5. Freshwater Management—Water Bottling and ExportingJAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime MinisterFreshwater Management—Water Bottling and Exporting5. JAMES SHAW (Co-Leader—Green) to the Prime Minister: Why did he say that we accept there is growing public concern" over bottling and exporting water for profit and when will he address that concern by putting a charge on water bottling?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH (Prime Minister): I said it because there was and there is. That is why we have asked a technical advisory group on water allocation to look at the issue. We look forward to considering its report later on this year. It is an issue that needs to be seen in the context of all the other intensive work that is going on to focus on better use and higher quality of fresh water in New Zealand.James Shaw: Will he commit to implementing a resource rental on water if the technical advisory group recommends it?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member has leapt to a much broader assertion about resource rentals on water. We have yet to see what the technical advisory group comes up with.James Shaw: Will he commit to implementing a price on water bottling if the technical advisory group recommends it?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: It just does not make sense to make open-ended commitments well before we have got an indication of the advice. But what I would say to the member is that over the last 5 or 6 years the Government has done intensive work on all these water-related issues and from that we have learnt the importance of getting the science right getting a very good understanding of all the different dimensions of the problems related to the use of water and the quality of water and we have learnt not to jump to conclusions about what the right answer is.James Shaw: Given that the Government has failed to implement many of the key recommendations of the Land and Water Forum why should the public have any confidence that he will follow the advice of the technical advisory group?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member is just wrong. The Land and Water Forum was a radical departure from the usual systems. It took a big leap to a collaborative process with I think 70 organisations involved in formulating our policy. We have implemented most of the recommendations. Probably the major one we have not implemented is the Government appointing all the regional councils and I think even the member might be opposed to that one.James Shaw: How comfortable is he with the idea that local authorities and tangata whenua in New Zealand are missing out on millions of dollars in royalties from water bottling that could be used to improve monitoring and to help farmers to fence rivers and plant trees?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The member is welcome to put forward to the public the view he has just expressed that councils and iwi should have hundreds of millions of dollars of royalties from fresh water. As it happens the farming community without the benefit of royalty incomes is actually fencing almost all the waterways certainly in grazeable areas of New Zealand. It has been a massive investment by the farming community alongside all the other investments and changes in farming practices they are putting in. I am hoping that councils will be able to respond as effectively as the farming community when the focus shifts to the quality of urban water where his voters might actually have to pay rates in order to achieve the high quality of water rather than just leaving the burden to the farmers.James Shaw: What other natural resources is the Government intending to give away to commercial companies to onsell for free?Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: The Government has given water to our electricity companies for years which is then onsold for free. You can argue about whether that is the right thing or the most effective economic way of allocating water. The advisory group is getting to grips with all of these issues and if the member actually got out and about he would see that in a number of communities and water catchments there is a very sophisticated discussion going on about both the allocation of fresh water and the allocation of polluted water.James Shaw: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was about natural resources other than water and the Prime Minister did not address that question.Mr SPEAKER: No I think the Prime Minister did because again it was a hypothetical question about what other natural resources the Government might consider giving away for free. It is very hypothetical in the question and therefore I refer the member to Speakers' rulings 195/5 and 6.James Shaw: Does he stand by his statement that it does not matter whether it is fair or not if water bottling companies are charged and how would he explain that to the people of Havelock North or Ōmārama who were dependent on bottled water when their own drinking water was contaminated?Mr SPEAKER: Again there are two questions there. The right honourable Prime Minister can address one or either.Rt Hon BILL ENGLISH: I am not exactly sure what the member means. I mean the situation in Havelock North appears to be—well it is not anything to do with bottled water although they have had to use it when their water was contaminated. It is about local government performance and overseeing ratepayer-funded assets whose purpose is to deliver clean and healthy water to its local people. The extensive inquiry into that incident was warranted by widespread illness in the area but it is not about charging for water; it is about local body performance and overseeing their clean water system."