Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill

Well, this is it. It looks as if we will be wrapping up the Committee stage of the Hamilton City Council (Parana Park) Land Vesting Bill. I could not let clause 10 go without coming back to the main purpose, which is the repeal of the

In repealing that Act it is quite sad, really, that it will now be the last legislative record of the link between Parana Park and George Parr. I understand—I understand entirely—that that Act needs to be repealed so that this more modernised and flexible bill can become law in its place. It will give Hamilton City Council the certainty it needs in moving forward and managing this piece of land. I think that is very important, and I do not want to take away from that, at all.

But I reflect on the fact that sometimes when we repeal Acts of Parliament, we pose the problem of taking away part of the historyHamilton City (Parana Park) Empowering Act 1958, which is being repealed by clause 10 of this bill, there was reference to the last will and testament of George Parr. An earlier clause actually removes from this legislation the requirement that the land be subject to his last will and testament. I can understand the reasons for that, but it with some sadness, I think, that we remove the Parr family name, for ever, from legislation in relation to this piece of land.

of what has gone before—in particular, the gifting of this piece of land. I think that in the

Of course, that does not mean that the Parr name will be removed for ever; nor is it only in the information about Parana Park. I am sure that in the Hamilton City Council library the entire story of Parana Park and its history will remain. I know that the Parliamentary Library now has quite a lot of information on the history of Parana Park and its gifting, and in particular on George Parr and what he brought to the city of Hamilton. So I know that the history will not be lost in writing, but certainly that link between George Parr and this piece of land will no longer exist in a legislative sense.

I feel that that is a little bit sad, because George Parr, as we know, was a man of great vision. He had the vision and the kindness to set aside this land for the children of our city. It was a great thing that George Parr did. By gifting this land to the city he has created a place, Parana Park, where many thousands—hundreds of thousands—of people over the course of time have gathered precious family memories because of his generosity.

If that land had stayed in private hands, that would have never taken place. All of those memories that members of Parliament themselves have been able to offer in this debate, which have been memories precious to their own families, would never have been created on that land right beside the Waikato River if it was still in private hands. I would like Government members to reflect on how important public access to those pieces of land is. They make a difference to our families and they make a difference to our history. George Parr was a person who understood that. He privately owned that land. It was land that had been confiscated, but I am not even sure whether he was aware of that history, because he was not the first owner of that land post the confiscation from Tainui. So he may not have realised that what he was doing was returning to the people land that had come from the people. It is quite a remarkable thing that he did.

Clause 10 repeals the Hamilton City (Parana Park) Empowering Act 1958, which is the last piece of legislation that will record George Parr’s generosity and make reference to his last will and testament. That is a little sad. I understand the reasons, but I take the opportunity in debating clause 10 to make sure that the contribution of the Parr family, and in particular George Parr, to our city is not forgotten.