Fresh start for water quality standards

Wednesday, 17 January 2018

Hundered of thousands of Kiwis could be affected by bad drinking water.

The Government is pushing ahead with plans to make freshwater standards stricter in a bid to improve water quality, the Minister for the Environment says.

Preliminary work to create a new national freshwater policy has begun, with formal plans expected to start by the middle of the year.

The new standards would not entirely depart from those recently passed by the previous Government, but they would likely be expanded - and include more rules that apply nation-wide.

Environment Minister David Parker saidhe has written to the Land and Water forum and contacted some other organisations about matters relating to a new National Policy Statement for Freshwater (NPS-FW), a document which requires regional authorities to set limits around water quantity and quality. It has been in place since 2011.

Dr Tim Davie, chief scientist for Environment Canterbury, discussing the changes to water quality at swimming spots in Canterbury.

* What are New Zealand's environmental priorities over the next 20 years?

* The environment, not agriculture is New Zealand's economic backbone**

Labour had campaigned to change the standards in response to public concern about water quality and criticism the standards were not strict enough.

The National Government changed the NPS last year to include a new 'swimmable' standard, based on E. coli levels over time, along with stronger rules around fencing stock. It resulted in criticism from experts who said it was unclear if the new standard was higher or lower.

Minister for the Environment David Parker and Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern.

Parker says a new statement would go much further and put rules on other forms of pollutants.

'We're trying to get something formal by the middle of this year,' he says.

A statue of a cow in Morrinsville, where farmers gathered to protest about the water tax in September last year. (FILE PHOTO)

'We're not going to throw out the good things they [National] did. Some of these curly issues were not resolved, despite the fact they needed to be - there are some areas in New Zealand where there are increases in livestock intensity that cause additional pressure on waterways that are not controlled by resource consent processes.

'Those sorts of things will be fixed in this NPS.'

Because implementing the standards is up to regional authorities, some parts of the country are further ahead than others. Canterbury, Otago and Waikato have made substantial progress, while Southland, Auckland and Taranaki have not, the Ministry for the Environment (MfE) said in its most recent review.

Despite being in place since 2011, no region has fully implemented the NPS. Most have said they aim to implement the standards by around 2025.

Common issues cited by councils have been a lack of funding, lack of guidance, and differing expectations for what could be achieved.

The Land and Water Forum was last year tasked with reviewing the progress councils had made. It said in its report 'implementation has been slow, variable and uncoordinated', and there was 'no one currently providing the leadership role needed within the freshwater management system.'

RURAL, URBAN AND INTERNATIONAL

Water quality became a divisive issue during the election and was portrayed as a wedge between rural and urban interests.

Critics accused Labour of targeting farmers, primarily through its proposed water tax - a feeling that reached its apex when farmers assembled for a protest in Morrinsville before the election.

Labour performed above expectations in traditionally rural areas. However, while National performed better than expected in urban parts of Auckland, which Parker said was part of a mandate for the new Government to pursue water quality issues.

'I think the vast majority of New Zealanders share an objective that their waterways should be clean enough to swim in summer and there should be enough water left in the river to swim in,' he says.

'There are some people who, in effect, disagree with that, and I don't require their agreement. Democracy is about empowering politicians to win an election, it's not to say that everyone agrees with you. It's absolutely undoubted, from surveys even over the Christmas period, the vast majority of New Zealanders want more done to protect our rivers.'

In recent years, there has been growing international coverage of New Zealand's struggle with degrading water quality.

International publications including The Economist, Al Jazeera, The Wall Street Journal and The Guardian have reported critically on the apparent contradiction between New Zealand's overseas image and its degrading rivers and lakes.

Multiple reports have pointed to rising nitrate levels in many rivers, particularly in rural areas, as well as increasingly frequent toxic algal blooms. Urban rivers are the most polluted, albeit comprising between 1 and 2 per cent of all waterways by length.

Parker, who is also Minister for Trade and Export Growth, says New Zealand still has its reputation, but it has to do more to live up to its brand.

'I think New Zealand's reputation internationally is still one that we are better than most other parts of the world, but it's also true you see increasing reporting of some of our poorer outcomes,' he says.

'Given there are some physical constraints on food, for example, we can produce for the rest of the world, it's important we maximise the value of what it is we sell… and part of that lies in our branding, and our branding has to be real rather than a slogan when it comes to obtaining a premium on our produce based on its quality and the way we produce it environmentally.'

Over time, it would be best for New Zealand to move to higher land use practices, not just defaulting to dairy farming, he says.

That may include a greater focus on technological advances, which could not only be used here but sold overseas.

'One of the objectives of the current Government is to enable higher value land uses that are not all dairying. When, for example, we deal with nutrient management issues and some of the technology research and development subsidies that are paid by the Government, we need to ensure these are enabling higher value vegetables, crops - not just dairying.

'If we do that right and utilise the technology coming forward that reduce the labour cost disadvantages that we suffer in respect of horticulture crops, that traditionally have a high labour content, we can sell to the world our incredibly high quality produce at good prices with a better environmental outcome then we currently have, and be wealthier as well as cleaner.'