Upston Louise: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeUpston Louise: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10860. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon LOUISE UPSTON (Associate Minister of Local Government): I wish to speak in support of the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill in its third reading. This bill is of course a result of the ministerial review of Environment Canterbury’s governance and resource management arrangements led by the Minister for the Environment the Hon Dr Nick Smith and me. It has come about after significant engagement and consultation with Canterbury stakeholders including each of the 10 territorial authorities Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu members of the public and other organisations. I am pleased to see this bill pass through its final stages in the House after thorough consultation and debate in the Local Government and Environment Committee and a successful Committee of the whole House which clarified an issue regarding the resource management provisions in the bill that was raised after it was reported back.The legislation will put in a transitional mixed-model governance structure for Environment Canterbury of seven elected councillors so I do want to put on record the correction of the speaker before me Ruth Dyson. Everyone in Canterbury will have a vote—as they should. They will get a vote for the majority of their councillors. There will be up to six appointed—up to six appointed—members for the 2016 term of local government and this will come after the 6 years of commissioners at Environment Canterbury who were appointed under the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Act of 2010.I do want to put on record my disgust at the representations by the speaker before me of the Creech report. I was actually beginning to wonder whether she had read the same report that I had.When the original Act was passed in 2010 the Government was hearing serious concerns about the ability of the council to fulfil both its statutory functions and duties but also importantly to provide clear direction on and strategy for how to manage the region’s unique and significant freshwater resources. Environment Canterbury reported meeting only 29 percent of its statutory time frames in the Ministry for the Environment’s 2007-08 survey of local authorities which was the worst in the country by a large margin. The council could also not legally implement its strategy for freshwater management in the region and the result was overallocation and mismanagement of water in Canterbury.It is clear from the speech that we have just heard by the Opposition member that Labour is attempting to rewrite history. It also clearly demonstrates how out of touch those members are with the people of the Canterbury region. They are clearly not listening. They have clearly not been paying attention and it is no surprise—actually that is why National took some of those seats in the 2011 election because that side of the House is completely out of touch with the concerns of the people on the street in Canterbury. Those members have completely forgotten the unprecedented step of 10 mayors—10 mayors—expressing their complete loss of confidence in the council. And it was not only the 10 mayors but also Ngāi Tahu and other major stakeholders. That is a significant issue and this Government of course was going to take significant action to address it. But just as importantly it is about managing the transition back so that the people of Canterbury have complete confidence in the ability of Environment Canterbury to function well beyond this point in time.What we have seen since the commissioners have been in place is significant improvements at Environment Canterbury. In the most recent quarterly report the council is now meeting 99 percent of its statutory time frames. Stakeholders of course such as Ngāi Tahu and the territorial authorities are also reporting considerable improvements in the relationships which is a significant part of a region working successfully. The commissioners have also spearheaded the efforts to establish a freshwater planning framework in Canterbury by taking a collaborative approach through the region’s 10 zone committees to apply local solutions to sustainable freshwater management.Although the commissioners have made considerable progress in their time at Environment Canterbury I do want to remind the House that it is still a critical stage for the region. There is still work to do to complete the comprehensive planning framework for freshwater management in Canterbury the majority of which is due to be completed by 2019—not 2016 but 2019. An abrupt loss of the knowledge and the expertise that has been brought by the commissioners at this single point in time would have a significant impact on the momentum that Environment Canterbury has made. It is also important as I said before to manage the transition so that the members of the community can be assured of continued success and progress.There have been some amendments recommended by the Local Government and Environment Committee. The bill does not just continue the momentum of progress that we have seen but it builds on it by strengthening the partnership with Ngāi Tahu. The bill will require that two of the appointments to Environment Canterbury be made on recommendation from Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu recognising their interests and guardianship role in the Canterbury region its environment and its natural resources. The bill also retains as my colleague talked about some of the special resource management arrangements put in place by the 2010 Act. However some of the special powers will be withdrawn.The bill being read today also incorporates a change brought about by Supplementary Order Paper 157 regarding the limited powers of appeal. Following the Local Government and Environment Committee’s report back it became apparent that the provisions as drafted had the potential to cause legal uncertainty around plans which would be subject to limited appeals. So the Supplementary Order Paper better clarifies the intention of the policy position and that means the restriction of limited appeals to freshwater plans and policy statements.I would like to thank all of those who took the time to provide their input and feedback into both the ministerial review and the resulting bill including the 10 district and city councils of Canterbury Ngāi Tahu members of the public and other organisations as well as thanking the Local Government and Environment Committee for its work. As I said before this work is important for Canterbury and the wider Canterbury region. I do want to put on record my personal thanks to the chair of Environment Canterbury Dame Margaret Bazley and the commissioners who have worked incredibly hard over the last 6 years as well as the officials from the Department of Internal Affairs the Ministry for the Environment and the Parliamentary Counsel Office who have all worked incredibly hard on this bill before during and after its consideration by the Local Government and Environment Committee. Thank you.