Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Second Reading – Part 2

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Second Reading – Part 2

Articles, Blog , , 0 Comments


whether whether in fact he does want to continue with this debate now is mr. speaker okay the Honorable dr. next Mr Speaker I move that the resource legislation amendment bill be now read a second time mr. speaker this is the second phase of the government’s substantive reforms to the Resource Management Act it’s the largest package of reforms since the original Act was passed 25 years ago the success of the government’s first phase of reforms is witnessed by projects like water view like the Kapiti expressway like major roading programs in Christchurch and new power stations that have been able to be consented in a far more crisp way and this bill is particularly focused on addressing the long-term issues around housing it is a litmus test for parties in this Parliament as to whether they are serious about addressing the long-term issues affecting housing supply and affordability this Parliament is full of MPs that want the omelette but aren’t prepared to break the egg unless we address the core issue of opening up land supply reducing the time taken to getting consents reducing the costs of land subdivision and enabling the construction of infrastructure we are not serious about addressing New Zealand’s long-term housing supply and affordability issues the evidence of the connections between the Resource Management Act and the housing issues are overwhelming eighty percent of the real increase in the cost of a home today as compared to 25 years ago is in the price of the section Mr Speaker I point out that a section worth 100,000 dollars in 1990 in Auckland and the most recent average is five hundred thousand dollars and mr. speaker you are not going to build a starter affordable house if the price of the section is that expensive and here’s the further evidence why is it possible in Christchurch to buy a home of a hundred and fifty square meters for under four hundred thousand dollars when the same home in Auckland would cost over seven hundred thousand dollars the building materials cost in Christchurch is about the same the cost of labour in Christchurch is about the same the cost of the consenting process is about the same the core issue is at the average price of a section in Auckland is five hundred thousand dollars and the price of a section in Christchurch is 190 thousand dollars now mr. speaker in Christchurch we use the syrah act to overall the RMA and to substantially increase the supply of land and that is why rents have dropped in that city by eight percent over the last 12 months that is why in that city why homes are so much more affordable order so mr. speaker no I will ask the Honorable Ruth Dyson to add or an apologize with ruin apologize mr. speaker mr. speaker the act that core governs the creation of sections is the Resource Management Act and it’s not just the government that is calling for their reform the Productivity Commission has produced through substantive reports the new zealand institute the Reserve Bank the Treasury similar issues in the UK where house prices are similarly at ratios of eight times those of incomes have been enquired into and the report in the House of Commons in the last couple of weeks a 400-page report saying exactly the same thing mr. speaker this is a test of leadership because whether it be the issue of superannuation or RM a reform members on the side and particularly the Prime Minister I prepared to deal with the long-term issues for New Zealand we’re members opposite are far more interested in paying short-term politics most mr. little and mr. lasane mr. Twyford have acknowledged their tight urban limits have been at the core of New Zealand’s housing issues and when we have the very bill before the house that will make a difference they vigorously oppose it and that mr. speaker is a lack of leadership if Andrew little was really up to the cat he would take the sort of measure that John Key did on the issue of smacking when label was in the government and be prepared to address these long-term questions mr. speaker when it comes to the issue of housing these are not new issues I remind members opposite that house prices doubled under the former Labour government and home ownership declined in every year that they were government if there was a quick easy fix it would have been done a long side ago what we need is a systematic long-term reform of the very act that drives the creation of sections and is at the core of those major issues in New Zealand’s housing market mr. speaker there are ten very specific amendments in this bill that will make a material difference the first is that this bill specifically includes a new function and requirement on councils to ensure that they provide a sufficient supply of land for development and for growth secondly a key weakness of our current planning system is that it takes so long for plan changes Auckland has been functioning for the last 20 years on a plane that was drafted in 1993 when its population or 600,000 smaller the streamlined planning provisions in this bill will enable newland to be able to be zoned for housing in a matter of months rather than the many years of the current law mr. speaker the spill quite specifically removes appeals on resource consents for residential activities where a land has been zoned for housing purposes that too is a key change in speeding up the process Mr Speaker we have a very confusing regime for developers in that we have councils able to charge both financial contributions under the RMA and development contributions under the local government act those two regimes do not make sense they create uncertainty they can result in double charging and it is sensible in this reform that we require those two provisions to be integrated mr. speaker this bill provides for planning standards it does not make sense that across this country we have over 50 definitions on how you measure the height of a building we have our cross this country more than a thousand different categories of zoning of land that makes the development a nightmare for those people that are trying to build the buildings for jobs and the buildings for houses and those planning standards that are provided for in the spill will make a real difference the changes to the reserves act that enables you to be able to integrate the changes to reserves with planning changes and resource consents there are thousands of homes in which that is exactly the circumstance of which this bill will provide for a better process and you can’t build houses unless you have infrastructure and right now there are difficulties with the Public Works Act in terms of being able to bring infrastructure on stream and the sensible more generous provisions for those people that’s property is required for infrastructure while speeding up the process makes absolute sense mr. speaker there are the new boundary provisions that enable homes and those issues to be resolved more quickly the issue of fixed fees there’s the issue of having the capacity to be able to even waiver the need for a consent in minor cases mr. speaker there are far more and bigger reforms there’s the issue of natural hazards that was an act of neglect in not including at in the original law that was recommended by the Royal Commission and we need only look at us at a subdivision like Bixley to say that natural hazards should have been at the front end of the decision-making in those areas there’s the new collaborative requirements there’s the new provisions in this bill that provide the commissioning plans for those activities in the easy there are the new provisions requiring the fencing of streams and rivers and new zealand air lakes so that we might have cleaner waterways Mr Speaker I want to acknowledge the merit pay yes they have advocated strongly for the year we participation agreements that are in this bill but they are a party that’s prepared to deal with the issues that are at the core of housing rather than simply playing politics Mr Speaker I also note the substantive issues in this bill about bringing together the different processes for national direction whether it’s a national policy statement whether it’s a National Environment standard or whether it is those 360 regulations mr. speaker there have been cries or foul that this bill is going to remove the powers for communities to be able to have a say here’s what I say to the Parliament why should it after parliament has regulated and set a standard for earthquake-prone buildings or their people can use a year any time has expired before I call remember I am going to go back in he’d give them member half an apology for the comments that I made earlier under sending order to 672 unless a bill is under urgency it has to be made available to members and in the experiences I’ve had in the past had been under urgency in there for my initial reaction was wrong however this bill was made available to members on the 6th in it was available on monday end and therefore that does not apply the question is the motion be greedy

Leave a Reply

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