SpeechDENIS O'ROURKE (NZ First): It is a very sad day indeed when this bill will pass into law—on one of New Zealand's best days the day we won the America's Cup again. That is especially sad for Aucklanders Auckland being the true home of the America's Cup. Yet it is also a sad day for Aucklanders in that they are going to be losing such a large part of one of their best and biggest reserves—a very sad day but also a great day and it is just sad that this bill will blight it.That has all been brought about by one of the saddest of all the Ministers I have seen operate in this House and that is the Minister of Sad" Smith. It is his Government's totally failed housing policies that have led to this situation driven by its hopeless immigration policies. A worse performance you could hardly imagine and it is sad in at least five ways.Firstly it is sad that this Government is now so desperate for residential land and so bereft of ways to show that it is tackling the housing crisis that it is willing to do something like this. It is a sad day when the Government is willing to sacrifice such an incredibly valuable reserve such an important area of open space so valued by Aucklanders and its irreplaceable conservation values which will be compromised by what is going to happen to this land—also bearing in mind the future needs of Aucklanders as that city develops and grows for more and more and more open space and recreation areas especially areas of the size that this reserve is.Thirdly it is sad very sad indeed that the local people were so comprehensively sidelined from any say about the future of this land and deliberately so.Fourthly it is very sad indeed that the Government has pitched local people against Ngāti Paoa by using this land as part of a Treaty settlement but only if used for expensive residential land. What kind of settlement is it really when the Government says: "Yes you can have this land as part of a Treaty settlement but only if it's used for housing otherwise you won't get it."? "Otherwise you won't get it."—what kind of dictatorial settlement is that? It is not very appropriate in our view.Fifthly it is sad that the options for alternatives—and there were plenty—have never been properly investigated.So it is indeed a very sad day and a very sad piece of legislation but there is one more sadness that I will add to it. I was very sad to hear again that the Green Party is going to abstain from this bill because of in my view some utterly misplaced belief that by opposing the bill they would be opposing a fair Treaty settlement. That is simply not so—simply not so. It is also a sad day when the Greens have dimmed to such a sorrowful brown on this particular issue. In contrast I would have to say that it is New Zealand First that has shined the brighter shade of green on this in its unequivocal support for local people in its undoubted upholding of their right to preserve scarce open space for sports fields and other recreational areas and in its staunch defence of the wildlife and conservation values of the land which the Greens apparently do not think are so important after all. Anyway putting that aside—Marama Davidson: You didn't listen.DENIS O'ROURKE: I did listen and that is the whole point. My friend over here says I did not listen but in fact I listened very closely and I was deeply underwhelmed by what I heard: an utterly confused litany of silliness that does not result in anything positive. How on earth can anyone genuinely abstain on a bill of this nature? It just does not make sense. It is just silly and they deserve the criticism they get for it.But the Government's actions over this bill are not just sad; the National Government has shown its arrogance at its very worst. It has done so by treating the local community like dirt and deliberately ignoring it—deliberately ignoring it; treating the open space provided by the reserve as just some more land that we can sell and use for housing as though the conservation and open space values do not matter at all; treating important wildlife as though it is irrelevant to be sacrificed on the altar of poor planning and sheer Government ineptitude; and treating the Auckland Council with disdain not only by ignoring its submission to keep the land—and that is what the Auckland Council wanted to do as a reserve for future recreational purposes—but also by actually taking over the council's function in determining what the remaining areas of this reserve will be used for in the future. That is not the role of Government; that is the role of local government and those members over there should learn the difference. They do not seem to understand.New Zealand First has always wanted more and better housing for all New Zealanders and especially in Auckland. For that reason it has consistently promoted policies of Government acquisition of land for housing of direct Government involvement in land development and of better long-term planning by both Government and local government. It has wanted to see transport-led development to avoid more traffic congestion it has wanted to see development of modest affordable homes on smaller sections and it has wanted to see much better Government assistance for first-home purchasers. It has consistently said that all along but New Zealand First would never promote any of that at the price of the destruction of such an importance piece of reserve land. It would never do that. It would never abandon the genuine and compelling interests of local people in recreation and open space nor would it abandon high conservation values. These are prices too high to pay.Nick Smith has shown National in its true colours: the colour of unbelievable arrogance in the way it has treated local people; the colour of gross untruth—that the land is just being used for grazing land and nothing else as though it will never be good for anything else when just about everyone with half a brain knows that areas of this size and kind will be needed more and more in the future for parks and reserves as Auckland continues to grow and develop. It will be needed more and more for those purposes and a paltry 300 houses is not anything like enough to justify ruining this reserve for that purpose. Then there is the colour of deviousness in the way that Nick Smith has used a Treaty settlement process as an excuse to rip the guts out of one of the most important reserves left in greater Auckland.Lastly and just as importantly this shows something else: it shows the bad faith of this Government in being willing not just to sacrifice this reserve but also to create an extremely bad precedent for the future. Now Aucklanders can be sure that none of their reserves—no matter how good no matter where they are no matter what their purposes are—will not be at risk from this Government. They will know that a reserve does not really mean a reserve when this Government can get its hands on it. They will know these things and they will know that when a Government is as desperate as this to show that it is finally trying to do something about the housing crisis that it created those reserves will then certainly be at risk.It is time for this Government to actually just give up and walk away. It has been so hopeless over housing and is now willing to sacrifice reserves of this value. A worse performance by any Government over any of these issues could not possibly be imagined. This bill should definitely not pass and this Government must not be re-elected to do any more damage like this."