Smith Nick: Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Smith Nick: Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill — Procedure Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6189] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment) 
: 
 That was an extraordinary contribution from David Cunliffe. It was wrong in fact wrong in process and wrong in philosophy. Let me go through each of the issues. The member opposite said that there is no provision except for individual tree protection. That is wrong. There is absolute capacity for groups of trees to be identified for protection through the proper process. All this bill does is ban blanket protection rules across the district. 
The second error I want to mention which I find extraordinary concerns amendments. Where are all the amendments that Labour members moved at the select committee when they heard submissions on this bill? I do not think a single amendment was put forward at the select committee. [ 
Interruption 
] Mr Twyford has said he has strong concerns. He was on the select committee. Was he asleep? Was he not there? Why did Labour members not move a single amendment at the select committee when these detailed provisions concerning trees were being dealt with? They have completely let the side down. 
Let us turn to the issue of philosophy. I will explain very simply the philosophy on this side of the Chamber. In an extraordinary backwards flip the member David Cunliffe is saying that somehow the changes we are making are an attack on liberty. Let me very simply explain for the member the principle that applies here. It is perfectly proper for Parliament to define something as simple as a person’s property right. Probably the most important asset that New Zealanders own is their little quarter acre and it is the proper business of this Parliament to define the limits and the extent of people’s rights around their little quarter acres. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: No limits under this Minister! 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member opposite keeps interjecting and saying that there are no limitations. That is simply untrue and it is below what I would expect of a front-bench member of the Labour Party. 
Members on this side of the Chamber say that is an absolute right—and David Cunliffe gave a speech about a huge tree that has been growing for 200 years—for a community to identify a tree or group of trees in its district plan and there is nothing in this bill to stop anybody from properly recognising those trees. 
I say to the member that if the council wants to adopt a rule of that sort then it should talk to the property owner. Is that not a novel concept? It seems to me that it is a novel concept for members on the Labour benches to say that if people have a tree on their property and the council wants to protect it the council should talk to them and consult them. Is that a radical notion? Is that something that this Parliament and its members cannot grapple with? 
Perhaps I should read for the benefit of Mr Cunliffe this contribution from Mr Bill Ralston. He says: “Before Christmas I decided to get rid of an ugly stunted exotic box elder tree at the bottom of my garden that was strangling a native nikau and a couple of other palm trees. The guy who does our garden brought around an arborist who told me he could not fell the damn thing without a resource consent. I wrote a cheque and several weeks later a man from the Auckland City Council with a clipboard came around and stared long and hard at the offending tree. Yes he would recommend we could cut it down. More weeks passed and eventually a long document arrived from the Regulatory Planning Department of Auckland City Environments saying we had been granted consent. The tree feller came cut it down and removed it in 30 minutes.” 
Bill Ralston said he was very pleased that the National Government is going to pass changes to end that sort of nonsense. He went on to say: “I will never again have to apply for a Resource Consent to trim my garden the council will not have to spend many hours pondering my botanical behaviour and the ratepayers of Auckland will not be wasting hundreds of dollars every time someone in this city wants to do some gardening”. 
I also draw Mr Cunliffe’s attention— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: How many emails has the member received in favour of whacking down trees? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well the member Mr Cunliffe asks about emails. That is an interesting question. I never— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: He has to read his media trainer’s emails. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member should take a big deep breath for a moment. I draw his attention to the  
New Zealand Herald  
poll. What did the poll say about this issue this week? 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: How scientific was that? 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: Well that member who has just been talking about the number of emails I have received is not prepared to accept a poll from the  
New Zealand Herald. 
 I have to tell the member that it is as simple as this: the vast majority of New Zealanders do not believe they should have to get a resource consent to trim their trees. 
I look forward to campaigning in 2011 and saying that a vote for Labour is a vote for a nanny State and a vote to go back to the nonsense we have tolerated for 9 years as has been demonstrated by the poor old citizens like Bill Ralston who had to go through a 6-week performance to get resource consent to trim a tree.