McClay ToddHon TODD McCLAY (National—Rotorua): Imitation is the greatest form of flattery and Minister Stuart Nash is channelling Maureen Pugh who is sitting beside me because this is almost an identical bill to the one that Maureen brought to this House two years ago which that Minister stood up and spoke against and said it wasn't needed and voted it down. Now he's back two years later with an almost identical bill except it's actually not as good as Maureen's because it creates a lot of extra red tape and bureaucracy that's not necessary to get the job done. I need to commend the Minister. For the first time in a long time we're seeing a Minister on the other side take almost all of their 10 minutes. One can only wonder that he wants to use every single moment available to him as a Minister to speak in this House and get every single word out.The National Party has some significant concerns with this legislation not with what it's trying to achieve but with the way it goes about achieving it because there are two ways to get things done. If you want to get as a visitor from A to B you can walk straight across the paddock or you can do what this Minister does which is zigzag all over the place and yes you finally get there—right? But it's a little bit like the point he was making earlier. You know this bill I wouldn't equate it to being a black water tank. It's a brown water tank in the way that he has developed it. You see there are challenges out there in as far as those that don't treat the environment properly. A few of them will be New Zealanders and many of them are likely to have been visitors to the country but whilst the intention of the Minister is valid and is good I'm not sure this bill is going to achieve what he wants. It's going to take a lot of work in committee listening to submitters to get it right because it is imperative we have a clear set of rules that are the same and they work everywhere and they don't overly burden anybody which is often the taxpayer. In this case it will be mum and dad New Zealanders who have a campervan who are responsible and they travel around the country drinking good wine and seeing the sights and actually there will be a great cost to them and a great imposition upon them to fit in with his regime and there will be uncertainty. We will be constructive in this to help the Minister get the legislation right because finally it would be good if we did. Look Mr Nash has been a tourism Minister for a period of time. There was a great expectation that he would be better than the last tourism Minister and we all thought that it was just a given. It's important that we help him get this right so that that question doesn't land out there. But here's the thing: do you remember when Mr Nash became the tourism Minster a little while ago? His very first pronouncement at the top of his voice on every radio station that listened to him was I send a clear message to those international visitors that they're not going to crap in our streams anymore."—those were his words not mine—and he was spectacularly successful. Well in fact the Prime Minister was because not long before he made that announcement they closed the border and there were no freedom campers in New Zealand and he saw that as a good thing but I'm not sure that the sector did.You see the challenge we have is twofold. The first is that actually land controlled by a local authority Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) or the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) where a campervan as an example—a vehicle that is self-contained—falls under the scope of this legislation. But therein lies the confusion because for LINZ and NZTA with the extra authority of power that's been given to the councils to enforce with penalties where people haven't been certified and don't meet the rules there is going to be confusion about how NZTA or LINZ apply that because actually they're not going to. My understanding is that the councils are going to have to pass bylaws not only for what they want to do but to get permission and then pass a bylaw for what they may want to do on LINZ or NZTA land in their area when actually this Minister making a decision and saying "Here are the rules they're the same everywhere and this is how we enforce them." would be much more straightforward.The second challenge we have is: why are NZTA or the transport authority not the certifiers of this legislation rather than the plumbers and gasfitters? What I'm trying to understand is how the plumbers and gasfitters board will have the ability and scope. They're going to have to set up a database or get access to someone else's—and there'll be privacy issues there—and then they're going to have to set up the regime and either find people to certify or I don't know maybe get plumbers to certify. I hope it's not the plumbers that will be certifying because actually we need them building the houses that the Government's promised and that aren't being built but also putting that aside it's just actually factually not their job.Here's a question for the Minister. He can't answer it now but we'll get to it in a committee and if it's not fixed in the committee we'll be bringing forward some Supplementary Order Papers. Why is there a difference between somebody that has a fixed self-contained unit—he said "has to be plumbed in"—and a responsible New Zealander with a campervan who might be mum and dad or your grandparents who has a portable one and they are responsible? It's not a bucket with a lid or some of the other things we hear about because what the Minister has decided to do is say to the vast majority of New Zealanders who like to go camping in their vehicles and don't have plumbed-in toilets that they can't get certified and therefore they will be restricted. Actually every four years you're going to have to get your vehicle certified whereas for many of these vehicles every year when they get their warrant of fitness they make sure that it is fit to be on the road. Actually the legislation had just said that you have to be self-sufficient and that it can be plumbed in or it can be portable up to a standard and that if you are not doing that then you are breaking the law and you can be prosecuted or the council can fine you and fine you just as you have a warrant of fitness for your car but then over the course of the next year if the tyres are not good you can get a fine—but oh no what the Minister is saying is it has to be plumbed-in which is a great cost. It's a great great cost to have a vehicle with that—number one. Number two every four years we'll certify it; and number three in between times the poor old council is going to have to run around catching people going to the toilet on something that's not fixed and it gets to fine them and prosecute them. It feels like a lot of bureaucracy and a lot of red tape. It feels like a great big sledgehammer that the heads come flying off to try and crack a nut and I know that Mr Nash likes to crack nuts. So the point here is actually the intention is good. We want to actually make sure that we have clear rules and visitors—that others know what the rules are and that they're clear and transparent and easy to see but we just don't want a lot of bureaucracy. I guarantee you: mum and dad sitting at home from the caravan or motorhome association who are responsible and have put their retirement savings into something where they can travel around the country enjoying themselves—and by the way who spend lots of money in the local economies—don't quite realise that they're going to have to go and get certified and the gasfitters drainlayers and plumbers board is going to have to set that up. It'll be cost recovery. It will be a great great cost—a huge cost. They'll have to pay for that and then every four years they're going to have to get recertified. But in between there will be bylaws and there'll be changes and they won't know what the rules are for LINZ compared to the Department of Conservation land compared to NZTA and the councils and every council will have slightly different rules. This Minister will trot up and say "We've done a great thing there. I told you on my very first day that we're going to tell those people to stop ruining our streams." but actually there's a very very high likelihood and chance this legislation won't achieve what he wants in anything but name because it's heavy on bureaucracy heavy on red tape and is creating more and more structures when they actually already exist. We will be constructive in this and we will be supporting it at first reading but we will want to see changes to it in the committee stage. We want to see that the submitters that come forward are listened to and we will want to work with the Government to find solutions so it can work so there's certainty and so that they don't have to rely upon a few mayors around the country who say that it's wonderful but they're about to leave office."