Three Waters Reforms
Thanks to those of you who’ve been getting in touch with me to share your concerns about the government’s proposed Three Waters Reform. I share some of these concerns and as it stands, I do not support the current direction.
Auckland Council’s Governing Body has been asked to provide some early feedback on the proposal (this does not include any type of decisions around opting in or out at this stage). So far, the initial feedback provided has been that Council generally supports the outcomes the government is seeking (economic efficiencies, introduction of an economic regulator) however their feedback notes that they do not agree with the governance structure that is proposed. Importantly, they’ve also told the government that a final draft of the Three Waters Reform must be consulted on publicly so Aucklanders can have their say – as you should be able to. They’re our assets you and I have paid for, after all.
This early feedback from the Governing Body echoes my own views. I do not support the proposal in its current state, mainly due to the suggested governance structure. The proposal would have us providing 92% of the assets for the new entity for which we would only retain 40% of the governance. We’ve got the potential for economies of scale with the size of our city, so giving up our assets for a 40% stake is a raw deal. For some Councils, the proposals would likely be attractive, but for the scale of our Council and the assets we own, it doesn’t seem in the best interest of our residents. I don’t believe any of our residents would be pleased about subsidizing Northland infrastructure.
However, don’t be fooled that the current state of Auckland’s water infrastructure and management is anything to be proud of. I believe there is merit in the overall principles that the government is seeking. We, like many other Councils, have ageing infrastructure that has not had the adequate investment to keep up with growth and renewals. We were completely unprepared with our water supply management – as we saw in the drought two summer’s ago, which we are still dealing with. Our wastewater and stormwater are equally shameful – how many times have our popular swimming beaches been closed due to wastewater leaking into stormwater? Investing at the levels we need isn’t exactly a ‘sexy’ spend for Mayoral election promises and deliveries, but it’s the leadership and foresight we’ve needed.
Water quality and natural environment targeted rates for the Hibiscus and Bays Local Board area
Protecting our natural environment and waterways is a priority. In 2018 Auckland Council introduced the natural environment targeted rate to invest in projects that tackle pest animals, weeds and pathogens that threaten our native species and ecosystems. They also introduced the water quality targeted rate, which enables investment into cleaner beaches, streams and harbours. These targeted rates would have expired in 2028 but were extended to 2031 this year to maintain the improvements already made. The water quality targeted rate was also increased at the level of the general rate increase so major construction projects can commence 6 years earlier.
In the East Coast Bays these two targeted rates are being used for projects such as:
Network screening investigations have been completed at Waiake, Browns Bay and Mairangi Bay. Private property inspections are being scoped and prioritised in all these areas next financial year. This work helps to find issues in the water networks and to identify solutions so our popular beaches are safer to swim at.
Three schools in our Local Board area are completing planting days as part of an environmental education programme that provides an opportunity for school children to learn about conservation, revegetation, wetland restoration and protecting stream quality. Across Auckland nearly 82,000 native plants have been planted along 8.100 metres of waterways.
Projects to reduce urban pollutants and sediment in our waterways. This includes ‘2 in a Ute’ programme the offers employment and training opportunities for locals to manage naturalised assets in the community, and ‘Closing the Gap’ programme which has completed nearly 6,000 site visits across the city where over half of the sites have had some form of enforcement action taken. In our Local Board, there was 54% non-compliance across the 1068 sites visited. This is absolutely shocking.
Pest plant and pest animal control in and around public parks. At Long Bay Regional park Council will be using a thermal imaging drone to survey for a reported wallaby sighting in the northern areas of the park. The good news though is the ground based cameras and specialist detection dogs have not revealed any sign of wallaby. The drone is just an extra precaution.
Enhanced support for our amazing volunteer community groups, including Centennial Park Bush Society, Friends of Okura Bush, Restore Hibiscus and Bays and more.
Changes being proposed for rubbish collections – will the whole city move to rubbish tags, rates-funded collection, or keep the mixed model we currently have?
Council is reviewing its kerbside rubbish collection policy. At the moment, there is a mix of collections models across the city- some areas are pay-as-you-throw (PAYT) like us, and others have a set cost for their bis size included in their rates. PAYT was introduced because best evidence at the time was that this was an effective way to incentivise people to create less waste. It appears that this hasn’t had the results Council had hoped for and there isn’t much difference in waste production between the two models. Council are now seeking feedback from Local Boards (public consultation to come) on three options – retaining the mixed model we have in Auckland, moving the whole city to PAYT, or moving the whole city to rates-funded.
I was pleased to write our Board’s feedback which was informed by my work on the regional Waste Political Advisory Group, collaboration with colleagues on other local boards, and the feedback many of you provided me.
My resolutions that were passed, included:
Endorsing the concept that the generator of waste should be responsible for paying the true cost of managing that waste
Endorsing PAYT across Auckland
Recommending that cost recovery or free waste options that serve to divert waste from landfill are investigated/implemented with urgency, especially in communities where there’s evidence of difficulties of paying waste removal charges.
Endorsing the eventual use of radio-frequency identification (RFID) tags on bins so people pay the weight of the waste they are throwing (this has been trialled already and I’m told was very successful – a small chip is placed on your bin and charges you directly for the weight).
Request that Council works with other councils across NZ to develop consistency in waste and recycling practices.
While PAYT hasn’t led to the success we had hoped for, it’s not to say it can with greater education, the roll out of the food scraps collection, and generational change. The arguments I’ve seen from other local boards to move to rates funded seems to be ‘well there’s no difference in waste production, so let’s just move to rates-funded which is easier for everyone’. There’s a marginal estimated cost saving, but not enough to write home about.
Moving back to rates-funded would be a significant step backwards in attempts to minimise waste creation. If we move to a rates-funded system then that’s it, there is no moving away from that anytime soon. There are significant benefits and challenges to all three options, but I strongly believe that the best thing to do is to firstly, retain the mixed model and then move the whole city to PAYT with appropriate support provided to communities that will require it. RFID bin tags is the gold standard we should eventually move to. It is apparently 1/3 of the cost to run a RFID service than to have someone running out to remove tags on bins. However, the RFID trial outcome was not included in the information to Local Boards when asked for feedback. This would have distorted the feedback greatly, giving Local Boards a preference for rates-funded.
As I’ve learnt a few times in this role already, sometimes good leadership means making decisions that are right for tomorrow, not right for today. I hope that the governing body makes the right call for our future and not a decision based on ease and a small cost saving.
Auckland Council’s Environment and Climate Change Committee will be looking at all the Local Board feedback at its next meeting in October. I am currently trying to get a spot in front of the ECC committee to speak to my feedback.
ECB library hours changing
From Monday 18 October, there will be some slight changes to the opening hours of East Coast Library. These include opening half an hour earlier and they are also trialing a Thursday late night.
Comments