Robertson Grant: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeRobertson Grant: Wellington Town Belt Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10287. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central): I thank colleagues who have spoken in support of the bill. I think in this contribution I would like to work through some of the operable clauses in the bill because we are doing the debate as one question to explain what is actually being done through them.The first one I want to highlight is clause 8 which explains the legal status of the town belt. It contains a couple of elements that are core to the way that the town belt is seen in Wellington and the way that this bill will enable it to be managed. The first of those is the statement in clause 8(1): “The Council holds the Wellington Town Belt on behalf of the inhabitants of the city of Wellington as trustee of the trust created by the Town Belt Deed.” This has been core from the beginning of the town belt—that it is the inhabitants of Wellington for whom this is held and that the council laws are merely the trustees of that following the trust deed. The trust deed is included in the legislation it is now part of the law and it remains the instrument that guides the way in which the council goes about its work and that is importantly stated in clause 8(1).Clause 8(3) is probably where the most controversy has arisen over the years in the way that the town belt has been looked after. Clause 8(3) says: “For the purposes of subsection (2) public recreation ground means an area provided for—(a) recreation sporting activities and the enjoyment of the public with an emphasis on the retention of public access open spaces and outdoor activities; and (b) the protection of the natural environment and historic heritage.” Putting that definition in law will deal with some of the issues we have had before—for instance about whether an early childhood centre is a public recreation facility or whether a commercial operation within a closed building is.This is not to say that we are trying to rewrite history. There are a number of buildings on the town belt—I think upwards of around 40 perhaps. We are not pulling those down but what we are saying is that the definition of public recreation is that it is about sporting activities public access and open spaces. That is what was intended with the town belt. Over the years for a variety of reasons and with all the best intentions in the world people have come to see opportunity to use the town belt for things that are not public recreation. That is what we are trying to achieve here and defining it as clearly as it is now in the law will I hope put to rest the misunderstandings that have occurred over the years about what public recreation actually is.Clause 9 talks about public access and I do want to read clause 9(1) out because again it picks up the spirit of this legislation: “Members of the public are entitled to freedom of entry and access to the Wellington Town Belt”. It is subject to some caveats which I will come to in a moment but that is the overriding principle. This is for Wellingtonians—this is for all Wellingtonians to have the opportunity to use. On any given day in Wellington if members of Parliament have the opportunity to be in the Wellington Town Belt you will see that that is how Wellingtonians see it. For the inner-city dwellers in Mount Victoria it is their backyard. They live in small confined properties; that is where they go. That is where they go to walk to sit to have their dinner and to watch the world go by. Up where I live on the western hills in the western boundary of the town belt it is the place where people go for exercise—to walk up the hills. It is where I do my training for the Oxfam Trailwalker. That is where I was in the western hills of the city. This is a place of public recreation that requires this level of public access.I do want to mention clause 10 of the bill which is around the question of the management plan. It is not as if the town belt has been operating in a void up until we got this legislation. It has been governed by a management plan that has been through extensive consultation reconsultation and reaffirmation over the years. Clauses 10 and 11 outline the way in which the management plan is created which is a highly consultative process and what should be in the management plan itself. This is the instrument by which the Wellington City Council will in an ongoing way put into practice the principles and the rules that are laid down in this legislation. The process for doing that as I say is a public one with a great deal of submission from the outside and I do hope that we will continue to see that process followed through.I want to now come to Supplementary Order Paper 169 that is in my name which covers clauses 16 and 17 around leases and licences. When the bill came before the Local Government and Environment Committee there were submissions about the question of leases and licences. From time to time the Wellington City Council will grant people the ability to lease part of the land. There are two leases that are exempted from the rules that I am about to go through and they are for the Chest Hospital and Wellington Zoo. The Chest Hospital is now actually used by the SPCA but it is an iconic building and an important part of Wellington’s history. Wellington Zoo obviously everyone will know. They are exempted from this but otherwise leases can be given for periods not exceeding 20 years. Licences which are for much more short-term activities can be granted as well but they cannot exceed 10 years.When the bill was introduced there was a statement in clause 16 that referred to: “At any point in time no more than eight hectares in total of the Wellington Town Belt may be leased”. That is a very strongly supported clause because we do not want a lot of land being taken out for permanent purposes beyond public recreation. A similar clause did not exist in the provision on licences and so some submitters said that they also wanted a restriction on the amount of land that could be used for licences. In a bout of overenthusiasm the select committee adopted the recommendation of officials to also include a clause saying that there should not be more than 8 hectares in total of the town belt to be licenced.Those who are good at maths like Mr Bridges will be able to note that 8 plus 8 is 16. So we ended up with a situation where it would have been possible for there to be 16 hectares of the town belt leased or licenced. That was not the intention of the Wellington City Council and in fact I am grateful to members of the Friends of the Town Belt and others who drew to our attention the possibility of the misinterpretation of this. There is a Supplementary Order Paper in my name which makes absolutely clear that the 8 hectares in total is for leases or licences.Hon Judith Collins: Oh.GRANT ROBERTSON: I am seeing that Miss Collins is deeply excited by this piece of information but it is—Hon Judith Collins: You haven’t seen me deeply excited yet. You never will.GRANT ROBERTSON: Thank goodness. But I would say that it is important to the people of Wellington that we do limit the land in the town belt that is being leased or licensed out because although there are always good reasons for that we do not want to see that become too much land. That is why we have a Supplementary Order Paper—to absolutely clarify that it is 8 hectares in total for leases and licences and Miss Collins will be able to vote for that should she choose in the next period of time.The other clause I just want to mention briefly in this call is clause 18 the clause on business activities. I do think it is very important here because this was raised in submissions to note that business activities can be authorised. These are the activities that are usually associated with the leases and licences that I have just mentioned but the business activity has to be temporary and the effect of the activity on the town belt and the public can be no more than minor. We have defined what “temporary” means and it means if we look under the interpretation clause it is an activity “that—(a) is of a non-repetitive transient nature; and (b) does not exceed 4 weeks’ duration; and (c) does not involve the construction of permanent structures or facilities”. So what we are talking about is that what is in would be having a coffee cart in the town belt when there is a particular event on so that people could use that. What would be out is what has been suggested from time to time—the construction of a gondola from the top of Mount Victoria down into the city.Hon Simon Bridges: Oh it’s a great idea.GRANT ROBERTSON: Simon Bridges wants a gondola.Hon Simon Bridges: No I want one from the Mount.GRANT ROBERTSON: The people of Tauranga might want a gondola from the ground to the top of Simon Bridges’ castle but the people of Wellington are perfectly happy not to have a gondola in Wellington. That would not be allowed under the definition of “temporary” within business activities.So they are some of the operative clauses that I want to mention. I will not have time in this call to talk about clause 23 and I will with the indulgence of the Committee today take one more call in this debate to go through what has happened with the changes to clause 23 around the Public Works Act. But I think members of Parliament will now have some idea of the purpose of the main operational clauses within this bill which do give the practical implementation of the principles of this bill.