Support for water meters not flooding in
The tide has yet to turn in favour of water meters in New Plymouth.
On day three of the New Plymouth District Council hearings on its draft $3 billion 10-year spending plan, there was little support for one of the most controversial ideas – introducing water meters to 26,000 homes.
If approved, the $18 million installation job would start in July. Real bills wouldn’t start arriving for a year, with residents receiving only mock bills while they get used to having to watch their water use.
Former mayoral candidate and cordial maker Greg Mackay was one of many dead against meters.
‘‘Money should go into infrastructure rather than water meters,’’ he told councillors yesterday.
‘‘It’s the infrastructure and treatments that people pay for in our rates,’’ he said. ‘‘Water is free.’’
Waitara councillor Tony Bedford told Mackay he had a meter installed at his house as an experiment.
It showed he had used more than 4000 litres a day when the sprinkler was on in his garden.
The average daily per-person use in New Plymouth is a little under 300 litres.
‘‘Are you quite happy subsidising me to do that,’’ Bedford asked.
It was fine with him, answered Mackay. ‘‘At some stage I’ve got to water my gardens, I’ve got to water my grass – it balances out in the end.’’
Allen Stancliffe, from Fish & Game, was one of the rare voices in support of getting the district’s water metered to drive conservation.
Districts and cities that have installed meters have generally found residents reduce water consumption by 20 to 25 per cent.
‘‘The Waiwhakaiho River in particular is already under significant pressure from water extraction,’’ he said.
Environmental activist Barbara Hammonds did not argue for or against water meters, but took exception to the options presented for consultation. She quite rightly pointed out there were no options given for saving water without the use of meters.
She also accused council officers of cherry-picking water figures to paint the picture they wanted.
Councillor Sam Bennett told Hammonds he was living proof of a water meter driving behaviour change.
Since one was installed at his home, he had become much more conscious of how much he was using. He asked her if she believed meters would see people change how they used water.
‘‘I believe it would, but the problem for me is it’s been linked together with paying for water,’’ she replied.
The meter proposal had the support of Anne-Marie McKay, from Te Runanga o Ngati Mutunga, who said the iwi welcomed their introduction as a water-saving tool.
‘‘We don’t think it will affect our kaumatua or elderly residents, simply because they are the most keen water conservationists I’ve ever met.’’
But there needed to be consideration to support larger lowincome families, she added.
Andrew Larsen from the Waitara Community Board said he was ‘‘dead against’’ water meters.
For commercial use it was fine, or for those with a pool or spa, he said.
‘‘But don’t put it in every house. At this stage we have no idea how it’s going to charge. You haven’t come forward with that.’’
Councillor Richard Handley asked Larsen if he understood that payment for water could only be for cost recovery, and asked for no more talk of putting prices up.
It wasn’t all about meters. Long-time council watchdog Peter Moeahu asked the councillors to consider adjusting rates by the level of inflation, using more income from the council’s investment fund, and finding imaginative ways to pay for the rest.
‘‘Because the huge rate hikes signalled in the Long-Term Plan are a killer,’’ he said of the estimated double-digit rise this year.
The hearing is set to continue at 9.30am today, and councillors will start deliberating on May 18.