Opinion: I was listening to the Kāpiti Coast District Mayor, Janet Holborow, on the radio this week as she again explained why, unlike her neighbouring councils, they did not have to impose water restrictions through a very hot and dry summer.
She credited this to the decision taken by the former Kāpiti mayor Jenny Rowan and her council which supported the introduction of water metering just over a decade ago.
I think I should say up front that water metering is first and foremost about water conservation, and that is something that really matters when it comes to pressure on infrastructure.
I really don’t think this has been well understood, so this is a very important conversation for us to have. Metering is not about charging for water – it is about charging for water infrastructure. It is also about the collation of data which enables good decisions to be made by residents and councils alike. It also means there are sufficient funds to keep the water infrastructure in good shape.
Kāpiti is the exception in the Greater Wellington Region. The other councils were meeting with the local government minister this week to talk about the state of the infrastructure and the water restrictions that were having to be imposed.
Water metering is clearly part of the solution when we look at the impact it had in Kāpiti.
I also listened to the Wellington Residents’ Coalition chair, Warwick Taylor, who was sceptical about this. He quite rightly looked at the increasing cost of electricity as a point of comparison. We don’t need another bill, he said.
I was tempted to segue into a debate about electricity deregulation and the creation of a market in electricity that required the splitting of generation, lines, and retail from each other, which was accompanied by the promise that electricity prices would come down.
The reason I think this case is different is because of what brings about the most significant reductions in water usage. I’m not just talking about showerheads, water tanks, and front-loading washing machines, which were examples Mr Taylor used.
In Kāpiti, the impacts of the metering were felt instantly even before the charging began.
Residents who discovered they would be confronted with a very high water bill started to look for leaks.
Mayor Holborow said they had discovered 443 leaks during the initial period as meters were being installed, and many more over the following years. Fixing these leaks meant millions of litres of water were no longer being wasted.
There was a 26 percent reduction in private household use once the meters were installed and even high-water users reduced their consumption by 70 percent.
These savings meant the River Recharge scheme had hardly been used even in dry summers when the rest of the region had to impose water restrictions. This also meant they could push out the building of a multi-million-dollar dam by 50 years.
This all started with a council that had the courage of its convictions, and a mayor who was willing to invest her political capital to do the right thing.
Back then water conservation, the primary motivation for metering, and coastal hazard lines for a coastal district were tough subjects to take on. The coastal hazards changes to the District Plan were challenged in the Environment Court, and along with the water metering were challenged at the ballot box. Jenny Rowan lost her seat in 2013 after six years as mayor.
There had been a huge campaign against introducing water meters at the time. This had produced an 8000-signature petition calling for a referendum, something the council rejected, but it is easy to imagine how challenging that was. That’s a lot of signatures from a small district.
In rejecting the petition, Mayor Rowan said the council had quite rightly proceeded with the proposal, because the fundamental issue was about the ability to conserve and save water.
“I will stand by that to the day I die,” Rowan said. “I think I will live long enough to see this region, if not the whole country, water metered.”
Another councillor from the time described the ‘heat’ she had experienced as code for verbal abuse, written abuse, and internet abuse. She says that now when it’s raised with her, happily it’s to talk about the benefits.
I think it’s important we talk about the benefits with practical examples of why it makes such a difference.
I will leave the last word to the current mayor. She said the main benefit had been a change of attitude. At the time the scheme was introduced, she said, a common question was, “Water falls free from the sky – should we pay?”
Her answer was that meters helped people find out how much water is wasted, and that water is not endless or free.
She said it’s a tāonga and a finite resource which needs to be treated with respect.
I agree. We need to use water in a sustainable and equitable way, thinking not only of ourselves, but of generations to come.
We discovered that we had a leak on our site when a meter was installed. Up to that point we had no idea. We got the leak fixed and our water usage want down. Also, even if it’s not a big amount, receiving a water bill for water usage over and above our basic entitlement does make us think about where we are wasting water.
I am a total supporter of water meters. It’s also a lesson to read about local body politicians who do the right thing, in this case the Mayor Rowan, who are dragged down by a braying mob. The media has a role in this sort of debate to ensure everybody has the correct information on a topic which is causing consternation.
The reason water metering was promoted originally was to give a means to privatize water services. Profit to the private provider, risk to the community. Privatization was being pushed in many ways and water was a special target because water is such a necessary community resource.
Thanks for explaining the behaviour change that water meters can bring about, & what former mayor Jenny Rowan experienced due to having the courage of her convictions. The willingness to put long term before short term has ultimately paid off, despite the 2013 election result.
And when the organiser of that 8000-strong petition was elected to council, she learnt more facts and did a complete U turn. Council officers provided facts. Nobody that I know opposes water meters now here. And thank you Jenny Rowan for putting up with all that abuse. I am a Kāpiti resident.
The problem in the Wellington Region is not the backyard pool or the leaky tap, its the major leaks in the main supply pipes, often old, more often shoddy workmanship. In our street, a 25 year old suburb , every toby has blown off the main over the last 10 years – none of which was fixed immediately of course. Householders fault? I think not. Spending $100 million on water meters instead of fixing the major leaks and lack of reservoirs (last one built in 1987?) just redirects the plumbers and the cash from fixing the council infrastructure to installing meters. I can guarantee that water meters will not result in any reduction in rates for me. Further, since the Wellington city can spend $1.5 million to replace a parking meter system it installed just 5 years ago, I foresee that changing water meters on a 5 year cycle might be a wonderful distraction from actually solving the problem – doubling the population while spending nothing much on buried infrastructure, just new convention centers.
nailed it.