Watts Simon; McAnulty KieranSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much for the opportunity to take a call on Part 2 of the legislation. My question in regards to this portion of the legislation—in particular I want to go to clause 40 which actually refers to the aspect in regards to the arrangements for the Chatham Islands actually. Because it's interesting that while right from the start of this reform programme the option of being able to opt out was never afforded to any councils—any councils. Simeon Brown: Say that again.SIMON WATTS: The opportunity to opt out. Remember the option to opt out if you wanted to opt out of this legislation? Simeon Brown: That was a phantom wasn't it?SIMON WATTS: Well interestingly enough it might have been. But what seems to have snuck its way into the Water Services Entities Amendment Bill in clause 40 is a clause in regards to the fact that the Chatham Islands Council is not subject to the specific clauses in this bill. So the Chatham Islands are now literally an island by themselves. And that's no disrespect to the Chatham Islands because it is a wonderful part of our jurisdiction. But interestingly enough none of the clauses in the legislation now apply to the Chatham Islands. It doesn't appear in Schedule 2 in regards to the 10 entities—it's not part of that. They are excluded. They have their own model in regards to the provision of water services. They have been given and afforded the rights to be able to choose their destiny in regards to this aspect.Joseph Mooney: Eight hundred people.SIMON WATTS: Eight hundred people is that right? Well there you go Joseph Mooney. There's a little bit of contribution. So how could it be that what's good for the goose is not good for the gander? As the saying—Hon Scott Simpson: Ask the people of Waiheke. What about the people of Waiheke?SIMON WATTS: Yeah well what about the people of Waiheke? What about the people of Great Barrier? What about that? What about the people of—Hon Scott Simpson: Stewart Island.SIMON WATTS: Stewart Island—the good people of Stewart Island. I'm going to do a little call out to a good couple of friends down there. One's running the pub and one's running the school on Stewart Island. Why are they cut? Why can't they choose their own destiny in regards to how they manage their water services and yet the Chatham Islands can?So that is interesting. So I'm really interested and intrigued on what occurred and what has occurred through the deliberations and the engagement by this Minister that has led to the insertion of this clause and the fact that that jurisdiction that territorial authority is not part of the Water Services Entities Amendment Bill. It won't be subject to any of the obligations in regards to these entities. I guess that's one saving in terms of not having an 11th water services entity with a new CEO and a new number of bureaucracy and all of that. But how could it be after all the significant submissions from councils across this country saying Actually you know what? We can manage our water infrastructure just fine. It's not broken. We're quite capable of doing that. Can you just let us get on and do our job."? But for some reason the Chatham Islands have been given special treatment by this Minister and they are excluded in regards to this piece of legislation. That's a little detail that I don't think too many people would have picked up on—the fact that there was one council or one territorial authority that has been given the choice to opt out of the three waters reform programme. What is going on—what is going on? I wonder why.Hon Scott Simpson: It's not a choice for them they are statutorily excluded.SIMON WATTS: They are excluded. And have the people of the Chatham Islands been asked—do they want to be part of this? There must be one person—CHAIRPERSON (Hon Jacqui Dean): Order! Order! Look I'm just going to bring the member back. I've just lost my Standing Orders but I just want to direct the member to cast his eye over Standing Order 108: "Member to address Speaker. A member on being called to speak addresses the Speaker and through the Speaker the House." There's a couple of good reasons for that. One is obvious: what would I be doing otherwise? And the second reason is that if the member wishes his dulcet tones to go out through the airwaves he would be wise to speak into the speaker.SIMON WATTS: Thank you very much Madam Chair. For those residents in the Chatham Islands that are listening this evening to this I'll just go back and repeat what I was just saying. [Interruption] No there are calls for me not to do that. OK well I won't repeat everything that we've said. But that's simple. Let's just have an explanation around what is so special—why have the good people of the Chatham Islands been excluded and what is the rationale for that? And just intrigue us with a little bit of rationale in that regard.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): It would be incorrect to compare the situation of the Chatham Islands with Stewart Island because of course Stewart Island aren't their own council. I'm surprised the member as local government spokesperson didn't know that. The Chatham Islands are their own council. There are 660 people on the island. The council has a longstanding unique relationship with central government where they are directly funded. They are directly funded because rates alone can't cover the basics. So there is a record amount of investment from this Government around the wharf but they also need funding for roading for simple basic provisions that other councils can do but with a small isolated population of 660 the Chatham Islands can't.The reason why they haven't been included in the entities is because after seeking advice on whether it would actually just be simpler to continue and extend the existing direct funding relationship that the Chatham Islands councils have with central government I deemed that it was actually better for them to just continue that. I put it to them and they agreed. They didn't ask to be excluded."