Court SimonSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Mr Chair. Minister thank you for coming to the House tonight to present your case for this bill. You know that the ACT Party has opposed the foundation the principles of this bill because the ACT Party fundamentally disagrees with the approach taken by this Government when it comes to centralisation when it comes to allocating rights to special interest groups to hapū iwi and Māori based on who their grandparents were. We've raised concerns that are validated by the officials and advisers like Standard & Poor's that the affordability the financial model balance sheet separation none of the objectives that the Minister has set for this legislation to solve the issue of three waters funding finance and delivery levelling up infrastructure across communities catching up with the lack of maintenance providing for new infrastructure in communities that need to grow—this bill does not deliver a regulatory framework to deliver those objectives. It creates a far more complicated environment for the provision of water infrastructure.So Minister I have some specific questions for you. When it comes to Te Mana o te Wai you refer often to the fact that Te Mana o te Wai is a concept that was developed under a previous National Government at a time when there was a National Minister for the Environment: Nick Smith. It seems like with the best of intentions to express how all Kiwis feel about water whether we're fishers kayakers like myself if we want to play in the water if we want our kids to swim in a river or if we have a need for water for our businesses whether that's farming or primary production like in Hawke's Bay—where they absolutely depend on being able to get water from rivers and from aquafers to irrigate crops that sustains industry like for example fruit and vegetable canning which employs hundreds of people in highly paid jobs that otherwise wouldn't exist without having access to the water to grow the crops in the first place. When we've seen Te Mana o te Wai statements and those principles applied in resource management decision-making into water conservation orders for rivers like the Ngaruongo River—if I've got that pronunciation—Hon Eugenie Sage: Ngaruroro. SIMON COURT: —correct. Eugenie Sage might want to correct me on that.Hon Eugenie Sage: Ngaruroro. SIMON COURT: Ngaruroro River which recently has been subject to a water conservation order which will restrict the amount of water available by about 40 percent and that all comes from the primary producers which means that there won't be during dry periods crops that can be harvested that can go to the canning factory that can then end up on our supermarket shelves. The decision makers have cited time and again Te Mana o te Wai directs us to leave water in the river." and yet if we think about the opportunity for places like Hawke's Bay to continue to be the food bowl of New Zealand and somewhere from where we export food to the rest of the world—well there can be water in the river. We could build dams and storage we could build pipelines and we could build networks so that there was always water available. The concern that ACT has is that with this focus exclusively on the health of the river at the expense of communities or farming families—people who produce food fruit vegetables as well as livestock sheep beef dairy—the needs of communities are not included.When we look at the provisions of the bill the bill states quite clearly that only iwi and hapū are able to provide Te Mana o te Wai statements and that these water services entities must give effect to them. This bill ignores the needs of communities ignores the needs of farmers and primary producers and all the people whose jobs depend on growing stuff and for that reason alone the ACT Party would object to this bill. It does not solve the issue that the Minister states needs to be solved which is how do we ensure clean drinking water and that the environment that we operate in—[Bell rung] Mr Chair?CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): Simon Court.SIMON COURT: Thank you Mr Chair. It doesn't solve the issue of how to allocate water fairly how to mitigate the risks of contaminants ending up in drinking-water supplies but also how to ensure that we actually can develop the regions—those places where we grow things—and our cities our urban environments.So what ACT proposes is an amendment to Te Mana o te Wai in clause 3 the purpose of the bill. We propose replacing Te Mana o te Wai with the words "regional water quality" because every community would agree that water quality is the single measure of whether these reforms are successful. Terms like Te Mana o te Wai have an important meaning to a large group of people in our communities who came to the Finance and Expenditure Committee and said that that's important to them. It describes their connection to their ancestors which the rest of us don't have.But when we come down to brass tacks what is this about? It's about water quality for drinking water and then control over the water resource that we all need for farming primary production for industry for manufacturing and of course for drinking water and that there must be enough water in the rivers in the aquifers to sustain the environment. That's why ACT proposes in our amendment to clause 3 to replace the term "Te Mana o te Wai" with "regional water quality". We think that every member in this House would understand that approach.Then I want to come to clause 4. We propose in clause 4 to remove geothermal and coastal waters from consideration under this bill. Now Minister you've stated that of course geothermal waters come out of the ground in places like Rotorua and Taupō even Northland. Hot Water Beach in Coromandel—geothermal waters come out of the ground. At Hot Water Beach in Coromandel you can take a spade you can take the kids you dig a hole and as long as you're careful you can dig a decent hole. It will fill up with hot water but you had better test it before you hop in. It could be very hot; it could burn you.Now it doesn't make any sense if we're talking about three-waters infrastructure Minister to include geothermal waters in consideration of how we supply drinking water how we manage waste-water discharges and potentially stormwater in the urban environment and in those catchments to include geothermal waters. When we consider coastal waters—well look every raindrop that falls on New Zealand no matter which piece of infrastructure it passes through ends up in the sea. So to think that a water infrastructure regulator is going to be able to manage that from the top of the mountain out to sea appears to be fanciful.Then I want to come to clause 9A in Part 1 the interests that the Minister claims and that this bill purports to enshrine that iwi and hapū or Māori have in fresh water—in fact in three-waters assets because that's what this bill is about. It's about pump stations. It's about concrete pipes. It's about horrible things like trash screens on the inlet to the sewage-treatment plant Minister. I asked a question of the Minister Nanaia Mahuta as to what rights and interests do Māori have in three waters assets. The Minister's response was: "None beyond that of anyone else in our community." I think that answer gives the lie to the proposed objectives of this reform. We know Minister Megan Woods today in the House announced funding for three-waters infrastructure to enable housing growth in places like Hamilton. We have the Infrastructure Funding and Financing Act which will be the vehicle to deliver an upgrade to the Moa Point Wastewater Treatment Plant in Wellington when that's approved.Minister I propose that there is no justification for the inclusion of co-governance and the provisions in this bill for iwi and hapū exclusively to give Te Mana o te Wai statements. So Minister I would like you to provide if it's at all possible any justification you think there is for why you've allocated special rights and interests to a group of people because of who their grandparents were in the management of our three-waters assets—Minister."