van Velden BrookeBROOKE VAN VELDEN (Deputy Leader—ACT): Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the ACT Party in support of the first reading of the Unit Titles (Strengthening Body Corporate Governance and Other Matters) Amendment Bill.I don't own my own home. Like most New Zealanders though I share the dream of homeownership. I'd like a three-bedroom weatherboard house with enough room for a dog and maybe a garden and enough surface level problems to justify a weekend trip to Bunnings! But I can't see that happening any time soon not with house price increases the way that they are. Unfortunately for many of us that dream has slipped further and further out of reach. New Zealanders on a good income are getting left behind let alone those on an average wage or even the minimum wage.So instead of looking to buy or live in homes on sections with a piece of land more and more people are looking for an alternative. They're looking to live in apartments town houses and units. More people are looking to the style of living that we've seen in Tokyo New York or even London. Apartment dwelling is more than just uni students wanting to be close to university buildings friends and bars or young professionals reducing driving time to work; apartments are permanent homes with a sense of belonging—a place to raise a family—and more families are going to be doing this going forward.There's an estimate that over 145000 New Zealand households live in apartments and that number is going to double in only 20 years. These people will live in homes that are considered unit titles. More people living under unit titles would not usually require Parliament's attention if the law was actually working. Unfortunately it's not; so Parliament has to act.ACT supports this legislation to the select committee because Parliament should spend time on things that matter to the people that elect us. When people buy a property in a unit title they want to know what they are buying into—how does the body corporate operate; what maintenance issues has it identified; and how does it plan to maintain them in the future? Once you own that property that is part of a body corporate you want to know that it will keep maintaining the property well that it will fix what needs to be fixed and that it will use your money carefully. Often there are conflicts within bodies corporate about how to do this. Investors for example might have different interests from long-term owners who are retirees. There needs to be a clear and transparent process for making decisions when people have different views about how a property should be used and maintained. I know of one battle between retirees of a certain age and younger people who wanted to use their Airbnb to help pay their mortgage. There needs to be a clearer process for how those kinds of issues within apartment buildings can be resolved.This bill seeks to improve governance for existing owners and disclosure for potential new owners. For that reason it deserves to be examined by the select committee. However we don't want this well-intentioned bill to place greater costs on people than the benefits they get from following this law. Normally there is a regulatory impact statement to assess the costs of a new law. Because this is a member's bill rather than a Government bill we have not seen a regulatory impact statement. If there is a cost added to a homeowner under this bill it should be spent to benefit the owner and their property rather than simply an added cost just for the sake of a new regulation and complying with a new parliamentary law. I would ask the Government to provide a regulatory impact statement for this important piece of legislation—an idea that arguably the Government should have provided as its own bill.What is certain is that this Parliament needs to turn its mind to the rules of unit titles and I urge MPs all across the House to join ACT MPs in supporting this first reading so all of the public can have their say at select committee. Thank you.