O'Connor Damien: West Coast Wind-blown Timber (Conservation Lands) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeO'Connor Damien: West Coast Wind-blown Timber (Conservation Lands) Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee Third Reading[Sitting date: 26 June 2014. Volume:699;Page:18983. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman):The Minister of Conservation as always cannot even get the facts straight. My amendment to clarify the facts for the people who are listening to the debate says that the Westco Lagan situation—yes it is registered in Christchurch but it is operating south of Hokitika. The amendment says that a person applying for authorisation “is a West Coast registered company or operation;”. This amendment is to ensure that people operating in our region employing West Coasters get a fair shot and the first opportunity to access these logs. It is as simple as that and I will not sit here and listen to the Minister mislead New Zealand. That is why my colleagues are so suspicious of the legislation. That is why they cannot trust Nick Smith or any of his colleagues to indeed carry out what they say in this legislation.If the bill does as the Minister states just deal with the logs from the particular event and if the Government was to support our amendments—to tighten it up to have opportunities for West Coasters to reduce the impact or possible impact and to not widen the scope of this legislation—we would support the legislation. But you cannot trust the Tories—that is the problem. So I and my colleague Moana Mackey have put forward amendments to tighten up the bill to try to get it to do what the Minister says it does but unfortunately that is not happening.The question of why this is being done is certainly the first one that I ask. Why? Is it because the trees are there? Well I guess if that was the answer we would say “Well there were trees standing there and because they are there we should utilise them and because they are on the ground we should utilise them.” It is not a good answer.The answer I would like to hear is that there are benefits from this and there are no adverse consequences which I personally believe is the possibility. The problem is on the benefit side. They do not necessarily accrue to the West Coast. On the other side the impacts my colleagues are suspicious and want changes made in order to do what the Minister says—that is to minimise the impacts—and it is possible through helicopter logging and through minimal soil disturbance. You can do this as long as it is safe and the legislation makes reference to safety but then it includes exemptions from the Resource Management Act. So my colleagues are wary suspicious and do not trust the Tory Government to protect the conservation estate.On balance I think there are potential benefits from this but without my amendments being passed there are no guarantees for the West Coast. Indeed is that not what the Minister and his colleague said when they spent $6000 to fly down in a helicopter and get the photo opportunity there for the West Coast papers in particular? They said “Oh this is all about the West Coast. This is all about job opportunities.” Never mind the fact that you have taken 1000 well-paid jobs from the West Coast through Solid Energy mismanagement. Never mind the fact that the legislation does not guarantee any jobs for West Coasters at all. No wonder my colleagues are suspicious.On balance I have to err on the side of hope. You might say that I am a little naive. You can say that because I am a Catholic I rely too much on my faith. Well yes I do. Yes I do. So along with my colleague Rino Tirikatene—and I appreciate that Rino also represents the good people in our region—we have to rely on our faith. It is a bit risky but I live in hope as well. What I would prefer to do and rather than the Minister misleading the House and New Zealand over—Hon Members: Oh!Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Oh yes misleading the House and the country over what my amendment said and what it meant. Anyone who has an operation in our region or anyone who has registered a company on the West Coast should have preferential access. That is what it says. The economic benefits from this are possible given proper harvesting methods and given the attempt to prevent the collapse of the price in the market place which is the second part of my Supplementary Order Paper. It is possible to have economic benefits from this and I believe it is sustainable in that the bugs and birds and bees will still have sufficient on which to survive but the benefits to the West Coast are still just possibilities and hope and based on my faith.I was trying to think of an analogy for Mr Brownlee who as I say lives in Christchurch and the one that would pop up would be the fact that there is a reclamation in the Lyttelton Harbour for Lyttelton we are told and for the Lyttelton port company. And the question would be: should the Tauranga port company do that reclamation? If we are indeed to implement the Tory ideology of anyone being able to do anything then why would we not open up the option for the Tauranga port to redevelop and reclaim Lyttelton Harbour—because they might be able to do it more efficiently?What I am saying is that we expect locals to firstly get the benefits of these one-off events. I am hoping that the National Government will see its way clear and will actually start to deliver on what it has promised because if the Supplementary Order Paper does not pass then I fear that we will have the same old colonial arrogant pompous dictatorial approach that has happened so often on the West Coast—Simon O’Connor: This member needs to go to confession.Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: —from people like the member at the back there sitting on his chuff in Auckland or in Hamilton telling the West Coast what to do. I fear that we will end up with the same thing. The helicopters will come from Rotorua. We know that but we do not know where the logging gangs or where the trucks or where the sawmills will come from because National refuses to put in place a measure that will guarantee benefits for the West Coast—Chris Auchinvole: Oh sorry—sorry.Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR: Mr Auchinvole sits on his haunches at the back there. He is too scared to speak out against his colleague Mr Smith and say “We need to guarantee West Coast jobs first.” He is always making noises about it. Here is the opportunity Mr Auchinvole. Back my amendment. Back my amendment that says there should be jobs first for West Coasters and protection for the market which is small and fragile at the moment for indigenous timber across this country.I will leave it at that and I will leave the challenge to the National Government to try to prove its so-called loyalty. I just once again remind the House that all too often we get misled by statements by Nick Smith and by National about what really happens here.