Eckhoff Gerrard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:623;Page:18373] 
6.  
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
 to the  
Prime Minister 
: How does she reconcile her plans to “build a more broadly based ownership society in which New Zealanders can enjoy the security of their own home” with her Government’s plans to allow the public access to private land beside waterways? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK (Prime Minister) 
: 
 Easily. Just as owning a home is an important element of the Kiwi dream so is walking along our significant waterways. The security of landowners is a key element of the walking access proposals with access excluded within 50 metres of a home. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Does the Prime Minister believe that allowing members of the public to wander at will alongside a water body on private property has no material impact on the owner’s use security or enjoyment of his or her property? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: The member is well aware that there is no wander-at-will provision in the proposal. Also there is provision in the policy for a range of exclusions to apply including those for situations like lambing or tree felling where members of the public might be in danger or obstructing a farming operation. 
Hon David Carter 
: Will the legislation that liberalises public access over private land be before the House before the general election—yes or no? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: There is still work to do in developing the legislation. I am not able to give the member a yes or no answer. The legislation will be introduced when it is ready. 
Hon David Carter 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was very specific. I asked whether the legislation would be before the House before the election—yes or no. Even such an outstanding New Zealander as you will not be aware of the answer to that question from the answer given by the Prime Minister. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: The member cannot demand such an answer; the member can ask for an indication. The Prime Minister certainly addressed the question. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Does the Prime Minister believe that allowing the public to walk over her private property—in which there will be considerable public interest—would in any way diminish her property rights and security and therefore her ownership of her property? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: First there is no 50-metre exclusion around my house and second it does not have a significant waterway through it. 
Hon David Carter 
: What compensation will be paid to the private landowner for this land-grab? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: Compensation does not arise because ownership does not change. I happen to be one who agrees with the sentiment that New Zealand has a “unique culture of not having private beaches rivers and lakes”. Those words are taken from the Hon Nick Smith with whom I agree. 
Rodney Hide 
: Can the Prime Minister not understand the anger of private landowners who are to have the right to keep trespassers out overturned through legislation with her self-satisfied answer: “Oh this legislation doesn’t apply to my property in Auckland.”; can she not see their concern? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: People most certainly have a right to keep trespassers out; what this is about is ensuring that where access is wanted over private land it will be gained either by permission of the landowner or by formal negotiation with the landowner. 
Rodney Hide 
: Does the Prime Minister not realise that the Cabinet paper sets out clearly that the legislation will change the Trespass Act so that members of the public can walk along a 5-metre strip beside significant waterways for up to 20 minutes; does she not understand that? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: I would not have thought that that was changing the Trespass Act; it is saying that this Government stands for walking access along significant waterways. Significant waterways will be systematically defined. 
Gerrard Eckhoff 
: Does the Prime Minister agree with the Hon Jim Sutton’s statement that the public will be able to come to the access commission and say that they think there is a big demand to get access to this piece of bush or that piece of conservation land and that the logic of gaining access to waterways also applies to gaining access to bush wetland or other areas of significant interest to the public? 
Rt Hon HELEN CLARK 
: If getting to those places required the crossing of private property where there is no significant waterway to which access has been allowed for permission would have to be gained from the property owner unless there had been a formal negotiated agreement. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The question was quite specific. I asked whether the Prime Minister agreed with the then Minister for Rural Affairs who said that yes we were to have an access commission and that the public would be able to go along to that and demand access to a particular area of bush. The question was whether the Prime Minister agreed with that statement. She is the one who is supposedly so good; I am sure she can answer that question. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No—that member is trivialising the point of order procedure.