Wall LouisaLOUISA WALL (Labour—Manurewa): Malo e lelei Mr Chair—it is Tongan Language Week—and I also want to take the opportunity to just say kia kaha to our colleague Nikki Kaye at this time. I am going to just outline the process of me trying to understand what Part 2 of this bill is trying to achieve. We are here debating the Housing Legislation Amendment Bill which seeks to amend the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act of 2013. Part 2 is about amending the Housing Act and refers specifically to sections 40 to 42 of the Public Works Act and I just want to look at those sections of the Public Works Act. Section 40 is about Disposal to former owner of land not required for public work" section 41 is "Disposal of former Maori land when no longer required" and section 42 is "Disposal in other cases of land not required for public work". I think the emphasis on public work in all those sections actually means that we should look at the definition of what public work is under the Public Works Act of 1981. The definition of public work in that Act is: "(a) every Government work or local work that the Crown or any local authority is authorised to construct undertake establish manage operate or maintain and every use of land for any Government work or local work which the Crown or any local authority is authorised to construct undertake establish manage operate or maintain by or under this or any other Act; and include anything required directly or indirectly for any such Government work or local work or use". So the definition of public work is actually really clear: it has to be undertaken by the Government or it has to be undertaken by a local authority. We take land that is owned by New Zealanders—citizens—but we take that land for the greater good. The Government does do this and has done this many times in the development of our communities of our society. The interesting question that I have for the Minister in the chair is: of the 154 special housing areas (SHAs) in Auckland how many involve State housing land? That cuts to the heart of this specific part of the legislation because in essence those SHAs do not actually fit when you look at the definition of public work. I want to highlight two developments that have been highlighted through the passage of this bill. The first one is the Clarks Beach tranche 10 development. That development is actually being undertaken by Knight Investments. They are the people who applied to Auckland Council for a resource consent to undertake that build. The Government is not building the 110 houses in Clarks Beach Auckland Council is not building the 110 houses in Clarks Beach but Knight Investments is so by definition—under what constitutes public work—that is not public work. If we have used State land for this development then there is an issue and we should have looked at whom that land was acquired from and we should have provided an opportunity for that owner whose land was taken for the public good to have a right at least to say whether or not they wanted to buy that land back. That is what our opposition to this part of the bill is all about. We could have had some of these questions answered. I could have known—if we had had a select committee process the officials could have answered—how many of the 154 special housing areas in Auckland involved State housing land. We know that in Tāmaki it does so what has been the relationship between that development and the local iwi for example? Have they been offered the right of first refusal? The other development that I managed to find the developer for was the Redhills (Fred Taylor Drive) Whenuapai tranche for development by Hugh Green Ltd the Westgate Joint Venture and Nuich Trust. In fact we are here because—"