Mitchell ClaytonCLAYTON MITCHELL (NZ First): It is a great pleasure to rise on behalf of New Zealand First to take a call and speak to the Wildlife (Powers) Amendment Bill. In all of the years—I suppose it is 2 years now—that I have been speaking in the House I do not think there has been one time that I have actually given a genuine nod of approval to Minister Maggie Barry for any legislation or views that she has brought forward. But today I am going to give you a genuine sincere nod of approval because I think this bill is quite good and the amendments made by the Local Government and Environment Committee—Hon Maggie Barry: Good job I'm sitting down.CLAYTON MITCHELL: I know. You are going all red. It is like you are blushing.Hon Maggie Barry: No no. Don't push it.CLAYTON MITCHELL: Ha ha! But the reality is I think the committee has done a great job in making some amendments that are here before us today particularly around extending those powers from not only full-time DOC rangers but to Fish and Game rangers as well. I have to lament some of what Eugenie Sage has said in relation to the funding because I think that is a real issue and I will touch on that. But the essence of the bill goes some way towards tightening up on poachers and people who are abusing our wildlife. At the end of the day tourism which is our largest GDP provider and our biggest export is looking to grow absolutely exponentially over the next decade and more. That is largely because of our unique flora and fauna and of course our native species that people want to come and see and be part of. If we allow the proliferation and degradation in the taking of species illegally and we do not empower our people to actually enforce the law then clearly that is just going to lead to the demise of what we hold absolutely pure: our 100% Pure New Zealand" brand which the world cherishes and which we should be should be cherishing too. This goes some way towards enabling that to happen. The ability in basic terms to prevent an event from happening—so for a DOC ranger or a Fish and Game ranger to be able to step in and if they feel that there is something that is going to take place that is potentially illegally they can actually involve themselves in that situation—is a good step. Stopping and being able to detain somebody if they are in the middle of illegal activities or are likely to be involved in illegal activities is good. The reasonable stoppage time—the key word being "reasonable"—whether or not that goes far enough will obviously come out in case law when that is first tested. Perhaps the Government would like to consider putting in more definition and clarification about what is fair and what is reasonable. Of course we do not want to be going into litigation with people who are illegally taking and plundering our natural resource and then having to justify what a fair and reasonable amount of time was. That could actually open up all sorts of legislative issues around the time frames for which they were held. But it is still a good measure. The ability for full-time rangers to be able to seize equipment and seize assets from poachers or potential poachers is a great idea. Enabling a ranger to be able to take a laptop or computer or cellphone to use as evidence is absolutely paramount. How can you build a case without the ability to gather that intel and information that can actually go towards indicting those people and obviously convicting them of an offence?Finally just like the powers of police to enable the police to get genuine information from those offenders—obviously name and date of birth are essential as well as addresses and proof of identification. Otherwise you are out in the bush you are looking at or talking to a potential poacher it is all going swimmingly until they give you an erroneous address of the person and there is no way to check up on that. These sorts of pragmatic steps have certainly been accoladed by New Zealand First and we look forward to those being implemented. I note the time in which—28 days after the Royal assent is given—this legislation will actually be introduced so we would like to see this bill expedited through the House. Again it is a good piece of legislation as it was last night with the Charities Amendment Bill. We would like to see good solid robust legislation that has full support of the House to be pushed through at some sort of pace unlike some of the other legislation that we have seen be put through in the past. Eugenie Sage mentions that our fish are not protected under this bill. Well I beg to differ because we have got most of our native birds covered under this bill; all of our native reptiles particularly the tuatara which is a targeted species on the international black market—whether our own fellow New Zealanders are actually exploiting this creature or if it is an international group that is doing it regardless the tuatara is a very very precious species and should be looked after. We have got two native species of frogs the gold and I think the green—the bell frogs. We are not very creative with our naming though are we? Green and gold North Island South Island Stewart Island; that was a guy who—you know. Anyway bats of course—we have got a native species of bat—and there are eight marine invertebrate species that are protected and certain specified native land all covered under this bill. So it does go some way. We do have concerns that our native species are being slowly but surely brought to extinction and we need to do everything we absolutely possibly can to ensure that they remain for future generations and they grow and flourish in this beautiful land of ours. Certainly we could talk about some other aspects of that but I do want to go back to what is probably the overarching issue here: this is good legislation a step in the right direction—a modernisation if you will—but funding is absolutely paramount and we have seen since 2009 a reduction in DOC funding of $60 million.Hon Maggie Barry: Oh rubbish.CLAYTON MITCHELL: Absolutely—it is here in black and white. I could come over there or I could table it if you like but it is actually available if you just look for it. In 2009 we had $403 million and in 2015 we had $342 million. In 2008 our capital expenditure within the Department of Conservation was $98 million and in 2015 it was $23.5 million. That causes some serious concerns in relation to health and safety. We have seen our number of DOC rangers be reduced from 809 down to 637. We are expecting our front-line officers—Hon Maggie Barry: Stick to the facts. Stick to the point of this bill. CLAYTON MITCHELL: —to do more for less. Now Maggie Barry wants to chip in and be part of the conversation. No you just do not like the reality that this is the truth and you are trying to shut down the truth from the people of New Zealand. This is the frustration that we have New Zealanders: Ministers will not face the fact that you are being completely underfunded and they are potentially putting our DOC rangers in harm by underfunding them—making them do twice as much for half the money. The reality is that New Zealand First has some serious concerns. This Government has overcommitted itself has not budgeted its finances properly and is causing all sorts of issues in the long term in many sectors—which I will not segue into but I might just talk about housing police corrections and a range of other things—but specifically the Department of Conservation needs to be seriously looked at. New Zealand First will be supporting this through the final stages. We would like to see it hurried through. We would certainly like to put the acid on Minister Maggie Barry to seriously put funding as a priority for our most precious of items our land and our native species because at the moment under this Government it does not seem to be a priority and you are making our front-line officers do more for less. It is absolutely in black and white—you can deny it all you like but at the end of the day you have had your lovely speech. We enjoyed it because listening to Maggie Barry of course is like getting beat up with toilet paper—it is just so soft and smooth and silky. Thank you I will end my contribution there."