Barry Maggie: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeBarry Maggie: Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 19 September 2013. Volume:693;Page:13590. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore): The Heritage New ZealandPouhere Taonga Bill is a bill that we support wholeheartedly. It is going to help us protect our heritage for the future. That is something that the Government feels very strongly about. You know Crown entities really do need to have something that is very strong about them. The Historic Places Trust has served us well for a number of years but now it really does need to be updated.I think that when you look at what is happening around Auckland and in the area where I am on the North Shore Auckland has the volcanic cones that are going to be regarded as a cluster and that is an excellent thing. I am starting really near the back of this bill as it were because it seems to me that there have been a number of concessionsthat have been discussed in some detail throughout the process. One of the things that did exercise the Local Government and Environment Committee was around the idea of how many buildings should be elevated to those of national treasures if you like. We have got around that by looking at the way that you can combine them and still make safeguards there count for our very important heritage.We want to lift the performance of the public sector. This is all part of that. We are also simply trying to streamline the archaeological consent processes. Applicants have told us have submitted and have written over a long period of time that there have been rather a lot of barriers that have been put up in front of people who just want to do something like extend a kitchen. Then there might be something that is found or might not be found and then a lengthy and rather expensive situation can ensue when they are not allowed to continue on with the work that they need to do. Of course it is very important if there are important archaeological sites but if there are not then it is important that things just get moving. So that is part of what this bill is doing. It is reducing costs for applicants but it is maintaining the current levels of regulatory control.There is a very important element that has been added in. I guess it is an update in the sense that with the New ZealandPouhere Taonga we need to consult more with the tangata whenua and also with the central government agencies. I think that when you are looking at the process of deciding what is important to the history of your nation and to buildings and places it is important that you give proper consultation to the people who need to be consulted.Non-invasive activities—for example walking across a site—are not going to be considered exploratory investigation in the way that they once were. Again this is a simplification of the way that we are approaching these sorts of things. I think it is very important that people are going to be able to access sites with assistance that is deemed necessary. Vehicles machinery equipment and things of that kind need to be able to get on the site without causing too much of a problem and this bill will enable that. I guess too increasing from 12 months to 18 months the time for Heritage New ZealandPouhere Taonga to develop general policy statements is going to increase the time for public consultation which is good. I think that certainly in my electorate on the North Shore Devonport—“the Republic” as they sometimes like to be known—they are extremely engaged with the process of discussing their heritage and being a big part of the consultation process in their community.Debate interrupted.