6. Question No. 6—Local GovernmentCHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Local GovernmentQuestion No. 6—Local Government6. CHRIS BISHOP (National) to the Minister of Local Government: Does he stand by all decisions made around the Government's water services reform programme in 2023?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON (Minister of Finance) on behalf of the Minister of Local Government: On behalf of the Minister yes in the context in which they were made.Chris Bishop: Has Cabinet agreed to the extra transition funds required as part of the move from four entities to 10 as mentioned in the regulatory impact statement on the Water Services Entities Amendment Bill estimated at at least a billion dollars?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Cabinet has indeed agreed to that process. I would note in the regulatory impact statement the member refers to in a number of cases while initial Crown funding is required it will be recovered from the water services entities when they are operational.Chris Bishop: Did the Government appropriate the extra transition funds required in Budget 2023 and if so what appropriation or appropriations is the money contained in?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Minister appropriations already exist for the overall reform programme. When new appropriations are required they occur when those decisions are made.Chris Bishop: So in relation to the extra billion dollars—at least—required is that money appropriated for in previous Budgets including the latest one?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: It's actually the same answer I've just given to the member: sometimes when the Government carries a cost for a period of time before that is transferred across that can be reflected in the Government accounts; other times it doesn't need to be because that cost will be paid back within the time that the Government accounts allow for.Nicola Willis: Dodgy books.Chris Bishop: Has he talked to his officials—[Interruption]SPEAKER: Order! We'll hear this in silence.Chris Bishop: All good?SPEAKER: Questions are asked in silence. Chris Bishop.Hon Andrew Little: Point of order Mr Speaker. The deputy leader of the National Party made a statement just now by way of interjection that reflected on the integrity of the Minister of Finance in a way that I would submit is contrary to the Standing Orders and the good order of the House.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Mr Speaker that may have been the implication taken by Minister Little but there was no reference to any individual and therefore no reflection on that person.SPEAKER: I will make this ruling. There has been an increase of interjections badly timed interjections during question time when questions in particular are being asked. I would ask every member to stop doing that. I did hear the comment—timing wasn't perfect but I'm loath to rule it as being personally directed at a member. However the member ought to be careful.Chris Bishop: Thank you Mr Speaker. Has he talked to his officials about the 32 unauthorised changes made to the Water Services Legislation Bill by Department of Internal Affairs officials that in some cases went directly against the instructions of the Finance and Expenditure Committee and if so what did he say?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: On behalf of the Minister the Minister speaks regularly with the officials who are responsible for this work. In terms of that specific matter we'll have to get back to the member and I'm sure the Minister will do that.Chris Bishop: Why has Cabinet not altered the position under the three waters reform programme where it is compulsory for a water services entity to respond to a Te Mana o te Wai statement issued by relevant mana whenua but not compulsory for the water services entity to respond to a community priority statement?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: Those are two distinct processes and I'm sure the member will be well aware that Te Mana o te Wai statements have been around since I think about 2014. The National Party included them within the resource management amendment reforms. They find their basis in the fact that among other places the Supreme Court agreed that there are rights and interests of Māori in water and in fact the Rt Hon Bill English made that statement at the Supreme Court.Chris Bishop: Why is it the Government position that the only way to give effect to legitimate Māori rights and interests in water is to privilege only mana whenua with the ability to issue directive and prescriptive statements to new water infrastructure bodies?Hon GRANT ROBERTSON: I completely reject the assertions in the member's question. Te Mana o te Wai has been part of the resource management framework in New Zealand for many many years. It is reflective of Māori rights and interests in water which as I say previously the National Party has acknowledged has been the case. Clearly Bill English's words no longer mean anything to the National Party.