Dunne Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Dunne Peter: New Zealand Bill of Rights (Private Property Rights) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:625;Page:20506] 
Hon PETER DUNNE (Leader—United Future) 
: 
 I congratulate my colleague Gordon Copeland on bringing this important measure to the House and I want to acknowledge the support of the other members who have spoken in the debate this evening for the principle that underpins this legislation. In essence it is a very simple proposition: it is to recognise that the right to own property is an unalienable part of our liberal democracy. 
Many references have been made already as to whether one can have democracy without property rights or property rights without democracy. The point they all come back to is that inextricable link. Even when one looks at the history of this country the link between property and people is profound. In many senses the Treaty of Waitangi is about recognising the property rights as they were at that time and about developing a mechanism that said that where property rights are transferred then effective forms of compensation have to apply. So the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act today which is the closest thing we have to a statement of the inherent rights of all New Zealanders is deficient in that it does not take into account that dimension of the right to hold and enjoy property. That is precisely what this amendment proposes. 
I have heard some members raise issues regarding the scope of the bill and the extent to which it may or may not cut across other enactments. I make this point: members need to see this bill in the context of what is already in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the entitlements and the limitations that are contained within it. If this amendment is adopted as an amendment to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act then it will stand alongside those other provisions. It will not create new entitlements over and above those already there; rather it will be part of the menu that is on offer in the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. So to that extent a number of the concerns that have been expressed this evening about whether this bill goes too far or is in conflict with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act will be resolved at that point because this amendment becomes part of it. 
Over the last few years as we have started to work our way through a range of issues associated with the broad interpretation of rights in New Zealand it has become clear that the absence of a clear definition of property rights and the rights of individuals in respect of those property rights is tearing at the fabric of our society in so many different ways. We have seen it most obviously in some of the debates related to treaty claims. We see it too in the debate about people’s rights of access over private property. One of the difficulties we have in resolving the issue is that because we have not determined the basic issue of the right to own and hold property it then becomes more problematic to determine other people’s responsibilities and rights in relation to that property. So this amendment legislation is timely for a whole range of reasons. 
I think it is entirely appropriate that the bill goes to a select committee. I hope there will be a number of submissions from all those people who over the years have wailed and bemoaned the fact that we lack a clear definition of property rights in New Zealand and that we lack a clear statement of how those rights might be enhanced and protected. Gordon Copeland’s measure provides a way through this dilemma. I am sure he would be amongst the first to say that any constructive improvement of the bill that could be made by a select committee would be not only desirable but highly welcome. That would be as it should be. 
The bill as it stands is short and relatively clear and I think it deserves the considered attention of the House. As New Zealanders become more prosperous and more affluent the notion of property ownership becomes more appealing. A few years ago one talked about this country as a property-owning democracy. That was an aspirational thing rather than as it is today a statement of fact. More New Zealanders own more property than ever before and it is only timely that as a consequence we have this consideration of how their property rights might be adequately protected. It is ironic—and somewhat bizarre—to think that we have come this far without a clear definition. It seems to me that this is now long overdue. 
I support the work that my colleague has done. I am grateful as he is for the support of other parties in this House. I do hope that when the bill goes to a select committee there can be a constructive consideration of the issues that it contains and that as a consequence in due course we can look forward to the incorporation into the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act of a provision relating to the protection and enhancement of individual property rights because that will be very welcome.