Simpson Scott: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSimpson Scott: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — Third Reading[Sitting date: 05 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10863. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SCOTT SIMPSON (National—Coromandel): It is a pleasure to rise in this third reading debate on the Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill because as a non-Cantabrian I have come to understand how important the water and sensible governance of Environment Canterbury is to not only Cantabrians but all of us as New Zealanders. I listened very carefully to the speeches of my two senior colleagues the Minister for the Environment the Hon Dr Nick Smith and the Hon Louise Upston. In their contributions to this debate they gave very measured careful and thoughtful presentations on the justification and the rationale for this transitional legislation being presented to the House. Minister Nick Smith made it very clear that the Government is taking a cautious approach and I would like to endorse that cautious approach because it is really important as I said not only for the people of Canterbury but for all New Zealanders that the governance of Environment Canterbury is absolutely stable and working functionally.It was a pity I think for the House to have had to listen to two Labour speeches now from members who are clearly still in denial about the state of affairs that was in place at Environment Canterbury prior to the appointment of the commissioners in 2010. In fact it is well-known that as late as the run-up to the 2008 general election the then Labour Government in its dying death throes absolutely knew that there was a huge problem with Environment Canterbury and refused to do anything about it. It refused to take a lead and work to solve what were enormously difficult challenges and problems with dysfunctionality. Simply it was not so much that there were poor decisions being made; it was just that there were no decisions at all being made by the Environment Canterbury organisation. It was completely deadlocked and unable to move forward in terms of its planning for what is 70 percent of New Zealand’s freshwater resource. That is a situation that simply could not be allowed by a responsible Government to continue.This bill establishes a sensible—in my view—mixed-model approach. It is a transitional model to ensure that when we go to the local government elections in October this year seven elected and up to six appointed councillors will ensure that the momentum and the good stable work that has been done by the commissioners—by the chair Dame Margaret Bazley and her fellow commissioners—over the time of their appointment since 2010 is continued and that their very good planning and structural work not only in terms of fresh water but also in terms of the contribution that Environment Canterbury is making to the rebuild and regeneration of Canterbury following the earthquakes is maintained and continued. I think that they need to be congratulated as other speakers have done and thanked for the very good work that they do.I think that probably one of the great hallmarks of this time under the guidance and governance of the commissioners has been the rebuilding of relationships in Canterbury not only with other local government authorities and territorial bodies but also particularly with Ngāi Tahu. At the Local Government and Environment Committee I was delighted that we were able to make a recommended change which has been adopted in this bill to have Ngāi Tahu nominating two representatives. Originally there was a plan that they would nominate one. Ngāi Tahu came to us at the select committee and suggested that they would like to nominate three. We agreed that probably there was a very good case for nominating two. So Ngāi Tahu will nominate two commissioners and they will then be appointed by the Minister. I think that is a very good and sensible approach to be taken.Environment Canterbury was one of the country’s worst-performing councils if not the worst-performing council at the time the commissioners were appointed. It is really important for us as legislators that we do ensure that that momentum the work and the task that the commissioners are doing is continued. I am very pleased that we as a select committee were able to work our way through those issues. We took an opportunity to visit Christchurch—to sit in Christchurch in the council chambers no less—and to hear from a range of very committed and passionate submitters many of whom were I think making a point about how important it is that Environment Canterbury and its management and structure continue in the good way that it has been. Yes of course they were making a point that they want to revert to fully elected representation but I think that many of them actually did understand the need for a transitional phase so that all these good things could be continued in a way that did not break that momentum.As chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee it is a pleasure for me to support this bill in its third reading and I commend it to the House.