IAWAI Water Services Strategy

I support the need for long-term water and wastewater infrastructure, but the Water Services Strategy should more clearly commit IAWAI to precaution, transparency, and meaningful engagement when progressing major wastewater projects. The Strategy says protecting the Awa is central to investment decisions and that water services must be delivered in a culturally and environmentally responsible way. In my view, that means IAWAI should not lock in pathways for the Southern Wastewater Treatment Plant that place pressure on sensitive environments such as the Nukuhau Stream catchment without a fresh and transparent comparison of other suitable sites.
The strategy should give stronger assurance that ecological effects, culturally significant sites, mana whenua views, and long-term public health risks will carry real weight in decision-making, not be treated as secondary to cost or convenience. This is particularly important where there are concerns about a delicate stream ecosystem, habitat values in the wider Nukuhau area, and unresolved opposition from those with direct historical and cultural connection to the area.
I would like the strategy to more explicitly commit IAWAI to: protecting sensitive waterways, ruling out unsuitable receiving environments, ensuring robust independent assessment of contaminants and downstream risks, and requiring genuine engagement where local impacts are high. If IAWAI wants public trust, its strategy must show that environmental protection, cultural respect, and fair process will guide infrastructure decisions from the start.

Partially support

I partially support a growth pays for growth approach in principle, because existing households should not be expected to carry the full cost of infrastructure needed for new development.
But I do not support a simplistic approach where ordinary new households are charged while the biggest drivers of demand or the full environmental costs are not properly accounted for. Any system should be transparent, proportionate, and reviewed regularly.
Most importantly, growth funding must not be used to justify poor infrastructure choices. IAWAI should commit that environmentally sensitive areas, culturally significant places, and downstream public health concerns will carry real weight in decision-making. Growth should pay for growth, but not at the expense of the Waikato River, sensitive streams, or fair process.

Partially support

I partially support treating secondary minor dwellings as 1/2 HUE. In most cases that seems fairer than charging them as a full dwelling, because they are usually smaller and place less demand on infrastructure.
However, I do not think a blanket rule will always be accurate. IAWAI should keep some flexibility so that very small secondary dwellings are not overcharged, while larger or more intensively used secondary dwellings can be assessed more appropriately if they function like a full independent household.

Website, E-newsletter

Partially support

I would like the policy amended so that projects with major local environmental, cultural, or public health implications (like the proposed waste water treatment plant) cannot rely on broad earlier strategy consultation as a substitute for genuine project-level engagement.

Partially support

No household should be disadvantaged simply because they fall on one side of a council boundary rather than the other.

No, these are my own personal views

Waipa District