Lee DeniseDENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie): Thank you very much Madam Speaker for the chance to speak to Taumata Arowai—the Water Services Regulator Bill.It'd be of no surprise to the House that we'll support this to select committee but with caution. The caution we've well heralded—it's in the same similar vein that we've expressed caution around the wider three waters work that's been undertaken by the Government and relating back first and in the primary instance to cost that we're not clear on and the impact of those costs on local communities.In this context when we're talking about work on a water regulatory framework we had begun work on this when we were in Government as Madam Speaker well knows and was very much involved in. Thank you for your work Madam Speaker in the past.So what we know from the general policy statement (GPS) in this particular bill is that it's implementing a new body a new regulatory body to oversee administer and enforce a drinking-water regulatory system. It will be a new Crown agent providing for as the GPS says objectives functions operating principles and governance arrangements." The reforms are designed to provide clear leadership—is what we're told—and to significantly strengthen compliance monitoring enforcement and equip the new regulator with powers and resources needed for that capability. I think these are interesting words "support suppliers of all kinds" I'll refer shortly to how that becomes quite crucial when we think about costs "supporting suppliers of all kinds"—if that also includes small suppliers then that's when the real rubber hits the road as far as we're concerned.It's also around managing risks to drinking-water safety ensuring that people can access safe water improving environmental performance transparency and then that national-level oversight.So these are all good and goals that we would support. But then a little bit later on in the GPS we start to get into some of the wording where we can also see—and I'll refer shortly to Treasury's concerns around where this bill is and could be heading. So while it's saying that there should be a strong focus on building and maintaining the expertise and capability the approach it's said is to "build confidence in the safety of drinking water". Well there'd be no sure-fire way to diminish that confidence if the price tag with this is monumental and an uphill battle for small councils and for small private providers.Back to some of the mechanics: I said earlier that Taumata Arowai will have a governance board; it will also provide for the establishment of a Māori advisory board. I think that also is something that we should flesh out in select committee where on the one hand it's said in the Government policy statement that we should be having clear leadership around this regulatory framework. On the other hand when it comes to the Māori advisory group the words "flexibility" and "enabling interpretations to change over time" and "adaptation"—we need to ensure that there's clarity for everything and for everyone associated with this bill. So let's flesh that out in select committee.Now just as I alluded to earlier comments from Treasury they have been very clear in their impact assessment that the problem for small suppliers could become quite well problematic and monumental. They've said here specifically that there will be developing cost estimates in addressing risks and affordability for those small drinking-water suppliers such as marae and papakāinga and their ability to transition to a new regulatory regime—that's going to be an issue and we need to be very careful to keep that in mind. I'll just finish with two other issues. One is time: the ability for a transition time for any suppliers and for the select committee to keep that in mind. The other would be getting that real clear focus on actual costs. So we know that Beca estimated a while ago in a report that they prepared that the cost—in terms of some of this three waters infrastructure and this—could be around $65 per person in Auckland to upgrade water treatment facilities and in Gisborne the costs would be $1626 per person. So we need to understand the cost to small councils to the private suppliers. We support this through to select committee we'd encourage stakeholders to make a submission and we would look forward to the day when we can avoid boil notices such as went out this afternoon from the Taupō District Council for Kinloch and Whakaroa areas. Long may—well short may the day come when we don't have to send out boil notices in Aotearoa New Zealand. Thank you Madam Speaker."