Halbert ShananSHANAN HALBERT (Labour—Northcote): Thank you Madam Speaker. Nicola Grigg is one of the most respected members in the House in my view. I appreciate her contribution usually. One thing that Nicola Grigg also knows is that the pipes below the ground in the water infrastructure in Selwyn are absolutely shocking and that National has no plan—no plan—whatsoever on how they are going to upgrade the water infrastructure in Selwyn across New Zealand and in Auckland. [Interruption]ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): Order! Order! I do actually want to hear the contribution from the member. Thank you.SHANAN HALBERT: Thank you Madam Speaker. It's a wonderful contribution because the question in the House today of course is: how is our country going to upgrade our water infrastructure deficit? It's $185 billion—Angie Warren-Clark: How much? SHANAN HALBERT: It's going to cost New Zealanders $185 billion—minimum it's going to cost—to upgrade our water infrastructure across New Zealand to get it to the place where New Zealanders actually expect it to be and that is a lot of money. That is a huge investment.Of course when we look at National's track record on investment in infrastructure that's also shocking because they don't invest in transport infrastructure. They didn't invest in housing and now they're saying that they don't want to invest in water infrastructure. These are basic fundamentals of a good New Zealand that we want to be a part of.I want to turn my attention to Tāmaki-makau-rau Auckland. I've spent a lot of time sitting when this bill was originally at the Finance and Expenditure Committee listening to New Zealanders and listening to submissions. When we look at this piece actually it strengthens—it strengthens—the opportunities and the representation for Aucklanders.If we look at it—and if I go back to the point of the Government of the day that established Auckland Council—a National and an ACT Government established Auckland Council as a supercity and established a council-controlled organisation called Watercare that actually doesn't have elected members on their representative body now. Can I say that again: it does not have elected members on their representative body a representative body that now includes elected members and mana whenua from across the region. So my argument is that it's a better representative model for Aucklanders.Aucklanders know. They saw back in last July a 9 percent increase in their water rates—9 percent Aucklanders are facing—and yet while National doesn't support this bill what they haven't told New Zealanders and Aucklanders is how they are going to actually fund the upgrade of water infrastructure. They've talked about the lack of infrastructure in this House. Simon Watts the MP for North Shore has talked about Wairau Valley which had a shocking impact in the Auckland floods at the start of the year and there is the need to upgrade that and support local businesses. I often talk about the paru—the dirty—beaches and how Aucklanders on the North Shore had to close their beaches and not have access to them. This fundamentally comes back to the need for better water infrastructure for Aucklanders.The conversation is: how are we going to invest the $185 billion that we need to? National doesn't have a plan because they don't invest in infrastructure. The Labour Party is the party for the investment in water infrastructure the investment in transport and of course—that old chestnut that we love—the big investment in housing that they didn't do.I'm proud to be part of this side of the House. I'm proud that we're getting on in difficult times and difficult issues and that we are happy to front up and put solutions forward. The difference between this side of the House and that side is we've got the ideas we've got the plans and we're getting on with it.