by Rachel Stewart

You’d think once you’d decided to eliminate regional councils – as the Government has – you’d be very clear about what you’re replacing them with. Combined Territories Board will be their new code name, but there’s some doubt about the level of democracy that particular change could bring. By abolishing regional councillors and replacing them with the mayors of regional bodies, I doubt this model will serve smaller communities well or be terribly transparent. Centralised systems don’t tend to be.

Established under the 1989 local government reforms and covering 11 regions based primarily on water catchments or drainage basins, regional councils have been failing for years. They are arguably more crucial than local government in their duties – although I’ve always been mystified and slightly amused by their role in providing bus services – because water and air quality, flood protection and pest control are all dear to my heart.

Why do I think they’ve been failing? How long have you got?

Because the average citizen often has no real idea of what regional councils actually do, they’ve been in the unique position of avoiding a lot of public scrutiny. Not everybody is a nerd. They just pay their rates and carry on. I made the mistake of getting interested in water quality some 15 years ago and accordingly, on that issue alone, I became very cynical about their effectiveness and integrity.

I even worked for one once. It was the worst employment experience of my life. Basically the whole structure appeared to be about doing very little while using zealous PR to make it look like they were hard at it. And given their whole brief was to manage the environment for their ratepayers, I observed they did sweet FA to actually achieve it. Time and again they ignored water quality red flags, preferring to stall, delay, deflect and protect individuals they had close relations with. It was so blatant as to be laughable, if it wasn’t so serious.

Back in 2011 a report from the Auditor-General’s office, on how well regional councils were managing freshwater quality, showed one consistent theme across the board. Political interference.

The report was based on investigations into water quality in areas covered by Waikato Regional Council, Taranaki Regional Council, Horizons Regional Council and Environment Southland. All are significant dairy farming areas.

What fascinated me most about the report were the strong statements by the Auditor-General about freshwater quality being put at risk by elected representatives meddling in the process. She stressed that councillors should not be involved in investigating breaches or deciding whether to prosecute. At all four councils, elected members were found to be involved in prosecutions to some degree. Most were elected dairy farmers.

In Taranaki, now National party MP David McCleod was chairman of their regional council for years while also a Fonterra director. Not only that, they invested millions in Fonterra bonds during his tenure.

In the years since, regional councils have been mindful of the growing tide of public opposition to dairying’s substantial – but not sole- role in deteriorating water quality. As far as the dairy industry’s credibility is concerned councils must be seen to be impartial and unbiased, while also caring for the environment. Hard to do, I concede, but where water quality is involved there is no room for error and back then that particular report meant they were officially put on notice to be seen to play with a much straighter bat.

But did they do it?

A couple of years later in 2013, The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment released a report called ‘Water quality in New Zealand: Land use and nutrient pollution’.

It ostensibly hammered the large amount of nitrates and phosphorous entering our waterways and argued that New Zealanders would soon be forced to choose between the environment and dairy farming with Canterbury and Southland likely to be the hardest hit if things didn’t change.

All of which has come to pass. But is that the fault of regional councils? Well, yes and no. They are the regulators and their regulation of environmental breaches – not just around water quality – has been haphazard and lacklustre. If you can’t enforce your own rules then why have them? And trust me when I tell you that there are endless examples of regulation failures.

But regional councils are also influenced by the whims of successive Governments. If the economy is up the Murrumbidgee in a barbed wire canoe – as it is right now – polluting businesses are given longer leads.

So, just like local government, regional councils have lost their social licence to operate. What I find interesting is the Greens response to this new direction. They are not happy, but when are they? They want the status quo, more bureaucracy, more inefficiency. Remember when they actually cared about the environment over Palestine and trans rights? Seems like a million years ago.

I remain unconvinced that this new regional structure will achieve anything much at all for the environment or any real accountability. Ways have been devised to make things look better than they actually are out there. And, let’s face it, are we as a country in any position to stymie productivity over environmental concerns? I’d like to think we are but it’s a false hope.

We’re squarely in the shit.