11. Question No. 11—Local GovernmentSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore) to the Minister of Local GovernmentQuestion No. 11—Local Government11. SIMON WATTS (National—North Shore) to the Minister of Local Government: Does she stand by her statement on entrenching a provision of the Water Services Entities Bill We know that while this particular SOP may not pass the constitutional threshold there is a moral obligation of people who believe that privatisation should not occur to support that particular SOP" and does she stand by all her statements on entrenchment provisions?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): As stated yesterday to exactly the same question yes. I also stand by my statement that we want all New Zealanders to know that when members in this House say they're against privatisation they actually mean it. But some people want to create a perception that they don't want privatisation. However they are offering up ways in which you could better privatise water infrastructure assets and we have already seen what happened in relation to electricity reforms. It has always been a bottom line for Government to safeguard against privatisation when improving water services delivery.Simon Watts: Why did the Water Services Entities Bill report back to the House on 22 November with entrenchment of a privatisation provision when Cabinet resolved on 30 May "that the Bill should not entrench the privatisation provisions in the Bill;"?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Because Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 285 had a lower threshold that was accepted under Standing Order 270. We rectified the advice that came after the vote was taken. A mistake has been fixed and we're moving on.Simon Watts: Did she discuss the 60 percent entrenchment of clause 116 of the Water Services Entities Bill with any Green Party MPs before SOP 285 was tabled; if so who?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: As I said in the House yesterday we became aware of Standing Order 285 when it was tabled in the House. Let me be clear; I made an error yesterday in the timing because that amendment to SOP 285 was tabled in the committee.Hon Members: Answer the question.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I am answering the question. Listen to the answer. [Interruption] If you really want to hear the answer listen. That SOP was tabled in the House after our caucus meeting on 22 November.Chris Bishop: Point of order. Mr Speaker I think you know what I'm about to say which is that that was a very clear question about conversations between the Minister and Green Party members of Parliament and that answer did not mention that at all.SPEAKER: None the less it's been addressed.Simon Watts: Did Cabinet authorise her to make a decision on any entrenchment amendments tabled on the Water Services Entities Bill and if not why did she say "supporting entrenchment was a moral obligation" despite Cabinet agreeing not to entrench any privatisation provisions on 30 May?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: As I said in the House yesterday Cabinet papers that I referred to in the House yesterday provided the context of entrenchment matters that were considered and for clarity the dates of those Cabinet papers were April 2022 and 30 May 2022. The SOP 285 that the member is referring to was an SOP by a member of the Green Party.Hon Stuart Nash: Has the Minister had assurances from all parties in this House that they will very definitely not sell our water assets?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Sadly no. National and ACT have not agreed to any undertaking of that kind."