User pays — or loser pays?

Forest and Bird, Volume 17, Issue 3, 1 August 1986, Page 37

User pays — or loser pays?

Conservation Director

Gerry McSweeney,

Treasury have set very strict controls on any future spending on Parks and Reserves. We understand funding is likely to be maintained at the present, woefully inadequate level. But by 1990 Treasury expects Parks and Reserves (and in fact all of DOC) to recover 20% of their gross expenditure from fees, concessions etc. Certain principles should guide us on this issue: ¢ Nature conservation will never be totally self-funding. Heritage protection has a range of benefits — many for future generations which can never be economically costed and charged. * Indirectly nature conservation is already contributing enormously to the national economy with clean water, recreational and spiritual opportunities and as the basis of our $1.2 billion tourist industry. * Free public access to Parks and Reserves is every New Zealander’s birthright. Services may be chargeable — huts, nature walks etc, although there should not be double charging of taxpayers. Revenue sharing of the government's GST earnings from overseas tourists (perhaps $120 million annually) is one funding mechanism for visitor facilities in Parks. It seems inevitable that there must soon be a showdown with Treasury over the funding of the new Conservation Department — particularly if vital programmes like the Protected Natural Area scheme, coastal zone conservation and private native forest protection are to get off the ground. WE WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS ON THIS IMPORTANT FUNDING ISSUE.