Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill — First Reading 
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1731] 
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill 
First Reading 
Hon Dr RICHARD WORTH (Minister for Land Information) 
: 
 I move  
That the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill be now read a first time. 
 At the appropriate time I intend to move that the bill be considered by the Primary Production Committee. This bill is an omnibus bill as provided for in Standing Order 258(1)(e). The intent of Reserves and Other Lands Disposal bills known as ROLD bills is to make non-controversial changes to land status that cannot otherwise be easily dealt with. These bills deal with authorisations transfers and validations of matters relating to Crown land reserves and other land held for public or private purposes. The last Reserves and Other Lands Disposal legislation was enacted in 2003. There are now sufficient matters to warrant this present bill. 
I will shortly refer to the detailed contents of the bill but may I say that although this is certainly technical legislation it provides for an important set of law changes with significant impacts. This bill deals with land throughout our country at all four cardinal points of the compass. Looking north we have provisions dealing with the reserve at Mahinepua Bay in North Auckland—in the Speaker’s electorate of Rodney. To the south we have provisions tidying up the administration of the Winton Racecourse in Southland—the Deputy Prime Minister’s electorate. Looking east we find a number of land-related changes including a reserve on Port Chalmers which is on the east coast of the South Island. To the west we have the Sugar Loaf Islands off the west coast of the North Island near New Plymouth. 
This legislation deals with some very iconic areas of New Zealand. I am sure that not too many pieces of legislation can lay claim to resolving issues with three of our national parks Kahurangi Paparoa and Westland; one of the most iconic features of Dunedin city the Octagon; all of the volcanic cones dotted around Auckland city; and an offshore island marine sanctuary. The benefits of this legislation are considerable. There will be real benefits for people throughout the country from the community in Port Chalmers whose residents will see their local bowling club’s lease formalised to the Otago Aero Club which will have its future secured and to the art aficionados in Auckland who will appreciate the extension of the Auckland Art Gallery. 
The bill has no fewer than 58 clauses covering 17 items. Nine were proposed by the Department of Conservation six by local authorities and one each by the Ministry of Transport and the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board. Clauses 1 to 3 relate to the title of the bill—its commencement and its binding of the Crown. Clause 4 is a standard provision in this type of legislation. It authorises the Registrar-General of Land to carry out any technical actions needed to give effect to the legislation. Clause 5 repeals sections 48(A)(6) 114(5) and 115(6) of the Reserves Act 1977 to correct an oversight that limited the range of reserves over which local authorities as administering bodies could exercise various powers. 
 Clauses 6 to 9 amend the definition of Albert Park in Auckland City so that the Auckland Art Gallery can be extended on to land that is currently part of the park. I understand that there is now a difference of view on this item between the Auckland City Council which requested it and the Auckland Regional Council but maybe that is a matter best resolved at the select committee. Clauses 10 and 11 update a Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act from 1915 so that the decision-making power over the excavation of volcanic cones or hills adjoining reserves in Auckland will be with the Minister of Conservation instead of the “Governor in Council”. Clauses 12 to 14 remove a restriction in a previous Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act on the erection of any structures in the Octagon in Dunedin city. That is to better enable the management of that piece of land by the Dunedin City Council. 
Clauses 15 to 17 formalise a realignment of State Highway 6 from the Hope Saddle to the Buller River at Kawatiri Junction through parts of Kahurangi National Park. These parts will be declared road. Clauses 18 to 20 clarify the status of land at Lookout Point in Oamaru Waitaki District. It will be confirmed that this land is endowment property in terms of the Local Government Act 2002 and is vested in the Waitaki District Council for the purpose of aiding council funds. Clauses 21 to 23 address local community wishes by vesting landlocked reserve land at Mahinepua Bay in North Auckland in the trustees of an adjoining Maori reservation while facilitating public access to land. Clauses 24 to 27 validate a 1903 transfer of the land where the Picton office of the Marlborough District Council is located and remove an antiquated interest on the title to the land. Clauses 28 to 34 remove specific hospital-related purposes and other constraints on five titles to land held by the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board. That change will enable the board to make more effective use of the land in providing health and disability support services in the Nelson-Marlborough community. 
Clauses 35 to 37 formalise a widening of State Highway 6 at the Punakaiki Village through part of the Paparoa National Park. This part will be declared road. Clauses 38 to 41 remove a restriction on the sale and lease under a 1901 statute of an area of reserve at Port Chalmers so that the Dunedin City Council can manage the reserve subject only to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977. That will enable the council to regularise an existing lease of part of the land to the local bowling club. Clauses 42 to 44 rectify the anomaly of having sanctuary areas and a conservation park within the Sugar Loaf Islands Marine Protected Area that are owned in part by local authorities rather than by the Crown. The land concerned will be transferred to the Crown. Clauses 45 and 46 requested by the Ministry of Transport amend section 9 of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act 1973 to enable the Dunedin City Council to transfer the land of Taieri Airport to a community trust. This will provide the users of that site which includes the Otago Aero Club with some certainty that aviation activities will be able to continue there. An issue relating to the proceeds of any future sale of the land will need to be considered further during the select committee process. 
Clauses 47 to 49— 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: This is important. 
Hon Dr RICHARD WORTH 
: —remove local purpose reserve status over a residential subdivision—mostly now developed—on land that is currently vested in the Waitakere City Council for cemetery purposes. I have responded to the interjection of the honourable member. Clauses 50 to 52 remove all trusts on an area of forest reserve land originally held in trust for the Waipa District Council and four other local authorities but now held by the council alone. Clauses 53 to 55 formalise a realignment of a bridge on State Highway 6 through parts of Westland National Park. These parts will be declared road. Clauses 56 to 58 amend section 3 of the Winton Racecourse Reserve Management Ordinance of 1873. Members may ask why. It is so five trustees of the Winton Racecourse can be appointed for 3-year terms rather than three trustees for life. 
This bill will enable the resolution of the 17 items that I have just outlined at length. The Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill is diverse legislation that spans this country has wide-ranging community interest at its heart and deals with a number of iconic New Zealand locations. It should not surprise members to learn that I commend this bill to the House. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 It is my great pleasure to rise in support of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. 
For a moment there I thought I might not get a chance to actually take my call this evening but we have got there thankfully at last. I get the feeling of Groundhog Day. Here I am again speaking on a technical bill and it has taken a while for me to get my chance to speak but I suppose such is the lot of those of us who hold the land information portfolios in our respective parties. It is not a glamorous spot but it does deal with important details of Government and some of those fundamental rights that New Zealanders hold dear and take for granted. The work all gets done behind the scenes without much media attention. 
Hon Dr Richard Worth 
: Sadly so. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: Yes indeed. It is not unlike internal affairs; it is not a glamorous portfolio but it is where a lot of the hard work gets done. Of course we are dealing with another one of Labour’s bills today—just another one of Labour’s bills. I congratulate the previous Minister for Land Information David Parker who was involved in the meticulous work of putting this bill together. He has done an excellent job. This bill is another one that the Government has picked up without touching in any way whatsoever so I congratulate the previous Minister on his superb work. 
As the current Minister for Land Information Dr Richard Worth said this bill is an omnibus bill; it pulls together a lot of different issues. Reserves and Other Lands Disposal bills are identified as non-controversial issues and have the consent of all parties in Parliament so really there is no need to waste too much time on the bill. I will cover a couple of areas just very briefly. 
The first area is the Auckland volcanic cones land. Under existing legislation it is an offence to excavate or quarry on the side or slope of a volcanic cone or hill in a domain or public reserve in Auckland without the express authorisation of the Governor-General by Order in Council. Seeking authorisation from the Governor-General for that type of activity is no longer appropriate. Accordingly clause 11 amends section 5(1) of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal and Public Bodies Empowering Act 1915 so that consent must now be sought from the Minister of Conservation. That is entirely appropriate considering that in March 2007 New Zealand submitted that volcanic field with several specifically named features as a World Heritage Site candidate based on the area’s unique combination of natural and cultural features. That is very much in line with Labour’s philosophy of protecting our unique landforms for future generations of New Zealanders to enjoy. 
The second area I will cover is the provisions relating to the Sugar Loaf Islands Marine Protected Area off the Taranaki coast. That protected area is currently a mixture of Crown-owned and local authority - owned land and seabed. The bill seeks to rectify the anomalous position of having sanctuary areas and a conservation park owned in part by persons other than the Crown. The bill also designates further areas within the protected area as sanctuary areas and removes the redundant wildlife refuge status from further areas within the protected area. 
New Zealand is blessed with some of the world’s most outstanding and distinctive flora and fauna and with conservation areas of great beauty and attractiveness for recreation and tourism. The recreational and heritage values of conservation areas can be readily diminished by alien weeds or pests and by overuse and poor management. Through this bill we can help protect these values and ensure we are responsible kaitiaki for future generations. 
There are as the Minister detailed a number of other provisions. There will be ample opportunity for any individuals or groups around the country affected by those provisions to make submissions to the select committee. I look forward to the progression of this bill and I commend it to the House. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 I rise in support of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill and in doing so I acknowledge the very articulate way that the Minister for Land Information went through the bill its very structured purposes and what it is designed to do. 
I also take up the comment made by the member who just spoke and who has resumed his seat. He said that it has taken some time for him to get his call and that he had not known whether he would actually get to speak on the bill today. I think it is worth tying that in with what another Opposition member said today. The member said effectively that it has really been left up to National to tidy up what Labour clearly left very untidy. This bill was introduced in the House on 15 July 2008 and it has languished on the Order Paper. It has now been picked up by an eager and enthusiastic National Government to ensure we get these matters sorted. This bill covers matters that are significant from the point of view of the communities involved. So there will be no more waiting; we have brought this bill forward for its first reading and I am sure it will be sent off to the select committee. 
Interestingly nine of my colleagues on this side of the House will be eagerly waiting to see the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill pass into law. I take the opportunity of naming those fine members. We have Shane Ardern the member for Taranaki - King Country. We have the member for West Coast - Tasman Chris Auchinvole. We have the member for Waitakere Paula Bennett. We have Jacqui Dean from Waitaki and Bill English from down in Clutha-Southland. From Auckland Central we have Nikki Kaye. I am from the Kaikoura electorate Lockwood Smith is from Rodney and Jonathan Young is from New Plymouth. That gives members some idea why we on this side of the House see this matter as of significant importance. 
Going back to my own situation and considering the eloquent speech given by the Minister Richard Worth I see that the explanatory note of the bill touches on a matter that is close to my heart. It talks about the “Marlborough District Council (Picton Office) land”. We see that a long way back in time the Picton Institute Act 1864 bequeathed land for the specified intention. However the council has used that land for another purpose and under this Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill the council wishes to validate a previous dealing with the land and to remove the interest in relation to the Picton Institute. That goes right back to 1864. We can understand that the purpose of this bill is to tidy up such anomalies. 
As we have heard 2003 was the last time that a Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill was put forward. Some 5 years have gone by and now we have this bill which covers 17 pieces of legislation that need to be pulled into line. Either there have been oversights or corrections are required. 
A situation that is occurring in the electorate of Kaikoura is hugely significant and everybody is waiting on it. It is with regard to the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board and the land that surrounds the Wairau Hospital. Clauses 28 to 34 relate to five parcels of land that are very important to the Wairau Hospital rebuild. In fact the rebuild has already started. We are well into the project. This matter is very important to the rebuild because unless we get those titles clear we will not be able to use these particular parcels of land to complete the hospital rebuild. It is a very very important matter. It is something that needs to be processed quickly because the community is aware that there is an intention in relation to that land. Some 16 hectares of land is involved. Not all that land is needed. However the way in which the land came to be bequeathed to the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board needs to be clarified so that it can be used for the purpose of rebuilding that hospital. It needs to be processed. 
The intention is that the land that is not required be used for the purposes of residential subdivision. That in itself raises another point in the sense that when we look at the explanatory note we see that it states that the bill is non-controversial. That is an interesting comment because “non-controversial” today can take on the meaning that the general public are in acceptance of the process. It will be very interesting when the bill goes through the House and submissions are called for—and I am a member of the Primary Production Committee—to see whether every member of the public in Marlborough agrees that the land should be disposed of and subdivided for the building of houses. 
Effectively about $5 million in general terms is required to make up the sum that is necessary to totally fund the Wairau Hospital rebuild. There is a view amongst a section of the community that the money should come out of the consolidated account of taxes and that this land should be reserved. However once something is bequeathed to a district health board the board effectively becomes the owner and on that basis the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill as it is presented is intended to tidy up the matter so that it can be moved on without there being any issue. 
When we look at this bill we consider that those matters are very very important to the community of Marlborough in the Kaikoura electorate but likewise throughout the country there are other matters of huge significance that need to be tidied up. One area that I found to be of particular interest—and I will try my very best to pronounce the name appropriately—is to do with a cemetery in the electorate of Waitakere. It is the Waikumete Cemetery. A lot of its 220-odd acres of land has now been subdivided and used for residential properties. That being the case corrections need to be made concerning the process and everything needs to be brought into order. There is no doubt that the community of Waitakere agrees with that. Things are being dealt with in an orderly way and by arrangement. 
It is worth noting that that cemetery has a significant historical background. It includes a monument to the Holocaust. The monument was erected adjacent to the Hebrew prayer house in the Hebrew section of the cemetery. Also a number of victims of the 1918 influenza outbreak are buried in unmarked graves along the eucalyptus way. Probably the most recent thing of significance in regard to that particular cemetery was the burial of a number of unidentified victims of the Mount Erebus plane crash. 
As members will appreciate the provisions relating to those things need tidying up and this bill the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill does that appropriately. It is very very important—hugely significant—to the communities that are involved. It gives me great pleasure to support the first reading of this bill. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 I rise in support of this riveting legislation the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. It is a technical non-controversial bill and I do not think it needs to occupy a lot of the time of the House. However given the current global situation I wonder why this bill gets priority over other more important things such as the creation of jobs. We are well aware of the much-vaunted Job Summit last week. We are also aware that there was another summit early in January when two Cabinet Ministers got together to talk about something else. It makes me wonder why this bill is so important when we could be talking about such things as protecting New Zealanders; we could be debating the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill which is a bill that really gets tough on gangs; or we could be debating superannuation portability and so on and so forth. But we are here debating this bill which as I said is riveting. We are talking about some small pieces of land that no one really knew much about until something happened and suddenly things had to be fixed with a bit of legislation. 
The previous speaker Colin King talked about the Waikumete Cemetery. He said the cemetery was quite significant and I guess that is not least because a few thousand dead people are buried there. They are of course our tupuna our family and friends and that is significant to us. But what concerns me about that parcel of land is that a bit of it was sold off in a shonky land deal. The Waitakere City Council without lawful authority disposed of the land. It subdivided the land and sold it off privately to people a few houses were stuck on it then the council said the land still legally had reserve status and remained subject to the Reserves Act. Clause 49 revokes that reserve status but it concerns me that pieces of land can be sold off have houses stuck on them then we say “Sorry there was a bit of a mistake there. But it is too late now so we will just have to change the legislation.” That concerns me because I know that from a Maori point of view a number of bits of land have disappeared or had houses thrown up on them. That concerns me. 
These are innocuous pieces of land except for the fact that again from the Maori world point of view there is not much land—well there is no land—in New Zealand that is really innocuous. My family sort of mocked my father when we were going around for drives as kids and it seemed that every stone every tree and every hill and bump had a story to it. But none of this land is insignificant. There is also a saying in Maori that goes “Ma te wahine ma te whenua ngaro ai te tangata” which basically means that by the pursuit of women and of land men perish. I dare not get myself into trouble with my wife by trying to justify or explain the first part of that whakatauaki—I will not go there—but the second part of the whakatauaki is basically a warning that we need to be careful about the way we treat our land and the way land is dealt with so that we do not create problems for ourselves down the line. 
Basically as I say I do not think that this bill should take up a lot of our time in the House; more important things could be consuming our energies in here. But I stand to support this bill at its first reading. 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 On the surface the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill is an innocuous little number. The explanatory note of the bill itself starts off by stating that the bill “makes a number of non-controversial changes to the status of … land land titles” and so on. However this bill is not innocuous and it is not non-controversial. The Green Party will oppose it every step of the way unless there are changes to the section of the bill that deals with the Auckland Art Gallery development. We are appalled that the bid to reclassify part of Albert Park was included in a bill that would normally just fly through the House without anyone—the public or politicians—being particularly aware of its existence. Last July the Green Party wrote to the then Minister for Land Information the Hon David Parker and asked him to consider removing this portion of the bill because it was the subject of such major contention in Auckland. But unfortunately the Minister considered that the issue had to be dealt with at the select committee. 
So here we are today with a bill that is supposed to be non-controversial but that in fact contains within it something absolutely abhorrent to many Aucklanders: the taking of a small portion of Albert Park for the art gallery extension. Public space in central Auckland is a rare commodity and every square metre is precious as our population grows apace particularly given the population density in the central city. For many of us who live or have lived in the central city and/or who have gone to Auckland University or the Auckland University of Technology Albert Park holds a special place in our hearts and memories. Albert Park has played quite a large part in my life in all sorts of ways and I am sure that I am not the only MP in this House today who feels that way. I call on all members—whom I hear around me right now—who care about Albert Park to join me in working to stop this section of the bill going through. 
The area this bill allows the art gallery to take is of special significance. It is one of only three small areas on the western edge of the park that provide access to the park from the city. To take away this space or to narrow it down even further will cut off the park even more from the city side. Open and green space in the middle of downtown Auckland is rare and precious. Neither I nor the Green Party has anything against the art gallery but we do not believe that the gallery should be extended at the expense of the park. 
Proponents of this open-space grab are acting as if it is the only option for the art gallery but of course there are always other options. During the consent hearings on this matter the gallery’s director himself Chris Saines actually agreed that even the new modernised gallery would have a limited life and that there would be a need to move on to a second gallery in the future regardless. I would far rather see a fine second gallery on the drawing board now than see the current project cut into scarce open space in Albert Park. 
Judith Tizard of course was a champion of the art gallery project and perhaps that was why Labour was so determined to keep these controversial clauses in a bill that was supposed to be non-controversial. She seemed determined to make sure the gallery could expand into this small area of Albert Park. However I believe that the new Government does not have quite the same allegiance to that former Minister and I call on National to look again at the issues involved and to support the call from local people in Auckland from the Auckland Regional Council and from the Green Party to save Albert Park from this encroachment. 
Ordinary Aucklanders have got involved in this partly through a petition signed by more than 1100 people who object to the 1117 square metres of the park being reclassified from a historic reserve to a local purpose art gallery reserve which is inconsistent with the policies originally put in place to protect urban green space. I agree with those submitters in their call for the Auckland City Council to look for an additional site for an adjunct art gallery and not to take any land from Albert Park for the art gallery development or remove or prune any trees for the purpose of that development. 
Once this piece of land is gone and the affected trees are cut down or pruned the land and trees will be gone forever. Section 18 of the Reserves Act 1977 establishes historic reserve classification as being “for the purpose of protecting and preserving in perpetuity such places objects and natural features … as are of historic archaeological cultural educational and other special interest.” Albert Park encompasses many of these things: it is a public park a historic reserve an archaeological site of both settler and Maori heritage a geological site a green open space part of an urban forest and a visual amenity. 
We believe that at the moment most people in Auckland are actually blissfully unaware of the Auckland City Council’s plan to build on Albert Park. I am also conscious that many MPs in this Parliament may be unaware that these clauses lurk inside this bill. The Green Party will be doing everything it can to amend the bill as it progresses through Parliament and I certainly hope other parties will join us in ensuring the protection of this small but significant portion of central Auckland’s rare and precious open space. 
HONE HARAWIRA (Maori Party—Te Tai Tokerau) 
: 
 Tena koe. Kia ora Mr Deputy Speaker. Kia ora tatou e te Whare. Tena koe Sue. Thank you very much for that korero about Albert Park. It brings back memories. 
Shane Ardern 
: Do we want to know about it? 
HONE HARAWIRA 
: Now now cut that out. 
The Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill raises important issues about land for the Maori Party. When the colonials first got here if they did not see any houses on the land they called it—what do you call it— 
David Garrett 
: Terra nullius. 
HONE HARAWIRA 
: —terra nullius. There was nothing there so they claimed it for themselves. After the colonials had been here a while if there were not any Maori still on the land 24 hours a day 7 days a week they said “We’ll call this wasteland and take this stuff too.” Later on in the 1800s after the colonials had started grabbing all that land and selling it off to each other they had a twinge of conscience and realising how many dodgy land sales there had been they passed an Act called the Validation of Invalid Land Sales Act. Then they could say “OK we’ve ripped off all this land but that’s OK—we’re going to make it OK.” So any time that a bill like this comes up about what is likely to happen to a piece of land—especially land that is called reserve land empty land or wasteland—and there is the opportunity to dispose of it in one shape or form we will express our concern. 
Apparently we are supporting this bill at its first reading because we want to get as many iwi as possible to signal what has happened with regard to a lot of their own reserved lands so we can get the picture in on that. Clearly a lot of these reserve lands are lands that were either gifted or transferred from Maori ownership into Pakeha ownership and particularly into Crown ownership for specific purposes. It did not end up staying that way. One of the Labour members talked about land in Waikumete where the local council grabbed some land and gave it to one of its subsidiaries which then flogged it off and some houses were built on it. I know of lands all around the country that were originally school land and when the schools were closed the land was transferred from one Government agency to another then to another then eventually sold off and not returned to its rightful owners. 
The Maori Party is concerned about any suggestion that these small pieces of land here there and everywhere may be eligible for immediate sale by the Crown its agencies or local bodies without any further consultation. The Waikumete land was one example of that having been done and the Albert Park land was another. That park apart from being a place of great value and great beauty to the people of Auckland is also a place of historical settlement by the people of Ngati Whatua. I know that at the resource consent hearings the iwi laid out a whole lot of their concerns about what might likely happen to that land and this bill will not assist them in ensuring that their rights will be adhered to. We have concerns about that. We know of lands in Marlborough that were originally set aside for hospitals but that have been chopped up and passed on to this entity and that entity then eventually flogged off. 
For example I know of some land in Kaitaia that is currently held by Far North Holdings Ltd on behalf of the local district council on behalf of the Crown which used to own it through the then civil aviation division of the Ministry of Transport. Far North Holdings is now starting to impose different rules and regulations on the use of that land and that has impacts on the local school. 
I am speaking only about the situations I know of personally but those sorts of blocks of land all over the country have huge value for Maori. As long as they do then we will raise these concerns—certainly at the select committee. We will be notifying as many of our people as possible and we reserve the right to vote on this bill according to however we feel at the second and third readings based on the information that comes before the select committee as a result of that process. Mr Deputy Speaker thank you very much for the opportunity to speak. Kia ora tatou katoa. 
SHANE ARDERN (National—Taranaki - King Country) 
: 
 I rise in support of the Reserve and Other Lands Disposal Bill. It is unfortunate that I was tied up with other parliamentary duties and I was not able to listen to what I bet was a very eloquent Minister’s speech. I am sure it would have been very precise. I am particularly interested in the area of this bill to do with the Waipa District Council. As others have said I am the MP for Taranaki - King Country. The Waipa District Council is in Waikato but it is in my electorate—go figure. It sits right in the heart of Waikato in Te Awamutu and covers a wide area right up to the Waikato Territorial Authority which is also partly in my electorate. The history in regard to the parcel of land in the bill is quite a long one and it is quite a substantial pocket of land. 
Before I touch on that I shall read the general policy statement in the explanatory note. It states: “This Bill makes a number of non-controversial changes to the status of parcels of land land titles and previous Reserves and Other Lands Disposal (ROLD) Acts.” I have just discovered that apparently that sort of Act—or bill as it is at the moment—is described as a ROLD bill. I am sure the learned Minister gave the House an explanation as to the origins of that term and what it means and I am waiting in anticipation to read the  
Hansard 
 and find out that explanation. There we go: it is a ROLD bill. 
My point is that when in Opposition and reading an opening comment like “non-controversial” Opposition members’ antennae suddenly prick up and they become very nervous. I noticed the member Sue Bradford did so and she highlighted it as an area of concern; likewise Hone Harawira who has just resumed his seat. But under the guidance of the new National Government and this Minister I think they have no reason to fear a recurrence of any of what has happened in the past with regard to those kinds of non-controversial things. 
In Taranaki there are a large number of little bits of land—primarily schools that were closed under the last Labour Government in fact—that it is a pity could not be included in legislation like this. The Office of Treaty Settlements has looked at them with advice from Te Puni Kokiri and it has said they are not required to be part of the land-banking process yet those buildings and properties languish in disrepair getting worse all the time. They are assets that are declining. I cannot for the life of me understand why that should be the case. Certainly under the new Government I know that that issue will be moved forward. Even if local iwi decide that the land should be part of the settlement process—and in this case they have not—under the National Government those settlements will be moved forward with much better integrity than has happened in the past. So Maori will have their day in that regard. 
The particular clause in this bill that is of relevance to the Waipa District Council is clause 50 relating to sections 51 and 52. Clause 50 states: “trust land means the land comprising 203.7996 hectares”—so not an insignificant amount of land—“contained in computer freehold register 78214 (being sections 23 and 26 Block”—well I am not familiar with roman numerals but it is VII which is six—“Pirongia Survey District).” So there we go. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: That’s seven. 
SHANE ARDERN 
: Six. 
Iain Lees-Galloway 
: Crusade for literacy and numeracy! 
Hon Member 
: The member can debate it. 
SHANE ARDERN 
: There we go. There is a bit of a debate about that. The background to this particular piece of land is as stated in clause 51(1) “On 9 June 1942 Te Awamutu Borough Council Otorohanga County Council Hamilton Borough Council Raglan County Council and Waipa County Council entered into an agreement to purchase the Government interest in the trust land with Te Awamutu Borough Council holding the land in trust for itself and the other councils for afforestation and water conservation …”. Now if members listened to some of the debate in the House today they would think that conservation water reticulation and water protection were new ideas and here we see that way back in 1942 the councils in central Waikato were involved in such a project. As clause 51(1) also states the “agreement was validated by section 10 of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act 1942 and vesting notices published in the  
Gazette … 
” in 1958. Clause 51(2) states: “On 15 July 1960 Raglan County Council withdrew from the agreement and a supplementary agreement was signed by the remaining parties to reflect this change. This agreement was also validated in legislation by section 14 of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act 1960.” So members can see that this particular proposal has had quite a long gestation period going back before the last Labour Government. Most of these things have a long gestation and this one obviously is as good as any. 
Clause 51(3) states: “Changes to local government organisation in 1970 and 1989 and arrangements between the councils again altered the parties to the original agreement so that by 2003 the legal and beneficial interest in the trust land resided solely with the Waipa District Council.” Hence the need for the changes now. It goes on: “In addition the purpose of the reserve had changed from afforestation water conservation and scenic purposes to a reserve for afforestation and water conservation purposes …” gazetted in 1973 on page 360 I say for the learned Minister Richard Worth in case he wants to go and clarify that. The Waipa District Council at this point “wishes to have the trusts cancelled and the reference to them on the computer register in respect of the trust land removed.” I am sure that at the end of this process that is exactly what will happen; I am confident of that. The Minister is nodding so it seems as though that will happen. 
Clause 52 is entitled “Trust land free of trusts” and it states that the trusts affecting the trust land are to be removed. So there you go Mr Deputy Speaker; as the land is very near to your own electorate I am sure you are very interested in all that. Certainly the next time there is a game of Trivial Pursuit in the Waikato you will be able to quote that back from  
Hansard 
 so it will be useful to you. 
Clause 42 relates to the Sugar Loaf Islands Protected Marine Area in the New Plymouth district. That is also for the learned Minister in one of the territorial authorities in my electorate the New Plymouth District Council—one of eight. This change is another great area of conservation. So once again those in the Green Party and others who think they are the first horse out of the blocks in terms of conservation need to go back and study some of this history. This matter will be tidied up by this bill and at the end of that the people of New Plymouth will be very happy with that change. 
I will leave the rest of that to my colleague Jonathan Young who I think may be following along in this debate and will complete my contribution today by pointing out to those who are concerned about the non-controversial changes in this bill that they will get their chance to raise those concerns in the select committee because under a National Government everybody gets the chance to have their day on these issues. This is a new change for Parliament. I can understand that members are not used to it because it did not happen under the last Government. This will be a new experience. There are some new members and they will understand that when a National Government puts up a bill that states it is non-controversial then most likely that is what it will be. 
CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South) 
: 
 I rise to support the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. In the interests of brevity I think that all there is to say is that we should be congratulating the previous Minister for Land Information David Parker. 
SANDRA GOUDIE (National—Coromandel) 
: 
 I am absolutely delighted to be following my most excellent colleague Shane Ardern. He makes an outstanding contribution to the New Zealand Parliament and to his electorate of Taranaki - King Country. What an outstanding member of Parliament he is! I have very fond memories of his wonderful tractor Matilda. 
This is a momentous moment in New Zealand’s legislative history as we speak to the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. It is an important opportunity for New Zealand to recognise the continuing excellent work of the National Government in moving matters forward. That is what we are intent on doing and have been doing for the last 100 days - plus. We are absolutely focused on getting the job done. I commend all my colleagues for the outstanding work that they have been doing. On my right is the Hon Richard Worth—another outstanding Minister. 
The Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill makes a number of non-controversial changes to the status of parcels of land land titles and previous Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Acts. In short we call these bills ROLD bills—R-O-L-D. I say for the benefit of those people who might happen to be listening in on this very special occasion that this legislation is important. If one looks at the breadth of the proposed changes one sees that—apart from the changes to the Reserves Act—there are about 50 different amendments. Some of those relate to Albert Park with the Auckland Art Gallery development; the Auckland volcanic cones land; and the Dunedin Octagon land. Do members remember that the Dunedin Octagon land was in the news recently? So many people have very strong connections and emotional ties to many of these places. I am sure they will be delighted that some of the constraints on their enjoyment of these places and on the community’s use of and wishes regarding them are now being set free. It is absolutely liberation. Communities will now have the freedom to enjoy these places and spaces as they wish. 
There is the Kahurangi National Park land. I hope I am pronouncing that correctly. We have been berated for the way in which we pronounce words in the House. We endeavour to be very careful about it. There is the Lookout Point land. Regarding the pronunciation of words local dialect must be considered and taken into account. 
Shane Ardern 
: The vernacular. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: Absolutely. In the Coromandel and all around New Zealand there are different pronunciations of words and that is to do with local dialect. 
But I will get back to the very important changes being made through this legislation. I must share with members that the Mahinepua Bay reserve land is mentioned—I am not sure I have said that correctly—as is the Marlborough District Council (Picton Office) land and Nelson Marlborough District Health Board land. 
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: What are the priorities of this Government—filibustering on this and avoiding the important legislation. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: I take issue with the member who does not believe that this bill is important. It absolutely is important. It is really important that these changes are made for the many communities throughout New Zealand who want the opportunity to enjoy these places and spaces. I would hope that the member supported communities being able to maximise their enjoyment and use of all these properties. 
 There is the Paparoa National Park Land the Port Chalmers Recreation Reserve—and what a delightful little place Port Chalmers is—the Sugar Loaf Islands Marine Protected Area and Taieri Airport which is absolutely important. The Waikumete Cemetery land is very important and there is the Waipa District Council land the Westland National Park land and—the coup de grace—the Winton Racecourse. 
I was interested to see the Winton Racecourse there because my family often used to go to the Winton Racecourse and we have had many a wonderful happy family time there. It is wonderful to see that the Department of Conservation is opening up the opportunity for the community to have an interest in the Winton Racecourse and to take part in the management of its affairs. Clause 56(2) states: “So as to enable wider community and independent input into the racecourse the Department of Conservation wishes to enable the Minister of Conservation to appoint up to five trustees at any one time for the racecourse and to limit each appointment to a three-year period.” Is that not wonderful? I think it is absolutely fantastic! I am so moved! 
Hon Parekura Horomia 
: This is outlandish. This is foolish—disgraceful. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: Well it is wonderful. The Winton Racecourse Reserve Management Ordinance 1873 is being amended. We heard the year 1973 given but the ordinance dates back to 1873. It had been left to languish until we took it by the horns and we are making it happen tonight. Clause 57 substitutes a new section 3(1) in the ordinance that states: “The Minister of Conservation must appoint by notice in the  
Gazette 
 not fewer than 3 but no more than 5 persons as trustees of the Winton Racecourse.” It goes on to talk about the term of office and the transitional provision which is of course incredibly important. 
This Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill is diverse legislation and it spans the length and breadth of New Zealand. It has wide-ranging community interests at heart and it deals with a number of iconic New Zealand locations. It enables the transfer of land to address community wishes it removes restrictions that prevent community use of land and it corrects historic oversights errors or omissions that are of a non-controversial nature. I recall the words of my most excellent colleague Shane Ardern who said that the Office of Treaty Settlements has had an opportunity to comment as have a number of other agencies and it has found nothing overly controversial in the formulation of the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. 
It would appear that we are satisfying the wishes of many people in communities throughout New Zealand about the use of these wide-ranging iconic places and spaces. I note that the Braemar Hospital site the Wairau Hospital site and the French Pass District Nursing Property are other areas of land whose use is now able to be determined to the satisfaction of the interests of those communities. 
I applaud National for its wonderful efforts in this regard— 
Hekia Parata 
: The leadership. 
SANDRA GOUDIE 
: —yes absolutely and for the leadership it has shown to the people of New Zealand. 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour) 
: 
 Here we are at 6 minutes to 6 on a Thursday evening and the Government is filibustering on a bill that is non-controversial and that is going to go to a select committee—the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. 
The Government is obsessed with gangs and crime and on the Order Paper there is a bill called the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill yet that bill is not considered important enough to debate. I think New Zealand needs to notice that this Government is full of rhetoric about getting hard on gangs and getting hard on criminal offending yet tonight it puts up—to filibuster and giggle about—a bill that is a tidy-up of all of the work the previous Government did. Government members are giggling away on clauses in the bill in order to waste the time and resources of the House when they ought to be getting on to the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Bill or the Sale and Supply of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill. 
It is an obvious indication that this Government is simply not organised. Its members are in total disarray. They are not ready to speak tonight on the liquor legislation so what are they doing? They are trifling with the House’s time. It is an appalling waste. When Labour was in Government we never did this; our speakers were always ready to go. They are not ready; they are a shambles. 
Tonight we are wasting time on the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill. I must say that the previous Minister for Land Information David Parker made sure he did the detailed work in the build-up to this bill. It is an appalling indictment that at this stage of Parliament—just after the first 100 days—Government members have forgotten the rhetoric of a bright future of cleaning up the gangs and of cleaning up the criminal offending and that they have put this sort of detailed bill on to the Order Paper. It is an appalling way to end what has been a very successful week for the Opposition. 
NATHAN GUY (National—Otaki) 
: 
 I wish to make a very good contribution to the debate on the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Bill which is a very important bill that is before the House this evening. 
I take offence at the previous speaker the junior Opposition whip Steve Chadwick standing up and saying that we should be focusing on crime and law and order issues. She has obviously forgotten about the 100-day programme that we have just implemented. With your consent Mr Deputy Speaker I think it is appropriate that the junior Opposition whip realises what this Government has achieved to do with law and order. I think it was a cheek that she stood up and berated this Government when we have been working on a very good plan to make our communities safer. We have introduced legislation to remove the right of repeat criminals to parole; we have introduced legislation to crack down on gangs which that former Minister said we are not doing enough of; we have toughened up the bail laws; and we have been extremely busy on youth crime—legislation to do with that is passing through the select committee. Legislation to do with DNA testing of criminals who come before the police is also moving through the select committee. There is a whole lot more but I do not want to take all of this precious time to enlighten the junior Opposition whip as to how successful we have been during our 100-day programme. 
I take some time to commend the honourable Minister Richard Worth for bringing this bill to the House. It will tidy up the Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Acts. It is a very very important bill that has been sitting around on the Order Paper since July of last year. This Government which has implemented a 100-day programme is getting on with the issues of the day. This is an important bill. When we think about it we see that this bill will be very very important for all those electorates that National holds. This bill affects the electorates of Shane Ardern Chris Auchinvole Paula Bennett Jacqui Dean Bill English Nikki Kaye Colin King Lockwood Smith and Jonathan Young. Labour has very few electorates in rural communities. This important bill will address concerns that have been raised by these electorate MPs in their own patches. 
This very important bill will be referred to the Primary Production Committee which is chaired by Shane Ardern. The committee has a bit of a work stream ahead of it and it will also have to work hard on this bill. The benefits of this legislation are considerable; there will be real benefits right across the whole of the country including the formalisation of the lease of the Port Chalmers Bowling Club and the securing of the future of the Otago Aero Club. 
We heard from one of the new MPs Clare Curran—one of the “listies”. She stood up and made a contribution for about 30 seconds. 
Debate interrupted.