Copeland Gordon: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Copeland Gordon: Overseas Investment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21560] 
GORDON COPELAND (United Future) 
: 
 I want to take a call on clauses 21O and 21T of Part 2 of this bill because I want to make United Future’s position on the matter of marginal strips etc. very very clear indeed to the Committee. I do so firstly to clarify what the Minister Dr Michael Cullen has just advised the Committee and secondly to completely rebut and debunk the comments that the co-leader of the Green Party Rod Donald has made to this Committee about our position. It is amazing how other people in other parties think they know more about United Future’s position than we do. 
 I go first to the Minister’s comments. It is not true that United Future asked the Government to remove marginal strips from this bill—we did not. We said to the Government that we could not agree to clause 21T and the provision that no compensation would be payable to any person. My specific suggestion in that regard was that the bill should provide for an appropriate access fee to be paid to the New Zealand land seller. United Future’s position in relation to this matter was very very clearly set out in the commentary on the bill that came back from the Finance and Expenditure Committee which stated: “United Future although supporting the creation of marginal strips next to rivers lakes and foreshores does not agree that private land should be acquired for this purpose without the payment of just compensation. If the creation of such marginal strips is seen to be of value to the people of New Zealand then the Crown on behalf of its citizens is duty bound to pay compensation.” I advise the Committee that the decision to remove marginal strips in their entirety from this bill was the decision of the Government but one that we acceded to. I think that is a slightly different story from the one given to the Committee by the Minister. 
I now turn to the Greens’ comments. Clause 21O states that a marginal strip put aside under this legislation is to be put aside until the end of time. It is a permanent alienation of the use and enjoyment of a piece of private land currently owned by a New Zealander. It is State interference in use and enjoyment if it forces people to share something that they may not necessarily want to share. Clause 21T then states—and I want to get this very clear because it is quite obvious to me that Rod Donald has the wrong end of the stick completely—that no compensation will be paid to New Zealanders who own private land if they are selling it to a foreigner. Mr Donald has told the Committee that we think that compensation should be paid to foreign purchasers. Obviously he has never read a sale and purchase agreement. He has no idea how they work because that is a ludicrous comment. That has never been our position and in fact it is a total misrepresentation of everything we stand for and believe. We are not as stupid as that. 
I shall talk also about our affiliation partner Outdoor Recreation NZ. I advise the Committee and particularly Mr Donald that Outdoor Recreation NZ’s position in regard to access strips in general which it is strongly in favour of as is United Future is that they should not be created at the expense of property rights. That is the point of difference is it not between Outdoor Recreation NZ the common-sense Greens—the practical Greens the intelligent Greens the logical Greens—and the party in this House called the Green Party which masquerades in that colour when in fact we all know it is just like a watermelon inside. The Greens are as red as it gets just like a watermelon. I am not at all surprised that the Greens are quite comfortable with the no-compensation clause. They back it to the hilt. The Green member Mike Ward spoke in this House on my member’s bill. His attitude was this: if he Mike Ward personally or any of the Greens disagreed with what someone was doing on his or her property they reserve to themselves the right to stop the person from doing it and to force him or her to do something else. That is what Mike Ward of the Greens told the House in respect of my private property bill and that is the Greens’ attitude. That is outrageous. It will not be tolerated by New Zealanders. Really when New Zealanders understand that that is the Greens’ agenda they will make sure that they disappear from Parliament. Such views override the Magna Carta and all the rights we have worked for over about 1000 years in terms of private property. To have those rights overridden by such ridiculous nonsense and sheer arrogance is unacceptable.