Dyson Ruth: Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dyson Ruth: Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 13 June 2012. Volume:680;Page:2966. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon RUTH DYSON (Labour—Port Hills) 
: 
 Like other members I am delighted to be able to take a call on the Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill. I want to begin by congratulating and commending the local member the Hon Gerry Brownlee MP for Ilam for what is probably a lot of work actually that has gone on behind the scenes in introducing this bill. Even though it is quite a small bill it has three parts and I know there would have been a lot of consultation and engagement with local organisations to get it to this stage.  
Like my colleague Megan Woods member of Parliament for Wigram I want to acknowledge the trustees and also the legal services team at the Christchurch City Council for the work they have put in. I am delighted that the member in charge of the bill has advised the House that he is proposing to refer it to the Local Government and Environment Committee. I was particularly touched by the way the member explained the links between local government and environment in the same way that he passionately described the need for protection of the bush and heritage buildings and I would like him to repeat it—a lot. We like to hear it in Christchurch from the member in his other capacity as the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery because those are the two things that we are in danger of losing quite a lot of. The member’s obvious personal inclination came to the fore and I personally want to hear more of it.  
I would recommend that the Local Government and Environment Committee come to Christchurch. It is quite common during a local bill to come to a city. Some people so I have heard think there is not much to come to our city for but I can advise them that that is not the case. I know that the local member—the member who just resumed her seat Nicky Wagner—Megan Woods and I and our other Canterbury colleagues would be delighted to look after them and ensure they see a lot of our city. But it is seriously important that they go and see the actual area that is being discussed in this legislation.  
We heard some excellent history from Megan Woods and I want to thank her for bringing that information to the House. I know that during the consultation process the local member would have had a lot of engagement and discussion with the Deans family who of course are very strong still in the affairs of our city and our region. I would be very curious to know—and perhaps the member could tell us in his concluding comments—whether they mentioned their continued frustration with the compulsory acquisition of private land that has been enabled because the Government has not taken any action to fix the part of the Resource Management Act that allows that. Also because of the Central Plains Water Trust activity part of their farm which goes back as long as this very area is now going to be compulsorily acquired. You know it is hard to imagine in this day and age—[ 
Interruption 
]—and we need smelling salts for Mr O’Rourke momentarily while we discuss this. 
 That farmland has been in the Deans family as long as this land has been in the Deans family then later put in a trust and now it will have a compulsory acquisition stamp on it which the Minister could do something about. I would encourage him to do that—in fact I would like to advise him that I have a member’s bill in my name which for the second time will be presented to this House. Last time he clearly was not aware of the repercussions of the compulsory acquisition of private land because he voted against it. I am sure that will be raised in future discussion with the Deans family.  
I want to conclude as I started by acknowledging the work that the member has put into this bill alongside the legal team at the city council and the trustees themselves. I listened to the member’s contribution as he began the first reading debate on the bill. He mentioned the chimneys and it gave me a bit of inspiration to suggest one small thing that the member might like to do to fill a vacuum of time that will clearly now be in his life—because he has finished the work on this bill to this stage—and that is to use his powers under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority legislation to grant all Cantabrians existing use rights so that we can have our log burners back in our rebuilt homes. The granting of existing use rights is a power that he does have under the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority legislation. That is the only change that is required. While we support the transition of the chimneys being lit through this Riccarton Bush Amendment Bill so too could the member support constituents all our constituents across our city being able to light their log burners as they were able to prior to the February quake. It is a pleasure to support this legislation.