During the recent election debates here in CHB, it was claimed by some that the Ruataniwha Dam was not an issue for the District Council.
As a mayoral candidate, I argued it definitely was - it was the most commonly asked question by the audiences and the outgoing Council had certainly made it one by wanting to borrow money to invest in it at one stage and then wanting to buy water from it more recently (and actually signing us up to it for water supplies for Otane and Takapau without the promised consultation).
So I make no apologies for seemingly being a single-issue mayoral candidate, namely wanting our District Council to be actively encouraging the saving of the Makaroro River from being destroyed by the Dam and the saving of our other waterways from the increased chance of further degradation that a massive increase in intensive agriculture would bring.
The outgoing Council was doing the opposite and the other two mayoral candidates would continue that approach of "egging" the Regional Council on.
Having just indicated that it may seem I am single-issue-focused, that actually isn't the case (although it was my main motivation for standing).
I am aware of many of the other issues facing our district - like the sewerage ponds, the stormwater system, the Building Consent Authority, the shingle build-up in our rivers near our main towns, problems with water supplies for our outlying towns, concerns about the present state of our rivers, employment prospects ...
I would be part of a team of nine elected representatives in the new Council and we should be able to address most of those as well.
My lack of experience in Council may be seen by some as a disadvantage - others may see it as an advantage. I actually don't think we have the luxury of opting for the experienced candidate in this election - there's just too much at stake.
I believe it is vital the CHB voters elect me as their mayor, or at least vote for me in significant numbers, as this is the only way the Regional Council might start considering that Hawke's Bay needs something better than the RWSS.
For instance, trying to drought-proof all farms everywhere in HB, and not just a relative few, by assistance with farmer-owned on-farm water storage, with planting up of wetlands to act like big sponges to slow down water run-off, and with dry land farming practices.
Pretty much what the deer-farming family in a recent Country Calendar programme are doing.
We need to accept that much of HB is drought-prone and that a long-term approach for all of encouraging drought resilience is preferable to a short-term one for a few that would make them reliant on a water supply that won't last and will adversely effect the environment.
One that would also be much more costly to ratepayers than what I and others are proposing - just look at the ratepayer-subsidised discounts that those farmers who have already signed up will get, then consider that the true cost of water needs to be about 70c per cu m rather than the present undiscounted price of 24c.
Many farmers in HB are already moving towards drought resilience. We need to encourage more not less.
This proposal would also give more local contractors more work than they are likely to get from the overseas company contracted to build the Dam.
It would increase the likelihood of farms staying in local ownership. About 70 per cent of farms in the irrigation zone are expected to change hands within five years under the Dam proposal.
It would avoid an 85m-high dam being built on a major fault line upstream of Waipawa.
It would mean there would be more ratepayer money for more pressing problems in CHB if our Council stuck to its "knitting" rather than trying to prop up the RWSS at every opportunity.
This Plan A could be the Regional Council's Plan B when it accepts the RWSS in its present form is dead / is not the best approach for all of HB...
And best of all, it would mean our Council was genuine when it promotes our region as "Beautiful CHB".
We have to accept that for long-term economic health we need to look after our environment rather than encouraging the Regional Council to destroy one river and put our other waterways more at risk.
What would be the point of having a nitrate-fuelled economy blasting along if there are a whole lot of us with constant diarrhoea because our water sources have been contaminated and when no one wants to visit our towns?
- Gerard Pain is a mayoral candidate in Central Hawke's Bay.