11. Question No. 11—Local GovernmentSIMON WATTS (National—North Shore) to the Minister of Local GovernmentQuestion No. 11—Local Government11. SIMON WATTS (National—North Shore) to the Minister of Local Government: Did she receive advice from the Department of Internal Affairs on 25 October raising the possibility that Hon Eugenie Sage would pursue entrenchment of provisions in the Water Services Entities Bill via Supplementary Order Paper and stating the Government would need to decide whether to support it; if so how does she reconcile that with her answer to me in oral questions on 6 December We were made aware of the details of the SOP at the same time as he was"?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA (Minister of Local Government): Yes I received advice from Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) in response to a letter received from Hon Eugenie Sage on 20 October 2022 that covered a range of their party's concerns related to the water reforms such as stormwater co-governance funding and privatisation. I can reconcile this with my response to the member's oral question on 6 December because it was related more specifically to a matter foreshadowed in that letter and then subsequently set out at a later date and tabled in Supplementary Order Paper (SOP) 285.Simon Watts: Did she send advice received on SOP 285 on 22 November relating to entrenchment to any other Ministers; if so who?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: That SOP was tabled by Hon Eugenie Sage in the House. It was a very dynamic debate. I saw that SOP at the same time and then subsequently sought advice on it.Chris Bishop: Point of order. That wasn't the question. The question was about the advice that the Minister received on that SOP and whether or not that advice was sent to other Ministers.SPEAKER: That's not quite how I heard it—but Simon Watts if you could ask the question again because I thought it was different to that but away you go.Simon Watts: Did she send advice received on Supplementary Order Paper 285 on 22 November relating to entrenchment to any other Ministers; if so who?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: As I said there was a dynamic debate that occurred in the House. I saw that SOP when it was tabled and then subsequently sought advice.SPEAKER: Sorry I'll give the member an additional question.Simon Watts: Did she receive advice on Supplementary Order Paper 285 on 22 November relating to entrenchment and did she send that advice to any other Ministers?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The advice that I sought was in relation to the discussions in relation to an entrenchment provision at a threshold of 75 percent. In that regard we did not have a provision within the bill as introduced because of decisions that were made at Cabinet.David Seymour: Point of order. It was a very reasonable question about advice received and shared on a particular day. The advice that the Minister was referring to occurred months beforehand. How can she get out of addressing the question of "Did she receive advice on that amendment on that day; and if so did she share it with anyone?" That wasn't remotely addressed.SPEAKER: Can the member ask the question once more?Simon Watts: Did she receive advice on SOP 285 on 22 November relating to entrenchment and did she send that advice to any other Ministers?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: The advice that I requested and received was in relation to an entrenchment provision of 75 percent. As I say that is the advice upon which I acted on. The fact that Standing Order 270 enables a lower threshold of entrenchment to be considered was a matter for the Clerk to determine whether or not it was in or out of scope within the context of the debate that we had. Chris Bishop: Point of order. Again that just does not address the very direct and simple question that my colleague Simon Watts is asking. It just goes nowhere to address that question. SPEAKER: Well having heard the answer a second time the answer covered the information that the Minister requested which was different to the information that the member asked about. So the member can read into that whatever he wishes.Simon Watts: Who did she send that advice to?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: I acted on the advice—to the extent that I sought advice in relation to the entrenchment provision at a 75 percent threshold and acted accordingly and the bill was not introduced with an entrenchment provision. In relation to SOP 285 we have already had the debate—a mistake was made that has been rectified; we have the water service entities law without any entrenchment provision.Simon Watts: Point of order. My question was clearly "who" did she send the advice to; I don't believe that question was answered. SPEAKER: I'll ask the member to ask that once more. Simon Watts: Who did she send that advice to?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: In relation to the advice I received regarding a 75 percent threshold of entrenchment there was no need to forward on that advice because we'd already made a decision in relation to that particular matter. David Seymour: Does the Minister for Local Government stand by her statement just now that it was a mistake to support Supplementary Order Paper 285 entrenching three waters provisions or does she stand by her statement to the committee of the whole House at the time that members had a "moral obligation" to support it—what was it a moral obligation or a mistake?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: We've rectified that matter. It was a mistake; it has been resolved there is no constitutional crisis and there is no entrenchment provision in the water services entities law.Simon Watts: Why did she seek advice if she had already made a decision?Hon NANAIA MAHUTA: That SOP was introduced by another member in the House; it was a very dynamic debate. It's not entirely the case that on every SOP—that could be tendered by any member in this House—that it wouldn't be debated or considered in a very dynamic environment. In regards to SOP 285 an admission has been made that a mistake did occur; we rectified it the water services entities law does not include an entrenchment provision."