Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 05 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7162. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill 
In Committee 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The House is in Committee. Kia ora tatou. Good afternoon honourable members. We are in Committee on the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill and the question that the Committee has to consider first is that clause 1 stand part. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Can we just take all questions as one question debate it and put it together? Have you got an amendment have you? [ 
Interruption 
] Sorry I thought we wanted to get it through. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is perfectly entitled to seek leave. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No no we are just trying to be helpful. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The member is trying to be helpful. [ 
Interruption 
] I am putting it. The question is—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! [ 
Interruption 
] Not yet. The question is that clause 1 stand part. 
Clause 1 Title 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 I am very happy to stand and take a call on clause 1 of the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill. In doing that I want to just perhaps explain to the Committee why I believe that it is so important to go through this bill— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Can’t do that on a clause 1 of a Committee stage. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Well with the leave of members and just to set the scene of this bill I think it is important that we do address the clauses of the bill in their entirety. Of course clause 1 of the bill refers to— 
Hon Annette King 
: It’s delaying tactics. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: No it is not actually. I am trying to find my copy of the bill. I think that is important because there are members of the public back in Oamaru who care a lot about this bill and have had quite a bit of dialogue with the Local Government and Environment Committee. 
Hon Annette King 
: They’ve waited for years for it. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: No. I think it is probably fair to them that this process is not truncated in any way. If it is truncated in any way they will not feel as if their word has been listened to. 
The Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill deals with three lots of land: one in Oamaru one in Palmerston—neither of those are controversial and they were passed through the select committee—and the third part known as Forrester Heights which has been controversial throughout the passage of this bill through the Parliament and indeed in the local community. That is why I think it is so important that we give good consideration to the entirety of this bill in the Committee stage. I will not talk too much on the first two parcels of land but Forrester Heights was land that was wrongly designated back in the 1930s as a reserve under the Reserves Act. That designation as it turns out was wrong. Through the process of the consideration of this Committee it is being determined that actually the land was reserved in aid of borough funds. It was an endowment in aid of borough funds. Once that is settled the Waitaki District Council can then dispose of the land as it wishes. It is that which has caused so many problems for some of the locals. They do not see the difference between the classification of the land and the use of the land. With that full explanation thank you. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
Clause 2 agreed to.  
Clause 3 Interpretation 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 Supplementary Order Paper 150 proposes that clause 3 of the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill be amended to “delete the definition of Lookout Point land” from the bill. The effect that that would have is that Lookout Point or the Forrester Heights portion of land could not be considered as part of that bill. I think it is worth reminding the Committee and perhaps the Green member Eugenie Sage that doing that goes against the wishes of the local authority. This is the Waitaki District Council’s bill. This is not a Government bill. This is not a member’s bill. This is a local authority bill. The local authority wishes to have this matter dealt with in Parliament which is why it brought it to us. What the Supplementary Order Paper does really is perhaps satisfy the wishes of the Green Party but this bill is not about the wishes of the Green Party. This is a local bill. It is about what the local authority wants to do. Therefore I will not be supporting the Supplementary Order Paper. Thank you. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 150 in the name of Eugenie Sage to clause 3 be agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 14 
Green Party 14. 
Noes 106 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; Mana 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
Clause 3 agreed to. 
Clause 4 agreed to.  
Clause 5 Existing reservation revoked 
NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) 
: 
 I am very pleased to speak on the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill specifically looking at clause 5. I want to raise just a couple of points first about the bill. I want to acknowledge the chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee Nicky Wagner but importantly I also want to acknowledge Jacqui Dean because I think as I have said before in this House she has done a lot of work on this bill. It has been an important local issue. We know there were a number of issues that related to the Palmerston Showgrounds and Lot 1 DP 345820 but one of the issues that is relevant to Supplementary Order Paper 150 which Eugenie Sage has put up is about the section of land referred to as Lookout Point. 
I want to go now to what the findings of the select committee were with regard to this land and I want to say that I think this issue has been settled. Not only has there been another piece of legislation before the House that has looked at this issue and not only did we hear a number of submissions but also we had several Government agencies looking at this including Land Information New Zealand the Department of Conservation and the Commissioner of Crown Lands. We have also had submissions from the council on this issue. 
I want to touch specifically on the commentary regarding Lookout Point and raise this issue. Obviously there was an issue about what the status of that land was and what we found with regard to this matter was that “In 1937 by Order in Council the Lookout Point land was set apart as reserves for an endowment in aid of the funds of the Oamaru Borough Council and erroneously made subject to … Title was issued in 1942 to the land now comprising Computer Freehold Register …”—I am not going to mention the name. I think we did settle this issue and from my perspective the select committee spent a lot of time going through the records via Land Information to resolve it. 
I acknowledge that Eugenie Sage has this Supplementary Order Paper but I think it has been made very clear that the confusion of the status did arise out of semantics that the land was reserved as endowment in 1885 and that it was not intended that the land itself be classified as a reserve. It was the case that we received extensive advice on this and this is based not only on the evidence of submitters but also on the advice from officials. So although I understand that there has been a long history to this issue I really believe that not only has the local member done a huge amount herself locally but also the select committee on another piece of legislation has looked at this issue thoroughly. We have found that we believe that the confusion arose out of semantics. 
I understand that the Supplementary Order Paper is here today because Eugenie Sage—and I am interested to hear what she says on the matter but it is quite difficult to see how that Supplementary Order Paper can be before this House given that we have had evidence from so many different agencies given that they have gone back through the records and given that we have had another parliamentary process around it. I do believe that this issue is an important issue locally for the people of Oamaru and I do believe that through this bill Parliament has the opportunity to clarify the status of this land. Through substantive evidence we have come to the conclusion as I said before that the confusion arose out of semantics. From that advice we have concluded that Lookout Point is not a reserve and we have confirmed it as being vested in an endowment in the council in aid of borough funds. 
I realise that it is a long road to have got here. I respect the submissions that have come to the select committee. I respect the fact that one member of the select committee has taken a different view and I am interested to hear that but I think that for the people of Oamaru and for the local member Jacqui Dean who spent a lot of time working on this issue this issue has been resolved and that it is important that members of Parliament recognise the huge amount of evidence and the huge amount of work that has been done by a number of Government agencies to clarify the status of that land. I am confident that we can finally settle this issue by the bill addressing the clerical error made in 1937 and by clarifying the status of the land as an endowment. 
I am pleased to say that I do support this clarification for the people of Oamaru for the fact that there has been so much resource gone into this—[ 
Interruption 
] Members opposite laugh—members opposite laugh—but actually it was a very collaborative process and many people have put energy into clarifying this. When I say that it is important for the people of Oamaru I ask members to go back through the press clippings as I have to see how often this issue has been raised and to see that it has been going on for a long period of time. It is time we resolved this issue once and for all. That is what we are doing through this bill through an evidence-based process. I am pleased to support this bill. 
EUGENIE SAGE (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe. Yes the Green Party is not supporting this bill because of the way in which this whole issue of Lookout Point has been dealt with. I certainly recognise the previous speaker Nikki Kaye and the considerable time and effort that the Local Government and Environment Committee went to to look at the evidence. But the Green Party has been convinced more by the submissions that were put forward by the residents of Oamaru and the evidence that they brought—particularly people like Mr Monks and Helen Stead—that the initial decision to vest the land as a reserve was not made in error. That was indicated by their evidence the photographs that showed that the land was treated throughout the 1890s and the early 1900s as a reserve in terms of Arbor Day plantings and for other recreation and that it had been treated that way by the council by being designated in the council plan as a reserve until that designation was uplifted in order for the council to proceed with the Forrester Heights subdivision. 
So it is an issue of principle because the council in deciding to proceed with that subdivision which would raise funds for the restoration of the Oamaru Opera House did not consult well with its community. It went through a non-notified resource consent process. So there is a considerable amount of resentment amongst people in Oamaru who care about this land who use it for recreation and who enjoy the views that it provides over the town and over the harbour that the council proceeded on a non-notified basis. When that consent lapsed the council proceeded to renew it so that it did not lapse and none of this was done with any opportunity for the public to get involved. 
Clause 7 of this bill would by making the land endowment land allow the council to proceed with the subdivision and to sell it. So Supplementary Order Paper 150 in my name changes that clause so that it would not see the land as being endowment land for the council to dispose of. It would remain as reserve land because there is substantial public value and community value in this land remaining administered by council and open to all rather than being subdivided. 
 It is unfortunate that the Oamaru Opera House has not got other sources of revenue that could be used for its restoration. It is also interesting that members opposite are very supportive of the protection of heritage in Oamaru but we do not see that same commitment in Christchurch in terms of the way the Christchurch Earthquake Recovery Act legislation has been used to expedite the destruction of heritage there. 
But we have had a difficult issue in front of the select committee with natural heritage in terms of Lookout Point and its recreational values as against the historic heritage of the white stone buildings and the council wanting to free up some money to restore those. But that is why we are opposing this part of the bill in relation to Lookout Point and that is why the Supplementary Order Paper is there: so that the council cannot just dispose of it and go ahead with the subdivision that it has resource consent for. 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 Just very quickly in reply to the member Eugenie Sage’s speech on Supplementary Order Paper 150 treating land as a reserve over a period of time does not make it a reserve and that is exactly what this bill the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill is addressing. I think that the comments on issues around the district plan are a red herring because what this bill does is deal with the status of the land and the status of the land only. This land cannot remain a reserve because it never was a reserve. Thank you. 
Hon ANNETTE KING (Labour—Rongotai) 
: 
 Seldom do I disagree with the work and comments of Eugenie Sage—she is a thorough member and is very knowledgable—but on this particular clause clause 5 I believe that she is wrong. I understand the issue of principle and I absolutely agree that the consultation process by the Waitaki District Council was poor. In fact we told its representatives when they came to the Local Government and Environment Committee that their consultation process had been poor. I do not think anybody on the select committee would disagree with that. But at the end of the day that is not a good enough reason to not support this bill because it has been 2 years in the making. Well probably longer than 2 years but 2 years before coming to this House at least so I think it is time that it was resolved and finished. 
I understand the member in the chair Jacqui Dean wanting the opportunity to act as a Minister because this will probably be her only opportunity to be sitting there in the Committee chair and I understand her wanting to drag it out. What I do not really understand is why she would want to do that in that there is agreement with her on this bill. We support the work that she has done. We congratulate her on bringing a bill to this House. 
I do believe that the select committee did a lot of thorough work to ascertain the status of the piece of land that was in dispute Lookout Point. There is no doubt that there was confusion in the evidence and confusion over what had happened there and there were a number of submissions put to us that raised doubt about the status of this land whether it was endowment land or whether it was reserve land. At the end of the day I had to believe what was told to us by officials who went away who did the legal checks who went through the historic records and who came back and assured us that the decisions we were making were the correct decisions. You might not agree at times with everything officials say but we did send them away not once but several times to get us more information about this piece of land. We wanted to make the best possible decision and I think that we have made the right decision about the only controversial part of this bill and that is the status of Lookout Point. 
The last thing I would like to say is that I want to commend two people who made submissions to the select committee Warren Crawford and Barry Monks. I know that some on the Government side were a little scornful of Barry Monks because he was a Labour Party— 
Maggie Barry 
: The failed Labour candidate. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Thank you Maggie. I was going to say it myself—I did not actually need your help—because I am not ashamed of the fact that Barry Monks was a Labour Party candidate. I do not know whether that means that anything he says is wrong but if Maggie Barry had read his submission she would have seen he did an incredible amount of work. He went into the records he went to Dunedin and he searched to try to get the right information about this bill. I want to commend Barry Monks for his submission. I am sorry that at the end of it it did not stack up because there was one fundamental mistake in what the whole argument was premised on. That was that he believed a bill had been passed that in fact changed the status of the land or secured the status of the land. In fact the bill never came to the Parliament it was never passed and therefore the premise on which he was basing his argument did not stack up. That does not mean that it was not a very good submission and I thank him— 
Maggie Barry 
: It wasted a lot of time. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: Goodness me! For the people who are listening—Maggie Barry who has not stopped interjecting through the whole of my speech is saying that democracy is a waste of time. Well we do not believe that it is. We believe that democracy is a very important part of our system here in this Parliament. Barry Monks and Warren Crawford took the opportunity to go to the select committee present a submission and appear before the committee. In fact they appeared through telecommunications rather than in person—we are so modern in our committee. Maggie Barry—that is democracy and they have the right to do that. We should be applauding them. 
Maggie Barry 
: He was wrong. 
Hon ANNETTE KING 
: It is not as she is interjecting a waste of time. It was a very important submission. We would like to see this bill passed. There are only seven clauses. The member has had the chance to stand up and be a Minister. Let us get it over and done with. 
ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First) 
: 
 I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First on the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill. Likewise we are concerned only about this land at Lookout Point overlooking Oamaru township. The rest of the bill we are happy with but it is this main contentious piece of land. 
I think that what people have to remember is the fact that this is not just about bits of paper it is not just about legal technicalities and it is not just about who was right and who was wrong. This is about a physical piece of land that has been there since the 1800s. This land has been there overlooking the township and laid out by generations gone before us for the future of that town but has been used by the people of Oamaru and of the district for more than 130 or 140 years as an open piece of reserve. 
Therefore four or five generations of people have always had the expectation and the understanding that that open large piece of land was for public use and for the public of Oamaru to use. It went up to Lookout Point and it formed part of the extension of the very extensive Lookout Point piece of land. Therefore quite rightfully there is a significant portion of the community who today say that it is wrong that it be carved up and turned into a subdivision for a short-term gain of $3 million or thereabouts of profit in order to plough the $3 million into upgrading the Oamaru Opera House. Once the $3 million is gone and the land is gone and there are hundreds of houses on what was a 100-year-old reserve it will never be there again. 
As I have said in this House before councils all over New Zealand are constantly trying to acquire more land and trying to acquire more public reserves. Just the other day Auckland Council announced that it had just bought a large piece of land up at Pakiri north of Auckland. It is a very sizable piece of land—several million dollars worth—which will be a huge improvement to the park area and the council is very proud of it and Aucklanders will be very proud of having that additional reserve land under public ownership. 
I know that many MPs often do not get involved in this because they do not get involved in local government. It is something quite foreign to them. But those who have been in local government know how important it is to have reserve land in public ownership and how much effort goes into buying public land for reserve purposes. For an expanding population—and New Zealand when I was a child had 2 million people and it has now got 4.5 million— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I didn’t realise the member was that old. 
ANDREW WILLIAMS 
: You did not realise who was that old? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You. 
ANDREW WILLIAMS 
: Yes there were 2 million people— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Two million people? 
ANDREW WILLIAMS 
: Yes there were 2 million people when I was a child. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: You’ve worn pretty well. 
ANDREW WILLIAMS 
: Exactly; I have. So now that our population is growing and is heading towards 5 million and in another 20 or 30 years it will be 6 million open reserve land becomes more and more and more precious. In a township like Oamaru where there are significant numbers of people saying: “We don’t want that lovely big ridge of land that overlooks the town being chopped up and turned into houses for a short-term gain.” I tend to fall on the side of those who are there to protect the land and keep it in perpetuity for our future generations. 
I think there was enough doubt even though the officials said that after analysing everything it seemed to be that it was an endowment piece of land rather than a reserve piece of land. There still seemed to be a certain area of doubt there and it was basically down to interpretation. I think that if you threw enough Queen’s Counsel and learned people at this you could come up with different answers at the end of the day. 
Therefore in that respect where there is an element of doubt and where there is a significant element in the community saying: “We want to keep our land and we want to preserve it.” I tend to err of the side of the reserve. New Zealand First likewise does not believe that it is in the interests of the area of Oamaru to start carving off reserve land for houses. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson) 
: 
 Firstly I want to commend the member of Parliament for Waitaki Jacqui Dean for the work that she has done on this bill the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill but more particularly for the work that she does for her absolutely huge electorate. She is one of this Parliament’s most effective local members of Parliament. The way that she has championed the cause of this bill on behalf of the Waitaki District Council speaks volumes and I am not surprised at all that she has got a majority about the size of Mount Cook in her electorate for a seat that was once held by members opposite. 
I want to comment quickly on a few of the issues specific to Lookout Point. I actually want to commend Annette King for her thoughtful contribution and her comments about officials. Annette and I do not agree on everything but we do have respect for officials. We on the Local Government and Environment Committee as a select committee gave them very specific instructions. We said “Provide us clarity about the origin of this land.” and they came back—not conditional not saying there was any doubt but absolutely definitive—and their advice was that this was endowment reserve for the local authority. On that basis Annette King has quite honourably said “Look we accept that.” and that is why Labour has taken its position on the bill. I commend the Labour Opposition for taking that principled stand. 
I want to particularly challenge the Greens and New Zealand First because I have witnessed so many speeches in this Chamber in which they stand up for local democracy. That is what they say they stand for. Here we have the locally elected council the Waitaki District Council coming into Parliament and saying “We think the best use of this land for our community is for it to be a subdivision and for the council to be able to enjoy the $3 million that it will receive for the sale of this land to be able to offset the debt and the rates of its communities.” And here we have the arrogance of the Greens and New Zealand First saying that they know better than the Waitaki District Council. How many votes did the Green Party and New Zealand First get in the Waitaki community that they believe they can veto the view of the local council? It is truly arrogance from those two parties. Really their view on local democracy is that if councils agree with them then of course they will back them but if they disagree with them they should veto them. That is effectively the position that New Zealand First and the Green Party are taking in respect of their double standards. 
I also want to commend my colleague Maggie Barry from North Shore because there is something that she understands that Andrew Williams will never understand—that is time is money. Time is money. You see when you have got a piece of land that is worth $3 million every week of delay is a cost to that local authority of $3000—$3000 every week. That is the cost. We know this from Mr Williams’ experience in North Shore where rates went up so hugely. We know that in North Shore there was an appalling record in terms of delays in getting resource consents and building consents—incredibly slow and bureaucratic—and that there is no understanding from either the Green Party or the New Zealand First Party that time is money and that we need to progress these things on so that there is not that expense. That applies to resource consents that applies to building consents and that applies to the passage of this bill. That is why the member in the chair Jacqui Dean and my colleague Maggie Barry from North Shore have had the view that we need to get on and deal with these issues in a timely way because every week that we delay is a cost to the ratepayers of Waitaki of $3000. 
The very last point I would wish to make on this bill is to ask why it is that members in the Green Party and New Zealand First do not trust the locally elected council. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 150 in the name of Eugenie Sage to clause 5 be agreed to. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the amendment be agreed to. 
Ayes 21 
Green Party 13; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1. 
Noes 98 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Amendment not agreed to. 
Clause 5 agreed to. 
Clause 6 Vesting of fee simple estate 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Waitaki) 
: 
 This part of the Waitaki District Council Reserves and Other Land Empowering Bill which vests those parcels of land in fee simple is the part that probably matters the most to the folk who are in the parcel of land in Oamaru and the folk who are in the parcel of land in the Palmerston Showgrounds. It matters a lot to them that this bill passes through this House because they have bought property or they are in property that a council and they mistakenly thought had a title that was able to be transferred. It was determined that it was not transferable and so this bill is correcting those mistakes made by a council. The impact of that will be positive for those two families living in those two homes and so this is quite a critical part of this bill for those people. 
Also of course this clause relates to Forrester Heights and again it will correct a historical mistake whereby the land was wrongly designated as a reserve. It never was a reserve; it was a mistake. It was correctly gazetted back in—I forget the year now but in the late 1800s as an endowment in aid of borough funds so in effect it was endowed in the predecessor of the Waitaki District Council effectively as a land bank. The current council of the day wished to have that designation corrected so that it can do whatever with that piece of land. Whatever it does is up to it and so it should be. Thank you. 
Clause 6 agreed to. 
Clause 7 Lookout Point land declared to be endowment land 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The question now is that clause 7 stand part. I would just like to advise the honourable member Eugenie Sage that the amendment to delete clause 7 and the cross-heading above clause 7 which is set out on your Supplementary Order Paper 150 is out of order as being a direct negative of the question. OK? So therefore the proper course of action for the member is to vote against the clause standing part. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That clause 7 be agreed to. 
Ayes 98 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 21 
Green Party 13; New Zealand First 7; Mana 1. 
Clause 7 agreed to. 
Schedule 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: The next vote we have is on the schedule. The amendment of Miss Sage is also out of order as it is inconsistent. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the schedule be agreed to. 
Ayes 105 
New Zealand National 59; New Zealand Labour 34; New Zealand First 7; Maori Party 3; ACT New Zealand 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 14 
Green Party 13; Mana 1. 
Schedule agreed to. 
Bill reported without amendment. 
Report adopted.