Hudson Brett: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeHudson Brett: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 12 August 2015. Volume:707;Page:5727. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]BRETT HUDSON (National): It is a pleasure to rise and speak in support of this bill. I have to say there is a bit of a love-in going on today. There are Catholics and Anglicans getting together like they never have done in history. My history in this may be limited but there was a time when they would greet each other with stick implements and fire and do bodily damage. I would say that if they could extend this fellowship and bonhomie to heathen atheists like me we would be singing “Kumbaya” before we knew it.But I would just like to talk to the bill if I might. What I would say is that the reason we are here to talk about this is just an illustration that needs requirements and situations evolve over time. So if we look at the private Act that exists that is in force today the Associated Churches of Christ Church Property Act 1929 it is a very very valid and good piece of legislation for its time. That was a time when over 30 congregations came into an association under Christian Churches New Zealand and looked to pull property under a trust so that they could continue their social good and charitable acts across not only their own congregations but in fact across the public of New Zealand.At the time I understand that a lot of the property was held in the names of the elders of those churches. Any view on governance would suggest that that would hold some real challenges in terms of what we would today call best-practice governance. So that association put together a trust structure to help manage those property assets and govern those property assets in a more appropriate manner. In the sense of giving legal certainties of the day that led towards the Act that exists and that we are not only amending but going to repeal if this bill goes through.At the time it removed risks that there could be legal challenges to the rights of that association or that trust to hold those property assets which would in turn provide the foundation for the charitable works that they would do. We have a bit of a converse but related issue now and that is the case that the churches have in fact disposed of some of those assets over time. They may in fact wish to do more of that. Doing that would not only be possible or desirable; it could actually be a far better use of the money or the proceeds gained to use them in a different form to support the charitable and good works they do in society.At the moment there is a real concern—a real concern—that if the churches liquidate some physical real estate property held under the Act as it stands today they must replace that with real estate assets to use those proceeds whereas it might be better for them to use the cash and provide charitable works in another way.So what we are doing as well as modernising the situation and bringing it in line with other trust practices across our society is making sure that this association of churches that does good work in our society is not going to be placed at risk of legal challenge for the good work that it does simply because of some archaic provisions which at the time were very very valid but which I would argue are outdated now.I think as other members have raised in the House there is a very very strong presumption that the funds received from the current assets can be used only in real estate and that they cannot be used as cash assets for other purposes. So the action we will take as we proceed through the stages of the bill will certainly give greater flexibility to this association of churches to do the work that it does.I think it is important to note though that although we will be making some modernising changes we are being very careful to ensure that all of the rights responsibilities and obligations that exist under the existing obligations particularly in respect of honouring leases or the management thereof or any contracts that might be held—potentially things such as maintenance contracts on existing property—will remain in force and that the association will be obliged to continue to honour those. That is a very important thing. We are not about breaking something here; we are about modernising it and giving it some flexibility but also maintaining fundamental good governance. So I support this bill and I commend it to the House.