government will then go and sneak behind closed doors and make all sorts of changes that suit it and are to its advantage just as it is doing with the Electoral Finance Bill and the public will not know about it until they run against it. That is the reason this bill is here.  
Let us be very clear that there are two things that this Parliament and the public of this nation should be concerned about with this bill. Firstly there is the fact that the Government will give itself the power and the opportunity to make regulations. This is the Labour socialist Government that wants to nanny manage everything in this society. Well here is another example of its hands-on control: “We won’t tell anyone. We’re merely going to make the decisions for you. You don’t have to worry we’ll take the bite out of this country.” Well actually that will not happen at all. Rules and regulations will be made that affect the public affect the dog owners of this nation affect the kennel clubs and affect the people who care about dogs—and they will not know. That is what this Government does. That is what it is about. It is about managing everyone’s lives for them rather than people taking responsibility. Added to that is the question of who will pay. Is it local government the ratepayers— 
John Hayes 
: The dog owners? 
JOHN CARTER 
: Hang on a minute; it will not be just dog owners. It will be ratepayers and local government too. Of course dog owners will pay. There is no question about that. They will pay through their fees and regulations but local government has to administer this in conjunction with the other 69 such bills this Government has passed since coming into office. Actually it will be 71 bills because we have the affordable housing legislation as well as this bill and there are two or three other such bills in the pipeline. Just about every day local government and ratepayers end up having to pay more because this Government says so. This bill will end up putting more costs on to dog owners and ratepayers. There will be more bureaucracy and more local authority staff and as a consequence the costs to ratepayers will continue to increase.  
We know in this nation that there is already a rates revolt. In fact the Government was so concerned that last year it had a rates review. Some of us remember that. The Government asked for a rates review to be done. I have to say that the review came out with some dopey stuff but it also came out with some very good stuff. I ask the Government this question: which one of the recommendations made in the rates review has been implemented? 
John Hayes 
: None! 
JOHN CARTER 
: Really? That is astonishing. Can I just ask this question then: what was the purpose of the rates review? 
John Hayes 
: Box-ticking! Mindless bureaucracy! 
JOHN CARTER 
: And shifting the focus off the Labour Government so that the Government would not be blamed. It was just to shift the focus and take the heat out of the issue—to do anything that moves it.  
That is exactly what this bill is for. It is exactly the same thing. It is merely there so that the next time someone is bitten by a dog the Government can say: “Hang on a minute hold it don’t worry I know your bum is hurting where the dog bit it I know the stitches are not good but don’t worry here is a bit of a paper called the Dog Control Amendment Act. That will make your bum feel better.” Actually it will not at all. It will not do anything and that is the problem.  
It seriously worries me that this nanny State Government continually wants to control the lives—the destiny—of everyone in this nation. This bill is more window dressing and it will merely cost money. It will cost dog owners money and it will cost ratepayers money. It will cause more bureaucracy and it will achieve nothing. If National thought this bill could make some difference any difference at all we would say it was worth supporting through all stages.  
One interesting thing is that this bill will add to the list of banned breeds. Although this is a silly bill and will add costs National is interested to see what the public think and for that reason we will support the bill’s referral to the select committee. But let me be very clear that in the select committee the Government will have to convince us that this bill is worth continuing with. Unless there is an advantage to the public and to the people we represent why would our party and other parties in this House support the bill? One of the things that has always worried me in this Parliament is our tendency to put through more and more legislation more rules and regulations more control more costs more—[ 
Interruption 
]  
Peter Brown 
: Does the member support the bill? 
JOHN CARTER 
: There he goes! I have just told the House that we will support the bill’s referral to the select committee. Sandra Goudie said we will support it to the select committee Nick Smith said we will support it to the select committee and I said that just 15 seconds ago. Never mind; poor Mr Brown is tired and he has dozed off. But that is OK. As I said he is the only member who can stand speak and be asleep—all at the same time. We have just proven that.  
The problem with the bill is that there will be more costs. There will be more compliance costs and more costs on ratepayers. In fact this year ratepayers will face huge rate increases across the country. The cost will be close to double figures and in some cases it will be well in excess. The average increase is likely to be 7 or 8 percent all because this Government has imposed costs on local government. This bill is another example of that. It will add to the worries and problems of this Government and when the public look at legislation like the Dog Control Amendment Bill (No 2) and the housing affordability legislation we have just put through its first stage they will realise why they have high rates bills.