Editorial: Lack of rigour in water report

THE WELLINGTONIAN

OPINION: New Zealand Rail stewards were once the stuff of legend.

They were said to chuck dirty cups out train windows rather than wash them.

In his book I've been thinking Richard Prebble said that was why New Zealand Rail had to be privatised – private enterprise would have ensured the stewards threw the polystyrene cups out the window more efficiently.

Sadly, it seems policy decisions by some of our biggest institutions are still being based on anecdotes rather than firm evidence.

"A mate bragged that he had taken a 15-minute shower because he was staying in a motel and not paying for the hot water," said a Wellington city councillor last week.

Councillors were discussing how residents' apparently profligate water use should be curbed, and whether the threat of water meters and charges should hang over householders.

Their reasoning didn't inspire much confidence.

Worse, the report they were discussing didn't stand up to the scrutiny of the members of the public present. It repeated misinformation about residents' water use and trumpeted a myth – "Introducing universal water metering will save 15 per cent of water consumption".

The water meters/savings in consumption legend is frequently cited in water management circles – one of water's Ten Commandments – yet no-one can point to any research that backs it up.

It appears it was an off-the-cuff comment made at a 1970s conference and repeated so often that it's now widely accepted as fact. It is not supported by research.

Just this week Murray Gibb of Water New Zealand repeated the fiction, saying: "Nelson's water consumption dropped 37 per cent following the introduction of meters."

The statement was misleading. Wellington's water consumption also dropped when Nelson was introducing meters, as did that of most other cities in the developed world.

The report that councillors were considering last week was produced by Wellington and Hutt city council-owned company Capacity, which stands to benefit by being the entity likely to be billing residents in future for their showers and their cups of tea.

Ominously, Capacity chairman Brian Jackson has also stated confidently that he expects to have control of the region's bulk water supply within a decade.

Among other options on the table to threaten ratepayers with was a new dam on a Hutt River tributary.

It was to be built on an earthquake fault line and to deliver its water through a pipeline that followed the same fault for 24km!

What's more, it will tap into a Hutt River tributary, catching water before it reaches the Hutt aquifer, another major source of Wellington water.

In effect, it's a hugely costly new tap higher on the same tank we are already tapping lower down.

Politicians' prejudices, informed by vested interests, are not the best ingredients for sound decisions.

As The Wellingtonian stories reveal, more rigour is needed in how facts about Wellington's water situation are presented.

What councillors were presented with last week was shallow and lacking in fact.

Mr Prebble was considering only transport. What the councillors have been considering is vital to life.