Labour environment spokeswoman Rachel Brooking, on the other hand, said the motive behind the government stopping the Otago Regional Council from voting on a new plan for the region’s waterways was a "disgrace".
No vote on the contentious plan was had at yesterday’s council meeting in Dunedin.
Nevertheless, chief executive Richard Saunders confirmed afterwards work on it had now paused.
For more than 10 months, the government has urged the council to delay its plan but failed.
But an amendment to the Resource Management Act Amendment Bill was announced on Tuesday stopping all councils from notifying freshwater plans before the government replaced the current national policy statement on freshwater management (NPSFM), brought in by the Labour government.
The Bill and the amendment passed third reading last night in a 68-54 vote.
And though it does not yet have Royal Assent, the amendment pausing councils’ plans is retroactive to Tuesday — the day before the Otago council’s scheduled vote.
"There’s been a lot of very dramatic and misleading rhetoric from the opposition on the Otago Regional Council," Ms Simmonds said in the House yesterday.
"It’s appalling, absolutely appalling that the previous government’s national policy statement for freshwater was so complicated, was so unworkable, so costly, so complex and so overburdening that it cost $18million of Otago Regional Council’s ratepayers’ money to develop their freshwater plan.
"Farmers, growers and others in the primary sector are absolutely keenly aware of the improvements that are needed in our freshwater, and they are actively working towards these improvements.
"It is appalling to have seen hardworking people in our primary sector being vilified by the opposition when they work to bring about these improvements.
"Unlike the opposition, we understand that a balanced approach which enables both economic growth and mitigation of the impacts on the environment is necessary, because quite simply a country that is broke cannot bring about those changes."
Ms Brooking said the government narrative that the council’s plan to protect the environment would have brought about huge problems was "fearmongering".
"The disgrace is that this new government, led by National, wants more pollution.
"That’s all it can possibly want."
"They want more pollution.
"They want to waste the $18m of taxpayers’ money," she said.
Mr Saunders said the next steps for the council were not yet clear.
A report was expected at next month’s council meeting to update councillors on the legislation and its implications.
At that time, staff would also seek direction on further engagement with the minister, Mr Saunders said.
"The minister has signalled a willingness to work with ORC and we hope to take up this offer in coming months."
Te Rūnanga o Ōtākou upoko Edward Ellison said the government’s position was "very disappointing" and would likely continue to weaken the focus on the health of Otago’s bodies of water.
"As mana whenua, we often observe a zigzag of policy changes over electoral cycles, with this government’s approach to water being the latest example.
"This wastes ratepayer funds and council time.
"It also leaves communities less motivated to invest years of effort to diligently work through plan development at a local government level," Mr Ellison said.
"For mana whenua, we remain concerned that a new plan based on the government’s amendment will result in further alienation from a resource which is central to our wellbeing and identity.
"The health of our waterways must be protected."
At yesterday’s meeting, Cr Elliot Weir put forward a motion asking councillors to express their "deep concern" about the government’s manoeuvering, but the motion was failed 7-5.
Cr Alexa Forbes said councillors had been prevented from playing their part in democracy and the future of the region.
Cr Michael Laws said the council decided to "play chicken" and lost.
"It was given plenty of off-ramps over plenty of months — it decided confrontation was the best way to go."
Cr Weir said it was appalling the lengths the government had gone "to get what they want".
— Additional reporting Matthew Littlewood
