Simon Lusk: Time to answer dam questions

The Ruataniwha Dam is still being debated.

The promoter of the Ruataniwha Water Storage Project, HBRIC, has managed to create the perception they are unwilling to answer reasonable questions about their scheme.

They have repeatedly refused to release information.

They refused to release the Tukituki River Instream Model until forced to by the High Court.

They have refused to release information to their own councillors, information that had already been released widely and was relatively easy for councillors to obtain through back channels. It is hard to find a charitable reason why an investment company or a council would force councillors of their own council to ask Official Information Act requests, yet this has happened.

Hawke's Bay Today's public meeting about the dam is a welcome opportunity for the dam promoters to respectfully answer reasonable questions from reasonable people. By doing so they will reduce the perception that they are hell bent on building the dam at all costs, and have refused to be open with the community about the impact of the dam.

The questions to be answered on Thursday night are:

1. Political change

What risk analysis has HBRIC done about the upcoming council election and the potential for the pro-dam councillors to be removed by opponents of the dam? And have they informed potential investors of this risk?

2. Legal delays

What analysis has HBRIC undertaken of potential legal delays by opponents of the dam, some of whom are emboldened by beating HBRIC every time they go to court?

3. Ratepayers' return on investment

Ratepayers are cornerstone investors in this scheme via the $80 million already earmarked. Is it envisaged that as a class of investors ratepayers will be treated differently in terms of investment return and/or risk exposure compared with other classes of investors?

4. Ignoring financial research

Why were the following ignored?

a. Butcher's report finding that the project was NPV negative at the public sector discount rate.

b. The business case that stated to attract investment at a market rate means a water price of 40-50cu m.

5. Methods of controlling nitrogen leeching

The consents state that by 2030 the DIN levels have to be reduced below what they currently are in some of the catchment. How does HBRIC envisage complying with these consent conditions?

These questions are being respectfully asked and the people asking them would like a respectful answer, not some glib putdown and a brush off, or a refusal to answer. For too long reasoned opponents of the Ruataniwha Water Storage Project have felt that HBRIC has refused to engage without expensive legal action. Reasonable questions deserve reasonable answers, especially when HBRIC is advocating spending vast amounts of ratepayers' money on a scheme that has questionable economic and environmental benefits.

-Simon Lusk is a political strategist and an election campaign manager, who is based in Hawke's Bay.

-Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions. The views expressed here are the writer's personal opinion, and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz.