National and Act’s policies on drinking water would reduce protections and ignore the recommendations of the inquiry into the Havelock North campylobacter outbreak
Opinion: During the heady weeks of election campaigning, fundamental public health needs can be overshadowed by more scandalous or dramatic political stories.
But, overlooked, public health concerns such as drinking water can become dramatic in the worst of ways, as the campylobacter outbreak in Havelock North in 2016 demonstrated. And for this reason, public health policies must be brought into the light for debate.
READ MORE:
* If there’s something in the water, we need to know
* Cracks in the system: stronger protections needed for our drinking water
* Quick start to Three Waters could save Auckland and Northlanders $1,000
Since we published our findings and analysis on where the parties stand on drinking water for Newsroom, further announcements on drinking water policy have been made by National and Act.
The new announcements are the most significant update to parties’ policy positions across the issues we surveyed. The policies would reduce existing protections for drinking water and go against the recommendations of the inquiry into the Havelock North outbreak.
The theme of National’s agricultural proposals is to scale back existing regulations brought in to provide protection for waterways
The inquiry into the outbreak stressed that “protection of the source of drinking water provides the first, and most significant, barrier against drinking water contamination and illness”.
It made a number of recommendations to strengthen drinking water source protection, including that resource management law should be “amended to expressly recognise the protection and management of drinking water sources as a matter of national importance”.
Many of our communities draw their drinking water from groundwater or rivers. To better protect these sources, the Government introduced Te Mana o te Wai as the central framework to the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020.
Te Mana o te Wai is a policy framework requiring councils to prioritise the health of the environment and provision of drinking water in their decision making, ahead of commercial uses.
This framework acknowledges two important points for drinking water. First, waterways that have been too degraded cannot provide good quality source water. Second, because drinking water is a fundamental need for all communities, its provision must be prioritised over commercial uses. Te Mana o te Wai has already had a positive environmental effect on decision making by regional councils, as Newsroom reported.
It prioritises public interests in the management of water over private interests. It does provide for commercial uses, acknowledging that land use will have some impact on the environment.
But under the framework, this impact cannot be at the expense of drinking water or push waterways beyond a certain level of environmental health (as defined by the bottom lines described in the policy).
The prioritisation of the public interest in regard to freshwater is a long overdue development in policy, and one that was a major election topic during the 2017 election when Labour came to power.
Act announced on Sunday that it would remove the framework, with party leader David Seymour stating, "we do not believe that Te Mana o te Wai improves the environment”.
Removing Te Mana o te Wai would remove the emphasis on and primacy of the protection of drinking water sources in regional council decision making. The Havelock North inquiry found that regional councils had been neglecting their duty to protect drinking water sources in many cases.
The inquiry report recorded “the clear sentiment from the expert panel members that in the absence of specific recognition, the protection of drinking water sources could easily be overtaken by competing pressures”.
National too has made further significant water announcements, which are filed under its agricultural policy. It mentions Te Mana o te Wai in the appendix of its agricultural policy document in a list of regulations introduced by the Labour government for water.
Though the document does not say National would remove the framework, the theme of National’s agricultural proposals is to scale back existing regulations brought in to provide protection for waterways.
On drinking water specifically, National plans to “amend the proposed National Environmental Standard for drinking water to avoid excessive compliance requirements for small providers of 30 connections or fewer”.
This is troubling. Strengthening the National Environmental Standard was a recommendation of the Havelock North inquiry. When highlighting a number of ways in which the standards should be strengthened, its report noted, “expert panel and submitters were adamant that the size of a drinking water supply should not determine the level of first barrier protection. The inquiry firmly accepts this view. All consumers should have the benefits and protections of the [National Environmental Standards] Regulations”.
The inquiry’s report went on to say, “As time passes, knowledge of the circumstances of the August 2016 outbreak will fade and its immediate impact will be lost. The Inquiry views express recognition as essential so that the protection of drinking water sources remains front and centre and visible in future”.
We need to have open, informed debate on what those campaigning to be in government say they will do to protect people’s drinking water – in the light, not the shadows.
