Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Regional Council



Date:                 Wednesday 30 July 2014

Time:                9.00am


Council Chamber

Hawke's Bay Regional Council

159 Dalton Street





Item       Subject                                                                                                                  Page


1.         Welcome/Prayer/Apologies/Notices 

2.         Conflict of Interest Declarations  

3.         Confirmation of Minutes of the Regional Council Meeting held on 25 June 2014

4.         Matters Arising from Minutes of the Regional Council Meeting held on 25 June 2014

5.         Follow-ups from Previous Council Meetings                                                                3

6.         Call for any Minor Items Not on the Agenda

Decision Items

7.         Affixing of Common Seal                                                                                              9

8.         Recommendations from the Corporate and Strategic Committee                             11

9.         Code of Conduct Complaint Response Process                                                        13

Information or Performance Monitoring

10.       HBRIC Ltd and RWSS Update                                                                                   27

11.       Hawke's Bay Tourism Quarterly Report (11.30am)                                                   35

12.       Monthly Work Plan Looking Forward Through August 2014                                      47

13.       Chairman's Monthly Report (to be tabled)

14.       Minor Items Not on the Agenda                                                                                  53




Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Follow-ups from Previous Council Meetings


Reason for Report

1.      There were no items raised at the 25 June Regional Council meeting that require follow-up.

2.      All items from meetings prior to 25 June have been completed and reported to Council and therefore removed from the list.

Decision Making Process

2.      Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that as this report is for information only and no decision is required in terms of the Local Government Act’s provisions, the decision making procedures set out in the Act do not apply.



1.      That Council receives the report “Follow-ups from Previous Council Meetings”.






Liz Lambert

Chief Executive





Follow-ups from Previous Regional Council Meetings




Follow-ups from Previous Regional Council Meetings

Attachment 1


Follow-ups from previous Regional Council Meetings





There were no follow-ups from the 25 June meeting and all previous follow-up items have been addressed.



Follow-ups from Previous Regional Council Meetings

Attachment 1


LGOIMA Requests Received between 19 June and 24 July 2014



Date Received

Requested By

Request Summary



Ian McIntosh

HBRIC has applied for a consent to take groundwater from the Ruataniwha aquifer - please supply me with:
1. a copy of their application for consent
2. the timetable for processing the application, including the timing of public notification, call for objections and any consent hearings.
3. the list of people who will be hearing any objections to the applications and/or granting the consent



Cam Slater

all information relating to any HBRC contract with any outside consultancy organisation undertaking groundwater modelling, including:
1. Draft reports provided by external parties undertaking ground water modelling.
2. Final reports provided by ground water modellers
3. Correspondence between groundwater modellers and the HBRC terminating the ground water modeller’s contract
4. Internal emails relating to contracting, dealing with and terminating ground water modelling contracts.



Natasha Rival - Property Group

Information relating to applications for resource consent in the coastal environment under the Proposed Regional Coastal Environment Plan.
The number of resource consent applications received by Council under the above rules.
The number of those applications approved,
The street address and summary descriptions of the applications approved.



Paula Fern

- Register of Pecuniary Interests of HBRC councillors and senior staff, including trusts they are a beneficiary of, that pertain to the proposed RWSS irrigation zones, and also what period of time any land and/or business interest within the irrigation zones has been in their ownership.



Luke Stewart

Aerial monitoring discharges to land/water and/or compliance with water quality rules



Marty Sharpe - Fairfaxmedia

Can you please let me know how many prosecutions, abatement notices and infringement notices your council has issued for dairy effluent discharges in the year ended June 30, 2014.Please tell me the name of all prosecuted parties, the charges they faced and the outcome of any court action.



Cam Slater

Iain Maxwell’s requests for info from Submitters and to Submitters:
1 All requests for info from submitters to HBRC in relation to the Board of Inquiry into RWSS in relation to surface water quality data & the Tukituki River Instream Model.
2 All requests Iain Maxwell has made to external submitters for info about their modelling & evidence.


Date Received

Requested By

Request Summary



Editor, Gisborne Herald

The editor of the Gisborne Herald has received a 'letter to the editor' asking what the cost to HB ratepayers has been for the Mexted /Mahanga development saga.



Cam Slater

information HBRC received from staff and external contractors about the validity of the Tukituki River Instream model including:
• Peer reviews by instream modelling experts.
• Action taken by HBRC to address issues raised by peer reviewers
• How TRIM model was changed over 6 iterations
• Internal reviews of Kit Rutherfords evidence at the Board of Inquiry



Cam Slater

all advice from external stakeholders that a single nutrient management approach is unacceptable provided through stakeholder meetings minutes, meetings with councillors, council staff and via mail, email and facsimile



Cam Slater

• Number of Staff terminated in the last five years.
• Number of staff terminated with confidential payouts in the last five years.
• Number of staff receiving confidential payouts after signing non disclosure agreements in the last five years.
• Number of staff receiving confidential payouts for opposing CE Andrew Newman’s views on the Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme in the last five years.



Cam Slater

Payments to Maori for supporting the RWSS
- to Mike Mohi and Roger Maaka for advice on RWSS
- to Tamatea Taiwhenau Hapu for their input on RWSS



Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Affixing of Common Seal


Reason for Report

1.       The Common Seal of the Council has been affixed to the following documents and signed by the Chairman or Deputy Chairman and Chief Executive or a Group Manager.




Seal No.



Leasehold Land Sales

1.1.1     Lot 1

          DP 13751

          CT  G3/1002

-     Transfer











25 June 2014



Esplanade Strip Agreement  ( 5 metres)

Resource Management Act 1991 – Taurapa Station

1.       Lot 1 DP 6789 Certificate of Title P3/1296

2.       Lot 1 DP 4157 Certificate of Title M3/922


(for the purposes of conservation over and along the Esplanade Strip including improvement of water quality, bank stability, protection and/or enhancement of natural values on the Maraetotara River)



24 June 2014


Esplanade Strip Agreement (5 metres)  Resource Management Act 1991 – Tourere Land Company


Lot 3-4 DP 313196 Certificate of Title           51879


(for the purposes of conservation over and along the Esplanade Strip including improvement of water quality, bank stability and the protection and development of natural values on the Purimu Stream and unnamed contributary)



26 June 2014

Decision Making Process

2.       Council is required to make every decision in accordance with the provisions of Sections 77, 78, 80, 81 and 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within these sections of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

2.1   Sections 97 and 88 of the Act do not apply;

2.2   Council can exercise its discretion under Section 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Act and make a decision on this issue without conferring directly with the community or others due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided;

2.3   That the decision to apply the Common Seal reflects previous policy or other decisions of Council which (where applicable) will have been subject to the Act’s required decision making process.




That Council:

1.      Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2.      Confirms the action to affix the Common Seal.





Diane Wisely

Executive Assistant



Liz Lambert

Chief Executive



There are no attachments for this report.


Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Recommendations from the Corporate and Strategic Committee

Reason for Report

1.      The following matters were considered by the Corporate and Strategic Committee on 16 July 2014 and are now presented to Council for consideration and approval.

Decision Making Process

2.      These items have all been specifically considered at the Committee level.



That Council:

1.      Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

Establishment of HBRIC Ltd Board of Directors - Composition and Recruitment

2.     Retains Councillor Directors on the permanent Board of HBRIC Ltd.

3.      Resolves that the Board of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company Ltd comprises a maximum of 4 Independent Directors and a maximum of 3 Councillor Directors, with a minimum of 3 independent directors.

4.      Instructs staff to engage a consultancy to undertake the identification and assessment of independent and councillor directors of the Board of HBRIC Ltd, and recommend the preferred directors to HBRC.

Board of Inquiry Decision on Tukituki Plan Change 6

5.      Authorizes the filing of a notice to appear should an appeal be lodged to Plan Change 6.

6.      Decides, at a later meeting, whether to withdraw or to proceed with the notice to appear and if so on what basis.

Reports Received

7.      Notes that the following reports were received at the Corporate and Strategic Committee meeting:

7.1       Follow-ups From Previous Corporate and Strategic Committee Meetings

7.2     Board of Inquiry Decision on Tukituki Plan Change 6

7.3     National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2014

7.4       Developing Strategic Priorities for the Long Term Plan Development

7.5       Public Transport Update.


Liz Lambert

Chief Executive




There are no attachments for this report.  


Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Code of Conduct Complaint Response Process


Reason for Report

1.      This report is to seek Council’s agreement to a process to be followed to investigate and resolve a complaint by Cr Scott in relation to an alleged breach of Council’s Code of Conduct by Cr Belford.


2.      All councils are required to adopt a Code of Conduct in accordance with Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), which states:

15 Code of conduct

(1) A local authority must adopt a code of conduct for members of the local authority as soon as practicable after the commencement of this Act.

(2) The code of conduct must set out—

(a) understandings and expectations adopted by the local authority about the manner in which members may conduct themselves while acting in their capacity as members, including—

(i) behaviour toward one another, staff, and the public; and

(ii) disclosure of information, including (but not limited to) the provision of any document, to elected members that—

(A) is received by, or is in the possession of, an elected member in his or her capacity as an elected member; and

(B) relates to the ability of the local authority to give effect to any provision of this Act; and

(b) a general explanation of—

(i) the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987; and

(ii) any other enactment or rule of law applicable to members.

(3) A local authority may amend or replace its code of conduct, but may not revoke it without replacement.

(4) A member of a local authority must comply with the code of conduct of that local authority.

(5) A local authority must, when adopting a code of conduct, consider whether it must require a member or newly elected member to declare whether or not the member or newly elected member is an undischarged bankrupt.

(6) After the adoption of the first code of conduct, an amendment of the code of conduct or the adoption of a new code of conduct requires, in every case, a vote in support of the amendment of not less than 75% of the members present.

(7) To avoid doubt, a breach of the code of conduct does not constitute an offence under this Act.

3.      Under this Council’s Code of Conduct, adopted on 6 November 2013, the Chairman is required to adhere to Clause 4.1 in the Code of Conduct in response to receiving a complaint.

3.1.      All alleged breaches of the Code will be reported to the Chairman. Any allegation of a breach of this Code of Conduct must be in writing, make a specific allegation of a breach of the Code of Conduct, and provide corroborating evidence.

3.2.      The Chairman will investigate the alleged breach and prepare a report for the consideration of Council. Before beginning any investigation, the Chairman will write to the elected member(s) involved, advising about the complaint and will explain when and how there will be an opportunity to respond to the complaint.

3.3.      The Council will consider the report in open meeting of Council, except where the alleged breach relates to the misuse of confidential information or could impinge on the privacy of an elected member, member of staff or of the general public.

The Complaint

4.      I received a formal complaint from Councillor Scott on 12 June 2014.

5.      That complaint (attached) specifically alleged breaches under:

5.1.      Section 3.1 Ethics

5.2.      Section 3.2 Relationship with other Members

5.3.      Section 3.3 Relationship with Staff

5.4.      Section 3.5 Contact with the Media.

6.      Upon receiving the complaint and referring to the Code of Conduct I was immediately struck by the absence of any formal, documented procedure or process to follow when dealing with it. In that absence, I initiated the steps that are contained within the Code and outlined in paragraph 3.

7.      To initiate the process, I therefore forwarded the complaint (20 June) to Councillor Belford for his response, which I duly received (attached) on 30 June.

8.      Following my initial assessment of the complaint and the response to it, I believe there may be a case to answer, and am seeking Council’s agreement to a process for determination on the complaint.

Toward Resolution

9.      In relation to reaching a determination on a complaint, the HBRC Code of Conduct, section 4.2, states:

9.1.      The exact nature of the action Council may take depends on the nature of the breach and whether there are statutory provisions dealing with the breach.

9.2.      Before initiating any action of consideration in response to a breach of this Code by an elected member, the Council will ensure that the natural justice right and obligations are understood by the elected members and that all the attendance issues are provided for.

10.    Further, being that there are no statutory provisions for dealing with the type of breach alleged:

10.1.    the Council may take the following action:

10.1.1.   censure

10.1.2.   removal of the elected member from Council committees and/or other representative type bodies

10.1.3.   dismissal of the elected member from a position as Deputy Chairman or Chairman of a committee.


10.2.    A decision to apply one or more of these actions requires a Council resolution to that effect.

11.    Given this Council currently has no documented process for resolving formal complaints of this nature, examples of other council processes have been sought and reviewed in an effort to develop a process that is transparent, fair and upholds the principles of natural justice.

Proposed Process

Complaint Investigation and Determination Process

12.    This process is at all times to follow the principles of natural justice. The fundamental principles are that each party:

12.1.    Has the right to know what the investigation/determination process is, and what the potential outcomes may be

12.2.    Is given due notice and is provided with an opportunity to be involved in the process

12.3.    Has a right to be heard

12.4.    Has the right to seek appropriate advice and counsel and to be represented

12.5.    Has their privacy respected as appropriate throughout the process.

13.    On receipt of a written complaint, the Chairman and/or the CE will undertake an initial inquiry to determine whether the subject matter of the complaint is appropriately dealt with under the Code of Conduct.

13.1.    Note: in the event of a complaint concerning the Chairman, the CE will undertake the initial inquiry.

13.2.    A positive answer to the following questions would serve as an indicator that there may be a case to answer.

13.2.1.   Is the complaint about an elected member?

13.2.2.   If the allegations specified in the complaint were proven could they amount to a breach of the code?

13.3.    If in doubt and there isn’t another statutory or other process that applies, the matter should continue at this stage.

13.4.    If the complaint doesn’t fit within the Code then it should be redirected in an appropriate fashion or simply declined and the complainant advised.

14.    The complainant will, within x working days (suggest 5), be advised in writing:

14.1.    That the complaint has been received

14.2.    That the Chairman and/or the CE will undertake an initial investigation and that if the complaint does not fit within the Code, then it may be redirected or even declined

14.3.    Of the process that will be used to address the complaint

14.4.    The timeframe within which they can expect a response

14.5.    A contact person who they can get in touch with to find out about the process

14.6.    The complainant may also be asked for more information so that the Council and the respondent can understand the complaint sufficiently to be able to respond.

15.    The respondent will be:

15.1.    Provided a copy of the written complaint within x working days (suggest 5) (unless more detail is required and then within 3 working days after receipt of the details requested)

15.2.    Advised in writing:

15.2.1.   of the process to be used to address the complaint

15.2.2.   requested to provide a written response to the Chairman/CE within 14 days of receipt of the complaint

15.2.3.   that they may like to seek advice and/or counsel.

16.    Chairman and/or CE assess both the written complaint and the response. If the assessment is that there is no case to answer the Chairman/CE will write to the complainant and respondent and advise them of that outcome.

16.1.    That letter may be used as an opportunity to recommend action, which could include:

16.1.1.   Provision of information and/or education for the complainant or the respondent

16.1.2.   A change in process, practice or policy to remedy the problem.

17.    If the assessment is that there may be a case to answer, the Chairman/CE is to commission a full investigation.

17.1.    The Chairman/CE will appoint an independent person to undertake the investigation.

17.2.    Terms of reference will be developed to provide guidance for those undertaking the investigation.

17.3.    The respondent will be advised in writing that:

17.3.1.   It has been assessed that there may be a case to answer

17.3.2.   The process that will be followed in a full investigation

17.3.3.   If a breach of the Code is substantiated what options the Council has available to it.

18.    The investigation will report directly to the Chairman and CE.

19.    The investigation may recommend that the matter may be more appropriately resolved by mediation.

20.    If the matter is resolved by mediation then an agreement shall be prepared that is signed by all the parties and will be subsequently provided to Council.

21.    Council shall consider the outcome of the mediation and, if considered appropriate, move to give effect to the terms of agreement reached in the mediation.

22.    If mediation is not appropriate or not successful then a ‘findings’ document shall be prepared which will include a summary of agreed and disputed facts that relate to the complaint and the recommendations of the investigation. The findings will be presented to the Chairman and CE for their review and then to the Council.

23.    Council will make a decision:

23.1.    The Council will consider the report in open meeting of Council, except where the alleged breach relates to the misuse of confidential information or could impinge on the privacy of an elected member, member of staff or of the general public.

23.2.    The Councillor complained about shall not be a part of the Council decision making process and shall not be present during deliberations.

23.3.    Prior to making a decision, the Chairman/CE will first send a copy of the findings document to both the complainant and the respondent with a letter asking them whether they wish to avail themselves of a final opportunity for written submissions before a Council decision is made.

23.4.    Council meets and if the findings and recommendations of the investigation are accepted by the complainant and the respondent then they shall be applied accordingly.

23.5.    If either party does not agree with the findings and recommendations of the investigation then all information will be placed before Council who will decide if a breach has occurred.

23.6.    In exceptional circumstances Council may call for the complainant or respondent or any witnesses to give oral evidence in person. This may be especially useful in situations where the evidence is contradictory and the credibility of the parties or a witness is an issue.

23.7.    The Council, after considering the findings document, written submissions and hearing any further evidence (if appropriate) will then decide whether a breach has occurred.

23.8.    If a breach of the Code is found to have occurred the Council will determine the penalty to be imposed and confirm that penalty by resolution of Council. Where there are no statutory provisions, the Council may take the following action:

23.8.1.   censure

23.8.2.   removal of the elected member from Council committees and/or other representative type bodies

23.8.3.   dismissal of the elected member from a position as Deputy Chairman or Chairman of a committee.

23.9.    The respondent will be informed of the Council’s determination, in writing, and will be given a 28 day opportunity to make submissions regarding the penalty and/or appeal the actual decision.

24.    Council will consider the written submission and/or appeal and either confirm its decision or amend it. Upon making that decision, Council will consider that the matter is finalised and that no further action is required, and advise the complainant and respondent accordingly.

In Conclusion

25.    I am proposing that we, as a Council, take the path to resolving this complaint by implementing the proposed process – picking it up from paragraph 17 above.

26.    I also suggest that the CE commissions the services of the LGNZ Disputes Resolution Advisor, Jenny Rowan, to carry out the investigation and determination of the complaint.

27.    In terms of the process itself, I believe that it should be appended, as adopted by Council today, to the Code of Conduct. If others are not completely satisfied that it meets their requirements, however, I suggest that we assess its effectiveness through its use in this instance with the objective of refining it as necessary at the conclusion of this process for inclusion in the Code.

Decision Making Process

28.    Council is required to make a decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act).  Staff have assessed the requirements contained in Part 6 Sub Part 1 of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded the following:

28.1.    The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset.

28.2.    The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.

28.3.    The decision does not fall within the definition of Council’s policy on significance.

28.4.    The persons affected by this decision are the elected representatives themselves.

28.5.    The option of not adopting a formal process has been considered.

28.6.    The decision is not inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.

29.    Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.



That Council

1.      Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted policy on significance and that Council can exercise its discretion under Sections 79(1)(a) and 82(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community and persons likely to be affected by or to have an interest in the decision due to the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided.

2.      Receives the ‘Code of Conduct Complaint Response Process’ report.

3.      Adopts the above ‘Complaint Investigation and Determination Process’ for resolution of the complaint received on 12 June 2014.

4.      Adopts the updated Code of Conduct, amended by appending the Complaint Investigation and Determination Process agreed today, 30 July 2014.






Fenton Wilson






C Scott Complaint of Breach of HBRC Code of Conduct




T Belford Response to C Scott Complaint




C Scott Complaint of Breach of HBRC Code of Conduct

Attachment 1


From: "Christine Scott" <>                         12 June 2014
To: "Fenton Wilson" <>
Subject: breach of Code of Conduct

Hi Fenton
Please find attached a formal complaint.



Breach of the Code of Conduct


On May the 20th on a blog site “Baybuzz’ written by Councillor Belford, accusations were made against fellow councillors, HBRIC Directors and HBRC staff that were blatantly untrue.


The content of the bog is included below.


As one of the named councillors I am lodging a formal complaint of a breach of our Code of Conduct under section 4.1.


I raised the matter in a council meeting and asked for a retraction of the article and an apology. The article remains on the councillor’s blog site, and through the newspaper (Hawke’s Bay Today), I learnt that he would not apologise. Therefore, it is only fitting that the matter be referred under the Code of Conduct.


Section 3.1 Ethics, has been breached in that the description of fellow councillors, staff and HBRIC directors not only lacks the respect required, but is offensive and derogatory. It is not true and is an attempt to deliberately mislead the public.


It is a breach under 3.2, Relationship with other Members, in that it is an attempt to deliberately undermine confidence in the elected body and in the council as an organization.


It is an appalling breach under Section 3.3, Relationship with Staff, in that it openly criticises staff, attempts to question their integrity and competence, and constitutes offensive and abusive conduct towards those staff members.


It is a breach under Section 3.5, in that it and statements made to legitimate media (those subject to oversight of standards such as the Press Council) compromise the integrity of the staff and fail to show any respect for views, opinions and lawful actions of the named councillors and Directors of HBRIC.


I do not think it necessary that I refute the content of the allegations part from the fact that I affirm the integrity and the expertise of our expert staff and that all decisions I have made have been based on the science and the need for good planning provisions with a recognition of the need for plans to be practical and able to be properly applied and compliance to be fairly administered.


I have at all times acted for the good of the region as a whole which I am required to do under this code and under my oath of office.


At no time have I not acted to achieve good environmental outcomes, and I will uphold the integrity of the staff both our science experts and our planning experts to achieve the best outcomes under all the legislation under which we operate.


I will also add that at no time in my time as councillor have I publically denigrated any other councillor or staff member, except to take  the necessary action in council to counteract the lies in Councillor Belford’s blog.




Christine Scott




Bay Buzz 20th May


Plan Change 6, as directed by the Board of Inquiry (BOI) in its draft decision, would give the region a swimmable, fishable, healthy Tukituki.

Four Regional Councillors — Barker, Beaven, Belford and Graham — heartily endorse the BOI decision. We believe farmers and growers can meet its requirements and prosper, and that HBRC and our regional ag sector should start working toward that end.

However, five Regional Councillors (Dick, Hewitt, Pipe, Scott and Wilson), the council’s investment company (HBRIC), and senior managers have a different priority. They want a dam … at any cost. And they fear the strong environmental protections required by the BOI will quash the dam, whose prime purpose is to promote intensified farming.

And so, since the BOI decision was announced on 15 April, they have worked mightily to undermine it. HBRC/HBRIC leaders have played semantic games as to whether or not they wish to seek ‘technical’ clean-up of the decision, as the rules permit, or to pursue a more far-reaching agenda based upon their opposition to the tougher environmental regime.

First, the staff initiated a request for a Ministers’ delay in the final decision of the Board of Inquiry regarding its plan for the Tukituki. Councillors — four of whom were reluctant to seek a delay — were not given an opportunity to review the final request before it was sent. And as it turns out, the request unilaterally reversed the posture that had earlier been agreed to by Councillors.

The BOI itself made no request for a delay, and when asked to comment on the HBRC/HBRIC request, said it had “no position” on any extension, adding: “The Board notes that if an extension is granted it will still release its final decision as soon as is practicable before the time limit for that decision.” That sounds like a Board confident of its decision.

Nevertheless, Ministers Adams and Smith extended the review period by one month in a letter released on 14 May, officially communicating a decision surely known beforehand by HBRC’s dam team.

However, on May 14, for the first time (a full month after the BOI’s decision), Councillors (meeting along with Maori representatives as the Regional Planning Committee) received a staff paper critically assessing the BOI decision. Based upon the interrogation that occurred, the Committee rejected the staff analysis, and declined to receive it. But at no time during the debate did staff indicate that the Ministers’ delay had already been granted, on the basis of arguments made in then-rejected staff paper.

Then, last Friday, HBRC/HBRIC filed ‘technical’ objections with the Board regarding the BOI’s Tukituki protection plan. These expanded upon the staff assessment rejected two days earlier. HBRC Councillors did not see in advance, let alone approve, the HBRC submission. This action breaks all precedent when HBRC submits on matters before external authorities.

So on what authority are objections about Plan Change 6 being voiced to Ministers and the BOI?

We — Councillors Barker, Beaven, Belford, Graham — believe the HBRC submission has no authority whatsoever. We have indicated that to Ministers Adams and Smith, asking them to provide an opportunity for we Councillors to officially submit in support of the Plan Change.

Perhaps mistakenly, we thought we — not the staff — were elected to make such major policy decisions.

This behaviour by HBRC/HBRIC leaders, with its breaches of important Council due process, constitutes poor governance at best, or contempt of Councillors’ role and responsibilities at worst.

Either way, they will be challenged.

T Belford Response to C Scott Complaint

Attachment 2




Wednesday 30 July 2014



Reason for Report

1.      Attached is the report of HBRIC Ltd to Council on its activities over the last few weeks.

2.      The HBRIC Ltd Chief Executive Andrew Newman, Company Manager Heath Caldwell, and Board of Directors Chairman Andy Pearce will be present at the meeting to speak to the Update.

Decision Making Process

3.      Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act).  Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.



1.    That Council receives the “HBRIC Ltd and RWSS July 2014 Update” report.





Liz Lambert

Chief Executive





HBRIC Ltd and RWSS Update Report




HBRIC Ltd and RWSS Update Report

Attachment 1



Report to Hawke’s Bay Regional Council

30 July 2014


This report covers the following issues:

·        HBRIC Ltd’s in principle approach to preparing a strategic plan as required in the Statement of Intent;

·        The final BoI decision on the RWSS Consent and HBRIC Ltd’s assessment of its operability;

·        The application by HBRIC Ltd to taker groundwater;

·        The appeals of the decision to the High Court and HBRIC Ltd’s decision to join;

·        Councillor access to detailed confidential RWSS information;

·        Financial Close.




HBRIC Ltd is recommending the following process for developing a Strategic Plan for both the parent company and Napier Port. A staged process was discussed of:

1)      developing investment principles for agreement with Council; then progressing to

2)      specific potential opportunities to be discussed with Council to assess support; and then

3)      proceeding to preliminary evaluation of the opportunities agreed with Council.


RWSS Execution


EPA and consenting

As at the release of the final decision of the Board of Inquiry (BoI) on the Tukituki proposal on 26 June HBRIC Ltd notes that the RWSS has been granted consent. Between the draft and the final decision the BoI accepted 33 of the 34 requested changes sought by HBRIC Ltd in full or in part.

HBRIC Ltd in its comments on the draft decision focused on technical issues especially those associated with the nutrient management regime. In our technical points we did seek to clarify the BoI’s intent regarding the granting of consent to the RWSS and the final decision reflects clearly that the BoI did indeed seek to grant an operable consent.

The requested change not accepted relates to utilising LUC leaching rates based on using Overseer version 6 versus 5. However, as has been traversed by Council staff the BoI decision has enabled a process to resolve that issue with Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (Council) needing to issue a procedural protocol.

Overall it is our view that the N leaching framework will require a high standard of farm management practice, it will limit high intensity land uses such as dairy on higher LUC classes particularly with light to very light soils and it will enable good measurement of performance and therefore compliance monitoring. Subject to a decision post appeals and based on some refined technical work we are of the view that it will be possible to either modify and or in the majority of cases remove the condition subsequent clause dealing with the application of Farm Environment Management Plans (FEMPs). However, given appeals we will retain that clause until the resolution of the High Court appeals.

HBRIC Ltd viewed the draft decision re “tranche 2” groundwater with surprise in that the effect of utilising groundwater for irrigation and then pumping further groundwater from the aquifer to supplement the impact on surface water flows incurred by the irrigation drawdown, at best seemed rather circular – ie: compounding an aquifer drawdown. HBRIC Ltd was of the view that provided it was clear that surface water flow impacts could be supplemented from stored surface water that there was a case for utilisation of this groundwater as part of a distributed irrigation network. The BoI in its final decision clarified this issue.

We note there have been questions asked as to the logic of HBRIC Ltd seeking to lodge a consent application for the Tranche 2 water. We are of the view there is a simple and compelling logic which is outlined above. We further note that the intent is to distribute the benefits of secure water to as many parties as possible which is entirely consistent with Council’s own water strategy. The groundwater may be utilised for irrigation in peripheral areas, improving reliability and or further optimising the distribution network. This application and the logic for it, was tested with representatives of the Ruataniwha Water User Group and it was in turn traversed by that group themselves. The impacts on surface water flows of drawing that water will need to be addressed through direct augmentation of those flows. To ensure compliance the Council will need direct evidence of that supplementation and the water flowing from a telemetered piped network will be easily measured.  We will continue to work with both current and future irrigators to ensure that their utilisation of this water benefits as much of the irrigation community as is possible as is consistent with a water storage scheme seeking to deliver community wide benefits and that framework will be integral to the full consent application which in turn will be publicly notified.

Our overall conclusion is that the final consent decision is considered operable. In particular, HBRIC Ltd regards the on land nutrient management regime being based on LUC leaching rates as requiring a high standard but achievable level of on farm environmental management with the performance being measurable.

High Court Appeals

Two appeals have been lodged with the High Court from Eastern Region Fish & Game and the Royal Forest & Bird Protection Society respectively. HBRIC Ltd notes that the Council is to consider joining the appeals at today’s meeting. HBRIC Ltd has sought its own legal advice in regards to its own options. That advice has reinforced that it is essential that HBRIC Ltd as an applicant, join on the basis that not to do so would be tantamount to accepting the arguments put for in those appeals – one of which would be to render the consent inoperable and the other dismiss the consent decision in its entirety. Clearly HBRIC Ltd does not support either outcome and as a consequence will be joining to defend the final decision.  




Due Diligence

We advise that HBRIC Ltd intends to provide the following process to enable all Councillors to undertake, prior to Financial Close, individual Due Diligence (DD) in regard to Council's investment decision. 

1)    HBRIC Ltd will provide a DD process that encompasses the documents requested by Councillors and other documents notably those arising from the formal due diligence process required by all investors including CIIL and Institutional investors.

2)    HBRIC Ltd will encourage all Councillors to undertake DD, to the extent they consider necessary, to satisfy themselves about the existence, general form, nature, and content of the documents.

3)    To protect all parties against any suggestion of breaches of duties, good process, confidentiality or the like, the DD process will conform with commercial DD processes for this scale of investment and complexity that involve multiple parties whose commercial interests need to be protected.

4)    Access to this information will involve the signing of a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) by each Councillor who wishes to undertake DD (as offered by Councillors requesting the information).  The documents will be available for inspection in a secure and locked DD room from which sign-in and sign-out will be required. No copies may be made of any DD material.  These are perfectly standard and normal requirements of commercial DD processes and that same information will be available to other investing parties.

5)    Given the volume of documentation, we propose providing the documents in logically-related groups, with the sequence being driven in part by the degree of completion of each group of documents.

6)    The first group of documents available will be those relating to:

·      Design and Construction, covering the tender process, tender evaluation process, the full preferred tender, the subsequent negotiations process and outcomes, and the D&C contract in its near-final state;

·      The Water User agreement;

·      The financial case as per that reviewed by Deloitte noting that that case will be subject to further negotiation with investors and subject to final review by Deloitte on behalf of the Council.

7)    Subsequent groups of documents will be:

·      Investment documents (also subject to further negotiations with investors);

·      The debt-funding agreement with CIIL in near-final form will also be included in this group of documents when that is ready;

·      Technical due diligence report;

·      Legal due diligence report;

·      Land due diligence report;

·      Insurance due diligence report;

·      Tax due diligence report;

·      Financial model audit;

·      The RWLP Limited Partnership Agreement and the Constitution of its General Partner.

8)    We will update Councillors each month as to the state of play with various documents but note that given High Court Appeals some of the above information will not be available until we have more clarity as to the outcome from those appeals.

Financial Close

Given High Court appeals and the final BoI decision, financial close will clearly need to follow resolution of such appeals and HBRIC Ltd is of the view that resolution will not occur until at a best case scenario late in the fourth quarter of 2014.  A more detailed assessment will be possible once hearing schedules have been determined by the High Court.


Table 1 sets out the June 2014 Financial Report for HBRIC Ltd.

The report sets out the actual costs incurred for both the month and the year to date against the full year budget to 30 June 2014 (operating) and full project budget for the RWSS as presented to Council on 30 April 2014 (capital).

Operating Income and Expenditure

A summary of the key elements outlined in the report for the month of June is as follows:


-        Receipt of the Napier Port interim dividend for the year ended 30 September 2014 of $3,767,400.

-        Payment of HBRIC Ltd’s final dividend to Council for the year ended 30 June 2014 of $3,653,000. Total dividends paid to Council for the year ended 30 June 2014 totaled $6,654,275, which was higher than the amount budgeted in Council’s 2013/14 Annual Plan.

RWSS Project Reforecast

On 30 April 2014 a full RWSS Project Reforecast was presented to Council based on a projected financial close date of 30 June 2014. As discussed at this meeting the date of financial close had been delayed to 30 September 2014 with Council requesting an outline of projected expenditure over this time period.

A process is currently being undertaken by HBRIC Ltd to identify additional budget requirements for the RWSS through to financial close. This process has been slightly delayed due to the Board of Inquiry decision being delayed by one month as well as the requirement to determine the implication of the High Court Appeals on the financial close date.


At its 30 April 2014 meeting Council also requested an analysis of the costs for the EPA Process which identified specific costs associated with Plan Change 6 and the RWSS Consents. This analysis has been undertaken as part of identifying the additional costs through to financial close with accounting and tax advice also being sought in relation to this matter.


It is anticipated that HBRIC Ltd will provide a full report which sets out details of the additional expenditure through to financial close and the identification of specific Plan Change 6 costs to Council once the date of financial close is known.


It is important to note that all development costs incurred by HBRIC Ltd prior to financial close will form part of its total investment quantum in the RWSS.


Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Hawke's Bay Tourism Quarterly Report


Reason for Report

1.      The purpose of this paper is to provide Council with Hawke’s Bay Tourism Limited (HBTL) results for the year ended 30 June 2014.


2.      At the Council meeting on 25 May 2011 Council resolved to approve the funding agreement between the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and HBTL. Section 11 of this funding agreement provided for a quarterly and annual report to be presented to Council to enable Council to monitor the outputs/outcomes being achieved and the financial progress against budget given the commitment by Council to fund HBTL, through a payment of $850,000 each year for three years commencing 2011/12.

3.      As an update for future funding assistance Council, at its meeting on 26 February 2014, resolved that Hawke’s Bay Tourism funding be extended for a further year to 30 June 2015 at the current assistance level of $850,000 per annum, noting that the timing of any revisions in funding levels and extension of the term of funding assistance would be considered in line with the 2015-25 LTP planning cycle.

4.      A report from HBTL setting out achievements, progress towards the key performance indicators as set out in the funding agreement, together with the Company’s financials, are attached to this paper.

Decision Making Process

5.      Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act).  Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only and no decision is to be made, the decision making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 do not apply.



1.      That Council receives the Hawke’s Bay Tourism Quarterly Update report.






Paul Drury

Group Manager

Corporate Services





HB Tourism 2013-14 Quarter 4 Report




HB Tourism 2013-14 Financials




HB Tourism 2013-14 Quarter 4 Report

Attachment 1


Hawke’s Bay Tourism Ltd – Quarter 4, 2014

Prepared by Annie Dundas, GM Hawke’s Bay Tourism


Hawke’s Bay Tourism Limited was officially formed in July 2011 and began a three year strategy for implementing visitor growth to the region supported by a three-year funding commitment from the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council as well as privately pledged funds and membership fees. A set of KPI’s were developed and Hawke’s Bay Tourism has completed all KPI’s to date.

This report will focus on the April - June 2014 period.


1.    Visitor Statistics

In an effort to take a broader industry view of what is happening within Hawke’s Bay we will use the following measures to record visitor arrivals and economic impact.

·    Regional Tourism Estimates – reflecting visitor spend (Please see appendix with graph). The RTEs provide regional stakeholders with absolute dollar estimates of tourism expenditure at a detailed regional level (i.e. by regional council, territorial authority, visitors’ country of origin and industry). Dollars spent is measured by dollars spent in accommodation, food and beverage services, retail sales, retail sales fuel, other tourism products and other passenger transport.

·    International Visitor Survey – international visitor arrivals

·    Commercial Accommodation Monitor – hotels, motels, holiday parks and backpackers

·    Private Household Monitor – a measure of friends and family staying in Hawke’s Bay

Overall, Hawke’s Bay has seen a gradual increase in both domestic and international visitors staying in the region. Spend figures show international visitors spent $85m in the region year end March 2013 and domestic visitors spent $372m over the same period. (Source Regional Tourism Estimates) – MBIE – see Appendix for breakdown of spend.

Results for Hawke’s Bay for the month of April 2014 combining Commercial Accommodation and Private Household figures show a positive result with 5,400 additional guest nights in April 2014 compared to April 2013. Year end indicates that the region saw an increase in guest nights of 118,948 across the year.


Hawke’s Bay Tourism, 19 Waghorne Street, Ahuriri, Napier. PO Box 12009, Ahuriri, Napier 4144, New Zealand­



Commercial Accommodation Hawke’s Bay

Commercial Accommodation Monitor for April 2014 shows Hawke’s Bay guest nights up 16.6% compared to the same period in April 2013. This equates to an additional 12,668 extra visitor nights spent in commercial accommodation in the region in April. Motels, Backpackers and Holiday all had substantial increases with hotels recording a decline. The reason for the substantial increase is due to Easter falling in April.


Private Household Monitor

The Private Household Monitor estimated 58,692 visitors to the Hawke's Bay Region stayed 233,392 nights in private accommodation during April 2014. This was a decrease of just under 7,269 guest nights on the previous April.  Note this excludes those who stayed in holiday homes and baches, but includes children aged 15 or under. The major reasons for visiting Hawke's Bay were visiting friends and family (94.9% of total nights stayed) and general holiday or leisure (2.1%). Visitors to the region stayed an average of 4.0 nights in private accommodation.

International Arrivals into New Zealand

Growth in international visitor arrivals continued in April.  Australian arrivals into New Zealand were +15.9% for April against April last year. Continued month-on-month growth from the long-haul markets of the UK (up 22.5%), USA (up 13%) and Germany (up 40.4%) was also a positive result. China again saw a decrease down 1.4% in April on the back of changes to visas which discourages controlled group tourism and commission shopping.


International Visitors to NZ

April 2014

Year end April 2014





+6.1%      (159,576)





+5.5%      (64,416)





+2.8%    (5,248)





+11.3%     (21,264)





+10.4%   (22,544)

Commercial Accommodation

April 2014

Year end April 2014

Hawke’s Bay





Total visitors





Total guest nights





International guest nights





Domestic guest nights





Average length of stay


Up from 2.14



Overall occupancy rate


Up from 31.7%


Up from 31.5%

Occupancy excl Holiday Parks




















Holiday Parks





Other Regions Total Guest Nights









Bay of Plenty








































Private Household Monitor

April 2014

Year end April 2014

Total Visitors


(+6,668) +12.8%


+9.6% (+60,039)

Total Visitor nights


(-7,269) -3.1%


+3.9% (+104,794)


Key Performance Indicators for Hawke’s Bay Tourism

The organisation has been working towards the goals and objectives set out in the Strategic Plan signed off by HBRC in May 2011.

In the fourth of the 2013 2014 financial year the following KPI’s have been met;

1.    Hawke’s Bay Tourism - the Regional Tourism Organisation is well established and has now completed  three years of operation. 


2.    Brand – The “Hawke’s Bay” brand continues to be widely used and is well established and used consistently in all marketing activity. Many Hawke’s Bay entities such as Business Hawke’s Bay, Food Hawke’s Bay, Central Hawke’s Bay, Havelock North Business Association, and Education Hawke’s Bay have adopted the brand for their own representation. Regional collateral also carries this brand which covers the Hawke’s Bay Visitor Guide, The Art Guide, The Food Trail Map, The Hawke’s Bay Trails Map, The Wine Trail Map and the Hawke’s Bay Summer Guide. In addition Hawke’s Bay Tourism has created and owns the F.A.W.C! brand as well as The Big Easy brand.


3.    Consumer Marketing -

·    Advertising - “Get me to Hawke’s Bay”

“The Get me to Hawke’s Bay” is the tagline used in all campaign activity.

Campaign activity has run through the fourth quarter online. Much of the advertising schedule through this period has been dedicated to promoting The Big Easy and Four Weekends of Winter F.A.W.C! This has revolved around the release of new video/digital footage as well as extensive activity within Facebook and other online channels such as, and eventfinda.

o The Big Easy 30 second video clip was viewed by 29,079 people

o The Winter F.A.W.C! 30 second video clip was viewed by 31,573 people

o The Hawke's Bay facebook page has 31,400+ likes

The 30 second F.A.W.C! video clip can be viewed here.

Search engine marketing also continues.

·    Public relations

Hawke’s Bay Tourism has hosted the following media in region between April - June:

o Dish Magazine, New Zealand

o New Zealand Herald

o Cooking Light, USA (Editor) 11 million readers per month

o Metro Canada 1.5 million readers per day


o Travel Classics Press Trip
- National Geographic Traveller (Travel Editor)
- Marisa D’Vari-Author, Luxury Travel Writer, TV contributor
-Haley Shapley, Four Seasons Magazine,
-Serena Renner, AFAR, Australian Traveller


o Robb Report USA (Editor) 180 000 print per month, 110 000 online per month

o Departures Magazine USA ( Travel Editor) 5.5 million readers

o Peggy Sijswerda USA, Parents, Endless Vacations, GO!


China Southern Press Trip
-Travel Magazine 120 000 copies per month

- Southern Metropolis Weekly 1 million online copies per month, 407 000 print copies per month

-  5 million unique users per month, 240 million readers

- I-weekly 6 million downloads per issue

- Gateway Magazine 400 000 copies per month

- Citizine Magazine 500 000 copies per issue


Media results include

Germany + Die Zeit. Circ: 554,305 (attached)

USA Chicago Tribune Australia  

Globe and Mail Canada (attached) 1, 535, 157 unique views per month EAV $79 917

Icon Malaysia (attached) 36 000 copies EAV $20 608


Digital Strategy is performing well with unique visitation up nearly 10%. Over 20,000 people visit the site each month. In addition Hawke’s Bay Tourism also owns and . Both of these sites are generating strong traffic. The region’s official facebook page has 31,500 followers.

July 1st 2012 – June 30th 2013

July 1st 2013 – June 30th 2014


Visits to site



+ 8.84%

Unique Users



+ 9.87%

Page views



+ 14.33%

Average pages per visit



+ 5.11%

Average time on site



+ 2.59%



A monthly one-page tourism monitor has been established and is distributed to stakeholders and industry each month. See April attached.


4.    Trade Marketing

In the fourth quarter we have taken part in five trade shows and hosted a large number of trade famils.

Trade Shows
TNZ - RTONZ Updates
Regional Tourism offices from all over New Zealand gathered in Auckland in April to conduct a three- day training session with Tourism New Zealand staff, and Inbound Operators. Around 56 companies were met with and 73 agents at the Inbound Day.
Explore Central North Island - ECNI
ECNI is a marketing collective of 8 regions including Hawke's Bay.  11 operators joined Hawke's Bay Tourism at Eden Park in Auckland in April to update Inbound Operators on their specific product.
This is the first time that Hawke's Bay has attended this trade show.  The focus is on Conference and Incentive business and targets the Corporate sector.  Eight operators joined Hawke's Bay Tourism at the Auckland Viaduct Event Centre.
This is the largest travel trade show in New Zealand.  Hawke's Bay Tourism conducted around 60 appointments with a cross section of international buyers and was joined by Art Deco Trust, Takaro Trails, MTG, Napier Tourism Services and The Crown Hotel. TRENZ is also confirmed for Rotorua in 2015 as part of a bid from Explore Central North Island. Hawke’s Bay will be heavily involved as one of eight regions hosting this major tourism event.

Now in its 18th year, Meetings attracts PCO's (Professional Conference Organisers) from NZ, Australia and in recent times some Chinese and Asian buyers. Hawke's Bay Tourism was joined by the Napier War Memorial Conference Centre and Nimons Coachlines.

Trade Familiarisations

·    Tourism New Zealand Trade Staff famil - 11 trade marketing staff from UK, USA, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia and Australia visited the region on a two-day familiarisation

·    Indonesian Agent famil - 9 of Indonesia's top selling agents were introduced to a 2 day program of Hawke's Bay product.

·    Travelers Choice/Qantas famil - Tourism New Zealand rates Travelers Choice as their second tier performing agency for sales into New Zealand.  10 front line sellers attended a 2 day hosted famil to Hawke's Bay.

·    Pre TRENZ famil –  15 international travel sellers were hosted in the region from Hong, USA, UK, China, Singapore, South America, Italy and Spain.

·    Two groups of luxury travel agents from the UK and USA were also hosted in May.

·    The Director of Product Development for Compagnie du Ponant – a luxury French cruise line was hosted in Hawke’s Bay to learn more about shore cruise excursion product.


Product Workshops

·    A dedicated China Workshop was held in June for the tourism sector. 30 local operators attended.

·    Monthly tourism sector meetings continue. Representatives from the following sectors attend  - motels, hotels, B&B’s, attractions, councils and hospitality meet on the first Friday of each month.

Conference Activity

·    Hawke’s Bay was featured in Meeting Newz  - feature  written by Aleisha Moore

·    Quarterly C&I portfolio meeting with industry leaders undertaken

5.    Events

Regional Events Strategy

·    A renewed focus to the events strategy has been undertaken due to the priority given to events by both Napier City Council and Hastings District Council having employed key event staff. Hawke’s Bay Tourism is coordinating the regions effort with close collaboration with both Councils and Sport Hawke’s Bay. The key objective is to increase visitor nights in the region, particularly in the off-season. A revised events strategy is currently being worked on.

Event Activity

o The Big Easy - The second Big Easy event was held at Easter. A total of 1523 riders took part which was a huge increase on the previous year. And just under 100 extra people paid to attend the concert at Church Road. Just under one thousand riders were local and 320 came from outside the region with Auckland and Wellington providing the largest number of out of towners. Good numbers also came from Tauranga, Hamilton, Palmerston North and Rotorua. Over 500 registered riders were aged between 40-54, 380 riders were 55+.

o An All Blacks Test Action Group has been formed and includes representatives from all districts and associations as well as the HBRU. All areas of Hawke’s Bay are building plans for fan activity prior to the test match. A special programme will be distributed in Hawke's Bay Today detailing what's on for visitors and locals. There are just on 2,000 tickets to the game left.

o Cricket World Cup 2015 – Hawke’s Bay Tourism will lead the Community Engagement Strategy alongside Councils, Cricket Associations and promotions groups. We have three matches in Hawke's Bay and tickets are on sale now. Visiting teams include our very own Black Caps, the West Indies, United Arab Emirates and Pakistan. A bunch of activity is being planned and will be confirmed soon.

o Hawke's Bay Tourism were a finalist in the Hawke’s Bay Sport Awards for the Big Easy (Innovation in Sport and Recreation category) held in May.

Big Events Coming Up

·      All Blacks vs. Argentina September 6, 2014

·      F.A.W.C! Summer Series October 31 – November 9, 2014

·      Air NZ Wine Awards November 22, 2014

Hawke’s Bay Tourism – Financial Statement

Hawke’s Bay Tourism Ltd will have a slight overspend year end June 2014 of approximately $20k, a 1.5% variance. This is due in part to the Strategic Planning Workshop taking place within the 2013/2014 financial year. This activity was not initially planned. Budget spent on strategic planning will be applied to activity in the coming year. To cover the overspend; Hawke’s Bay Tourism will plan for a surplus within the coming years budget.

A final set of audited accounts will completed in September 2014.

Please note External/Other Revenue includes F.A.W.C! (Summer and Winter) ticket sales. This is collected by Hawke’s Bay Tourism and then passed on to event managers. This also includes income from The Big Easy which goes towards the running of the event.


Key Hawke's Bay Tourism Results April 2014


Total Visitor Spend 1

Years Ended March 2009-2014

Total Arrivals 2

Year Ended April 2014


April 2014

YE April 2014

Annual % Change

Hawke’s Bay




Napier City




Hastings District




Commercial Accommodation 3




VFR Accommodation 3




Conventions Activity Delegates 4




Cruise Ship Visitors 5




Total Night-Stays 2

Year Ended April 2014

Domestic Tourism 7

Year Ended April 2014


April 2014

YE April 2014

Annual % Change


April 2014

YE April 2014

Annual % Change

Hawke’s Bay




Total Arrivals




Napier City




Total Visitor Nights




Hastings District




Average Length of Stay (Nights)




Ave Length of Stay (Nights)3




% of All Nights




Commercial Accommodation 3




Commercial Nights




VFR Accommodation 3




VFR Nights




Total Commercial Occupancy Rate % 6




Key Markets 8

Waikato, Wellington, Auckland, Bay of Plenty, Manawatu-Wanganui.

International Tourism 7

Year Ended April 2014

Economic Contribution of Tourism7

Year Ended Mar 2014


April 2014

YE April 2014

Annual % Change


April 2014

YE April 2014

Annual % Change

Total Arrivals




Domestic Visitor Spend ($M) 8




Total Visitor Nights




International Visitor Spend ($M) 8




Average Length of Stay (Nights)




Total Visitor Spend ($M) 8




% of All Nights




GDP Contribution ($M) 9




Commercial Nights




Total Direct Employment  9




VFR Nights




Cruise Tourism Spend ($M) 10




Key Markets 8

Australia, Europe, UK, USA, Asia.







1.     Base data sourced from Ministry of Business, Innovation & Employment (MBIE).

2.     Includes commercial and VFR overnight visitors.  Commercial data sourced from Statistics NZ and VFR (visiting friends and relations) data from HB Tourism.

3.     Hawke's Bay region only figures.

4.     Data sourced from MBIE quarterly conventions activity surveys.

5.     Data sourced from Napier City Council.

6.     Data sourced from Statistics NZ.

7.     Hawke's Bay region level results.

8.     Based on MBIE expenditure figures.

9.     GDP and Employment contributions calculated on basis of results of recent tourism economic impact studies in HB.

10.    ‘Cruise NZ' forecast for 2013/14 cruise season.


HB Tourism 2013-14 Financials

Attachment 2



Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Monthly Work Plan Looking Forward Through August 2014


Reason for Report

1.      The table below is provided for Councillors’ information, to provide them with an indication of issues and activities coming up over the next month in each area of Council.


Area of Activity

Activity Status Update

External Relations/ CE’s office





CE’s Office

-     Progress development of Digital by Default Strategy

-     Preparation of August edition of “Our Place”


-     Long Term Plan strategy development

-     Plan Change 6 appeals

Corporate Services


Items to go to August 2014 Council meeting:

-     Setting of Rates 2014/15 year.

-     Financial Report for Year ended 30 June 2014.

-     Draft Annual Report Year Ended 30 June 2014 – for adoption and forwarding to Audit NZ.

Asset Management & Biosecurity









Proposal for development of a Clifton - Tangoio Coastal strategy approved by HDC, NCC and HBRC.  Liaison with iwi continuing and first meeting of the Coastal Strategy Development Committee to be held in August.


Cost benefit analysis for individual pest species under the plan review framework underway.

Cape to City trial underway.

Regional Pest Management Plan working group 2nd meeting scheduled 12 August 2014.


Resource Management



-       The Twyford Irrigators global consent trial being evaluated and draft resource consent being prepared. Envisaged final consent will act as template for future consents of the same type.

-     Draft compliance strategic plan completed and in conjunction with recommendations for continued compliance service will be presented to the Executive and Council.

-     Review of the current cost recovery regime underway.

-     Strategies and resource requirements being determined to meet requirements of the Tukituki plan change.


Resource Management


-       NCC application for coastal protection structure at Whakarire on hold pending further assessment of options and effects by coastal engineers / scientists.

-       TAG application for an oil exploration bore at Boar Hill being processed.


Resource Management continued



-       Catchment and lake modelling of Lake Tutira continues

-       Reporting on the life supporting capacity of the Karamu Stream underway

-       Presentation of Tukituki sediment modelling results expected early August

-       Karamu catchment will be flown to identify the present location and extent of wetlands and the information analysed in August

-       Land-use/land-use change mapping continues to inform nutrient modelling on the Heretaunga Plains

-       Soil mapping (S-MAP) continues in Central Hawkes Bay

-       Results from nutrient limitation studies in the Tutaekuri and Ngaruroro rivers will be reported on within the coming months

-       Fieldwork for the isotope study in the Heretaunga Plains gravel aquifer is being completed

-       Development of the steady state version of the Heretaunga Groundwater Flow Model continues

-       Input datasets for the Heretaunga Groundwater Flow Model being constructed and analysed

-       Collection of samples for analysis of groundwater age and groundwater quality in the Papanui catchment will take place

-       Greater Heretaunga and Ahuriri management zone plan change fieldwork continues for surface water quality, estuarine water quality and spring-fed streams.

-       Field studies for Papanui surface water nutrient characterisation study to be finalised

-       Mohaka Plan Change workstreams continue, including work with Environment Bay of Plenty and GNS on a collaborative investigation of catchment boundaries and groundwater.

-       Regional SoE reporting is under development

-       Collating available data and assessing investigations required for Lake Poukawa modelling

-       Trialling a satellite telemetry rainfall site

-       Link station for collection of Lake Tutira buoy data to be installed

-       Monitoring and initial reporting for 12 extra PM10 monitors across Napier and Hastings to be concluded by the end of August.

-       Climate and air quality State of the Environment reporting data analysis continues


Strategic Development

Resource Management Planning

Coastal marine area-related provisions in Regional Coastal Environment Plan approved by the Minister of Conservation after 18 months of ‘processing.’  Editing and publishing arrangements being made so RCEP can be made operative end of August.

Consultant engaged to assess gaps in how Regional Coastal Environment Plan gives effect to 2010 NZ Coastal Policy Statement.  Draft assessment intended to go to 20 August Regional Planning Committee meeting.

Board of Inquiry’s final decision on Plan Change 6 issued 26 June 2014.  Two High Court appeals have been lodged (one by HB and Eastern Fish & Game councils and another by NZ Forest and Bird Society).  Work continuing on PC6 Implementation Plan.

Decisions expected on two funding applications to MfE’s Community Environment Fund - 1 for $80,000 toward development of outstanding freshwater body assessment criteria & methodology and 1 seeking $117,000 for development of Bayesian Network tool for freshwater management with application to TANK project.

TANK Group finalising terms of reference and meeting schedule/work programme for Phases 2 and 3 leading to preparation of a plan change.

Taharua/Mohaka science investigations continue and assessment of recreational use/values being undertaken.

Hearings of submissions on proposed HDC Plan topics commenced and scheduled to continue throughout rest of 2014.

NCC yet to schedule hearings for submissions on its District Plan Change 10.

Statutory acknowledgements to Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust’s Treaty settlement legislation being prepared for appending to regional plans. Statutory acknowledgements can be incorporated into plans without further formality.

Further revision of second draft of HB Biodiversity Strategy by the Core Working Group following feedback from 10 April external Steering Group meeting.

Reports to 20 August Regional Planning Committee meeting proposed to cover:

a)  Resource management work programme update;

b)  NPSFM Progressive Implementation reporting 2013/14 period;

c)  Regional Planning Committee activity reporting 2013/14 period;

d)  Gap analysis of RCEP against 2010NZCPS;

e)  Overview of revised NPSFM and National Objectives Framework implications; and

f)   Options for oil and gas regional plan policy development and Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment’s report.


Strategic Development


Changes to the bus service to improve operational efficiency are confirmed and will commence on 1 September.

Draft Regional Public Transport Plan will include proposals for service improvements to be implemented as and when funding becomes available.  Expect release for public consultation in November.

Work continuing on preparation of the Regional Land Transport Plan, which sets out the region’s funding bid for all modes of transport for the six years from June 2015. Regional Transport Committee expected to confirm the strategic direction of the plan at the August meeting, along with key projects to put forward for funding. RTC will also confirm a submission on the draft Government Policy Statement 2015 released on 16 June.

Draft Regional Cycle Plan nearing completion and will be considered by the project governance group in mid August.


Asset Management & Biosecurity

Land Management
































Open Spaces



Papanui catchment group reaffirmed commitment to improve water quality and Land management team to facilitate a workshop in August for development of a strategy to achieve this.

Progressing development of a land management strategy to better align programmes and processes with Council objectives and proactively support implementation of Plan Change 6.

MPI expected to advise HBRC whether they will help fund the next 12 months ‘bridging’ period for re-establishing the Wairoa hill country initiative. A longer term proposal will be developed later in the year.

The Whakaki steering group will produce the first draft of a catchment MOU and the first draft of a Whakaki Lake Level Management Agreement.

Tukituki catchment - significant effort going into assisting landowners to use available tools to begin addressing N and P management and design effective Farm Environment Management Plans (FEMPs).

Development of agenda and support materials for a pan-sector meeting in early September around PC6 implementation.


Asset Management Plans for each of the Flood Control and Drainage Schemes will be progressed for adoption by Council later in 2014.

30 year infrastructure strategy (required by the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill) to be completed late 2014.


Contract for the construction of Central Hawke’s Bay pathways will be let for construction commencing early August.


A review of Council’s forestry portfolio being undertaken for report back to the September Corporate and Strategic Committee meeting.

A review of the Tangoio Soil Conservation Reserve Management Plan has been commenced, including consultation with a number of stakeholders.  Once the consultation complete the revised Plan will be brought to Council for consideration and adoption.


Decision Making Process

2.      Council is required to make a decision in accordance with Part 6 Sub-Part 1, of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements contained within this section of the Act in relation to this item and have concluded that as this report is for information only and no decision is required in terms of the Local Government Act’s provisions, the decision making procedures set out in the Act do not apply.



1.      That Council receives the Monthly Work Plan Looking Forward Through August 2014 report.





Mike Adye

Group Manager

Asset Management



Helen Codlin

Group Manager

Strategic Development



Paul Drury

Group Manager

Corporate Services



Iain Maxwell

Group Manager

Resource Management



Liz Lambert

Chief Executive




There are no attachments for this report.  


Wednesday 30 July 2014

SUBJECT: Minor Items Not on the Agenda


Reason for Report

This document has been prepared to assist Councillors note the Minor Items Not on the Agenda to be discussed as determined earlier in Agenda Item 6.



Councillor / Staff