Williams Andrew: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliams Andrew: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3) — In Committee[Sitting date: 29 May 2014. Volume:699;Page:18500. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]ANDREW WILLIAMS (NZ First): I take a call on behalf of New Zealand First on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 3). New Zealand has two tiers of government: central government and local government. Both tiers of government rely on either taxes rates or other forms of income to operate. It is most important that local government has every tool at its disposal to ensure that it can provide that second tier. Over the last decade or so development contributions have gone through extensive litigation through the courts through processes of local government through central government involvement and that has resulted in a system that has allowed local authorities to impose development contributions and levies on growth in their areas. That growth creates increased demand on the infrastructure of a town or city or district and it means that those who are coming into that particular region or district contribute to the expanding growth that is required.In this particular instance the Government is talking about removing a portion of those development contributions: the element around community infrastructure. It is not talking about removing it from other hard infrastructure like roads sewerage and all that sort of thing; it is talking about removing it from community infrastructure. In that respect it is a retrograde step by this Government to do so because a society and a community is not just reliant on roads sewerage footpaths and hard tarmac - type areas. It is also reliant on what the community has to offer in the way of community infrastructure. That community infrastructure includes sportsgrounds recreational facilities swimming pools libraries playgrounds for children—all sorts of areas of community infrastructure that are important for the good balanced lifestyle that we would expect in New Zealand.Therefore if this portion is going to be removed it will put greater imposition on local authorities to try to fund that community infrastructure from other sources. That means going to the ratepayers and charging them higher rates to pay for that necessary community infrastructure because they are not just going to stop putting it in even though in the Local Government and Environment Committee at least one of theNational Government members made the comment that councils do not need to put in all this stuff and that they can just stop putting it in if they cannot afford it. Do we in New Zealand want to live in a society where we end up with housing ghettos and housing estates as some parts of the UK and the United States and Europe have had where basically the community is not living in a reasonably good lifestyle environment? Do we want that? We do not. I do not believe that any of us would really want that. But this Government seems intent to take this tool out of the local government tool chest and make sure that it will charge it by another means which is rates.In the case of the Auckland Council—and it was one of many many councils that came and submitted on this—it said that it has budgeted for $450 million in revenue over the next 10 years from that community infrastructure levy. If that is removed Auckland Council will have to find that $450 million somewhere else and that will mean an increase of 8.5 percent in rates in Auckland over the next 10 years. You can imagine at the end of 10 years if rates have gone up by an additional cumulative 8.5 percent over that period to achieve that just so children’s playgrounds can continue to be put in and sports fields put in for the growing population—another 40000 or 50000 people every year arriving in Auckland. They need more places to play sport more recreational facilities more libraries and more swimming pools. Just so Auckland Council can continue to do that it will have to find that $450 million or else Auckland will certainly not be heading towards being the most liveable city in the world. It will be on a downward spiral.So this is a retrograde step and it is incredible that the Government still cannot see sense even when developers came along. One large developer from Tauranga came to the select committee and disagreed with this as well. He said that it was madness to remove this community levy. He said that he has sold over 2500 properties in the Bay of Plenty and Tauranga and the wider area and he said that people come to the area because of the sorts of community facilities that are there and the lifestyle environment that is offered in that area. He said that it worked out to something like $750 per property developed in the Tauranga area that you were talking about removing and he said that that was a false economy. He said he would far rather pay that extra $750 in the development to ensure that the council had sufficient funding going forward to put in the required community infrastructure. But if you look on the other side of the ledger if the Tauranga City Council for instance loses $750 from every property that is going in and every new section and every new subdivision of every property in the Tauranga area that adds up to a lot of money for a council to have to find somewhere else to continue trying to carry out its programmes.So this is not wise. We hope the Government will see sense in this. I know there are a few Supplementary Order Papers along these lines to change this but rest assured that this will be one thing that will be repealed under a Government that New Zealand First takes part in. We will repeal this and we will ensure that it goes back to how it should be because we have heard from councils all over New Zealand and we have heard from submitters all over New Zealand who say that this is not in the best interests of local government. We cannot understand why this Government continues to kneecap local government continues to say that it has to keep rates within affordable levels for all New Zealanders and why it criticises local government for the way it operates and for its spending levels. Local government is doing its very very best to maintain and provide a huge range of services in towns and cities and regions throughout New Zealand and to then take away yet another means of income for them to provide for New Zealanders is wrong. This Government is not acting in the best interests of New Zealanders in doing that so New Zealand First will not be supporting this bill.