Barnett Tim: Christchurch City Council (Lancaster Park) Land Vesting Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
Barnett Tim: Christchurch City Council (Lancaster Park) Land Vesting Bill — Second Reading Third Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:18042] 
TIM BARNETT (Labour—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 I move  
That the Christchurch City Council (Lancaster Park) Land Vesting Bill be now read a second and a third time 
. In essence this is a straightforward piece of legislation. The existence of the Victory Park Act of 1919 necessitates Parliament’s ongoing interest in the health and legal structures of Lancaster Park which is based in my Christchurch Central electorate. 
My electorate is a place of many names: Lancaster Park AMI Stadium Jade Stadium and Victory Park. Over time names change structures change the balance of influence and power in our city changes and management systems change. In the last 10 years the stadium has gone through a modernisation process and this bill completes the reorganisation of its management and the transfer of that asset to local government. The final significant stage is now under way to create a sparkling place which we in Canterbury trust will host a couple of quarter finals in the Rugby World Cup in 2011— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Like hell! 
TIM BARNETT 
: A couple of quarter finals I tell Mr Mallard. 
The passage of this bill through Parliament has been very smooth and its prominence has involved complex and very sensitive and prolonged negotiations between the sporting interests in and around the stadium. I congratulate those in Canterbury who managed to conduct their arguments together came up with their own arrangements involved Ngai Tahu and present this as a united solution to this House. I thank the members of the Local Government and Environment Committee and also the advisers to that committee. The committee received only one submission and that in itself is a sign that we in Canterbury can get these things together when we try. 
I would just like to make two particular points. Firstly I reiterate the significance of the stadium. I described it in my first reading speech as Australasia’s best known sporting venue and no one including Mr Mallard has dared to argue that since. Its history is extraordinary beginning in terms of the iconic events in 1894 when it hosted the first All Black match in New Zealand. As early as 1903 it was recognised as New Zealand’s finest sporting ground. Thirteen years later in the middle of the First World War it became a potato patch—as part of the war effort—and from then on it has never looked back. 
My second point relates to the most significant amendment made by the select committee and I would like to pause for a few moments to talk about that. The select committee has added clause 7A “War memorial gates”. That really puts the responsibility on the council to ensure that the war memorial gates which exist now in the ground exist in perpetuity as a memorial to the Canterbury soldiers who lost their lives in the First World War. 
I promoted that amendment to the council and it was happy to agree to that. The reason was that the Victory Park Act of 1919 stated very clearly that the land was vested in the Crown in commemoration of the victors of the allies in World War I and more important in a sense in commemoration of the soldiers who died in the service of their country. So by building that provision into this new slick and efficient piece of legislation we have ensured there is an obligation to keep those gates upon which is a list of the Canterbury soldiers who lost their lives in the First World War. 
Why is that so important? There are three reasons. Firstly it was a permanent commitment back in 1919 and if it suddenly disappeared I think the House would be failing to meet its obligation. Secondly the First World War period as I mentioned saw the turn-round in the history of the stadium; and the third point is that the contribution made by soldiers throughout our nation—not least from Canterbury—is an extraordinary humbling and numbing contribution. I dug out the figures today. At the time of the middle of the First World War there were about 10000 men aged between 20 and 30 living in Canterbury at any one time and by the end of the First World War 2711 had died in the service of their country. So of the age group of men who went to war one-quarter died. 
On the scale of things nowadays that contribution is on the scale of the situation in Dafur in terms of the impact it had in the community. So the very least we can do is make sure we keep that commitment to keep that memorial and keep those names together and on the basis of that I would like to again thank everyone involved in this legislation. I strongly commend the bill to the House and I look forward to other contributions.