Roy Eric: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
Roy Eric: Walking Access Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:650;Page:18855] 
ERIC ROY (National—Invercargill) 
: 
 I understand that this debate is a continuation of the debate on Part 1 that I was not here for so I do beg the indulgence of the Committee if I canvass some matters that have already been presented in debate. Part 1 sets out the purpose of the bill which is followed by some matters of interpretation that are quite significant. Essentially though I want to focus my comments on the purpose of this legislation. 
It is probably appropriate to discuss some of the history behind the establishment of this bill. I am not sure how far back we want to go but we can go back to about 1839 when the first instruction came from Queen Victoria. That actually pre-dated the Treaty of Waitangi. The instruction was to embrace a chain 22 yards along every waterway in New Zealand. At that point the instruction was rejected. Queen Victoria again gave the instruction sometime early in the 1840s—I think it was about 1843—which became part of the fabric of New Zealand. The instruction was that New Zealanders should have rights of access along waterways. That was the beginning of it. 
This bill is a continuation of several pieces of legislation and of instructions that have occurred both in local government and in the Government itself. It was John MacKenzie whose statue is on top of a hill near Palmerston who under the Ballance Government in 1891 moved this whole area significantly forward again. Not only did he break up the large squattocracies of the South Island and institute what became the symbol of New Zealand farming—the family farm—but he again attempted to extend the walking access of New Zealanders. As well overlaying a great part of New Zealand is a series of paper roads. There are various calculations as to how much of those exist in New Zealand. The smallest figure I have come across is about 56000 kilometres but the figure rises to about 76000 kilometres. The amount is significant. So that is the history of what we have had in New Zealand. 
The reason we have this history of course is that New Zealand has a resource in terms of its rivers its mountains its scenic vistas and its conservation land. All of these are part of the birthright of New Zealanders to enjoy and no one shall own access to them. However there are some issues of difficulty. In some places we have conservation land marginal strips the Queen’s chain or whatever for which there is no point of access except by crossing private land. So this bill sets out some steps involving a negotiation process by which access can be gained across private land. 
The bill also sets up a Walking Access Commission which will have the responsibility for this negotiation. It will have the responsibility for compiling a database of what actually does exist in terms of private land and of establishing a code of conduct. It is important that where we have negotiated access the public adheres to a code of conduct that is in keeping with the land use in the area. That will be the role of the Walking Access Commission. The commission having been set up by this bill and coming into existence after the bill has been passed will look after and conduct the affairs of those people who are seeking to walk across private land in New Zealand. I need to just make these points; this has been a bit of a tortuous process. 
Initially Jim Sutton Minister for Rural Affairs back in about 2003 I think set up a ministerial committee to look at the issue of walking access. I think that perhaps one of the biggest mistakes in the stellar career of the Hon Jim Sutton was to say: “I want you to have a look at the wander-at-will provision.” because this immediately raised the hackles of every single private landowner in New Zealand. It is important to note that while on one hand we talk in this bill about what the public resource is and how important it is that New Zealanders have access to it as their birthright we also have enshrined in the fabric of New Zealanders property rights. So just to lay down a wander-at-will provision certainly would be contrary to the expectation of every property holder in New Zealand and this suggestion in terms of the public has raised considerable ire. There was the yellow ribbon— 
Hon Member 
: Orange ribbon. 
ERIC ROY 
: Oh orange ribbon was it? Yes it was. Well anyway there was the ribbon parade where all the landowners got quite upset about the proposal that walking access would be freely available under the wander-at-will provision. 
I also need to say that I was actually on that first ministerial panel so I have some understanding of that process. In the just over 400 submissions that the walking access reference group received only 1½ of them wanted that wander-at-will provision: there was a vague reference in one submission and another clearly came out and said it. So there is no great desire in the New Zealand public to have that provision but there is clearly a desire to have a body like the Walking Access Commission sit down and do the negotiation in a way that allows access in and around New Zealand. 
This bill is primarily about walking access but there are also some other issues in the purpose clause for which the Walking Access Commission will have a responsibility to negotiate. In some instances it is not only about just walking; walking is a means to achieve other interests that New Zealanders have whether they be hunting fishing— 
John Carter 
: Four-wheel driving— 
ERIC ROY 
: —well yes—and it is not only about just shooting with firearms. Also mentioned here are other means of propulsion so that people who are archers can be catered for for example and the Walking Access Commission will be the body that does the negotiating for that. 
There were a huge number of submissions and probably of most concern to a lot of the people who submitted was the fact that they could see that this bill would impinge upon other rights of access. One part in the bill suggested for example that the paper roads would be a point where walkways could be put in and the assumption was that this would impact upon the rights of four-wheel drivers to be able to use the area as it was originally. 
John Carter 
: And it would. 
ERIC ROY 
: Well I tell Mr Carter that I am not sure whether it would or would not. But the select committee in its discussions said: “Well look there is an access guaranteed along a paper road; there is no need to designate a walkway on a paper road.” So I just want to assure those four-wheel drivers who are out there in drive-time right now—and I still almost every day get emails from people concerned about what this bill might mean to them—that their rights are in no way impacted by the Walking Access Bill. 
Furthermore under the purpose clause clause 3(c)(ii) states that the Walking Access Commission can negotiate for “motor vehicles” as well. So there is a whole raft of things that this panel will do. Primarily this legislation as set out in the purpose clause is about providing access across private land to conservation land marginal strips or whatever. Wherever there is a public resource the bill is about negotiating on that and it is about a code of conduct and the compilation of the database. So I think this bill is an important step forward. 
I need to say also that this legislation will not resolve every single issue that exists out there but I believe that it is another step forward. It is a logical step forward and it is a very reasoned step forward. National is happy to support the bill during the Committee stage.