Three Waters Infrastructure Reforms (Key considerations (Which consenting…
Three Waters Infrastructure Reforms
Drinking Water Safety
Environment and Planning
Aggregation of DW and WW with 3-5 providers
Aggregation of DW and WW with 10-12 providers
Status Quo - TAs retain service delivery
Aggregation of DW, WW and SW with 3-5 providers
Aggregation of DW, WW and SW with 10-12 providers
Status Quo with consenting decisions and CME by 16 regional councils
SQ + additional compliance monitoring and benchmarking by national body
Consenting decisions made by RCs but CME undertaken by national body (based on criteria/threshold)
Consenting decisions and CME functions transferred to national body (based on criteria/threshold)
Which consenting decisions would be transferred to national boy? E.g. all consent decisions associated with wastewater treatment plans and networks? Or just discharge consents?
What does a ideal regulatory system look like? What do we think needs to be done differently? What will incentivise better compliance and outcomes?
How do we ensure a catchment management approach is still operable that allows regional councils to allocate discharge consents across different activity types to achieve best water quality outcomes?
What criteria/threshold would be need to determine when a wastewater consent decision requires national oversight?
How to ensure consent decisions by national bodies take into account local planning considerations?
What aspects of environmental regulation of Three Waters infrastructure need improvement? Drinking water source protection? Wastewater and Stormwater discharges?