Talking point: Three Waters reforms raises more questions than answers

Napier Mayor Kirsten Wise says the Three Waters reform raises more questions than answers. Photo / File

The Government's proposed Three Waters Reform – one of the biggest changes for local government in a generation – is heavy on sell, light on information. Its interaction with councils so far has been superficial and more recently adversarial, wasting precious time and money.

Launched in July 2020, with an ambitious three-year programme to reform the delivery of drinking, waste and storm water, crucially it raises more questions than answers for local government.

So, here's what we do know: Napier is part of "Entity C" which includes councils from East Cape, down the coast to Wellington, as well as the top of the South Island and the Chatham Islands. That includes 22 councils with a combined population of 955,150.

Under the proposals, councils' water assets will be transferred to the new multi-regional entity, with legislation to protect against privatisation. Councils' water related debt will be transferred to these entities in a co-governance model between local councils and mana whenua. Each entity will have a Regional Representation Group of 10–12 members with half coming from local councils and half from mana whenua. The RRG will appoint an Independent Selection Panel who will appoint and monitor the Entity Board. That board will be responsible for governing Entity Management.

Central to government messaging is the investment required in water infrastructure – from $120 billion to $185b. The accountant in me is always dubious of any estimates that are plus or minus 50 per cent and these figures prove it.

As a member of Entity C, we are being told that the average household cost a year for water services will be $1260 with reform and $3730 without reform. At the moment, Napier households are paying on average $610.

Which brings us to the unanswered questions which are top of mind for me:

Given that Entity C, which covers 22 councils and even more mana whenua entities, how will fair representation be achieved with a maximum of 12 members on the Regional Representation Group? As elected members we swear an oath to represent our local community not a wider regional collective, just as mana whenua represent their marae and hapu, not a wider regional collective of marae and hapu.

Will councils really have the ability to opt out? Having already promised that councils can opt out, how would that realistically impact the modelling that's been undertaken?

How will the work programme be prioritised within the new multi-regional entities? Who determines where the highest need lies with so many conflicting priorities across a range of very different communities?

How can the community be confident their voices will be heard, with three layers of governance to wade through?

Each new entity will have its own consumer body but how will it be constructed and how will members be appointed?

How will individual councils retain the ability to implement locally-based initiatives? For example, how would Napier retain the ability to introduce a chlorine free network?

How will councils with low debt, such as Napier, be compensated? Ratepayers stand to lose out if our water assets are transferred without the benefit of transferring significant debt.

The threat of privatisation is said to be protected with a referendum of 75 per cent or more but what is there to stop a new incoming government from changing the legislation and selling off hundreds of billions of dollars of public assets?

Any centralisation process results in overheads remaining in the original entity and the loss of revenue to fund these, so how will these stranded overheads be dealt with?

Just last week our council committed to significant investment in our water infrastructure so it is frustrating to have this level of uncertainty, only for government to respond with a continued lack of detail. With 89 per cent of the tax take their focus should be on supporting local government to do the work to secure the delivery of water services and repair past lack of action – not demonise us.

Citizens and local government don't need a campaign, we need information. We have had enough of hearing about the need for change. It's time now for government to explain what that change looks like and how it will result in the delivery of better water services.

• Kirsten Wise is Napier mayor