Submission

30th April 2004

Simon McCarthy
NZWWA
P O Box 1316
Wellington

Submission on Drinking Water Supplies
Rural Women New Zealand (RWNZ) supports that every resident should have access to a potable water
supply. However, the cost of compliance and the level of bureaucracy involved to simply provide a
monitoring service paid for by users affects rural disproportionately to urban. This is due to small suppliers covering a wide geographical distance and the testing requirements legislated require qualified testing
personnel.

Due to the level of compliance RWNZ suggests that self-testing be done by the supplier who has knowledge of the drinking water source and infrastructure. This would be cost-effective in the case of those with a secure water supply (underground) and those with unsecured water sources would by necessity need to carry out an increased number of samples. Self-compliance would seem practical with the assistance of workshops so that rural people know the implications of caring for their drinking water source. RWNZ would advocate an ‘educate rather than legislate’ philosophy.

Further we note that the legislation refers to a monitoring service and not assistance where there are
problems with drinking water. To ensure the objective of ‘every resident has access to a potable water
supply’ there should be remedial measures that will assist the rural sector if drinking water is deemed a
serious health risk. Remembering the infrastructure has been paid for by rural and in cases of schools and
marae upgrading of a system could be significant and therefore financial assistance would be required.

We note from the NCEA requirements that a ‘Drinking Water Inspector’ qualification is deemed a diploma
and would submit that such a level of education would necessitate a significant outlay by the rural sector
given distances such inspectors would be expected to travel. The criteria for inspectors appears more
relevant to urban situations of one treatment plant covering a population in excess of 10,000 rather than the small supplier. We would note that this is another element of the ‘one size does not fit all’ and that selfcompliance is a good practical way of ensuring potable water in the rural sector.

Through the discussion forums held in the main centers it has been noted that rural will be the most affected by the change in legislation. Despite comments from those fora and comments prior to the forums from RWNZ to the Ministry of Health and endorsement by Federated Farmers and Ministry of Agriculture, the rural sector have not been consulted. The centers selected are a significant distance from the rural consumer and the timing of the discussions is not conducive to the rural sector attendance and therefore input. We note that in flood affected area’s where drinking water nfrastructure will be an issue that no discussion forum was held. Advocating discussion after the legislation is passed shows a total disregard of the rural sector and the practical solutions such a sector could have offered related to their specific region.

Jo-Anne Stokes
Executive Officer
Rural Women New Zealand