Parker David: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Parker David: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 26 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8221. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) 
: 
 I want to just follow on from my colleague the Hon Ruth Dyson’s comments. Cantabrians are not just losing the right to vote; they are losing appeal rights. One of the provisions of the existing legislation the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act which was passed in 2010 was to deny Cantabrians the right to appeal regional plans and also changes to water conservation orders. Normally those processes carry with them appeal rights to the Environment Court. I can understand at one level the National Government wanting to sort out the regional water plan in Canterbury. I do not think that that justified the abolition of the regional council back in 2010 but given that that was the Government’s intent I can understand its desire to sort out the water plan. But what I cannot understand is why 3 years after that it needs to retain the right to change that plan without appeal rights to the Environment Court. It is outrageous that not only have Cantabrians lost the right to elect their councillors but they have lost the right—which New Zealanders have in every other part of the country—to appeal provisions and plans that they disagree with to the Environment Court. 
I see with some suspicion that in Part 2 of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill we have the promise that “The responsible Ministers must begin a review of ECan on 1 March 2014.” Then it says that the review must cover amongst other things “ECan’s powers and functions under Part 3.” It worries me that we are going to see through that review process new proposals that we are not yet aware of that may for example for ever take away the appeal rights on plan provisions in respect of the regional plan of Environment Canterbury. We may also see the abolition of Environment Canterbury and the merger of it with the Christchurch City Council. Neither of those things has been acknowledged by the Government as yet but you wait—you wait. Well not you Mr Chairman. We should wait because I for one am suspicious that there is an ulterior motive here. I cannot understand why else the Government would breach its promise of 3 years ago. 
Su’a William Sio 
: What do you think that might be? 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: I think the ulterior motives are the reorganisation of the councils in Canterbury to a vast degree and the effective subjugation of those interested in environmental outcomes in the rivers of Canterbury—having their interests subjugated to the more powerful interests of some people who do not want to do enough to improve water quality in the region or who want to extract more water from those lowland rivers particularly than is sustainable. I think that this extension together with these powers and functions of Environment Canterbury that are talked about in Part 3 in respect of their being reviewed as well as looking at the membership of Environment Canterbury—again code for looking at whether it should bring all of these bodies together—portend some future changes for Canterbury that I think will not suit Canterbury well in the long run. 
Can I also endorse the comments of Ruth Dyson in respect of conservation orders. Conservation orders apply only to outstanding water bodies. There are only about 10 conservation orders in New Zealand. There are two or three in Canterbury. I cannot remember which. Is the Ahuriri River within this catchment? Is the Ahuriri River within this or is it the Otago Regional Council? I am not sure. I think it is Canterbury. We have got the Rangitata River— 
Aaron Gilmore 
: Waitaki’s the boundary. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: No the Waitaki River does not have a conservation order on it. You would need to understand what conservation orders are. It is the Rangitata River the Ahuriri River and the Rakaia River. I think they are the main rivers in the Canterbury region that have conservation orders. The Rakaia River was the first conservation order that was granted in New Zealand. It went all the way to the Court of Appeal. There were scraps between all of the people who had competing claims to it. I actually remember it well because I was a junior in the case before the Planning Tribunal. But that and the other conservation orders that are there are precious. 
It is very very hard to get a conservation order to protect a river. These few rivers that we have protected with conservation orders are listed and have rules for their protection. These few rivers that have conservation orders in the country have special protections that are attached to them that put them beyond the control of the regional council. That is after a very thorough process that starts with the Minister for the Environment having to be convinced that there is a real issue to be looked at followed by a first hearing by a panel that is appointed by the Minister followed by appeals to the Environment Court. The Environment Court eventually makes a recommendation and then the Government of the day chooses whether or not it implements that by way of a statutory regulation which then has force against the regional council. 
These few rivers that we have in New Zealand that have been identified as having outstanding characteristics are truly precious; they really are truly precious. By and large most of them rise out of our national parks and are quite high-volume rivers but none the less they are precious rivers both for the aquatic environment that is maintained through those river flows for fish and for the biota and for the morphology of the rivers which are maintained by decent water flows in these braided rivers and which in turn protect bird habitats and other things. These rivers are absolutely precious and this legislation— 
John Hayes 
: You’ve said that 10 times. 
Hon DAVID PARKER 
: Well actually you still have not heard the message. These rivers are precious and they should be preserved for New Zealanders and put beyond the ability of regional councils to modify them. This legislation alters the status quo of those conservation orders and puts them within the jurisdiction of Environment Canterbury without any appeal rights to any Environment Court or anything like that to change. It is wrong it is unprincipled and it puts at risk these precious rivers. 
So the Labour Party for those reasons and others that have been covered by my colleagues wants the Minister of Local Government to explain why it is that it is necessary to strip our rivers in the Canterbury region that are protected by conservation orders from the legislation which protects rivers elsewhere in the country.