web analytics

No one owns water, apart from corporations who sell it …

Written By: - Date published: 12:43 pm, May 22nd, 2017 - 27 comments
Categories: business, Conservation, Environment, exports, farming, water - Tags:

Water is an issue that has been hurting this Government.  From its expansion of dairying and the destruction of so many of our waterways, to the use of the fast forward fund to provide extra irrigation for Canterbury farmers, to the financial support supplied by water exporting companies such as Oravida to the National Party, to the strange support offered to the Ruataniwha Dam, to water quality problems in Havlock North as well as other areas, and to the refusal to countenance Maori’s very reasonable claim that water is a Taonga under article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi, to the sleight of hand about what “swimable” means, a lot has been happening.

And there have been some doozie examples of indifferent decision making.  Allowing a water exporting company to extract water from a Unesco World Heritage site and lay a pipeline through DOC area which is a sanctuary for New Zealand’s rarest kiwi and potentially forcing their removal takes a lot of chutzpah.

I suspect the water pricing issue is starting to really show up in the Government’s polling.  The Government thinks that the issue is too hard to solve.  Clearly this is in deference to the views of its farmer supporters who refuse to accept they should pay for water even though there are very strong policy and environmental reasons why this should occur.

But the Herald this morning has provided analysis suggesting that the Government’s approach and pro business attitude means that foreign corporations are paying peanuts for our water and then making huge profits.

From the Herald:

Water bottling companies are paying an average 500 times less than ratepayers for each litre of water they’re allowed to use.

A Herald investigation into water fees set by every regional council around the country found bottlers were charged an average $0.003 – or one third of a cent – per cubic metre of water.

Comparatively, in Auckland, Watercare charges $1.40 per cubic metre (1000 litres) for water piped to houses, while the rest of the country paid an average $1.60 per cubic metre.

“Water companies are getting the same water but paying bugger all for it,” said water campaigner Jen Branje from the Bung the Bore group.
“Why are ratepayers paying for something that corporates are getting almost for free? It’s an unfair equation.”

The approach of Councils is clearly in line with the Government view on water.

The Herald requested consent details from each regional council following nationwide protests in March.

It asked how much water it had allocated to bottling companies, and what annual fees they paid.

The results showed in total, 23 billion litres per year had been allocated for bottling. Not all consents were active or fully in-use.

Water bottlers paid an average $200 per year in fees to council for duties such as consent monitoring or administration.

Because water is considered a public good in New Zealand, councils cannot charge for the water itself, although many of their fees were calculated from volume amounts.

And the amounts are significant:

The amount of water allocated also varied widely- some users were granted 7 million litres per year, while others such as Okuru Enterprises on the West Coast were granted upwards of 900 million litres annually.

Public information showed the average bottling company in New Zealand had a turnover of $1.5 million per year – excluding beverage giants Coca Cola Amatil and Frucor – which both have turnover of around $500 million a year.

Last year, 27 million litres of water were exported to countries including the United States, Germany, Japan and Australia. Water exports are valued at 80c per litre, with a total export value for 2016 of $21.5 million, according to Statistics New Zealand.

The case for charging for the use of water, at least for corporations that make a profit for it, just became stronger.

The Green Party are opposed:

Right now companies can use huge amounts of our water for next to nothing, and make money out of it.

That’s not fair – water is precious, and many of our rivers and aquifers are being polluted and are under stress.

Bill English has tried to dampen public outrage by getting an advisory group to look at it. But he won’t commit to doing anything despite knowing we need to act now.

The Green Party says that if they’re taking it, and they’re profiting from it, they should pay for it!

And they are running a petition which if you want to sign is here.

27 comments on “No one owns water, apart from corporations who sell it … ”

  1. Nick 1

    Petition signed. Cheers Greens

  2. McFlock 2

    “sleight of hand”. Not “sleigh” 🙂

    But I also quite liked the Greens intentional pun / freudian slip: “Bill English has tried to dampen public outrage ” (my emphasis)…

    Language trivialities aside, damned right water is a pushbutton issue. And will only get worse for the nats. Serves the bastards right, too.

    [Oops now fixed – MS]

  3. Ad 3

    Here’s the shareholders of Okuru Enterprises:

    http://bestbusinessnz.com/company/493056/okuru-enterprises-limited

    I think government should support this kind of local business.
    If they are paying for it I don’t care if it’s Coca Cola either.

    All in favour of corporations and farmers paying a commercial rate for their water.

    BUT.
    Make sure you think about what happens next.
    If regional council are allowed to set a commercial rate for water – i.e. make more $$ in the price than simply paying for the cost of capital and operations and depreciation, then you have given Council license to print money – just as much as the corporations.

    If regional councils are selling water at a commercial rate, then they are metering it. Businesses would then rightly point out that if they are paying for it, then so should every citizen. That would mean water meters in every town, alongside every letterbox.
    That’s quite a big political step.

    Don’t even mention nationwide fluoridation.

    If regional or local councils were selling water – even with a little fee – they would be liable for the quality of the product. We have had that rehearsed in Havelock North recently. That effective liability would mean harder and stronger enforcement of the National Water Standards. These I understand now come under the Ministry of Health (correct me, do). That’s a consumer lightning rod few politicians and even fewer Council staff would want to hold.

    I haven’t heard any party mention the equivalent of an Electricity Commission for water. There, the electricity price is set – in significant measure – by the cost of capital. It is a fully regulated industry. Same for airports, where aircraft landing charges are limited to the provable cost of capital from the airports. Really, really hard to contest.

    Who sets the price?
    Should there be regional variation?
    Who controls quality?
    Who is the beneficiary of that price?
    Should there be domestic v commercial price variation, and why?

    I want to hear the whole policy framework from those who really want this.

    At the moment the National government doesn’t have to answer any of these questions – which is of course to their advantage.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.1

      If regional council are allowed to set a commercial rate for water – i.e. make more $$ in the price than simply paying for the cost of capital and operations and depreciation, then you have given Council license to print money – just as much as the corporations.

      Councils, just like central government, should be printing money.

      That would mean water meters in every town, alongside every letterbox.

      They should be there anyway as we actually do need to know how much is being used and where. They can also help find leaks.

      Who sets the price?

      The market.

      Of course, the local council should determine, through the scientific method, just how much water is available.

      Should there be regional variation?

      Nope, there should only price.

      Who controls quality?

      That would depend upon if quality control is needed wouldn’t it?

      Should there be domestic v commercial price variation, and why?

      No but people should be guaranteed access to water while the corporations aren’t.

      • Ad 3.1.1

        Councils are never going to “print money”, so forget that as a possibility. Not even helpful.

        Re metering: plenty of Councils have been thrown out for proposing it. It’s a major democratic problem. Not everyone accepts that “user pays” is appropriate for what is an essential human right.

        The market should not set the price for something that no-one can live without.
        And before anyone says “rainwater tanks”, 90% of New Zealand lives in cities, and they are not practical for them other than for an elite few who choose them, live with the quality risks, and can afford the capital to buy and upkeep them.

        Why should there not be price variation? Why should a West Coaster or their business pay the same where it is abundant, compared to the Hawkes Bay or Canterbury Plains where it is scarce? It’s reasonable to respond to catchment capacity, as Regional Councils already do.

        Quality control is a requirement through the national water standards. Which are legally binding upon all suppliers and regulators of potable water.

        As for “people should be guaranteed access to water while corporations aren’t” … well, most Councils now have water corporations, who sell and process water for both domestic and commercial use. No one regulates them.

        • dukeofurl 3.1.1.1

          Well the regulation is that the water supply isnt able to make a profit.

        • Draco T Bastard 3.1.1.2

          Re metering: plenty of Councils have been thrown out for proposing it. It’s a major democratic problem. Not everyone accepts that “user pays” is appropriate for what is an essential human right.

          Poor education and limited logic. Metering is essential even without user pays.

          Quality control is a requirement through the national water standards. Which are legally binding upon all suppliers and regulators of potable water.

          But not all water supplied needs to be potable but does still need to be charged for.

          As for “people should be guaranteed access to water while corporations aren’t” … well, most Councils now have water corporations, who sell and process water for both domestic and commercial use. No one regulates them.

          Then those ‘corporations’ need to be changed to public services which is really what they are.

          • Ad 3.1.1.2.1

            – compulsory nationwide metering to all NZ catchments and users is very impractical outside urban areas. It’s not impossible. It would take a decade, and need water-specific legislation. Compare rollout of telephones, electricity, and broadband. About a decade each.

            – all water supplied from public sources is subject to regulation for quality. You will have major consumer guarantee problems and health problems if raw water sold for industrial use is sold for other purposes. Would need explicit liability and insurance clauses.

            – further legislation would be required to banish public water companies. Recall what happened to council-owned retail electricity companies? They werent bought in house.

            For all of the above, there are massive policy holes. Its a lovely little petition, but needs actual thinking.

  4. greywarshark 4

    Watch the gummint try to pour cold water on that.

  5. Draco T Bastard 5

    Here’s the authors Twitter story on how hard it was to get the info from the councils.

  6. Molly 6

    “Businesses would then rightly point out that if they are paying for it, then so should every citizen. “
    And that is when it should be pointed out to them that they are not actually a living organism that requires clean water to live. They can change their business model or strategy and make money elsewhere.

    • greywarshark 6.1

      Molly
      The trouble is that sometime in the 1990s I think the laws were changed to give companies and corporations the same rights as citizens. Which wiped any special privileges we might have as living individuals right away. The lawyers that write here may like to confirm that and demonstrate with an example what it means and how we are disadvantaged by this.

  7. dukeofurl 7

    “Comparatively, in Auckland, Watercare charges $1.40 per cubic metre (1000 litres) for water piped to houses, while the rest of the country paid an average $1.60 per cubic metre.”

    Watercare charges for both the treated water supply and its disposal as sewage treatment , including all the dams , plants, pipes to do so.

    This comparison has to be one of the stupidest things to ever come out of the Herald.

    There is plenty to be said for having a higher price for those bottling water from their own bore.
    But comparing the amount for treated supply and disposal with that for a bore drilled by the bottler on their own land ( most cases) is absurd.

    Would you compare restaurant prices with the price of raw ingredients at a supermarket ?

    • dukeofurl 7.1

      The charge by Watercare for sewage treatment is in addition, so the effective charge per m3 , as read by meter, is $ 3.37 m3

    • re 7.2

      dol is touching on a very good point. The comparison in the OP is a great emotive button pusher, but doesn’t stand much scrutiny.

      The huge fraction of municipal water supply are fixed costs for bulk water treatment and distribution direct to homes. A typical city supplies between 200 – 400 litre/person/day all treated to a high drinking water standard, yet only a tiny fraction (<1%) is actually directly consumed by humans. The ratio of fixed capital costs to the marginal cost of delivering each litre of water is enormous.

      Bottled water has a completely different economic model. If taken from a clean aquifer source the treatment and supply capital costs are very low, while the transport and distribution costs are directly related to marginal cost of each litre sold. Of which almost all is actually directly consumed as drinking water. In this case the marginal costs of supply completely dominate the picture.

      Or put it this way, how would you feel if your local council started charging you bottled water prices for each of the 300 litres of water each person in your household uses per day?

    • RedLogix 7.3

      dol is touching on a very good point. The comparison in the OP is a great emotive button pusher, but doesn’t stand much scrutiny.

      The huge fraction of municipal water supply are fixed costs for bulk water treatment and distribution direct to homes. A typical city supplies between 200 – 400 litre/person/day all treated to a high drinking water standard, yet only a tiny fraction (<1%) is actually directly consumed by humans. The ratio of fixed capital costs to the marginal cost of delivering each litre of water is enormous.

      Bottled water has a completely different economic model. If taken from a clean aquifer source the treatment and supply capital costs are very low, while the transport and distribution costs are directly related to marginal cost of each litre sold. Of which almost all is actually directly consumed as drinking water. In this case the marginal costs of supply completely dominate the picture.

      Or put it this way, how would you feel if your local council started charging you bottled water prices for each of the 300 litres of water each person in your household uses per day?

  8. Ethica 8

    This is such an important issue. Our best and deepest water is literarily being syphoned off by overseas corporates and we get nothing except the contaminated left over shallow water. There are huge water factories spouting up all over the country. This must become an election issue. The water industry should be nationalised.

  9. Mat Simpson 9

    All signed Mickey.

    The water issue has the potential to damage this government.

    This grab of a natural resource for free and the profit being made from its sale while joe the public has to pay twice , once for supply and again to purchase it bottled is a perfect example of why the current government should fall at the next election.

    Third term governments always have sleeper issues that provoke strong feelings like how much water you can have while you are in the shower and the ” ditch the bitch ” protest by truckies at the increase in road user charges in Labour’s last months in government.
    https://www.nbr.co.nz/article/clark-defends-rise-road-user-charges-32799

    The water issue though is inherently unfair and the impact on the environment and supply into the future must be addressed.

    But there will be no action before September 23rd with a glib response to be seen to be doing something while doing absolutely nothing.

  10. Ian 10

    If you think that selling bottled water is such a money spinner why don’t you all put your money where your mouth is. Then you could give your profits to the poor and first home buyers.
    You would then solve the housing crisis and the poverty dilemma with a wave of your magic wand.

    • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1

      Nah, I’ll leave the primary extraction industries to lazy bitter dullards like you and get on with something worthwhile and productive instead thanks,

      • Ian 10.1.1

        So how do you contribute to the New Zealand economy nameless one ?

        • One Anonymous Bloke 10.1.1.1

          You think your handle is any more anonymous than mine? Logic fail.

          I contribute to the economy via private enterprise, and I value my privacy.

  11. greg 11

    no one has manged to answer why the fuck are we giving a public resource away for nothing is this government so corrupt or they just total morons for goodness sake royalties should be paid and plunder should be tightly regulated does Saudi Arabia give away its oil no fucken way.
    >

  12. JC 12

    “If the Minister of Conservation grants a concession to electricity company, Westpower, to build a Hydro scheme on the Waitaha River – as she says she intends to do – Mogan George will become an emanciated trickle for much of the year, Opponents say this would be an environmental tragedy and a cultural loss, and tantamount to building a wind farm on the summit of Aoraki/Mt Cook”

    https://www.nzgeo.com/stories/a-tale-of-two-currents/

    WTF! Still this goes on!, (And On) No decision yet…..

  13. Jeremy 13

    I think some info might be missing.

    Are the bottling companies buying water after it has gone through distribution and treatment infrastructure, or they sourcing the water directly from source?

    If it’s the latter, as I would suspect, it would explain much of the discrepancy.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Celebrating the Entry Into Force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons
    [Opening comments, welcome and thank you to Auckland University etc] It is a great pleasure to be here this afternoon to celebrate such an historic occasion - the entry into force of the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons. This is a moment many feared would never come, but ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 days ago
  • Supporting disabled people to stay connected
    The Government is providing $3 million in one-off seed funding to help disabled people around New Zealand stay connected and access support in their communities, Minister for Disability Issues, Carmel Sepuloni announced today. The funding will allow disability service providers to develop digital and community-based solutions over the next two ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Voluntary saliva testing offered to quarantine workers from Monday
    Border workers in quarantine facilities will be offered voluntary daily COVID-19 saliva tests in addition to their regular weekly testing, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said today. This additional option will be rolled out at the Jet Park Quarantine facility in Auckland starting on Monday 25 January, and then to ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Next steps in firearms buy-back
    The next steps in the Government’s ambitious firearms reform programme to include a three-month buy-back have been announced by Police Minister Poto Williams today.  “The last buy-back and amnesty was unprecedented for New Zealand and was successful in collecting 60,297 firearms, modifying a further 5,630 firearms, and collecting 299,837 prohibited ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    4 days ago
  • Jobs for Nature projects target iconic ecosystems
    Upscaling work already underway to restore two iconic ecosystems will deliver jobs and a lasting legacy, Conservation Minister Kiri Allan says.  “The Jobs for Nature programme provides $1.25 billion over four years to offer employment opportunities for people whose livelihoods have been impacted by the COVID-19 recession. “Two new projects ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • New Public Housing Plan announced
    The Government has released its Public Housing Plan 2021-2024 which outlines the intention of where 8,000 additional public and transitional housing places announced in Budget 2020, will go. “The Government is committed to continuing its public house build programme at pace and scale. The extra 8,000 homes – 6000 public ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Prime Minister congratulates President Joe Biden on his inauguration
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has congratulated President Joe Biden on his inauguration as the 46th President of the United States of America. “I look forward to building a close relationship with President Biden and working with him on issues that matter to both our countries,” Jacinda Ardern said. “New Zealand ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    5 days ago
  • Jobs for Nature funding will create training and employment opportunities
    A major investment to tackle wilding pines in Mt Richmond will create jobs and help protect the area’s unique ecosystems, Biosecurity Minister Damien O’Connor says. The Mt Richmond Forest Park has unique ecosystems developed on mineral-rich geology, including taonga plant species found nowhere else in the country. “These special plant ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    6 days ago
  • Pre-departure testing extended to all passengers to New Zealand
    To further protect New Zealand from COVID-19, the Government is extending pre-departure testing to all passengers to New Zealand except from Australia, Antarctica and most Pacific Islands, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “The change will come into force for all flights arriving in New Zealand after 11:59pm (NZT) on Monday ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    7 days ago
  • Bay Cadets learn skills to protect environment
    Bay Conservation Cadets launched with first intake Supported with $3.5 million grant Part of $1.245b Jobs for Nature programme to accelerate recover from Covid Cadets will learn skills to protect and enhance environment Environment Minister David Parker today welcomed the first intake of cadets at the launch of the Bay ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    1 week ago
  • Cook Islanders to resume travel to New Zealand
    The Prime Minister of New Zealand Jacinda Ardern and the Prime Minister of the Cook Islands Mark Brown have announced passengers from the Cook Islands can resume quarantine-free travel into New Zealand from 21 January, enabling access to essential services such as health. “Following confirmation of the Cook Islands’ COVID ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Supporting communities and landowners to grow employment opportunities
    Jobs for Nature funding is being made available to conservation groups and landowners to employ staff and contractors in a move aimed at boosting local biodiversity-focused projects, Conservation Minister Kiritapu Allan has announced. It is estimated some 400-plus jobs will be created with employment opportunities in ecology, restoration, trapping, ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Border exception for some returning international tertiary students
    The Government has approved an exception class for 1000 international tertiary students, degree level and above, who began their study in New Zealand but were caught offshore when border restrictions began. The exception will allow students to return to New Zealand in stages from April 2021. “Our top priority continues ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Tiwai deal gives time for managed transition
    Today’s deal between Meridian and Rio Tinto for the Tiwai smelter to remain open another four years provides time for a managed transition for Southland. “The deal provides welcome certainty to the Southland community by protecting jobs and incomes as the region plans for the future. The Government is committed ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • New member for APEC Business Advisory Council
    Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has appointed Anna Curzon to the APEC Business Advisory Council (ABAC). The leader of each APEC economy appoints three private sector representatives to ABAC. ABAC provides advice to leaders annually on business priorities. “ABAC helps ensure that APEC’s work programme is informed by business community perspectives ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Govt’s careful economic management recognised
    The Government’s prudent fiscal management and strong policy programme in the face of the COVID-19 global pandemic have been acknowledged by the credit rating agency Fitch. Fitch has today affirmed New Zealand’s local currency rating at AA+ with a stable outlook and foreign currency rating at AA with a positive ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • Additional actions to keep COVID-19 out of NZ
    The Government is putting in place a suite of additional actions to protect New Zealand from COVID-19, including new emerging variants, COVID-19 Response Minister Chris Hipkins said today. “Given the high rates of infection in many countries and evidence of the global spread of more transmissible variants, it’s clear that ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • 19 projects will clean up and protect waterways
    $36 million of Government funding alongside councils and others for 19 projects Investment will clean up and protect waterways and create local jobs Boots on the ground expected in Q2 of 2021 Funding part of the Jobs for Nature policy package A package of 19 projects will help clean up ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    2 weeks ago
  • New Zealand Government acknowledges 175th anniversary of Battle of Ruapekapeka
    The commemoration of the 175th anniversary of the Battle of Ruapekapeka represents an opportunity for all New Zealanders to reflect on the role these conflicts have had in creating our modern nation, says Associate Minister for Arts, Culture and Heritage Kiri Allan. “The Battle at Te Ruapekapeka Pā, which took ...
    BeehiveBy beehive.govt.nz
    3 weeks ago