Nash Stuart: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeNash Stuart: Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 02 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9329. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]STUART NASH (Labour—Napier): I rise to take a call on the Christian Churches New Zealand Property Trust Board Empowering Bill. But before I do I think there are a couple of comments by previous speakers that deserve just a little bit of rebuttal.Mr Doocey suggested that perhaps these Churches need to come to his electorate in Waimakariri. I ask: is that because of the growing number of disenfranchised people whom the Government has forgotten about and the member refuses to advocate on behalf of and because there is a growing underclass in “Waimak” and therefore the Church is needed there to pick up the slack where the Government has slacked off?The other thing I also note is that Mr Bishop wondered whether we could do this bill better or whether there are private bills that do not need to come to Parliament. I would like to remind Mr Bishop that in fact democracy is not confined to large corporates or social housing providers. This is a House for all New Zealanders and I believe that private bills do actually play a very important part in democracy. It is important that they do go through the robust processes that Parliament affords. I would be loath to see any change to Parliament hearing private bills.The other thing is I listened to Alfred Ngaro’s speech—he is a National list MP—and do you know what I thought? I thought that is a speech from a Labour member. That is a speech from someone who understands community values. [Interruption] No no not only understands community values but champions community values and principles. Alfred Ngaro spoke about the intent of this bill. He talked about his role as a lay preacher. He is not the first to hold that esteemed position in this House. In fact there are a number who have been lay preachers within their communities who have come here to make a difference. In fact two Labour leaders—Walter Nash and Arnold Nordmeyer—were also lay preachers. In fact common consensus is that the first Labour Government was not a social democratic party; it was actually a Christian democratic party because it preached the Christian values and principles at the heart of its philosophy let alone its drive to create a better society.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Trevor Mallard): I am now going to interrupt the member and say that as with a number of other members he has given a good run-around history but 3 minutes into his speech it would be good to refer to the bill.STUART NASH: Have I spoken for 3 minutes already? As mentioned—I think by every speaker—this bill does replace the Associated Churches of Christ Church Property Act 1929. But whenever I see a bill like this which is as everyone has mentioned non-contentious and basically just changes the legal structure under which assets are held I always have one question. I think it was answered by Minister Smith but my question is whether all members of all parishes actually agree to the change of structure. I think they do; that is the impression I have had.Obviously the legal implications from changing the structure alter but it is still bound by all the deeds contracts and obligations of the old trust. In fact it appears through reading the bill that very little has changed except the actual name. Again we just need to know that every parish that is part of this actually agreed to it. That is why actually it is so important that members’ bills do go through a robust process so that we make sure this is not one large group sort of steamrolling over a group of smaller ones.I also note that things change over 85 years. Back in 1929 who knew what was going to happen in 2015? They set up this structure 85 years ago to meet the needs of the times and times have changed. It is quite interesting to reflect on this. Obviously back in 1929 the country was in the grip of recession. There was record unemployment. People were worried about their jobs their future their children and their families. Although some things change in 85 years I think that if we reflect some things do not.Eighty-five years later the Labour leader gave a speech in this House today about child poverty about the minimum wage about the Kiwi Dream about jobs about homeownership about education about a future because today people are still worried about their future. The Labour Party has a Future of Work Commission because we do not know what work is going to look like. The same issues that were around in 1929 when the first bill passed through Parliament are still as relevant today. The thing about the Churches is that they are still there picking up the pieces of a Government that has lost touch with the community. This is the case today.I think the Churches do a fantastic job and I applaud them. I think the Churches do a necessary job. But what we are seeing more and more is Churches picking up the slack where the Government has dropped the ball. This is absolutely the case today. It is one of the reasons why I am proud to speak about this legislation because anything that gets the Church structure to a point where it is best utilised to serve the needs of the parishioners of the people—in fact if we are honest about this the vast majority of people whom Churches serve these days are not actually their parishioners; they are members of their community whom they have taken in and cared for. This is what Churches do because that Government has failed a whole lot of people in our community.I do support this bill. Why would you not? But I would also like to say congratulations to the Churches on the wonderful work they do in our communities. Thank you.