Swimmable water plan defended

Heated debate around the Government’s proposed swimming waterquality standards continues, with more groups joining the critical chorus against the plan.

The Government announced on Thursday a proposal requiring 90 per cent of rivers and lakes to become swimmable by 2040, in accordance with new waterquality guidelines.

Those guidelines change the national ‘‘wadeable’’ standard to a ‘‘swimmable’’ standard, which requires a different grading method.

The proposal’s critics – including environmental groups and several freshwater scientists – said the new standards were misleading and either did little more than the existing guidelines or in some case were lower.

Yesterday more groups criticised the proposal, including the and the Rural General Practitioner Network, which both said Government had been too slow in addressing poor water quality.

Environment Minister Nick Smith defended the Government’s plan and accused critics such as the Green Party of using ‘‘junk science’’.

He reiterated his view that the plan was ambitious and would improve water quality to its highest point in decades.

‘‘There’s no question we want to improve water quality. We are not in dispute with the Greens about that.

‘‘What we are in dispute over is whether the Government’s classification of rivers is fair and reasonable for an average person.’’

He said for a river to be classed as swimmable under the new guidelines, E.coli levels could not exceed 540 per 100 millilitres more than 20 per cent of the time, but it would also need an annual median level of 130 E.coli per 100ml.

At the 540 concentration, there would be a one in 20 chance of getting sick. At the 130 concentration, there would be a one in 1000 chance. Smith said it was unfair for critics to cite the 540 figure because the river would be closer to 130 most of the time.

The country’s environmental watchdog, Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Jan Wright, said some aspects of the announcement were laudable, but she had concerns.

She welcomed plans to increase stock fencing and restrict discharges of urban sewage but said it was difficult to tell if the standards were being raised or lowered. ‘‘It’s very confusing,’’ she said. ‘‘There’s been some goalposts moved.

‘‘When I grew up in Christchurch, Coes Ford in the Selwyn River was the place to go and swim in a river and it was lovely – not now.

‘‘That’s what we’re worrying about.’’

Freshwater ecologist and Environment Canterbury (ECan) councillor Lan Pham said the announcement was a ‘‘betrayal’’ and did nothing to address freshwater degradation.

She said it would be up to regional councils to set their own targets above the ‘‘gutless’’ national standards, which should be more in line with community water-quality expectations.