10. RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) Link to this
to the Minister with responsibility for Auckland Issues
Is she aware of any risks created by the Local Government Act 2002 to Auckland’s waterworks, given her reply to supplementary questions on 15 June 2006; if so, what action has she taken to address those risks?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN (Leader of the House) Link to this
I am aware of an issue in relation to section 225(d)(i) of the Act, and discussions are continuing with the Minister of Local Government.
Does she find it acceptable that anyone endangering Watercare Services’ above-ground pipes must advise Watercare Services, but that such advice is not necessary, because of a drafting error in the Local Government Act 2002, if the pipes are below ground, so endangering Auckland’s water supply?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
Indeed, that question relates to section 225(d)(i) of the Local Government Act 2002. But simply rectifying that by inserting a reference to Watercare Services in relation to the reference to a local authority would not have dealt with the issue that caused this question to arise.
Dr Richard WorthDoes she not realise that her covert support for the Auckland Regional Council proposal to take over the asset of Watercare Services from the constituent territorial local authorities and the removal of the statutory cap on water prices in the Local Government Act 2002 will hugely increase water prices for consumers in the Auckland region; why does she not back off?
R Doug WoolertonDo the references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi contained in section 4 of the Local Government Act 2002 in any way affect the risk to Auckland’s waterworks; if so, how?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
I am not aware of a risk to Auckland’s water supply from section 4 of the Local Government Act 2002, but I always welcome further representations from the member on those matters.
Is she aware that Genesis Energy recently did not tell Watercare Services, because it was not required to do so, of its intention to shift a huge transformer over roads that passed over underground pipes in South Auckland that carry the water from the Waikato River to Auckland, that if it had not been for an alert staff member in a water retail company a major source of water to Auckland could have been cut, and that because of that error Auckland runs the risk of having its water supply cut, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week; what is she doing about that?
Hon Dr MICHAEL CULLEN Link to this
As I said to the member, it is not quite as simple as I think he assumes. Section 225 of the Act refers to the carrying out of work on or in relation to a waterworks, and the particular incident he cites, which is the cause of the concern that has led to the matter being brought to the attention of the Government, probably would not be covered by simply amending section 225 in order to refer to Watercare Services. That is why further work needs to be done to make sure this kind of situation can be covered in the future.