• About this site|
• Site index|
• Contact us|
• Jobs

Wai Ora: Report of the Sustainable Water Programme of Action Consultation Hui

Whakataukī

Executive Summary

Purpose of this Report

Background - The Sustainable Water Programme of Action

Key Issues Emerging from Consultation

Feedback from the Hui

Conclusion

Appendix 1: Details of all Sustainable Water Programme of Action Consultation Meetings

Appendix 2: Details of Consultation Process

Appendix 3: Minutes of the Sustainable Water Programme of Action hui, Prepared by Indigenous Corporate Solutions

Feedback from the Hui

This section provides feedback on:

• the scope of the Sustainable Water Programme of Action
• the eight issues identified in the Sustainable Water Programme of Action discussion document
• the 13 actions identified in the Sustainable Water Programme of Action discussion document.

Feedback on the issues

Eight key issues for improving freshwater management in New Zealand are identified in the discussion document:

Issue 1: National and regional strategic planning for water management could be improved

Issue 2: Nationally important values need to be better addressed

Issue 3: Setting environmental bottom lines and allocation limits is costly and contentious

Issue 4: Water is over-allocated in some catchments, is not consistently allocated to its highest value use over time, and can be wasted

Issue 5: Tension between investment certainty and planning flexibility

Issue 6: Māori participation in water management could be improved

Issue 7: A lack of effective action in the management of diffuse discharges of contaminants on water quality, in some catchments

Issue 8: Development of water infrastructure is not keeping pace with demand.

Issue 1: National and regional strategic planning for water management could be improved

Improvement is needed in consistency between councils in how they operate, especially as iwi have to deal with a number of councils. Raukawa commented that they deal with a number of local authorities:

Within Raukawa there are a number of different local authorities, we duplicate our efforts on less resources than councils have. (Hamilton hui)

Participants at several of the hui felt that Māori concerns are over-ridden by other interests, such as industry and energy concerns during local government processes. Even council representatives admitted that it is difficult to withstand strong lobby pressure from certain industries in their regions.

Issue 2: Nationally important values need to be better addressed

Concerns were expressed about identifying water bodies of national importance for Māori values, as Māori values for water have a strong local flavour. Hui participants expressed concern that defining nationally important values for Māori would be difficult, because of the localised iwi/hapū-specific nature of Māori interests in freshwater.

Support was shown for addressing nationally important values where iwi saw this as a way to protect important local values.

It is possible to develop water bodies of national importance for Māori cultural values, eg, Whanganui and Taupo. The call depends on the local people, but there is also a notion of what other iwi perceive, particularly where an iwi is identified by their river (eg, Waiapu River). Every iwi or hapū have their own pepeha or whakatauki that identifies their water body, these are identifications of national importance. (Wellington hui)

Issue 3: Setting environmental bottom lines and allocation limits is costly and contentious

Iwi involved in the Genesis case appreciated that this is a complex issue and that policy-making will be a difficult task. Problems with setting minimum flows were seen as partly a political issue, as well as a complex technical and policy issue. Concern was expressed that minimum flows have become a new norm (rather than a minimum) and support was shown for improving the methods for setting minimum flows.

There is also suspicion where iwi have been reassured by councils a minimum flow has been set (around irrigation and farming) and then iwi are told current levels are unsustainable and water bodies are under pressure. For instance, the Nelson hui expressed concern that in Tasman water users had to recently reduce their use by 20 percent.

The current allocation method is flawed, if people lose water, [they] lose crops and employment. (Hastings hui)

Issue 4: Water is over-allocated in some catchments, is not consistently allocated to its highest value use over time, and can be wasted

Low flows and particularly the over-allocation of water were stated as issues of serious concern at a number of hui. Specific concerns referred to at the hui included lack of access to water in fully allocated areas in the Waitaki Catchment, and farm water use and the need for on-farm water sources.

Concern was expressed that consent applicants can seek more water than they need under the current process for allocating water. Participants also recognised a danger that applicants would seek more water now under the current system if the current allocation system was perceived as changing in the near future. There was also concern that councils allocate more water than is available so cannot guarantee its availability now or in the future, and concern over the environmental impacts of this:

I remember when we used to swim and bathe in our stream Te Wai o Hotu, we had special bathing places, and mahinga kai. Now it has almost dried up. (Hamilton hui)

Distrust of the 'first-in, first-served' approach to allocation was expressed:

There are difficulties with the first-in, first-served process - one difficulty is that everything has an incremental impact. First-in, first-served reinforces inadequacy. It is difficult to address issues with individual consents without being able to step back and address the whole catchment. (Dunedin hui)

Some Māori felt that Māori freehold land, including traditional Māori reserves, should be given priority access to water:

Shouldn't Māori who have traditional rights be automatically at the top of the queue? This also relates to lands that have been returned to Māori. We need to have the water rights to use the land as well [as having the land returned]. We should be a priority. (Christchurch hui)

There was also concern that global warming would make the issue of water allocation more serious as some rivers will be drier, resulting in more pressure on other rivers, especially if implementation of the Kyoto Protocol does not make a difference.

There was also concern about water efficiency and that the emphasis on efficiency is really about productivity. This emphasis could lead to overly intensive land use that has negative consequences on water bodies. Participants frequently referred to the need to encourage efficient use of grey water, water recycling, and use of tanks to collect rain water on all houses.

Issue 5: Tension between investment certainty and planning flexibility

Although this issue was not discussed specifically or in any depth, the Christchurch hui expressed concern that consents are granted for 35 years, without needing to justify consent applicants' need for the water. This term leads to consent holders taking water for granted as they have a consent that spans most of their working life.

Issue 6: Māori participation in water management could be improved

Issues around Māori participation included:

• a lack of resources and the consequent negative impact on Māori participation
• councils marginalising Māori by excluding them, and not giving adequate recognition to Māori values
• councils only allowing Māori to influence planning when another interest group initiates the change
• difficulties making submissions due to lack of resources
• needing iwi management plans
• a lack of technical ability and the need for Māori science and water quality monitoring
• problems around non-notified consents.

Hui participants felt strongly about improving Māori participation in freshwater management, and that the barriers preventing this are of serious concern. Māori want recognition for the positive difference they can make:

The key issues are participation and the need for the legislated ability to do that, that tangata whenua [need to] be recognised for the contribution they can make to the management of the quality of the water, we want to help the community win. (Waitara hui)

Māori participants were concerned that although they may 'get to have a say', they do not have any part in decision-making and management:

Māori need to have the power to protect their taonga (water) as guaranteed by Article 2. Planners and decision makers must realise that. At some stage those decisions must involve iwi. Iwi must have input. We have no representatives on either of the two councils here. Once decisions are made, we are then told what the decision is. (Nelson hui)

The Resource Management Act was praised many times at hui, but support was tempered by the observation that there is a lack of willingness to implement the provisions of the Resource Management Act that recognise Māori interests.

On the issue of relationships with Māori - legally, part 2 of the Resource Management Act requires these relationships section 6(e) - but more than that, Māori have hundreds of years experience as kaitiaki, as mana whenua protecting and managing land, waterways and so on. This needs to be recognised. (Auckland hui)

Issues around kaitiakitanga were raised, including that Māori are not 'anti-development':

Māori (particularly in the context of the Resource Management Act) shouldn't be seen as anti-development, or as problematic but we are kaitiaki - to protect the whenua, the awa and sacred sites and this is affirmed in Te Tiriti o Waitangi. As we move forward, we must be in partnership. Any sustainable water programme of action must see water as a taonga in the context of the Treaty and this benefits all of us, not just Māori. (Auckland hui)

Issues were also raised around the need to provide funding for Māori to be involved in resource management.

[I] sit on two committees that deal with waste, all work is unpaid, and there are huge problems in these areas. (Hastings hui)

Some Māori are keen to form iwi management plans but feel constrained where their local council collects inadequate information for iwi to make decisions and develop an informed plan.

Issue 7: A lack of effective action in the management of diffuse discharges of contaminants on water quality, in some catchments

Water quality was a key issue raised at all hui. Speakers at the hui did not distinguish between the pollution issues resulting from diffuse discharges and other water quality issues. Both direct and diffuse discharges were seen as an issue that needed to be addressed, and were generally discussed in the same terms.

Participants felt strongly that waterways are polluted and that water quality is an issue. Concerns expressed included:

• farming
• forestry
• discharge consents
• rapid or uncontrolled subdivision
• absence of water quality standards
• untreated/poorly treated sewerage discharge into water
• long-term effects of past discharges
• stop banks causing sedimentation and shingle build up
• vehicles driving through waterways.

Many iwi expressed concern about local water quality:

Out of 51 stretches of water in the region, only one is safe to drink and 10 safe to swim in. (Nelson hui)

Here in the North Shore, not one of our water-courses meets health standards for bathing. (Auckland hui)

The quality of the Waiwhetu stream is a major concern. The impact of urban development is a major issue. More rural areas are becoming urbanised with the development of lifestyle blocks. Inevitably water quality will decrease. (Wellington hui)

There was a sense that under Māori management this kind of harm would not have been caused:

The run-off into our tributaries is polluting our awa, and yet here we are expected to respond to this sustainable water programme of action. In our history we have practised protection, and yet we are prevented from continuing to do so. (Nelson hui)

Many hui participants reflected that Māori consider the health of local mahinga kai as an indicator of water health and water quality. The decline and loss of mahinga kai and associated indicator species was seen as a reflection of how seriously Māori concerns are taken.

In this rohe, kōtuku are paramount. What comes out of the river will end in the estuary. The sign of the kōtuku is that the environment is healthy. If the kōtuku does not appear, we are all in trouble. (Nelson hui)

There was much discussion of links with farming practices and that more action in managing the riparian margin was needed. Waitara iwi found that even though some practices had stopped (eg, discharge from an old meatworks into the Waitara River) that the river was not able to recover some 15 years on.

Our kaimoana is declining due to pollution and declining water quality, large scale farming, direct pollution of waterways through fertiliser and stock in waterways. (Gisborne hui)

[There are] big water quality issues with Lake Taupo, I am thankful that we may have caught Lake Taupo in time. No one ever understood the delicate balance of the ecosystem around the lake. (Taupo hui)

The impacts of activities in riverbeds and channels on water quality was also an issue for some submitters.

[We don't agree with] the practice of councils putting in flood protection schemes. The Ōreti River meandered from time to time, now there are flood channels in which the river is being controlled. Because of this, year after year, habitat and ecosystems, eeling spots and fishing spots are changing. When the river is confined (by flood protection schemes), the river digs in and the habitats dry up. (Invercargill hui)

Through gravel extraction, we are trying to replace what has been lost. Populations of some birds nesting up the river have disappeared over the years. It is not good practice to be narrowing and confining rivers. Rivers don't naturally go straight, they like to meander. Birds like to settle on the river beds in protected areas - to keep cool and to feed. These areas are just not there. (Invercargill hui)

Issue 8: Development of water infrastructure is not keeping pace with demand

Concern of this issue was expressed where there is a growing population and inadequate infrastructure for drinking water and sewage. There are also issues for marae that have to deal with changing regulation and rules around drinking water sources:

For our marae, there have been changes in the requirements regarding water tank supply - so we had to bore down, now we can't bore down because the water quality is undrinkable and we cannot afford to link up to the supply. Requirements change and we have to deal with the hurdles. (Hamilton hui)

Council-related issues

Many hui attendees had serious concerns about the performance of territorial authorities and regional councils, in relation both to their obligations towards Māori and to their freshwater management responsibilities. These were issues that had not been explored in the discussion document.

Inconsistent performance by councils in their application of Part II of the Resource Management Act, particularly those sections which give protection to Māori interests, was a significant issue for many:

Sections 6(e), 7 and 8 of the Resource Management Act are great tools for achieving Māori aspirations, but performance is variable in meeting those provisions. Although the Resource Management Act was passed in 1991, it was not until the Ngāi Tahu Settlement Act and apology that we saw a real change in attitude by councils. (Dunedin hui)

Councils have not been giving effect to sections 6, 7, 8 of the Resource Management Act. Some of our settlement processes have been about improving the performance of councils. (Dunedin hui)

Hui participants also commented that councils never use 'avoid', but always use 'remedy or mitigate', and that there is a reluctance to enforce the Resource Management Act due to either a lack of funding or councils misinterpreting their responsibilities.

In some places the Resource Management Act is being enforced, not here (there are) dead cows in the waterway, and yet the so-called 'caretakers' for our land, air and water do nothing. (Kaitaia hui)

A few submitters had more significant concerns about political interference in freshwater management within councils, and the potentially damaging effect this had on Māori issues.

Some iwi have very poor relationships with their local councils. Some found councils resistant to acknowledging that Māori have a cultural identity with the land and freshwater; and that some councils will not listen to Māori unless they are present in large numbers.

We are talking from our background, our history, our culture. We won't just drop all that because of some government law. There is strong resistance to us when we say we are coming from a cultural identity. (Whangarei hui)

Some iwi have good, constructive relationships with their local councils and were keen to show support for those councils.

On the issue of building relationships - this is going well down here. We have Te Ao Mārama, adapted from the Tūranganui a Kiwa experience. There is resourcing for rūnanga, so they can act as a link with council. We have a roopu (group) Taiao which has regular quarterly meetings. It is a political group with representatives from each rūnanga and from each council. Policies and consents are discussed. The ongoing working relationships with councils have done us an enormous amount of good. There is a need to formalise those relationships in case personalities change. Social interaction is important - you build friendships and gain a better understanding of each other. (Invercargill hui)

Other issues

A number of additional issues were raised at hui, which participants regarded as not included or sufficiently emphasised in the Sustainable Water Programme of Action discussion document. These included:

• the need to see water management in the global context
• the need for alternative and renewable energy (especially in relation to hydro-generation)
• concerns about flooding and flood management.

Several speakers also commented on parallel policy issues which they felt had implications for water management:

• the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Bill
• the Treaty settlements process.

Several participants commented on the Resource Management and Electricity Legislation Amendment Bill (resulting from the Resource Management Act Review in 2004), and the potential effects on Māori participation in water management. The consensus view was that the proposed changes to Māori involvement in consents and planning processes were likely to make it harder for tangata whenua to have input on water issues, and would water down Māori participation. Some submitters recognised that there is no existing legal obligation to consult with Māori, and that the proposed amendments would reduce this even further. There was a feeling that consultation with Māori would be unlikely to occur unless there was some sort of obligation to do so, despite the requirements of Part II of the Resource Management Act.

Treaty Settlement matters were raised in Whanganui and Waikato, where negotiations are currently under way on major river claims. In Whanganui there were some concerns that related processes such as the Sustainable Water Programme of Action and the Resource Management Act Review had not been coordinated, and that iwi/hapū were not resourced to deal with these consultation processes while also involved in settlement negotiations.

Feedback on the actions

A package of 13 actions is proposed in the discussion document to address the issues identified, as shown in Table 2 below. For the purposes of presentation at hui and analysis of feedback from consultation hui and submissions, the 13 actions were grouped into four major areas:

• providing national direction
• central government being more involved
• providing more tools to councils
• working together.

Table 2: The four sets of actions

Provide national direction

Support was expressed for the idea of central government providing national direction on water management. Participants saw that a benefit of this would be that regions would no longer be required to continue 'learning as they go', and that there would be greater consistency of process and performance. However, this was coupled with strong support for decision-making to remain at a regional and local level. A balancing of central and local government involvement was seen by many hui participants as benefiting the development of sustainable policies where rates and other issues may influence council direction.

Water efficiency, discharges to freshwater including nutrient run-off, and sewage were seen as issues requiring national direction. A related suggestion was that national direction is needed to provide a set of practical guidelines or standards for efficient sewage treatment.

Doubts about providing national direction were also expressed. Participants at the Waitara hui questioned whether the national direction would benefit some iwi as central government 'have never done anything for us'. Kaitaia iwi did not want to see another layer of bureaucracy, which could then be used by central government as an excuse for not holding regional councils accountable for their functions.

As a landowner of a large portion of the catchment, I am nervous about the concept of national interest, national standards which will lead to national policies which may not necessarily align with local interests. All rules and policies should be in line with specific catchments, the ownership of the catchment and what the catchment wants. One model (for example, what is happening in Lake Taupo) may not sit nicely elsewhere. (Taupo hui)

Action 1: Develop national policy statements

There was some support for a national policy statement to be developed with implementation possibly by central government. Supporters of a national policy statement saw that some issues would need to be addressed to gain the desired outcome. Those who supported the use of a national policy statement felt that it could provide for consistency between councils and a clear direction for water management.

Not all participants supported the idea of a national policy statement, or felt that it would be useful. There were concerns that actions required now would not be addressed soon enough due to the time required to develop a national policy statement, or that an national policy statement could become a document too large to be of any practical use. Others saw the national approach as a potentially inappropriate way to deal with tangata whenua interests.

National policy statements pose risks for tangata whenua, often these interests are at a hapū/iwi level and a national process might override many of those critical interests. Water is integral to identity and wellbeing locally. Our local characteristics need to be reflected in any water plan. (Dunedin hui)

Action 2: Develop national environmental standards

Strong support was expressed for the development of national environmental standards. Many participants felt that national environmental standards are needed so that councils can work consistently, and so that water quality rules would be more enforceable than under the current guidance-based approach. For Māori, we heard that national environmental standards should include that:

• no sewage discharge directly into water
• all freshwater is drinkable
• all discharges are of a drinkable quality where they re-enter a water body
• water ways are swimmable
• minimum flows are the absolute bottom line.

Māori want a role in determining national environmental standards. The potential development of freshwater national environmental standards was seen as an opportunity for Māori values to be included in the development of national standards, and Māori to be included in the decision-making process. This could, for example, encompass the mauri of waterways:

National standards should adopt our values and should clearly outline the weightings to be given to our values. (Auckland hui)

Concerns were expressed that standards would be set nationally, overriding locally-based iwi/hapū interests, and that they would be set too low to achieve what local people want. Participants asked for regional standards to be able to be set higher if desired by the community, and some were altogether opposed to national environmental standards as they thought they would not address regional needs.

Action 3: Address nationally important values

Participants were opposed to ranking the importance of waterways.

Every single waterway is significant and valid to this region. In terms of 'mountains to the sea' we believe in 'heavens to the sea'. Every single waterway is important and vital to us. (Nelson hui)

There was also some wariness that water bodies of significance for Māori cultural values would not be recognised and would be left at the bottom of the list.

The cultural importance of freshwater to Māori was constantly expressed at hui, along with a rejection of Action 3:

Tīpuna viewed that all creeks, streams, rivers are arteries of Papatūānuku. In human terms, the vein in your toe is as important as the ones in your heart. Similarly, grading of waterways is exclusive rather than inclusive. All water is connected. (Dunedin hui)

I am a bit suspicious of the concept of national importance, water quality will be deemed to be important is some areas, and not in others, and some areas might be left out. All waterways are important and need to be of a high quality. The waterway most important to me is the one closest to me. The concept of nationally important waterways is a very limited concept. (Dunedin hui)

Support was shown where iwi saw Action 3 as a way to protect important local values:

The lake, Te Karu o te Ika (The Eye of Māui's Fish), is the place where all rivers and streams meet. According to the stories of our old people, the water was once black with eels. Customary trade of eels from the lake is noteworthy and illustrates the lake's importance. How do we go about making our lake a waterway of national importance? Our lake is not treated very well. We want to find any and every way possible to raise the profile of our lake as a place of significance to us. There was some discussion regarding the international recognition of the lake. It is worthwhile pursuing the making of this lake a water body of national importance. That would be an incentive to clean up the lake. (Greytown hui)

However, reservations were expressed when the values of each hapū were discussed:

Nationally important water bodies - standards need to be set on how the Crown intends to identify these. In assessing this, we also need to be clear on Waitapu, Waiora etc, each hapū identifies with awa, that is the most important water body to them. There will be no direction from central government that will address that. (Whangarei hui)

Central government being more involved

Hui participants supported the need for central government to have a closer relationship with local government, in particular in providing more direction to councils on environmental sustainability issues. It was suggested that this could be achieved through an expanded Ministry for the Environment monitoring role, including monitoring the implementation of regional plans and consents as a means of measuring how well environmental management by councils is working. However, reservations were expressed that this needs to be done without removing decision-making at a regional or local level.

Action 4: Increase central government participation in regional planning

It was also suggested that central government should provide funds for the development of iwi management plans. It was also stated that the Local Government Act 2002 needs clearer links to the Resource Management Act in terms of Māori involvement in environmental management, especially around mana whenua issues. Some felt the current Sustainable Management Fund was not sufficiently supportive of iwi planning:

We, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua, applied for funding from the Sustainable Management Fund and got it (and had done the first of 12 capacity milestones), but the contract was suspended due to a political about turn in policies. So we do not have an iwi management plan and we have to reapply again with everyone else for funding. (Auckland hui)

Action 5: Increase central government's support for local government

Support was expressed at the Greytown hui for central government providing more training to councillors to enhance their understanding of environmental issues, which would lead to improved environmental management practises. We heard that an improvement in councillors' understanding issues relating specifically to Māori is also required.

Participants noted that local government does not require more support where it already has sufficient funding. One participant at the Dunedin hui suggested there is a need to set priorities that provide for good environmental management, and that more enforcement is needed to implement plans and legislation.

Providing more tools to councils

There was general support for improving processes to enable more efficient water use, and it was suggested that efficiency be broadened to include a quadruple bottom line. In general, the Resource Management Act was seen as a good piece of legislation and most concerns were around implementation issues.

Much has been done since the Resource Management Act 1991. Prior to that you could see destruction all over the place. (Christchurch hui)

However, at the Hamilton hui Māori asked for separate legislation (as opposed to the Resource Management Act 1991 or Local Government Act 2002) for the tupuna awa.

There should be separate legislation for the Tupuna awa - the Resource Management Act process and the Local Government Act process does not work for us. We, in Raukawa, are walking the talk in terms of the impacts on tupuna awa and have had to battle bureaucracy time and time again. We are grouped, marginalised/divided and ruled. (Hamilton hui)

Comments were made at the Dunedin and Greytown hui that cultural issues should be included in every option for new tools.

On the issue of providing tools which was discussed today, we need to analyse each of the tools proposed and have an input into who takes what decision at what level. How closely does each decision affect us will determine how strongly we wish to participate on each issue. Water is allocated to vineyards and now the marae on the Ruamāhanga River can't get access to any water. (Greytown hui)

Action 6: Develop special mechanisms for regional councils

There was support for an integrated catchment management approach.

Integration is a key issue for us - we need to look at the policy in a holistic way....[We] fully support and highly recommend catchment based strategies - we as kaitiaki know what is happening in our catchments and how we can work together to deal with these issues of allocation. (Hamilton hui)

It was suggested that all consents be renewed at the same time. It was also suggested that the cumulative effects of resource consents on freshwater should be looked at in more depth.

We need to ensure that councils look at whole area, not just one property. (Kaitaia hui)

Research should be done on the cumulative effects resource consents have had on our waters. (Christchurch hui)

One participant suggested that the Mahurangi Catchment in Whangarei would provide a useful pilot study for integrated management.

Riparian management was also frequently discussed with some gains noted in fencing-off wetland areas from stock.

There was also support for recognising customary water quality indicators based on the presence of certain species.

Support was expressed for efficient water use and a good allocation system. Some speakers supported the suggestion that water users should be charged for the water they use, to better reflect the true costs of that use and to encourage efficiency.

Resource rentals could play a role in encouraging people to be more careful with water use, and the volume applied for (in anticipation that it will become a tradable commodity in the near future similar to what happened in the fishing industry). We don't want people hoarding water permits only to build up water rights for future allocation. This must not be allowed to happen. (Invercargill hui)

There was support at the Greytown hui for transfer of allocated water as a means to demonstrate the true value of water and encourage efficient use.

Action 7: Enhance the transfer of allocated water between users

Many reservations were expressed about making water consent transfers easier. Some Māori would rather see 'excess' water left in a 'bank' or available for other forms of re-allocation. Concern was expressed around private 'stockpiling' of water for profit.

Allocation: did the concept of transfer include transfer of allocation? We have already had to deal with the transfer of our water to other rohe, this has strong cultural and spiritual impacts. (Hamilton hui)

Questions were also raised around whether increased tradability would affect perceptions of property rights.

The ability to transfer water is almost like a property right - our fear is that someone who can afford the resource consent will over-apply - eg, Meridian, who assert that they own the river for hydro, and therefore everyone else has to satisfy them rather than the consent authority. What's to stop them gathering up 'spare' and then selling on? There is unequal sharing of the resource. Tradeable water rights, those who already have the resource (farmers) will 'rule the roost'. They are driven by economics not the environment. There are real concerns about transfers. The proposed [Resource Management Act] amendments would make the situation worse; investment is one of the determinants for decision-making. (Christchurch hui)

Discussion on transfer and tradability was linked to outstanding issues around Māori rights to water.

If we begin to trade property rights in asset, this will raise issues about what our [Māori] ownership rights are. Assertions of ownership run through customary ownership. We are large-scale landowners of lands from which water springs. (Greytown hui)

Strong reservations were expressed as to when transfer became a 'trade'; with the thought of money changing hands for water a serious issue for Māori.

No concern with transferring consents and discharge, but there will be major problems if money starts changing hands. (Kaitaia hui)

As noted above under Action 6, there was support from a few participants for the use of increased water permit trading as a means of encouraging greater efficiency in water use.

Action 8: Develop market mechanisms to manage diffuse discharges

Support was expressed around stronger use of the 'polluter pays' principle. Those who discussed this action felt that it should be about polluters being required to minimise pollution. Those who opposed the action believed that a 'cap' may encourage people to feel they can pollute to the maximum (cap) rather than emphasise the need for reduction of discharges, which they said is an issue with the (fisheries) quota management system.

Action 9: Set requirements for regional freshwater plans to address key issues and challenges

Some participants expressed concern that council plans, and the policies and rules in those plans, did not properly address issues of significance for Māori.

The main concern raised related to the need to recognise the significance of mixing water and the mauri of water. This was expressed at the Nelson, Christchurch, Invercargill and Dunedin hui.

There are proposals for water from Motueka to be transported to Nelson. This is wrong. Mauri should be retained within rohe, keep water within its catchment. (Nelson hui)

I am opposed to mixing waters - it is bad enough that our rivers Awatapu and Waihao do not have enough water, but now there is water coming from elsewhere [in the Waitaki] with weed in that water. (Christchurch hui)

Cross mixing is an issue - it links to mauri, but it can be a tool. Where water has been cleansed on land there may be no issue, it is where it goes directly from one water body into another that is the major issue. (Invercargill hui)

Action 11: Enable regional councils to allocate water to priority uses

In general there was concern that allocation models need to be strengthened.

Allocation models lack teeth, limits need to be firmer, councils are too variable and need more accountability. (Palmerston North hui)

There was also concern the first allocation should be to the environment to ensure the habitat of aquatic species.

The native aquatic species have first right to the water. The cows come in on a truck. They can go out on a truck. The native species have nowhere else to go. (Invercargill hui)

Many speakers expressed disagreement with the notion of market mechanisms being used to allocate water resources. People were concerned that this was a privatisation of the resource, or created a property right. There were also concerns that any such creation of property rights would not protect Māori customary interests or Māori ownership of the water resource.

It looks as though we are moving towards a property right, if I buy something, I own it and can sell it, this is totally wrong for our waterways. (Invercargill hui)

[I] disagree strongly with bartering and trading of permits, this implies ownership. This will greatly affect our river claim and co-management. (Hamilton hui)

As well as concerns about the effects on Māori interests, some felt that market mechanisms would potentially favour the rich. Some were worried that tendering for water would create inequities, as not all would be able to afford it.

I am not in favour of tendering the use of water: the rich man he gets richer, and the poor man, he stays poor. (Nelson hui)

[I have a] concern about the idea of putting water up for tender. This will remove the use of water from those with limited resources. (Kaitaia hui)

Doubt was expressed over whether tradable rights would lead to better water management by users, or entrenched rights and complacency. There was also concern that charging of water would add another, undesirable, layer of bureaucracy.

Many reservations were expressed about the effects of greater trading of water allocations on the prioritisation of different water uses. Rather than water being moved around among existing users, some Māori would prefer to see water which was not being used returned to the waterway, or made available for allocation to non-extractive activities. Concern was expressed around private 'stockpiling' of water for profit.

Working together

There was overwhelming support from hui for working together. There was support for improving relationships between Māori, local government and the wider community, and strong support for increased involvement of local communities. Hui participants thought that it was important that solutions align with local values and ownership constructs to be effective.

[We] fully support the working together idea. Whole of government approach would work on catchments for example, in the Mahurangi Catchment - where there is heavy sediment. (Auckland hui)

Hui participants stated that working together to manage freshwater would be particularly useful in the form of joint management, co-management, and integrated catchment management. In Gisborne there was strong support for joint governance of freshwater (such as the Environment Bay of Plenty model), joint management (Ngai Tahu experience), joint planning, joint regulation, joint compliance and enforcement.

We are aiming to improve our relationship with local government; we need to work with central and local government to address water quality issues. The relationship between the Crown and Māori should include joint governance (Environment Bay of Plenty model), joint management (Ngai Tahu experience), joint planning, joint regulation, joint compliance and enforcement. Only kaitiaki know how to address the problems relating to our wāhi hāpu. Local communities need to be involved in developing plans. (Gisborne hui)

Some collaborative projects incorporating different government and non-government sectors have already begun around the country:

Wellington Regional Council Masterton are currently working on a document regarding Ruamāhanga - integrated catchment - a long- term research project. This is focused on bringing in all the different interests groups to work together in an integrated manner - which is the way that it should be. (Greytown hui)

A desire to begin more collaborative community projects, and the need for more community involvement in planning for freshwater was expressed.

[We have] rights as tangata whenua to participate in decision-making. People are responsible to their neighbours. Everyone has a personal responsibility to improve the quality of water, to do whatever they can do. (Hastings hui)

Statutory plans must be part of a planning cycle. But they are not. There is no cycle that the community can really take part in. There must be an iterative planning cycle. (Dunedin hui)

It comes back to the people in the community, the local people who know what is happening on the ground and local ownership of the problems and answers is important. There are a lot of people here who do a lot for our environment. There is a real sense of willingness for people to work co-operatively. (Hamilton hui)

There is a responsibility upon us all, [the] whole marae, whole of New Zealand to put degeneration of freshwater right and look after our freshwater. It is important that all interest groups work together to achieve sustainable solutions, rather than politically motivated solutions manipulated by lobby groups. (Wellington hui)

A need to create processes where iwi are more involved and more significantly recognised for their contribution was expressed at the Wellington hui:

Iwi are seeking more significant recognition and control. In this region Māori participation is very active and it comes from the tangata whenua groups, those who have kaitiaki responsibility. Dealing with resource consents. [We] have an intimate knowledge of the area. (Wellington hui)

Some doubts were expressed about the practicalities of making working together happen.

Support was expressed for iwi groups working together with other iwi groups.

Tūhoe and Ngāti Awa need to work together to develop plans for the environment and their water. (Whakatane hui)

Action 10: Enhance Māori participation

There was overwhelming support at all hui for enhancing Māori participation. An extensive range of solutions and ways to enhance Māori participation for freshwater management were presented to us in much greater depth than was provided for in the discussion document.

Māori participation in water management MUST be improved. Māori need a greater role in decision-making at local government level. Māori need their own wharenui with their own paepae, own experts that every policy must run through. Policy statements should reflect that iwi (whānau, hapū, waka) as tangata whenua are the kaitiaki over the mauri of all fresh water. (Hastings hui)

[Māori] have a passion for the water - our health our wellbeing all of our philosophies are to safeguard and protect the water. If we have a say, everyone benefits - we have everybody's interests at heart. (Nelson hui)

We are not the same but we ought to be treated as equals, ideas, knowledge, wisdom should receive equal consideration. Too few Pākehā have embraced Māori wisdom, it will enrich our lives. (Gisborne hui)

The nature of 'Māori participation'

At most hui we heard that simply enhancing Māori participation is not enough; that Māori want more than just participation, and want to be involved in the decision-making processes for freshwater management rather than just being consulted. These statements were backed up strongly with examples of local knowledge and experience.

It is important that people in this rohe have representation in the decision-making. (Whangarei hui)

Māori need to be directly involved to mature and move from consultation and participation to actual governance, management, regulatory and compliance power...Don't just consult with us; allow us to participate. Don't let Māori be relegated to a second tier level of consultation when Māori are the Treaty partner. (Auckland hui)

We need to be treated equally as those making decisions and most times we are not. I am tired about people consulting tangata whenua, officials running up and down the country, local bodies, and government departments and we are hitting our heads against brick walls. Our people are capable of being in the highest positions. (Auckland hui)

We need more than input, we need membership and representation of the whole motu - we would have more confidence in the process - we have the expertise. (Hamilton hui)

We want our own management teams, we want to be practitioners leading the way for other communities. (Hastings hui)

In the last round of Resource Management Act changes, 'tangata whenua' were not specified, but there was reference to Māori. Tangata whenua have responsibility as kaitiaki in our area, so if tangata whenua are seen as too difficult, councils can take the easy way out, Māori can be pitted against each other and we all lose. (Wellington hui)

Ensuring a Māori role in decision-making at governance level (for example, providing Māori seats on councils) was suggested as a workable solution at many hui. The Environment Bay of Plenty model, where the council structure includes Māori councillors was frequently referred to as a model that would be appropriate to ensure Māori decision-making at the local government level.

Māori need to have the power to protect their taonga [water] as guaranteed by Article 2. Planners and decision-makers must realise that. At some stage those decisions must involve iwi. Iwi must have input. (Nelson hui)

In Environment Bay of Plenty there is a model to ensure that there are Māori around the decision-making table. (Whangarei hui)

We who have been doing the work need to be in Wellington talking, not leaving it up to politicians. We need to be resourced to participate, to engage effectively.

We need to be at governance level, an example could be regional tangata whenua water boards - which could sit alongside councils and make decisions at that level. (Auckland hui)

There needs to be commitment from councils at all levels - from governance level in councils to work with governance of Māori ... Environment Bay of Plenty [Māori members] works for them, we could look at this. (Hamilton hui)

We hope the Government will set up Māori constituency like the BOP where Māori will be ensured participation at regional council level. (Hastings hui)

Other ways to ensure Māori a role in decision-making in water management were also voiced widely (for example, having commissioners, consent authority, co-management).

Iwi must be involved in the planning process (permitted uses), in the consent process, otherwise money talks and iwi cannot continue to participate [and] challenge policy and rules and so on must be right in the plans, and a good relationship helps with this. (Invercargill hui)

Our people need to be utilised in the planning and decision-making process - and we need to make sure that there is support for our representatives. (Whangarei hui)

We are not involved in the regulation and we need to be. This includes having our Māori commissioners on an equal status as other commissioners on these decision-making boards - and not just one representative. (Auckland hui)

We need to be at management level - how can you help develop iwi management plans? (Auckland hui)

Resource Management Act review - planning commissioners will have more involvement in process - in Manukau - there is only one - she doesn't stand a chance - we need equity in the representation of these commissioners. (Auckland hui)

Regional councils should have some discretionary powers to change conditions immediately and iwi must be able to review those permits. [We] would like an opportunity to explore co-management, co-regulation and delegated authority - these could become useful mechanisms to allow Māori to participate more effectively in the decision-making .... In terms of commissioners, the lack of numbers makes it incredibly difficult for them. (Hamilton hui)

It comes back to Regional and District Councils and we need to be involved at different levels, on a more proactive approach at the decision-making end of policy and planning. We desire clean water, and we are interested in talking about co-management rather than ownership. Sir Robert Mahuta's view prevails, that we know we own the river but we are interested in co-management. (Hamilton hui)

We have a lot to offer in co-management regimes, we can make meaningful contribution as kaitiaki. Changes for regional rules and monitoring require Māori commissioners, not advisers that are seconded, need funding for that from ports. The Māori affairs representative body needs to be reformed so that we can have representation with our regional council. (Hastings hui)

Treaty claim settlement processes offer an ability to establish relationship with central government and advance co-management. Māori cannot remain as mere commentators. (Wellington hui)

The importance of ensuring Māori a role in the regulation, monitoring and compliance of freshwater management tools (resource consents) was also voiced at hui in Christchurch, Dunedin and Auckland. The need for systems to be set up to include Māori in this role was clear:

[We are] not opposed to allocation, but there is a need for it to be monitored where appropriate by iwi. (Christchurch hui)

We are not involved in the regulation and we need to be. We are not there in monitoring and compliance, and we need to be there as kaitiaki and as Treaty partners. When local government take water, we need to be right there to ensure compliance according to national standards and national policy. The local government bodies who have the delegated power to allow these things to happen, come to us at the last minute for our approval. We as tangata whenua should be delegated power under LAW (Resource Management Act s33/34) to be the decision-maker and regulator. We need to be at regulatory/compliance level - perhaps we could establish something similar to honorary fisheries officers. (Auckland hui)

One issue that was raised in some areas (particularly at the Whangarei hui) was the question of the appropriate level of engagement with Māori on freshwater management. While many spoke about resource management planning by iwi authorities, and engagement between central/local government and iwi or hapū organisations, some speakers were strongly of the view that both central and local government needed to engage at the 'flax-roots level' by dealing primarily with marae/hapū and whānau on freshwater issues.

The voice needs to come from the rūnaka. (Christchurch hui)

Trust boards have an important function, but our people need to come together - particularly at marae level - and support the kaupapa. (Whangarei hui)

Engaging whānau hapū - there needs to be more active engagement with marae. (Whangarei hui)

Relationship management

Hui participants stated that Government direction needed to be clarified, and that greater clarity of the relationship between local and central government and Māori is needed.

We need to get the Treaty Relationship right. This includes joint governance, joint management, planning, regulation, compliance and enforcement for non-compliance. (Hamilton hui)

[We] expect the Crown to give some direction as to what the relationship is between Crown and Māori. (Greytown hui)

The need for Māori to work proactively with councils - and the benefit of doing so - was voiced at some hui, with practical examples given.

We started years ago to work with the Far North District Council, and we know that you have to be proactive and work cooperatively to achieve what you want to achieve. (Whangarei hui)

We are taking responsibility and leadership for over-fishing but we need to work with central and local government to address water quality issues. (Gisborne hui)

Tūwharetoa are already doing this. (Taupō hui)

Some participants talked about the need to develop effective relationships with their local community at the hapū or marae level, and the benefits that would come about when this level of engagement took place. At Murihiku Marae, participants noted that this is already occurring in Invercargill with effective and productive results.

For the past five years or so, we have pushed for applicants (farmers etc) to come to our marae and listen to our point of view and gain understanding of what we are saying. (Christchurch hui)

Protecting Māori interests in the process

The need for the freshwater management system to give effect to kaitiakitanga was stated strongly.

If you really want to walk the talk: then put our korero from today and the past on Māori values back into these documents or the subsequent policies that are developed. (Auckland hui)

People stated that the interests of Māori as landowners and developers needed to be considered as well as the interests of Māori as tangata whenua. The consistency of treatment of Māori landowners compared to other landowners for environmental protection reasons was also raised.

Māori are landowners, and those that regulate are the local authorities, therefore you come to us as landowners and owners of development - you must come to us with a different mindset, and we will be part of the decision-making. This is an important point - Māori as landowners and stakeholder interests, and also kaitiakitanga. This programme would need to talk to Māori as landowners and tangata whenua - knowing about Te Ture Whenua Māori Act and Māori Trustee constructs. The public need to be made aware that we are more than protestors. We are landowners with economic development aspirations. (Auckland hui)

In terms of the discussion on nitrate levels and the impact on quality - there is a proposal that undeveloped land may need to stay undeveloped. This raises a huge question about the rights of people who have owned that land for a long time to do anything with it (when they eventually retire or return back to the rohe). It is like confiscation to have a policy preventing you from developing your land. [I] agree, includes the issue of landowners not having the right to develop forests on their land. The imbalance regarding the Waihāhā housing issue: a 45 house development has been approved, yet tangata whenua are trying to develop five houses on their papakāinga, and this was declined. Undeveloped land - previously we were unable to develop, but now we are better resourced and more innovative and we are being penalised by not being allowed to develop for the good of the environment. We are being told to plant trees - we can't farm. What are the Pākehā doing? When are they going to be asked to do as much as Māori? We have given up so much and we continue to give our land for sewerage schemes. (Taupo hui)

The need for greater recognition of Māori concepts in government policy was stated:

Government needs to do more to develop Māori capacity, and fostering Māori concepts. For example, a limit on taking is no different to the Māori concept of rāhui. So why has this concept not been fostered before? (Palmerston North hui)

Hui participants stated that Māori need to be able to exercise customary rights within any freshwater management system, and clarity should be provided as to how this should happen with the water management system.

How do we as Māori exercise our customary rights, for example, eeling when we have no control over lakes owned by the Hutt City Council and Regional Council, Kohanga Piripi and Kohanga Te Ra? Conservation estates are very hard to change. (Wellington hui)

Building capacity and capability

Funding and resourcing issues were discussed at some hui. In some cases these issues were seen as requisites for building capacity for Māori and developing strong relationships between Māori and local and central government. Different methods of using funding and resourcing were suggested.

Building relationships and capacity - this does not often occur. You could take a lead on looking at good models both in New Zealand and internationally on best practice for indigenous people being involved in water issues. We have to move from just saying we have got to do it, to actually going though with some models. (Whangarei hui)

We who have been doing the work need to be in Wellington talking, not leaving it up to politicians. We need to be resourced to participate, to engage effectively. (Auckland hui)

We need to share funding and allow us to participate equally. Let's go halves on Whanganui Water Catchment Authority. People would like assistance so that they can manage their own water. (Whanganui hui)

[The] Crown needs to resource us to enable us to hold another hui amongst ourselves and meet with neighbouring iwi, we have our own specialists and policy writers who can meet with the Crown and write a joint policy. (Gisborne hui)

[We] need a collective grouping of Māori entities. [We] want Te Mana Taio to put together our plan looking at iwi concerns around nitrogen, water quality, monitoring and abstraction. Where do we get support for starting the plan? (Raukawa hui)

[I] pose a question: How do you get resourced to participate effectively in the analysis and protection of fresh water, for example, a marae's ability to obtain independent expert advice to analyse and critique some of the scientific material put before them or the methodology used? Some iwi/hapū have whānau members with this expertise, we could apply for funding to educate our own people. (Greytown hui)

[Our] role in this is good, but [we] are poorly funded. There are some tools available, for example, Whanganui people currently in negotiations with central government. We need more funding, local government, central government get our kaitiaki too cheaply. (Wellington hui)

There is a need for funding to be provided to iwi if effective and efficient Māori participation in freshwater management is to be achieved. Suggestions for allocating funding for improving Maori participation in freshwater management ranged from providing funds for flax roots iwi, to providing funds for better involvement of iwi liaison officers with iwi.

We need to be resourced to participate, to engage effectively. (Auckland hui)

We strenuously support the concept of resourcing and education of our people at all levels of the process. (Hamilton hui)

These process take up lots of time, we need funding to be able to participate to make these processes effective. (Gisborne hui)

We need to have more environmental responsibility, and need guidance at grass roots level. Take the money off the urban developers that are concreting the land and give it to those that are doing things to restore the balance, for example, riparian planting. (Wellington hui)

Council need resources to enable iwi liaison officers to go out to marae and talk to whānau. A tool that the Crown can give us is money. Every area will have its own unique circumstances. Water quality will affect us all in unique ways and will require different solutions. Give us the dollars and we can develop our partnership. I would hate to see a national statement that gives central government certain roles or more roles, and establishing another layer of bureaucracy, where the money that pays for that bureaucracy could be coming into the community. (Taupo hui)

Funding provided by central government could also be used to resource hapū to participate in policy, planning and consent processes. Participants stated that it is important to recognise regional specificity and issues when providing support as all regions throughout New Zealand are different.

There is an issue of equality - Council or Crown can come any time of the day and everyone is getting paid. On the iwi side it is all koha (giving up their day's wages). Our people should be resourced properly to participate in accordance with the Treaty. (Nelson hui)

Capacity of Māori to effective work on regional and district plans does need to be addressed. When plans are notified - that is the beginning. Words are so important. There is an opportunity to influence through appeal process - but it is a huge expense, and time involved - and it is not resourced. I have been involved in meetings with a room full of lawyers, scientific experts and so on. (Whangarei hui)

There are currently two funds administered by Ministry for the Environment and Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry - the Sustainable Management Fund and the Sustainable Farming Fund. In the future, when hapū, iwi make applications, we should not have to fight with Crown Research Institutes such as Landcare or horticultural research, or government departments for the same funds. As a solution, money should be put aside solely for Māori. Within this funding, some could be set aside solely for water. This will ensure that Māori planning documents are bite size and achievable. (Auckland hui)

At the very least, we should be resourced to meet amongst ourselves, meet with out Tainui waka iwi, utilise our own specialists/policy writers, then meet with you, work together, to ultimately achieve a policy that both Māori and the Crown have had meaningful input into. (Hamilton hui)

Māori want to use their own rates for their own purposes. (Whakatane hui)

Central government assistance to develop a better working relationship between local government and iwi was supported:

Environment Bay of Plenty have a system where three of fourteen councillors are Māori, this is a good beginning model. (Whakatane hui)

We need a partnership, we need to work together, because our people know the land, sea and rivers and how to look after them. (Gisborne hui)

[There is a] need to develop better relationships with local government and Māori, there has been a huge failure in the delegation of management to local government who continue to deny their responsibility. (Hastings hui)

Our iwi/hapū sought to have input into the variation of District Plan - water quality was a major issue - Lake Tarawera. One of the biggest issues was the council acknowledging the special relationship with our water, we still have not achieved this understanding or the respect after a four year journey which has taken tribal resources - a lot of money in the Environment Court and legal fees. But we have been very clear on how we wanted to be treated, not just on ownership issues, but on management - in informing policy and legislation around the use of our taonga. Because our relationship has not been acknowledged, we cannot even get into a conversation until this issue is sorted out. (Taupo hui)

There was support for government to provide assistance and education for Māori so that they can manage resources.

Māori want expert knowledge, and want to be able to utilise the knowledge that their people have (Ratahuna and Waiohau). (Whakatane hui)

[Māori should be managing resources] Because government is not doing a good job of looking after water. (Gisborne hui)

There was great support for central government and local government providing assistance for the development of iwi management plans. There was also support for increasing the development and role of iwi management plans in water management process and council planning:

We need to be at management level - how can you help develop iwi management plans? We, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua applied for funding for SMF and got it (and had done the first of twelve capacity milestones), but the contract was suspended due to a political about turn in policies. So we do not have an iwi management plan and we have to reapply again with everyone else for funding. (Auckland hui)

[There is] no iwi management plan in Ruawaipu, [we] can't sustain ourselves, so how can we sustain our land and waterways? (Gisborne hui)

We need an iwi management plan with Tasman District Council. (Nelson hui)

Iwi management plans - [we have] always strongly supported these plans. (Dunedin hui)

Iwi plans already have a greater recognition than in the past. They are only taken into account when a new plan or a plan change is being considered - then it is too late. Iwi plans are often too broad and often fail as a useful tool - real care to be taken as to how that is done. (Whangarei hui)

We need to be [involved] at management level - how can you help develop iwi management plans? From discussions with Ngāti Whātua - hapū/ iwi planning documents are a way of putting our Māori benchmarks on how we will do things in our rohe. This gives us an onus as well. (Auckland hui)

Funding provided by central government could also be used to resource iwi/hapū to monitor the state of freshwater ecosystems and collect environmental data, and provide information on minimum standards. The intimate knowledge that iwi have through generations of acting as kaitiaki of their rohe, is hugely beneficial. Iwi could be making a more valuable contribution through providing environmental information.

Māori are kaitiaki and could play a more active role in determining minimum standards, collating of data, and monitoring at marae level (whānau/hapū) in their own rohe. We want to participate and to interact. Contracting services at the marae base is a really serious issue. Our people have information that is valuable to this work, and it is about time for that information to be paid for. (Whangarei hui)

We need to be at regulatory/compliance level - perhaps we could establish something similar to honorary fisheries officers. (Auckland hui)

We will need to input into water issues over a number of years in planning. There are things in the future that will change and we need to be there to continually ensure that the changes meet our expectations. Resourcing is an issue. [We] have already been doing some testing and a study to see what resources are available to us and it is poor. (Wellington hui)

We need more funding for Māori in science, water monitoring by iwi. (Waitara hui)

Funding from central government could also be used to build capacity for Māori in freshwater science.

Support for iwi includes resourcing and access to technology. (Auckland hui)

Scholarships for Māori to be educated in the necessary fields of science [are a good idea]. (Hamilton hui)

If there is a rental system set up some money should be used to train Māori specialists to be skilled in resource management and technical issues. (Hastings hui)

Holding an annual national hui for Māori to discuss water issues, with funding provided by central government was proposed at Waitara.

Action 12: Raise awareness of freshwater problems and pressures, and promote solutions

There was great support across the country for raising awareness of freshwater problems and pressures, and promoting solutions. A range of examples and solutions were provided:

We are conscious of the need to protect these resources for the future. The Government does not do enough to educate people around water usage. If irrigators are allowed to take water, and then store it to be used later, is this the most efficient use of water? There needs to be more focus on education. (Waitara hui)

[We] agree, people are not educated about water use, farm irrigation is operating when it is raining - the inefficiency is frustrating. Some savings for water could be achieved through council checking each house to make sure there are no water leaks or wastage. Need more environmental education at primary school level. Education needs to include stories about the history of our water bodies in terms of Māori and other cultures. Our young people need to be taught to value water. (Greytown hui)

[We] would like to see information become available from the Taupo project. (Invercargill hui)

One key thing the Resource Management Act has achieved has been an awareness not to discharge human effluent into our waterways. There is a poor level of understanding of what landowners have the right to do. And the lobby groups are strong. Some of what people do is absolutely wrong. It is not a problem with the legislation eg, no right to non-specific point discharge beyond boundary. We had a unique piece of land, and we have changed the nature of the land by putting animals on it - plants have not been able to adapt quickly enough, nor have the water ways. Has this been signalled to people? (Dunedin hui)

We need to manage the need/demand for water rather than managing the quantity of freshwater. This has to be part of any sustainable water programme of action. We need to raise people's consciousness about freshwater resources - mainly in the urban area. One project is the 'daylighting' of Waitangi stream to bring it to the surface to remind people that it still runs, even though it is underground because of urban development. (Wellington hui)

We need resources for councils to conduct education programmes with tangata whenua. We have come a long way since the Resource Management Act, we need to be educated on all these policies. (Taupo hui)

Support was expressed for developing education programmes on water issues. Many ideas were provided for implementing education programmes effectively, as well as examples of existing education programmes.

Education about conserving water, and about recycling of water is needed. It is too easy to turn on a tap for this generation. We can't keep taking water like this. We need organic soaps that will break down and not pollute our fresh water. (Nelson hui)

Education is the most important thing. Teaching our tamariki that the earth must be clean is the number one priority. There needs to be education at the grass roots level. (Whangarei hui)

We support education programmes for schools and communities. (Gisborne hui)

We already have programmes for education etc. (Hastings hui)

If water is a taonga, it should be valued - a water conservation education programme was disseminated in all schools in the region [at the time of the Auckland water shortage] and was successful. We developed a conservation kit 'Taniwharau' in consultation with Tainui for the Tamaki region during the water crisis. Watercare supported this. Education and awareness is crucial. (Auckland hui)

We need to value water, we need to be educated on these issues...Education is necessary - can funding be built in? There needs to be education programmes for schools, and we want to contribute to those programmes. We strenuously support the concept of resourcing and education of our people at all levels of the process. (Hamilton hui)

[We need] resourcing/scholarships for Māori to be educated in the areas of sciences and sustainability. (Gisborne hui)

We already have programmes for education etc. (Hastings hui)

More work needs to be done to emphasise the importance of water - to remind people of the value of water, rather than looking straight at allocation measures. (Auckland hui)

Promoting water efficiency and recycling measures was widely supported.

Yes [we support] including roof tanks for domestic use [and] councils checking for domestic water leaks. (Greytown hui)

Recycling is a good solution from washing machines, and the use of water tanks etc. Prior to this hui, I said that every bit of rainwater that hits our roofs should be used again - not be wasted. Too much storm water runs off houses through drains straight into the sea. (Nelson hui)

If people were required to put in water tanks, they would be so much more aware of their use. It is not a large shift for urban areas to become far more efficient in their use of the water. (Dunedin hui)

There was widespread support amongst those in attendance for the idea of recycling and consideration of conservation strategies. (Auckland hui)

The need for communities to take responsibility for problems and be proactive was discussed.

We need to sit down and talk as a community. (Christchurch hui)

It comes back to the people in the community, the local people who know what is happening on the ground and local ownership of the problems and answers is important. Money doesn't solve all the problems, acknowledges the work Raukawa has done with Kinleith, there are a lot of people here who do a lot for our environment. There is a real sense of willingness for people to work co-operatively. (Hamilton hui)

We could sit down with water wasters and work out better ways for them to meet their needs and the wider communities. (Hastings hui)

It was expressed that it would be useful for government to facilitate the sharing of local solutions:

There is much good work being done on the ground locally, for example, filtering of nitrates, why aren't these wonderful ideas being shared? (Taupo hui)

The impacts of agriculture were discussed at Waitara:

The sorts of attitudes of some people are causing erosion. This country is slowly washing to sea and destroying our water resources. The numbers of dairy farmers have increased, there are some good farmers but there are some bad farming practices. (Waitara hui)

Action 13: Collaboration between central and local government, scientists and key stakeholders, on pilot projects to demonstrate and test new water management initiatives

There was great support for collaboration between central and local government, scientists, and key stakeholders on pilot projects to demonstrate and test new water management initiatives. Many existing projects were discussed, and many new ideas were presented. Hui participants clearly stated the importance of basing pilot projects around regionally-specific issues, that one size does not fit all, and that projects should be specific to particular regions and water bodies.

Through the Māori Liaison Group, the Regional Council announces six times throughout the year what they plan to do. A good example is the riparian planting scheme. Massey University Professor Tilman of the Natural Resources Department is interested in coming in to do a total water catchment management plan. This water catchment management plan is a good tool for this area to look after our resources. It could involve the community, local government and the iwi authorities. The expertise of Massey University could be used to study the Papawai catchment over 10 years, to identify problems and involve the communities in the research. Small, local, successful projects will buy-in community support. Remember to use marae in communicate info, and as models of some good practice. (Greytown hui)

Pilot programmes are a good way of experimenting with things that work, all regional councils should have to have pilot programmes in their own areas to fix obvious problems (eg, estuary here and the Taieri). (Dunedin hui)

An example is Putauki Farm (AgResearch/Foundation for Research Science and Technology) being used to trial new ideas including optimum use of freshwater. (Whakatane hui)

To compensate for our past inaction and actions, Māori need to be a part. We must create our own strategic plan. Tangata whenua still own vast quantities in our headlands, maybe we could store water up there as kaitiaki, and then look after our downstream people. (Hastings hui)

Joint management operation such as that in Waihora could be used here, and elsewhere. (Wellington hui)

Encouraging and funding community-led projects and solutions was supported.

Everything I do is voluntary, and I do because I want clean water for our future generations. However, if the resources were available then it should be used to support the work that we are doing to keep our environment clean. (Dunedin hui)

Support was expressed for funding community groups to undertake monitoring and remedial work.

The solutions are simple really - fence off the waterways, plant trees, stop poisoning the land - give us funding and we will do the job. (Kaitaia hui)

We need funding to create our own pilot programmes - and for education, we want funding in order to create a level playing field. Some of our ideas include: fencing off waterways, creating riparian strips, land-based effluent treatment and technology (ultraviolet treatment), recycling of water from roofs. (Hamilton hui)