Smith Nick: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeSmith Nick: Environment Canterbury (Transitional Governance Arrangements) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 05 April 2016. Volume:712;Page:10160. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon Dr NICK SMITH (Minister for the Environment): I am not at all surprised by the very defensive contribution from Eugenie Sage because she was one of the regional councillors who sat on the governance body of the most dysfunctional unit of local government in New Zealand. She went on to say that it was the farmers or the irrigators who asked the Government to intervene in Environment Canterbury. Actually it was the 10 mayors of Canterbury who unanimously came to the Government: the Mayor of Christchurch the Mayor of “Waimak” the Mayor of Selwyn the mayor—the ten mayors of Canterbury. Mayors do not often agree and they unanimously expressed no confidence in the body of which Eugenie Sage was a member.The second point I would want to make is that anybody who is engaged in the water issue in New Zealand knows that nowhere is it as important and pertinent as it is in Canterbury. It is where 70 percent of the irrigation in New Zealand takes place. It is where we have got our biggest challenges around water quality. It is also where over 50 percent of our hydroelectricity is stored in New Zealand. Despite all those factors in 20 years of the regional council we still had no operative rules around fresh water.That was a disaster for New Zealand and it was absolutely right of this Government to say that our fresh water in Canterbury deserves better and that we need to get some high-skilled people to get on top of these challenges. I salute the work of Dame Margaret Bazley; of people the likes of David Caygill who does not share my politics but does have a great deal of public service ability and dedication; of people like Tom Lambie and those other commissioners. When I reflect on the sort of extravagant language about those commissioners from people like Eugenie Sage and what I have just heard from Megan Woods I say that they are out of touch with the people who have actually done more to improve the management of water in Canterbury than anybody in a century.I want to challenge Megan Woods on a very basic point. She used language saying that it was Draconian that the votes of Canterbury were stolen by this National John Key - led Government. Did Helen Clark steal the votes of all Aucklanders when she sacked the Auckland District Health Board? Did the member David Cunliffe whom I think Megan Woods was a strong supporter of being a leader—did he steal democracy when he sacked the Auckland District Health Board? Did her good friend Sandra Lee previously from the Alliance steal democracy from the people of Kaipara when she sacked that council? Was there a stealing of democracy when the Rodney District Council was properly dismissed? The report was overwhelming: Environment Canterbury had the worst record in processing consents in statistics that were recorded and intervention was required.Megan Woods has asked for a reassurance—that is whether there will be local body elections in 2019 the same as for every other regional council in New Zealand. I give that assurance absolutely but I also say that if we really are concerned about the water issues in Canterbury then we need to ensure that there is a smooth transition. That is why actually the majority of councils in Canterbury have supported the transitional approach that is taken in this bill.I also want to reflect on an editorial in the Christchurch Press. I go back and read it from when I announced the decision to sack the councillors and to appoint commissioners. The editorial said this: “Voters will get to judge the merits of the Government’s moves at the election in 2011.” When we extended the arrangement the editorial in the Christchurch Press said: “Voters will get to have their say on whether they support National in these interventions at the 2014 election.” Well what is surprising and where I think we feel how out of touch Megan Woods and Eugenie Sage are from public opinion is that actually National got the best results ever in the history of Canterbury holding seats like Nicky Wagner’s in Christchurch Central because the voters knew that we had acted absolutely in the public interest and in the interests of fresh water with the intervention that we made at that time.This bill is about taking a responsible approach to Government. It is ensuring that we maintain the momentum and a sensible transition around those crucial freshwater issues that are being developed in a collaborative way across Canterbury. For those who really do beat their chests in this Chamber concerned about this country lifting its game about fresh water they will back the commissioners and they will back the Government in its intervention because every independent observer has noted that there has been more done over the last 6 years in respect of improving the management of fresh water than what there had been in the previous 60 years.The fact of those red zones the fact of those plans that have been put in place—well Eugenie Sage strokes her head. Tell me how many dairy farm expansions had been declined in the period when she was an Environment Canterbury commissioner? Do you know what the answer is? Absolutely zero—absolutely zero. In fact if she looks at the record of the growth in the amount of dairy industry in Canterbury it actually grew at its fastest and most uncontrolled rate when she sat on the governance body of that board.Actually the limits that have been put in place around nutrients is causing real tension real pressure in Canterbury but at last the issues of fresh water in Canterbury are being properly constrained. Those diffuse pollution issues are having limits put on them which is absolutely proper. That is why I urge this Committee to look at the progress that has been made back those commissioners and ensure there is a smooth transition. Again I would say that what the Government is doing is actually backed by the majority of the councils in Canterbury. That is why we should see this smooth transition through and ensure that the job we started in 2010 is properly completed for the good of the people of Canterbury.