Robertson Grant: West Coast Wind-blown Timber (Conservation Lands) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: West Coast Wind-blown Timber (Conservation Lands) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 June 2014. Volume:699;Page:18992. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central):This is the second reading of the West Coast Wind-blown Timber (Conservation Lands) Bill. This would be the moment at which I would be picking up the select committee’s report to see what the people of New Zealand—and in particular the people of the West Coast—might have thought of this proposal. We would be getting interesting feedback from people on the West Coast within the timber industry and those from regional government on the West Coast. I am sure Damien O’Connor and Rino Tirikatene the members who represent the area would have put their submissions in as well asking what this bill means. We would have had Forest and Bird and we would have had all the conservation groups.This would have been the opportunity for New Zealanders to have their say. But the arrogant out-of-touch National Government does not want New Zealanders to have a say on this. It does not want submissions that will say actually this will flood the market; it will depress the price. It does not want the private foresters to come in and ask how it is that timber from public lands is coming in and flooding the market and depressing the prices they get. The Government does not want the regional leaders on the West Coast to come up and say that the National Party has ignored them; the National Party has come in and told them what to do one more time.The Government does not want to hear that and that is why there has not been a select committee process. It is quite clear that the Government does not want this because David Cunliffe wrote to John Key and said: “Here are the conditions for the Labour Party’s support of this bill.” The first of those was a 2-week select committee process. It was not a long process. It still would enable the bill to return to this House before we rise for the election but it was completely ignored and dismissed by a Government that does not want to hear from New Zealanders and does not want to hear from the people of the West Coast.The people of the West Coast will see this bill for what it is—pure politics from the National Party. This is not about West Coast jobs. If it was about West Coast jobs then Nick Smith would have come back to us and he would have said: “I support Damien O’Connor’s Supplementary Order Paper.” That is what he would have said because that is what Damien O’Connor’s Supplementary Order Paper 476 does. It says West Coast people will benefit from this and there will be jobs on the West Coast. That is what the Government tells us it is about and it is not. It has got nothing to do with that and everything to do with playing politics in the period just before the election.This bill would have gone to a select committee. What is that Government so scared of that it would not send this bill to a select committee for 2 weeks so that the people of the West Coast could have a say? It is a disgrace that it has not done that.We are sitting here under urgency to debate this bill. Nobody on the Government side of the House has been able to explain to us why it is with urgent legislation—it has got problems at either end. It has been 3 months since the storm but suddenly it is urgent now. At the other end it wants 5 years to be able to extract the timber. The Government cannot quite make its mind up. The bill is either urgent or it is not. It either needs a lot of time or the timber has to be taken out immediately. Again if this was really about this one-off operation then the Government would accept another amendment from the Labour Party to give a 2-year window not a 5-year window. But again it was arrogantly dismissed by the National Government because it does not want that.I have to say that on this side of the House we do not trust Nick Smith. We do not trust Nick Smith. Nick Smith stands up and says: “Oh no this is just about this single event.” Well if it is just about this single event why are there 5 years? Why is there a dismissal of the Resource Management Act? Chris Auchinvole got up and began his first reading contribution on the basis of talking about 2006 and still carrying all the scars of the fact that he is really upset that they cannot do logging of native timber on the conservation estate. That is what he is really upset about. That is why on this side of the House we have no confidence that a bill brought forward to this House by Nick Smith supported by Chris Auchinvole is about just this event because the way the bill is drafted it is clearly not just about this event. The way that it has been talked about in the House shows it is clearly not about just this event.We have amendments on the table that if they were supported by the Government would allow the Labour Party to support this bill. We understand the issues on the West Coast. We have great representatives of the West Coast within our caucus in terms of Damien O’Connor and Rino Tirikatene. As local representatives in the Labour Party we support their right to vote the way they are. But what we on this side of the House will not do is allow Nick Smith to get away with pulling the wool over the eyes of the people of the West Coast and the people of the rest of New Zealand.There is an opportunity for the National Party to show that this piece of legislation is actually founded in some real desire to support the people of the West Coast. That comes in supporting Damien O’Connor’s amendments. If they do not do that then this bill is as disingenuous as it looks.