Let’s recap the journey so far. Following the serious campylobacter outbreak in 2016 in Havelock North and the subsequent Government Inquiry into Havelock North Drinking Water, central government considered the issues and opportunities facing the system for regulating and managing the three waters (drinking water, wastewater and stormwater). The findings from those investigations became the driver for massive reforms of the existing system.
The original proposals, promoted by then-Minister Nanaia Mahuta, were based around four jumbo-sized water entities with three in the North Island and one in the South. This met with fierce, often-misinformed criticism. The targeted response to these proposals focused on the size and geographical spread of the water entities, and the governance and ownership arrangements.
Her successor, Minister Kieran McAnulty, later reviewed the proposals and made significant, welcome changes to address some of these issues. At the time, the Taranaki Mayoral Forum had asked that in the new model, Taranaki should be a regional entity. Subsequently, when the four entities became 10, Taranaki was identified as one of those. While it was mandated as opposed to being a choice, it was what had been asked for.
Last year, opponents of the Three Waters Reform would have taken some comfort from the election outcome because National had pledged to repeal the Labour proposals. Some of the more outspoken opponents even, in my opinion naively, believed Three Waters would be scrapped and gone, but how wrong they were. As pledged, National did repeal the legislation and replaced the proposals with its model called Local Water Done Well (LWDW). The new model was more flexible, gave more choice and, importantly I feel, included new financing mechanisms.
The new model allows councils to choose which other councils they wish to partner with to provide larger, more economically sustainable delivery organisations. Ironically, in Taranaki, the regional model mandated by Labour is the same choice that is on offer now, if we opt to go down the path of a regional Council Controlled Organisation (CCO). In the past month all three district councils have approved exploring this option further. All three have also agreed to explore stand-alone options for each council, effectively being the status quo or some variation of it.
The consultancy team working on the water reform proposals had earlier put eight options up for consideration, which recently were whittled down to five and now down to two or maybe three. We have now reached the pointy end of the decision-making process, which requires councils to submit a service delivery plan by September 3, 2025 and get on with the job.
I still think there is an elephant in the room and that is stormwater. After attending dozens of meetings and webinars and reading bundles of reports and papers on the three waters over the past seven years, I can’t recall any meaningful comment on stormwater. It is the forgotten part of the debate. It is the great unknown because it is fundamentally different from the other two waters.
Drinking water has been the main focus of the debate. It is water that is captured with known usage demands, managed in a reticulation network and easily measured for charging purposes. Wastewater management follows the same principles, but stormwater doesn’t. Stormwater arrives in unknown quantities, at unknown times and unknown locations; it is not “captured” in the same way as the other waters.
Controlling measures for stormwater can be quite diverse and often form part of flood protection schemes. Many believe stormwater services are best provided as part of roading services where there is more of a natural alignment, and I agree. Furthermore, the charging mechanism for stormwater services looks better suited to a rating charge as it is at present, whereas drinking water and wastewater are able and more likely to be charged on a volumetric basis in the future.
In the coming months, as the debate ramps up over three waters, my sense is that the three may become just two waters and councils will opt to leave the stormwater management within their roading departments. Wherever this reform process lands and whatever model is chosen , we are sure to be headed into some great debate in the next six months.
