Dean Jacqui: Real Estate Agents Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
Dean Jacqui: Real Estate Agents Bill — Second Reading In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:649;Page:18406] 
JACQUI DEAN (National—Otago) 
: 
 In rising to address Part 2 I say that it is a bit of a concern for National that there are some glaring omissions within legislation that is meant to provide good consumer protection. The exclusion of property managers from the regime is a matter of some concern because it creates inequities within this bill. I would like an explanation from the Minister in the chair the Hon Clayton Cosgrove as to why that is the case if this is such a good piece of consumer protection from the cowboys and the land sharks—so-called by the Minister on a number of occasions. It is interesting. In my travels throughout New Zealand I frequently pop in and out of real estate agents’ offices and they say things about the Minister that are never very complimentary. They ask me about that man— 
Hon Member 
: The angry man. 
JACQUI DEAN 
: —the angry man—who will lose his seat at the next election and why is he going to lose it— 
Hon David Carter 
: Which one? 
JACQUI DEAN 
: Clayton Cosgrove. I will restrict my comments to the Minister in question Clayton Cosgrove. He is the man who is hated by every real estate agent I come across—probably every real estate agent in the land. Why do they hate him? Who wants to be called a land shark? Who wants to be called a cowboy by a Minister of the Crown? And what does this Minister do to fix these land sharks and cowboys? He brings forward to the House the Real Estate Agents Bill. The trouble with the bill is that it has some glaring omissions. It does not even address the issue of property managers. 
I did not sit in on the submissions but I understand that a number of very strong submissions were made to the select committee about the inequities in not making provision for property managers within this bill. Those of us who have children going out into the world and becoming tenants in properties or flatting if they are students or going into the workforce know that they are the very vulnerable young people who have to come into contact with property managers. It seems to me to be a glaring omission on the part of this Government which touts itself as the champion of consumer protection to turn a blind eye to those very people within this Real Estate Agents Bill. 
This bill is not worth much if it does not address the real issues being faced particularly by young people who have to deal with property managers. The submitters to this bill did not consider that the provisions for property management in the Residential Tenancies Act 1986—which of course relate primarily to relationships between parties as tenants owners and property managers—are sufficient to ensure that consumers are protected in property management transactions. So what does the Minister propose to do about it? He proposes to conduct a review. Well that does not provide much comfort to those people who deal on a day-to-day basis with property managers. National’s view is that this bill should include property managers within it and without doing that the Minister’s fine words about cowboys and land sharks remain very pertinent. 
The Hon Peter Dunne really hit the nail on the head when he said the Minister was indulging in petty abuse. That is what he has been doing and that is what he has been doing out in the electorates all around New Zealand. Well I say to the Minister that the real estate agents have heard him they have made up their minds about him and they have no faith in this bill that the Government is putting forward. There are glaring omissions in the bill and just one of those is the exclusion of property managers. This is not a good consumer protection bill. National supports good consumer protection legislation but this is not it.