By Ian Powell

The ‘Three Waters’ initiative (drinking, storm and waste) has been a big challenge for the current Kāpiti Coast District Council which, for good reason, has raised serious concerns about its risks for the Coast. It will continue to be a big challenge for the incoming Council.

As a candidate for one of the three district-wide candidates it is appropriate that I give my views on the controversy.

The first question is problem-definition. That is, what is the problem ‘Three Waters’ is trying to solve. I base my understanding on the advice of public health experts (medical specialists working in population rather than personal health).

There is a serious health issue with New Zealand’s current water system. It is conservatively estimated that 34,000 New Zealanders get sick from drinking water each year.  Water quality reports also show one in four people drink from a water supply that is not fully compliant with the drinking water standards.

The new Crown water regulator released its first annual drinking water quality report in July 2022. It showed that in its first two months of operation, there were 82 breaches of the drinking water standards and 27 boil water notices (when a community’s drinking water is or could be contaminated by pathogens that can cause disease).

There are also serious concerns over the economic sustainability and efficiency of the current model of water service delivery nationally. It is independently estimated that between $120 to $185 billion of investment will be needed over the next 30 years to replace and refurbish existing infrastructure and upgrade three waters assets to meet drinking water and environmental standards..

So there is a very serious problem which, in my view, is beyond the capacity and capabilities of councils the size of Kāpiti to resolve on their own. The Government has recognised the problem and its establishment of a national regulator in March 2021 is a step in the right direction.

Unfortunately, since then, its approach has been ham-fisted leading to a proposed cumbersome overly centralised system based on four large water entities. The bureaucratic complexity of Three Waters would lead to confusing decision-making accountability. In all this morass the biggest issue for me is the absence of a robust and transparent democratic system of governance.

The Government’s Water Entities Bill is currently being considered by Parliament (there is a further bill to come next year). A submission from no less than the statutorily independent Auditor-General has warned that:

Overall, I am concerned that….the accountability arrangements and potential governance weaknesses, combined with the diminution in independent assurance…, could have an adverse effect on public accountability, transparency, and organisational performance.

My approach to Three Waters is that the critical issues are, first, the structures should have the capacity to resolve the serious public health needs, and, second, their governance should be based on democratic accountability. They will need to be bigger than KCDC but much, much smaller than the four proposed entities (and without their non-existent local accountability).

Even though all other parliamentary parties are apparently opposed, Labour has the numbers to pass its Water Entities Bill. But there are signs of government concern that Three Waters is becoming a big election liability next year.

Consequently, if elected, I will encourage KCDC to advocate my approach for wider discussion with other district and city councils and with government.

The basis could be the regional councils which are democratically elected; for Kāpiti that would mean the Greater Wellington Regional Council (in those parts of the country where the regional councils are much smaller then some amalgamation for the purposes of water could be considered).

By Ian Powell, Ian is a candidate for a District-wide Kāpiti Council seat.