Nats won’t budge on ‘entrenchment’

The Government’s apparent effort to have political parties ‘‘discuss’’ its bid to entrench public ownership of water assets appears destined to fail.

National Party shadow leader of the House Chris Bishop said his party would not support Labour in its bid to have public ownership of water assets entrenched in law, after the Government voted through a tweak to a Three Waters bill and found itself in hot water.

‘‘This is not a principle thing. This is just a wholly political ploy and they are playing havoc with the New Zealand constitution, and they need to back down and realise they’ve made a mistake,’’ Bishop said.

The change to the Water Services Entities Bill, which will enact the Three Waters reforms if passed, would entrench public ownership by mandating any future law change on asset ownership occur only with a 60% majority in Parliament or public referendum.

Such a super majority requirement has traditionally been reserved for constitutional matters in the Electoral Act and, responding to concern from the Opposition and constitutional law experts, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Monday said the Government would refer the matter to Parliament’s business committee.

‘‘We still stand firm against the privatisation of water assets, and I’d ask the other political parties be clear on their view on that issue,’’ she said. ‘‘We will never oversee the privatisation of these assets. I think it would be useful if other political parties who believe that pledge that publicly, then separately we can resolve the entrenchment issue.’’

Bishop said there was ‘‘no need’’ for the business committee to consider entrenchment, as Ardern suggested. ‘‘We have a very settled position on entrenchment in New Zealand. The position is that entrenchment is very rarely used, it’s done so after careful debate and consideration for constitutional matters.

‘‘I have no idea why she’s indicated the business committee will look at it. It’s nothing to do with the business committee. They’ve made a mistake, entrenchment is totally inappropriate for public policy matters like this.’’

He said the Government should return the bill to the committee of the House stage in the lawmaking process to remove the clause. National would propose a motion to this effect. ACT has previously said it would support this.

Bishop said National had opposed the use of entrenchment when Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta approached the party seeking agreement in December 2021 because it posed a constitutional risk. ‘‘We’re not in favour of water privatisation. But our view is that entrenchment should be used for constitutional provisions only.’’

Green Party local government spokesperson Eugenie Sage, who put forward the 60% majority threshold in a supplementary order paper supported by Labour last week, was similarly unsure what the business committee would discuss.

‘‘There won’t be any wider discussion of entrenchment at business committee, I wouldn’t have thought. It’s just a procedural issue.’’

Sage said the standing orders committee would be the place for entrenchment provisions to be discussed further.

The Green Party remained committed to entrenching public ownership, she said, and she questioned National’s ‘‘aspiration’’ for Three Waters.

‘‘They’ve said they don’t want to privatise, if so, why wouldn’t they support a provision which seeks to provide a safeguard against privatisation?’’

Clerk of the House David Wilson said, in a statement, the next business committee meeting would take place next Tuesday.

The committee, made up of MPs and headed by the Speaker, determines how Parliament will run. Its deliberations are confidential, but the outcome of a discussion will be made public.

However, the committee can not refer the Water Services Entities Bill back to the committee of the whole House, a stage of lawmaking where the entrenchment provision was included, and could be removed.

MPs in the House would have to decide to do this, however the committee could set the conditions by which another debate about the entrenchment clause could occur if it were to return to the committee of the whole House stage.

‘‘They are playing havoc with the New Zealand constitution, and they need to back down and realise they’ve made a mistake.’’ Chris Bishop National Party shadow leader of the House