Hauiti Claudette: Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHauiti Claudette: Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 12 March 2014. Volume:697;Page:16627. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]CLAUDETTE HAUITI (National):I would like to reiterate that the Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill will validate the rates set by the Tasman District Council for the period 2003-04 to 2008-09 during which time the council did not follow correct process in setting rates. The bill will also validate rates and penalties paid over that period authorise the council to recover any unpaid rates and ratify the Tata Beach and Ligar Bay stormwater rates. This bill is as we have heard this evening retrospective legislation but it is very necessary legislation in order to set the foundations for better local government going forward.This National Government is about Better Local Government reforms. It is about allowing those councils to make those very hard decisions especially under increasing pressure. However mistakes like this do occur and we are hopeful that this legislation will minimise the risk going forward and will ensure that other councils learn from this mistake. Better Local Government reforms include work streams to monitor and improve council performance. This legislation will reinforce to those councils that they will be monitored and that compliance must be met. Although those viewers at home may find that this is very technical and rather dour and boring it is absolutely necessary that we get this right for the sake of the Tasman District Council and all other councils going forward. I say again that this is retrospective legislation but it is necessary. Of course it is being supported across the Committee albeit not overly enthusiastically but again the bill has got to be given its due diligence.For the sake of consistency technical amendments will be made as we have heard this evening. The Local Government and Environment Committee was sympathetic to the proposals that were brought forward by members of the Tasman District community to delete clause 9. However it must be reinforced that the Tasman District Council (Validation and Recovery of Certain Rates) Bill is absolutely necessary for the Tasman District Council to go forward in a robust fashion. The committee noted that there would be many practical implications of deleting clause 9 which is actually quite important. It needs to be reiterated and reinforced that the time that had passed since those rates were set compounds this. Without validation of the stormwater rates the council would be required to determine which ratepayers had paid the rate in 2006-07 and the amount that they paid. I am repeating this because although this bill may seem to be technically very detailed it is absolutely crucial that clarification around these technical details is had. The merits of setting a stormwater rate were found to be outside this bill and I think that that needs to be reiterated as well given the submissions that wanted that to be done.From 2003-04 to 2008-09 the council passed rates attached to the annual plan rather than ratifying each rate individually and that is something that this council will need to do going forward. To ensure that this does not occur again the council will need to implement procedures to ensure it meets compliance with the legislation. This was in breach of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.The Local Government (Rating) Act provides an avenue for councils to amend incorrectly set rates but the window of time had passed. The bill as we have heard is needed to validate certain rates that were set incorrectly during that period. Without the validation the council remains vulnerable to legal challenges from ratepayers over incorrectly set rates. Validation is also required to allow the council to recover unpaid rates and penalties.Some residents have objected to details of the stormwater rate. They were not properly consulted on the urban drainage area and they are being charged for stormwater services that are not being used. The committee noted that aspects of the council’s consultation were not ideal but steps taken—