Latest news with #WiseWaterUse
Scoop
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
BSA Upholds Complaint Against Central FM Re. Incorrect Labelling Of DoC Conservation Land As ‘Stewardship Land'
Press Release – Wise Water Use Wise Water Use Hawkes Bay spokesperson, Dr Trevor Le Lievre, says the finding raises a credibility issue for Mr Petersen, and is questioning his capacity to manage the build of the estimated-$500 million Ruataniwha dam v.2. The Broadcasting Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Central FM regarding an interview with Mike Petersen, spokesperson for Ruataniwha v.2, where 22 ha. of DoC conservation land was inaccurately labelled as 'stewardship land'. The damning Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) decision, released today, found that Mike Petersen, lead proponent for Ruataniwha dam v.2, inaccurately labelled the 22 ha. DoC-owned land needed to build Ruataniwha v.2 as 'stewardship land', when in fact it comprises 93% conservation land. Wise Water Use Hawkes Bay spokesperson, Dr Trevor Le Lievre, says the finding raises a credibility issue for Mr Petersen, and is questioning his capacity to manage the build of the estimated-$500 million Ruataniwha dam v.2. The BSA found that Petersen '…made two definitive statements that it was not conservation land' on Central FM Radio, Waipukurau, in an interview held on 8 October last year with station part-owner and fellow dam-proponent, Steve Wyn Harris: [1] The BSA found: 'The Authority agreed the description of the 22 hectares of Department of Conservation land needed for the dam project as 'only stewardship land', when approximately 93% of it has 'conservation park status', was a material inaccuracy which the broadcaster had not made reasonable efforts to avoid.'[summary]; and 'The broadcast created a misleading impression about the 22 hectares of DOC land needed for the project as being 'stewardship' land and having inferior conservation values'. [para. 25] 'Mr Petersen is asking the community to trust him to build a $500 million dam, yet can't even correctly identify the status of the DoC land needed to build the dam. This begs the serious question as to what else Mr Petersen has got wrong?' said Le Lievre, adding: 'alarm bills should be ringing loudly for potential investors. 'Mike Petersen is selling the public a story about Ruataniwha v.2: a story about economic prosperity to be shared by all, about a solution to our depleted aquifer and rivers, and about restoring our water quality, and dealing with the vagaries of climate change: has anyone fact checked the story?' Wise Water Use is now questioning other statements made by Petersen: 'A number of statements have been made by Mr Petersen as part of the Ruataniwha v.2 story. We believe that in light of this recent ruling Mr Petersen now needs to provide evidence to back those statements,' said Le Lievre, who cited several unsubstantiated claims: 'This is a commercial project …we are not seeking public investment into this project at all' [2] Mike Petersen recently petitioned local lines company, Centralines, for money to develop another feasibility case for the dam, and received a commitment of $100,000. Wise Water Use argues this money is coming out of the pockets of CHB power consumers; The dam promoters are also wanting the public to pick up the cost of so-called 'environmental flows' which would allocate 20 Mm3 water annually for release down the main Tukituki River stem. [3] Wise Water Use calculates that should this cost fall to Regional Council ratepayers it would entail an average 10% rates increase and is running a petition asking the Regional Council to state publicly they won't assume the cost. 'There is a hydro generation component in the project as well, which appeals to those seeking green investment.' [4] Wise Water Use points out that there have never been any detailed plan for hydro generation presented in any public reports on the dam, nor other public forum, and that such a proposal doesn't stack up financially, and argues this is an attempt to greenwash the project by Mr Petersen. 'The proposal is completely different in focus and intent from the original Ruataniwha project, despite sharing the original project's site on the Makaroro river.' [5] Wise Water Use says that the renamed 'Tukituki Water Security Project' is no different to the Ruataniwha dam v.1: it would use exactly the same engineering design, rely on the same consents to take water, be located on the same part of the Makaroro River, still need the 22 ha. of DoC conservation land, and would remain an industrial-scale irrigation dam. 'Mike Petersen is fronting a $500 million dam project, which with associated on-farm infrastructure costs would cost more than $1 billion dollars. His inability to get the status of the DoC conservation land correct brings into question every other unsupported statement he has made in support of Ruataniwha v.2, and undermines the very viability of the project,' finished Le Lievre.
Scoop
10-06-2025
- Politics
- Scoop
BSA Upholds Complaint Against Central FM Re. Incorrect Labelling Of DoC Conservation Land As ‘Stewardship Land'
Press Release – Wise Water Use Wise Water Use Hawkes Bay spokesperson, Dr Trevor Le Lievre, says the finding raises a credibility issue for Mr Petersen, and is questioning his capacity to manage the build of the estimated-$500 million Ruataniwha dam v.2. The Broadcasting Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Central FM regarding an interview with Mike Petersen, spokesperson for Ruataniwha v.2, where 22 ha. of DoC conservation land was inaccurately labelled as 'stewardship land'. The damning Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) decision, released today, found that Mike Petersen, lead proponent for Ruataniwha dam v.2, inaccurately labelled the 22 ha. DoC-owned land needed to build Ruataniwha v.2 as 'stewardship land', when in fact it comprises 93% conservation land. Wise Water Use Hawkes Bay spokesperson, Dr Trevor Le Lievre, says the finding raises a credibility issue for Mr Petersen, and is questioning his capacity to manage the build of the estimated-$500 million Ruataniwha dam v.2. The BSA found that Petersen '…made two definitive statements that it was not conservation land' on Central FM Radio, Waipukurau, in an interview held on 8 October last year with station part-owner and fellow dam-proponent, Steve Wyn Harris: [1] The BSA found: 'The Authority agreed the description of the 22 hectares of Department of Conservation land needed for the dam project as 'only stewardship land', when approximately 93% of it has 'conservation park status', was a material inaccuracy which the broadcaster had not made reasonable efforts to avoid.'[summary]; and 'The broadcast created a misleading impression about the 22 hectares of DOC land needed for the project as being 'stewardship' land and having inferior conservation values'. [para. 25] 'Mr Petersen is asking the community to trust him to build a $500 million dam, yet can't even correctly identify the status of the DoC land needed to build the dam. This begs the serious question as to what else Mr Petersen has got wrong?' said Le Lievre, adding: 'alarm bills should be ringing loudly for potential investors. 'Mike Petersen is selling the public a story about Ruataniwha v.2: a story about economic prosperity to be shared by all, about a solution to our depleted aquifer and rivers, and about restoring our water quality, and dealing with the vagaries of climate change: has anyone fact checked the story?' Wise Water Use is now questioning other statements made by Petersen: 'A number of statements have been made by Mr Petersen as part of the Ruataniwha v.2 story. We believe that in light of this recent ruling Mr Petersen now needs to provide evidence to back those statements,' said Le Lievre, who cited several unsubstantiated claims: 'This is a commercial project …we are not seeking public investment into this project at all' [2] Mike Petersen recently petitioned local lines company, Centralines, for money to develop another feasibility case for the dam, and received a commitment of $100,000. Wise Water Use argues this money is coming out of the pockets of CHB power consumers; The dam promoters are also wanting the public to pick up the cost of so-called 'environmental flows' which would allocate 20 Mm3 water annually for release down the main Tukituki River stem. [3] Wise Water Use calculates that should this cost fall to Regional Council ratepayers it would entail an average 10% rates increase and is running a petition asking the Regional Council to state publicly they won't assume the cost. 'There is a hydro generation component in the project as well, which appeals to those seeking green investment.' [4] Wise Water Use points out that there have never been any detailed plan for hydro generation presented in any public reports on the dam, nor other public forum, and that such a proposal doesn't stack up financially, and argues this is an attempt to greenwash the project by Mr Petersen. 'The proposal is completely different in focus and intent from the original Ruataniwha project, despite sharing the original project's site on the Makaroro river.' [5] Wise Water Use says that the renamed 'Tukituki Water Security Project' is no different to the Ruataniwha dam v.1: it would use exactly the same engineering design, rely on the same consents to take water, be located on the same part of the Makaroro River, still need the 22 ha. of DoC conservation land, and would remain an industrial-scale irrigation dam. 'Mike Petersen is fronting a $500 million dam project, which with associated on-farm infrastructure costs would cost more than $1 billion dollars. His inability to get the status of the DoC conservation land correct brings into question every other unsupported statement he has made in support of Ruataniwha v.2, and undermines the very viability of the project,' finished Le Lievre.
Scoop
10-06-2025
- Business
- Scoop
BSA Upholds Complaint Against Central FM Re. Incorrect Labelling Of DoC Conservation Land As 'Stewardship Land'
The Broadcasting Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against Central FM regarding an interview with Mike Petersen, spokesperson for Ruataniwha v.2, where 22 ha. of DoC conservation land was inaccurately labelled as 'stewardship land'. The damning Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) decision, released today, found that Mike Petersen, lead proponent for Ruataniwha dam v.2, inaccurately labelled the 22 ha. DoC-owned land needed to build Ruataniwha v.2 as 'stewardship land', when in fact it comprises 93% conservation land. Wise Water Use Hawkes Bay spokesperson, Dr Trevor Le Lievre, says the finding raises a credibility issue for Mr Petersen, and is questioning his capacity to manage the build of the estimated-$500 million Ruataniwha dam v.2. The BSA found that Petersen '…made two definitive statements that it was not conservation land' on Central FM Radio, Waipukurau, in an interview held on 8 October last year with station part-owner and fellow dam-proponent, Steve Wyn Harris: [1] The BSA found: 'The Authority agreed the description of the 22 hectares of Department of Conservation land needed for the dam project as 'only stewardship land', when approximately 93% of it has 'conservation park status', was a material inaccuracy which the broadcaster had not made reasonable efforts to avoid.'[summary]; and 'The broadcast created a misleading impression about the 22 hectares of DOC land needed for the project as being 'stewardship' land and having inferior conservation values'. [para. 25] 'Mr Petersen is asking the community to trust him to build a $500 million dam, yet can't even correctly identify the status of the DoC land needed to build the dam. This begs the serious question as to what else Mr Petersen has got wrong?' said Le Lievre, adding: 'alarm bills should be ringing loudly for potential investors. 'Mike Petersen is selling the public a story about Ruataniwha v.2: a story about economic prosperity to be shared by all, about a solution to our depleted aquifer and rivers, and about restoring our water quality, and dealing with the vagaries of climate change: has anyone fact checked the story?' Wise Water Use is now questioning other statements made by Petersen: 'A number of statements have been made by Mr Petersen as part of the Ruataniwha v.2 story. We believe that in light of this recent ruling Mr Petersen now needs to provide evidence to back those statements,' said Le Lievre, who cited several unsubstantiated claims: 'This is a commercial project …we are not seeking public investment into this project at all' [2] Mike Petersen recently petitioned local lines company, Centralines, for money to develop another feasibility case for the dam, and received a commitment of $100,000. Wise Water Use argues this money is coming out of the pockets of CHB power consumers; The dam promoters are also wanting the public to pick up the cost of so-called 'environmental flows' which would allocate 20 Mm3 water annually for release down the main Tukituki River stem.[3] Wise Water Use calculates that should this cost fall to Regional Council ratepayers it would entail an average 10% rates increase and is running a petition asking the Regional Council to state publicly they won't assume the cost. 'There is a hydro generation component in the project as well, which appeals to those seeking green investment.' [4] Wise Water Use points out that there have never been any detailed plan for hydro generation presented in any public reports on the dam, nor other public forum, and that such a proposal doesn't stack up financially, and argues this is an attempt to greenwash the project by Mr Petersen. 'The proposal is completely different in focus and intent from the original Ruataniwha project, despite sharing the original project's site on the Makaroro river.' [5] Wise Water Use says that the renamed 'Tukituki Water Security Project' is no different to the Ruataniwha dam v.1: it would use exactly the same engineering design, rely on the same consents to take water, be located on the same part of the Makaroro River, still need the 22 ha. of DoC conservation land, and would remain an industrial-scale irrigation dam. 'Mike Petersen is fronting a $500 million dam project, which with associated on-farm infrastructure costs would cost more than $1 billion dollars. His inability to get the status of the DoC conservation land correct brings into question every other unsupported statement he has made in support of Ruataniwha v.2, and undermines the very viability of the project,' finished Le Lievre. [1] Petersen: 'This is not conservation land, this is DoC stewardship land'; and 'This is not part of the DoC conservation estate, it's owned by DoC but is classified as stewardship land'. Source: Central FM interview (8/10/2024) [2] Source: Central FM interview (8/10/2024) [3] Petersen was recently quoted as stating: 'I would argue that it's unreasonable to expect private investors to supply that (environmental flows) free of charge'. Source: Newsroom (15/5/2025). [4] Source: Farmers Weekly (8/10/2024)
RNZ News
29-05-2025
- Business
- RNZ News
'There's been no transparency': Ruataniwha Dam protest outside meeting
Wise Water Use protestors. Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook Opponents of the controversial Ruataniwha Dam in Central Hawke's Bay staged a surprise protest outside a Centralines meeting in Waipukurau discussing the use of trust beneficiaries' money for the fast-tracked dam project. The protest comes a month after Centralines trustee Tony Murphy resigned because the electricity distributor's board put $100,000 towards a re-scope of the fast-tracked and rebranded Ruataniwha Dam , now called the Tukituki Water Security Project. Hawke's Bay power distributor Centralines is one of many sources of funding for the Ruataniwha Dam. It is comprised of a board, which makes operational decisions, and a trust that represents the public stakeholders. Protest group Wise Water Use spokesperson Trevor Le Lievre told RNZ Centralines had now committed $300,000 towards the controversial project . "There's been no transparency around this money. We believe it's a case of cronyism, pure and simple. So we are here to send a message to the trust because the trust appoints the board and so have some sway over what the board does. "We're here to tell the trust to call the board in, hold them to account, rescind that decision on the $100,000 and act in the best interest of beneficiaries," said Le Lievre. However, Centralines board chair Fenton Wilson was confident there was no issue, and makes no apologies for supporting the dam. "I welcome the strong views - from the company point of view we deal with what's in front of us and there's an opportunity to invest in a project that has real growth potential if it comes off. "But we are not in this alone, businesses right across Hawke's Bay are investing - the government is investing. People have done their due diligence and it fits the growth potential with this business and this company," he said. Wise Water Use protestors peacefully talk to Centralines' Board Chair and Trustees Photo: RNZ/Alexa Cook The Central Hawke's Bay Consumer Power trust chair Karen Middelburg told RNZ she has been listening to all of the community's voices on the issue, including the protestors concerns. "We've got a meeting now where we'll discuss what they've brought to the table and we'll certainly be passing that on to the board. "But our role is certainly not to tell the board how to make financial decisions for the company - our role is to appoint the board to do that on our behalf," she said. Wise Water Use is vowing to keep protesting against the dam project and member Murray Rosser said it should not be allowed to proceed under the government's fast track legislation. "It's such an outdated idea - it's going to ruin the river and wreck a whole lot of environmental precious taonga. "And it's going to put money in the hands of a few people and others won't get a dollar," he said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
01-05-2025
- Business
- Scoop
Centralines Commits $100K Of Power Consumers' Money To Ruataniwha Dam V.2
The Centralines Board has committed $100,000.00 to the Ruataniwha dam v.2. This breaking news was announced by Wise Water Use HB's Paul Bailey at a public wānanga to discuss Ruataniwha v.2 held in Waipawa this evening. Second-term trustee, Tony Murphy, has also resigned in protest about this decision. Murphy, one of seven trustees, told Wise Water Use that he does not believe this decision is in the best interests of CHB power consumers and beneficiaries, and that he can't in good conscience remain as part of a trust which has chosen to support the Board in its decision. Wise Water Use is also questioning the public undertaking made by Mike Petersen, spokesperson for the Ruataniwha dam v.2, that the dam prompters would not be seeking public investment into the controversial project (more below). 'Wise Water Use HB fully support's Mr Murphy's decision to resign,' said spokesperson Dr Trevor Le Lievre, adding: 'It's infuriating that this Board continues to treat money which should be returned to CHB power consumers like a personal slush fund, to be used for their pet project, Ruataniwha v.2'. 'To add insult to industry the Trust, who appoints the Board, has opted to endorse this decision and to ignore their fiduciary duty to protect the assets of their beneficiaries, the power consumers of Central Hawkes Bay'' said Le Lievre. The Centralines Board has declared publicly that there will not be an annual discount offered to CHB power consumers for the 2025-2026 period, and has not given any undertaking as to when discounts might be resumed. Advertisement - scroll to continue reading 'This $100,000.00 largesse by the Board, at the expense of annual discounts to CHB Power consumers, comes on top of $200,000.00 gifted to the dam promoters in 2021. Then, as with now, there was no public announcement, likely in the hope that handing money to the controversial Ruataniwha dam project would fly under the radar.' said Le Lievre. Wise Water Use in a flyer distributed at their wānanga is calling on their supporters to contact Central Hawkes Bay Consumers' Power Trust chair, Karen Middelberg, and to ask her to move a motion at the next trustee meeting, to be held in late-May, to direct the Board to rescind their decision, noting that the Trust has the power to remove the Board if they refuse. If Ms Middelberg is not prepared to act on the concerns of trust beneficiaries, then she should resign. Wise Water use is also questioning whether public statements by Mike Petersen can be relied upon. Petersen in October 2024 stated on Central FM Radio that Ruataniwha v.2 was a commercial project, and that the dam promoters would not be seeking public investment. Mr Petersen is currently canvassing for capital to fund a revamped business case for Ruataniwha v.2. Money raised will be matched dollar for dollar, up to a cap of $3 million from the Regional Infrastructure Fund, as announced by the Honourable Shane Jones (Minister Regional Development) in December last year. 'Mr Petersen's undertaking once again rings hollow, said Le Lievre, who also asked: 'what other public money has Mr Petersen been touting for? 'Wise Water Use calls on Mr Petersen to come clean and announce exactly what other public sources of money he is seeking. 'Unfortunately, this squandering of CHB power consumers' money is in keeping with the legacy of the Ruataniwha dam, which is to commandeer large sums of public money often well away from the glare of public scrutiny. It's abundantly clear that transparency and the Ruataniwha dam are incompatible bedfellows. 'Ratepayers and taxpayers should prepare themselves for an assault on their wallets, as this zombie project has an insatiable appetite for public money,' finished Le Lievre. About Wise Water Use HB: Wise Water Use is a grassroots environmental advocacy group dedicated to promoting sustainable water management practices and ensuring transparent decision-making processes in Hawke's Bay. We work to protect the long-term interests of local ratepayers and safeguard the region's natural resources. Supporting Information overleaf Central FM interview with Mike Petersen from 8/10/24. Interview link here ( Excerpt: 'This is a commercial project …we are not seeking public investment into this project at all' (1:30 – 2:00) Excerpt from CHB Consumers' Power Trust Deed 12 Duties of Trustees The Trustees shall: 12.1 As shareholders Act as Diligent shareholders and in particular monitor the performance of the Directors of the Company and exercise the rights of shareholders for the benefit of the Trust Property and of the Consumers as beneficiaries. No Trustee shall exercise or attempt to exercise any rights or powers as a shareholder other than in the capacity of a Trustee, and in particular shall not exercise or attempt to exercise beneficial ownership of the shares. In exercising their rights and powers as shareholders the Trustees shall recognise and observe their status as Trustees holding shares in the Company and/or its Subsidiaries, and shall always endeavour to act collectively in the best interests of the Trust Property and of the Consumers as beneficiaries.
