8. Hon SHANE JONES (Labour) Link to this
to the Minister of Local Government
Will his proposed local government reform facilitate private ownership or management of council assets?
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) Link to this
The focus of the proposals is not to facilitate private ownership of existing council assets. They do, however, make it easier for the councils to use private sector management of council assets where this best suits council needs. In the context of water services, the councils must retain control of policy and pricing. The councils can already contract any aspect of the operation of all or part of a water service. That was the rule under the previous Government; it will remain the rule. The change announced yesterday simply extends the period of the contract from 15 years to 35 years to reflect the life of the assets being invested in.
Given the importance of water infrastructure to Auckland, could the Minister tell the House who owns water?
Mr SPEAKERThe interesting thing about this question is that, strictly, water is not the Minister’s responsibility, at all. Water is not owned by anyone. I guess the member may have meant certain water, not just water at large. I invite him to make the question more within the Standing Orders, then perhaps we can get an answer.
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In the Minister’s response, it was he who focused on water infrastructure. It was he who raised the notion of private enterprise.
I have pointed out that the member’s question asked who owns water. That is certainly not the Minister’s responsibility. I invite the member to reword his question to make more clear what he wants answered.
In the changes to the Local Government Act 2002 to address the concerns of the Minister in relation to infrastructure, and the use of that resource called water, what ownership rights does he imagine will be recognised, and ought to be recognised, to protect the public’s interest in water?
I will do my best. I am happy to have two goes at the answer, if I have misunderstood the member’s question.
Not while a microphone is open will I have that kind of interjection made back. The Minister will just answer the question, please.
David GarrettI raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. As I understand the Standing Orders, it is contrary to them to suggest that a member lacks courage.
That is a fair point. It is not helpful when members make that kind of interjection. I invite the Hon Rodney Hide to answer the question.
I will do my best to answer the member’s question. To make it clear to the House and to the public of New Zealand, there are no Government plans to privatise water services. Ownership of water assets, under the proposals, would revert to the councils at the end of any management agreement; thus the councils would retain ultimate public ownership. What has changed is that the period has gone from 15 years to 35 years. I note also that there are over 1,800 private water supply schemes registered with the Ministry of Health—that is 1,800. They are privately owned schemes that existed under the previous Government and will continue to exist.
Is the Minister actively supporting the plans for a $1 million super-city bash in the Auckland Domain, and how does he reconcile that with his concerns about council-related spending being wasted on non-core activities?
The member’s question asked—[ Interruption] I am on my feet. The member’s question may not have been very usual, but it sort of related to the primary question, and I ask the honourable Minister to please not just ignore it but answer it. I think he has a fair bit of licence in answering it.
Hon Gerry Brownlee Link to this
I raise a point of order, Mr Speaker. In order to be answered properly, a question needs to be somewhat intelligible. I think asking the Minister whether he is happy about a bash, a domain, and various other bits and pieces just invites the Minister to take the opportunity to further elaborate on what he thinks the member might have been asking.
I will explain my confusion. The primary question was this: will his proposed local government reform facilitate private ownership or management of council assets? The question is about council assets. I then got a question about who owns water—
I apologise to the Minister. I must say to the Hon Shane Jones that he knows full well that I am hearing a point of order but he has continued to interject; if he does that any further at all, he will lose one supplementary question. I do not need to hear further on this matter. The question was a fair stretch from the primary question—I accept that absolutely. That said, though, I think it should not be ignored totally. It seemed to refer to a celebration that is allegedly being planned, and, certainly, that is a long stretch from the assets of the council. One could perhaps argue a linkage, and that is why I am giving the member the chance to answer it.
I am all for Auckland celebrating and having fun. I have to say that Auckland has been doing that ever since the last election. With the new super-city, Aucklanders will have every reason to have a lot more fun than they ever did when Helen Clark and the Labour Party were in power. They killed off fun and laughter, not just in Auckland but right through the country.
Moana MackeyWhy were social or pensioner housing assets not included in his list of core local government functions, and what specific representations did he receive from the Minister of Housing advocating for their inclusion?
They were not included because that was Cabinet’s decision. I have worked very closely with the Minister of Housing on this issue, and also, indeed, with the Minister for Social Development and Employment. I know that is a surprise, because under the previous Government everything was decided from the ninth floor.