Tolley Anne: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — Second Reading 
Tolley Anne: Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park)  Validation Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:631;Page:3569] 
ANNE TOLLEY (National—East Coast) 
: 
 I move  
That the Gisborne District Council (Alfred Cox Park) Validation Bill be now read a second time 
. This bill validates the uses of Alfred Cox Park which is a centrally located park in the city of Gisborne that was gifted to the borough of Gisborne in 1944 under a deed of trust. The uses currently are contrary to the Reserves Act 1977. Every Saturday morning a flea market is held in the grounds and an excellent i-site has been built at considerable expense as part of the Gisborne Visitor Information Centre which is an important part of Gisborne’s tourism. 
Alfred Cox Park was classified as a recreation reserve in 1985 but in 1966 the council had allowed the public relations office to be replaced by the visitor information centre that I have just mentioned. Prior to 1990 part of the land was also being used for the flea market. Both of these uses according to legal opinions obtained by the council and scrutinised by parliamentary counsel are contrary to the Reserves Act 1977. So the Gisborne District Council is promoting this local bill which was accepted by the Clerk of the House in June 2005 after several false starts. My predecessor Janet Mackey MP promoted the bill originally and as the newly elected electorate MP I am delighted to continue its progress through this House on behalf of the Gisborne District Council. 
I thank the Local Government and Environment Committee for the time and effort it put into the scrutiny of this bill and I thank the officials who came up with good solutions to some of the legal problems that were raised during the select committee process. The committee received several submissions on the bill. The submission from the council outlined the history of the park and the activities that have taken place. It referred to the establishment of the public relations office and its subsequent replacement with the visitor information centre. The council had consulted with the two current users of the reserve and also with members of the family of Alfred Cox. 
Two differing legal opinions were obtained. The solicitors for Tourism Eastland which operates the visitor information centre felt that the centre actually met the description in the deed of trust which refers to “buildings for the entertainment convenience or amusement of the public or other buildings of a civic nature”. I have some sympathy with their view that a visitor information centre that disseminates information widely to the public and displays objects from a museum fits the description in the deed. The council outlined in its submission the considerable efforts it had made—quite unsuccessfully—to relocate the flea market and referred to the petition to the council from 72 signatories who supported the continued existence of the flea market. That was followed by another petition from local people in the neighbourhood who were concerned about the undesirable effects of the flea market. However anyone who attends the flea market knows that it is extremely well attended and that many many Gisborne citizens go there on a regular basis to get fruit and vegetables. 
A submission from a Dr Helen Papanui supported the intent of the bill supported the use of the land by the flea market as a tourism attraction that may fit the terms of the deed of trust and as a meeting place for locals and agreed that the information centre was important for tourism in the district. Note that it is not information from the museum that is displayed in the centre but Department of Conservation information perhaps fulfilling the public entertainment criterion. Overall there was support for the two uses of the park and there was definite support for the desire to ensure that the activities continue in the interests of the residents of Gisborne. The council sought then to come within the terms of the law in order to protect the continuation of those two activities in the park. 
The select committee made a couple of changes to the bill on advice from officials. Their reasoning was that in order to validate the use of the park by the visitor information centre as well as the flea market the bill needed to apply to the Reserves Act in general and in whole not just—as the council had suggested—to the specific part that related just to the flea market. In fact the Department of Internal Affairs suggested that it was unclear whether the bill as drafted originally would actually validate the presence of the visitor information centre. In addition the officials suggested a change to clause 5 to allow validated uses to flow through to the provisions dealing with leases and licences in the future so that the council could continue to lease the land out in accordance with the current activities. 
The Gisborne District Council representatives did not agree with those suggestions from the parliamentary officials. They told me that in their opinion the fundamental objective of the amending legislation was to validate use not to provide a designation and they felt that our officials were focusing on the designation of the reserve. They also said the officials had failed to appreciate that the action in 1998 of redesignating a part of the recreation reserve as a local purpose reserve was unlawful. Therefore as an action that is unlawful cannot be deemed to be lawful the designation did not actually take place. It is all very complicated and if one is not a lawyer it is very difficult to find one’s way through all this. However the important thing is that the select committee has followed the advice of its officials and the Gisborne District Council whilst telling me it did not necessarily agree with that felt overall that it wanted the bill to proceed in order to put the validation process in place and to put an end to what has been a rather lengthy process through this House. 
I am delighted as the electorate MP to stand in the House today and speak on the return of this bill to the House for its second reading. I have to express disappointment. I had hoped to progress this bill right through all stages today and had sought and obtained consent for that from almost all parties in this House. However because we have to seek leave we need only one member to disagree. Therefore knowing that someone was going to disagree I have not sought that leave from the House. Instead we will see this bill go through the normal processes and take a little bit longer. I say to the Gisborne District Council that the bill is in safe hands in this House and that we will progress the bill through the normal processes of the Committee stage and third reading as quickly as we are able to do so. I commend this bill to the House.