The last time Dunedin city councillors discussed water reform, they were utterly fed up.
"Frustration" was the word used by Cr Steve Walker to sum up their mood ahead of approving yet another submission to the Government urging a rethink.
Cr Jim O’Malley pleaded with the Government to "slow down, because you’re going into a hairpin turn too fast".
"In fact, stop."
The submission itself vented indignation and exasperation.
"Council were not alone in voicing their concerns, particularly around ownership and local influence, so it is disturbing that Parliament has refused to listen to such widespread sector opposition and ... forged ahead regardless."
This unequivocal messaging was approved by the council on February 28 this year. As it was dispatched, a sense of resignation went with it because hope for a change of heart seemed forlorn.
Back in July last year, the council put up an alternative idea to the Government’s insistence four large water entities should take over functions from councils.
The city council was worried about dilution of local voice. If the Government was determined to push on with its favoured model, which included one entity covering most of the South Island, a smaller regional entity should be considered for Otago and Southland, the council suggested.
An Otago-Southland entity would better ensure local representation and would also be better placed to manage land-use planning in a considered and meaningful way for local communities, it was argued.
This month, a considerable distance through a contentious process that stirred up communities and riled councils, the Government tweaked the reforms.
The key adjustment was expanding the number of planned entities from four to 10.
The timeframe for setting them up was also pushed out by up to two years.
Cr Walker was one person who noticed how similar the adjustments were to what the council had argued for.
"Our calls for an Otago-Southland entity and for a start date well beyond July 2024 appear to have been heard loud and clear," he said.
Most Dunedin elected representatives who responded to a request for comment were happy enough to call the Government’s adjustments a step in the right direction.
Cr Lee Vandervis was not among them.
He provided a shorthand response that highlighted the vast majority of councils had given the Government negative feedback or had signalled they would opt out of being part of the reform model, and participation was then mandated.
The 10 entities would still have "50% Māori governance", just like the "earlier tribal" four, Mr Vandervis said.
"Theft" was still occurring of Dunedin assets built up over 150 years and worth about $1.6 billion.
Retention of co-governance provisions, or what Central Otago Mayor Tim Cadogan calls co-guidance, led Act party leader David Seymour to say Prime Minister Chris Hipkins was either too scared to stare down the Labour Party’s Māori caucus or he tried to and lost.
Cr Walker’s response: "Let’s not forget, the status quo was never an option, and it’s a crying shame that reforms designed to create better health and environmental outcomes ...[have] been hijacked by a vocal few wanting the discourse to only be about co-governance and the so-called Māori caucus."
Cr Walker’s candidacy for the council was endorsed by Labour, so a positive review from him may be seen as unsurprising, although he has previously criticised the Government’s stance.
Ngāi Tahu had backed the four-entity model, but freshwater group spokesman Prof Te Maire Tau said the iwi would work with councils to ensure the new structure succeeded.
Reform became inevitable when four deaths were linked to contaminated water at Havelock North in 2016. A Government inquiry was scathing. It signalled "complacency was common within the drinking water supply system".
Included in its reports was an observation from a Local Government New Zealand project: "At the risk of generalising, smaller rural and provincial councils tend to face greater challenges than larger metropolitan areas."
The inquiry expanded on the point.
"Securing the benefits of economies of scale was seen by the inquiry as not only important, but in fact crucial for all of the smaller suppliers within New Zealand which are currently reporting poor compliance figures and which do not have the resources either in financial or people terms, or in available advice, to produce, and maintain into the future, a high-quality drinking water supply."
A system described as dire inevitably required an expensive fix. The Government favoured setting up the water entities as the best way to harness economies of scale and keep large looming bills somewhat in check.
"The cost of meeting the upgrades needed for our water systems is projected to be up to $185 billion over the next 30years," Minister for Local Government Kieran McAnulty reasserted this month.
"Local councils cannot afford this on their own, and households in some areas could see rates rise up to $9730 per year by 2054 if we do nothing."
A concession this month was "the reform programme must be led at a regional level — we have listened closely and absolutely agree".
And so four entities became 10.
"By extending the number of publicly owned water entities to 10, every district council in the country will have a say and representation over their local water services entities through regional representative groups, forming a partnership between council representatives and iwi/Māori that will provide strategic oversight and direction to the entities," Mr McAnulty said.
As it happens, the figure of $9730 was the one applied to Otago and Southland. The status quo was compared unfavourably with a $4430 water bill under the 10-entity model. The four-entity model would have been cheaper still.
The shift from four to 10 was lamented by Clutha Mayor Bryan Cadogan as eroding savings that might have helped southern households.
He and Queenstown Lakes Mayor Glyn Lewers both raised the possibility of entity mergers down the track.
Dunedin deputy mayor Sophie Barker gave the Government’s tweaks a C+.
"Affordability is the bottom line to people — I haven’t seen figures to back up this model as being the most efficient," she said.
"Dunedin has looked after its water, so we’ll be disadvantaged whichever way."
A shift in approach by the Dunedin City Council is evident from recent 10-year plans.
In 2018, the council considered $878 million to be a large enough overall capital spend for the next decade. In 2021, the figure was bumped up to $1.5 billion.
A big mover was Three Waters — capital spending for 2018-28 on water, wastewater and stormwater systems was going to be $305 million; three years later, the next decade of such expenditure planned had moved to $562 million.
Three Waters had already been flagged as a looming issue in 2015, by which time an infrastructure strategy had highlighted a $60 million backlog in what the council calls renewals.
For Cr O’Malley, such numbers show a council getting ahead of the game.
He has consistently doubted the financial structure underpinning the Government’s reforms.
"There’s no doubt regulatory change will ensure our communities continue to receive safe and affordable water services into the future, but questions remain about the underlying economic model."
Dunedin Mayor Jules Radich said the council wanted to see a balance between local control and affordable services, but "further detail is needed before we can be confident the Government has got this right".
Cr Christine Garey welcomed the proposed establishment of 10 regional entities.
"This gives us a better chance of our local voice being heard," Cr Garey said.
"The Government has clearly listened to that strong message from the local government sector.
"I’m pleased to see there is no change to the integral governance role mana whenua will have. That’s as it should be."
She was concerned about reforms being characterised as providing safer, reliable and affordable drinking water for all New Zealanders.
"This reform only applies to those on reticulated water systems and rural water schemes," Cr Garey said.
Many people were known as domestic self-suppliers, which meant they received their drinking water from such sources as off house roofs.
"They are barely mentioned and yet their drinking water supply is often unreliable, unaffordable and for some, unsafe."
The city council’s most recent submission also covered potential harm for the way city development was planned. As Cr Barker put it at the February meeting: "Who really wants our city to be planned from some bungling, bureaucratic power that lives somewhere else, that we have little input into?"
On the face of it, part of the concern expressed there might still stand and uncertainty about some implications of reform remains an issue.
