Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
Brownlee Gerry: Consumer Protection (Definitions of Goods and Services) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:609;Page:6877] 
GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam) 
: Although I would like to say that this bill should never commence that it should have no commencement date I accept that the Government is hell-bent on driving it through this Committee. I want to know why Tim Barnett Ruth Dyson Lianne Dalziel and Clayton Cosgrove are going to vote for such a patently anti-Christchurch bill. 
Hon Judith Tizard 
: Oh! 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: The Minister shrugs her Auckland shoulders in a sort of mock profanity but the truth is that coming from Auckland she has no idea what exists south of Wellington. She is a unique Aucklander because she gets down to Wellington on a regular basis although it is not as regular as some might expect. As the previous speaker pointed out we have a bill here that will absolutely destroy the recycling programme in Christchurch. Countries all over the world have problems with the disposal of whiteware. A programme was put together in Christchurch that will enable those who are less well off to have a fridge that might last an extra 6 8 12 or maybe even 24 months but no that programme has been scuttled sent off to the landfill because of a bill like this. 
As I said before there is also the issue of water. This bill will cost the Christchurch City Council—and at the end of the day that is every ratepayer in Christchurch—$5.241 million to comply. What does the council have to do to comply? It has to supply to the community water that meets or surpasses New Zealand drinking-water standards. On the face of it everyone would say that is a good idea a wonderful idea but in order to meet New Zealand drinking-water standards the Christchurch City Council would need to tip into the water supply large quantities of chemicals designed to take out all sorts of nasties that do not exist in Christchurch water. That is why I will not support this commencement date. A group of Auckland MPs have decided that they want to lower Christchurch drinking-water standards to the same level as their own. 
Stephen Franks 
: They wouldn’t even drink tap water. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: There we are! My colleague Stephen Franks has announced that Aucklanders do not drink tap water. 
Hon Judith Tizard 
: They do; all the time. I do. 
GERRY BROWNLEE 
: That may explain a lot. The Minister says she drinks Auckland tap water—there is a perfect out. I do not want to get into slagging off various other communities but I do want to make the point that Christchurch has the best drinking water of any city or any province in the country. Marc Alexander the United Future member nods to that but he will vote for this bill which requires the Christchurch City Council at an expense of some $5.241 million to tip additional chemicals into our water. Why should anybody who comes from the city of Christchurch be expected to support this commencement date? I do not think there is any reason whatsoever to do that. 
I am happy about the waste-water provisions in this bill and I am happy about a number of the other consumer protections that exist in this bill. But it is the stupidity of including something like water; the stupidity of excluding State generators as manufacturers of electricity from any scrutiny; and the idiocy of taking out of the bill the telecommunications broadband around the country that also make it totally unacceptable to support the bill’s introduction on the date proposed. I would like the Minister to stand up and tell us whether the officials did any sort of analysis of water quality throughout the country. Were those New Zealand standards—which incidentally give Christchurch water a rating of B—well considered at any time by the officials?