Edmonds BarbaraBARBARA EDMONDS (Labour—Mana): Thank you Mr Speaker. I think that Mr Watts' speech was about 8½ minutes and never once did I hear a solution. Never once did I hear an alternative. Never once did I hear We know how we can fix this we will work constructively with you and we've got a solution for you." Never once did I hear any solution from that side of the House.But listen up: "Titahi Bay residents frustrated as sewage flows on to the beach faeces and toilet paper on to the street" "Wellington water woes becoming daily disasters council[s] [are] under pressure". Here's a good one for you: "Wellington businesses sick of constant 'poo-namis' stench after latest burst pipe[s]" or maybe one from Mr Watt's electorate: "Auckland's North Shore beaches are clean but sewage pollutes inner harbour beaches". Or this one: "Havelock North campylobacter study estimates 8320 [people] were infected". I can go on and on and on—pick a different region throughout this country for why this bill is needed why this bill is a solution to all the infrastructure woes that have led to poor health outcomes.I quote John Wesley-Smith the Tītahi Bay Surf Life Saving Club chairperson "Our biggest worry is sewage. We've got sewage coming from everywhere at the moment on our beach. [It is] really affecting our community and our club primarily because we can't put people in the water.' Hundreds of kids come to the beach every Sunday for the club's water safety programme - but in the past 12 months one-third of all these were cancelled or scaled-down because of the health risk."This is an issue in Tītahi Bay. It is an issue in Porirua. It is an issue in Wellington. It is an issue in Gisborne. It is an issue in North Shore. But again that side of the House has not come to the table with an alternative solution to provide New Zealanders with a constructive way to fix the issues that this bill is trying to solve. New Zealanders do have a right to expect that when they turn on the tap the water that comes out is clean and that it's going to be safe to drink and that it won't make them sick.In a developed country like New Zealand we should not be having these problems. We should be trying to keep our communities safe. We need to allow for growth. Kāpiti Coast is one of the biggest growth populations—it's estimated to be the biggest growth population—but the infrastructure needs to be able to set up in order to allow for that 30000 growth that's going to occur. Recent estimates that show up to $185 billion worth of investment is required in New Zealand's three waters infrastructures over the next 30 years to address the years of under-investment in maintenance and replacement.For decades councils have had to make a trade-off—decades. For over 20 years this problem has been on the table. We've had a Minister who has worked incredibly hard for four years—four years—and the members on the other side of the House still laugh but they still don't provide an alternative solution. Instead we have a Minister who's worked with officials who's worked with councils who's spoken to real experts—real experts—in this. They've helped her to develop a decision that is bold and one that has had to be made because again in the alternative there is nothing. In the alternative there is nothing.So privatisation protections—I heard on the other side of the House issues around privatisation and yet when the Minister approached them and actually asked them to help us secure those privatisations what did they say? Again no. No solution—nothing—nothing constructive has been brought to the table to be able to help New Zealand communities protect their assets.So what does this bill do? It allows for continued public ownership of the water services entities. It contains a number of safeguards. It requires a minimum of 75 percent of votes in a public referendum for any privatisation proposal to proceed. Furthermore no privatisation proposal could proceed without the agreement of all councils and the communities they represent. Again that's based on a longstanding provision in the Local Government Act 2022. The bill requires that an entity must not use its assets as security for any purpose divest its ownership in a water service or sell or lose control of significant infrastructure—that is the status quo.But again no alternative solution—nothing to help our communities throughout the country. This country my electorate and Mr Watts' electorate of North Shore deserve much better than this. So therefore I stand in support of this bill. I commend the Minister for the work that she has done across our communities with her officials looking at international experts as opposed to those on the other side of the House who have provided nothing. I will commend this bill to the House.ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Ian McKelvie): Just before I call Matt Doocey I remind members on my left that the select committee stage starts in two or three weeks' time."