Power Simon: Palmerston North Reserves Empowering Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Power Simon: Palmerston North Reserves Empowering Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:638;Page:8425] 
SIMON POWER (National—Rangitikei) 
: 
 National will support the Palmerston North Reserves Empowering Amendment Bill at its first reading. This is in fact the second occasion on which the Hon Steve Maharey and I have been involved in a local bill in quite a short period of time. The first was also not without its controversy. The Manfeild Park Bill caused a few hiccups along the way but we got there in the end. 
When I was written to by the council solicitors I had some concerns about this bill because I was aware of some controversy around its progression particularly in relation to the concerns of those people at the neighbouring tennis club. This land—the corner of Park Road and Fitzherbert Avenue—is what could be described only as a prime spot of land in the Palmerston North area. It is a piece of land that I drive past every Sunday morning when I am taking my little boy to swimming lessons. 
It has to be said that I was sufficiently concerned about these issues to seek a meeting with council solicitors on Friday to have explained to me exactly whether this legislation was as potentially problematic as I had been led to believe. The solicitors advised me that they had received about five phone calls expressing concern since the advertisements relating to the bill had been published. Then I spent some time talking to a council staff member on Friday afternoon and I asked her to email through to me the background information so that I was clear what process had to be followed for this bill. 
The Hon Steve Maharey reflected those conversations in his statements earlier today and it is indeed my understanding that if the land becomes surplus it is the council’s intentions as signalled by certain clauses in the long-term council community plan that any funds realised would be used—as they have to be because it is part reserve—for reserves funding at the local esplanade. The funds would be primarily for a conservatory as I understand it. I have to say as a reasonably regular visitor—certainly every second week when I take my young son down to the esplanade—that any money spent there would be welcomed in the long run. 
But some people are going to be a bit concerned about this bill. The select committee process is the appropriate place to deal with those concerns so that both the promoter of the bill and those of us like Dr Ashraf Choudhary and myself who are familiar with the area will have the opportunity to get feedback from the party members we have on that select committee as to that level of controversy. Indeed Steve Maharey is correct when he says that as the local member it is actually his duty—to some extent—to put forward the bill because he has been requested to do so by the local authority. I see the Hon George Hawkins sitting in the back of the Chamber there. He has had to do similarly with legislation from his local body authority recently which was also not without controversy—although one has to reflect on the fact that that particular legislation was probably a lot more controversial than the one currently being promoted by the Hon Steve Maharey. 
Having said that I tell members that I did ask Diana Everton who is the property officer at the Palmerston North City Council to give me a bit of a written summation of the position. She said on behalf of the council that the reason for the amendment bill is that the Palmerston North City Council currently holds this land but that currently the Palmerston North Reserves Act 1922 prevents the council from selling the land. Who would have thought that? The council wishes to be able to sell the land if it becomes surplus to the council’s requirements thereby requiring an Act of Parliament to overturn the original legislation in respect of just this one piece of land. 
The title which is attached by way of schedule 5 gives a historic record of the background to the particular piece of land. The questions which no doubt were on the minds of the members of the tennis club were about what would happen to that piece of land whose hands it would go into whether it would go into the hands of a developer whether it would be available for further amenities required for council usage and what the downstream effects of its sale would be. We do know that the Palmerston North City Council draft annual plan—as if the council did not have enough to do it is doing more plans—says this about the possible sale of assets: “The Council has a dynamic portfolio with the acquisition of property necessary to serve the community and the sale of surplus property from time to time. Land on the corner of Park Road/Fitzherbert Ave was identified as surplus in 2005 and the sale signalled in the 10 Year Plan. Since then the Council has asked that any sale process for this land allow the opportunity for community use to be considered”. 
So if the land were sold the first port of call would be community use first and foremost. I am sure that Ashraf Choudhary and the Hon Steve Maharey would join me in saying that that would be described as appropriate. A community meeting is also to be held to look at future options as part of that consultation process if this legislation makes it through all three stages. 
The annual draft plan goes on to say of the land’s background: “As this land is reserve land it is proposed”—as Steve Maharey indicated—“that the proceeds received from the sale will be applied to developments at the Esplanade”. It gives by way of example although not by way of limitation the construction of a new conservatory. So the land is not specifically tagged or earmarked for that specific purpose but the plan makes clear that that is the type of thing the council would consider doing with the proceeds of any sale. 
 Other properties identified for sale include land on Pembroke Street in Ashhurst and Nash Street which funnily enough concerns the roadway itself. That will be an interesting one when the Hon Steve Maharey is asked to promote that bill in the House. These properties will then create additional rates revenue and the conclusion to this paragraph states: “Overall the estimated effect on rates is a 0.2 percent reduction in rates.” This is quite an important point given that the current Government is involved in a wide-ranging and reasonably important rates inquiry. So when the rates are next struck by the Palmerston North City Council we will see whether that vision is realised and whether those who live in the Palmerston North City catchment have their rates reduced by 0.2 percent as a result. 
It appears as is often the case with local bills that this is a short and non-controversial matter. But as I indicated earlier some issues do need looking at. I am not sure whether Dr Ashraf Choudhary sits on the Local Government and Environment Committee but maybe the Labour Party would see fit to have him transferred to that committee for the hearing of evidence on this bill so that when the report back comes he will be in a position to enlighten those of us who will not be able to sit on that committee as to the progress of the submission process during the committee’s deliberations. 
This is the first step. Members on this side of the House will listen carefully to submissions and feedback received from the select committee and the local community before supporting the bill further. But the Hon Steve Maharey is dead right—it is his duty to present the bill to the House. At this point in the process we are happy to support him in those endeavours and we will be voting for the passage of this bill at its first reading.