Goldsmith Paul: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeGoldsmith Paul: Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 23 October 2013. Volume:694;Page:14218. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]PAUL GOLDSMITH (National): I am very pleased to take a call on the excellent Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill brought to the House by Jacqui Dean who is a very fine member of Parliament—a strong and staunch member of the Bluegreens a promoter of the Mackenzie agreement a well-known personality in Wanaka and chair of the Law and Order Committee. And it is that commitment to law and order and upholding the law that I think lies behind this piece of legislation that she has brought to the House which is indeed extending that concern for law and order to the area of the geckos the skinks and all the critters of this piece of the world that we call New Zealand which we are talking about today.It is very pleasing to see the Greens supporting this legislation supporting tough penalties and being tough on law and order. It is a pity that they do not carry that logic across to other crimes but we do celebrate their support in this instance today.I just wanted to remind us all that indeed New Zealand was the last significant land mass to be populated on the Earth apart from Antarctica. It was only 700 or 800 years ago that the first Māori arrived in this country and prior to that it had lived in splendid isolation for millions and millions of years with no people around. I remember very well going down to the Catlins one time with Simon Upton when I was working with him back in the 1990s. We stood beneath a great rimu tree a very ancient tree that had been grazed by moa. It was that old—an 800 or 900-year-old tree. It just brought home powerfully the fact that we just missed what must have been one of the greatest shows on Earth by a split second in geological time. So New Zealand does have to accept the fact that so much has been lost due first to a wave of extinctions after Māori arrived and then to another wave after Pākehā settled in these lands. And we have lost so many birds due to the forest clearances. My favourite place is a little place called Huia named after the rather beautiful bird that we lost only 100 or so years ago. So we have had great success in this country building our prosperity by developing the country and we enjoy that today but we look back with regret that previous generations were so quick to burn and clear the forests and lose so much of our biodiversity.So what do we do today? We certainly have a huge commitment to preserving the environment and that commitment is widely shared across the House. It is certainly not the preserve of just the Green Party. It is widely shared and deeply embedded in the beliefs and attitudes of the National Party and shared by countless New Zealanders who on their private land protect areas of natural habitats and make sure that they do everything they can. We also have a massive investment in the Department of Conservation which runs to well over $300 million per year.Of course it is often forgotten that we have over one-third of the land mass of New Zealand set aside in the Department of Conservation’s area. One-third of the land masshas been set aside to preserve our forests and our natural habitats. We also have 13000 square kilometres of marine reserves up from only a fraction of that figure 10 years ago. Indeed we also have 111 threatened species under active management up from only 42 a few years ago. So we do have a massive investment in conservation in this country.That brings us finally to the Conservation (Natural Heritage Protection) Bill which we are talking about today. What are we trying to achieve by this bill? The purpose of the bill indeed is to update the penalties across six conservation-related Acts in order to better protect public conservation lands and protected native species. It is expected to act as a deterrent to those who would engage in illegal activity. It is expected to act as a deterrent. We were shocked—we were shocked—in the Local Government and Environment Committee consideration when we were listening to lots of information from people coming through about where and in what ways people smuggle geckos in and out of the country. It was illuminating and it was interesting but we all agreed that conservation offending poses a serious threat to our natural heritage. Such offending includes smuggling protected species killing marine animals illegal hunting of protected species logging trees and draining wetlands in protected areas and releasing potential pests into protected areas. So increased penalties are proposed across the board for illegal commercially motivated activities as well as for non-commercial offending and breaches of by-laws and regulations across all six Acts. That is a singular achievement by Jacqui Dean in bringing this bill to the House. I am sure it will make no small contribution—a large contribution—to sending the message that New Zealand has no truck with people who will go into our conservation areas into which we are investing such huge sums across the nation and which we are so determined to preserve in order to make their own money in nefarious ways.I suppose one of the other questions that lingers is why we have longer jail terms and stronger fines. There is no question that it does send a strong signal that there are serious consequences for those who choose to break the law but it also sends a message that New Zealand takes the protection of our species and native species seriously. That is a strong message to get across internationally particularly at a time when we are trying to advance our cause on all sorts of international bodies. In the sense of New Zealand being an isolated set of islands in the South Pacific with a whole lot of endemic species that are unique to this country we do not indeed take our responsibilities that kaitiaki lightly but we make every effort that we can to ensure that we deserve that distinction.For some offences the potential gains for people if they are not caught are highly lucrative which acts as an incentive to offend. So we do need to match the potential gains of this lucrative trade with the maximum penalties because there is no point undershooting on these issues. The options of longer jail terms also mean that when serious offences are committed international offenders can be refused re-entry into New Zealand. There is no point being soft on people like that who go around smuggling geckos in their underpants on the plane who come back and get caught and then letting them have another go. Most people would be surprised that this is something that people would build their career doing. I think the average New Zealander would not expect or understand that this was the sort of thing that people would choose to make their life’s vocation but surprisingly enough it is a highly lucrative business and we do need to clamp down on it. I stand here and commend Jacqui Dean for this piece of legislation which is now approaching the end of its third reading.I will just say that another question that lingers is whether the maximum penalties will indeed be imposed. That is not something that we can have full control over because it is up to the courts to decide. But we have given the courts the flexibility toimpose a sentence proportionate to the seriousness of the offending in each particular case. So the court is required to take into account the seriousness of the type of offence committed the circumstances of the particular offending including aggravating and mitigating factors and the circumstances of the offender. I think that all makes good sense.So on that basis I would be very pleased to commend this legislation to the House and to commend Jacqui Dean the MP for Waitaki since 2005 for this very good bill. Thank you very much.