Hide Rodney: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
Hide Rodney: Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10261] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I rise to oppose the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Bill. I oppose it as the Minister of Local Government I oppose it as the leader of the ACT Party and I oppose it as a New Zealander. This bill represents a radical departure in terms of the management of natural resources and in terms of local government in New Zealand. I do not think that members appreciate how big the departure is. Indeed the Government is on record as saying that this is a one-off and that it is unique but today we heard Minister Turia say when she began the second reading debate that it will be the model the benchmark. We heard the Labour Party say that that was the case too. 
The way we manage natural resources in New Zealand is through private property owners and the Department of Conservation managing the resources that they hold in freehold or as part of the Crown estate. Overlaying that we have regional councils—in this case the Waikato Regional Council—which are required under the Resource Management Act to take care and to provide the framework within which water air land and other resources are managed to protect the common interests that we have in these resources. 
The regional councils have enormous power. In the case of a farmer for example a regional council can allow or deny the ability to use a water right. It can set rules for how one can farm one’s land how much fertilizer one can have on one’s land and how many stock units one can have. So the power of the regional council over people’s way of life is enormous. That is why we have a process of electing locally in our regions representatives to represent us—because if they make decisions we disagree with we can vote them out. 
Someone might be a farmer who is being regulated in a way that that person considers to be unjust and his or her response to that is the democratic one of agitating politically to get that representative or that council dumped and to have one’s say. That means that regional councils have to have regard for the interests of the people in their community and in their catchment. That is why the Government had to think long and hard when it was confronted with the issue of Environment Canterbury—it had to think long and hard about its responsibilities to the people of Canterbury and about denying them the opportunity to have an election this time around while we sought to sort out the problems caused by the dysfunction of Environment Canterbury. 
I remember hearing at length form Labour members opposite about the loss of democracy. Well here is a question: what about the loss of democracy inherent in this bill? The loss of that democracy is huge. Let me explain. This bill introduces co-governance to New Zealand at the local government level across an entire catchment across everyone in it for the first time ever. We have not had that model before. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Isn’t it a great day? 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Mr Tau Henare calls out that it is a great day. Well I have to say that it is a very very sad day for the people of Waikato and the people of New Zealand. Let me explain why. What we will now have is the Waikato River Authority and it will be made up of people who are not elected from that community. The authority will represent the tribes of the region and there will be Crown appointments. I know that Tau Henare likes this because his brother-in-law Tukoroirangi Morgan negotiated it. The Tainui people will be in the box seat for the use of the river and the catchment so why would they not be appreciative of this bill? But the bill is wrong. 
The Waikato River Authority—unelected appointed by the tribes and matched by the Crown—will set the vision and strategy for the river and the catchment and the Waikato Regional Council will have nothing to do but follow it. Picture this—it will go like this: in the future a dairy farmer will apply for a water-right consent or to roll over an existing consent and the Waikato Regional Council will deny the farmer that consent at the cost of his or her livelihood and way of life. The council will do that not because of the Waikato Regional Council’s decision but because of the decision of the Waikato River Authority which will decide on the basis that the activity does not fit with the authority’s vision and strategy. That is what makes this a sad day. It might be all right for Tau Henare and his mates who are in the driver’s seat but it is a bad bad day for the people of Waikato. 
David Bennett 
: Let us decide. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Well that is a very interesting comment. I would be happy with that but the Waikato Regional Council did not get a choice. This is Parliament I say to Mr Bennett and the Waikato Regional Council could have done this if it had chosen to but Parliament and the Government came along negotiated without their involvement and now through Parliament is forcing it upon them. 
Paul Quinn 
: Why did you sack Environment Canterbury? You’re the Minister. You talk about democracy and you sacked Environment Canterbury. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Now we have a backbench National MP not agreeing with the sacking of Environment Canterbury which I find very interesting. My point about Environment Canterbury I say to Mr Quinn—[ 
Interruption 
] The member is chirping away because my microphone is not working and I cannot sit in my seat. If he listened for a change rather than trying to be a smart dick in this Parliament we might get some sense. 
Paul Quinn 
: Anger management. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: No I have no problems with anger. All I am saying is that if Mr Quinn would let me make my speech he might understand what the issue is. I will go on with my speech. I respect Maori values and spiritual views— 
Hon Tau Henare 
: Oh rubbish! 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: —people can believe what they like—but it is very difficult when we put that into law. 
Keith Locke 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think that the noise is a bit too loud. As I understand it a member cannot move from his seat—and Mr Quinn’s seat is at the back—in order to interject on a speaker in the way that Mr Quinn is. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Speakers’ rulings are quite clear that a member cannot move to take advantage of interjection. But in the House there is a general kind of acceptance that people move for other reasons. The member is correct that the noise level has got a bit higher. I caution members. 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: One of the difficulties is that people do shout down those with a dissenting view in this House. Let me read this passage from clause 8. This is what the Crown is legislating for: “The Waikato River is our tupuna (ancestor) which has mana (spiritual authority and power) and in turn represents the mana and mauri (life force) of Waikato-Tainui. The Waikato River is a single indivisible being”—which is to say that the river is a living thing; it is an ancestor according to this legislation—“that flows from Te Taheke Hukahuka to Te Puuaha o Waikato (the mouth) and includes its waters banks and beds (and all minerals under them) and its streams waterways tributaries lakes aquatic fisheries vegetation flood plains wetlands islands springs water column airspace and substratum as well as its metaphysical being.” 
So the whole lot the whole catchment is an indivisible living thing that is the ancestor of a people. The only people who can interpret whether that ancestor is upset or hurt or being annoyed disrupted or affected are the people who believe that. Now I do not happen to believe it. I think it is hocus-pocus. But what we are doing is legislating this hocus-pocus and the Waikato River Authority the Waikato Regional Council and the people of the Waikato will have to live by that. I say shame on the National Party which once used to stand against this and used to believe in one law for New Zealand.