AM Edition: Top 10 Politics Articles on LiveNews.co.nz for March 26, 2026 – Full Text

Source: Radio New Zealand

Thirteen education organisations representing thousands of teachers and principals have united to oppose the government’s school curriculum overhaul.

In a letter published on Wednesday organisations including teacher union the Educational Institute, the Principals’ Federation and several subject associations, said the proposed changes were not fit for purpose.

They said the curriculum framework and six draft curriculum documents were not fit for purpose, did not meet the Education Ministry’s own standards, “and represent a profound, unworkable narrowing of curriculum scope”.

“The pace of curriculum change is unreasonable, has layered multiple demands on schools and kura, and has created huge workloads on the sector,” they said.

“This will have significant negative impacts, including impacting on the recruitment and retention of teachers.”

Principals’ Federation president Jason Miles told RNZ primary schools had already introduced new maths and English curriculums, which made huge changes to the way schools taught the subjects, and work on the remaining six learning areas should stop.

“There is a lot wrong with the draft curriculum that has been presented for consultation. It’s devoid of anything to do with Te Tiriti. It is full of knowledge, rich objectives, over 1000 objectives from year zero to eight, they’re not coherent,” he said.

“It’s surface level teaching, it’s tick-charts, it’s knowledge-rich objectives which will be easily assessed. But what we are concerned about is the deeper, capabilities and competencies that are missing from these curriculum.”

Miles said the groups’ decision to make a joint statement was hugely significant.

“We’ve all slammed the direction, the pace, and the lack of genuine consultation, and the government’s rushed wholesale curriculum reform,” he said.

“We’re fundamentally saying that these curriculums cannot go ahead.”

Miles said he hoped the ministry and Education Minister Erica Stanford would listen, however he said the minister was choosing to talk with other people in the education sector.

NZEI Te Riu Roa president Ripeka Lessels told RNZ the minister and ministry had not listened to the organisations so far, but she hoped that would change.

Asked if there was middle ground between the groups’ philosophy of education and the approach favoured by the minister, Lessels said there was still room for talk.

“We clearly do believe that the [government’s] ideologies are in opposition to what we believe is good practice for education and for the classroom,” she said.

“We do believe that some of the things that we believe are driving this ideology are definitely not good for our country and not good for our children and we do believe that if we don’t stand up and have a conversation, then these ideologies may become something that the country has no choice but to take on board.”

Other signatories to the open letter included the Māori principals’ association Te Akatea, the Teacher Education Forum and associations representing teachers of subjects including social studies, physical education, and drama.

It’s not the first time different education organisations had united to oppose the government’s school sector changes.

Multiple principals associations last year published open letters urging the government to slow down its curriculum overhaul and 10 organisations including Catholic school principals and kindergartens spoke out against changes to teacher registration and disciplinary body the Teaching Council.

Principals and teachers spoken to by RNZ this year have warned that while some of the government’s English and maths changes were positive, it was trying to make too much change too fast.

Thirteen organisations signed the letter and the NZEI said others were considering it.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The minister responsible for fuel security says he has received proposals from import terminals to open up more diesel capacity, but any recommission of tanks would be a while off.

Associate Energy Minister Shane Jones said almost half of Marsden Point’s available storage was being used, and there had been a proposal to refurbish unused and empty tanks to boost diesel storage.

The tanks had been empty since the closure of the refinery in 2022, with Marsden Point now operating solely as an import and storage terminal for refined oil.

Jones said he had spoken to Rob Buchanan, the chief executive of Channel Infrastructure, which owned and operated Marsden Point.

“He said that there could be two tanks that could be repurposed, and he has sent through a proposal to us. However, because of the degradation since the closure of the refinery, it will take time,” Jones said.

“They have put forward a proposal to work, as I understand, with the Crown, to refurbish some storage tanks. Then the officials are working through, ‘do they think it’s a sensible thing to do and what it’s likely to cost the Crown and Channel if we were to work together?’”

He expected to receive that advice from officials “sooner, rather than later”.

Jones had also spoken to the chief executive of the Port of Taranaki, who had told him there could be up to three days of storage there.

“But two thirds of the potential storage is owned by Methanex, so I’m in no hurry to chase Methanex out of New Zealand,” Jones said, adding Taranaki would also need some new infrastructure.

“I think Marsden Point are confident, if they can get some regulatory relief. Taranaki said they have to build a new bund, because the regulations have changed. So look, I think that if we’re going to do this, we need to strip away the regulations without creating a public nuisance, and also arrive at a point where we can, if not share the costs, work out how soon it can be done.”

Combined, Jones estimated it would add “several days” to diesel storage capacity, with costs going towards the refurbishment and then purchasing the diesel.

Those costs, Jones expected, would be shared between the Crown and Channel.

A spokesperson for Channel Infrastructure said Channel was aware of Jones’ comments, but it did not comment on discussions with any of its customers.

“Channel has identified some very preliminary options for significantly increasing diesel storage capacity at Marsden Point,” the spokesperson said.

The spokesperson said Channel had almost 300 million litres of fuel storage in service at Marsden Point, and an additional 350 million litres of tanks that “could be converted” to provide additional fuel storage if required.

“The government’s Fuel Security Study concluded that the best way to improve New Zealand’s resilience was to increase the in-country storage of fuels that are critical to keeping our economy moving, and Channel stands ready to put all efforts into safely assisting with additional fuel resiliency measures, should we be asked to provide them.”

Fuel importers were required by law to hold 28 days’ worth of petrol, 24 days of jet fuel, and 21 days of diesel.

From 2028, the minimum requirement for diesel would increase to 28 days, if the fuel importer had more than 10 percent of the market share.

In 2024, the government stopped work on procuring 70 million litres of reserve diesel stock, saying it carried significant capital cost and Cabinet would need a robust understanding of options and their impacts before making decisions.

The fuel would have been funded through the Petroleum or Engine Fuels Monitoring Levy.

Instead, the government decided to explore other options to increase the diesel reserves from 21 days to 28 by 2028, and commissioned the Ministry of Business, Innovation, and Employment to study New Zealand’s fuel security requirements.

Under questioning from Labour’s energy spokesperson Megan Woods in the House on Tuesday, Jones said there was “no budget, no proposal that I could credibly take forward to my colleagues” on the reserve diesel stock.

New Zealand First has continued to blame Labour for the closure of the refinery in 2022, and has been attempting to tie the “degradation” of the storage capacity to the closure.

New Zealand First leader Winston Peters went as far as to suggest the refinery was “deliberately shut down, with the government’s connivance”.

In 2021, Labour had the option of providing a loan or subsidy to keep the refinery open, but then-minister Woods said there was not a strong case.

“There does not appear to be a clear case for maintaining refinery operations for fuel resilience reasons, except to address an exceptional ‘no fuel imports’ scenario,” she wrote in a 2021 Cabinet paper.

“This is an unlikely scenario, but not entirely implausible, therefore I believe the option of maintaining refinery capacity warrants an active decision by government.”

In the House, Jones accused Woods of making an “active decision” to close the refinery.

“If you close down 700 million litres of storage, 70 million is a mere drop,” he said.

Labour has repeatedly said the closure was a business decision made by its private owners, not a government decision.

“At most, you’d be talking about five days of unprocessed crude oil, in addition to whatever we have in terms of processed fuel onshore. Five days in the grand scheme of what we’re dealing with at the moment isn’t very much,” said Labour leader Chris Hipkins.

“There are certainly other things the government could have done over the last two years to increase our resilience. Marsden Point would be right at the bottom of that list.”

During Question Time, Peters asked the prime minister if all the “anxiety” around supplementary reserves would be relevant if “they hadn’t shut down Marsden Point?”

“It was a critical piece of national infrastructure and that was a decision of a previous government,” Christopher Luxon responded.

Luxon was then made to withdraw the comment, after Hipkins raised a point of order to argue the previous government had made no such decision.

On Tuesday, Woods told RNZ she was supportive of proposals for more storage space.

“Absolutely, and I would hope the government’s looking at that right now,” she said.

But she accused the government of being “short sighted” for scrapping the 70 million litre strategic reserve plans, which were to be a “worst case scenario” to ensure critical services like fire engines, ambulances, and food distribution could keep running.

That would have been in place this year, Woods said, whereas the government’s increased requirement for 28 days of diesel holdings would not come into place until 2028.

“One of the reasons the government scrapped that strategic reserve and got rid of the request for proposals that was out there, they said it was cost. It’s several million dollars to build that facility, in terms of being able to hold it, but there was up to $100 million of built-up levy sitting in the Petrol Levy fund, essentially that had built up over Covid that we were proposing to use for that,” she said.

“Instead, the government has gone for an option where the fuel companies themselves will hold this additional diesel, which will cost motorists more for diesel at the pump, and it will be two years’ delay.”

ACT leader David Seymour has previously disagreed with Jones on the economics of keeping the Marsden Point refinery open.

But he saw the merits on using more of its storage capacity.

“The reality is it would probably be a levy on the fuels themselves. But if that was to be proposed, I think we would look at it very carefully on the costs and benefits. I think the world just changed, and we can see that having some more independence is probably not a bad bit of room to have.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

MIL OSI

Source: Radio New Zealand

The coalition has ditched a contentious aspect of fisheries legislation after a backlash from recreational fishers.

The Prime Minister stepped in and spoke with Minister in charge Shane Jones, and said he agreed to take out the sections of the Fisheries Amendment Bill that removes the minimum size limits.

Winston Peters also took to social media, saying New Zealand First agreed to remove the contentious clause, after feedback about the proposed catch size limit changes for commercial companies, and how that would affect a large number of ordinary Kiwis.

The legislation is currently before Parliament and Peters said the party is now looking to review the issue of catch size limit during the select committee process.

“We believe in democracy, and the most important part of democracy is listening to the people. We are doing that,” said Peters.

Luxon said on social media he shared Kiwis’ concerns on the impacts to juvenile fish stocks.

“I know Kiwis still have some concerns, which is why we want the fishing community to submit to the Select Committee process on this Bill,” wrote Luxon.

The change comes following comments by Jones – also deputy leader of New Zealand First – saying on Monday critics of his Fisheries Amendment Bill were “a range of noisy voices”.

Peters said on Wednesday he spoke with Jones on the matter and “we decided to review this part of the legislation and use the select committee to remove this clause”.

The bill has been welcomed by the commercial sector but condemned by recreational fishing groups.

The current recreational size limit for snapper is between 25cm and 30cm depending on location, while the commercial size limit is 25cm.

Minimum size limits are imposed to ensure fish can reach sexual maturity before being caught.

Jones argued on Monday that allowing the commercial sector to land and sell undersize fish would prevent wastage.

Currently commercial fishers must dump undersize fish dead or alive, and it doesn’t count against their quota.

“The new provision is that if you catch them, you pay for them,” Jones said.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Families of those killed in the Pike River Mine disaster fear the government’s proposed health and safety law changes will remove worker protections and risk another tragedy.

Sonya Rockhouse, who lost her 21-year-old son Ben, and Anna Osborne, who lost her husband Milt, told the Education and Workforce Select Committee on Wednesday they wanted health and safety laws strengthened.

A methane-fuelled explosion ripped through the Pike River coal mine in the rugged Paparoa Range on the South Island’s West Coast on 19 November 2010, killing 29 workers.

The Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill was introduced to Parliament last month and the government said it was intended to reduce death and injury rates while also cutting compliance costs by focusing on the most serious critical risks and reducing confusion.

But critics said the changes could weaken worker protections and result in more workplace injuries.

Osborne said her husband’s death was preventable, it was not bad luck or an act of God.

“He was killed by a company that put its profit ahead of his life and the lives of 28 others, and that was allowed to happen by years of people, sitting in the same seats you are now, weakening the health and safety laws and regulations again and again,” she told the committee.

“This should never have happened and the travesty of justice that followed is a blight on New Zealand’s soul.”

‘This bill takes that away’

Workplace health and safety laws were strengthened in 2014 after the mining disaster, which had kept workplace deaths and injury rates at bay despite the population of the country growing larger, she said.

“People could be confident in speaking up and employers began to feel they needed to listen,” she said, of the 2014 changes.

But that was still not enough and Osborne and Rockhouse wanted to a corporate manslaughter charge introduced in New Zealand law.

“Milt always looked out for his people – he was a volunteer fireman, a local councillor – I have always thought that among all the bad that came from Pike he would have taken some heart in the fact his death helped keep others safe even just by a little bit,” Osborne said.

“This bill takes that away. It takes it away from every person at work in New Zealand and it takes it from the memory and the legacy of Milt and all the men he is lying with in that shithole of a mine.”

The pair made the submission on behalf of Stand With Pike outlining their concerns with the proposals in the Health and Safety at Work Amendment Bill.

Rockhouse said Ben was a intelligent, articulate, gentle boy who believed people were good.

“I don’t know what he would have made of how hard we’ve had to fight for truth that should have been ours by right. We should never have had to fight, protest and campaign for justice, accountability or truth,” she said.

“I don’t even know what to think of this right now, of the fact that we are having to come here again to tell people yet again about the consequences of taking people’s rights to health and safety from them.”

Osborne and Rockhouse met with Workplace Safety Minister Brooke van Velden at Parliament last November on the 15th anniversary of the disaster.

The minister, who admitted she had not read the Royal Commission’s report on the Pike River Coal Mine Tragedy, and did not support the introduction of a corporate manslaughter charge, instead preferred to focus on “upfront guidance” for businesses.

Rockhouse said everyone had the right to go to work in the morning and come home safely.

“It feels like the authors of this Bill have failed to learn from history, they have wilfully ignored it and it makes me sick and angry”, Rockhouse said.

“To wind back health and safety despite the price our men and us – their families – have paid, despite the fact that all of New Zealand has seen that cost? Shameful does not even begin to describe it.”

‘Absolute conflict of interest’

Green Party MP Ricardo Menéndez March asked the pair about their concerns with the law change.

Rockhouse said both her sons – Dan was one of just two survivors from the disaster – told her if they tried to raise issues around health and safety, no matter how big or small, they were told to “just shut the F up and get on with your job, basically that was the mentality”.

Several miners told her they had been worried about an explosion at the mine and the chief executive had said, “if you don’t like it there’s the door, leave, you’re not in Australia now”, she said.

“It’s very hard in that context to think the CEO would have identified the appropriate critical risks under the financial pressure they were under.”

Osborne said methane levels in the mine peaked over 19 times in the two weeks before the explosion.

“Those 19 times the men should have been out of the mine and, until that mine re-ventilated, they should not have been allowed to work but [Peter] Whittle and the managers there wanted production to happen,” she said.

“It was almost like they were playing a game of Russian roulette – production over safety.”

Stand With Pike advisor Rob Egan said the Bill assumed the workplace health and safety regulator could police and provide guidance and consultation to employers.

“That’s exactly what happened at Pike River … it is an absolute conflict of interest,” he said.

Earlier this year police said they were nearing the final stages of the criminal investigation into the disaster.

Detective superintendent Darryl Sweeney said the investigation was legally complex and police had been working with the Wellington crown solicitor for more than 18 months.

Further investigation was still needed and an update was likely to be several months away, he said.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

Erica Stanford is being accused of using government resources to distribute party political videos, but her office says it was simply “human error”.

On Tuesday morning, the Education Minister emailed school principals about the government’s new SMART assessment tool from her ministerial account.

“From today, SMART is available for schools and kura to prepare for the first assessment window,” the email read.

“I’m sharing this email for you to pass on to your teachers, along with the short video below which shows how SMART will support teaching and learning in practice.”

The email included an explanation of the tool, as well as a link to a video she said “focuses on what SMART will mean in the classroom, and how it can support teaching and learning.”

The video, which has since been removed, was uploaded to the NZ National Party YouTube page.

RNZ has seen comments by education staff in response to the email and video, expressing disappointment and criticising the use of a party platform to distribute information about a Ministry initiative.

Another response from a principal directly to the Minister indicated they would not be sharing the video due to it being hosted by the @NZNats page and requested that in future materials be shared through the appropriate channels.

Labour’s education spokesperson Ginny Andersen told RNZ it was “completely inappropriate” for a Minister to use Ministry of Education contact lists and government resources to distribute National Party videos.

“Erica Stanford should know better than this by now.”

A spokesperson for Stanford said the video was posted in “human error” and had been taken down.

Her office planned to send a new email on Wednesday with the correct link.

In response to Labour’s criticism, the spokesperson said: “This was a ministerial video for teachers that was simply uploaded to the wrong channel and has been rectified.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

People who are not eligible for the government’s fuel relief package – including beneficiaries or those living in rural communities with no children – say it is a “kick in the guts”.

The government announced on Tuesday that more than 140,000 working families with children will get an extra $50 a week to help counter rising fuel prices, with another 14,000 families qualifying for a part payment.

The government said the payment will target those struggling the most, but people living by themselves, without children, receiving the pension and living rurally feel as though they have been squeezed out.

A Christchurch single mother – who works part-time and receives a benefit – said she was left with just $93 for food after her bills were paid and her petrol tank was filled up.

“That doesn’t even take into account if someone needs a pair of shoes, or the car breaks down. $93 is all that is left over, with this increase in petrol.”

Sarah* said the $50 boost would have made a big difference to her family.

“It means that you’re constantly having to mentally juggle what choices you can make and what you can afford. Everything has to be calculated because it is so expensive.

“You end up eating the same thing over and over and having to make a batch of bolognese and that just goes for a whole week.

“My poor daughter has to moan and groan because there’s hardly any food for lunch boxes.”

In the past three weeks, Sarah has had no choice but to go to her local food bank, twice.

“We don’t buy takeaways at all, so there’s no stopping for an ice-cream on the way home, obviously the ability to buy clothes is non-existent.

“I had to buy my daughter a pair of sports shoes on Sunday, that money had come out of the power and internet that’s due, so I have to find that somewhere which is probably going to come out of food.”

A mum living in rural Mid-Canterbury, who did not want to be named, said she has to drive more than 100 kilometres each way to get to work, costing her $180 per tank of petrol.

But because she and her partner’s combined income added up to $130,000, they were just over the threshold to get the $50 boost.

“We’ve cut the shopping bill, luckily we have a decent amount of land, so we grow our own fruit and vegetables.

“But there will be more of a focus on growing as much of a winter crop as we can, although we are an alpine village so we get a lot of snow, so that cuts down on what we can grow.”

A woman living in rural Otago – who also did not want to be named – receives the pension and works part time, alongside caring for her elderly mother.

She has to drive 20 kilometres into town often to take her mother to her GP appointments, but it meant she would have to cut down on other things to be able to afford petrol for the week.

“It will be like blankets and jerseys and going to bed early, rather than having the heating on, but here down south it does get pretty cold in winter.”

Minister for Social Development and Employment Louise Upston was asked on Tuesday at Parliament about the assistance beneficiaries can access if they were struggling with fuel costs.

“One of the requirements at the moment is that they are fulfilling their obligations and if they have challenges meeting, for example, fuel costs, there is assistance available through MSD.

“I would always expect them to be talking to their case manager and to MSD about any challenges they face.”

But Sarah said it felt like a kick in the guts that the government had not taken single people and retirees into account.

“I just thought that was so offensive and a kick in the guts to block out, especially single parents who do work part-time, as non-working Kiwis.

“What’s the problem in supporting a parent to be a good parent? Is that not a form of work? I think to be excluded from that bracket was just so uncaring and humiliating.

“It feels like the sentiment is that being on a benefit is a choice, when it’s not a choice.”

The temporary $50 top up is being delivered through a boost in the in-work tax credit starting from April.

It is set to last a year or until the price of 91 octane petrol drops below $3 a litre for four consecutive weeks.

*Name changed to protect identity

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The Tertiary Education Commission (TEC) has warned it will not have enough government funding to cover all domestic enrolments next year – the third consecutive year funding was expected to fall short of demand for tertiary education.

The warning came in the commission’s guidance to institutions applying for government funding in 2027.

“Investment planning for 2027 is taking place in a very challenging fiscal environment. We expect demand to remain strong and available funding to be unlikely to match it. Trade-offs will be required and most providers will see reduced investment,” it said.

It said the commission would base its funding decisions on factors including evidence of improvements in student pass rates, financial performance, and institutions’ contribution to the network of tertiary courses provided around the country.

The commission also warned some institutes could lose some, or even all, funding.

“We expect to actively disinvest where these requirements are not met,” it said.

“In exceptional circumstances we may disinvest from all [of] your provision.”

Last year, the commission said it had enough funding for 99 percent of expected enrolments in 2025 and in 2026 and would use its reserves to provide funding for up to 102 percent of forecast enrolments this year.

However, 2025’s domestic enrolments exceeded forecasts and the commission said it was still calculating the result for that year.

“The final 2025 position across the entire tertiary sector is still being processed as we work through the annual wash up process over the next couple of months,” it said.

The commission said the government’s Budget could affect the outlook for this year.

“Unfunded learner numbers for 2026 will not be able to be forecast until after Budget ’26 decisions are taken and TEC receives it first data return on enrolments,” it said.

“The signalling in the plan guidance document reflects the current situation where the government is operating in a very tight fiscal environment and where economic conditions, the job market and demographics are driving enrolment growth. The sector needs to be prepared that not all programmes they wish to deliver can be fully funded with the focus being on supporting programmes in priority areas.”

The guidance also cautioned against rapid growth in foreign enrolments.

“Providers need to ensure growth in international education is sustainable, and that the quality of education and educational experience for international students and domestic learners is maintained or enhanced,” it said.

“This will support New Zealand’s reputation as a competitive global provider of high-quality education… Any potential negative impacts, such as on placement capacity, need to be carefully managed.”

Universities New Zealand chief executive Chris Whelan said historically governments had funded all enrolments because they did not want students to be turned away from courses.

“The government has funded the forecast numbers, the problem is actual numbers keep exceeding forecast,” he said.

Whelan said institutions could cope with small numbers of unfunded students, but not with large numbers and the effect varied depending on what proportion of a student’s education was covered by government subisdies.

In some subjects, the split was 50/50 between student fees and government subsidies, in others it was more like 33/67.

Whelan said as a result some institutions were refusing unfunded enrolments.

“Certainly I’m hearing, even though it’s quite early, that is happening in some places where universities are discouraging enrolments because they are unfunded places… And in other places, of course, universities are simply saying, yep, we can take on a smallish number of unfunded places.”

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

Source: Radio New Zealand

The local government minister has called Wellington’s mayor for an explanation of the huge water bills that residents are facing – and are forecast to hit almost $7000 a year by the end of the decade.

Wellington’s new water entity Tiaki Wai is a council-controlled organisation taking over Wellington, Lower Hutt, Upper Hutt and Porirua City Councils water assets from July.

It announced this morning that residents will face an average nearly 15 percent hike in water charges this coming financial year – from $2100 to $2400.

Those bills may rise by nearly a quarter the following year – and keep increasing – to reach an estimated $6800 per year for water services by 2036 as the water entity tries to fix old, failing infrastructure.

Local government minister Simon Watts said those costs were higher than he was expecting.

“I’m concerned for Wellington ratepayers again, you know we’ve got a long string of issues in this area.”

Watts said the plan that Tiaki Wai presented to the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) and the water regulator last year did not forecast such high costs.

He said he phoned Wellington’s Mayor Andrew Little about this today.

“I outlined to him that we received a plan from you which outlined a profile of cost increases, and as a result the entity has now published a price which is not in the plan, which is much higher, I need to understand, and have an explanation around that.”

A Tiaki Wai spokesperson said the Water Services Delivery plan it presented in August last year was based on the best available information at the time, and the organisation will continue to review its costs as investment plans develop.

Little said Tiaki Wai was responsible for what it sent to DIA last year, and he did not control or veto the organisation’s decisions under the new system.

He said he shared the minister’s concerns about bills, but the government campaigned on this model under its Local Water Done Well policy.

He said he will be scrutinising Tiaki Wai’s performance and pricing closely.

“If the increases follow the path that Tiaki Wai are saying, then people are going to expect high quality, that leaks are repaired quickly, also that they can contact their water company, at any time of the day.”

He wanted the Commerce Commission to be granted the power to intervene if water entity’s bills became unreasonable.

Watts did not confirm if the Commerce Commission would have the power to step in over sky-rocketing bills, but said he had called in the commission in this instance to work with Tiaki Wai and the councils over the projected prices.

Porirua Mayor Anita Baker said bills reaching nearly $7000 a year in a decade were horrendous, and could drive people away from the region.

“At those sort of prices, who’s going to be living here? I can’t pay $6000 in water, and $6000 in rates… we have to do something.”

She said while she supported the establishment of the water entity, and understood the scale of the work at hand, water charges still needed to be affordable.

Wellingtonians divided over jump in bills

Some Wellingtonians RNZ spoke to were worried about the charges due to cost of living pressures, while others said the region’s assets had to be fixed.

Dale said she did not look forward to the future knowing those charges lay ahead.

“That sounds pretty crap. I’m 28, so the way it will be, by the time I am 38, that doesn’t sound like I’ll be living a great life.”

But another resident Daniel Freese said the city had ignored failing assets for too long.

“I think it has to happen, I think we’re paying for under-investment over many years, and although it’s not good news, we just need to suck it up and pay for it.

“If we don’t pay now, we’re going have to pay later, and it’s going to be more.”

Resident Tom Arkell said he was keen to see water meters brought in for the city.

“I’d like to think we could bring in some pay-per-use water monitors, that we can actually incentivise people to use less water, and to track, and therefore they could pay within what they’re comfortable, rather than getting a fixed bill no matter how much water you use.”

Tiaki Wai is considering water meters, and the organisation expects they will take up to seven years to roll out across Wellington, and cost $590 million in total.

Peet yesterday told reporters the dire state of the region’s infrastructure could no longer be ignored after decades of under-investment.

“We know we’ve got a lot of leaks, we know we’ve got compliance issues with wastewater, and we all know that stormwater continues to be a significant challenge for many cities – but Wellington in particular.”

Peet said fixing the failed Moa Point plant – which has been spewing raw sewage into the sea for nearly six weeks – will be a top priority.

Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

– Published by EveningReport.nz and AsiaPacificReport.nz, see: MIL OSI in partnership with Radio New Zealand

MIL OSI