Watts Simon; McAnulty KieranSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Mr Chair. I want to traverse four aspects in the questions I've got on this part. The first is in regards to the Minister's Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 306 in regards to new clause 5A in Schedule 1. I asked a number of questions in regards to whether this is a clarification or a change—these answers have not been provided to date—and whether the actual comments made by the Minister in terms of providing clarity of assets that have a primary purpose or—and we're now using the term predominantly" and I appreciate that those words can be used interchangeably but can we clarify what that looks like and what advice has the Minister got from the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) in regards to the parks and reserves that would be deemed to be clearly out of scope and clearly in scope. But in particular I'm interested in the advice from DIA around those that are in effect in a grey area because I think it's fair to say that there is a lot of confusion in this specific point and I appreciate that the key reasons why the Minister has tabled an amendment in order to try and clarify that would be appreciated.The second point that I wanted to raise—Nicola Grigg: Mr Chair.SIMON WATTS: —I acknowledge the enthusiasm of my peers but please give me three more minutes—is in regards to my SOP 289 something that we haven't discussed today in regards to changes to clause 6. What I'm tabling here is the opportunity to quite simply remove the confusion and lack of clarity that has been created by the inclusion of the two aspects around overland flow paths and green stormwater infrastructure as part of the stormwater network. I'm sure other members will get into detail in their respective regions of where that complexity lies but drawing a clear line particularly around transport corridors farming environments it is very very challenging and think this is going to the heart of why there is such a degree of confusion. The quite simple way when you look at it is that these assets will be transferred into entities and I think then the concern that Kiwis have is that these mega-entities are co-governed and Kiwis don't like that and that the democratic accountability model around the governance of those entities also has issues. So I'd like the Minister to make comment in regards to my SOP in regards to changes to clause 6 and the definition around "stormwater network" and provide a little bit of context around that.I want to move into an area that we haven't discussed yet which is in regards to clause 11 of Schedule 1 which relates to Part 1. It relates to an SOP that I have on the Table SOP 301. This SOP in effect removes the provisions requiring territorial authorities to comply with the water services entities. The reason I have put forward this amendment is that right from the outset whether it was intended or not the intention was that the central government should be working with local government in regards to the implementing of reform in this regard. And we will recall that right from the outset originally there was the ability for councils to opt in to this legislation and then quite rapidly when the Government determined that the vast majority of councils and Kiwis were against this reform they changed that and it was mandatory to be in the scheme. So my SOP is removing clause 11 from Schedule 1. All those involved with these reforms were originally particularly councils very much under the premise that they should be able to opt out and I think that's a key element that should remain in the legislation. The bill contains provisions obviously that require councils to undertake work for water services entities but councils are under a lot of pressure across this country and so my amendment provides options to councils to not be mandatorily forced to undertake work that should be optional. So if Labour are so confident in their reforms and they think that everyone's bought into these reforms they should support my amendment and make it allowable for councils to voluntarily contribute to this.Hon KIERAN McANULTY (Associate Minister of Local Government): To address the concerns raised by Mr Watts the changes proposed in the Minister's Supplementary Order Paper will clarify—by including in clause 5A "Guiding principle for treatment in allocation schedule of secondary water services assets or property"—a provision which states that secondary water services assets or properties whose predominant use is not the delivery of water services are actually listed in as "should not transfer". To directly address the query around Mr Watts' SOP on clause 11 this clause concerns the transition of critical infrastructure the very thing that his colleague Mr Bayly was imploring us to make sure went smoothly."