Boyack Rachel; Hamilton Ryan; Lyndon Hūhana; Brown SimeonRACHEL BOYACK (Labour—Nelson): Thank you Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): Please keep it original.RACHEL BOYACK: I've got lots of original questions to ask. I want to focus on a couple of matters related to my proposed Amendment Papers particularly in relation to stormwater. But before I do so the Minister of Local Government has a couple of times in his contribution tonight mentioned the setting up of new entities and I believe when he's discussing that—so I'm just responding to the Minister's comments. I'm interested in his answer to this particular question around the Orders in Council that are included in the most recent water bill that was put through the Governance and Administration Committee last year because I sat on that committee.My question to the Minister is: my understanding—and I'd like his clarification on this; it's a pretty simple question and I'm sure the officials can help him with this—is that actually those Orders in Council can be put in place by the Minister pretty quickly after the legislation was enacted. I think it was either immediately—so perhaps the Minister could answer that question. Can Orders in Council under that existing legislation that he's referred to in his responses be introduced immediately and were they scaled? I can't quite recall but maybe he'll be able to answer because he obviously knows a bit about the legislation that it was either every three months or six months. So maybe he could just clarify that but I'll come back to him if he doesn't answer that question because my recollection was that we could begin those Orders in Council from this point forward and the Minister was able to stagger that over three points. So I was a little bit confused because officials advised our committee that those could be happening throughout 2024 throughout 2025. The Minister seems to be saying tonight that it could wait until 2026 but that wasn't my understanding of the legislation. So I'm sure he can get that clarification but I'll definitely come back and ask again if we don't get it. Just noting because we don't have that select committee process for us to be able to ask these questions of the Minister so it's just important to me because maybe I just got my recollection of sitting on that select committee wrong. But just to my amendments there is a piece in here where I have some amendments inserting after clause 8 an exception for the Tasman Nelson and Marlborough entity. The reason why I'm raising this and why I want to talk about stormwater—and I raised this in an earlier contribution today in the second reading of this bill—is we haven't had a big discussion about stormwater. But for those of you who know Nelson you'll know that we have a lot of hills around our inner-city area and we've had a significant number of climate change events over the last few years one of which has been floods. We've often thought Oh floods might mean flooding of properties." But what it's actually shown is landslips. Landslips are from council land on to private property from private property onto private property. One of the reasons this has been such a problem is that in the hills of Tāhunanui there literally is no stormwater—like zero stormwater. So when we hear that people have invested in pipes throughout our city that is correct but in developments that are over 100 years old we don't have a functioning stormwater system which has led to a huge amount of land slippage. I know that the Nelson City Council has the investment of a stormwater system in its long-term plan so I'm interested in whether the Minister's going to help fund that because there have been requests from Nelson City Council to Ministers for that support. There have been requests from myself as the local MP to Ministers for that support and I will continue to seek that support as the local MP.In another area of the city Stoke which is where my office is we have assets that again have been invested in and we keep hearing that councils have done a great job in investing—yes they invested really well in Stoke decades ago. Those pipes have now come to the end of their useful life. So yes the council did a great job a long time ago but now we know that there's going to be a replacement cost. So my question to the Minister is: given that Nelson and Tasman and Marlborough have excellent plans have shared plans across our region know what we want to do why can't we be exempted so that they can actually set up an entity with that balance sheet separation? A council-controlled organisation actually wouldn't do enough to allow that investment to happen. And if he doesn't allow that exemption that allows for a greater level of investment—because we have a massive bill coming our way and anyone who says we don't don't listen to them; we have a massive bill—will he fund the infrastructure needed for Tasman and Marlborough and Nelson over the coming decades that we need for good quality water infrastructure?RYAN HAMILTON (National—Hamilton East): I move That debate on this question now close.CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): I'm going to call Hūhana Lyndon.HŪHANA LYNDON (Green): Kia ora. Ngā mihi Madam Chair.CHAIRPERSON (Barbara Kuriger): And it'll be original won't it?HŪHANA LYNDON: Yes but I'd like to clarify for the committee the Minister responded to Adrian Rurawhe's question and confirmed that he had only advised the Waikato River Authority and Te Awa Tupua of the repeal. My question which has not been answered tonight: what consultation and engagement hui have been held with the iwi of Tāmaki ki Te Rerenga Wairua Auckland Northland in the repeal proposal for the ending of the water services entity for our tribal rohe? That's 19 iwi in Auckland and 12 in Tai Tokerau. Now have his officials had any hui with the tribes of that district beyond Waikato-Tainui for the river authority? And if they have what feedback has he received? Kia ora.Hon SIMEON BROWN (Minister of Local Government): The question was in relation to iwi consultation. I directed officials at the Department of Internal Affairs to consult with iwi who had their settlement Acts amended by the bill. That process is under way and we'll continue to engage with iwi as we do develop further policy."