Unit Titles Amendment Bill

This is a bill that was split off from the Statutes Amendment Bill. It was taken out by the Government Administration Committee on the basis that there was more in it than was appropriate for a Statutes Amendment Bill. Traditionally, statutes amendment legislation amends one, two, or three clauses of the substantive Acts. In this particular case there are 21 clauses of the substantive Act amended. None of them are that controversial, other than the fact that they drew attention to the very slow progress on a substantive reform of the unit titles legislation, which the Government has been promising for the last 5 years.

There are very minor changes around utility interests, around alterations of plans, and around the timing of the annual general meetings. There are some very minor changes to the duties of the body corporate, especially around maintenance. There are some requirements about what has to be disclosed to buyers. Any of these, individually or as a group of two or three, would have been fine for a Statutes Amendment Bill, but they were, in the view of the committee, too substantive. Because we are not opposed to them, we are quite happy for them to go through on this relatively fast-track arrangement, based on the assurance that we received in the committee. It is going to be interesting, because we were going to get a substantive amendment bill in the House on the unit titles question later this year.

I hope I did not push in front of the Minister in the chair, the Associate Minister of Justice. He is welcome to take the call. It is usual for the Minister in the chair to take a call first up in debates in this situation, but he does not seem to want to. So I am happy to wait, and it will be worth waiting for, I am sure. As my colleague the Hon Trevor Mallard has just explained, the Unit Titles Amendment Bill is the part that was taken out of the Statutes Amendment Bill when it was first referred to the Government Administration Committee some time ago, not because there was anything in it that did not have unanimous support in terms of policy across all members of Parliament but because the number of amendments that it sought to make to the Unit Titles Act was not appropriate for a Statutes Amendment bill. So on that basis we not only took it out of the Statutes Amendment Bill but gave our commitment to ensuring that it was progressed in a speedy fashion.

That was in May of this year—quite early in May, at the start of the second week in May—and it is now nearly the end of November. I want to know what the Government has been doing between May and November that caused it to not progress a bill that has the support of every single member of Parliament and that was taken out of the Statutes Amendment Bill, and why it now rams this through all its stages under urgency. There is clearly no consideration of what urgency does and of what should be in an urgency motion, let alone an explanation of how the incompetence of the Leader of the House, in terms of House management, could possibly justify our putting a bill like this through under urgency. So I want the Minister to explain why this bill is being put through under urgency when our committee, representing three parties—and I am sure that we had the understanding from other parties, as well—had agreed that it was fit in content for a Statutes Amendment bill? Why would the Government not see fit to progress this bill in our normal extended sitting time on a Thursday morning, rather than under urgency?

The other point that I want to make is that our understanding was that for the last 5 years the Government has been working on a substantial housing package, including a reform of the Unit Titles Act. I would like to know how much longer New Zealanders have to wait to get something of substance out of this Government in a pretty critical area, the housing area. I know that we in Canterbury are used to waiting. The very Minister who is responsible for the incompetent management of the House, Gerry Brownlee, promised my constituents that the zoning decisions would be announced before Christmas 2012, and guess what? Eleven months later we are still waiting for those decisions. People’s lives have been put on hold. They have no ability to do repairs or a rebuild of their house while the zoning decisions are still not determined. So in terms of this Unit Titles Amendment Bill being put aside since May and now being put through under urgency, I am not at all surprised. So, with frustration over the incompetent management of the timetable of the House, we support the substance of this bill.

I seek leave to have all questions heard as one.

Leave is sought for all questions to be put. Is anyone opposed to that course of action? Leave is granted. That does simplify matters. [Interruption] Oh, we have just done that.

The question was put that the amendment to clause 150 set out on Supplementary Order Paper 358 in the name of the Hon Chester Borrows be agreed to.

Amendment agreed to.

Clauses 1 and 2, and 142 to 163 as amended agreed to.

Bill reported without amendment.

Report adopted.

Third Reading