THREE WATERS WORRIES

SHORT ON DETAIL: Bill Turner says papers relating to the Three Waters reforms contain conflicting comments and some things which are 'simply inaccurate'. Picture by Paul Rickard

I don't support it at all,” says Bill Turner.

He is talking about the proposed Three Waters reforms, which he says are based on insufficient information and lack detail on how they are to be implemented.

“Any change will have both positives and negatives, but these are extremely difficult to identify with the lack of both detail and evidence that has been provided.

“The proposal suggests a massive increase in spending and employment of more staff but with a significant reduction in costs.

“They made the announcement with no detail. It is a bit like the health system; they have changed it all and set it up with very little detail but there are no more nurses on the ground.

The approach seems to be one of ‘trust us, we know what we are doing'.

“After the 2017 election the Prime Minister stated that her government would be ‘open and honest' but in my opinion there have been many instances where they have failed. Recently she stated that local government was in control of its own destiny but with Three Waters that is absolutely wrong. Central government is dictating the changes.

“With Three Waters they made an announcement with no detail. They have made a bit of comment on governance but the governance alone is not going to operate the Three Waters system. There is no detail on how economies of scale will be achieved. It seems that all the detail will be sorted out after the Three Waters entities are established which is akin to putting the cart before the horse.

“When you look through the publications and the papers there is not a lot of detail. There are conflicting comments and some of the things I would say are simply inaccurate.

“There is one report which is dated 2007 that talks about how many people are subject to waterborne infections but that is now 15 years old. Some of the problems were with small providers who will probably not come into the Three Waters reform.

“To the best of my knowledge I have never seen the Ministry of Health take enforcement action against a drinking water supplier despite my own records showing many hundreds of non-compliances since 2011. If you break the rules nothing happens. Rather than the major upheaval that has been promoted, a possible alternative could have been to establish a more competent enforcement scenario as a first step and undertake any other reforms on a gradual basis as required.

“They got a complicated analysis done by the Water Industry Commission of Scotland (WICS). How you can compare Scotland with New Zealand I am buggered if I know. We are two big islands and several small ones. They are one block of land with most of the population down at one end of it and close together. One lesson I have learned is that what works in one place won't necessarily work in another because there are always different factors involved.

“The WICS report mentions modelling and the outcomes of that. Modelling only produces a range of possibilities from the most to the least extreme and everything in between. It does not result in predictions.

“They talk about a lot of problems at the moment such as there being a lot of providers, which is correct, and there being no economies of scale. Well, you are not going to join Gisborne and Wairoa together for water or some of these towns that are so far apart. There may be efficiencies with construction and maintenance providers and specialist designers but only time will tell.

“Napier and Hastings, for instance, you could probably amalgamate but again there is no detail on what sort of benefits it will produce.

“In the case of Gisborne, I cannot see what will change in terms of where the water comes from. One benefit being promoted is that large water entities will be able to secure loans on better terms than local government and that is probably correct.

“This will, however, have a negative impact on local government which is required to fund depreciation on all physical assets. Having individual depreciation funds building up over time means local government can utilise these for internal borrowing which has a significant benefit. Without depreciation from Three Waters assets the availability of internal funds will be significantly reduced.

“The significant assets that new entities will produce are a major unknown as are the charging mechanisms that will be used. Currently local charges vary significantly. Variations may continue or charges could be standardised within an entity which means an element of cross subsidisation.

“I suspect that universal water metering will become standard practice which I support as a more equitable means of charging. I accept, however, that there are many people who will not agree with this.

“Wastewater probably will change because of the definite push for alternative means of disposal nationwide. That won't be cheap regardless of how the system is managed.

“The big problem in Gisborne is finding land to put it on. In my time we were looking at options like the Wharerata pine forests. That was about the closest piece of suitable and available land you could find. The costs of that are horrendous.

“You can't put it on food producing land. There were arguments that you could graze cattle on it. A lot of the opposition (to discharging wastewater on food- producing land) might be perception.

“One of the things that Scottish report talks about is inefficiencies, and a lack of strategic and coordinated asset planning. They don't provide any evidence of it.

“That has been the big problem — they make these statements with nothing to back it up.

“There are some people in local government who are extremely skilled but some of them must be pretty concerned about what the future holds for them.

“The Scottish report says that with reform they will employ a lot more people. They are talking about an increase of 6000 to 9000 extra people in New Zealand.

“Hopefully the district council people working in it now remain involved.

“They are talking about lack of innovation and lack of management skills (at local government level). I just simply don't agree with that. There has been a lot of innovation in local government infrastructure and asset management skills for the Three Waters were developed by local government along with the system providers.

“In my time (GDC staff member) Neville West and other people were right at the forefront of that. Now they are saying that asset management skills are lacking.

“Consultants have definitely got a role in the design of treatment plants and infrastructure in general. They have a role in large design because local government (except for the largest councils) does not have the scope of work to justify employing specialist designers.

“But to manage the thing you have got to have people on the ground, people based in Gisborne or Wairoa or anywhere else so that when something happens you are there on the spot. Local staff have intimate knowledge of where problems may occur and can work proactively rather than reactively.

“One of the comments made is that larger providers have greater asset management maturity and specialist asset management teams. I am not too sure where that comes from because there are more asset management teams in local government than anywhere else.

“We had a system called Hansen which was used by several other local bodies. People like Neville West and other local government people were closely involved in developing it and advancing it.

“There are a lot of things on which no detail at all has been given.

Bill Turner was the GDC engineering and works manager from 1990 to 2007.

He then went to Australia and worked at shires in New South Wales and Queensland, the second of which, Central Highlands Regional Council based in Emerald, covered an area the size of Tasmania. He retired in 2014. After 18 months driving around outback areas in Australia with a four-wheel drive, he returned to New Zealand and now lives with wife Kitty in Hawke's Bay, south west of Hastings just off SH 50.

“I remember talking to former GDC chief Bob Elliott one time and we agreed we had both been in the job too long and needed a change and the council needed a change. We had been there a long time. I looked for a job in Australia and they are not hard to get.”

The general manager changed at his first job and his replacement wanted to control everything so he moved.

“Bob Elliott was a good guy to delegate; he would give you a job and leave you alone to deal with it.”

Bill Turner was a rugby referee here. His ambition was to referee a game after he turned 70 but a back injury prevented that. He describes himself now as similar to a vintage car with a reconditioned back, two new knees and a new shoulder.

He was also a member of the Kiwanis Club.