Smith Nick; Williams PotoHon Dr NICK SMITH (National—Nelson): This bill is a radical change to the way in which our local government sector has been organised for more than 150 years. The basic principle of the election of our local councils whether they be regional or local is that they are elected by the general public. The deep irony from the Minister who's just introduced this bill is the history of Environment Canterbury which I want to come to in a moment and the views that Labour New Zealand First and the Greens took at that time.The first important question I want to put to the Minister of Local Government is this: if direct appointments on to the Canterbury Regional Council are so strongly imported by Nanaia Mahuta is it Government policy that it will be provided or made available to other councils? I asked the Minister—I'll ask her again—is it now Government policy that direct iwi representation being appointed to councils will be supported by Government?Hon Ruth Dyson: This is a local bill.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: No I'm asking the member a question. It's actually an important question because the lack of answer to that question really does expose the ad hoc nature of this bill.I've gone back to the Hansard from the time our previous Government decided to intervene in Environment Canterbury. It was a time when all 10 mayors in the Canterbury region made submissions to our Government that the issues in Environment Canterbury were so serious that they required our intervention. What is so interesting reading this Hansard is the level of opprobrium the criticism the passion that was expressed by Labour members and can I quote directly what Labour said at the time: Anything less than 100 percent elected members is unsatisfactory to the Labour Party."Hon Ruth Dyson: And what happened? You sacked them all.Hon Dr NICK SMITH: Well my question is this: if the Labour Party had said at that time "Hey look we support this bill and having temporary Ngāi Tahu appointments to help Ngāi Tahu through that transition." then we might today find their position believable and consistent. But the truth is: do you know how far it went? Labour members accused me of behaving like the likes of Nazi Germany—Nazi Germany—when we made that intervention in the Canterbury Regional Council. That's what members like Megan Woods and others said of me. How dare they now come into the Parliament and pretend that somehow it's just a minor tinker a local bill in which they now want to change the way in which the governance of Environment Canterbury operates and not on a temporary basis of which our intervention was in Environment Canterbury but for ever more. It's very telling that the Minister of Local Government will not be straight with New Zealanders and say whether this is going to apply more generally to councils across New Zealand.It's even more significant in terms of New Zealand First. They railed up and down New Zealand against our Government providing even a voice for iwi—to say that if you were managing a river you had to talk with your local iwi. New Zealand First pledged to repeal those provisions. It is New Zealand First policy that they will vigorously oppose any Māori representation on local councils yet today they are going to vote for this bill—a flip-flop on a grand scale. The existing Local Electoral Act does provide a process by which there can be Māori wards. Members opposite need to answer why they would not use that mechanism that exists already in the law and provide the opportunity for those persons to be elected rather than appointed. I stress again: this is a fundamental change—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): Thank you Dr Smith. Your time has expired."