'The government says its water reforms will allow much-needed investment by councils – but Labour says ratepayers could be left on the hook.'
Isn't that how it should be? People pay rates because they own a property that uses water, sewerage and drainage. Who better to pay? Surely the issue is spreading the repayment for building infrastructure over generations, rather than presenting today's ratepayers with a huge bill.
That's only workable in theory a) some small councils are nowhere near a neighbour they can share infrastructure with and/or $$$ and have a TINY rateable base - surely we can agree EVERYONE should have safe & sanitary water, sewerage & drainage? b) even LARGE and/or amalgamated groups can't control some of their local issues because they are affected by outside factors i.e. a river crosses many boundaries and what happens upstream (snow melt, lack of snow melt, huge rain events, lack of rain, diversion for irrigation, pollution of aquifers etc.) And before anyone says "well RIVERS are not local body water " try telling that to Christchurch for a start! c) rainfall & other weather events affect local water management including ALL aspects, as demonstrated with drinking water being contaminated, sewage overflowing, and drains unable to cope & flooding homes with polluted water.
I agree with the premise that water is an Aotearoa wide resource plus management responsibility, and therefore $$$ via central govt backed funding is the answer to "spreading the repayment for building infrastructure over generations". We NEED people living in rural communities to support rural activities, and anyone else who doesn't want/need to live in a large urban concentration. They should not have to pay OTT for basic water services.
LOL ... I'm glad we can "solve" inflation by taking a survey! 😵💫
'The government says its water reforms will allow much-needed investment by councils – but Labour says ratepayers could be left on the hook.'
Isn't that how it should be? People pay rates because they own a property that uses water, sewerage and drainage. Who better to pay? Surely the issue is spreading the repayment for building infrastructure over generations, rather than presenting today's ratepayers with a huge bill.
That's only workable in theory a) some small councils are nowhere near a neighbour they can share infrastructure with and/or $$$ and have a TINY rateable base - surely we can agree EVERYONE should have safe & sanitary water, sewerage & drainage? b) even LARGE and/or amalgamated groups can't control some of their local issues because they are affected by outside factors i.e. a river crosses many boundaries and what happens upstream (snow melt, lack of snow melt, huge rain events, lack of rain, diversion for irrigation, pollution of aquifers etc.) And before anyone says "well RIVERS are not local body water " try telling that to Christchurch for a start! c) rainfall & other weather events affect local water management including ALL aspects, as demonstrated with drinking water being contaminated, sewage overflowing, and drains unable to cope & flooding homes with polluted water.
I agree with the premise that water is an Aotearoa wide resource plus management responsibility, and therefore $$$ via central govt backed funding is the answer to "spreading the repayment for building infrastructure over generations". We NEED people living in rural communities to support rural activities, and anyone else who doesn't want/need to live in a large urban concentration. They should not have to pay OTT for basic water services.