Cosgrove Clayton: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Cosgrove Clayton: Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 28 February 2013. Volume:687;Page:8360. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE (Labour) 
: 
 I would like to just touch for a moment on the last point that the previous speaker Nicky Wagner made and that was about a ministerial review and that Environment Canterbury would be looked at. Part 2 of course is about governance and about membership. The problem with that is we cannot believe these people any more. We cannot believe the Government any more because Government members told us prior to the last election—there was a cast-iron guarantee from Nick Smith—that there would be an election on schedule this year. Now they say that is delayed some years out—democracy denied yet again. 
Now we sort of get all excited—we get all excited. “Isn’t it all lovely?” says Ms Wagner. We are all excited about a ministerial review. Is it not going to be wonderful? The problem Ms Wagner has got is that nobody believes her. Nobody believes this Government because the people of Canterbury were lied to—they were lied to. They were told that they would have an election and they were lied to. That crew over there—Ms Wagner included—broke their promise to the people of Christchurch Central broke their promise to the people of Canterbury and now they talk about a governance review. 
Well I have to say to Ms Wagner that no one believes you—through you Mr Deputy Speaker—no one believes you and believes the intent of this legislation. They do not believe that there will be a positive outcome of a review. They do not even believe that there will be elections on schedule as scheduled in this piece of genius work which was of course introduced to the House after the last election. 
That is where we get to the rub. This crew are very very good at talking about mandates. There ain’t a mandate for this. They could not prove there was a mandate right through the debate. Right through the debate Ms Wagner claimed that there was the overwhelming support of Canterbury and at every stage we pointed out to Ms Wagner that there were five submissions in support of the Environment Canterbury (Temporary Commissioners and Improved Water Management) Amendment Bill and 90 submissions against it. She cited Ngai Tahu an eminent organisation. She cited Federated Farmers—the National Party in gumboots. She cited Local Government New Zealand—a really grassroots organisation! There were two others who were irrigators. There were five submitters in favour of this bill and 90 submitters who were against it. 
There is absolutely no mandate. This bill was introduced after the last election. The people of Canterbury were lied to again and this Government stands up and the best it can do is put up “Daisy Chain” who says: “Isn’t it all exciting? Isn’t it all wonderful? Isn’t it all fantastic?”. 
I say to Ms Wagner: as she polled her electorate in the last 2 weeks—I ask her this question—I wonder whether she polled her electorate and asked them about this legislation and also asked them about Phillipstown School and what she said and the promises she made to that school which she went back on; the promises she made to Phillipstown School in terms of representation which she never delivered on; and the fact that she never ever said to that school that she would back it to the hilt and fight to keep it open. I wonder whether she polled on that. 
The people of Canterbury let us be very very clear about it have been lied to and lied to again with this piece of legislation. Nick Smith made a cast-iron promise: come hell or high water there would be an election. That was a broken promise. 
Andrew Little 
: When was that election? 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: When was that election? Well it was supposed to be later this year Mr Little as you would be aware—later this year. 
The point I made time and time again and that colleagues have made throughout this debate is why is it that the Government refuses to have faith in the people of Canterbury—their leadership and their community—to draw from themselves sound men and women and sound leaders to represent them? Why does it have no faith? Why does Ms Wagner think that in Christchurch Central there is no one good enough—no one good enough—smart enough or intelligent enough to lead our region as an elected person in Environment Canterbury? Why does Ms Wagner think that an unelected unaccountable set of commissioners installed by her and her ilk who are accountable to no one in Canterbury apart from the boffins and her colleagues in Wellington—why does she think that is appropriate and why does she think there is nobody with leadership qualities in Canterbury who could lead our region and contribute to it? 
I say the reason is this: the reason that this crew do not want an elected Environment Canterbury this year is that that will provide another platform for the Canterbury community to stand up and elect leaders and men and women who might turn round to Ms Wagner Gerry Brownlee Amy Adams Kate Wilkinson and anybody else who sort of imposes their will down there and say: “I’m sorry National Government. We disagree with you.” Government members do not like listening to people who disagree with them. They love listening to yes-men and yes-women. So if they do not have an election they will have their puppets as commissioners unaccountable to anyone in Canterbury without a mandate who will do their bidding nod quite sweetly and do what they are told as they are patted on the head—as they are patted on the head. Do what Ms Wagner and Gerry Brownlee say—no opposition. 
Here is the problem in a practical sense in the communities you have. There used to be a time—Jo Kane was a commissioner in Environment Canterbury. She is a good local person in the area in which I live—a great person. You could ring Jo up and you could say: “One of the ratepayers has got a problem Jo. You’re elected. We need you to help to sort it out.” and she would do her level best to do it and she would get back to you and she was accountable. Even if she could not deliver she would be accountable to that community. Now what happens is that the puppets that the National Government have put in place the commissioners who are not responsible as Jo Kane was to her electors in her region—you cannot find them you cannot get hold of them and by the way there is no motivation on their side of the fence to engage in those practical solutions that the community needs. 
But in fairness to the commissioners their paymasters are not the people of Canterbury. Their paymasters who dictate to them sit on those benches over there. Their paymasters are the ones who lied to the people of Canterbury promised them an election this year lied to them broke that promise and now dress it up in all of Nicky Wagner’s fine words about how excited she is and how wonderful it is because we are going to have a governance review. When is it? It is in March 2014. Well as I said at the start of this speech no one believes Nicky Wagner that that review will involve the community because there is no guarantee in this legislation that the community will be involved in that review. No one believes her. No one believes Amy Adams. No one believes Gerry Brownlee or Kate Wilkinson or that the community will get the authority back to have an election as scheduled in this extension bill. These people over here have no credibility. 
The once-great National Party—in theory in its own eyes with its own ideology—believes in free markets freedom of choice freedom of expression and presumably freedom of democracy. Well I wonder what old “Kiwi Keith” Keith Holyoake would say about this crew over here. The only motivation behind keeping the vote away from the people of Canterbury is one to deny them the opportunity to elect leaders to represent them and two to deny those leaders the opportunity with a mandate to voice opposition to some of the things that this crew are doing in Christchurch. 
Andrew Williams 
: Bainimarama. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: Yes Bainimarama—a very good point. A very good point. A touch of Zimbabwe as well I suspect—although even in Zimbabwe they get a vote now. They never used to but they got a vote. 
Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga 
: Leadership speech. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: But not this crew—not this crew. What was the interjection over there? Well I say to Sam Lotu-Iiga that at least in Auckland that member and his constituency in Maungakiekie actually get a say. They have a vote they get a say they are allowed to—and he defended that mandate I am sure. 
Andrew Williams 
: They get two votes. 
Hon CLAYTON COSGROVE 
: They get two says. They get two votes. They are allowed to have a crack. But these guys do not want that. They want to crush any opposition—not even opposition; they want to crush the ability of people to stand up and say: “We respectfully disagree with this Government. We believe there is a better way for our province. We believe that we should not be bullied steamrolled or bulldozed by Gerry Brownlee Ms Wagner Ms Wilkinson and Amy Adams. We want to be part of our community. We want to elect leaders—fine men and women—in Canterbury who are not substandard who are intelligent who are community leaders and who are damned well good enough to lead our province.” But Nicky Wagner—oh and do not forget old what’s-his-face Aaron Gilmore; they think they know best. They have no faith in the people of Canterbury and those community leaders—and at a time also when we have a dysfunctional Christchurch City Council. The mayor and Gerry Brownlee the sort of human buttresses are at each other throats cannot agree on most things—cannot agree on most things. We need a functioning local government down here. 
I say to this crew: remember and rue this day because this was the day the National Government and the National Party members of Canterbury lied and lied again to the people of Christchurch and the Canterbury province.