12. Drinking-water Contamination—Havelock North InquiryHon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Attorney-GeneralDrinking-water Contamination—Havelock North Inquiry12. Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour) to the Attorney-General: Does he believe the Hastings District Council bears primary responsibility for the contaminated water they supplied to their Havelock North residents which caused over 5000 people to become ill some very seriously and has been linked to the death of 3 people?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON (Attorney-General): My belief is irrelevant. As Minister responsible for the inquiry I accept the findings of stage one of the Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry. The inquiry found that several of the parties responsible for the water supply regime for Havelock North failed to adhere to the high levels of care and diligence necessary to protect public health and to avoid outbreaks of serious illness.Hon David Parker: Was he disturbed by the inquiry's finding that in recent years the Hastings District Council did not properly deal with a relatively high number of positive E.coli readings at the bore for Havelock North both underestimating their significance and ending water treatment before establishing the contamination source."?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: As Minister responsible for the inquiry I was concerned at all the key findings of the inquiry helpfully set out in paragraph 10 of the inquiry. I also note that there were a number of serious failings by the regional council.Hon David Parker: Does he accept that the Hastings District Council and the regional council should both have known that the aquifer from which untreated drinking water was being drawn was not confined but rather was open to intrusions of polluted surface water?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: As Minister responsible for the inquiry I accept all the findings of stage one of the inquiry. That includes the failings by the regional council and the district council and in particular the critical lack of collaboration and liaison between the regional council and the district council.Hon David Parker: Does he accept the finding that although the outbreak could not be pinned to any one fault or omission by the district council had any of these failures not occurred the outcome may have been prevented?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: As the Minister responsible for the inquiry I accept all the findings of stage one of the inquiry. In particular I accept that there were failings on the part of many players.Hon David Parker: Does he think it twists the inquiry's findings to say that because no one fault can be proven to be the cause of this calamity nobody and no entity have responsibility for the event which is what some of the players are now saying?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: As the Minister responsible for the inquiry I am not seeking to twist or turn over anything. I accept all the findings of the inquiry. My understanding is that the district council issued a press release yesterday in which it said it welcomed the findings. I also understand that the regional council and the district council are now helpfully working together—as they should have at all times—to comply with the interim recommendations of the inquiry in relation to this matter.Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: No I will just deal with the point of order.Hon David Parker: I think the Minister took it to mean that I was implying that he was twisting the inquiry. I was not. I was asking him whether it was—Mr SPEAKER: So what is the point of order?Hon David Parker: My question was: does it twist the inquiry to say that no one has responsibility for the event?Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! I suspect the question has been addressed but I will give the member the benefit of the doubt to repeat the supplementary question.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Supplementary Mr Speaker?Mr SPEAKER: No I am having a repeat of this supplementary question.Hon David Parker: Thank you Mr Speaker. Does he think it twists the inquiry's finding to say that because no one fault can be proven to have caused the calamity nobody and no entity have responsibility for this event which is a quote from one of the participants?Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I do not think anyone is trying to twist the inquiry in any way shape or form. My understanding is that yesterday the district council released a press release in which it said it welcomed the results of the inquiry and it was moving on the failings that were found against it and that all parties are working together to ensure that this sort of thing does not happen again.Hon Dr Nick Smith: Did the inquiry conclude that the serious incident with Havelock North's drinking water supply was caused by intensive dairying as asserted by both the Labour and Green parties in this Parliament last September?Hon David Parker: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The latter part of that question is out of order and incorrect. I am the water spokesman and I have never asserted that.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! The latter part of the question is completely unnecessary to the question. The question is: did the inquiry conclude that the contamination was related to intensive dairying and the Minister can address that.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I have read through the full report not just the key findings on paragraph 10 and I can assure the House that dairying had nothing to do with it. So the scurrilous attacks on dairying by the Greens deserve an apology.Mr SPEAKER: Order! [Interruption] Order! We do not need to go there either. [Interruption] Order! We now move to—[Interruption] Supplementary question—Catherine Delahunty.Catherine Delahunty: Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Tēnā koutou e Te Whare. Given that 40 percent of New Zealanders including in Hawke's Bay rely on clean water from aquifers for their drinking water what actions will he recommend to ensure that aquifers are managed with better care and consideration?Mr SPEAKER: In so far as there is ministerial responsibility—the Hon Chris Finlayson.Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I heard that comment Mr Speaker but as the humble Attorney-General I am responsible for the inquiry. Those questions are probably—they are very valid questions—better addressed to other of my ministerial colleagues although I can tell the honourable member that my understanding is that all the parties to this inquiry who have been criticised recognise that there is a need to lift performance to ensure this does not happen again. But I would suggest that it would be better to address those particular questions to the relevant Ministers. As I said I am responsible for the inquiry; I am not a general know-all.Catherine Delahunty: As the Minister responsible for the inquiry will he recommend that the Minister for the Environment use his powers to intervene to ensure that the people are kept safe from awful sickness including permanent health damage after drinking fresh water? Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: As the Minister responsible for the inquiry I have suggested to all my colleagues that they read the report. I do know that the Minister of Local Government is intending to write or has already started to write to various local authorities saying they had better know the processes. It is not a question of saying that the Minister for the Environment should do this; it is a team effort across a number of agencies. Catherine Delahunty: Further to the team effort given the multiple failings detailed in the report as well as the numerous boil-water notices in other communities how will his Government ensure that they are doing enough to protect the people of Aotearoa from further outbreaks? It may be outside your scope. Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: Yes the last comment hit the nail on the head. It is outside the scope of the Attorney-General who under the Inquiries Act is responsible for the inquiry. These are very helpful and incisive questions that are better directed at the Ministers responsible. Rt Hon Winston Peters: Too repetitive. He likes the sound of his own voice. Hon CHRISTOPHER FINLAYSON: I can assure the honourable member—and the grumpy old member for Northland—that the Minister of Local Government for example has got on to local authorities to immediately—not after the inquiry's stage two report—start to address their processes so that the kinds of problems the honourable member refers to will be addressed sooner rather than later.Mr SPEAKER: And I thank the humble Minister."