Government's Three Waters Reform

Share Government's Three Waters Reform on Facebook Share Government's Three Waters Reform on Twitter Share Government's Three Waters Reform on Linkedin Email Government's Three Waters Reform link

This consultation about the Government's Proposed Three Waters Reform has now finished. The Council will now consider all feedback before reporting back to the Government at the end of September. Thanks for participating.

New Zealand’s Government recently announced a proposal to change the way three waters services (drinking water, stormwater and wastewater) are provided across the country.

Currently, each of New Zealand’s 67 councils is responsible for supplying and managing the provision of water services and infrastructure for their communities.

The Government’s Three Waters Reform proposes to remove that responsibility from councils and place the provision of three waters services under four large water entities. One of those entities would cover the Ngāi Tahu takiwā, which is most of the South Island including Waimakariri.

To date the Government has not asked councils to consult with their communities about whether they should opt-in or opt-out.

In Waimakariri, we want to carefully weigh up what’s best for our District, and hear the views of residents before providing feedback to the Government.

About the Three Waters Reform

The Three Waters Reform was originally triggered by the 2016 campylobacteriosis outbreak in Havelock North. This event led to the introduction of new legislation and a new national regulator for water services called Taumata Arowai. This organisation will have responsibility for overseeing and enforcing new drinking water regulations, and providing oversight of the environment from the impacts of wastewater and stormwater.

The objective of the reform is to provide a more efficient and consistent way of delivering three waters services across the country. It is believed that by providing these services at a larger scale, greater efficiencies and capabilities can be achieved.

There is a lot of information to consider and we have provided more detail in the "What You Need to Know" section and we would encourage you to review this information before providing us with your feedback.

We wanted to provide you with a snapshot of our District, what our three waters services look like and how the reforms could affect us.


We welcome your feedback about the Three Waters Reform - based on the information available to date. Most importantly, we want to know the reasons for your decision. If you think we should opt-out, tell us what you like, or what your concerns are about the proposal.

Alternatively, if you think we should opt-in, tell us what you don’t like, or what you think the opportunities are for the proposed reforms. Either way, we want feedback on what you think needs to be considered if the reform goes ahead.

Please let us know what you think by Sunday 5 September.


New Zealand’s Government recently announced a proposal to change the way three waters services (drinking water, stormwater and wastewater) are provided across the country.

Currently, each of New Zealand’s 67 councils is responsible for supplying and managing the provision of water services and infrastructure for their communities.

The Government’s Three Waters Reform proposes to remove that responsibility from councils and place the provision of three waters services under four large water entities. One of those entities would cover the Ngāi Tahu takiwā, which is most of the South Island including Waimakariri.

To date the Government has not asked councils to consult with their communities about whether they should opt-in or opt-out.

In Waimakariri, we want to carefully weigh up what’s best for our District, and hear the views of residents before providing feedback to the Government.

About the Three Waters Reform

The Three Waters Reform was originally triggered by the 2016 campylobacteriosis outbreak in Havelock North. This event led to the introduction of new legislation and a new national regulator for water services called Taumata Arowai. This organisation will have responsibility for overseeing and enforcing new drinking water regulations, and providing oversight of the environment from the impacts of wastewater and stormwater.

The objective of the reform is to provide a more efficient and consistent way of delivering three waters services across the country. It is believed that by providing these services at a larger scale, greater efficiencies and capabilities can be achieved.

There is a lot of information to consider and we have provided more detail in the "What You Need to Know" section and we would encourage you to review this information before providing us with your feedback.

We wanted to provide you with a snapshot of our District, what our three waters services look like and how the reforms could affect us.


We welcome your feedback about the Three Waters Reform - based on the information available to date. Most importantly, we want to know the reasons for your decision. If you think we should opt-out, tell us what you like, or what your concerns are about the proposal.

Alternatively, if you think we should opt-in, tell us what you don’t like, or what you think the opportunities are for the proposed reforms. Either way, we want feedback on what you think needs to be considered if the reform goes ahead.

Please let us know what you think by Sunday 5 September.


This consultation about the Government's Proposed Three Waters Reform has now finished. The Council will now consider all feedback before reporting back to the Government at the end of September. Thanks for participating.

If you need more information or a have a specific question we haven't covered, please ask here and one of the team will get back to you shortly.

  • Share Does the councils budget allow for the cost of climate change adaption to 2050 or is it based on historic ground water / rain fall levels? Also does it allow for the cost of likely tighter regulation on nitrate levels? on Facebook Share Does the councils budget allow for the cost of climate change adaption to 2050 or is it based on historic ground water / rain fall levels? Also does it allow for the cost of likely tighter regulation on nitrate levels? on Twitter Share Does the councils budget allow for the cost of climate change adaption to 2050 or is it based on historic ground water / rain fall levels? Also does it allow for the cost of likely tighter regulation on nitrate levels? on Linkedin Email Does the councils budget allow for the cost of climate change adaption to 2050 or is it based on historic ground water / rain fall levels? Also does it allow for the cost of likely tighter regulation on nitrate levels? link

    Does the councils budget allow for the cost of climate change adaption to 2050 or is it based on historic ground water / rain fall levels? Also does it allow for the cost of likely tighter regulation on nitrate levels?

    Becca asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question. In 2020 the Council adopted a Climate Change Policy as an initial statement to inform Council’s role in climate change adaptation and mitigation. The next step in 2021 is to develop this into a Climate Change Strategy. There are some aspects of climate change already considered throughout work in the 3 waters space. This includes allowance for climate change when predicting runoff impacting on stormwater and wastewater system designs, as well as some consideration being given to changing weather patterns and potential impact upon aquifer levels and water supply sources (so yes we do allow for increased rainfall and runoff events in our wastewater and stormwater modelling). While this work does take into account some of the implications of Climate Change, there are further improvement projects to help better quantify some of the other potential impacts that may not be captured by the initial works. Further information can be found in the Council’s Infrastructure Strategy, around pages 36 – 39. https://www.waimakariri.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/48695/210602088763-Infrastructure-Strategy-2021-2051.pdf  

    There are increases in nitrates forecast over the coming decades, as demonstrated by the modelling undertaken by Environment Canterbury (ECan) as part of the Plan Change 7 work. While nitrate levels are forecast to increase in the district, these are not forecast to exceed the current Maximum Acceptable Value (MAV), for the Council’s public supplies, with the modelled changes in land use proposed through the PC7 process. The current MAV for nitrate in the Drinking-water Standards for New Zealand (DWSNZ) of 11.3mg/L is based on WHO guidelines. In terms of tighter regulations for nitrate, I suspect you may have heard of and be referring to a more recent Danish study in suggesting that the current MAV adopted by both the WHO and in turn the DWSNZ is too high. It is understood that the Ministry of Health is considering some further research in this area to consider the appropriateness of the current levels in the DWSNZ, however at this stage budget allowances have not been made in anticipation of changes resulting from this study, as it would be considered premature given the early stages of research at this time.


  • Share Is the original infrastructure in Rangiora catering for for water supply , sewerage and storm water capable of accepting the increasing demand created by the new subdivisions or will be a cost for upgrading in the future on Facebook Share Is the original infrastructure in Rangiora catering for for water supply , sewerage and storm water capable of accepting the increasing demand created by the new subdivisions or will be a cost for upgrading in the future on Twitter Share Is the original infrastructure in Rangiora catering for for water supply , sewerage and storm water capable of accepting the increasing demand created by the new subdivisions or will be a cost for upgrading in the future on Linkedin Email Is the original infrastructure in Rangiora catering for for water supply , sewerage and storm water capable of accepting the increasing demand created by the new subdivisions or will be a cost for upgrading in the future link

    Is the original infrastructure in Rangiora catering for for water supply , sewerage and storm water capable of accepting the increasing demand created by the new subdivisions or will be a cost for upgrading in the future

    Kinley asked about 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question. Infrastructure planning occurs as part of Council’s asset management methodology. When subdivisions are proposed development contributions are made payable by the Developer for new infrastructure that is required to cater for the growth and demand as a result of their subdivision. New infrastructure and upgrades regularly occur across the District to allow for growth, and as these are adequately planned for it is ensured that these developments are self-funding, therefore cost neutral to Council.

  • Share Can you please confirm, or otherwise, that the WDC figures are based on fully funding infrastructural asset depreciation annually, and that the "depreciation accounts" are fully fenced from application to new capital works. on Facebook Share Can you please confirm, or otherwise, that the WDC figures are based on fully funding infrastructural asset depreciation annually, and that the "depreciation accounts" are fully fenced from application to new capital works. on Twitter Share Can you please confirm, or otherwise, that the WDC figures are based on fully funding infrastructural asset depreciation annually, and that the "depreciation accounts" are fully fenced from application to new capital works. on Linkedin Email Can you please confirm, or otherwise, that the WDC figures are based on fully funding infrastructural asset depreciation annually, and that the "depreciation accounts" are fully fenced from application to new capital works. link

    Can you please confirm, or otherwise, that the WDC figures are based on fully funding infrastructural asset depreciation annually, and that the "depreciation accounts" are fully fenced from application to new capital works.

    gjs8805-17 asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question. Yes, depreciation is collected over all assets, these accounts are ‘ring-fenced’ to ensure rates collected via depreciation funding can only be used for funding renewals.

  • Share Is the Council's ability to fund new works constrained by Government limits on borrowing terms. E.g can you, say, borrow for a new water main over the expected life of that main? on Facebook Share Is the Council's ability to fund new works constrained by Government limits on borrowing terms. E.g can you, say, borrow for a new water main over the expected life of that main? on Twitter Share Is the Council's ability to fund new works constrained by Government limits on borrowing terms. E.g can you, say, borrow for a new water main over the expected life of that main? on Linkedin Email Is the Council's ability to fund new works constrained by Government limits on borrowing terms. E.g can you, say, borrow for a new water main over the expected life of that main? link

    Is the Council's ability to fund new works constrained by Government limits on borrowing terms. E.g can you, say, borrow for a new water main over the expected life of that main?

    gjs8805-17 asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question.

    In short, yes. They help give a complete answer, I will explain the three ways capital works are funded.

    Growth related works are funded either directly by the developer, or by the Council raising a loan and recovering these costs via Development Contributions (see above for more explanation of this). Renewal of existing infrastructure that has reached the end of its life is funded from a ‘renewals fund’ that is built up by Council collecting for depreciation over the life of each asset. Finally, assets to improve the level of service or address deficiencies (i.e. anything that isn’t growth or renewal funded) are funded by Council raising a loan and paying this down over a set period. There are limits to the ratio of debt to revenue, which affects the credit rating that Council receives, however Council has always been within these limits, and this has not historically been a constraint on completing projects that are needed.

  • Share Does the Council currently take development levys where these are appropriate? on Facebook Share Does the Council currently take development levys where these are appropriate? on Twitter Share Does the Council currently take development levys where these are appropriate? on Linkedin Email Does the Council currently take development levys where these are appropriate? link

    Does the Council currently take development levys where these are appropriate?

    gjs8805-17 asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question.
    Yes, Council currently collect development contributions. These are mainly collected when subdivision occurs to reflect increased demand on Council infrastructure. Development Contributions fund growth related projects required to service new development areas in the District and include Roading, Reserves, Water, Sewer and Drainage. Please see our Development Contribution Policy for more information: https://www.waimakariri.govt.nz/planning/related-content/development-and-financial-contributions 

  • Share The government case for reform seems to rest on managing an expected large increase in cost to provide services and to improve delivery to standard. Their claim is that cost per household currently will more than double by 2051 but with reform they might keep it to about $1640. The council's estimate of the 2051 average household cost is that it will be 25% lower than current costs and they state that this is estimated by taking expected annual costs and dividing it by an increased population to give $908. This seems too simplistic. To me the case for reform hinges on whose costing is more realistic and credible. What we need are objective (independent?) reviews of these costings so ratepayers can have confidence in them. on Facebook Share The government case for reform seems to rest on managing an expected large increase in cost to provide services and to improve delivery to standard. Their claim is that cost per household currently will more than double by 2051 but with reform they might keep it to about $1640. The council's estimate of the 2051 average household cost is that it will be 25% lower than current costs and they state that this is estimated by taking expected annual costs and dividing it by an increased population to give $908. This seems too simplistic. To me the case for reform hinges on whose costing is more realistic and credible. What we need are objective (independent?) reviews of these costings so ratepayers can have confidence in them. on Twitter Share The government case for reform seems to rest on managing an expected large increase in cost to provide services and to improve delivery to standard. Their claim is that cost per household currently will more than double by 2051 but with reform they might keep it to about $1640. The council's estimate of the 2051 average household cost is that it will be 25% lower than current costs and they state that this is estimated by taking expected annual costs and dividing it by an increased population to give $908. This seems too simplistic. To me the case for reform hinges on whose costing is more realistic and credible. What we need are objective (independent?) reviews of these costings so ratepayers can have confidence in them. on Linkedin Email The government case for reform seems to rest on managing an expected large increase in cost to provide services and to improve delivery to standard. Their claim is that cost per household currently will more than double by 2051 but with reform they might keep it to about $1640. The council's estimate of the 2051 average household cost is that it will be 25% lower than current costs and they state that this is estimated by taking expected annual costs and dividing it by an increased population to give $908. This seems too simplistic. To me the case for reform hinges on whose costing is more realistic and credible. What we need are objective (independent?) reviews of these costings so ratepayers can have confidence in them. link

    The government case for reform seems to rest on managing an expected large increase in cost to provide services and to improve delivery to standard. Their claim is that cost per household currently will more than double by 2051 but with reform they might keep it to about $1640. The council's estimate of the 2051 average household cost is that it will be 25% lower than current costs and they state that this is estimated by taking expected annual costs and dividing it by an increased population to give $908. This seems too simplistic. To me the case for reform hinges on whose costing is more realistic and credible. What we need are objective (independent?) reviews of these costings so ratepayers can have confidence in them.

    Stephen asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question.

    The Department of Internal Affairs have had Farrierswier, Beca and Deloitte undertake reviews of their findings. These reports can be found on the DIA website: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-Waters-Reform-Programme 

    Waimakariri District Council Long Term Plan figures have been audited extensively by Audit NZ. This has included Council’s Infrastructure Strategy identifying all projects for the 30 year horizon, and taking into account population projection changes, to forecast future rates. Rates have been converted to exclude inflation to present in current day figures, to provide a like for like comparison with DIA figures. Further detail on the Council’s Infrastructure Strategy can be found here: https://www.waimakariri.govt.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0032/48695/210602088763-Infrastructure-Strategy-2021-2051.pdf 


  • Share Has there been an independent review of the cost and savings projections? on Facebook Share Has there been an independent review of the cost and savings projections? on Twitter Share Has there been an independent review of the cost and savings projections? on Linkedin Email Has there been an independent review of the cost and savings projections? link

    Has there been an independent review of the cost and savings projections?

    ianadriennehunter asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question. Yes, the Department of Internal Affairs have had Farrierswier, Beca and Deloitte undertake reviews of their findings. These reports can be found on the DIA website: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-Waters-Reform-Programme 

    Waimakariri District Council Long Term Plan figures have been audited by Audit NZ. 


  • Share Cutting through all the crap about this - isn't it just another transition to Maori control? Why then isn't the local council presenting it as such? on Facebook Share Cutting through all the crap about this - isn't it just another transition to Maori control? Why then isn't the local council presenting it as such? on Twitter Share Cutting through all the crap about this - isn't it just another transition to Maori control? Why then isn't the local council presenting it as such? on Linkedin Email Cutting through all the crap about this - isn't it just another transition to Maori control? Why then isn't the local council presenting it as such? link

    Cutting through all the crap about this - isn't it just another transition to Maori control? Why then isn't the local council presenting it as such?

    ZIbber asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question. Please refer to material on our Let’s Talk page including supplementary information provided under the Supporting Documents heading: https://letstalk.waimakariri.govt.nz/threewatersreform
    Here we having linked the Department of Internal Affairs information which explains the reasons for the Government’s proposed Three Waters reform, and proposed Governance arrangements.

  • Share why can't I register to this? And why can't it be simple like email and rates reference? on Facebook Share why can't I register to this? And why can't it be simple like email and rates reference? on Twitter Share why can't I register to this? And why can't it be simple like email and rates reference? on Linkedin Email why can't I register to this? And why can't it be simple like email and rates reference? link

    why can't I register to this? And why can't it be simple like email and rates reference?

    Christine Rowe asked over 3 years ago

    Good afternoon,
    I'm sorry to hear that you are experiencing issues registering to complete the online feedback form. We have logged a request with our provider to see if there is an issue with the system.
    In the meantime you can email threewaters@wmk.govt.nz or provide feedback on the hardcopy form posted to all ratepayers. An electronic version of the feedback form is available on our Let’s Talk page under Supporting Documents: https://letstalk.waimakariri.govt.nz/threewatersreform

  • Share There is a very big difference in the projected rates between the Council & government, Can you give more explanations on these. Regards bryan on Facebook Share There is a very big difference in the projected rates between the Council & government, Can you give more explanations on these. Regards bryan on Twitter Share There is a very big difference in the projected rates between the Council & government, Can you give more explanations on these. Regards bryan on Linkedin Email There is a very big difference in the projected rates between the Council & government, Can you give more explanations on these. Regards bryan link

    There is a very big difference in the projected rates between the Council & government, Can you give more explanations on these. Regards bryan

    Bryan asked over 3 years ago

    Thank you for your question.

    Waimakariri District Council have used our audited Long Term Plan (LTP) figures when projecting likely rates by 2051, we have excluded inflation however, to remain consistent with the figures released by the Department of Internal Affairs. We understand the Government’s figures include an allowance for an additional $1 billion of expenditure in our district, over and above what we have budgeted. This does not appear to be based on specific projects, but rather based largely on experience in Scotland where additional expenditure was identified post amalgamation. More information on the Government’s figures can be found on the Three Waters page of the DIA website: https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-Waters-Reform-Programme