…and signed by the Mayor. Our submission ran to 4 pages but, despite being told earlier that everything would be responded to, the only issue that is covered here is that of building a dam on the Waikanae River to create a water reservoir for the needs of most of the District in the dry months of January to March.

In essence, they’re not going to do it because, “In 2003 council adopted a 50 year water use strategy which sets out the vision for water management”.

The letter goes on to effectively state that the council decided that instead of a dam it would go with the river recharge project.  Ah, well, yes, 10 years later in November 2013.

The lie as to the claim that ‘We’ll reduce water consumption by charging you for it’ was revealed a couple of months ago when it was stated that because people have since used less, the council is increasing the rate charged so that the revenue remains the same.  In other words, it was really all about revenue raising.

We totally disagree that there is any evidence that the recharge scheme will be sufficient for the next 50 years.

You may well wonder whether there is any point in making submissions to government bodies when they are just going to be ignored. Are councilors just rubber stamps for decisions made by bureaucrats? Isn’t it the role of elected councilors to decide these things?  As we’ve seen, the boss bureaucrat, Mr Pat Dougherty (the local Sir Humphrey Appleby of Yes, Minister), and Mayor Church decide what councilors are told and not told.

Mr Dougherty’s reappointment in May was handled undemocratically as this article explains.

In all then, shenanigans, but it’s important to remember that the bigger councils get, the worse it gets, and under the dormant (not extinct) ‘super-city’ notion, the autocracy would be much worse.