Auchinvole Chris: Unit Titles Bill — First Reading 
Auchinvole Chris: Unit Titles Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:652;Page:1716] 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE (National—West Coast-Tasman) 
: 
 The Unit Titles Bill is a bill that I am pleased to support. The Minister of Housing Mr Heatley gave a very detailed and exact speech and one that was really good. The bill addresses and corrects the problems that developed under the Unit Titles Act 1972. That Act needed modernising and I am glad that this is something we are in the process of achieving. The Act was not bad legislation when it was first introduced but the demands of the modern context make it necessary to repeal and replace that legislation with something more attuned to present demands. In essence this bill addresses the changes that have occurred in property development over the past 36 years. 
The legislation enacted 36 years ago was designed for simple small-scale developments in discrete areas and does not adequately provide for the range complexity and size of developments today. The Unit Titles Act of 1972 governs building developments where multiple owners hold unit title property tenure. This is defined as being a specific part of a building such as an apartment as well as the shared ownership of common property such as lobbies and driveways. Such building developments are typically apartment blocks townhouses office blocks and industrial and retail complexes—malls for instance. As of September 2006 there were an estimated 15774 unit title developments comprising 88817 units and the number of unit title developments is rapidly increasing. Changes need to be made as the trend towards unit title development will be continuous and will accelerate. It is estimated that over 500000 people will be living in apartments townhouses and high-rise buildings within 50 years. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Who estimates that? 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: The people who are involved in demography statistics. The member used to be the Minister of Statistics; he should know. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: And will be again. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: The member can live in hope. I thank the member for that contribution. It could well be that the honourable member— 
Chris Tremain 
: That is the height of his aspiration. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: That is the height of that member’s aspiration—to go back to where he was—and we wish him well. 
Clearly it is imperative to modernise the Act and this bill is not something that has been put together lightly. The bill is the result of nearly 5 years of a review and consultation process. It was put on the Order Paper last August but since then there has been little action on it. National has made this bill a priority and is committed to ensuring its passage through Parliament. I will reiterate the key features of this bill which in my view succinctly summarise its positive features and how it provides clarity in areas that were previously a little murky. 
This bill establishes a real and meaningful legal framework for ownership by different parties and establishes clear and simple processes for building unit title developments and technical detail for developers. The Minister has already given an amount of this detail and a Labour speaker asked for further clarification. That is why we are giving it now. Clearness and simplicity are understood as things that should never be made unnecessarily complicated. When something is clear and simple it can be easily followed and hence more progress can be made. I am sure that the developers will be grateful for the transparency of the new guidelines which will assist them a great deal in their work. If we can make their lives easier then I am sure this will aid overall progress. 
This bill aims to encourage a holistic approach to the management and maintenance of unit title developments. It will clarify the responsibilities of unit owners and bodies corporate ensuring sound management practices and will protect long-term capital value. These are highly worthy aims and when I investigate the minutiae of this legislation I am convinced that these aims will rapidly grow to outcomes. If indeed the duties and powers of unit owners and the body corporate managers and developers are made obvious then this will minimise disputes about rights and responsibilities which is always a good thing. It will also reduce costs. 
However speaking of disputes one part of this bill that is very satisfying to see included is the introduction of a dispute resolution process for unit title matters covering education information mediation and adjudication. This will enable disputes to be dealt with swiftly comprehensively and cost-effectively. This bill provides for recourse for dispute resolution by extending the jurisdiction of the Tenancy Tribunal to hear and determine most disputes related to unit titles. The monetary limit for this is $50000 and the tribunal may not hear cases relating to the title of the land. The bill provides jurisdiction for the District Court to hear cases involving monetary amounts of between $50000 and $200000 and jurisdiction for the High Court to hear cases involving sums in excess of $200000 and includes those cases involving the title of land. As one can see the bill provides comprehensive cover for the full range of possible disputes. 
The bill will provide a clear flexible governance structure with reduced voting thresholds for bodies corporate in order to make decision making more easily managed and to enable the body corporate to act in the interests of the majority of unit owners. I can envisage the concerns of some people in regard to reduced voting thresholds. Reducing voting thresholds by their very nature can lead to more contentious measures becoming more likely to pass. I do not consider though that the reduction of voting thresholds in this bill will have that effect as I consider the previous requirements were too rigid. For example in the Unit Titles Act 1972 there were a number of situations in which a unanimous resolution was required. I will quote one as an illustration. Section 17(1) states: “Any instrument evidencing any transfer lease or grant of easement affecting the common property or land that is to become part of the common property may be executed by the body corporate if the transfer lease or grant has been approved by unanimous resolution of the body corporate.” Section 42 in Part 3 did provide for slightly less restriction stating that if 80 percent voted in favour of the resolution this could be taken by the courts and if the courts so ordered the resolution could be deemed to be passed unanimously. 
However with the advent of the Unit Titles Bill none of this will be required. The bill stipulates that 75 percent composite votes are required. We say that 75 percent is stringent enough. It is still a high threshold and will allow the body corporate to act in the interests of the majority of unit owners. 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: How does the member know all of this? 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: I have done my work on it. Actually we have covered this issue at various times over the last 3 years. In not having to take the matter to the court when one lone vote disrupts the passage of resolution we are removing unnecessary delays and costs. 
We in the National Party went into the election promising to streamline and simplify regulations. This is what we are in the process of doing with the Resource Management (Simplifying and Streamlining) Amendment Bill and that is precisely what we are doing with the Unit Titles Bill. We are ensuring the decision-making process is not hamstrung by vexatious and frivolous objections. We are about getting things done. 
Paul Quinn 
: Say that again. 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: We are about getting things done! The Unit Titles Bill is a lucid and cogent bill. It is an excellent replacement for the Unit Titles Act 1972. The Act needed modernising. This bill does precisely that. It was an Act that analysis has demonstrated was no longer adequate to deal with the range of matters. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: Well done Shane Jones! 
CHRIS AUCHINVOLE 
: Let us refer to Mr Shane Jones—a future Prime Minister if ever there was one. In May last year Shane Jones said: “The Unit Titles Bill will streamline development processes and allow flexibility for those who are building the really big developments. This will mean up-front costs are reduced and developers can make changes to their plans more easily.” I applaud those comments of Shane Jones. It is the mark of a true political leader. Put some water on him; he will grow. I am pleased the Government is making this bill a priority as the Act is certainly overdue for a shake-up.