Sage EugenieEUGENIE SAGE (Green): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Well I stand here with a heavy heart to speak to the Point England Development Enabling Bill because the reserve that the Minister is sacrificing for housing is not small and unappreciated as he has tried to make out with his many references to cows grazing; it is a jewel in the Tāmaki crown. It is adjacent to the Tāmaki estuary. It is adjacent to Pt England School Glen Innes Pool and Leisure Centre and Ōmaru Creek. It is a reserve that is highly valued by local residents. It is used for everything from kilikiti to sports games to the Weet-Bix Tryathlon and for passive recreation and open space.Yet this Minister Nick Smith has created such division and distrust in the community because of the way he has gone about this bill and prevented the community from engaging and because of the way—and this is where I have a really heavy heart—he has burdened Ngāti Paoa with this whole sense of distrust and division. It will not be the Minister who goes in now to try to resolve that; it is going to be Ngāti Paoa who goes in and has to deal with that because of the shambles that the Minister has created with this bill.There is that division because of the process that has been used through the bill to override the normal processes in the Reserves Act and in the Resource Management Act (RMA) in terms of rezoning land for residential housing. It has created anger and a lot of bitterness about the loss of this land which is so valued and used by the community for housing development without potentially even the opportunity for the community to have a say on how that housing development happens what sort of density it has how it is planned how it connects with the Glen Innes shopping centre and how it connects with transport links because of the changes that Nick Smith has made to the RMA which have made it so much harder for councils to notify resource consent applications for public submissions.This bill is also really unfair on Ngāti Paoa because it is requiring Ngāti Paoa to buy the land as commercial redress but it does not give them the right to use the land as they see fit. They have to take it on a use-it-or-lose-it basis. The preconditions for purchase include the Minister's having to agree that the development meets the Crown's minimum requirements for both the pace of the development the yield and the dwelling mix and yet it is Ngāti Paoa who has to bear the costs and the risks. The Hon Christopher Finlayson's letter of October last year made it very very clear that if the Crown's preconditions for the development were not met then the Crown was able to offer it not just to another Tāmaki iwi but could offer it to a private developer. So there is nothing in the bill that guarantees that the land will actually go to Ngāti Paoa.The Minister has again shown his arrogance and his failure with his last-minute changes through a Supplementary Order Paper which once again override local democracy impose his will on Auckland Council by requiring the council to amend the management plan for the balance of the reserve and require that at first an extra 5.3 hectares of sports fields are created there and then that increases to an extra 8 hectares.So we have the Minister promising in the House that the proceeds from the land sale will be used for reserve development. What are they going to be used for? To bulldoze the best remaining area of open space on the headland at the reserve to create more sports fields. So the community gets nothing from that. It loses area that it values and has the Auckland Council's ability to identify other reserves in Point England where sports fields could have been created—to instead supplant the Minister's will on that. As the chair of the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki Local Board said that board normally makes decisions and plans for its parks and reserves based on community engagement. But here the Minister has substituted his decision for that of the boards and the Auckland Council. His decision pre-empts any consultation with the community. So it is setting once again a very dangerous precedent of legislation overriding council decision making sacrificing this valued reserve for housing development which the community has virtually no input into.