Smith Nick: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Smith Nick: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6885] 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH (NZ National—Nelson) 
:  
I find it extraordinary that as we debate Part 1 extending the Consumer Guarantees Act to new services this is occurring on the same day that the Government is passing a law stating that anything that a group of officials within the Immigration Service do that was wrong erroneous or mistaken is now to be all OK but when that situation applies to somebody else the Government wants to have a different set of rules. I simply ask the Government this evening to show some consistency. It seems to me that it is highly duplicitous to say on the one hand that a council when providing water services has to meet these additional burdens about quality and all those things and on the other hand when it comes to a service that is provided by the Government itself like immigration to say it does not want that to come into the consumer protection and other areas covered by this bill. Not on your life! This is an example of the double standards that we see over and over again from this Government. 
That is also interesting to me because I sat on the Local Government and Environment Committee when it dealt with the new local government legislation around water supplies. We were told water was an essential service and we should not have any damn private enterprise providing water in New Zealand. It was only late last year that we passed ridiculous laws to restrict the private sector from being able to participate in the provision of water services even in rural communities. I think we showed at the time that half a million New Zealanders receive such water supplies. But the Government’s ideological view was that water was a public service that could only be provided by councils and must be governed under the Local Government Act. Then we come to this bill and notably to Part 1 where it shows the Government has changed its mind. Water is to be just another tradable service. I tell the Minister in the chair the Hon Judith Tizard that she should get her head clear. Either it is one thing or the other. Water supply is either a monopoly service to be provided through democratically elected local councils or it is a service to be traded. It seems to me that in this part we have a serious contradiction with the very provisions that were argued with such passion but with such ideological stupidity by Labour as recently as late last year. 
I also want to know just how much this legislation will cost. My colleagues Georgina te Heuheu and Tony Ryall have been asking questions about the cost—the bill—for this. We have not heard an answer on that. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: It could be up to $750 million. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: My colleague Tony Ryall tells me that the cost New Zealand – wide of this provision is $750 million. 
Hon Judith Tizard 
: He just made it up. 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Don’t say that. A report was tabled. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: The member says that. What does the Minister think the cost is? Can the Minister answer the question of what the cost of Part 1 will be for the water supplies around New Zealand? 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: It’s been reported at $750 million. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: My colleague Tony Ryall without any of the resources that the Minister has and without the hundreds of bureaucrats— 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: Just the Parliamentary Library. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: He has had the Parliamentary Library find out that the figure is $750 million. If the Minister wants to say that figure is not correct we are prepared to consider and contest it. What is her figure? The silence is deafening; the Minister has no idea! She is proposing that this Parliament passes laws that will impose significant costs on New Zealanders without having any idea even faintly of what it will cost them. 
I say to the Minister that is not good enough. Where is the cost compliance report? When will New Zealanders find out the cost—the bill—for this part? I ask the Minister to perhaps seek some advice from the officials who are kindly in the Chamber this evening and to ask that question of them. Or is she another one of those arrogant Labour Ministers who come down to this Chamber and do not think they have to answer the real questions to which New Zealanders deserve answers? 
Hon Tony Ryall 
: She’s a mini-Minister. 
Hon Dr NICK SMITH 
: I am told she is a mini-Minister. I am prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt and to listen to the answer to that question. I say the public of New Zealand deserves to know just what costs this Minister is imposing on them.