Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair for the opportunity to take a call on Part 1 of the Water Services Entities Bill. I appreciate the opportunity to ask the Minister some questions. My questions relate particularly to clause 4 Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and Te Mana o te Wai". The clause states "(1) All persons performing or exercising duties functions or powers under this Act—(a) must give effect to the principles of te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi; and (b) must give effect to Te Mana o te Wai to the extent that Te Mana o te Wai applies to those duties functions or powers." My question is: what are the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi? I can't find them defined in the legislation. I've been through the definitions in the bill and there's a range of definitions in terms of the interpretations: board members chairperson commission committee constitution stormwater network green stormwater network and a whole range of other things but I can't find any definition of what the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi are.The question I have that follows that is: is there a difference between the interpretation of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi and which interpretation will prevail? I understand there's a range of judicial court judgments which have been handed down over the years by our illustrious courts in this land trying to interpret the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and I ask the Minister why this has not been put into the legislation to clarify what is actually meant.Then the question is: which would be given effect to if there is a difference between the two? If there is a difference between the interpretation of the principles of Te Tiriti and the principles of the Treaty which would be given preference? I think that's something that certainly affects this piece of legislation significantly due to the fact that all persons performing or exercising functions under the Act must give effect—it's not that they must consider or must think about or must look at—to the principles. So if they're giving effect to something isn't it helpful to know what they're giving effect to? I think that most New Zealanders looking at this piece of legislation think this is the biggest rort ever by the New Zealand Government taking assets off local councils that have been paid for by the ratepayers over many decades and possibly taking their stormwater assets too parks and reserves across New Zealand. I can think of parks and reserves across my electorate of Pakuranga which could be at risk of being stolen by this Government and it would be helpful to know what is actually being given effect to. A number of people—the boards the chairpersons all of these people—are going to get appointed and they'd probably find it quite helpful to know what they have to give effect to as well.If it's so important that it's a "must give effect to" what's so hard about actually putting that in the legislation and making it clear and transparent for New Zealanders to know exactly what is being given effect to? So I ask the Minister to take a call and to answer the question and to list so it's on the Hansard so the courts of this land when they are trying to interpret this legislation in years to come—if it's not repealed by then—are able to know exactly what the Minister and the Government were considering when they said "must give effect to the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi/the Treaty of Waitangi". Secondly we need the Hansard to say which should be given preference if there is a difference between the two—between Te Tiriti of Waitangi and the Treaty of Waitangi. I look forward to the answers from the Minister."