Central Plains Water

Canterbury Regional Council has summarised the scope of the Central Plains Water enhancement scheme as follows;[4] 'The applicants propose to irrigate 60,000 hectares of land between the Rakaia and Waimakariri Rivers from the Malvern foothills to State Highway One.

In July 2007, the trustees of Central Plains Water Trust informed Christchurch City Council that they had run out of money to fund the lawyers and consultants needed for the consent and notice of requirement hearings.

In September 2012, Selwyn District Council approved a loan of $5 million to Central Plains Water Limited for the design stage.

[8] The Central Plains Water enhancement scheme has had a small but influential group of supporters, some of whom have been involved as steering committee members, trustees and company directors.

[21] In November 2005, Lewthwaite was a Senior Environmental Engineer employed by URS New Zealand Limited, and the project manager and co-author of the application for resource consents lodged with Canterbury Regional Council.

Opponents include; Between 1,192 and 1,316 of public submitters oppose the 64 notified consent applications lodged with Canterbury Regional Council and between 153 and 172 submissions are in support.

[38] On 19 February 2008, the evidence of Walter Lewthwaite, one of the principal engineering witnesses for Central Plains Water Trust, became available from the Canterbury Regional Council website.

The issues to be dealt with later were;[44] Central Plains Water Trust has been in some lengthy litigation with Ngāi Tahu Properties Limited and Synlait.

[57] On 5 June 2007, Christchurch City Council was informed that Central Plains Water Limited had 'a shortfall of $NZ1 million' and had run out of money needed to pay for the expenses of the impending hearings on the applications for the various resource consents.

[65] The Central Plains Water Trust applications for resource consents may not have been technically used as security for the loan from Dairy Holdings Limited.

However, the Christchurch City Council report clarifies that Dairy Holdings Limited, will now get the benefit of the first use of water from the Rakaia River, under the loan arrangement.

That benefit will flow from the date the consents are granted, which will be some years before any of the 'ordinary' farmer shareholders in CPWL receive water, once the full scheme is constructed.

[66] Bob Parker, who became the new Mayor of Christchurch, favoured allowing the Central Plains Water scheme to proceed through the hearings into the resource consent applications.

[68] Sally Buck, a Christchurch City Councillor in the Fendalton Waimairi Ward, strongly opposed the Central Plains Water scheme.

[70] Richard Budd, a long-serving regional councillor, who had been a paid consultation facilitator for Central Plains Water, [11] lost the Christchurch East ward to Sutherland and Tindall.

[73] In October 2002, staff of the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA), were engaged by Central Plains to survey fish populations in the Waianiwaniwa River catchment as part of the investigation into the potential dam site.

NIWA concluded that the dam would be problematic for the mudfish as their habitat would be replaced by an unsuitable reservoir and the remaining waterways would be opened to predatory eels.

A rare combination of conditions makes the Waianiwaniwa River a unique ecosystem and creates an important whole catchment refuge for the conservation of this nationally threatened species".

[77] Angus McIntosh, Associate Professor of Freshwater Ecology in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Canterbury, presented evidence on behalf of the Department of Conservation.

[82] The summary Canterbury Regional Council report, by Principal Consents Advisor Leo Fietje, did not make a formal recommendation to either grant or decline the applications.

Uncertainty remains over fish screens, natural character of the Waimakariri River, terrestrial ecology, and effects on lowland streams.

[83] The summary Selwyn District Council report, by Nick Boyes of Resource Management Group Ltd, recommended declining both the Notice of Requirement and the applications for land use consents.

The cost-benefit-analysis, which was critical to the farmer-uptake and investment in, and therefore the viability of, the scheme, was considered to lack robustness and to overstate benefits and understate costs.

Also, a burden of proof lies on any party who wishes a hearing panel (or the Environment Court) to make a determination of adverse or positive effects.

[85] The Officers' reports, in noting several adverse effects, have moved the burden of proof for rebuttal onto the witnesses for Central Plains Water Trust.

[87] On 3 April 2009, the Commissioners released a minute stating that consents to dam the Wainiwaniwa River were unlikely to be granted and that the hearing would be resumed on 11 May 2009 to decide whether to proceed with a proposal not including water storage.

[91] The Malvern Hills Protection Society recommended declining all applications, noting that CPW had obtained requiring authority status on the basis that the dam and reservoir were essential (para 14).

The Society also noted that any water-take consents granted were likely to be ultimately transferred to Dairy Holdings Limited under existing loan agreements (para 29).

[93] On 30 October 2009, the Commissioners announced that, subject to conditions, they considered they could issue resource consents and grant the Notice of Requirement for the revised scheme.

[94] In June 2010, Environment Canterbury issue a press release stating that the hearing panel had granted 31 consents and the notice of requirement for the revised scheme without the storage dam.