Wellington City. Photo / Mark Mitchell
Three panellists provided answers to the capital city’s infrastructure challenges at Vision for Wellington’s latest forum, reports Graham Skellern
Wellington will become a more resilient, thriving and liveable city by moving beyond short-term infrastructure fixes to long-term stewardship.
An infrastructure panel emphasised that this shift includes transparency, full asset life-cycle thinking, and a genuine commitment to maintenance, not just as an afterthought but as a strategic priority.
The planning, investment and maintenance decisions need to be open and transparent to build public trust, accountability and genuine partnerships, and the decisions must be based on the entire lifespan of infrastructure assets, not just immediate needs.
The panel promoted disciplined, daily decision-making where every choice considers long-term impacts and resilience, and invests wisely in the future of Wellington’s infrastructure.
Organised by Vision for Wellington, the panel was given the task of discussing the city’s pressing infrastructure challenges — from ageing water pipes and inadequate housing supply to climate resilience, seismic risk, and long-term urban planning.
The panel comprised former Infrastructure New Zealand chief executive Ross Copland, Te Ātiawa business leader Liz Mellish, and Morrison partner and former Infratil chief financial officer Phillippa Harford. The discussion was moderated by Kirsten Patterson, chief executive of the Institute of Directors.
Harford said infrastructure involves significant commitments and management of assets that are fundamentally long-term in nature. At times, the Wellington City Council seems to have decided that an investment had to happen irrespective of cost/benefit.
“Information shortcomings are a more obvious and simple problem. Council reportedly has 400 different services and several dozen business units. But what stands out is that key business units are not ring-fenced and given their own balance sheet or transparent financial structure. The obvious example is council’s Three Waters assets and activities,” said Harford.
In the full-year 2026, the Three Waters rate amounts to $230 million (about 36% of the total) without any clear disclosure of where the money is going, she said.
“Apparently it hasn’t been going to where it was needed and council’s projections are that catching up on maintenance and renewals is going to push up the average water rate from $2500 to about $4500 in five years’ time.”
Harford said creating an essentially standalone view of each activity would mean that spending decisions and performance assessment could be made based on profit and loss and balance sheet, bringing into focus the full costs and liabilities associated with each of those activities.
She backed the proposed Metro Water (a working title) which would “provide a much clearer view of the state of those assets and the cost of their operation”.
Greater Wellington Regional Council and Hutt, Porirua, Upper Hutt and Wellington city councils have agreed to establish a new water services entity, which takes over the ownership and management of drinking water, wastewater and stormwater from Wellington Water.
The new entity, expected to begin operating by July next year, will own the water assets and have the ability to raise its own revenue and manage its debt.
Harford said there are clearly critical elements of local infrastructure that must be provided for the city to function efficiently – such as roads, water and waste, and street lighting.
But beyond the critical elements of infrastructure, the city should prioritise only projects that grow gross domestic product, whether that be through helping businesses thrive and want to be in Wellington (therefore supporting the commercial rates base) or making the city an attractive place to live (therefore supporting the residential rates base).
“For the latter category, there’s a lot of spending that could be argued as desirable. However, these choices must be prioritised in terms of the benefits they bring and their affordability.
“Infrastructure procurement must be supported by a business case that robustly assesses the viability of the project and ensures it stacks up strategically and financially. Performance then needs to be tracked to learn from successes and failures,” Hartford said.
Mellish brought a Te Ao Māori perspective, saying: “As long-term thinkers, we think 200 years out. We are not content with a three-year thing because we have to think about our mokopuna.
“We have Māori land trusts that operate under a different act, and we should all be thinking about what we can do together that’s financially useful. Even more than that, everybody needs to be very clear about our responsibilities to land, water, air and people. The answer is great partnerships.”
Mellish said the Māori approach to water services emphasised kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and stewardship, and the need for good management to ensure fresh water sustains present and future generations.
She stressed the importance of maintenance and innovation, especially for infrastructure that is “underground, not seen and ignored,” like water pipes.
“Sewage and stormwater are chucked into pipes and thrown out to sea. We need to think about what we do every day and help the issues of infrastructure. It’s about taking personal responsibility and not expecting everybody else to solve the problems.”
Copland said, “When we think about infrastructure as this really complex system, it thrives on a stable, clear consensus view and long-term thinking. The very first task we were set at the commission was to write this 30-year plan for infrastructure. It deliberately stayed away from projects and investments. It really talked about settings.
“How do you create a system that encourages investment, that identifies problems, that rewards maintenance and doesn’t reward robbing the maintenance budget to pay for the new announceable?”
He said asset management is the basis of good investment management. “Asset management planning is a very systematic approach to understanding your customer, understanding the service delivery, and understanding how your asset base allows you to meet those objectives and expectations in a cost-effective manner.
“My hard truth is to prioritise ruthlessly and price honestly. Can we one day finally get sensibility in the way we price and deliver infrastructure? God forbid, water metering. We will need a third less water infrastructure if we adopt quality electric pressure.”
Copland said the private sector is very good at thinking inter-generationally, and “as government we used to be quite good at it as well. But we’ve really lost our way, both in asset renewal and new investment or growth infrastructure and protecting those corridors for that purpose.”
Harford referred to the $180 million investment in the Central Library. “Hopefully it will result in a building that, once completed, will be operational for several decades.
“But in making that investment decision, how did we think about the changing needs of society and the role the library will or will not play in the future? Did council need to take on responsibility for owning and operating that facility or could that have been better served through a relationship with the private sector?”
The panel was asked how they’d like Wellington to be in 10 years’ time.
Harford said she would like to see a community that is proud to be part of the city, with successful businesses and happy residents, all the while maintaining a focus on affordability and prioritisation.
Mellish said Wellington would be a city that looks outward, is proud to be the capital, and is more connected and engaged, rather than inward-looking.
Copland said: “I’d love to see us resolve how we connect the two islands together. I think it would be super cool to come to Wellington and say, ‘Well, that’s how the north and the south join together. That’s our sort of Blue State Highway One.’
“Equally, we need another poll on our High Voltage Direct Current power network, and one of our great infrastructure institutions in New Zealand, thinking about how we connect our two islands together, over at Haywards, so that we can move electricity around. It’s the fuel of the future.
“I think it would be really cool to see population growth back in the city, and better asset utilisation across what is incredibly precious and scarce land in the central business district.”
Ross Copland, former chief executive of NZ Infrastructure Commission:
Wellington faces growth pressures, big expectations from the community and a once-in-a-generation renewal of its core infrastructure. That would be a challenge anywhere — but when you add fragmented governance, outdated pricing and a high regulatory bar, the risk is soaring costs, plummeting productivity and escalating network failure.
While Wellington is home to world-class talent, it suffers from a disproportionate focus on civic infrastructure at the expense of core networks.
It is essential that residents, asset owners, regulators and the supply chain co-ordinate efforts, prioritise a credible programme of cost-effective renewals, and have honest conversations about pricing, governance and affordability. My hard truth is to prioritise ruthlessly and price honestly.
Liz Mellish, Te Ātiawa business leader:
The “M” word is maintenance. Rather than always reaching for more, we should be investing in quality maintenance of what we have got and future-proofing it. There is a need for personal responsibility in addressing infrastructure issues.
The Māori approach to water governance emphasises kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and stewardship, and the need for good governance to ensure water sustains present and future generations.
We need great partnerships. It’s about how we all come together and access each other and those ideas. It’s not happening right now. We have forgotten who we really are - smart and well educated. We live in this fabulous landscape and we should be out there every day.
Phillippa Harford: Morrison Partner and former Infratil chief financial officer:
Wellington can solve its infrastructure problems, but needs more rigour and imagination. Start by asking: Does this deliver long-term value to the city, including gross domestic product (GDP) growth, liveability, and ease of doing business?
Procurement processes must be supported by a business case that robustly assesses the viability of the project and ensures that it stacks up strategically and financially.
We need to be disciplined about what infrastructure the city needs to own. This leads to considering the current rationale or function of council spending and how we consider the evolving needs of our city, so those significant investments continue to deliver value to the community over their lifetime.