Blumsky Mark: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — In Committee 
Blumsky Mark: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:14453] 
MARK BLUMSKY (National) 
: 
 When one reads through Part 2 of the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill one realises the work that has been done by the Local Government and Environment Committee on it. The most common words used in Part 2 are “struck out” “unanimous” and “new”. I raise that because when we read this bill we see that it has literally been rewritten by the select committee with the support of the Parliamentary Counsel Office and officials. 
There has been talk about the divided community and it has been acknowledged by the member who brought the bill forward that there is division. It is caused by confusion. There is confusion in this bill—it has been rewritten—and one has to ask whether arrogance was shown by the bill’s promoter by the local council in bringing the bill forward without going as is normal to the Parliamentary Counsel Office for advice on the best way to bring it forward. That did not happen. 
The local council—the promoter—and its lawyers Simpson Grierson showed arrogance in totally thinking they had the answer written down here. Because guess what? We have rewritten the bill. There is confusion and there has been confusion. Even now tonight there are people such as Andrew in Glengarry Road who asks: “Is my house included? Is Glengarry Road included?”. I say to Andrew that we have no idea. No wonder he is confused. It is an issue; there is confusion. As I said was there arrogance on the part of the council in bringing the bill forward? There is a divided community. The bill’s sponsor admitted the community is divided. We sat— 
Lynne Pillay 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I said quite the opposite. I did not say the community was divided. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No no. 
MARK BLUMSKY 
: Speaking to the point of order— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Clem Simich) 
: No I have dismissed the point of order. 
MARK BLUMSKY 
: You have? The member actually stood and said that we in the select committee had caused the division by the confusion. I remember those words specifically because we took exception to them. So I will accept the member’s apology in writing. 
The bill is confusing. It has been rewritten by the select committee. The community is confused; it does not really know quite what is happening. Will the bill protect the community? Is it adding further cost? Will it stuff up property rights? Will it enhance property rights? Members of the community do not know. The Waitakere City Council I believe has done this wrong. It should have stepped back when it saw that the community was not on board as much as it should be for something that is so damn important. It should have stood back had a cup of tea and had another discussion with the community to clarify the issue. It should have brought forward a bill that would not be rewritten by the select committee and brought forward a bill that was understood by all. For sure we do not expect something that is 100 percent to come forward but we do not expect a bill as split and divisive as this bill is to come forward. 
I rate Bob Harvey as a mayor but I think Bob Harvey got this one wrong. I fully buy into his vision—I fully buy into what he is trying to do—but I think this bill has not delivered the vision. I think it has left his community not as cohesive as it should be. Bob Harvey’s role as mayor is to make sure the community is onside and I think his officers have led him wrong. As I said I think an arrogance came through in the way that this bill was presented to the select committee and the way that the lawyers tried to argue and jockey with the officials to present the arguments. Bob Harvey cannot blame the community for being confused. 
The interesting thing is that the community is absolutely passionate. We have to take our hats off to all parties who came forward to everyone who made submissions—they really do care. They really do care but they want to draw the line at what the Government is doing to them. They do not believe that the Government has the right to impose new conditions on them. They believe that the existing scenario that they bought their houses under the existing Resource Management Act conditions are actually appropriate. They should not be redesigned and rewritten halfway through. That confusion is not necessary. 
To finish as I said I think it is sad that the Waitakere City Council has not brought this bill forward cleanly sharply and with the community behind it as the council could have should have and really must do.