Dal Minogue

You are asking questions, many of which no-one should respond to until a lot of information is put forward to guide a reasonable decision making process. 

To give answers to the questions you are posing could mean that legal advice could request that an elected member consider excluding themselves from voting with regard to them because they could be seen committing to a course of action without the information necessary to make an informed decision. That is called having a pre-determined view and I suggest you look at the Auditor Generals advice regarding that. 

To give you an example, when I was elected to the Thames Coromandel District Council in 2004, Coromandel Watchdog asked all candidates to sign a document saying they would prohibit mining on the Coromandel Peninsula if elected. Six elected Councillors signed that pledge and subsequent legal advice asked that they all consider standing aside from any decision making about mining because of the perception of a pre-determined view that could become subject to judicial review. 5 of the 6 candidates did withdraw as they could have also been held liable for subsequent legal and processing costs if a judicial review had found them wanting.

I did not sign that document and I will not sign yours because it is going down the same track. You would be wise to withdraw your questions. 

Regards,

Dal Minogue.

Kataraina Hodge

Thank you for the email. I have read it and taken into consideration my loyalty to my Māori Constituencies, who have decided wholeheartly to put me back unopposed not to participate.

I believe over the last three years I have formed some really good relations with my constituents, but I also am not naive enough to not know that there are some who do not and may not agree with me all the time.

On this note, once again thank you for the email.

Ngā mihi
Kataraina Hodge

Fred Lichtwark 

Most land owners know what I’ve helped to achieve for the Whaingaroa Catchment as the manager of Whaingaroa Harbour Care for 25 years. In this time, we’ve worked with 80+ landowners and planted almost 2 million trees to protect water quality in streams and the Whaingaroa Harbour. At the same time, landowners have fenced almost 500km of streams and harbour edges and retired hundreds of hectares of land.

By supporting landowners to do riparian management over the past 25 years, the majority of farmers in this catchment will be unaffected by upcoming government rules designed to ensure all farmers comply with good farm management practices to improve water quality at their own cost.

West Coast farmers have shown they are ahead of the rest of Waikato’s farmers and capable of managing water quality issues themselves

As your regional Councillor for the past three years, I’ve been committed to value for money, sustainable farming and clean water – we all deserve swimmable rivers, lakes and harbours and working together we can achieve this in 20 years not 100 years. 

My experience proves that involving communities can be a win, win; we can reduce rates and enjoy a healthy, resilient environment and economy.

In three years as your Councillor, I’ve improved Council’s purchasing policy, now our rates money is spent locally to optimize community wellbeing. I’ve also enabled Council to use technology to reduce costs, improve consent compliance and ensure polluters are caught.

There are two very important plans under review right now, the Coastal Plan and the Regional Plan. These two plans will have major impacts on our West Coast and I have a good understanding of our coastal communities and their coastal environments. 

My biggest challenge in this role, is to encourage Council to allow communities to take the lead in catchment management, as I know from experience that communities can achieve this at far less cost than Council and communities often achieve a better result.

If I’m elected again, I’ll keep working for ratepayers and focus on building resilience in our communities for the effects of climate change by improving flood defenses and enabling landowners to plant more native trees.

If I’m unsuccessful, I’ll have more time to go fishing. Thank you so much for your time and I hope I can continue to work for you as your Regional Councillor.

Regards

Fred Lichtwark

Dan Armstrong

It would depend on what the changes and are and what they are for.

Gray Baldwin

For, if justified

Bernhard Chrustowski

Keeping rates and charges artificially low by running significant annual deficit budgets is socially irresponsible and economically unsound. All you are doing is shifting the burden and onus on to future ratepayers without actually addressing the real financial issues. It is not realistic to guarantee no rate increases at this time without being able to analyse council’s true net financial position. Reviewing the actual needs versus the wants would also be a good start. It is imperative we maintain the integrity of council’s statutory responsibilities, followed by actual regional needs and only then fulfilling any wants.

Alana Delich

I intend to make financially responsible decisions and aim to get the most value possible from the rates received. If all core services, including future proofing the region, can be delivered with the current rates take, I will vote to maintain rates at the current level.

Richard Gee

Yes if justified and relevant to the region development and council charges have to be realistic and relevant to the services provided.

Clyde Graf

During my term on Council between 2013-2016 I was part of the Rates Control Team. We promised to keep rates down and that’s what we did. In this current term, rates have increased drastically. If elected, I will continue to advocate for rates reductions, and will not support increases.

Keith Holmes

I cannot support increased rates nor increased cost of services [which are a significant part of the revenue stream].

I believe that there are significant opportunities to improve the service delivery with no loss of jobs or major restructuring. Creating a “Can do” culture with a devolving of responsibility by empowering people, is critical.

Stu Husband

I am opposed to increased rates unless specifically requested by ratepayers to fund new works or for Council to recover genuine costs for services. Any services provides and charges made for services must be commercially competitive.

Michael Kedzlie

Against. We have to restrain rates and council “mission creep” as the public actually demand it from us as ratepayers.

Stu Kneebone

Depends what the issue is – the pros and cons of each case need to be weighed up before making these sorts of decisions. However inflation is a reality – the only way to avoid cost increases is to stop investing into the region – not something I am in favour of. None the less, Council must be vigilant in its pursuit of ongoing efficiencies to keep costs down. Proposals to increase a level of service, with associated rates increases must be subject to a sound business case, and thorough analysis, as well as the obligatory public consultation before decisions are made to proceed.

Fred Litchwark

Looking at the budget for 2018 vs actual expenditure, you can see that some activities were underspent, while others were overspent. Overspending occurred in the following activities: Corporate, public transport, flood protection and integrated catchment management. There was also a significant underspend in science and strategy.

The reported $7 million deficit only considers operating revenue and expenses. It hasn’t taken into account the use of reserves that council has accumulated over previous financial years, nor does it take into account planned borrowing.

The approach to funding aims to achieve ratepayer equity, and tries to match the timing of funding against when ratepayers receive benefit from an asset or service and to smooth rates impacts for ratepayers to avoid big rate increases in any one year.

For your information, the 2019/20 Annual Plan was adopted by the council earlier this year.

It has a budget of almost $101 million, with an average rate’s increase of 4.5 per cent for all properties (excluding targeted rates).

Targeted rates rose an average of 11.2 per cent, mainly driven by increased budgets for biosecurity, public transport (Hamilton only) and catchment work.

For biosecurity, more funding is being put into pest control, including management of possums, wallabies and kauri dieback. The council is also collecting rates from Hamilton City ratepayers for the Hamilton-Auckland passenger rail service, while more flood protection work has been requested by landowners in the Lower Waikato and Waihou-Piako catchments.

Andrew MacPherson

I would hope not! There will need to be very good reasons for any rates increases and they would need to be supported by significant analysis. In the case of major drivers of rates increases, I will be looking for well-reasoned business cases, and my position will depend on what is driving any proposed increase.

My governance experience around significant capital and operational expenditure allocation decisions is considerable. I have first-hand experience of what happens when enthusiastic executives are allowed to enter into business plans without appropriate governance oversight. Part of my role will be helping the CEO and executive make the best possible decisions, so I would need strong convincing to allow rates increases.

I have led and worked on a number of boards and I need to be confident that capex and opex decisions that I sign off on have been scrutinised. I will strongly register my disagreement if I feel that resources are not being allocated sensibly.

It is becoming clear to me that WRC also faces additional responsibilities from central

government for costs which go to the ratepayer rather than the taxpayer. I will try hard to use my communication skills to make sure these costs are fair and reasonable.

Jennifer Nickel

That’s something I’d have to make a call on case by case. In a regional governance role I’d be expected to decide strategically on behalf of all constituents. I can state that I would analyse any proposed increases for necessity, reasonableness and value for money.

Barry Quayle

I have been one of the most active councillors against rates and other charges increases. I give staff significant interrogation on any rates. It is interesting that some rural farmer councillors (3) voted for the Hamilton Theatre at $6million dollars from WRC. I did not. I vigorously opposed it. The financial reports said it was risky and costs could not be verified. It got through on the chairs casting vote.

Russ Rimmington

Yes

Hugh Vercoe

Rate increases should be similar to the annual CPI unless very good reasons for undertaking extra work. Prioritisation of existing work should also be considered rather that add everything in to the budget because everything is a good idea.

Kathy White

As a Rates Control Team member, I’m committed to voting to keep rates increases at or below CPI and focused on core services. I’ve consistently voted that way during Annual Plans and LTPs since 2013.

I vote for increased charges only if there’s a good exacerbator/beneficiary argument for proportionally changing how the charges are allocated. I listen to all arguments and complaints, and I attended the presentations and working party workshop on changed policy around irrigation charges.

Dan Armstrong

Not a fan of debt but I understand that the likes of infrastructure and regulations will likely force an increase of debt without substantial central Government support (most councils seems to be facing this). Making sure that expenditure and debt on projects and systems that will be strategic and properly support the people/environment has to be a priority.

Gray Baldwin

No

Bernhard Chrustowski

No. Unbalanced budgets and running deficits year in and year out are not fiscally prudent nor financially sustainable especially when there is a limited income stream, such as rates, and no alternative generating funding option. The anticipated drawdown of a $52 million loan over the next few years is a concern to me as no repayment plans are indicated. There is insufficient information in the CEO report to understand the rationale behind the current financial strategy.

Alana Delich

This depends what the deficit is to be used for, but generally no, I do not support the council running a deficit.

Richard Gee

Yes deficit funding if managed is a good financial strategy for temporary time frames.

Clyde Graf

I do not support the Council running at a deficit. Council should not be budgeting beyond its revenue.

Keith Holmes

Absolutely not. It is indicative of a Council that has allowed itself to have too many “Irons in the Fire” and without budgetary constraints.

Stu Husband

I am extremely concerned and have made it clear as a councillor that there is a need for our Council to stop central Govt imposing their costly work on our ratepayers48. For example increased costly treaty settlement administration, National pest control, and other central government warm and fuzzy whims that impose new costs on our regions ratepayers.

Michael Kedzlie

The deficit is going to balloon out to over $52 million over the next few financial years. This level of borrowing will exceed half the financial assets that the WRC has currently under management. This is a real concern as the ROI (Return on Investment) of their financial assets will likely be negatively impacted over the next term of council due to an expected downturn in global financial markets. The WRC may have to prioritise some of the new “well-being” focuses more than others.

Stu Kneebone

 Yes – I am comfortable, noting that there are sound reasons for it. Some key reasons for the deficit are as follows:

Spreading of depreciation funding over the first three years of the LTP to soften the rates impact of flood protection works in the Lower Waikato & Waihou Piako

Phasing of funding for the biosecurity work programme

Borrowings for the Waikato Regional Theatre WRC contribution

Funding associated with the new regional ticketing system for public transport (in advance of expected funding contributions from NZTA)

This approach is also about matching the timing of funding verses when ratepayers are likely to receive the service, as well as smoothing rating impacts – ie, avoid big spikes in rates in any one year.

Fred Litchwark

No, I support a break-even budget, where reserves, interest and depreciation are used to avoid budget fluctuations and large rate increases between years. 

Andrew MacPherson

As a matter of principle, I am not in favour of council running deficit budgets. It was my understanding that they were not allowed to run deficit budgets.

I note in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan there is a “proposal for an unbalanced budget for the first three years of the plan and also in year six of the plan. This means that in each of these years, the money we expect to spend on operating expenditure is greater than the money we will receive”. They give five reasons, including:

– funding of non-cash items eg depreciation

– funding associated with the new regional ticketing solution for public transport

– phasing of cash contributions items for the Waikato Regional Theatre

– system development required for implementation of Healthy Rivers and failure to fund depreciation for this project and redevelopment

– redevelopment of the council’s premises in Paeroa which will be funded by borrowing so depreciation on the new asset will not be funded for the period of the loan (20 years). The item that concerns me the most is the funding to implement the Healthy Rivers project. It’s clear this item is causing considerable consternation for ratepayers. Once consultation is finished, WRC will have a clearer picture of what is required and more importantly what the project phasing will look like. I will be extremely cautious to make sure that the implementation plan is in the best interests of all ratepayers – not just a few. This will need very careful analysis of the science, financials and regional economic impact of this proposed plan change. It appears that 76% of that budget is driven by;

•  Integrated catchment management
•  Public transport
•  Flood protection and control works
•  Science and strategy

Those are the areas I would take the closest look at to understand in detail what the possibilities are to make savings and achieve a balanced budget.

The council believes that “overall that the budget it is proposing for the period of the LTP is financially prudent”. However, I remain to be convinced and will have a very vigilant approach to the annual plan development and how that fits with the LTP.

Jennifer Nickel

In principle no, but due to the nature of accounting I am comfortable with fluctuations as long as they are well understood, in control and transparent. Further, I support short-term borrowing in times of low-interest rates in order to achieve strategic goals in a preferred timeframe.

Barry Quayle

It is $6.6 m. The main reason is the loan for the theatre which I disagree with. Otherwise it was financially prudent to spread some expenditure over 3 years for certain items as follows: The council’s decision to spread the funding of depreciation expense in the lower Waikato Waihou and Piako catchment zones to manage affordability of rates increases; and the council’s decision to not fully fund depreciation of the new regional ticketing for public transport as it is expected NZTA will contribute part funding.

Russ Rimmington

No

Hugh Vercoe

WRC does not adopt a deficit budget but uses other income to balance. i.e. investment returns, reserve accounts, carry forwards, etc.

Kathy White

I don’t support running a deficit. I’d like us to manage our work programmes as cost-effectively as possible and only commit to what we can afford. Having more members from the Rates Control Team in the previous triennium helped to keep things fiscally prudent. I did not support the regional funding of the theatre in Hamilton or that it should be funded from borrowings. I’m also not happy with the spreading of costs over multiple years, because it delays expenditure and makes the impact of it less immediate. I’ve been disappointed by budget blow-outs in this triennium, and having to find funds for unanticipated rises in flood infrastructure costs. 

Dan Armstrong

Combination of rates, charges, and Government funding.

Gray Baldwin

Not supportive of running a deficit.

Bernhard Chrustowski

Not supportive of running a deficit.

Alana Delich

 It is my preference that the figures balance. Any deficit would need to be well-justified in terms of critical services or future return on investment – the provincial growth fund may be able to aid in funding of some projects, or there may be enough current equity to fund a deficit.

Richard Gee

Existing bankers arrangements and govt bonds.

Clyde Graf

Not supportive of running a deficit.

Keith Holmes

While not supporting running a deficit, Councils can take a “hit” in terms of the aftermath of a disaster. Managing this it will be a Central Govt., Local Government negotiated position as in the Christchurch Earthquake situation. However Regional Councils are mandated to have Disaster Relief reserves and some Insurance and these need to be safeguarded.

Stu Husband

I do not support deficit funding except in a rare instant where for example we have an unforeseen natural event such as a major flood event that causes considerable damage to essential infrastructure that requires council to remedy for the safety of our community and our reserves do not cover that immediate cost.

Michael Kedzlie

Not supportive of running a deficit.

Stu Kneebone

 Mix of targeted and general rates, plus Council investment fund income – standard Council funding mechanisms. Also note, the interest costs of Councils external borrowing programme through the LGNZ funding organisation are less than the return currently received from the investment fund.

Fred Litchwark

Not supportive of running a deficit.

Andrew MacPherson

I am not in favour of deficit budgets unless there is an extremely good reason.

Careful consideration must go into the funding of non-cash items. I would go to the source of the cheapest finance available to the WRC. The Local Government Funding Agency gives local government access to well-priced debt instruments.

Jennifer Nickel

My understanding is that the WRC has an overall healthy financial position as outlined in the Long Term Plan and with a stable income stream which it must work within wherever possible.

Barry Quayle

The theatre is covered by a loan which I disagree with. As spread over 3 years there is a equalisation on the other items.

Russ Rimmington

Reduce overhead, staff and salaries.

Hugh Vercoe

At the end of the year there is usually a small Operating surplus which is applied to other operational overspends. The Capital budget is usually well in surplus simply because the proposed capital work has not been completed. This surplus is simply carried forward to allow the completion of the work into the next financial year.

Kathy White

 I don’t support running a deficit, but on the rare occasion that there’s a major flood or other emergency, and there’s significant damage to vital infrastructure, I would support taking funds from emergency reserves or using available funds from the investment equalisation reserve in order to enable urgent action and minimise community risk. 

Dan Armstrong

A combination of GDP, employment, wellbeing, environmental and anecdotal data and information.

Gray Baldwin

GDP Growth & employment

Bernhard Chrustowski

The following indicators are useful tools to help measure the strength of our regional economy: Unemployment rate, Retail Trade sales, Regional Consumer Price Index, Construction activity, Expansion in Human Investment/Capitol such as education, Literacy Rate, Increase or decrease in standard of living, Financial Investment into new business and new technologies and companies profitabilities, General wellbeing of our communities measured in terms of life expectancy and housing.

Alana Delich

Maintain or increase the size of the regional economy – maintain or increase employment rates – a diversified regional economy (as a more diverse economy is more resilient to any downturns in any one industry).

Richard Gee

Growth in economics of the region from better run business , farms, and employment and increased tourism and ratepayers confidence in the Regional council.

Clyde Graf

Business confidence, inflation rates, community opinion.

Keith Holmes

This can’t have a simple answer as to measure on purely GDP does not signal any palpable “engine house” adjustments.

I think it is imperative to bring in a working group of Waikato Region Industry leaders [Tainui are a Powerhouse in this] with local regional bias to “Think Tank” ways to enhance economic activity. The trick will be to filter that into WRC’s attitude and behaviour towards business activity and commerce.

Stu Husband

A healthy community environment where sustainable economic growth is encouraged by balancing both the economy and environment whereby ratepayers and citizens expectations are supported by an enabling council that ensures access to good infrastructure and services provided as part of Councils core business.

Michael Kedzlie

Deloitte’s Regional General Equilibrium Model (DAE-RGEM) is an independent and credible large scale, dynamic, multi-region, multi-commodity computable general equilibrium model that focuses on New Zealand’s regions. The Deloitte’s model will provide an enlightening scorecard to see if any tangible progress has been made.

Stu Kneebone

A key set of measures that would influence my judgement would be the Waikato Progress Indicators. These put measures around a range of indicators in the Waikato region, including growth in the regional economy.

Giving effect to the Vision and Strategy for the Waikato/Waipa rivers is clearly going to be challenging, particularly from an economic perspective. The Council is required to give effect to the four wellbeings, and while the Vision & Strategy is not negotiable, we can ensure that the time period for implementation minimizes the economic impact. However I would suggest that three years is probably not really long enough to effectively measure the economic impact of PPC1.

Fred Litchwark

No Response. See general comments in the table above.

Andrew MacPherson

In answering this question, I am assuming the reference is to Waikato Raupatu Claims Settlement Act 1995.

I have limited background in understanding the implementation of the changes anticipated in this Act. But I expect there are relationships/partnerships with Waikato Māori and that WRC is working collaboratively to meet its obligations enshrined in this Act.

In three years’ time I anticipate there will be a number of Key Performance Indicators which indicate that iwi are enabled to engage and participate effectively as an equal partner. There should be a focus on joint projects and ventures that are effective and valued by both parties and the wider community.

WRC and iwi must be able to work together to achieve cultural, economic and environmental outcomes that meet the needs of both parties. There are likely to be differences of opinion about the rate of change; an example could be the rate at which the water quality improves in the Waipa and Waikato Rivers.

The assessment of how “Robust” the Regional Economy will be in some part subjective however I hope that there is evidence of a lot of green arrows on the Scorecard of Waikato Progress Indicators laid out in the In the Ripoata Whiringa Poti Tomua (Pre-Election Report).

The indicators on the Score Card that I will apply focus on will include;

1.  Regional GDP*
2.  Life Satisfaction
3.  Educational achievement*
4.  Housing affordability*
5.  Perceived health
6.  Social connectedness*
7.  Community pride
8.  Cultural respect*
9.  Community engagement
10.  Income*
11.  Income inequality*
12.  Building activity
13.  Employment*
14.  Public transport*
15.  River water quality*
16.  Soil quality
17.  Greenhouse gases
18.  Coastal ecosystem

The 10 items highlighted * are most important to me.

I note also the new council is required to review the Māori partnership approach. I have extensive experience with working with iwi nationwide. I am convinced that as we build ourrelationships with Māori, Māori will develop the ‘Māori economy’ and that will significantly benefit both the Waikato Region and wider New Zealand.

Fred Litchwark

No response

Jennifer Nickel

I would draw upon whether I consider it sustainable based on feedback and advice provided at the time.

Barry Quayle

Farming is a large slice of our region’s economy, so any regional economy measure must include an evaluation of how farming is contributing to the total. I would expect several independent measures as well as Fed farmers views.

Russ Rimmington

 GDP growth exceeding 2.5%.

Hugh Vercoe

Healthy Rivers is predicted to have the single biggest negative impact on the Waikato economy. Rules and time frames for this need to be adjusted to allow the economy to continue to improve.

Kathy White

WRC recently went through a Qualmark quality assurance process. I hope that spending the money to do this has been valuable in changing council processes for the better. WRC uses performance indicators to check how our region is tracking in a variety of economic, environmental, social and cultural areas. The Waikato Plan is also being used to provide direction and guide government funding and other investment.

Dan Armstrong

A combination of sitting on local NGO boards, project management (with different amounts of funds), and being someone who lives on a budget out of necessity and knows that sometimes tough calls must be made.

Gray Baldwin

Audit Committee Farmlands & LIC

Bernhard Chrustowski

I started and operated a Wellington business for ten years with proven financial stewardship skills that allowed me to retire to Taupo in 2001. Additionally, while serving as Taupo District Councillor our council achieved the highest Standard & Poor’s Credit Rating for NZ Councils. We also reduced Taupo District Council’s nett debt position while strengthening the balance sheet.

Alana Delich

 I know how to read a budget, and was the Treasurer for my local Playcentre. The budget was substantially smaller, but the same principals apply – making sure the funding is in place for the “need to haves” first and foremost, and then seeing how many of the “nice to haves” are possible within the budgetary constraints and prioritising these accordingly.

Richard Gee

The ability to ask questions and probe for answers based on 35 years of personal company ownership and mentoring plus business coaching of over 2500 business owners.

Clyde Graf

I have been involved in businesses all my adult life. I have employed many staff, and I have had plenty to do with balance sheets. However, I also source expert advice when required.

Keith Holmes

At the end of the day there is no difference between running a household budget and a multimillion Dollar budget. It is a question of prioritisation, fiscal responsibility, and demanding accountability of the CEO and senior staff.

In the past I have run and chaired successful multi-million dollar enterprises. At Regional Council level I will not and do not have a monopoly on Intelligence, and would seek suitable calibre expertise to complement the Councillors expertise. Not to do that would be both arrogant and irresponsible.

Financial Policy is a weakness in successive Regional Councils, and we are entitled under the Local Govt. Act to have advisory boards or Committees to advise and scrutinise Council Financial activities. The Audit Committee’s terms of reference need to changed, to allow investigation and recommendations on business units as well as all Council activities as a whole.

Balancing the “Books” is only one part of financial management, how efficiently we use Rate Payers rate money is becoming an even greater issue.

Stu Husband

I have had a wide range of experiences throughout my life including time with the Prison service, fire service, and then becoming self-employed working through sharemilking to current farm ownership. Running a small business and employing staff is an exceptionally good training ground that enables one to have a good understanding of all matters financial and legal.

Michael Kedzlie

I am currently on the board of Trust Waikato and through that have a governance role in the management of over $400 million through a range of investments and financial instruments. I am also a business owner.

Stu Kneebone

Self employed as a sharemilker and farm owner) for 35 years, including 8 years on WRC catchment and biosecurity advisory committees, three terms on the Regional Council as councillor.

Fred Litchwark

No response

Andrew MacPherson

My academic qualifications include an MBA (with Distinction). As part of that programme I

studied Public Sector Accounting and Finance. I have led or sat on a number of boards andin most cases ended up on the Audit & Risk Committees;

• AgResearch, I chaired the Audit and Risk Committee
• Westland Milk Products, member of the Audit committee (for the past 18months as the company was prepared for eventual sale)
• The Animal Health Board (now Ospri)

These governance roles and training have equipped me with the skills to make a significant contribution to governance at WRC. I am absolutely committed to working with staff along with internal and external auditors to make sure there is strong and robust financial oversight.

I’m also a businessman myself. As the former owner of a sheep and beef station and current part-owner of a dairy farm, I have a working knowledge of and appreciate the budgets associated with farming businesses. I have had hands-on experience with farm financials and corporate accounts and I will offer this breadth and depth of experiences to the WRC

Jennifer Nickel

I have managed operational budgets and run capital projects at Fonterra manufacturing sites for the past 5+ years. During this time I have repeatedly implemented efficiencies to save money and argued business cases for improvements successfully.

Barry Quayle

I have significant financial management experience. Not only have a been a principle contributor to the work of the finance committee of council, but I was General Manager of Fieldays for 20 years and took it from a struggling entity to a very strong balance sheet. I have been on the management team of Braemar Hospital and achieved a reduction in maintenance and some operating costs, with an increase in service, during my 4 years of tenure. I had a position in Head Office of Ministry of Ag and Fish where I was responsible for the entire capital works programme and its required financial management. I was lauded by Treasury as the only Ministry that managed their budget within 2.5% of capital budget.

Russ Rimmington

Self employed for over 35 years. Founding Rimmington Advertising in 1979. Owned Cook Island Stee Industries Ltd 17 years. Chairman Wel Energy Trust that grew from $40 million to $400 million without debt.

Hugh Vercoe

I started my own business, Vercoe Insurance Brokers in 1971 which I sold some years ago. Also started another business, Embassy Finance which I still own and manage, as well as a large dairy, sheep, and cattle property.

Kathy White

I’ve been a councillor for six years. I managed a number of budgets for six libraries as the co-ordinator of North Shore Libraries’ children’s services in Auckland. I’ve been a self-employed researcher and writer of children’s resources for a number of local and international educational and trade publishers. I took economics, accounting, marketing and financial investment papers at Auckland and Massey University, as well as library management papers as part of a post-grad qualification at Victoria University.

Dan Armstrong

That really depends on what the situation/motion is.

Gray Baldwin

Change.

Bernhard Chrustowski

My opinion is that the chair should vote for change. Alternative adjourn the meeting and request further information so that councillors can gain a greater understanding of the issue and make a better informed decision.

Alana Delich

This depends entirely what is being voted on.

Richard Gee

Status quo to get members to think about the situation again.

Clyde Graf

If the chairperson uses a casting vote it should be for status quo. Too often important decisions are made by a chair’s casting vote, and that’s not a democratic outcome, it’s a single person decision.

Keith Holmes

Each situation have to be taken on its merits and in a crisis situation the use of the Chairs casting vote is an act of leadership, for better, or for worse.

However, very rarely should a casting vote need to be exercised as most decisions “materially” don’t require a “forced decision”. Nor are they “time constrained”.

In my view if an issue has reached a decision impasse, then it obviously has not got sufficient information to make a good decision. In this case, it should go back to the drawing table to be reworked or dropped altogether.The Waikato Regional Council unfortunately has had a history of abysmal decision making with extreme consequential and costly consequences. PC1 is a case in point where at huge cost, both time and money, for our greater community, something is being discussed with implied regulatory consequences.

However the Govt. is about to roll out a “Fresh Water Accord” with sweeping and punitive results to supersede any PC1 decisions. Crazy or not, to put the cart before the horse?? One of the issues that WRC faces is a deluge of things that it feels it needs to put urgency on. The Agenda is far too “busy” and as a consequence, the Councillors are not doing their primary Role of Strategy and setting Policy. If the policy was set, the budget was agreed, then it becomes staff’s responsibility to get on with the job and deliver outcomes.

Stu Husband

100% status Quo !!

Michael Kedzlie

Denison’s rule should apply and the casting vote should be for the status quo as change should only occur if an actual majority vote is in favour of the change.

Stu Kneebone

As a general rule it should be used for status quo and/or business as usual – however each situation needs to be assessed on its merits.

Fred Litchwark

I support a casting vote for no change and retaining the status quo. It is better if a proposed change has a strong majority.

Andrew MacPherson

have seldom seen a board discussion that has ended up in the need for a casting vote. I would hope WRC Councillors would have open minds able to listen, consider and analyse the facts, debate and then come to a sensible consensus.

Should there be a need to have a casting vote I would prefer there was additional debate. If that doesn’t lead to a clarification of the outcome, I would prefer the status quo.

Jennifer Nickel

That depends on the situation.

Barry Quayle

It should always be used for the status quo unless there are extra ordinary circumstances. The theatre should never had funding approved on a casting vote.

Russ Rimmington

Yes

Hugh Vercoe

Yes definitely for the status quo as there is no majority to change.

Kathy White

Always status quo. You should have majority support for change. 

Dan Armstrong

Having a clear and achievable path for preparing our region for the effects of climate change.

Gray Baldwin

Implement PC1

Bernhard Chrustowski

For me transparency, openness and a no surprise policy is important. I expect the CEO to provide all necessary and relevant up-to-date information to allow councillors make fully informed decisions. I also expect the CEO to be a team player to guide and advise council without any undue influence or bias. Additionally I expect the CEO to achieve the agreed objectives set out in their annual job performance reviews.

Alana Delich

The CEO should meet any current KPI’s that have been set. I think CEO needs to ensure operations are as efficient as possible, and that national policy and the decisions of council are adhered to.

Richard Gee

Better communication with ratepayers, stake holders, councillors and the communities

Clyde Graf

I would like to see the CEO replace the directorate and employ new talent. I think the CEO can at times struggle with some senior staff, and there’s nothing like fresh heads with open minds.

Keith Holmes

Before the CEO is instructed, the Councillors need to understand their role and set Policy. In my view the policy has to move from a reactionary “shotgun” approach to one that embraces the KISS Principle [Keep It Simple Stupid]. Foremost has to be getting the “weighting” right, on the local interpretation of the RMA.

At the moment we need to create a focus on regenerative wealth at the lowest possible cost. We need to stop the transfer of wealth from one sector to another – it is central Govt.’s responsibility to enact social policy. Nobody is talking about the massive environmental cost in our Region from the overflow of immigrants coming into NZ via Auckland.

Nor is anyone articulating the hidden buoyancy created by the Housing boom, the Expressway expenditure and the Tainui Inland Port Developments. These are hiding a stagnating and dying rural economy with nothing tangible to replace 50% of our Regional GDP.

Stu Husband

It concerns me that there is a lack of a sustainable business model that measures council performance against a competitive private sector. Council’s current cost plus model is unsustainable and many ratepayers are paying a heavy price because of this. I believe the elected council must set clear expectations for the CEO and ensure they are implemented. Carrying on in isolation from any form of any financial constraints of competitive performance criteria is no longer sustainable.

Michael Kedzlie

Control costs and have the organisation live within its means.

Stu Kneebone

Regardless if whether it is my first term or my 4th term, the CEO has the same job to do. That is work with Councillors to agree on a strategic direction, and then put in place an appropriate plan to deliver on this, with clear KPI’s agreed to with Council. I would be expecting the CEO to action an appropriate induction programme for new Councillors, to provide Council with sound and timely advice, and subsequently implement council decisions, and manage the council operations etc.

Fred Litchwark

Bring a new council up to speed and ensure they are well informed on all issues, both regional and national. Achieving a pragmatic balance between the 4 wellbeing’s -economic, social, cultural and environmental.

Andrew MacPherson

Tactically: I expect the CEO to deliver on the business plan.

Strategically: There is real anxiety amongst the farming communities around Plan Change One. We MUST implement this change in a way that doesn’t cause significant damage to the economy. This is a first order priority for me.

With climate change there is a real risk that the cost of flood protection will increase and the costs associated with establishing and maintaining these assets will also increase. This is one area where considerable financial wisdom will be required. The CEO must be very careful to make sure his team achieve commercially sensible outcomes from these investments. It is our money being spent.

Climate change initiatives will need to have a significant amount of analysis applied to them before investing

Jennifer Nickel

My expectations relate primarily to ‘doing what you say you’re going to do’ and delivering quality work on time and within budget. Key items I look forward to seeing progress on include completing the Proposed Plan Change 1 process, implementation of the Waikato Plan and progress on climate change actions (detailed in questions below).

Barry Quayle

I am seeking greater efficiency and effectiveness within council and its level of service. I have been the champion of bringing “business intelligence” to council, and I want to see that rolled out by the CEO throughout the organisation in the next year.

Russ Rimmington

To ensure Plan Change One is achievable both financially and environmentally to farmers.

Hugh Vercoe

Look at what can be cut from the budget rather than what should be added.

Kathy White

A cost-effective affordable plan to improve water quality. 

Dan Armstrong

There are some aspects that I’m not enthused about but overall, I support it.

Gray Baldwin

Support with modifications

Bernhard Chrustowski

I support the proposed Plan Change in principle and look forward to the Commissioner’s findings and recommendations to the new council early in the new year. Much still remains to be done to make the plan change fully operative.

Alana Delich

 I support the principals of Proposed Plan Change 1 – I welcome the proposal for consents to be required to change to more intensive landuse, and the increased regulations on logging operations. I still need to understand more about how the proposed changes will be implemented in practise, and how the “priority catchments” have been determined etc. I do not yet know enough about the small print to know if I support all the proposed targets. PPC1 needs to have fair rules, that are applied strongly. If I am elected to council getting up to speed on Proposed Plan Change 1 will be my first priority.

Richard Gee

Probably Support after further full study time.

Clyde Graf

I opposed Plan Change 1 when I was a councillor in 2016. Moving forward I would need to consider the commissioners decision, and the publics feedback, and go from there.

Keith Holmes

PC1, sadly is conceptually a necessary discussion, but in terms of process, is being very poorly “executed”

We are “half pregnant” in terms of process so I would have to support the completion of the Block 3 hearings. Then it would be in our best interests to take a “deep breath” and reassess all options before going forward.

The urgency is self-imposed, the purpose is laudatory, but the reality is that the “sky is not going to fall on our heads”.

We need to take “stock” of the true environmental cost of the “avalanche” of people coming into our region. We also need [alongside central Govt.] to give serious consideration 300,000 people below the poverty line and that the majority of our children will not be able to own their own house.

Stu Husband

Opposed as per my vote

Michael Kedzlie

I am against the grandfathering of discharge of contaminants in the proposal.

Fred Litchwark

I cannot support Plan Change 1 until the Commissioners have completed their review and I do not support rolling out PC1 until government have made clear their intentions on the Three Waters Policy and regulations.

Andrew MacPherson

This Plan is a cause of considerable anxiety for many in our community. Listening carefully to the outcome of the submissions and the conclusions that are reached will be a priority for me if elected.

In its current form there is a risk of considerable negative economic outcomes. So, we will need to proceed with real caution in adopting this Plan in a timely manner to avoid significant economic damage to the primary sector. I need more information, especially concerning the Freshwater National Policy Statement that the government is to issue. This will have implications for all catchments not just the Waipa-King Country catchments. From personal experience I know the NZ farming community has limitless energy when it comes to problem-solving and I believe there are as-yet to be discovered science and technologies that will assist farmers meet the outcomes anticipated in this Plan Change.

The work of the King Country River Care Group is an outstanding example of determined smart primary producers being proactive to drive environment enhancement initiatives, who get my support.

Stu Kneebone

I’m on record as having supported the notification of PPC1 for public notification so that we could open it up for public consultation and enable people to have their say. Given the cost to date, the thoroughness of the hearings process, and the diligence and integrity demonstrated to date by the hearings panel, it would take exceptional circumstances for me not to support the hearing panels final recommendations.

 None the less, the new council will need to ensure they have a thorough understanding of the process to date, and the implications of adopting the hearing commissioners recommendations. Noting of course that the governments impending freshwater directives may subsequently necessitate further alterations.

Jennifer Nickel

I support the overall aims and vision of PPC1. However, as someone who has experience managing industrial dairy-manufacturing wastewater treatment plants with river discharges and has spent a great deal of time demonstrating compliance with water quality measures I have a great appreciation for how legislation must be very clear and pragmatic in order to achieve its intended outcomes. 

I have enormous respect for the expertise of scientists and technical experts but the expertise held by farmers about their land must not be overlooked. Therefore, I hope the hearings process serves its purpose well. Obviously, the recent freshwater announcement by central government now plays into this as well and I hope that it can serve to help the successful conclusion of the PPC1 process. 

To clean up our rivers will require money to be invested on our farms but with smart legislation we can ensure that every dollar spent is actually adding value to both achieving the goal and the farm itself. I believe in flexible means of implementation to result in best value for money expenditure, and regional council working with farmers to find the right solutions for their land would be the most inclusive way to get through the necessary transition.

Ultimately, I support the current governments views that best practice on farms should become normal practice on farms and I expect repercussions for farmers that do not engage within a reasonable timeframe. Further, I believe urban sources of contamination should be focussed on with as much enthusiasm as rural sources, and breaches held to account equally.

Plan Change 1 is a big project that, humbly, I admit I don’t yet understand intimately point by point but I hope this answer has provided some insight into my values and what I would advocate for

Barry Quayle

I want the staff to be open to pragmatic approaches that can be adopted by the farming community, businesses and urban areas that don’t stifle the economy but make logical progress. I expect that the Commissioners will have several changes to the draft plan that will give a better solution than in the draft. After all they have heard a vast number of submissions. I will support changes where it doesn’t undermine the fundamentals of our region’s economy. I do worry that Central Govt will effectively override a progressive improvement by requiring and setting unrealistic timeframes for our region through a National Policy Statement (NPS) on freshwater and the 3 waters.

Russ Rimmington

Support

Hugh Vercoe

I am on record for voting AGAINST PC1 in its current form.

Kathy White

I don’t know yet. I didn’t support it back in 2016 because I believed the overall plan and process had deficiencies – deficiencies such as inadequate time committed within the CSG to the economic implications of the Plan, no discussion of nitrogen trading (which is one of the most valued aspects of the Lake Taupo Protection Project), and the unfairness of grand-parenting. I’m hoping that the hearings process will resolve my concerns because we need fair, practical and affordable rules to enable us to meet statutory targets and limits set through the NPS for Freshwater Management.

Dan Armstrong

Yes, but hopefully we can learn from it so when any other large reforms occur in the future kinks will have been worked out.

Gray Baldwin

Yes

Bernhard Chrustowski

I cannot comment on the cost effectiveness of the process as I have no relevant data to refer to. The principle of the Collaborative Stakeholder Group process however I whole heartedly endorse as it goes toward community engagement and ensures that our democratic principles are given effect and upheld.

Alan Delich

Input and involvement from stakeholder groups is important to understanding and defining a problem and its solution. I do not know how much the CSG process for PC1 cost, but the value that has come from it is important than cost. Do stakeholder groups feel adequately consulted and agreeable with the outcome?

Richard Gee

No questionable costs to achieve the recommendation but I was not on the council at the decision time

Clyde Graf

The CSG was extremely costly, and protracted. And to top it off, Govt is about to release a policy statement that will likely match or duplicate PC1.

Keith Holmes

That is now history. The pertinent point is the question “Was the Governance up to the occasion?”

The answer is no, and we need to focus collectively on overcoming the successive Governance issues in Regional Council.

Stu Husband

I do not believe it was cost effective by any measure

Michael Kedzlie

No. Because the consultation process was poor.

Stu Kneebone

This is the first ever proposed plan change to manage diffuse contaminant losses from agriculture in the Waikato/Waipa catchments ever undertaken by WRC. The only other comparable plan change was the Taupo one, however it was significantly smaller by comparison, with a only a fraction of the landowners and associated farming businesses affected. It was also the first time WRC had deviated from the standard process where staff would normally draft a proposed plan for public notification. Therefore we really don’t have any comparable scenarios to measure cost effectiveness against.

In saying this, all policy and plan making processes that are required to utilize the RMA schedule 1 process are very costly exercises, and I guess that is the reality of democracy and public consultation along with the associated submission and appeal processes. Are they cost effective? No, I don’t think that they are, and I am certainly an advocate for reform in this area. We really do need a more streamlined process, however we need to do this in a way that recognises and enables meaningful input from affected stakeholders.

Fred Litchwark

Firstly, this process was required by Treaty Settlements to be a co-governance process. The intent of the CSG was the “ideal” as it engaged and involved all stakeholder groups at the front end of the plan change process. It has not been a cost-effective process and is still incurring costs as it has not been implemented.

Andrew MacPherson

Probably not, but democratic governments require democratic processes. At times, those processes can be expensive but they are a fundamental part of building an engaged citizenry. However, I suspect there are certainly ways to be more efficient and Councillors should be pushing for those.

The excessively high price we are forced to pay as part of the driving change must be reviewed by the government in their review of the RMA. There is an absurdly high cost associated with the RMA.

Jennifer Nickel

No, but I commend the council on trying new ways of undertaking consultation with relevant stakeholders. It is important work to get right but more ‘check and adjust’ steps early on may have added value is my current impression

Barry Quayle

No I think that the Regional Council can do better with processes and the cost of those. Legal opinons and RMA provisions can make processes unwieldy and costly. I will continue to challenge expensive and inefficient processes.

Russ Rimmington

No

Hugh Vercoe

PC1 has cost aprox $25.0m to date and costs are ongoing.. If we get a National Policy Statement from Government this will over ride PC1 and the whole cost will be wasted.

Kathy White

No. The Collaborative Stakeholder Group process has cost us more than $20 million so far without us having achieved any benefit on the ground. This is 3-4 times as much as it would have cost to use a standard process. In my opinion, it was an experiment that should not be repeated. 

Dan Armstrong

I think that until we get the commissioners report in early 2020 it’s difficult to accurate predict something like that without already being in on council.

Gray Baldwin

30

Bernhard Chrustowski

There is insufficient information in the CEO’s report to form a rational and fully informed opinion.

Alana Delich

More staff will be required to support landowners through these changes, and ensure a well informed transition. But this depends on how much implementation is led through industry and / or landowner professional services (e.g. farm consultants) with support of WRC.

Following implementation – when it comes to monitoring PPC1 there needs to be enough staff on the ground to ensure the rules are being followed. If monitoring is all “self reported” then there will be the potential for some to game the system, which will be unfair to those working hard to do the right thing.

Richard Gee

That is unknown as the CEO must determine how the goals are to meet effectively.

Clyde Graf

There should be no increases in staff, but there’s likely to be many. 

Keith Holmes

How long is a piece of string?

There can be no correct answer to either question as there is much more water to flow under the metaphoric bridge. Of huge concern to me is that WRC currently has a staff of over 530 earning on an average of in excess of $100,000. The new WRC Building nearing completion can house 2000 people. How many does the WRC intend to employ and who is going to pay their salaries.

With an average Council revenue increase of in excess of 10% per annum in the last 20 years, it is unsustainable. That is an “empty pantry” question that needs to be answered first.

Stu Husband

$21,000,000 and climbing of ratepayers hard earned money has been wasted on this exercise. Now central Govt are set to bring in an overarching plan. When is someone going to say enough is enough?

Michael Kedzlie

I think their current muster of 520 staff (with around 25% on over $100K p.a salaries) should be sufficient.

Stu Kneebone

Given that PPC1 is still in draft form, it’s final form is as yet unknown, and that it currently proposes a multi year implementation approach, I could only guess – not prepared to do this. Once the hearing panel have reached a decision, and assuming it has been adopted by Council, I would be directing the CEO to create an implementation plan, which would include staff resourcing requirements.

Fred Litchwark

Without the Commissioner’s final recommendations on PC1 and government’s proposed Three Waters Policy, it is pre-emptive to determine how regional council staff will be deployed.

Andrew MacPherson

I believe it is dependent on what form the change is adopted in. But I’m concerned it could be a significant FTE (Full Time Equivalents) impost to implement, especially when it comes to agreeing and monitoring farm environment plans (FEP).

I am concerned about the business risk and cost (borne by ratepayers) and would seek a thorough briefing as yes, I do have concerns. I am not keen on growing head counts. It can reduce efficiencies when technological solutions could help mitigate the FTE impost. I’ll support industry-led schemes that will work with Council to reduce the FTE impost and take on the risk of the specialist staff required to implement the plan.

Jennifer Nickel

That depends on how the process concludes.

Barry Quayle

I suspect it will be about 10. However, some of those will come from existing teams. I will be seeking justification in every case. I am a believer that local authorities should not just increase numbers when a new service is required. They must look at the overall numbers and reduce staff numbers elsewhere or create efficiencies to reduce staff numbers to provide for the new service just as a business would do.

Russ Rimmington

25

Hugh Vercoe

The region can not afford for WRC to manage everything connected with PC1. Fonterra monitors everything on their supplier farms now either direct or by QCONS. They have the ability to monitor Farm Plans in the same way.

Kathy White

None. They need to look within the organisation to see where they can draw on existing staff for project management roles. Additional staff have already been added as part of our implementation preparations.

Dan Armstrong

It’s a responsibility for all of us. While not a fan of talk-fests, if it will send a message to central Govt I’d support a declaration. As far as climate change I’m eager to see the WRC have clear plan going forward to work with district authorities to reduce emissions, to work alongside rural communities and farms to prepare for the effects of climate change such as increased droughts, and look further into how prepared our civil defence is and what areas require additional protections for the likes of flooding.

Gray Baldwin

Regional, No

Bernhard Chrustowski

My belief is that climate change is everybody’s responsibility with government and regional council taking the lead role. Waikato Regional Council signed up to the Local Government Leaders Climate Change Declaration in 2017.

However the latest United Nations scientific reports makes it quite clear we have now entered the sphere of a climate change emergency. As such we need to implement many of the UN’s recommendations and ensure that our own policies and strategies are up for the task ahead. We and our communities behaviour and expectations towards the environment must evolve to ensure a viable future for all to come.

Alana Delich

I consider climate change to be a National responsibility, but if the central government is not stepping up to the task, then it is a Regional responsibility to signal that the situation is very serious. Our region will also be affected in slightly different ways to the rest of New Zealand, much of the lower Waikato basin is very low-lying land; and in our coastal areas we have already seen some of the potential effects of Climate change e.g. the

Thames coast road is very susceptible to king tides. I would vote to declare a climate emergency, and recommend that potential emissions and the potential risks of a changing climate, be factored into every decision that the Regional Council makes. The corporate activities of council are already CEMARS certified with a goal of 2% emissions reduction each year (this could be higher), however climate change/adaptation needs to be addressed in long term plans for the region.

Richard Gee

Climate change is very much regional to control as the affected ratepayers are regional.

Clyde Graf

I believe that WRC should do what it can to help to contain climate change, recognising nonetheless, that its ability to have much impact is limited. Climate change should be a national responsibility, not a regional one. Govt policy should form the direction councils take to avoid another level of bureaucracy, conflicting initiatives, and excessive costs. No, I will not be supporting a “climate emergency”.

Keith Holmes

Climate Change has always happened and I do not subscribe to the shrill cries of Doomsday Apocalypists. Every generation has had their “end or the world” scenario and has worked through it. As community leaders we need to see the positives of the generation we live in, and act proactively, providing self-belief and adequate provision for tangible eventualities.

Stu Husband

Central government are setting policy in this area. Regional Councils must implement any policy’s passed by central government without question as they are required by law to do so. I see no sense whatsoever in declaring a climate emergency as it achieves nothing what so ever.

Michael Kedzlie

It is a national responsibility being pushed down on to the regional and local government level. New Zealanders are paying about five cents on every litre of petrol to the government for the ETS and currently over $400m has been set aside and not being spent. Regional councils must be more vocal in getting some of this this money released towards climate related / environmental projects in their regions.

As for a climate emergency in the Waikato Region I would vote no. For those asking for the Waikato to declare a climate emergency they will first have to tell me how they will deal with the carbon footprint and energy consumption of the 100 largest metropolitan areas in the world and give me a rational explanation why declaring an emergency in Hamilton, Thames and Te Kuiti is a more appropriate than Tokyo or Shanghai.

Stu Kneebone

Both Central and Local government have responsibilities with regards to climate change. I am supportive of WRC taking climate change seriously, however I do not agree with the way the word “emergency” currently appears to be used.

WRCs responsibilities with regard to flood protection, coastal management, land management and community safety all necessitate that it takes a proactive approach to ensuring the impacts of climate change are factored into its decision making (eg, flood protection asset maintenance/renewal, coastal planning, urban development/infrastructure etc), and that appropriate adaptation measures are implemented.

 As a leader in the region, WRC also has a responsibility to ensure it is leading by example, and taking appropriate actions to manage and reduce its own emissions.

Fred Litchwark

Climate change is a nation wide responsibility and everyone has a responsibility to help make a difference.

Regional council has developed a hazards portal, so people can assess the risks to their property due to the effects of climate change. Regional Council ratepayers can not afford to protect private property in areas of high risk.

Andrew MacPherson

We need a national perspective but we cannot escape the fact that we are in a part of New Zealand that is uniquely impacted by the impacts of climate change and the impacts of the policies implemented to mitigate it.

So, while I believe this requires driving from central government, as a region we must look to play any part we can if we are to be part of the solution, and not have a solution imposed upon us. I would definitely not support declaring a climate emergency as that would lead to timing concerns and unintended consequences. Equally, I am yet to be convinced that a regional

council declaring a ‘climate emergency’ would have any practical impact. Symbolism does nothing for our communities, our environment or our economy. We need to use the best globally available science in a NZ setting to make sure we minimise the likelihood of unintended consequences.

Jennifer Nickel

It is everyone’s responsibility. Whether a council names a ‘climate emergency’ or not, my main concern is whether appropriate action is taken. The actions I expect Waikato Regional Council to take are:

(1) to understand their own carbon footprint well, which they have done with CEMARS;

(2) to understand the footprint of the region and what activities would increase or decrease it, which is underway;

(3) to reduce the barriers for others to take action on climate change, including advocacy with central government, education for organisations/individuals and facilitating the right collaborations for rapid scaling and uptake of solutions that serve our region

Barry Quayle

If the former, would you vote to declare a ‘climate emergency’? If yes, what action would you require be taken by the Regional Council? There are now 3 regional councils that have adopted a climate emergency, they have each backed that up with the actions they have been and are taking. If our region does not declare then much greater negative publicity will descend on our region with unwelcome extremes of views on our farmers and others disproportionate to our real situation.

The real message our region has will get lost in the rhetoric. So if the words climate emergency can be backed by pragmatic and reasonable actions that keep the economy progressing then I believe we are better to declare. I am privy to being aware of the very promising research that is happening which can make farming continue to be meet the pressures to reduce emissions. We just need some time to get research fully tested and adopted

Russ Rimmington

Both. Yes. Work together to implement change without killing the farming sector. Its the life blood of NZ

Hugh Vercoe

Climate Change is a National response issue. Would definitely not vote to declare any emergency.

Kathy White

It’s primarily a national responsibility. However, there are a number of things that happen at regional level that achieve multiple purposes (including mitigating climate change) – eg. planting indigenous and exotic vegetation to provide habitat for wildlife, mitigate sediment loss, reduce erosion and improve soil and water quality. Waste minimisation and product stewardship starts with things like National Environmental Standards, but strategies are implemented at the regional and local level. I think that regional council should consider EVs as part of their fleet, educate people on ways to adapt to and mitigate potential change in their specific areas such as heavy rain events, inundation, gullies and tomo. I personally do not believe in declaring a climate emergency.

Dan Armstrong

A lot of work is already done to combat koi, but if that mechanism will mean additional resources can go towards dealing with it, I’d certainly be open to that conversation.

Gray Baldwin

No nothing about koi carp

Bernhard Chrustowski

Yes.

Alana Delich

Yes – Koi carp not only remove aquatic plants from our freshwater systems, which reduces their ability to absorb nutrients, but they also stir up sediment, which results in turbid water, and prevents aquatic plants from re-establishing. Controlling koi carp where they already exist is difficult and expensive, so would need to be looked at on a case by case basis, but the further spread of koi carp absolutely needs to be prevented.

Richard Gee

Yes

Clyde Graf

I am unsure about what pest status koi carp should have. There have been issues with “black water” consequences where bio controls have been implemented overseas. I support any private enterprise measures to harvest for profit and manage populations where they exist.

Keith Holmes

Absolutely. Koi Carp is the most destructive species after humans, when it comes to water ecology in our region. It is the “Possum with Fins” in our waterways

Our Lower Waikato Zone Committee [WRC] and Iwi can take some credit in elevating the pest status of Koi Carp, nationally. It now requires Resolve by Councillors and WRA to hold DOC to account as lead provider in allocated monies, for Pest fish management/eradication

Stu Husband

Yes and I already have. I have been proactive in lobbying Ministers to address this issue. I have also sought and received funding from central Govt from these meetings for this area.

Michael Kedzlie

Yes

Fred Litchwark

Koi carp have a big impact on freshwater habitats. As they feed, koi carp stir up the bottom of ponds, lakes and rivers, muddying the water and destroying native plant and fish habitat. They also eat a wide range of food, including insects, fish eggs, juvenile fish of other species and a diverse range of plants. I support their removal from our freshwater habitats and I’m keen to see if a koi herpes virus, which is currently being researched in Australia, has the potential to eradicate koi carp in New Zealand.

Andrew MacPherson

Yes, I would declare Koi Carp to be a regionally significant pest. This fish does considerable damage to the ecosystem and is spreading. They contribute to bank erosion and are a huge problem. Koi carp has a serious impact on water quality and must be fixed as part of Plan Change 1 and involve the Waikato River Authority. Koi carp are now in the Waipa and they are a very serious pest. A pest fish coordinator has been employed by DOC with some WRC funding to develop a freshwater pest management strategy.

I hope that there is some clever new thinking (eg introducing the herpes virus) to control the pest. These efforts will get my support but there is no quick fix solution.

Stu Kneebone

There is no question that Koi Carp is a significant pest in parts of the region, But if the question is with regards to declaring Koi Carp a pest in the Waikato Regional Pest Management Plan, then given the way the legislation currently stands, my answer is no. The Department of Conservation (DOC) has a statutory responsibility under legislation to manage pest fish. If WRC were to declare Koi Carp a pest in the WRC Regional Pest Management Plan (RPMP), it would effectively be taking over this responsibility from DOC, with associated resourcing/funding implications that would fall on the regions ratepayers.

 I would not be supporting such an approach, as I do not believe it is fair on the regions ratepayers. WRC is already struggling to keep up with its responsibilities under the biosecurity act to manage current incursions of plant and animal pests, so it makes no sense to take over the funding responsibility of pest fish from DOC.

WRC is taking a proactive approach towards the management of Koi Carp. It has initiated a joint venture project with DOC to look into the options to manage Koi Carp.

Jennifer Nickel

If presented with the data to show it meets relevant criteria it would make sense to do so.

Barry Quayle

Absolutely I have been pushing for koi carp to be included in the pest management plan. I don’t accept that just because its become a significant problem that we should give up.

Russ Rimmington

Yes

Hugh Vercoe

Koi carp is already a significant pest and getting worse, and this needs urgent action to remedy.

Kathy White

I have passed on information by someone at NIWA who would personally like to help the local iwi to work on a strategy to harvest koi carp in Lake Waikare. I would prefer that this happened than my council and others voted to introduce the koi carp herpes virus, which could cause a major black water event, or the virus could mutate and affect native fish. I would rather they were managed to low levels through harvesting than have high-risk biological controls used. 

Dan Armstrong

Eager to recognise and promote those contributions – and the wider work that is being done, but not certain if that’s the best way forward

Gray Baldwin

No

Bernhard Chrustowski

The notion has some merit and warrants further debate. I would also need to see the latest funding impact statement. It must be recognised that retired and or protected land does not automatically become unproductive or unprofitable but can be used for alternative eco-friendly income streams such as hemp or honey production, thereby offsetting any potential nett losses.

Alana Delich

I am in support of finding ways to enable and incentivise our rural landowners to improve water quality and protect biodiversity. This may be one way to do this. The Department of Conservation does not pay rates on public conservation land within the Waikato Region.

Richard Gee

Yes if ensible for the land chosen.

Clyde Graf

YES I will support rates rebates for riparian initiatives undertaken by farmers and landowners.

Keith Holmes

Yes. It has been of ongoing concern that we are getting increasing “theft” of land by regulation. If society desires to change the land use of privately owned land, then as under the Public Works Acquisition Act, the same rules should apply. This in itself requires Central Govt. to come to the table

Stu Husband

Absolutely. It is a fundamental premise that if someone has the ability to earn from their land restricted by Council, then they should not be rated.

Michael Kedzlie

In principle I would support it as it is likely that a cost contribution of the riparian or biodiversity protection will be coming out of the landowners pocket.

Fred Litchwark

Waikato Regional Council has a rates rebate for landowners who covenant bush and wetland areas. I support amending this rebate to allow landowners with any native ecosystems on their land (with or without formal protection) applying for this rebate, including riparian areas.

Andrew MacPherson

On a pro rata basis, yes most likely. However, I would need to find out a bit more. The Willingness to Pay considerations for the rest of the community to give such a relief to land owners could be an interesting discussion.

Stu Kneebone

Noting that there is no explanation on how this concept could work. I am struggling to envisage how it could work in practice, therefore I would be uncomfortable supporting such an approach without further explanation. Given the significant number of small land parcels throughout the region that are either already fenced off, or proposed to be fenced, I would also want to know what implications would be for existing rateable land as exempting one bit will inevitably have implications for the balance remaining. The Waikato Regional Council, along with many other Councils offer rates rebates for biodiversity enhancement related work, and while these rebates are not significant, I think that they are an important part of recognizing the work that private landowners do to maintain and enhance biodiversity. However I am unaware of anyone who has successfully done this utilizing a “pre-retirement Land Expectation Value” approach.

I do however think that we can be much more effective at recognizing the efforts of private landowners efforts to protect biodiversity, and that we need to put more effort into designing better mechanisms. There has been work done in other countries along the lines of a “biodiversity credit” system, where those landowners who enhance biodiversity can “sell” their credits to those whos actions are resulting in a loss of biodiversity (eg, urban development sites). The following website is an example of a system used in NSW.

https://www.environment.nsw.gov.au/topics/animals-and- plants/biodiversity/biobanking/biodiversity-credits

Jennifer Nickel

I support reasonable incentives to retire land for riparian or biodiversity protection, and if a rates reduction or a rates rebate is shown to be the best practicable option to achieve waterway health and increase biodiversity then I would support this. I prefer simple solutions over excessively administrative ones.

Barry Quayle

I don’t believe it would be beneficial for the entire farming sector to do that as it would likely generate an additional rate for farmers to cover the cost of rebates. Those farmers who have acted to date would be penalised. Effectively paying twice.

Russ Rimmington

Yes

Hugh Vercoe

I support rate relief on certain land based on value at the time, not on some supposed future valuation.

Kathy White

I support rates rebates for these purposes.

Dan Armstrong

The situation for every lake and waterway is different, and what improved quality looks like is different but yes, we need to be doing as much as possible to improve the situation – something we largely seem to be doing on farms, but urban areas increasingly need to step up to match the reforms that rural areas are needing to do so we’re all contributing.

Gray Baldwin

Yes I support natural water quality being restored everywhere. No removing hydro dams

Bernhard Chrustowski

I support water quality being restored in all our waterways, rivers and lakes. The protection of the water catchments also play an integral part in achieving this outcome. The removal of the regions hydro dams is an admirable ambition but cannot realistically be implemented in the short to medium term without causing immense economic, financial and social hardship. We can however be proactive and begin the planning process in anticipation of the removals.

Alana Delich

I support improving water quality across all our water bodies. I believe it is unfair to expect landowners in some catchments to work really hard to control their nutrient budgets etc., but let others off the hook. However “Natural water quality” is not a realistic goal. The catchments of our waterways have been changed irrevocably since pre-human times, and we no longer know what “natural water quality” is. I do believe that the regions hydro dams have a larger than usually acknowledged role to play in the water quality of the Waikato River, as the slowed movement of water exacerbates the problems of high nutrient loads – leading to algal blooms – it is estimated that the dams have increased the time for water to flow from Taupo to Karapiro from 62 hours to 830 hours (during summer low flow), and during summer low flow conditions the algal biomass is 3-4x what it would be without the dams . Unfortunately, the consents for the Waikato hydro dams are not up for renewal until 2041. I would support requiring larger contributions from Mercury towards water quality in the Waikato – but obviously our Hydro Dams are vital to NZ’s power grid, and should continue to operate.

Richard Gee

Natural water should be restored where possible but not at the expense of changing the hydro dams structure, common sense should prevail everywhere and local communities involved in the strategy decisions.

Clyde Graf

If water quality can be improved everywhere, that’s a great outcome. However, I believe that waterways should be protected from the top down. From the headwaters, down, not the other way around. Farmers are singled out for downstream impacts, when in some cases the contamination is starting higher up, in the forests, by DoC’s management.

It would be great to see the Govt walk the talk, rather than just expect farmers to. No hydro dams should be removed. They are a sustainable source of electricity. I guess we could line up a bunch of bureaucrats on a tread mill and ask them to run – as an alternative – but I doubt they’ll generate the megawatts required to power cities, let alone Council offices.

Keith Holmes

A question with a “sting” in the tail.Of course I support preservation and enhancement of the environment – and that includes our waterways. The demands and impact on our country have gone up expedentially since the pre-European population of 100,000 to the projected population of 5 million in February 2020. With the current immigration rate we will have a population exceeding 10 million – mostly in Auckland and the Waikato by 2050

NZ will never be in its pre human state again. The bigger issues will be how are we going to cope with an extra 2 million people living in the Waikato, how are we going to get enough fresh water to them and critically, how are we going to feed them when we have built houses on the best Horticultural land in NZ at Pukekohe and Tuakau?? It requires cool heads and rational behaviour to prepare for that in our lifetimes.

Stu Husband

I support incremental improvements in water quality in all water bodies. Removing the hydro dams would be environmental folly with the loss of a truly renewal energy source.

Michael Kedzlie

I fully support tangible improvements in water quality throughout the region, however it is not realistic to achieve complete perfection.

Fred Litchwark

As a candidate for Waikato Regional Council, I’m committed to value for money, sustainable land use and clean water. We all deserve clean rivers, lakes and harbours and I know that by working together, we can achieve this.

My experience managing an award winning care group that planted 2 million trees to improve water quality in the Whaingaroa catchment proves that involving communities can be a win, win; we can reduce rates and enjoy a healthy, resilient environment and economy.

Stu Kneebone

I am unsure what is meant by the term “natural water quality”? If it is to describe the state of water bodies throughout the region prior to human activities, then no, I could not support a return to that objective. All water bodies in areas of human habitation will clearly be impacted to varying degrees. If one takes the example of Lake Taupo, the intent of the project was not to restore the lake to a pre-human habitation state, but rather prevent any further degradation, and therefore maintain the lake water quality where it currently was at the inception of the project. This is a good example of a regional water body that was deemed to not be requiring improvement in order that the values the regions communities place on the lake could be maintained/realized. Noting of course that review of these values by the community is also appropriate at a point in the future, and the current values and/or aspirations may well change.

The Vision and Strategy has set out the objectives for water quality in the Waikato / Waipa Rivers, and obviously the water quality of the various tributaries within the catchment need to be in a state that is consistent with the objectives for the main rivers. WRC is yet to initiate a process to determine what water quality will be required over the other parts of the region.

The recently released national freshwater proposals are clearly proposing some rather ambitious standards and associated timeframes that I believe are not realistic to implement in their current proposed state. However noting that they are still a proposal at this point of time, we will have to wait and see what the outcome of the consultation process will be, and if they are changed as a result of this. I will be advocating strongly for changes to their current proposed form.

Fred Litchwark

No response. See general comments in table above.

Andrew MacPherson

Our regional water resources are pivotal to driving economic activity and they are important for sport and recreation. There is a change in water quality associated with some of the activities of the primary industries; the question is how much change in the water quality is acceptable to the wider community?

To what extent should quality be restored? If people want a return to precommercial levels of water quality (before we used the land for economic activity) This will take a concerted effort by everyone along with new tools to improve water quality. We (urban and rural communities) need to decide on what is acceptable water quality. It is going to take time to improve water quality. I will support any sensible plan to lift water quality and improve our natural environment. There are some water courses that need more priority for water quality improvement and improvements will take time. I will prioritise those sub catchments with the greatest need.

Jennifer Nickel

I support water quality being improved everywhere, but to standards that are appropriate for each water body.

Barry Quayle

I do not support some unilateral natural water declaration to be implemented. We need to prioritise where the most gain can be achieved that has beneficial outcomes.it is pointless wasting effort for no real gain.

Russ Rimmington

Yes including hydro dams as they are part of the river systems. Same water.

Hugh Vercoe

The hydro dams perform a national service and I would certainly not call for their removal. While everyone supports improved water quality this needs to be balanced with best use of water. If we have pristine water simply flowing out to sea no one benefits.

Kathy White

I support incremental improvements for all water bodies, but we can’t afford to do it all at once so we need to prioritise. It’s not feasible to remove the hydro dams. They’re providing vital renewable energy. The hydro power suppliers spend on environmental projects to mitigate the adverse effects of the changed flow of the Waikato River.

However I do support the hydro dams further reducing their own contamination of the Waikato and Waipa Rivers. They currently spray and mulch weeds, which releases pulses of nutrients into the water column. Removing weeds through harvesting would reduce nutrient levels. They also cause sediment loss through the ramping of the Waikato River. 

Dan Armstrong

I’m standing so we can have someone who has spent nearly all their life in rural communities and wants to see them supported as climate changes and environmental legislation.

Gray Baldwin

To make a difference to environmental policy

Bernhard Chrustowski

I have grandchildren: I don’t want to leave their and their generation’s future up to chance when we today have the means to protect it. We have a moral obligation to act when we have the means to do something. So I want to be part of the solution and contribute to the future in a positive and sustainable way.

Alana Delich

love where I live, and as a Mum, I want to do what I can to ensure all kids grow up with an environment they can thrive in. I am also an ecologist who grew up in a farming family. I know good work towards clean water and biodiversity restoration is already happening on the ground over much of our rural land, but there is still room for improvement. With the right policies environmental outcomes, and profitable rural businesses can go hand in hand. I hope that having a foot in both these worlds will enable me to facilitate conversations, rather than confrontations between our urban and rural communities.

Richard Gee

I believe the Waikato and Northern Waikato regions need a strong voice on the council to champion the needs of the community and help the regional council become a better communicator with its ratepayers and community.

 My experience in local govt and business and community organisations in Tuakau & districts has been successful getting many tasks completed from community plans, 10 year plans , special plans and much more within the community standing up for the common sense approach to decisions and making sure the ratepayer is involved at all times.

 I listen and make sure I am fully informed about decision making needs.

I can make a difference, I understand both Rural farming communities [ My daughter and husband have a diary farm in Otorohanga] and Urban residential business and social communities. I live in my communities yet work all over the Waikato and Auckland and am widely exposed to the development and problems of the Waikato in total.

I am concerned about Auckland based resource consumption from the Waikato with little benefit in return we need to stop the pillage of resources and control our region more.

I believe ratepayers do not understand what the Regional council does or impacts and this lack of interaction and communication needs to be changed to improve the understanding.

I am passionate for the Waikato and North Waikato area and want to be the voice that communicates our community vision. I will make a difference to the regional council by my contributions.

Clyde Graf

I grew up in Te Urewera National Park and have been filming forests and observing wildlife behaviour, across New Zealand for the last 22 years. With my brother Steve, I have produced ten, 90 minute DVD titles presenting New Zealand’s wildlife and our great outdoors, including one of the productions commissioned by the New Zealand Police and the New Zealand Mountain Safety Council.

I have also produced several full-length environmental award-winning documentaries, and produced dozens of environmental, short films. While making these documentaries, I have enjoyed photographing, filming and interviewing people all over New Zealand, to hear about their issues and then represent them in Council. I am standing because I enjoy representing people and defending their rights and interests.

Keith Holmes

Each of us has the option to be a Watcher or a Doer

Being Chair of the WRC Lower Waikato Zone Committee has given me an insight to a $150 million “beast” that hugely impacts on our lives but slips below the radar

There are a lot of awesome people working within the sphere of the Waikato Regional Council. However the “Beast” lacks good governance and hence good leadership. I am a Doer and those that know my track record, know that I can make a positive difference. I am determined to do just that.

Stu Husband

I have been encouraged by many ratepayers to put my name forward for re-election as a Waikato Regional Councillor

Over the last 6 years I have enjoyed the challenges of representing the publics needs against the bureaucratic machine. The public sector needs passionate people who aren’t afraid to speak out about issues facing the community. With my communication, enthusiasm and influencing skills I have shown I have these qualities and more to offer the Waikato region

I have always been interested in advocacy and supporting the community I live in and have proven I have the tenacity, energy and determination to follow through on constituent requests and provide a high-quality service

It takes time to make a difference, build up networks and see benefits. I feel I have a good relationship within the areas I have represented. I have a very good understanding of how the processes work and have considerable experience in issues that matter to ratepayers. I would like to keep the momentum going and remain actively involved in ensuring we seek necessary changes that ensures we have a more efficiently run council that provides real benefits to our regions ratepayers.!

Michael Kedzlie

Because the Coromandel region, which I am hoping to represent is very much an outlier with respect to the WRC, particularly regarding planning around Transport and Economic Development. This is hindering our full potential as a district. I am concerned about the value for money the Thames-Coromandel sub-region gets from the WRC. Maintaining the integrity of the Coromandel’s environment, as is all of the Waikato is personally important to me, as it is our competitive advantage and why we love the place. I trained as a lawyer, have a background in policy and research in an international environment, governance experience as a Trust Waikato board member, a business owner, and in my 50’s I feel that enough life experience, energy and sound judgment to be a sensible, pragmatic voice from the Coromandel in Hamilton.

Stu Kneebone

I’m standing for WRC because I am passionate about the Waikato, and want to do my bit to ensure it remains a great place to live, work and play. The privileges and benefits of a modern society and a growing economy are immense, however we do need to ensure that they are sustainable into the future. Its important to me that future generations have access to the same opportunities that we enjoy today, and so we as the current custodians of the region need to ensure that the future and what it holds is front of mind. The regions economy, its environment, its social and cultural values and its communities are all important, and we need to get the balance right.

Fred Litchwark

No response. See general comments in table above.

Andrew MacPherson

Because I believe that I have the skills and experience to add value at the council table. I bring a lifetime of commercial experience initially formed in the Waikato and then expanded to include national and international business experience in a range of industries. For the last twenty years I have sat around a range of board tables and this has sharpened my governance skills. As I have stated elsewhere a vote for me is a vote for;  Development of evidence-based policies which protect and enhance our environment

 Promotion of sound economic development

 Building of vibrant communities

Coupled with the above I have a working knowledge of what the implications of WRC initiatives are for our farmer and urban rate payers and I will bring an empathetic approach to understanding the concern of both farmers and the urban communities. I will bring a pragmatic knowledge of sheep beef and dairy farming along with personal perspectives on these industries. Some time ago my business partner and I identified how difficult it was to attract good quality staff to come and work on our sheep and beef station. As a result, and with the help of the local community we established the Waipaoa Station Farm Cadet Training Trust (see https://www.waipaoa.co.nz ) which set about producing

job-ready graduates who are able to add value from day one. We have now sold that station however the great training continues to produce world class graduates. This is an example of the innovative and can-do attitude I would like to bring to the WRC.

I would appreciate your support for my candidacy and welcome any further questions you may have. Thank you for the opportunity to contribute.

Jennifer Nickel

I desire environmental, social and economic wellbeing for our region. I decided to stand because I had the realisation that I could contribute diversity and relevant skills and experiences to WRC. My background is in biological sciences research and development as well as environmental roles in the dairy industry. Over my career I have developed as a leader and understand core issues to consider in health and safety, quality, environmental management, emergency management, community engagement as well as utilities and infrastructure management. Previous training in sustainability and the UN Sustainable Development Goals would also come in very useful to contribute to WRC’s role in delivering on the four wellbeings.

Barry Quayle

Briefly, why have you decided to stand for the Waikato Regional Council? I have started on a drive to get the regional council delivering its services more efficiently and cost effectively. There are some big challenges ahead and we need competent councillors who can critique proposals and provide pragmatic and reasonable solutions. I believe I can contribute so we achieve the best possible solutions.

Russ Rimmington

Proven track record to get things done.

Hugh Vercoe

After 6 years as a minority voice I do wonder!

Kathy White

I believe in healthy ecosystems and compassionate conservation. I also believe in affordable rates and cost-effective, practical catchment and compliance work. I’d like to see more work happening on the ground, and less duplication of effort through multiple committees. I’d like to see fewer toxins used in pest control, and rules that prevent those toxins entering water. I want Waikato Regional Council to really listen to its communities about what they want, and work with them to achieve their goals in the ways that they want to achieve them.