Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): ACT won't be supporting this bill. After what we've seen tonight—the performance of the Minister who introduced this bill at third reading who couldn't work out which reading it was—it confirms what ACT has been saying: this Government is leading the coalition of the klutzes" who couldn't even work out how to deliver a bill that works.So ACT's opposing this bill. The Self-contained Motor Vehicles Legislation Bill proposes to solve some real problems. I've been a camper around New Zealand. I've camped out of a tent in local council camping grounds Department of Conservation camping grounds and on private land. Responsible New Zealanders always take care of their waste; we always clean up after ourselves. We used to have a campaign on television when I was a kid called "Be a tidy Kiwi". There were billboards everywhere.New Zealanders agree on what a good clean environment looks like. Then there are issues you say "Oh crikey all of these people are coming to New Zealand." They're buying a van or renting a van and they don't understand what to do when they arrive in a special place and they get out the mattress lay out all the sleeping bags get the camp cooker out and then they're like "Well we've had dinner now and I've got to go somewhere. Where do I go?" and off they go into the bushes.I mean maybe we should issue them—instead of some enormous long card they have to fill out when they cross the border—a little camping spade. I don't know. ACT's the party of practical solutions. Instead what the Government has given us is this ridiculous bill the Self-contained Motor Vehicles Legislation Bill.It was heartening to see some really practical amendments proposed by Joseph Mooney during the committee of the whole House stage none of which were taken up. But ACT believes that there is a problem to solve; that local government has a role to play and it's important that they can enforce local bylaws so if people are taking advantage of our special places—occupying them littering polluting—they can be moved on. But one of the reasons that this behaviour has become so commonplace compared to decades past is because those roadside facilities that actually enable tourists—whether they be from overseas or local—to be able to relieve themselves on those long trips; on those trips when maybe having had one too many coffees or pies they need to go in a hurry.Now it's not just people who are tourists but it's also local New Zealanders. It wasn't that long ago that we heard from Crohn's and Colitis New Zealand who came to Parliament actually that it would make their lives much easier if there were more public toilets on our main routes around New Zealand.So when we think about the problems this bill's trying to solve is it a problem that people are lazy and need to be punished for not picking up after themselves? Or is it a problem of infrastructure; and the fact that you've got towns like Queenstown a population of 45000-odd people—roughly the same as Nelson—but which is potentially going to take 3 million visitors a year when their airport is upgraded in the next few years' time? How is a town that can only rate 45000 people supposed to raise the revenues to provide all of those facilities for 3 million tourists passing through their town?So this bill is typical of the "coalition of the klutzes". It is half-baked barely identifies the problem and doesn't actually provide solutions like ACT would—sharing GST sharing revenues back with local government so that they can pay for the infrastructure to support their tourism industry and actually to make the lives of everyday Kiwis travelling who need to use public toilets who actually need that privacy to actually have somewhere to do that.So ACT won't be supporting the bill. We'll be working when there's a change of Government on a whole lot of practical solutions to solve this problem. These are not the solutions."