Simpson Scott: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Second Reading[Sitting date: 10 March 2016. Volume:711;Page:9630. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): Anyone listening to that speech and contribution from the current member for Wigram could be led to believe that the people of Canterbury and Christchurch are up in arms about this piece of legislation. In fact that is not the case. At first reading we were promised by that member that there would be tens of thousands of submissions on this bill. We were told that there would be an uprising in Canterbury and across Christchurch on this bill.In fact what we found when we got to Christchurch—because the Local Government and Environment Committee sat in Christchurch and I want to acknowledge at just this point the gracious hospitality of the Christchurch City Council and the mayor the Hon Lianne Dalziel who made the Christchurch City Council chambers available to hear submissions in—was that we heard from only a relatively small number of the 93 individual submissions received. What we heard from was in fact 42 submitters because of those over 1000 submissions more than a thousand of them were in fact form submissions generated by a third-party email harvesting programme that was sponsored by no less than the Labour Party. So what did arrive was not a tsunami of opposition; it was measured and it was useful to the committee in our deliberations.What the previous speaker did not tell this House—because she was not in Parliament at that stage—but it is well known is that the previous Labour Government back in early 2008 in fact considered intervening to solve the conundrum that was a completely ineffectual and dysfunctional Environment Canterbury and the Labour Government chose to neglect its duties to the people of Christchurch and Canterbury and it did nothing. It did nothing. It was scared of what might happen ahead of an election that it was so clearly going to lose and it did nothing. It abandoned the people of Christchurch and Canterbury and when its leadership was most needed the Labour Party actually forsook its responsibility and left the people of Canterbury in the lurch.What happened at our select committee was that we worked through this transitional piece of legislation. As Louise Upston speaking on behalf of the Minister said in her speech a few minutes ago we have come out of that process with I think an even improved piece of legislation that we are submitting to the House for second reading today.Environment Canterbury has gone from being perhaps the worst-performing council to now one of the best. Decisions have been made and progress has been made on all the important water decisions in particular that so affect the people of Christchurch and Canterbury. What has been more important is that the relationships that were so broken have been renewed refreshed and new credibility has arisen from that process.This is a piece of legislation that will take us through a transitional stage from the local government elections to be held later this year through until the next local government elections in 2019. Right and proper as part of this transitional process is that a majority of Environment Canterbury councillors will in fact be elected at the election in 2016 later this year. I think that Environment Canterbury has made huge progress in the period of time that the commissioners have been in place. I think they have done a terrific job and this is a transition that will mean that the knowledge the understanding and the credibility that has been built up over the last few years will be maintained through until 2019 when full elections will take place.One of the matters that the select committee did change from the first reading was the one relating to the nomination of Ngāi Tahu representation. I want to acknowledge the contribution of my colleague and friend Nuk Korako who has I think very strongly advocated on behalf of Ngāi Tahu. They came to the select committee seeking three nominations. In the original piece of legislation at first reading the suggestion was that they should nominate one. The committee I think wisely and sensibly has recommended that they nominate two. I was pleased to hear the Minister Louise Upston say that she supported that process when she was speaking earlier on.This is a very good piece of legislation for the people of Canterbury and Christchurch. In fact it is part of a suite of Canterbury legislation that the Local Government and Environment Committee has been guiding through the House in recent months. It forms an important part not only of Christchurch’s future pre the earthquakes but post the earthquakes as well. It is an important part of the building blocks of getting Canterbury back to where it needs to be. I am very supportive of this second reading debate. I support the legislation and I commend it to the House.