Watts SimonSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore): Thank you very much Madam Speaker. It's a pleasure to rise on the Water Services Legislation Bill first reading. This bill is Three Waters: Part 2" and this evening I'll provide an overview in terms of the National Party's position on this bill and the key areas in which we want to provide comment.National opposes this bill and that should not come as any surprise to anyone who is watching this evening. It is our intent that we will repeal and replace this if elected in 2023. The legislation that we are reviewing this evening was tabled only hours after the Water Services Entities Bill was passed last Thursday morning. This bill that we are talking about this evening significantly expands on the legislation that was passed only last week.It in effect doubles the length of the original bill that was only passed three hours earlier to when this bill was tabled and it provides a number of provisions and clauses which in our belief are ones in which the Government did not want to talk about through the select committee process that nearly 88000 people made submissions on. What we are going to in terms of the overview—in terms of the key challenges with this bill—is outline what we see as the issues and then it will go on to select committee where it'll go through a thorough process.The key principle in regards to water assets—and the Minister's articulated in terms of a future state—and no major party within this Parliament does not believe that improvement of water infrastructure is required in this country. The conversation and the difference between this side of the House and that is in terms of "How do we achieve that outcome?" And we still absolutely categorically do not believe that a four-entity co-governed mega-entity model is the model which will deliver the sustainable health outcomes in regards to water infrastructure for this country.We believe that other alternative models exist which can achieve the requirements about capital expenditure while also managing the constraints around funding and financing and pressure on consumers in regards to their water bills.The other element of course is that we still remain committed to the water regulator Taumata Arowai and it is our belief that that regulator will play a significant role in terms of dealing with the water-quality aspects which the Minister has articulated has underlying problems.But it is very clear that the bill on the table this evening is not going to assist and enable us to get to that future state. There is a number of issues in regards to it and we have already articulated one of the key aspects in terms of the simple timing.So let's work our way through some of those components. The first aspect within the bill is in regards to provisions around the charging for water. It's interesting that a lot of the narrative to date by the Government has been "Don't worry your rates aren't going to go up under this new model. Everything's going to be fine." But what they fail to recognise is what's in this bill is actually water pricing and water charging will actually be undertaken by the new water service entities. So while your rates may not be impacted you're going to get another bill in the mail from the water services entity which will be charging you for that water infrastructure.So I think Kiwis can see through the fact that actually this is not a zero-sum game. And the reality is that consumers are going to be faced with having to pay the price for the significant bureaucracy and complexity that will be within these water services entities. And we've already seen the rampant expenditure in regards to consultants and contractors in those entities and this bill brings the provisions to actually on-charge those costs to hard-working Kiwis.The second element within the bill that raises a number of concerns that I expect the select committee will get into details into regards the penalties regime. Clause 414 for example provides a fine of up to $20000 for an individual who breaks water restrictions. While it's pretty difficult to get locked up if you do a ram raid if you leave your sprinkler on Ian McKelvie then you might be out for $20000. You know we're talking about years of due diligence reviewing this bill before it came to the House but some of these things—look and that's fair enough; it was only one clause. But let's move on to new section 407 set out in clause 22 which is undertaking works if you're next to a stormwater network asset of which parks and reserves and the majority of parks and reserves are in scope. So if you dig a hole in your backyard Matt Doocey and you don't notify the mega-entity before you dig your hole then you could get a bill for up to $100000 per individual. I'm not making this up. Have a look at new section 407—and I know it's Christmas but I'm not going to go on on any more of those clauses.New section 372 set out in clause 22 also provides provisions for entry to premises without a warrant—and I see the Hon Mark Mitchell's just walked into the House—for checking water meters and stuff like that. I mean I think I've covered enough in terms of the penalties regime within this bill that are going to be pretty much open to quite a significant element of review within that.We talked about the ownership of water assets and the key differential between this side of the House and the Government is that we believe that water assets should be controlled and owned by local communities and local councils not in bureaucratic non-democratic mega-entities. These reforms reinforced through the asset transfer mechanisms that are within this bill are that these assets will not remain under the control of local communities and that is a significant issue. This lack of ownership is particularly concerning for those communities that have funded these assets over generations and generations. This bill will see the usual rights and responsibilities of ownership transferred across to those mega-entities and the territorial authorities will not have the power over those. This will just simply increase that degree of tension that the community have raised through the submission process on the Water Services Entities Bill and it definitely will not make it better.Changes in regards to stormwater are interesting. The Government have taken the decision to remove transport stormwater systems from the stormwater networks. So if you live in rural—particularly in Northland potentially you think about all of the stormwater networks up there pretty much 70 percent 80 percent of stormwater in Northland would be on the side of the road so all of those corridors are now excluded from this bill. So what's that going to mean for your roads up in Northland? Well I can tell you what. I can pretty much guess where the maintenance in that is going to go.The issue around that brings more complexity and confusion to a bill in regards to—in effect I sort of worked out that it was three waters and then it got two more waters added so it's five waters. We're now taking half the stormwater out so it's four and a half waters now I think is where I'm at but I'm sure by the end of the select committee process it'll be at a different number. But that sort of shows the mockery in regards to you know all of these years of planning and we're still making significant changes in regards to the scope of the bill.I want to get into the changes around the Treaty provisions and Te Mana o te Wai statements because the Government have not missed the opportunity to strengthen the provisions that were in a bill passed only three hours earlier. They've now doubled down and increased the provisions in regards to that. Te Mana o te Wai statements—this bill significantly expands those provisions that were set out in the original bill and that's in clause 16. The water services entities now must respond and action these statements that are submitted exclusively by mana whenua. It's also got the provision that the CEO of these water entities for every report that's provided to the CEO of the water entity they must do another report—so we're into a lot of reports—in terms of how that affects or how that gives effect to the Treaty for every single report. That's now in this bill as well under clause 13. So much for doubling down but that's basically what we have seen in regards to this bill.The other elements in regards to this bill is it also allows the water services entities to set up subsidiary organisations. So we sort of talked about the concept of privatisation and all that stuff. Well now these entities can go off and create subsidiary organisations underneath them so I'm not sure why that's necessary or why that's required but again the select committee are going to need to get into this very thoroughly.Madam Speaker I'd love another 10 minutes but I know you're not going to give it to me—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Jenny Salesa): No I'm not.SIMON WATTS: But in context I really am looking forward to a thorough assessment by the Finance and Expenditure Committee. This bill is a dog. It is an absolute dog. It is absolutely "Three Waters: Part Two". This is a trilogy that has got a sad ending. But for those at home the ending is coming soon so I do not commend this bill to the House."