Drinking Water Source Protection Downgraded In Proposed RMA Replacement

Protection for Aotearoa New Zealand’s drinking water sources would be significantly weakened under the Government’s proposed replacement of the Resource Management Act, as set out in the Natural Environment Bill and the Planning Bill, according to the latest Public Health Communication Centre Briefing.

The expert authors say the proposed reforms fail to be the safety net they should be for communities’ access to safe drinking water. They say the bills signal that further freshwater degradation will be permitted, with serious implications for public health.

“The two Bills proposed to replace the Resource Management Act remove clear priorities for protection of New Zealand’s drinking water sources and replace them with weak and often murky law,” says lead author Marnie Prickett. “The Natural Environment Bill signals that more pollution of fresh waterways will be allowed, even though the state of our freshwater is already dire.”

“As they stand, the bills pose a serious threat to human health and the freshwater ecosystems we all rely on. The bills need to be sent back to the drawing board, not rushed through with such consequential flaws.”

The Briefing notes that the proposed legislation fails recognise the protection and management of drinking water sources as a matter of national importance. This is in opposition to recommendations from the Government Inquiry into the 2016 Havelock North campylobacteriosis outbreak that drinking water source protection be explicitly written into resource management law to ensure it remains visible and prioritised over time.

“The Havelock North Inquiry warned that the lessons from Havelock North would fade unless drinking water source protection was clearly embedded in legislation and that’s exactly what we’re seeing,” says Prickett. “Not only is the Government failing to recognise the national importance of drinking water, it proposes to dramatically reduce its protection.”

The Briefing also highlights that while the Government has stated the bills would including “binding environmental limits”, in reality, the Bills would remove existing national ecosystem health bottom lines for freshwater and instead require councils to redevelop local limits that must factor in “economic needs or aspirations”.

“The bills mandate undefined trade-offs to what should be science-based human and ecosystem health protections. This opens the door to industries demanding weak local limits that allow them to pollute drinking water sources,” says Prickett. “This is a dangerous step backwards from Te Mana o te Wai, the existing policy that requires councils to provide for people’s need for safe drinking water before commercial interests can be considered.”

The authors also raise concerns that the long-standing requirement for councils to “maintain or improve” water quality appears to be gone and includes provisions where “the proposed limit allows for environmental degradation”.

“The result of these changes and others is that pollution of drinking water sources becomes much harder to prevent. Once source water is degraded, treatment alone cannot reliably or affordably protect public health.”

The authors conclude that without reinstating Te Mana o te Wai or including a hierarchy of priority in the reforms (elevating drinking water source protection to a matter of national importance), the proposed Planning and Natural Environment Bills are unlikely to provide adequate protection for New Zealanders’ drinking water or freshwater ecosystems.