Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 5 – Part 3
Articles,  Blog

Resource Legislation Amendment Bill – Committee Stage- Video 5 – Part 3


that the person who’s receiving the compensation has the opportunity to buy a replacement property mr. Chanin are the Honorable doctor next month mr. chairman I’m happy to respond to some of the questions that have been put I welcome the broad support in the parliament for being more generous in the Public Works Act I think every member of this house would see two thousand dollars that was set in 1975 as pretty raw for the disruption to a property owner and the impacts of the Public Works acts of taking a property there are three things that are done in this part firstly that is lifted to thirty-five thousand dollars secondly there’s a further incentive payment that is set for settling quickly and thirdly there’s an order and council power to adjust that into the future so that it isn’t so out of date I do want to comment mr. chairman that this is actually a really important provision align to the infrastructure challenges at New Zealand faces so often infrastructure projects are held up sometimes for years because of very strong disputes over the levels of compensation and the fairness of either a local authority or a crown agency acquiring someone’s property now there’s nothing magical about the thirty-five thousand dollar increase from the three thousand that was set in 1975 it is related to what we think is being fair to both the taxpayers as well as the property owner I don’t agree with those that say that should be proportional to the value the impact of that would be that if someone’s got a two-million-dollar property it’s a lot more generous than if someone’s got a half million or a million-dollar property in my view would be actually there’s a disruption to the person’s life as a consequence of compulsively requiring them to sell their property and to move and the actual cost of that disruption to the alive is not much different as in my view as the weather a house is a house for that family so I think I fix some is appropriate on particularly enthusiastic mr. chairman about there being a time incentive I like most members of this house will have dealt with dozens of constituents that have been through the Public Works Act I’ve seen people for instance on the new highway between motto acre amarpur in the Nelson region people that were involved in 10-15 years of disputes and in my view that was incredibly disruptive and stressful for their lives actually putting some extra money on the table and getting these things resolved more quickly is actually in the interest of the public authority to be able to get on and build the infrastructure but also for the families that are affected to be able to get on with their lives out why do we hold the view that it’s appropriate for by ordering Council to adjust these amounts into the future is frankly because we don’t want to be sitting here in 20 years time thinking that the fifty thousand dollars that we’ve set today with the extra of premiums from war are the increase and the time frames that at some time and future they equally become out of date and so the order in council mechanism the fact that Parliament is not looked at this since 1975 when I was in primary school actually being able to have a mechanism to look at it more frequently through ordering council makes good sense in respect of the issue as to why it does not cover residential tenancies the average period of residential tenancy New Zealanders between 18 months and two years it’s interesting there are large number of the property settlements that are done through the Public Works Act have deferred settlements and the reason for that and deferred occupation is because often the public agency needs the security that I’ve got our property that they can build a road but actually by the time they get through all the other mechanisms it’s many years down the track when they actually acquire it and often they lease it back at to the tenant so I don’t think that case is strong mr. Robertson asked for a broader review of the Public Works Act and I think there are some issues that are incredibly difficult and it’s no coincidence that the public works it hasn’t been touched for a long time I believe in terms of the powers of this Parliament to take people’s private property as essential as it is raises a whole lot of really difficult questions our government’s not in a hurry to do so we think this is a useful tweak if other parties want to drive a earlier reform of that bill that 80 know there are provisions in the UDA proposals that make change to the to the Public Works Act but we don’t have it on our schedule at the moment but we think these are useful amendments and I think there’s actually pretty broad consensus across the Parliament that these provisions are useful the Honorable ring Tyson human and I understand that when we’re discussing

Leave a Reply

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