Mitchell Mark: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMitchell Mark: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 06 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10275. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MARK MITCHELL (National—Rodney): It is a pleasure to take a call on this the third reading of the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill. I have been able to follow this bill right through the whole process as a member of the Government Administration Committee and of course I would like to recognise and acknowledge the chair the Hon Ruth Dyson and my colleagues who sit on the committee with me. I would like to acknowledge Sarah Dowie. She was the deputy chair at the time but she has moved on to another committee and has been replaced by the very able Mr Paul Foster-Bell who comes on to the committee as the new deputy chair.I would like to acknowledge my colleague Brett Hudson who also sits on the committee with me; Mojo Mathers from the Green Party; and Adrian Rurawhe who made a very good speech and took a very good call earlier; and of course my good friend and parliamentary rugby team-mate Kris Faafoi.Phil Twyford: Haven’t you missed somebody Mark?MARK MITCHELL: No I think I have got everyone Phil. I know that in the Committee stage Mr Assistant Speaker Tisch you gave me a fair bit of latitude in terms of talking about some of the Churches that are affected by this. I think that is actually really important and I think I will come back to that. But one thing that I would like to do also is acknowledge the Hon Dr Nick Smith who is the original sponsor of this bill.Going through the list I would like to acknowledge some of the Churches that are in his electorate. There is the Annesbrook Church of Nelson. There is the Unite Church in Nelson which I know is heavily involved in youth missions and youth counselling so I want to acknowledge them and the work that they do in the community in Nelson. I know there is another one—the Richmond Church of Christ in Nelson. I do want to acknowledge them as through the members and the members of the more than 30 congregations—obviously it was their local member the Hon Dr Nick Smith who originally sponsored the bill and brought the bill which is an important one to the House.I would just like to maybe go over a little bit of the history again. Christian Churches New Zealand was the name given to an association of more than 30 congregations throughout New Zealand. Until 2012 they generally described themselves locally as Churches of Christ. Together they are still known legally as the Associated Churches of Christ in New Zealand and of course as part of this bill there is going to be a name change.Christian Churches New Zealand congregations are autonomous but they act together through their regular national conferences and I think this is very important. If you were actually to make contact with any of the Churches or if you were living in a certain area for example Nelson and you happened to be moving to Invercargill or Tasman or Auckland or Tauranga they already have a very strong network so you are able to enjoy what would hopefully be a seamless transition from one congregation and one Church to another—one of these Churches that are very aligned in what they are doing. I have to say that as a dyed in the wool Catholic I got a little bit of ribbing—Paul Foster-Bell: A Roman?MARK MITCHELL: —that is right—about taking calls on this. But you know what? At the end of the day actually we are all bound together by Christian faith and that is what is important.Carmel Sepuloni: The end of the day is night-time.MARK MITCHELL: To be honest with you I find it actually very rude that there are interjections—on a bill like this—coming from the whip of an Opposition party.Carmel Sepuloni: Oh you’re exaggerating! That’s ridiculous.MARK MITCHELL: No no I am not exaggerating. This is something that is actually pretty important to people. Two of your members have got up and made very good contributions and you are sitting there making fun of it and that actually indicates a lot about the way that you guys think. It is poor. It is very poor. I can guarantee you right now—Carmel Sepuloni: It’s pathetic.MARK MITCHELL: —no I am serious—that there are people sitting at home watching people stand up and speak to this which is fundamentally very important because do you know what the way that they use their assets the way that they administer the way that they deal in their communities is fundamentally very important to them. So I would ask that you keep your comments to yourself and that you have respect for the House and allow everyone to get up and make their contributions. Thank you very much.The global family of Christian Churches and the Churches of Christ now extends to more than 185 countries. It was begun in the early 1800s in both the United Kingdom and the United States of America. It evolved largely from a concern growing strongly through the Enlightenment era that the Church had become rigid authoritarian and divided making the meaningful preaching of the Christian message more challenging for them of course.Christian Churches’ pioneers felt strongly that the whole Church would be more effective if it showed unity and I believe that was a very important step. I believe that actually unity wherever you find it always provides a very powerful message. They felt that the whole Church should be more effective and that they would return to and use the New Testament for their model. They intended that their message should be one of reform within the Church but eventually they were forced to become a separate movement in themselves.Just talking about the history of these Churches if you go back and look at for example—and we heard a very good contribution from Chester Borrows who is very strong in his Christian faith. So I want to acknowledge that and talk about one of the Churches in his electorate. It is the Riverside Christian Church. That Church had its first meeting and was founded back on 28 April 1867. I think why this is quite a good example is because at that time they had no assets at all. They rented a hall and they had their first meeting there but as time progressed they started to accumulate assets and of course it was important for them to know exactly how they could use those assets and the best way to be able to administer in the community that they were working in. That is why this bill is so important because we are allowing and we are giving them the flexibility.As Chester Borrows alluded to some of these ministries do not want to have all their capital tied up in assets. They want to be able to free some of that up to be able to actually perform the missions that they do. I think this Church has actually got some members who are leaving fairly soon for Papua New Guinea on a mission there. So if they are able to free up some funds to be able to support those types of missions these are very important things to them.The Churches of Christ was established in New Zealand soon after the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi again going back to these very early dates. The first congregation was actually in Nelson which I think probably gives it some real added value and meaning to Dr Nick Smith. In 1944 other cities were added: Auckland in 1845 Dunedin in 1858 and Christchurch in 1870. By 1885 they actually had 25 Churches that had joined as part of the group.The first dominion conference was held in 1901 in the capital city here in Wellington. National conferences became annual gatherings by 1920. They provided opportunities for stimulus and inspiration and enabled the Churches to work together on home mission projects ministerial training Christian education women’s work examining public issues and they also were able to produce a national paper.Along with other mainstream churches the Churches of Christ experienced a drop in numbers and of course over the years there would be an ebb and flow. Numbers would decrease and then increase again which is very common with a lot of different organisations. This led to a simplification of structures and a focus on development. New Churches have been established and the movement as a whole is growing which is a very positive thing.Initially property was in the name of the elders of the congregations which was common because obviously in the very early years they were starting to slowly accumulate assets and often these Churches were driven by a small group of people so it was not uncommon for them to be registered in the name of these original elders and leaders within the Churches. On 18 April 1924 in Dunedin at a duly convened conference of delegates from the Churches a board of trustees of certain members of the Churches was set up. So that was the original board of trustees.