A referendum requires two clear options, and the Government is not at a stage where they have confirmed any proposal.

We are currently following the direction provided to us by Central Government. Councils have until 1 October 2021 to respond to the Government's proposals. This is an opportunity to provide feedback and questions, but no decision is being made at this stage. On 23 September Council agreed on the questions to ask the Government.

We are happy to receive any feedback that anyone wants to submit to us now through the form on this page.

Please note the COVID-19 Alert Levels have restricted our ability to hold face to face public meetings, and so we have held two online webinars to help inform people about the proposed reforms.

The is a significant amount of information available on the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) website and LGNZ’s website. There are links to those pages on this website.

There is evidence both internationally and locally that efficiencies are achievable.

Scottish Water has achieved efficiencies and there are plenty of other examples in UK and the EU that show efficiency gains are possible.

In Tasmania and Victoria, their combined waters authority has achieved significant cost efficiency gains.

In New Zealand, Watercare in Auckland is an excellent local example (they have been in operation for 10 years). They are also achieving the operational efficiencies set for them.

The proposed operational efficiencies are achievable with entities of a larger scale. These overseas models have proven to be effective, which is why the Government has been looking at these models to develop their proposal. The proposals are tailored to New Zealand.

While councils will be the owners of the new entities, mana whenua have a governance role (not an ownership or management role) in the proposed model. An independent, competency based board will be appointed to run the entity.

This direction has been proposed by the government, and the final governance model has yet to be confirmed.

In the current proposal Iwi/Māori will have a joint role with councils in the oversight and strategic direction of the proposed new water services entities, with mana whenua having equal representation alongside local authorities on a Regional Representative Group for each entity (see diagram).

No single local government or mana whenua representative would have a veto right or ability to exert negative control over decisions for the Representative Group. Iwi/Māori will not have ownership rights in the entities.

A number of people have mentioned that this involves the sale of assets. This is not what the Government reform is proposing. The assets, along with liabilities (such as debt), will be transferred to Entity C.

If we sold these assets for $700 million – and all other Councils in Entity C did the same, then the entity would be crippled with debt. They would not be able to afford the extra investment required to address the water, wastewater and stormwater challenges that we face in the coming years.

Also, if we sold the assets to Entity C - then the three waters customers (i.e residents) would start to repay the debt again (so they'll have to pay for debt twice).

The council holds these assets on behalf of the community. Water entity C would do the same.

If you sell something, then you no longer have use of those assets. The three waters customers will still have use of these assets.

Water services would be more difficult to privatise under the proposal than they are right now.

The reform proposals combine a series of measures that together help safeguard against future privatisation, including:

• The councils that make up each entity would be the owners of that entity
• There is no shareholding structure in the proposal and no dividends
• There would be statutory restrictions on the sale or transfer of material, strategic water assets. This is the current approach in the Local Government Act 2002, which prevents local authorities from selling or disposing of strategic assets or the infrastructure necessary for providing water services.

Three Waters staff are likely to be involved in the transition process and to work for the new entity. Currently, there is a shortage of engineers and staff in the three waters area, and if anything more staff will be required.

The DIA figures are based on modelling assumptions using national average data. In Nelson's case, the figures have been reviewed and the current average household cost is close enough to actual costs to provide a comparison for future average costs.

The Department of Internal Affairs has advised that it considers the Castalia report for Whangarei District Council misrepresents the evidence base and analysis supporting the reform proposals, and reaches conclusions that are not well supported by the available empirical evidence from similar reforms undertaken in other jurisdictions.

All councils are considering the impacts of the reform proposals on their own areas. Local Government New Zealand is keeping councils informed of sector views and approaches as well.

Removing Three Waters from Council's balance sheet is likely to improve Council's debt to revenue ratio. There should be no impact on Council's credit rating, and this is being investigated at the moment.

The Government has allocated $296 million for the transition phase and implementation. The details for this are yet to be finalised. Consultation with mana whenua is being led by Central Government.

With or without reform, there will be the same need to respond to natural disasters and to assist affected areas – for example this would be the case with the Kaikoura earthquake and the rebuild of the state highway. It is anticipated though that a larger entity will be in a better position to assist with such a response.