Robertson Grant: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:661;Page:10015] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I want to speak specifically to clause 22 of Part 2 of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill. It is interesting because the heading above this clause states: “2010 election for member of ECan” then the title of the clause is “2010 election for members of ECan must not be held”. That is an unusual juxtaposition is it not? We have the election but it must not be held. It is a remarkable thing. It cannot be understated what is being done in the House right now in Part 2 of this bill. The first words of an article in the  
Press 
 this morning read: “The Government’s sacking of Environment Canterbury (ECan) councillors will deny hundreds of thousands of Cantabrians the right to vote for regional representation this year.” That is what is being done in the House right now. It is the taking away of the democratic right of Cantabrians. It is cancelling an election. We know about countries around the world where elections are cancelled by a central government. There are names for those kinds of countries such as banana republic. That is what the National Government is perpetuating today with the assistance of the ACT Party in this bill. 
This is a democratic outrage. We have to ask ourselves why the Government would do this. We found that out this morning in the  
Timaru Herald 
. The article states: “Dr Smith said part of the reason he replaced the council with commissioners—rather than appointing a commissioner adviser to oversee water management issues as ECan had suggested—was that he was wary of the outcome of the October elections.” People are wary of the outcome of elections all the time. I was particularly wary of the outcome of the 2008 general election but nobody cancelled it. Nobody decided it was time to cancel the election because we were wary of its outcome— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: We couldn’t get the numbers. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: —I tell Mr Mallard that I do not think we would have even tried—but that is what Dr Nick Smith is doing through this bill today. This is anti-democratic. This is cancelling an election where the ratepayers of the Canterbury region would expect to have representation. Their rates are not being cancelled. I ask Mr Hide whether that is a proposal on the table—to cancel the rates for the people in the Canterbury region. No they will still be paying the rates but there will be no representation for those people. There will be no representation because this Government has decided to cancel an election. 
This is an outrage. Clause 22 of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Bill sets this out in the baldest possible terms without any real justification coming forward from the Government at this time. This is the first time in New Zealand local government history that councillors have been sacked like this without their interest without their involvement and without them actually coming forward. The Rodney District example has been raised numerous times in this House by the Government side but that is completely different. Rodney District asked for the review and the process of having the next election was put in place as quickly as possible. There is no guarantee in Part 2 that the 2013 election will take place. 
I challenge the Minister in the chair or members opposite to stand up and tell us that there will be a 2013 election for the Canterbury Regional Council. No one has done it so far. I challenge the Minister in the chair to stand up and tell us he can guarantee that the people of the Canterbury region will have the opportunity to elect their regional councillors in 2013. When we look at clause 23 we do not see anything that guarantees that—there is nothing there. We know that people all around New Zealand should be very very concerned about what is coming next. In fact Alec Neill a former member of this House from the National side said in the  
Press 
 this morning that this is a big call because there is always a political downside and to that end a message has been sent to other regional councils. That was said by Alec Neill who is a former National MP and the chair of the regional council. He said that this Government is sending a message to councils right around the country that there is no guarantee that regional councils will continue under this Government. 
I know that here in Wellington the performance of the Greater Wellington Regional Council comes under scrutiny from time to time but people are happy with it. People vote in the elections and they work with that regional council. As Brendon Burns said those regional councillors play an important role in the environmental health of the region. MPs are able to work with regional councils as closely as a lot of us do to make sure that there are good outcomes. That is at risk from clauses 22 and  23 of this bill.