Ngaro Alfred: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNgaro Alfred: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10265. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ALFRED NGARO (National) on behalf of Hon Dr Nick Smith (National—Nelson): I move That the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill be now read a third time. Can I first of all just acknowledge the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Exemption for RNZRSA Clubs from Special Licencing Requirements for Anzac Day) Amendment Bill and my friend and colleague Paul Foster-Bell. It is a bill that has obviously had wide support and I congratulate him on getting it through. It is a rare thing as I have been told. As a member of the Te Atatū RSA and the RSAs out in west Auckland I know that they too will salute that bill which is really important. So I acknowledge the fine work that he has done as well.The bill that I will be speaking on the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill like the bill around the sale and supply of alcohol talks about the legacy of service and sacrifice of those who served their country. The bill that I will be speaking on on behalf of the Minister the Hon Nick Smith is a private bill that he brought to this House and I give the Minister’s apologies because he cannot be here with us this afternoon. My speech will not be long but it will cover the essentials that he has requested me to cover including acknowledging those who have been part of bringing this bill to the House and the intention behind it.Christian Churches New Zealand is an association of more than 30 Churches. This began some time ago in Nelson in 1844. The Christian Churches movement began in the early 1800s in both the UK and the US out of a concern that the more traditional Churches were too rigid and authoritarian. It was at that stage that those Churches at that time felt that it was important that they should congregate together and to have Churches that were more accessible and also I suppose that met some of the needs that were more community and communally orientated. That was the reason for the forming of this Christian Churches movement as well.Its focus is on unity and the teachings of the New Testament so in a sense the Christian Churches movement grew rapidly in New Zealand. New congregations were formed in Auckland in 1845 in Dunedin in 1858 and in Christchurch in 1870 and by 1885 it had grown to 25 churches across the country. Mr Assistant Speaker I do beg your indulgence because the Minister was quite clear that he would like to acknowledge some of the foundational aspects of this bill and those who have been involved and so I will be talking just a little bit about that as well.Initially each of the church properties was vested in each autonomous congregation in the name of the Church elders. This was not entirely practical and in the 1920s a conference of Churches decided to have a legal entity that could own all of those properties. In April 1924 at a convened conference of delegates from the Churches a board of trustees of certain members of the Churches was set up with the intent that the board should hold as trustees the lands of those Churches that wished to vest the land and their properties in the board and also all real and personal property for Church extension purposes.In that sense what has also come out of the work of those founding members and those who have been actively involved in those 30 congregations is that the congregations actually have more of an outreach focus. Not only was it to be unified but in a sense the ramifications and the confinements of the trust as it was constituted allowed them to deal only with properties and yet we know that a lot of the work in these Churches was not just about properties. It was also about the outreach ministries that they have. It could be everything not just from Sunday schools that they delivered on Sundays and the Church services but often these Churches have other social services that are involved like budgeting services kindergartens and after-school programmes that are run potentially with an out-of-school care and recreation contract. These are a number of the services that are being run by these Churches and by these congregations.The intent then was to be able to give them more flexibility to broaden their reach and the scope of their ability to be able to make a difference in those communities in particular. The legal entity was incorporated as the Church Extension and Property Trust Board of Associated Churches of Christ in New Zealand. There was some doubt about the legal capacity of the board to hold these properties vested within it so the private Act was passed by this Parliament in 1929.The reason for this bill is that the Associated Churches of Christ Church Property Act of 1929 which governs the management of these Church properties is outdated and needs modernising. As I was explaining a number of these Churches—I have talked to some of them about their activities that were important in order for them to be able to I suppose demonstrate their relevance to their local communities. Hence this becomes an important part of their evolution and change as a Church to become more relevant to the needs that they face within their congregations as well.This bill repeals the Associated Churches of Christ Church Property Act which dates back to 1929. The core of the changes proposed in this legislation is to enable the new trust which those 44 Churches have agreed to establish to have a more modern governance structure and to be able to manage their Church properties in a more flexible way. I also want to reiterate that some of the Churches were unsure about different matters that may be affected by this change. I just want again to reassure the members of those 44 Churches who may be listening about for instance the matters not affected by the transfer of property rights and obligations.The bill provides that the dissolution of the old board and the transfer of those property rights and obligations to the new board are not to be treated as placing a person in breach of or default under any contract or in breach of trust or in breach of confidence or as otherwise making the person guilty of a civil wrong and are not to be treated as entitling a person to (a) terminate or cancel or modify a contract an agreement or an arrangement; or (b) enforce or accelerate the performance of an obligation; or (c) require the performance of an obligation not otherwise arising for performance and do not release any surety wholly or in part from all or any obligation; and (d) do not invalidate or discharge any contract or security. These were issues of some concern that I know were raised and so I hope that by clarifying these in my speech it will give some clarity and confirmation to those who seek it.The other thing too is the dissolution of the old board. I think that is important. The bill provides that on the commencement of this Act the old board is dissolved and the Registrar of Incorporated Societies must as soon as practicable after commencement of this Act remove the name of the old board from the register of charitable trust boards kept under Part 2 of the Charitable Trusts Act 1957.I want to finalise this part of my speech again to give some clarity to those members who are listening. I turn to the part where it talks about the records and registers. The bill provides that neither the Registrar-General of Land nor any other person charged with the keeping of records or registers is obliged solely by reason of Part 2 of the bill to change any name in those records or registers or in any document.The bill also provides that in the absence of evidence to the contrary an instrument whether or not it is an instrument of transfer is sufficient proof when presented to the Registrar-General of Land or any other person charged with the keeping of any records or registers and that any property rights or obligations have under this bill become the property rights or obligations of the new board if the following requirements are met: (a) the instrument has been or purports to have been executed by the new board and (b) the property rights or obligations in question were the property rights or obligations of the old board immediately before the commencement of this Act.I know that was a little bit tedious but again it is just to give clarity and confirmation to the 44 Churches and their members who may be listening out there.I just want to conclude my speech by noting that probably the most significant change in this bill from the 1929 Act is that the Act put quite a narrow constraint on the property trust board to be able to spend the funds and the revenues of those properties only back on property in the view that 44 Churches have today the ability to be able to exercise their outreach ability into their communities.Can I finally just acknowledge the Hon Ruth Dyson who is the chairperson of the Government Administration Committee and the deputy chair Sarah Dowie and also all the members who are on the committee for their work on this bill. I would also like to acknowledge the new trust solicitor Mr Viesturs Altments for his work on bringing this bill to the House. This bill is simply about letting those 44 Churches have a more flexible ability to manage their own property. I commend this bill to the House.