Court Simon; McAnulty KieranSIMON COURT (ACT): Thank you Madam Chair. Minister McAnulty I wasn't entirely sure whether it was worth continuing to labour the point with you but you seem to have an enormous appetite for responding to challenges to this legislation so I'm going to offer you a couple more. I'll offer you a couple more.Now I understand that the Hon Kieran McAnulty has been known to offer odds and I'd be interested in hearing what the Minister's odds are that this legislation will survive past Christmas. But before we get to the wagering part of the night Minister: clause 35 inserting clause 31 into Schedule 1AA Long-term plan to take effect for all or any of 2024/2034 and related documents". So for context local government—councils—are required to develop a long-term plan a 10-year plan of which ACT would say it's probably not long enough. In fact what ACT would say is actually future Government needs to adopt ACT's proposal for 30-year infrastructure plans. But at the moment it's a 10-year long-term plan.One of the problems that councils identified Minister was that when trying to make provision for 2024-25 2025-26 and so on—because this bill provides for an uncertain transition time frame to one of the nine water service entities there are councils up and down New Zealand who won't know how long they're going to have to provide maintenance contracts or whether capital works are required to upgrade plant and equipment replace pipes and manholes maybe re-sleeve sewer networks so that rather than digging them up and replacing the pipes they repair them from the inside. All of this work needs to be budgeted and planned but they don't know on the day that a water service entity will be created by the Department of Internal Affairs. They're told to jump in now no matter what their long-term plan no matter what their budgets no matter what their procurement arrangements are with their contractors and with their professional service providers.I mean it really goes to show the complete lack of understanding of this Labour Government its Cabinet Ministers even its myriad backbenchers some of whom have even worked for local government. They have failed to understand how to operationally implement infrastructure reform. But Minister don't worry. All of the effort all of the submissions that we've heard at select committees over the past few years of three waters reform won't be wasted. That is because the ACT Party has listened and we'll be prepared to deliver ACT's infrastructure plan—30-year infrastructure agreements set out in this document ACT's solutions for building New Zealand and conserving nature.Minister question: what on earth are councils supposed to do with the lack of certainty and timing which inserted clause 31 alludes to? They're going to have to make plans long-term plans but they won't actually know on which date their assets go into a three waters entity.Then Minister I want to come to "Infrastructure strategy" clause 37 inserted into Schedule 1AA by clause 35. It says a local authority is no longer required to include water services in the infrastructure strategy. Can you imagine any other developed country in the world where a local authority responsible for planning; responsible for land-use planning and consenting; responsible for the interface between landowners people seeking to develop land and wanting to know what is it that council and asset-owners are doing "Where do I go to find the information?"—the local authority infrastructure strategy won't include water services? What kind of infrastructure strategy is that? How on earth during a water infrastructure reform process did the policy intent result in water being separated from local governments' infrastructure strategy?I mean what would be helpful what we've heard from councils what we've heard from the Infrastructure Commission Infrastructure New Zealand operators professionals Taituarā association of local government Local Government New Zealand—honestly all the submissions Minister; you should read them you really should. What they said was that a coherent infrastructure strategy that combines land-use planning with an infrastructure pipeline—that actually goes some way towards giving certainty not just to landowners and property owners but also to the industry that is supposed to deliver all of this infrastructure that is supposed to fund and finance all of this infrastructure. Yet here we have an infrastructure strategy Minister that's supposed to be broken out—water is not to be included in local government infrastructure strategies. Please explain Minister.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Minister of Local Government): In response to Mr Court I did read the submissions and that's why I can say with absolute confidence that the provisions that he referred to in the first part of his contribution have the backing of the majority of the local government sector. They are happy with this so I don't see what the problem is. The member has expressed a concern on behalf of the sector but the sector's happy so I consider that all good.In regards to his second point that's dealt with by the inclusion of the requirement in the first two years of the long-term plan moving forward."