O'Connor Damien: Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Connor Damien: Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 20 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8061. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAMIEN O’CONNOR (Labour—West Coast - Tasman) 
: 
 I move  
That the Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill be now read a first time. 
 I nominate that the Local Government and Environment Committee consider the bill. 
I have to say I am not overly enthusiastic about bringing retrospective legislation to the House. However I am a very proud local member and I have spoken to the Tasman District Council and agreed to sponsor this bill into Parliament where a select committee can give it due consideration. 
The purpose of the Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill is to correct a number of irregularities that occurred when the council set and assessed the rates for the Tasman District Council between 2003 and 2009. The council also wants to address the irregularity with the Ligar Bay and Tata Beach stormwater rates that were set for the 2006-07 financial year. Legislation is now the only way for the council to validate these rates assessments and thus provide certainty for both the council and ratepayers. The bill proposes to validate the rates set and assessed by the council from 2003 to 2009 and any penalties added to those rates to treat all rates payments received by the council as having been lawfully paid and to authorise the council to recover any part of the rates and penalties for those years that remain unpaid. The bill also proposes to validate the stormwater rate for Ligar Bay and Tata Beach for the 2006-07 financial year as I said. 
The origins of the bill lie with a 2006 decision by the council to include the Tata Beach settlement in an urban stormwater drainage area. The decision was challenged by a ratepayer and led eventually to a review by the Office of the Ombudsmen. I am sure that that ratepayer will present to the select committee and put forward some very sound arguments for his position. It was found at the time that the rate was not properly imposed. The council had not complied with the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 because it did not identify the category of rateable land in Ligar Bay and Tata Beach on which the rates were set and assessed. In addition it failed to include a map showing the location of the Tata Beach drainage area. 
The council then reviewed its processes and rationale for including the Tata Beach settlement in this rate and drainage area. It did this through a consultation process with affected ratepayers where three options were considered. In the end however the council determined that the status quo should remain and that the inclusion of Tata Beach in this drainage area should be maintained. 
I should say at this point that Ligar Bay and Tata Beach can be found in Golden Bay about 20 kilometres from Takaka which is about an hour’s drive from Nelson. As the name suggests they both possess stunning golden sand beaches and are a wonderful place to holiday should you have that privilege. There is plenty of accommodation from basic through to de luxe and I would recommend this area as I said to anyone wanting to come down and visit a wonderful electorate. 
However this business with the stormwater drainage area prompted the council to undertake a separate review of its total rates-setting process for 2006. This was subsequently extended out to cover the years of 2002 to 2009 and the review identified additional procedural errors in the way that the rates had been set between 2003 and 2009. Again the council was found to be in breach of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 because of the way in which it set and assessed the rates during these years. These included firstly a failure to resolve and set and assess rates in accordance with section 23 of the Act for some years; secondly resolving to adopt rates before the council had adopted the annual plan and funding impact statement; thirdly a failure to state the financial year in which the rates applied that they were payable by instalments and the date that they were to be paid by for some of the years; and fourthly a failure to resolve to authorise that penalties were to be added to rates not paid by the due date. 
The council’s practice of using its annual plan as its source of rates setting instead of resolving each rate individually was found to be in breach of the Act. This is because the decision to adopt the annual plan did not also mean that a rate had been adopted. This has raised questions about the validity of the rates and leaves the council open to rating challenges. Validating legislation is now the only way to correct the breaches and give certainty to all parties concerned. The council accepts that it has made a mistake and is now taking steps to correct the situation. 
I do hope that the Local Government and Environment Committee will give this bill a good and thorough hearing and allow all parties to present their submissions but at the same time return it to the House in good time. 
Before I end my speech I must say that I have met with a number of ratepayers from Tata Beach and Ligar Bay. They are concerned about the process and they will no doubt bring to the select committee what sparked this off in the first place. Believe it or not it was the replacement of a large drainage pipe for a new area of a subdivision that did not affect the main area of Tata Beach which has been there for some time. They have as the Ombudsman and others have identified a legitimate claim on the council for perhaps a change. The council has been caught in a situation where it does have to validate these rates. 
As I say I am a reluctant sponsor of retrospective legislation. The main area where we seem to have this in the House is over fisheries legislation. This is not the case here. It is local government. Mistakes do happen from time to time. I know each and every one of the councillors in good faith took advice from their staff and of course assumed that they had put in place valid rating claims on the ratepayers. So this is perhaps a long and drawn-out and quite expensive process but it is one that we have to go through none the less. 
I commend the bill to the House. I hope that the Local Government and Environment Committee will give all submitters a very fair hearing and make any adjustments necessary to ensure that this piece of legislation protects the ratepayers and the council of Tasman District as well but ensures a fair process for all ratepayers both now and into the future. Thank you.