Faafoi Kris: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — Third Reading 
Faafoi Kris: Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:672;Page:18359] 
KRIS FAAFOI (Labour—Mana) 
: 
 It is an honour to speak to the third reading of the Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill. The bill has been colourful both in terms of the debate in this House and the length of time it has been going through the House. Some would say that a bill that is administrative and relatively routine has enjoyed debate and scrutiny that is disproportionate to its importance but it has been interesting to listen to some of the contributions today by members on both sides of the House. 
First of all I will touch on the fact that Parana Park played a very important role just over a week ago on Anzac Day. I believe that Parana Park is the main meeting-place on Anzac Day for the people of Hamilton. I am sure that if the ceremonies at Parana Park on Anzac Day were anything like they were at Titahi Bay and Porirua for me a couple of Mondays ago they were just as moving. 
I reiterate that Labour supports this bill basically because of the bill’s intent and that is to safeguard an asset in the hands of the people of Hamilton. As I said before to the member in charge of this bill David Bennett I think he may have gone a bit rogue in National because this bill is looking to protect an asset and make sure it stays within the hands of the people of Hamilton. He is bucking the trend to make sure that Parana Park stays in the hands of the community. 
Just down the road from Parana Park is the Huntly power station and I wonder what would happen if we did the same thing for Huntly power station that we are doing for Parana Park to make sure we protect the power station and keep it in the hands of the mum and dad investors who have paid for and protected it over many many years. 
I think there were only five submissions on the bill if I remember correctly—and I spoke numerous times during the Committee stage because of the bill’s importance. The submissions were very very thorough and thoughtful. I think one of them proposed changes to the way in which the park is protected. 
As I said this bill sets out to protect an asset. Over the last 4 years power companies which are State-owned assets raised $732 million for the people of New Zealand. I wonder what would happen if we protected those State-owned assets like we are protecting Parana Park today. What could we get with that $732 million if we protected power companies which we own in the way we are protecting Parana Park today? If we protected power companies like we are protecting Parana Park today we could get 10000 teachers at the average rate—10000. 
If we protected our power companies to make sure they bring in those profits like we are protecting Parana Park today we could bring in 12000 more police officers. If we protected our power companies to make sure they bring in those profits and keep them here in New Zealand like we are protecting Parana Park today we could do 33000 more hip operations. If we protected our power companies to make sure they bring in those profits like we are protecting Parana Park today we could increase the number of places at polytechs such as the Whitireia Community Polytechnic in my electorate by 91000 places. 
If we protected our power companies to make sure those profits stayed in New Zealand we could have 70000 more university places. So we should be protecting our power companies our State-owned assets just as we are protecting Parana Park today. We must make sure we protect Parana Park for future generations and we must make sure we protect our State-owned enterprises so that all Kiwis can benefit just as the people of Hamilton benefit form Parana Park and enjoy playing and picnicking in it with their families. 
Over the course of the bill’s passage through the House we have learnt quite a lot about Parana Park and its history. It has been very interesting to find out about a man called George Parr who gifted the land to Hamiltonians. It was gifted by George Parr in 1929 and as we have heard it was intended to be a playground for children who were using the Waikato Hospital. There was a play area which makes up the bulk of the park which was supposed to be a convalescent home. 
We have heard a lot about Mr Parr and about his Liberal Party background—if I am correct. There was some debate about the accuracy of that matter but we do know that Mr Parr was the son of a Hamilton mayor and that the Parr family owned a grocer’s shop in Hamilton. I just wonder what Mr Parr would make of Hamilton today if he could take a trip forward in time plonk himself back in Parana Park and have a chat to the people of Hamilton. 
I think the member for Hamilton West is very interested in what Mr Parr might think of that and whether Mr Parr would be worried about the cost of living and the fact that New Zealanders seem to be going backwards under this National Government. I think Mr Parr would also be worried that the people of Hamilton were looking for a plan to make sure that those who do not have jobs or are looking for jobs got the economy going. I think Mr Parr would be a bit concerned about what is happening in that space as well. He would be a bit concerned that although the Government with this bill might be protecting an asset for the community it has on the whole become out of touch with the public. 
It is absolutely brilliant that this bill looks to protect a community asset to make sure that the community is listened to and to ensure that the people of Hamilton and future generations can continue to enjoy this park. The protection of an asset for the community—in this instance Parana Park—is a rarity. In my area the community is not being listened to in terms of the Kapiti Expressway. The people of Raumati South and Raumati Beach want to make sure they protect their community. They do not want a four-lane expressway through their community. They want to make sure that their community is protected just like the people of Hamilton want to see Parana Park protected. But in the instance of the expressway the Government is not listening. 
In the case of Parana Park we have the protection of a community asset but on the Kapiti Coast we have a four-lane monstrosity. In the instance of Parana Park we have the protection of a community asset but on the Kapiti Coast we have an expressway through a community not for a community. In Parana Park we have a great protection of a community asset but on the Kapiti Coast the Government is going against the will of the people. 
In Parana Park we have the protection of a community asset but on the Kapiti Coast we have an expressway that nobody wants. We have asset sales around the rest of New Zealand which nobody wants to happen and on 26 November the people of Otaki will send that clear message to the Government. Although this Government might be protecting Parana Park it is not protecting the Kapiti Coast by putting in an expressway that nobody wants in their communities. 
I will touch on the lighter side of this debate. As I said the debate on the bill has probably extended beyond the importance of the bill but it has been an interesting experience to go through some of the history of the bill. I congratulate the Hamilton City Council David Bennett and other Hamilton members of Parliament including my colleague Sue Moroney on making sure— 
Tim Macindoe 
: And me. 
KRIS FAAFOI 
: Sorry; and the member for Hamilton West Tim Macindoe. He is a typical politician. He wanted to be mentioned in the speech; he did not want to miss out. [ 
Interruption 
] I got him in there. I congratulate all of them. Labour supports the bill.