Mahuta NanaiaHon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): Let me come to the new issues that have emerged in the House before responding to the other questions. In relation to green stormwater infrastructure what we know is that within urban areas land and infrastructure can deliver multiple outcomes and services for three waters: the transport system the recreation amenity values and for the environment are all but some examples. These approaches have been identified as mixed assets within the context of waters infrastructure. If the function of a mixed-use asset for infrastructure or land has stormwater as a predominant use then it would transfer to the water services entity—that came up as a question in the House last week and I clarified that. If the predominant use of an asset or infrastructure is not stormwater such as a park or recreational reserve for example then that asset will not transfer and it will remain with the council. I think it's an important clarification within the context of the two last contributions that have been made.However where stormwater is not the predominant use of an asset or infrastructure or land is critical to the function of the stormwater system then the proposed water service entity and territorial authority or transport corridor manager—for example New Zealand Transport Agency—must establish an agreement to manage the interface between any stormwater function and other predominant function of that asset infrastructure or land. That's going to be an important element of how to bring these things together and those relevant parties who continue to manage that infrastructure. So where a stormwater network infrastructure transfers to a water service entity the expectation is that existing and future public access will continue. And that goes to the point that has often been raised by that member of the House in relation to green water infrastructure—unless there's a specific health and safety risk.I also want to make clear through my Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) that's been tabled in the House that the clarification of predominant use in relation to stormwater is included. That has been on the basis of our stormwater technical working group advice and the way that they considered these mixed-use assets. Let me come to the SOP that Eugenie Sage has tabled in the House—that's SOP 307. I'm inclined to support the premise of that particular SOP because it will require water service entities to consider if there are green solutions to infrastructure problems which is the whole scenario that the member has raised and I welcome that contribution because we know that there are some councils who have innovated their response to ensure that when it comes to stormwater it doesn't necessarily have to be swales and pipes under the ground. We can make better use of the land and the environs within a particular context. It's a helpful change that the member has put forward in her SOP and shifts the emphasis—particularly in the area of stormwater infrastructure—to the way the broader catchment works. So it's complementary to the way in which the natural environs are. Solutions like this have become industry standard in many areas as green solutions. Again as the member has pointed out rather than pipes we can look to green solutions as I've already said.Water-sensitive design is the future for good urban design planning and placemaking and that's what this Government wants to see where it makes sense. It can happen in urban areas and provincial areas alike and certainly in small rural communities it can make a critical difference to quality of life outcomes. So I welcome the member's questions in that regard. Can I just come to then the question around Te Mana o te Wai and the hierarchy of needs that the member had asked about. The reason why there is a hierarchy of needs—which roughly go water people then communities—is that if we want the sustainable and efficient use of water we have to make sure that we are not taking more than we need. We have to make sure that the ecosystem is looked after. In order to protect the ecosystem then there must be at least a minimum ecological use range that we recognise before we start taking water for drinking for irrigation for horticultural purposes for growth and development. If we do not do that then our sacred and precious resource of water will dissipate very quickly.Water security will be an issue for us because of climate change. That's why we recognise the hierarchy of needs within Te Mana o Te Wai. Can I just go—[Bell rings]CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The honourable Minister.Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: Thank you. Thank you for your indulgence.At the heart of Te Mana o Te Wai—and I will be at pains to reaffirm and affirm and restate and state—is the sustainable use of our water resource not just for Māori but for everybody. But that concept that water is an interconnected system and must be treated as such as a sacred and precious resource for this generation and the next generation is a welcome addition to the way that we think about water. When we consider the position of water: that nobody owns it we all own it then we need to look after it. When we consider that our kids and their kids rely on us to make good intergenerational decisions then adopting Te Mana o Te Wai into the way that we're thinking about water service delivery is a welcome addition to the current state.Let me come to the point that the member raises in relation to centralisation—not all centralisation is bad. When it comes to water service delivery we have 67 councils currently delivering water and we need to think about some of the general inefficiencies that fall from that. We can't go in to really strong procurement pipelines in a significant area of infrastructure in a way that we can get greater advantage. That's why at the heart of this model scale and aggregation delivers us a set of solutions where we aggregate and leverage the benefit of scale. That's where small communities will actually be the greatest benefactors. That's where in this instance the model that we're proposing in terms of aggregation and the benefits of scale will ensure that the cost impost on ratepayers lessens over time—lessens over time. The biggest benefactors of this approach will be those in our small communities or those communities who are ageing out where you have got people on fixed incomes living in small communities who won't be able to afford to pay for the range of services that they so desperately deserve but cannot afford. This model in so far as water service delivery is concerned will help alleviate that pressure.Now the member also pointed to the definitions in the legislation around safety quality resilience accessibility affordability and efficiency as defined in clause 3(1) the purpose of the Act. Look let's just talk about efficiency—well actually let's talk about the expression of that statement. It actually sets out what we want to see going forward in the future. Because if we look at an inefficient system the greatest challenge we have in our water network is the amount of leakage that is occurring. Nobody wants to talk about that but people know that if the pipe is leaking and then their water bill is going up something's wrong. We don't want to see that. We know that greater efficiency can be achieved by addressing the issues of leakage but you have to understand your water network to even get to that point. And what we found out in the last five years of accumulating evidence is that many councils are not able to quantify a simple thing like leakage and the cost impost that that causes their ratepayers. The solutions that we have will lead us to a pathway of greater efficiency of use: reducing leakage and improving the way in which we're using water because water conservation goes hand in hand with efficiency as well.Affordability: I think I've spoken quite a bit about that based on the costs that councils have offered up. And I know members on that side of the Chamber have critiqued the figures that we've put up but we have ensured that many of the cost analyses have been peer reviewed. Much of the costs came through a request for information (RFI) process that we embarked on with councils because we wouldn't have been able to magic up the numbers. We had to ask councils themselves to go through a thorough RFI process line by line and help us get accurate information in order to model the features that inform this particular model. It was councils who came up with the information.When we think about resilience this is where climate change comes into play because if we right now if our immediate challenge is addressing repairs and maintenance and then responding to growth we won't be able to have a resilient system until we can do the core features of strengthening our water network. But do you know what? Every time there's a significant natural weather event we know how vulnerable our water network is because stormwater goes out into our rivers and lakes. We know that waste often is on our streets when there's a big flood event and we know that those vulnerable communities who cannot now afford to pay for good resilient infrastructure will be deserving as a result of these changes.CHAIRPERSON (Greg O'Connor): The time has come for me to suspend the sitting. The committee will resume at 9 o'clock tomorrow morning. Good evening.Sitting suspended from 9.56 p.m. to 9 a.m. (Wednesday)