Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 4 – Part 2

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 4 – Part 2

Articles, Blog , , 0 Comments


that would get more homes built more quickly yeah Tanaka mr. Chia thank you this is another next myth special it’s all about sniffling public land public reserves for more housing mr. chair when we’ve got intensive urban development residential development in our cities and towns and particularly in Auckland those areas of green space become absolutely critical for providing respite for giving back to nature for allowing people to relax for providing Oasis’s of green and the city to help reduce our heat pollution and summer for providing trees and I hear the Minister of Conservation attacking protection of trees it was this government of course that changed the RMA to allow private property owners to cut down a lot more trees that stripped out that urban tree protection provisions and the RMA and substantially weakened it here the Green Party believes in good urban parks and reserves to provide a network of places where people can enjoy nature and where nature can thrive because accessible and pleasant public reserves contribute to people’s well-being and sense of amenity these places have got to be people friendly they have got to protect our natural values but what this bill in conjunction with part one which made residential development and subdivision and unplanned subdivision much easier what this part of the bill is doing is introducing a new process where instead of going through the usual processes under the reserves act around land exchange where the Minister of Conservation as a final decision-maker it bundles it up with the resource consent process and it does the ministry oversee hasn’t read the bill so this part of the bill ensures as Dennis O’Rourke has pointed out that the applicant only has to claim that there is a net benefit for recreation and that could be putting in a new walking track or a new cycle track and the applicant for development in the reserve for using the reserve for housing as the Minister wants to happen in the point England reserve is able to say there’s a net benefit to the community because a few more people will be able to walk there what this part of the bill fails to recognize is that once an area of public reserve has been sacrificed for housing and building development the opportunities for future generations to use that reserve is gone the loss of green space has gone for present generations it’s much less accessible so this is sacrificing intrinsic values and opportunities for future generations to determine how public land should be used just so we can have short-term our housing development we should be able to plan our housing development and our cities and towns so that it is more intense so that it is situated around public transport corridors we’re good planning but this bill in toto is not about order im- it was sort of going pretty heavily for a while but then when it starts crossing in front from New Zealand first two national in front of the member who is trying to speak it makes it almost impossible for us to hear and forend and i’m sure it doesn’t assist the member i mean one set of interjections as bad as you know you can handle but having to happening at once from different sizes quite hard eugene side Thank You mr. speaker mr. chair so we want good well-planned studies but those cities don’t occur worth sacrificing public lands and reserves for the short term for housing and the minister’s claiming that pointing and reserve doesn’t have any value because it has cows grazing on it and as open space if the minister had listened to submissions on select committee she would have heard a lot of people value the land because of that because it allows access to a farm experience in the city anyway getting back to verse bill it cuts right across using reserves for public recreation and amenity and introduces a shortcut process for enabling them to be subdivided and thieved from the public to use for housing so that’s another one of the reasons that the Green Party is opposing the bill Michael Wood Thank You mr. chair

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *