Sage Eugenie: Canterbury Property Boundaries and Related Matters Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSage Eugenie: Canterbury Property Boundaries and Related Matters Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 03 November 2015. Volume:709;Page:7588. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]EUGENIE SAGE (Green): I am pleased to take a call on the Canterbury Property Boundaries and Related Matters Bill. The Green Party will be supporting this bill partly because—well obviously because—New Zealand’s whole land title system is very well regarded and it is long established. There needs to be certainty inherent in people when they buy a parcel of land knowing that they are buying an area—its location its shape and its size—that has been marked out by a registered cadastral surveyor and that title is guaranteed by the Government through the Land Transfer Act; the certainty that then provides to all sorts of transactions in relation to property.So where you have had an earthquake and where the land has moved there is uncertainty about property boundaries because of that land movement. This bill is sensible in addressing the issue that surveyors have faced where they have not known where to put the boundaries. In common law the boundaries do not move with changes in the surface of the land. What this bill is doing is recognising that nature is actually more powerful than the law that the law needs to change and that our common law understanding of boundaries needs to change in relation to Christchurch and the effect of the earthquakes so that property boundaries do move where there has been substantial movement of the land.This has affected a number of properties. As others have said over 135000 Christchurch properties have been affected by land movement and that has made it very challenging for surveyors particularly in those worst-affected areas in the eastern suburbs and close to rivers: in Redcliffs New Brighton the lower slopes of the Port Hills and Sumner. So the bill is in a way making the way in which land title is regarded and the way land boundaries are defined by law similar to what happens with water; because there boundaries do move where the waterway moves. I think it is a recognition that nature is more powerful than the law.We do have some concerns about why it has taken Land Information New Zealand over 4 years to address this issue because surveyors knew that it would be an issue immediately after the quakes with the extensive amount of land movement. Certainly there have been some guidelines that the Surveyor-General issued in I think February this year but there was substantial pushback from the surveying profession because those guidelines confirmed the common law position that the boundaries stayed in the same place and did not move with the land. Surveyors came back and said that a much more pragmatic response was needed from Government rather than just reasserting the common law position.We are interested in submissions on the bill. As other speakers have pointed out the fact that we have got three significant pieces of legislation affecting Canterbury all being pushed through at this late stage of the year and all being requested to have a truncated process by select committee really does undermine democracy because it reduces the time that the public have to make submissions. It reduces the time for officials to actually examine those submissions and analyse the points that are made. It inevitably reduces the time that the select committee has to consider changes to the legislation and to consider submissions. So again it is this Government not having a good sound legislative programme coming up with things late when this could have been put into this House much earlier and then reducing the opportunity for the public to have their say.This is important on this bill because although there was a technical advisory group established to provide advice to Land Information New Zealand that was made up of professionals; it did not include Ngāi Tahu it did not include residents or homeowners. There was some discussion with CanCERN but that was all. Yet it is residents and homeowners particularly those going through settlement of insurance claims and settlements of claims with the Earthquake Commission who are potentially disadvantaged by changes in the boundaries. So people need to have a say and Government needs to gets its legislative programme in better order so that the select committee is not being forced to have hasty consideration of important bills such as this.Nevertheless we will be supporting it because it is a sensible measure to provide more certainty around land title and to recognise where the land has moved that boundaries should move in accordance with that because that is much more practical on the ground. But I would note to the Government that nature is more powerful than the law. The Government’s current approach to climate change is that it has got its head in the sand over the real consequences for Aotearoa New Zealand both in terms of sea level rise and the incursions on property there and the impacts that there will be on property owners. The Government has got to address that too and address it by mitigating the effects of climate change and reducing our emissions so that in future we do not have to change the law to look at the encroachment of the sea on what people had understood was their property. Thank you.