Privatisation is a hot topic at the seventh annual New Zealand Water Summit in Auckland.
Privatisation's chief flag-bearer, Business Roundtable chief Roger Kerr, and leading opponent Dr Joel Cayford are key figures at the gathering.
But yesterday they and other delegates were confronted by an Alliance claim that the Government has alreadycommitted itself to the move.
Sandra Lee, the party's co-deputy leader, said in a statement that a national review into waterways was strongly focused on investigating the merits of privatisation.
This was a signal that the Government had made up its mind.
"It is clear from [the review's terms of reference] that the Government will use this as a wedge to force local government to sell water supplies," she said.
"They will claim the most efficient model is some half-baked competitive system with private water companies competing for people's sewage.
"To create a market based on suppliers required to make a profit will seriously compromise the provision of water to the country."
But the Minister for Enterprise and Commerce, Max Bradford, who will address the water summit this morning, responded later that the review was looking at the "long-term safety and security" of water supply, and privatisation was only a small part of it.
While the issue was being thrashed out on the political front, business leaders and environmentalists debated the issue during a summit panel discussion.
Dr Cayford, a staunch opponent of the plan for Auckland to draw water from the Waikato River, said giving profit-driven private companies control of water services clashed with the need to conserve the resource.
Dr Cayford, a North Shore City councillor and member of the Watercare Services shareholders' group, said councils needed to encourage residents to collect rainwater from their roofs and use it in their gardens, washing machines and loos to ease the burden on struggling networks.
He said the North Shore council was looking at collecting stormwater for use on golf courses, school playing fields and parks.
These methods would clash with the aims of private ownership, where profits would be cut if less water was used.
But Mr Kerr said: "Public ownership has been less effective and seen some incredible environmental damage done.
"Private ownership would drive some efficiency into the system and the environmental gains would be phenomenal."
