Donnelly Brian: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Second Reading 
Donnelly Brian: Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12029] 
Hon BRIAN DONNELLY (NZ First) 
: 
 Mention has been made that the Local Government and Environment Committee considered this Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Bill and improved on it but for the sake of people who are listening I just want to reflect upon the composition of the select committee. There were four National members four Labour members and one Green member. I think we have to recognise that the balance of power lay with the one Green member and that that composition is not necessarily a reflection of the composition of the House itself. Although it is not unusual in an MMP environment to have that sort of arrangement in our select committees it does not necessarily mean it reflects the House as a whole. 
I lived for a while up in Waiatarua. For people who do not know it it is right up the top. It is a word that has entered the international language—the language of international athletics—because Waiatarua is a long gruelling run and it came from when Arthur Lydiard used to train the likes of Peter Snell. One of the most unusual things that would happen up there was that one would get up in the morning and it would be bright and sunny. Then as one descended down through the Waitakere Ranges through the clouds there would be a misty moisty morning below them. 
Also I taught at Henderson Intermediate School and lived in Glen Eden. Every morning I used to go through Parrs Cross Road past Bruce McLaren Intermediate and through to Henderson Intermediate itself. That reminds me in fact of Dr Pita Sharples. He cajoled us at that particular time to go for a long march over the Waitakeres one Saturday morning to raise money for the Hoani Waititi Marae. Certainly I am very much aware not only of the ranges—the park and the heritage area—but also of the foothills. 
When I was teaching at Henderson Intermediate in 1974-75 a long time ago Lincoln Road was largely orchards and vineyards from the intermediate school onwards. Now it is just absolutely packed; it is the middle of suburbia. There is the Warehouse Mitre 10 Pak ‘N Save and you name it. It is certainly a completely different place. 
I guess the point I am trying to make is that there is no need to convince me of the beauty of the Waitakere Ranges and of how important they are to Auckland our largest city. In a way they dominate the city. If we sit at Eden Park what do we look out at? We see the Waitakeres in the same way as the Blue Mountains dominate Sydney. 
However I now live at a place called Ngunguru. That also has an iconic sand spit which is under the threat of development by a rapacious property development company. In Northland there is a whole pile of iconic places. In the Bay of Islands—for example the area around Kawakawa and Ohaeawai—there were a lot of significant battles as Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith would know. Ruapekapeka is there. If one goes further north there is Doubtless Bay where Surville came into Brody’s Creek and dropped three anchors and there is Lake Ohia and the gumfields—whole piles of iconic places. 
This legislation is based upon the assumption or premise that our existing legislation is not working or that it is flawed. In fact the select committee report actually states this. It states quite clearly that it does not work. It states: “The bill reflects the promoters’ belief that further local statutory guidance is needed to provide sufficient long-term protection to the heritage area from the adverse cumulative effects of urban growth and development.” People cannot tell me that the Waitakere Ranges is the only place that is facing those cumulative effects. I can tell members that the coastline area around Ngunguru is certainly facing the same things and John Carter will also tell members that. 
It has always been New Zealand First’s position that if there is a fundamental flaw in the legislation that is supposed to be operating then one goes back and fixes up that legislation; we do not do it on a piecemeal bit by bit process. That is exactly what we did with the Hauraki Gulf Maritime Park Bill. We said that if there was something wrong with the planning mechanisms that are already in place that are supposed to be protecting the environment then let us go back and fix those up instead of fixing up something that is just in that particular place. So New Zealand First is not able to support this bill and we say that with regret because we recognise the sincerity of the person in whose name the bill is. However we believe that it points to something that actually requires a different answer. 
 The second thing—and this we believe is a real flaw—is that the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area will encompass 27720 hectares of public and private land. Elsewhere we are told that the Waitakere Ranges Regional Park which exists now contains some 17000 hectares. That by the way is the playground we are talking about; not the 10000 hectares of private land which is not the playground of Aucklanders I have to say. Yet this heritage area will encompass 10000 acres and as has already been said 22000 people will effectively lose at least some of the property rights they have at the moment. Therefore New Zealand First has some real difficulties with this particular approach. 
New Zealand First thinks it is certainly worthwhile looking at the suggestion put forward by Paula Bennett although we believe it is even more important that we go back to the fundamental legislation around the Resource Management Act and get that sorted out so that we have adequate protections against the cumulative effects which the Resource Management Act does not take into account at the moment. In fact the Resource Management Act is an enabling Act which means that even if councils want to do something about the cumulative effects they are often restricted from doing so. Certainly we believe that we need to go back to the Resource Management Act and work on that. 
I will just point out that we concur with the National minority view in the commentary on the bill. I will read some of it out: “This bill adds a mechanism for the development of local area plans (LAPS). These will sit alongside district regional and national plans. Councils are also required to have annual plans and Long Term Council Community Plans (LTCCPs). These multiple and complex plan processes add confusion and cost to local government at a time when the public is in revolt over rating increases.” New Zealand First concurs with that particular point. We believe that it is at the nub of the particular question we have here. 
Therefore New Zealand First will not be able to support this bill—as we stated in fact during the first reading debate. We will be voting against it. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.