Hawke's Bay Needs Water, and the Numbers Prove It

The Hawke's Bay Regional Water Assessment concluded that by 2040, even with significant efficiency gains, the region could face a freshwater shortfall of nearly 25 million cubic metres. Climate projections point to reduced river flows and worsening droughts. With an El Niño weather pattern forecast this coming winter, we may well see exactly the kind of drought conditions that expose how vulnerable Hawke's Bay remains, environmentally, economically and in terms of community resilience, without the water storage infrastructure that much of New Zealand already relies on.

Water security has been on the agenda here for over a decade and in that time, the rest of New Zealand has not been standing still. Canterbury, Otago and Tasman Marlborough have embedded water storage projects that have delivered real economic resilience - the South Island economy is strong, underpinned in no small part by water security driving the food and fibre sector. Northland has already built and integrated water storage. Gisborne Tairāwhiti may move ahead of us very shortly. Wairarapa is initiating its own work. Water storage is not new to New Zealand, but it is new to Hawke's Bay. Without it, we risk a flight of businesses and capital to better-resourced parts of the country. Water storage is not a point of difference we can afford to give away.

The Tukituki Water Security Project (TWSP) commissioned the New Zealand Institute of Economic Research to model what the project could mean for the region, and the findings are significant. Once fully operational, the project would increase annual regional GDP by up to $693 million per year - 5.7% of regional GDP - and add up to $452 million per year in additional household spending across the region. It would support more than 1800 new permanent jobs, equivalent to lifting total regional employment by more than 2%, while generating up to $195 million per year in additional Government revenue. Over the project's lifetime, total economic benefit ranges from $1 billion to $5 billion, with 200 to 300 jobs supported during construction alone.

The same modelling indicates the project's benefit-cost ratio ranges from 1.5 to 9.1 depending on the scenario. To put that in perspective: the Government's Roads of National Significance, widely accepted as essential infrastructure, typically come in between 1.0 and 1.1. The Puhoi to Wellsford motorway had a ratio of 0.8, meaning it cost more than it returned, and yet I am not aware of anyone calling that a fantasy. The economic case for water security in Hawke's Bay is, by any comparable measure, exceptionally strong.

The recent closures of McCain and the Heinz Wattie's frozen lines are devastating for the growers and workers affected in our region. They also demonstrate what water security advocates have been saying for years - the low-margin, high-volume processing model is under structural pressure, and growers they produce. In Hawke's Bay, with out climate and soils, the real opportunities lie in higher-value horticulture, livestock and seed production. NZIER modelling projects that TWSP would irrigate over 5000 hectares of horticultural crops. The land is suitable. The market and local opportunity for premium New Zealand produce is there. What many growers lack is secure and reliable water.

Water is the foundation of everything we grow, everyting we drink, and the health of the rivers we love. The question is not whether Hawke's Bay needs water security - the numbers make that clear. The question is whether we have the will to act while the window remains open.

In Part Two of this series, I will address the how - how the project is funded, what it means for the environment, and why the concerns being raised publicly deserve straight answers.

Mike Petersen is chair, Tukituki Water Security Project.

For more information, visit https://www.tukitukiwater.co.nz