Watts SimonSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Well thank you very much Mr Speaker. I wish I could say it was a pleasure to be standing here talking on the second reading of the Water Services Entities Amendment Bill but with nine days left of this Parliament sitting in the 53rd Parliament this Government is bringing the third of a trilogy of bills that are destined to make our water infrastructure and our water industry and water provision in this country worse not better for Kiwis across this country. That is a great shame because the opportunity has on many many occasions in regards to this legislation been there for the taking.The opportunity to listen to New Zealanders across this country to take on board their feedback and their ideas on how to solve a problem which all people in this House agree exists—but that opportunity to listen to Kiwis has not been taken up. A select number of individuals have had the ability to contribute to this legislation and as a result it does not reflect the views of all New Zealanders and that is a great shame.The process in which this bill has gone through—and I do want to acknowledge the work of the Governance and Administration Committee the select committee under the auspicious chair of Ian McKelvie who led what was a hugely challenging process. Thirty-four days was how many days that committee was given in a truncated process in order to consider this bill—34 days. The standard in this House as a baseline is six months—six months is the baseline standard for any bill. Why? To ensure the voices of New Zealanders in our democracy can be fairly heard in regards to the changes of legislation that go through this House.Thirty-four days is a travesty in regards to the way in which our democracy works and is an insult to New Zealanders in regards to complex and comprehensive legislation that affects an asset and a commodity which is fundamental to all of our lives—water. That is disappointing; 1997 people or individuals or organisations made submissions—nearly 2000 people. Don't forget the last bill before this leading up had 86000 submissions—that is a huge number—but the select committee heard 58 of those submissions and of the 58 28 individual submissions were heard—around 1.4 percent of that 1997. We heard in those submissions that many of those individuals were people that were not listened to or had the opportunity to contribute at other stages of this bill. That's what they told us. They said their voices were not able to be heard—they were not able to participate in our democracy—and that is after the Minister in his first reading speech in relation to this bill said that this bill represents important changes". The Minister articulated clearly and recognised and acknowledged the pressure which councils across this country are under but only gave those councils 34 days to be able to prepare submissions make submissions and make consideration.Well I tell you what: that's pretty hypocritical isn't it? Because on one hand and you heard it this morning in terms of the opening address around this bill how hard it is for councils around this country how difficult it is. We know that; we've had natural disasters of massive and significant scale. Our councils our volunteers our communities have been absolutely hammered this side of Christmas. Tairāwhiti Gisborne; in Hawke's Bay; in my home patch of Auckland—significant impacts and councillors and mayors and individuals have stepped up to the plate. They've done more than would be expected and under difficult circumstances. Yet at the very same time the Minister has said "You know what? We're going to push this piece of legislation through making important changes but we're only going to give you 34 days."So I think what that evidences and substantiates is a Government that does not listen a Government that does not keep its word a Government that Kiwis cannot trust and do not trust and that is the reality of what we have seen.National if given the opportunity to govern will repeal this legislation. We will repeal this and the two other elements of legislation that come before it. Why? Because that is what New Zealanders have clearly said is what they require and that's what we will do. Because Kiwis are the people in whom we represent in this House. They are the people which this House represents and National will listen to Kiwis and make sure that reform in this area is comprehensive and will deal with the issues that they face.Hon Poto Williams: So—status quo.SIMON WATTS: The other aspect in regards to this legislation—Hon Poto Williams: So we go back to the old Resource Management Act do we?SIMON WATTS: —which was talked about a lot leading up to that was in regards to these regional representative groups. Hon Poto Williams: Because you can't have a vacuum.SIMON WATTS: You can hear on the other side can't you Mr Speaker? You can hear the narrative of a Government under pressure and I don't blame them. I understand that. You know they've got a Minister that is looking after this bill that yesterday is quoting that he's going to put a bet on winning the election. That is what the Minister of this bill is focused on making bets about winning an election. Are we serious? Are we serious that that is fundamentally the biggest issue that our country faces? No Kiwis see through that. Kiwis are sensible and can see through that this is a Government that is distracted.But I want to get back to the elements of the bill in regards to the regional representative groups the groups that are meant to in effect represent stakeholders in regards to these mega-bureaucratic entities which this Government has created. One of the biggest entities is in Canterbury-Westland—15 councils will form part of that entity. So under the governance model there will be a minimum of 15 representatives from the territorial authorities and 15 members from local iwi—so 30 people sitting around that regional representative group.Excuse me Mr Speaker for sort of having a little bit of a laugh or a joke a bit of a cough there because when you think about the effectiveness of having 30 people around the table—think about the family Christmas. We have many people at the family Christmas how often around that big table of 30 extended family whānau are they all going to agree right? Let's be realistic. Sometimes with respect even if you've got two people at the table—and maybe it's only in my own position—you don't agree. But 30 is absolutely hopelessly impractical and going to be ineffective. Yet these representatives are going to be the ones that represent and reflect the views of the communities which will be implicated by this legislation. Don't forget those individuals aren't democratically elected onto that governance group either—not even the council representatives need to be democratically elected. So what hope do New Zealanders in our communities have to be able to influence the decision making that affects one of the most important assets and one of the most important aspects of their life—the provision of water? Well they don't have any. It is a façade and this Government have failed to listen to that feedback through the select committee process to make the changes that would in effect make the improvements required. I'm out of time and you know I think the points are clearly made in regards to this. This is a bill that this Government will ram through in the next nine days of this Parliament irrespective of the opposition irrespective of the public view that says this bill will not deliver better outcomes for New Zealanders. National will repeal this legislation and replace it with "local water done well" comprehensive policy that will restore local ownership of assets and water assets implement strong regulation and importantly ensure there is financial sustainability. We oppose this bill."