New Zealand to charge foreign tourists to visit famous natural sites
Overseas visitors can expect to pay between NZ$20 (£8.87) and $40 (£17.75) to visit the sites. The measures, announced by prime minister Christopher Luxon and conservation minister Tama Potaka, are part of a plan to create more jobs and boost wages.
The first locations to introduce the charges will be Cathedral Cove / Te Whanganui-a-Hei, Tongariro Crossing, Milford Sound and Aoraki Mount Cook, where foreigners often account for 80 per cent of all visitors.
Conservation minister Tama Potaka said: 'Tourists make a massive contribution to our economy, and no one wants that to change.
'But I have heard many times from friends visiting from overseas their shock that they can visit some of the most beautiful places in the world for free.
'It's only fair that at these special locations, foreign visitors make an additional contribution of between $20 and $40 per person.'
'For the conservation estate that will mean up to $62m (£28m) per year in revenue, which will be directly re-invested into those same areas, so we can keep investing in the sites that underpin so much of our tourism sector,' Mr Potaka said.
The plan announced on Saturday 2 July highlighted missed opportunities for tourism on conversation estate due to 'outdated rules'.
Prime minister Christopher Luxon said: 'Many New Zealanders already run outstanding businesses on the conservation estate – from guided walks and ski fields, to filming documentaries, grazing sheep and cattle, or hosting concerts and building cell phone towers.
'But to do any of that, you need a concession – and the concessions regime is totally broken, often taking years to obtain or renew and leaving businesses in a cycle of bureaucratic limbo.'
Entry for New Zealanders would remain free.
The Prime Minister said: 'It's our collective inheritance and Kiwis shouldn't have to pay to see it.'
'If we're serious about keeping Kiwis at home, creating jobs, and increasing wages for all New Zealanders, we can't afford to keep saying no to every opportunity that comes our way,' Mr Luxon added.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
18 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Palestine Action co-founder accuses ministers of making defamatory claims
The co-founder of Palestine Action has accused ministers of making false and defamatory allegations about the banned group and contradicting their own intelligence assessments in an attempt to justify the arrest of more than 500 people. The government has come under pressure to justify the detention of 532 people arrested over the weekend under the Terrorism Act – half of whom were 60 or older – on suspicion of showing support for Palestine Action. The number of people arrested for peaceful protests, together with the images of older people being led away and the demands placed on the criminal justice system have led many to call into question the criminalisation of so many people. On Monday, a Downing Street spokesperson responded by saying that Palestine Action, which last month became the first direct action protest group to be banned, was 'a violent organisation that has committed violence, significant injury, extensive criminal damage'. The home secretary, Yvette Cooper, told the BBC that Palestine Action 'is not a non-violent organisation' and claimed that court restrictions meant people 'don't know the full nature of this organisation'. But Huda Ammori, co-founder of Palestine Action, said: 'Yvette Cooper and No 10's claim that Palestine Action is a violent organisation is false and defamatory and even disproven by the government's own intelligence assessment of Palestine Action's activities … 'It was revealed in court during my ongoing legal challenge to the ban that the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre's (JTAC'S) assessment acknowledges that 'Palestine Action does not advocate for violence against persons' and that the 'majority' of its activities 'would not be classified as terrorism'. 'Spraying red paint on war planes is not terrorism. Disrupting Israel's largest weapons manufacturer, Elbit Systems, by trespassing on their sites in Britain is not terrorism. It is the Israeli Defense Forces and all those who arm and enable their war crimes who are the terrorists.' JTAC, a government body based within MI5, produced a secret report on 7 March which was disclosed in the high court. While recommending banning Palestine Action, JTAC said the group 'primarily uses direct action tactics', which typically resulted in minor damage to property. 'Common tactics include graffiti, petty vandalism, occupation and lock-ons,' it added. Defend Our Juries, which has organised multiple demonstrations, including Saturday's, in support of Palestine Action, also highlighted Whitehall officials' description – again in documents revealed in court – of a ban as 'relatively novel' as 'there was no known precedent of an organisation being proscribed on the basis that it was concerned in terrorism mainly due to its use or threat of action involving serious damage to property'. A Defend Our Juries spokesperson said: 'It is despicable that under political pressure, Yvette Cooper is now actively misleading the British public about the nature of Palestine Action, knowing that if people come to their defence to counter her disinformation, she can have them jailed for 14 years [because they could be deemed to supporting a proscribed group].' The group said many hundreds of people had already committed to the next protest, which is likely to take place in early September and will be on an even larger scale. Uncertainty remains over the status of charges and prosecutions. Tom Franklin, chief executive of the Magistrates' Association, said: 'Based on the information that we currently have, and the statement put out by the Metropolitan Police yesterday, it could take days and possibly weeks for decisions to be made on whether or not to charge any of those arrested over the weekend. Many of these cases may also be heard in the crown courts, rather than magistrates courts.' Magistrates courts hear less serious cases although some charges under section 13 of the Terrorism Act are 'either way', meaning the defendant can choose whether to be tried before magistrates or a jury in the crown court. The Defend Our Juries spokesperson said: 'Personally I would go to the crown court because I know where the British public is, both on the genocide in Gaza and secondly on the British government's support for it, and thirdly on people not being allowed to express their opinions.' However, they added that they expected most charges to be laid under section 13, which are all heard in the magistrates courts, as the criminal justice system would not be able to cope with so many jury trials.
Reuters
18 minutes ago
- Reuters
American Bar Association adopts resolution against Trump's law firm crackdown
Aug 11 (Reuters) - The American Bar Association's policymaking body on Monday adopted a resolution opposing government efforts to punish 'lawyers, law firms, or other organizations for representing or having represented any particular client or cause disfavored by the government.' The resolution, opens new tab is the latest in an escalating conflict between the Trump administration and the ABA, which is the nation's largest voluntary lawyer organization with about 170,000 dues-paying members. In recent months, the ABA has publicly clashed with the administration over officials' attacks on judges and law firms, while government officials have dismissed the ABA as a 'snooty' organization of 'leftist lawyers' and alleged that some of its diversity efforts are illegal. The U.S. Department of Justice has barred its attorneys from participating in ABA events and curtailed the organization's ability to vet new federal judicial nominations. Trump in April threatened to revoke the ABA's status as the federally recognized accreditor of law schools. The rule of law 'will not long survive if lawyers and law firms are threatened and punished for doing their jobs and if judges are threatened with punishment for doing their jobs,' the ABA's new resolution said. The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the resolution. The ABA has brought multiple lawsuits against the Trump administration, including a pending case filed in July that seeks an order barring the White House from pursuing what the ABA called a campaign of intimidation against major law firms. The ABA said Trump's actions, including executive orders targeting specific firms, have chilled the ability of some public-interest organizations to find lawyers for new matters. Reuters in a special report last month described how some firms were retreating from public interest legal work in the wake of Trump's pressure campaign. The Justice Department on Friday asked, opens new tab a federal judge in Washington D.C., to dismiss the ABA's case, arguing that there's no certainty that Trump will target the business operations of another firm, and that the claims could only be brought by individual plaintiffs, and not the "monolithic" ABA. The DOJ also said the ABA hadn't shown Trump's actions had dissuaded lawyers from taking certain cases. The ABA's House of Delegates is meeting Monday and Tuesday in Toronto to consider a slew of resolutions, many of which relate to the federal government and the rule of law. The resolution opposing attacks on lawyers and law firms also opposes threats to impeach judges 'based solely on disagreement with the merits of the rulings made by those judges.' Since returning to the White House, Trump has issued a series of executive orders targeting law firms over their past clients and lawyers they hired. Nine law firms have struck deals with the president, pledging nearly $1 billion in free legal services on mutually agreed legal issues with the White House in order to stave off similar executive orders. Four law firms successfully sued the administration to block the orders against them, which stripped their lawyers of security clearances and restricted their access to government officials and federal contracting work. Read more: How Trump's crackdown on law firms is undermining legal defenses for the vulnerable What Republican, Democratic judges said about Trump's law firm orders ABA ramps up defense of judges as White House dismisses 'snooty' lawyers American Bar Association sues to block Trump's attacks on law firms
Telegraph
18 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Minister vows to fix broken nuclear regulation
Ministers have vowed to speed up crucial nuclear projects as part of a plan to transform Britain into a green energy superpower. A new independent taskforce commissioned by the Government called for a 'radical reset' of nuclear regulations this week, taking aim at the current system which it said was 'unnecessarily slow, inefficient and costly'. In its first report, the taskforce said overly complex and expensive red tape was holding up crucial infrastructure projects and increasing the cost of the UK's nuclear deterrent. John Fingleton, the former head of the Office of Fair Trading who is leading the taskforce, said: 'Nuclear energy is safe and reliable and can contribute to net zero goals. It is also vital to the UK's strategic deterrent. 'However, over recent decades, nuclear regulation has become more complex and costly without always delivering commensurate safety and environmental benefits.' He said the current system was 'not fit for purpose'. Miatta Fahnbulleh, the minister for energy consumers, said: 'For too long, big British infrastructure projects have been held back by needless bureaucracy. 'It's time for a new approach to getting nuclear projects off the ground more quickly, and at a lower cost. 'We look forward to working with the expert taskforce to modernise outdated regulations so we can unlock growth, jobs and energy security for the British people.' It comes after ministers were forced to admit that the Sizewell C nuclear power plant could end up costing £48bn to build – £10bn more than they estimated when final approval was given last month. The cost of the new plant in Suffolk had already more than doubled from about £16bn in 2016. Meanwhile, a sister project at Hinkley Point C in Somerset is six years late and £28bn over budget. Ed Miliband, the Energy Secretary, recently heralded a new 'golden age' of nuclear amid concerns that the rapid shift to wind and solar has left Britain exposed to blackouts. However, the ballooning cost of nuclear projects has fuelled concerns about rising energy bills for consumers. A new levy to help fund Sizewell C is due to kick in this autumn, adding an average of £12 per year to household bills. In its report, the taskforce attacked 'risk-averse cultures that prioritise bureaucracy over proportionate safety measures', which it said led to higher costs and delayed projects. It also criticised complex and inconsistent rules, with processes often duplicated across overlapping regulators, as well as outdated planning rules. The Government said it would work with the taskforce to develop a new strategic direction for the nuclear industry to ensure projects are completed quickly and safely. A final report and recommendation will be published in the autumn. Mike Finnerty, the chief executive of the Office for Nuclear Regulation, said: 'Our discussions with the taskforce have been extremely productive. We will continue to work with the team, providing further requested regulatory expertise, to help inform the final report in a way that supports innovation.'
