Kedgley Sue: Local Government Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
Kedgley Sue: Local Government Law Reform Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:630;Page:2518] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party will support the Local Government Law Reform Bill going to the Local Government and Environment Committee with some misgivings. There are very many good aspects of this bill—which I will talk about—but Green members are a little bit worried that this is one of those omnibus bills whereby there are very positive aspects in it and then in the fine print we see a whole lot of things some of which slightly worry us. 
Clause 47 states: “Clause 10(1)(c) of Schedule 3 is amended by omitting ‘must’.” What does that mean? We really have no idea and the Local Government and Environment Committee will be looking very carefully at some of these clauses. As another example clause 41 is headed: “Power to restrict water supply”. What does this mean? We certainly would not wish to inadvertently support legislation that gives local authorities powers to restrict water supply in ways that would concern us. We have not had a chance to look at all of the many detailed amendments in the bill and in the schedules. We have concerns about some of those and we will look at them very carefully. 
However we strongly support other provisions and that is why we will support this legislation going to a select committee. Who would not support rates rebate relief? Who would not support the requirement for public consultation before a local authority disposes of sells or agrees to dispose of or sell a park? I would have thought that the public consultation provisions of the Local Government Act would require this but if they do not then it is a very good thing that we are including that provision. There is another provision for a regional park or reserve to be protected in perpetuity from sale or disposition. I gather that this would enable a regional council to apply for a ministerial Order in Council to preserve a park in perpetuity. Once again we think that is an excellent idea and we strongly support that provision. 
There are other provisions relating to things such as cycle lanes and bus lanes and we strongly support those. And of course we support the strengthening of dog controls so that if a dog is classified as dangerous in one local authority that finding will hold throughout New Zealand. Who would not support that? Who in this House is not interested in trying to reduce the number of dangerous menacing dogs in New Zealand? Another provision states that such a dog would have to be neutered within a certain period. That too we support. 
One other aspect we strongly support is the strengthening of the litter provisions in the Act. My understanding is that at present local authorities are able to take very few prosecutions in relation to litter because the present legislation is not strong enough in relation to the presenting of proof and as a result we have an incredible amount of litter in New Zealand and people are not being prosecuted. Indeed our lovely so-called clean green image is being undermined by the amount of litter we see all over New Zealand. In the street in which I live we have a constant litter problem. We have a section of our street where there is perpetual litter and it looks like a rubbish tip for much of the time. People in the street have been complaining about this on an almost weekly basis for several years and there have been no prosecutions. Nothing has happened; it continues to look like a tip. So it is our sincere hope that the strengthened provisions in the bill will give local authorities the ability to take prosecutions for litter and that this might result in our particular street and many other streets around New Zealand not looking like a rubbish tip. 
We are very very pleased to support the very many positive clauses in this bill. However we find other provisions that we really have not had the chance to look at. We know about fine print and we know it is very easy to slip some clauses that might cause real concerns into an omnibus bill like this bill which covers such a wide range of issues in local government. So we have certain reservations particularly about some of the amendments to the schedules and so forth. We think they need to be examined with a fine-tooth comb as they say—or with a microscope—and we will be doing that in relation to the Local Government Act. But we do sincerely support parts of these provisions and for that reason we support the bill’s referral to the Local Government and Environment Committee.