Agenda of Corporate and Strategic Committee

	Agenda Item	Follow-up / Request	Person Responsible	Due Date	Status Comment
1	Follow-ups from previous meetings	Members’ Interests Declarations to be published on HBRC website	L Hooper	Immed	Register as confirmed at 30 July Regional Council meeting published
2	Public Transport update	Provide trend information relating to SuperGold Card trips and detail of Council’s cost per trip	A Redgrave	Immed	Information distributed to Councillors via email 17/7/14 (attached following)

Draft Significance and Engagement Policy

Attachment 2

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council
Significance and Engagement Policy

Purpose and Scope

Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC, Council or ‘we’) has developed this policy to:

1. Enable Council and our communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions and activities

2. Provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged in decisions made by Council

3. Inform Council from the beginning of a decision-making process about the extent, form and type of engagement required.

The Local Government Act 2002 (the Act) has consultation principles to guide HBRC when making decisions. With this in mind, HBRC commits to:

· Identify and assess options

· Place a value on benefits and costs

· Consider an appropriate level of detail

· Show evidence of how we comply with this Significance and Engagement Policy

· Provide processes to encourage and engage with Māori.

Process

On every issue requiring a decision, Council will consider the degree of significance and the most appropriate level of engagement.

HBRC will refer to the Criteria for significance to identify matters, issues or proposals that require a Council decision. Advice on significance and options will come from an HBRC officer or other professional. Council will consider and make decisions, taking into account the degree of significance of the issue and referring to the Criteria for engagement to identify the appropriate level and type of engagement.

Advice from HBRC officers normally comes through the Council-approved report format. This format specifically alerts elected members to significant impacts and engagement considerations.

Our general approach to significance

Significance means the degree of importance of the issue, proposal, decision, or matter, as assessed by the local authority, relating to its likely impact on and likely consequences for:

· The district or region

· Any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by or interested in the issue, proposal, decision or matter

· The achievement of, or means to achieve, HBRC’s stated levels of service as set out in the current Long Term Plan

· The capacity of HBRC to perform its role and carry out its activities, now and in the future

· The financial, resource and other costs of the decision, or that these are already included in an approved Long Term Plan.

Significant means that the issue, proposal, decision or other matter has a high degree of significance.

If the issue, proposal, decision or other matters concerned involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, Council will take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga.

When making decisions, Council will:

· Identify and assess as many options as are practical

· Evaluate the costs and benefits resulting from the decision/s to be made

· Provide detailed information, which will be accessible to the public

· Maintain clear and complete records showing how compliance with this Significance and Engagement Policy was achieved.

As part of the engagement process for the adoption of this policy, and subsequent reviews, Council will ask people in the region their engagement preferences and will review those preferences each three-year term.

Council will also take into account views already expressed in the community and make judgements on the level of support for those views, when determining the significance of a decision.

Criteria for significance

When looking at the significance of a matter, issue, decision or proposal, elected members will assess:

· The likely level of community interest

· The likely impact or consequences for affected individuals and groups in the region

· How much a decision or action promotes community outcomes or other Council priorities

· The impact on levels of service identified in the current Long Term Plan

· The impact on rates or debt levels

· The cost and financial implications of the decision to ratepayers

· The involvement of a strategic asset.

Strategic assets

Strategic assets are defined as ‘an asset or group of assets that the local authority needs to retain to maintain its capacity to achieve or promote any outcome that it determines to be important to the current or future well-being of the community.’

HBRC considers the following to be strategic assets:

· Napier Port

· Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme

· Upper Tukituki Catchment Control Scheme

· Tūtira Regional Park (excluding commercial forestry)

· Pekapeka Regional Park

· Pākōwhai Regional Park

· Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company Limited.

HBRC owns a number of assets that, managed as a whole, we consider them to be strategic. However not all trading decisions made regarding these assets are regarded as significant nor do they affect the asset’s strategic nature, i.e. the Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme is strategic, but small parcels of land that make it up may not be, and the purchase or sale of such parcels of land may not amount to a significant decision.

Our general approach to engagement

Engagement is a term used to describe the process of seeking information from the community to inform and assist decision-making. There is a spectrum of community involvement, and HBRC follows these general principles:

· We conduct our business in an open, transparent, democratically accountable manner

· We stay aware of, and have regard to, the views of all of our communities

· When making a decision, we consider: the diversity of the community and the community’s interests in its district or region; the interests of future as well as current communities; and the likely impact of any decision on these interests

· We provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to our decision-making processes.

HBRC seeks authentic engagement with our community and applies a Criteria for engagement. We acknowledge that “community” may be ‘communities of place’ or ‘communities of issue’ and will use appropriate tools and techniques to make meaningful and timely connections that result in feedback. Formal consultation is one of many approaches that can be used.

HBRC will prepare an Engagement Plan for each major decision or group of interrelated decisions. Decisions are not usually delegated to those involved in the engagement processes, however they are likely to be informed by community and stakeholder engagement.

An Engagement Plan will outline:

· Engagement objectives – the feedback that is sought from communities

· Timeframe and completion date

· Communities to be engaged with

· Engagement tools and techniques to be used

· Resources needed to complete the engagement

· Communication planning needed

· Basis of assessment and feedback to the communities involved

· Project team roles and responsibilities.

Engagement is not solely about providing information, is not always about reaching an agreement or consensus and is not always about negotiation. Engagement is not appropriate when outweighed by commercial sensitivity or when there is a threat to public health and safety.

Criteria for engagement

Community engagement is a process. It involves all or some of the public and is focused on decision-making or problem-solving. HBRC considers the significance of a decision to be made and uses a table of criteria to assess the approach we might take to engage the community.

In some circumstances HBRC is required to use the special consultative procedure, set out in section 83 of the Act and described in a separate section below.

Decisions will be “informed” as a minimum standard. Decisions of high significance will be at the very least informed to wider communities, and will use engagement tools and techniques beyond “inform” for affected communities.

While community and stakeholder engagement improves decision-making, it is not the sole input into a decision. There are a wide range of information sources and perspectives that will inform a council decision. All the input gathered is harnessed and collated to help make a ‘sustainable’ decision (i.e. unlikely to require re-visiting because it is well-informed and well-considered). Decisions made by Council may differ from the prevailing public opinion.

The level of engagement will be agreed on a case-by-case basis. The significance of the decision will guide the selection of appropriate engagement tools and techniques to be used. A low level of engagement does not mean that engagement is diminished, inappropriate or necessarily that a decision is of lesser significance. Time and money may limit what is possible on some occasions.

Engagement Spectrum^{^[1]} – our approach





Level	1. Inform	2. Consult	3. Involve	4. Collaborate	5. Empower

What it involves	*One-way communication* - to provide public with balanced, objective information to assist them in understanding problems, alternatives, opportunities and/ or solutions	*Two-way communication* - to obtain public feedback on analysis, alternatives and/ or decisions	*A participatory process* - to work with public through the process to ensure that public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered	Working together - to partner with public in each aspect of the decision including the development of alternatives and identifying the preferred solution	*Public empowerment* - to place final decision-making in public hands
Types of issues that we might use this for	-Report adoption -Algal bloom -Pest control -Access issue	-Annual Plan -Long Term Plan -Regional Land Transport Programme	-Flood & drain scheme review -Regional cycling plan	-Tukituki plan change -Taharua/ Mohaka plan change	-Election voting systems (MMP, STV or first past the post)
Tools Council might use	Website Media release Brochure/ flyer Public notice/s	Formal submissions & hearings, social media, email, focus groups, phone surveys, surveys, video	Workshops Focus groups Citizens panel	External working groups (involving community experts)	Binding referendum Local body elections (Special Consultative Procedure)
When the community can expect to be involved	Council will generally advise the community when a decision is made	Council will advise the community when a draft decision is made and generally provides the community with up to four (4) weeks to participate and respond	Council will generally provide the community with a greater lead-in time to allow the time to be involved in the process	Council will generally involve the community at the start to scope the issue, again after information has been collected and again when options are being considered	Council will generally provide the community with a greater lead-in time to allow them time to be involved in the process – typically a month or more

HBRC engages with communities in many ways, from face-to-face to meetings, forums and surveys. Preferences for community engagement are periodically evaluated through regional surveys^{^[2]}.

Special Consultative Procedure

In some cases, and under the Act, HBRC will use the special consultative procedure to issue a proposal. When that happens, the proposal will be open to the community to provide their views for at least a month. The process we will follow is to:

· Prepare and adopt a statement of proposal, and in some cases a summary of the statement of proposal which is:

o a fair representation of the statement of proposal

o in a form determined by HBRC, i.e. published online, in the newspaper and/ or in HBRC’s regional newsletter, so long as it is distributed as widely as reasonably practical

o indicated where it is available

o stated how long it is open for public submission

· Make publicly available:

o the statement of proposal

o a description of how people can present their views

o a statement of the period the proposal is open for comments

· Make the summary of proposal widely available

· Allow people to present their views to HBRC ensuring that they have a reasonable opportunity to do so and know how and when this opportunity will be available to them

· Allow people to present their views by audio link or audio-visual link, or as agreed.

HBRC may also request advice or comment from a Council officer or any other person.

Where HBRC is required to use the special consultative procedure as part of making or amending bylaws, the statement of proposal must include:

· A draft of the proposed bylaw, or the proposed amendment of the bylaw

· The reasons for the proposal

· A report on any determinations made under the Act on whether a bylaw is appropriate.

Where HBRC is required to or chooses to use the special consultative procedure, the statement of proposal is a draft of any plan, policy or similar document or in any other case a detailed statement of the proposal which must include:

· The reasons for the proposal

· An analysis of options

· Any other relevant information.

Review of this policy

This policy will be reviewed at least once every three years, when it will involve community engagement. It may also be amended from time to time.

Pre Long Term Plan Discussion Document

Attachment 1

Content for ‘The Big 6’ Strategic Priorities pre LTP consultation booklet.

Introductory Statement from the Chairman

Kia ora

Thanks for taking a look at this booklet and for your interest in the future of Hawke’s Bay.

We are on the road to updating our Long Term Plan, looking UP AND OUT so we don’t miss the opportunities for our region to connect, be resilient and prosper.

In these few pages we’re SHARING WITH YOU what we think are the six big priorities facing Hawke’s Bay. Please tell us whether we’re on the right track, and what you expect Council to do as a response to these priorities.

Don’t be concerned that all of Council’s activities are not mentioned in this booklet. We will continue to focus on activities tied to our land, water, air and coast but for the moment we are looking ‘up and out’.

Take a look through the next few pages, tell us what YOU THINK and give some comment on the questions we’ve asked. Are they the right priorities? Is our thinking on the right track?

We’re after your views, whether in a good old-fashioned letter, an email, through facebook or twitter. Talk to me, to your Councillor or staff. It’s all good conversation, and it helps us to get our PLANNING RIGHT.

Comments before 15 October will mean they can be considered in Council planning and our workshops in November, but as your representatives we are here to reflect your views at any time, so just give us a call.

Relationship with Maori

Hawke’s Bay is the rohe of Ngati Kahungunu iwi, the third largest tribe in New Zealand. There are about 70 marae in Hawke’s Bay, forming the hub of many Māori communities.

It is a time of significant change and uncertainty for Ngati Kahungunu iwi. While two treaty claims have been settled and five more are well underway, there will be a need to create new governance organisations after settlement. There will be new voices, new directions and new iwi organisations.

The establishment of new organisations will take time. In the meantime, there may be some uncertainty as to who has the mandate to speak on behalf of iwi, or collective groups of hapu.

HBRC engages with iwi, hapu and marae at various levels and will continue to do so.

The long-established Māori Committee comprises representatives of the four Taiwhenua organisations and provides advice to Council and makes recommendations on matters relevant to Māori people in the region.

The recently established Regional Planning Committee has equal representation of the Crown-recognised mandated groups and HBRC. This committee enables co-governance of natural resource management in Hawke’s Bay. This does not replace the need to consult with tangata whenua on the development of regional planning documents.

In other areas of HBRC’s activity, close relationships have been formed and are maintained with various hapu and marae.

HBRC is asking the iwi and hapu of Ngati Kahungunu what more can we do to better demonstrate its commitment to an enduring relationship with iwi, to help iwi express their full potential to grow and prosper, and to help iwi be involved in the planning and management of the region’s natural resources?

And we are asking the whole community how might HBRC help them understand the importance of this period for Hawke’s Bay iwi and hapu.

Hawke’s Bay’s Regional Economic Development

Hawke’s Bay is a small to medium sized economy and one of New Zealand’s key horticulture and viticulture regions. Home to 155,000 people, the region’s GDP per capita is $39,035 or $6.05b in total. Of our 16 regions, Hawke’s Bay is the 9^th largest, but it is worthwhile noting that the top 8 regions account for 88% of our national GDP.

Hawke’s Bay’s warm climate, plentiful water and rich soils have supported its primary production. It is widely predicted that we can expect increased climate volatility in the future. With the management of natural resources dominating our economy in the form of food and fibre production, value-adding processing, branding and tourism, it follows that our economy will face equal volatility in the years and decades ahead.

The potential for increased activity within the Māori economy is widely known, particularly in securing returns from land and sea assets. Might Wairoa be the next economic hub for Hawke’s Bay? Māori also make up 23% of our population and will account for the majority of the working age population growth over the next two decades. This presents both an opportunity and a challenge for our education and training systems.

Economic Development ultimately requires us to make choices about how we move forward. For Council, these choices invariably focus on long term regional-scale infrastructure initiatives, which in turn involve complex collaborations across commercial, community and regulatory stakeholders.

1. How does Hawke’s Bay best define economic development – what outcomes are sought, what are the time frames, and how will we measure success?

2. How should we support Māori economic development and tourism opportunities?

3. What is unique about our economy? Is there an opportunity to create, identify or highlight a regional point of difference that commands an enduring premium with our consumers?

4. Or should we concentrate our efforts on diversifying our economy? If so, what areas do we prioritise, Tourism? What industries or sectors don’t we have that we should get? What are the opportunities and threats arising from global economic trends?

Connecting our Region

The vibrancy and prosperity of Hawke’s Bay relies on good land, sea and air transport links as well as high quality telecommunication networks.

Telecommunication networks connects Hawke’s Bay to the world, they are the backbone of today’s and the future’s technology. Our people and businesses increasingly rely on these networks and it is essential that connectivity is fast and reliable. 71% of Hawke’s Bay households have access to the internet. Government’s UltraFast and Rural Broadband initiatives are aiming for 90% of businesses (in Hawke’s Bay or NZ) to be connected by 2015 and the remaining 10% by 2019.

Hawke’s Bay Airport offers a good frequency of flights to the main centres and other regions, and other flight services are available. However flights in and out of Hawke’s Bay are expensive for passengers.

Our coastal port is the fifth largest port in New Zealand and connects us to the global markets. Napier Port has a growing catchment area which is reliant on an efficient transport system to get its freight to and from the port. The Port predicts a cumulative growth of 50% in both imports and exports.

Road transport networks are well developed on the Heretaunga Plains and the Whakatu Arterial Link, and the Pākōwhai -Links Rd intersection improvements will enhance its efficiency for all users, especially for freight movement. We have good road and rail connections to the south through SH2 and SH50, and to the west SH5 provides a good road connection with the ability to carry the larger, longer trucks (High Productivity Vehicles) for improved freight movement. Funding for maintenance of rural roads which are important to rural communities and moving produce to processing plants may reduce if lower levels or service are set nationally, leaving local communities to pay for the balance if a higher level of service is desired.

Where transport connections are less secure are those with Wairoa and north to Gisborne-East Coast. This corridor is currently serviced only by road, as the rail line was mothballed eighteen months ago. However, heavy traffic on the route is predicted to increase due to forest harvesting over the next 10 to 15 years. Economic development, such as opportunities for tourism growth in Te Urewera National Park, and access to regional social services in the Wairoa District may be constrained without safe, resilient and efficient transport links.

Hawke’s Bay has a new-found status as a centre for safe recreational cycling. We can enjoy the network of off-road cycle trails, which link with parks, bike-friendly routes and services in Napier and Hastings cities. Local people are changing their commuting habits. Wairoa has added a pathway to the sea, while a new trail is connecting Waipawa and Waipukurau.

The frequency and coverage of public bus services around and between Hastings and Napier has significantly increased over the last five years and provides transport for people who are unable to use a car for whatever reason. There’s good growth in passenger numbers and we anticipate this to continue.

We’d appreciate your thoughts on communication and connectivity for our region –

· What role could the regional council take in improving telecommunication networks around the region and with the rest of New Zealand and the world?

· How could we make transport links between regions and cities as efficient and safe as possible?

· How could the reinstatement of the Napier – Gisborne rail line for freight reduce future traffic issues on State Highway 2, and what role should HBRC play in this?

Wise Land Use

Do you realise how important the top 30 centimetres of the earth’s surface is to our regional wellbeing? Our soils are the foundation of our regional economy, but only about 1% of Hawke’s Bay has high value, versatile soils and these are mainly on the Heretaunga Plains. Most of Hawke’s Bay (about 75%) is hilly or steep with some of the highest rates of soil erosion in New Zealand.

The challenge for Hawke’s Bay is to protect our soil quality and to maintain and improve our land’s productivity while reducing the environmental footprint. This is what we mean by ‘wise land use’.

The high value land of the Heretaunga Plains is now protected from inappropriate urban development through the Heretaunga Plains Urban Development Strategy and the Regional Policy Statement.

More intensive farming of the rolling hill country is made possible thanks to technological advances in irrigation, cultivation and cropping systems. But the soil running off our hilly and steep land, especially in intense rain storms, is a problem. The resulting sediment deteriorates the water quality and habitats in our streams, rivers and lakes right out to our coastal environments. Lost soil is lost productivity. It also means the loss of other benefits from soils, such as recycling nutrients and treating wastes, cleaning and storing water, locking in greenhouse gases and enabling biodiversity.

We need more than ‘band-aids’ on top of the traditional farming systems. Hawke’s Bay needs innovative farming systems using research and forward thinking entrepreneurs. Leaders from the primary industry sector, central and local government, iwi and land holders could work more closely together on solutions for wise land use in Hawke’s Bay and the wider East Coast.

Unlike water, land is a private resource and much of it is in private ownership. There are no National Policy Statements on land or land management, but the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management requires the integrated management of land and water for freshwater outcomes.

Until recently, HBRC’s approach to land management has focused on research and incentive programmes – helping those landowners who want to improve the way they use the land. The Tukituki Plan Change 6 indicates the shift to focussing attention onto ‘hot spot’ areas where land use practices are a significant cause of the poor state of the rivers and streams. HBRC will be prioritising funding and incentives in those areas, such as the Papanui sub-catchment flowing into the Tukituki River.

We believe that we need to pay much more attention to the way we use our land, as we have done for water over the last 25 years or so, so we’d like your views on -

· What more should be done to understand soil quality state and trends in Hawke’s Bay?

· What do you think should be done to protect soil quality and achieve wise land use in Hawke’s Bay?

· How can the development of innovative land use solutions on the farm be well-supported?

· What role is there for collective governance, particularly for finding resilient social, economic and environmental solutions to the challenges of the East Coast hill country?

Climate Change

In Hawke’s Bay, everyone will be impacted either directly or indirectly by climate change.

Human activity (such as industry, agriculture and transportation) is now well recognised as affecting our planet’s natural climate balance. Scientists warn that the expected impacts of climate change will include rising temperatures, rising sea levels, changing rainfall patterns and more storms, all of which increase the natural hazard risk for our communities and our primary production based economy.

Hawke’s Bay needs to be preparing for and adapting to the impact of these changes on our economy, environment, infrastructure and way of life, so we can minimise the risks and maximise the opportunities, increasing our resilience. But will adaptation be enough?

Many coastal communities will be affected by sea level rise. For some, there will be an increased risk of property being inundated by sea water during storms, while others will experience damage to their property by continual coastal erosion. What’s the adaptation strategy for Hawke’s Bay? For a start we’ll need to think about planning for how we use land in the future and options for protecting our property and infrastructure.

Changing rainfall patterns will increase the risks of the two extremes of flooding and drought. Flood protection schemes might no longer provide the level of protection they were designed to provide to the economic hub of the Heretaunga Plains, and the twin cities of Hastings and Napier. The Regional Council is already looking at increasing the level of protection against higher floods.

For the rural community, the increased risk of drought heightens the challenges that farmers are already facing in dealing with Hawke’s Bay’s natural climate variability. Careful use and management of land and fresh water resources should be actively pursued in all climate circumstances.

Many of HBRC’s activities are a response to climate change and aim to help our community to adapt. These include our role in civil defence and emergency management, land use planning to reduce natural hazard risk, the work on a coastal hazard management strategy for Te Awanga to Tangoio, land management research, water storage, and land and water management practices.

HBRC’s roles and responsibilities enable us to provide leadership to help both the urban and rural communities become resilient in the face of climate change as well as the natural variability of climatic events.

1. Is adaptation and resilience enough? Should we also focus on initiatives thought to slow the onset of climate change, such as seeking Regional Carbon Neutrality.

2. How else should HBRC help the community understand how climate change could impact their future, such as insurance consequences or health and disease implications?

Hawke’s Bay’s Energy Future

We cannot survive in today’s world without energy – we flick a switch or jump into our cars without really thinking where the energy to create the electricity or run the car’s engine comes from. We also need energy to grow our food and pump water. All these energy costs are rising.

Hawke’s Bay doesn’t have a comprehensive profile of the region’s current energy use or its future needs. In planning for the future, it would be useful to understand the environmental, economic and social issues that go with energy use and development. We also need to understand that there are global influences over which we have no control.

The potential for oil and gas development on the East Coast and public concern about fracking raises a bigger picture issue – what is the Energy Future for Hawke’s Bay?

Suppose Hawke’s Bay wished to declare ‘Energy Independence’ for the region, that is stating 100% of our region’s electricity and transport fuel requirements produced locally and/or from renewable sources. Ambitious maybe, but how might we start to contemplate such a goal? And what would the benefits or disadvantages be?

Hastings District Council’s proposal to convert methane to energy is an example of what can be done, but will these types of projects make a significant dent in our energy needs? Recent advances in solar energy technology appear to present a regional opportunity, but how much energy could we gain from solar or wind, and are there sufficient incentives within energy markets to encourage investment in this area?

HBRC thinks that developing an Energy Strategy might be one way of charting the path towards a desired Energy Future. We’d need to do some research and get your views on questions such as:

1. How might increasing energy costs affect the viability of our agriculture and horticulture sectors, as well as other Hawke’s Bay export businesses?

2. If oil and gas exploration and/or development goes ahead in Hawke’s Bay what extra information will we need? What additional measures would be needed to protect our water, environment and public health?

3. What investments or incentives might need to be established to help achieve a cleaner and more sustainable energy future?

4. What are the opportunities, other than conventional oil and gas, for producing fuel and/or electricity right here in Hawke’s Bay?

5. What does an ambitious energy conservation programme for Hawke’s Bay look like? In what energy-saving technologies might we excel or lead the way?

6. What values should drive our Energy Future – energy security, economic growth, sustainability, legacy to our children, reducing costs, the global ‘big picture’? What changes are people prepared to make in their lifestyle to achieve the desired Energy Future?

What do you think?

Top 10 Corporate Risks Assessment

Attachment 1

Risk Issue 1

Water Quality

Risk Statement

If Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) is not quickly and effectively addressing this issue, water quality in some waterways in Hawke’s Bay will decline or fall below acceptable standards.

Risk Status

The potential for water quality in the region’s water bodies to decline is real without ongoing proactive management by HBRC.

The public of Hawke’s Bay are increasingly concerned at the quality of water in the region’s rivers, and that there could be a decline in the quality of water in our key aquifers.

HBRC is required to give effect to the 2014 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management by 2025 (setting water quality limits). The 2014 NPSFM includes a National Objectives Framework to assist regional councils to set water quality limits and timeframe targets in regional plans.

HBRC has a major focus on this issue. HBRC Strategic Plan (Oct 2011) sets out the proposed programme of work and financial provision to undertake this is provided for in the Long Term Plan (LTP) 2012-22. An overview of the Resource Management Planning programme for the draft 2015-25 LTP suggests that significant additional funding will be required to meet the NPSFM and other legal requirements.

HBRC monitors water quality at a network of sites throughout the region and reports annually on trends through its State of the Environment report.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and Catchment based plan changes.	The Tukituki Plan change (Plan change 6) (PC 6) was adopted by Council on 24 April 2013 is the first of a number of catchment specific plan changes which HBRC is developing and will implement in accordance with the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. The Board of Inquiry decision released in June 2014 has been appealed on the basis that it does not give effect to the NPSFM from a water quality perspective. Two other catchment based plan development processes are underway (Taharua/Mohaka; Greater Heretaunga/Ahuriri)	Control can only be effective with effective implementation of PC 6. An implementation Plan for PC 6 has been adopted by Council for managing non-point source discharges from rural land users. A broader implementation plan is being developed but is unable to be finalised until the Board of Inquiry appeals have been resolved. Taharua/Mohaka Plan Change currently being developed will deal with land use impacts on water quality. The TANK collaborative project allows the many community views to be expressed and discussed prior to the development of a Plan change for the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro and Karamu catchments.
Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme (RWSS).	Project now being progressed by HBRIC. Resource consent application was considered through a Board of Inquiry process under the Environmental Protection Authority. The Board of Inquiry has released its decision, however this is being appealed. Investment partners and farmer uptake being actively pursued.	Subject to consent conditions imposed by Board of Inquiry and final decision to construct, however likely to be effective based on science.
HBRC Strategic Plan and Land and Water management Strategy.	Adopted by Council 2011.	Effective in communicating strategy and establishing basis for LTP work programmes and financial provisions.

Water quality continues to be a focus of HBRC. Provision for the following projects was included in the 2012/22 LTP. These projects have been developed to improve water quality over time in water bodies in HB.

• Hill Country Afforestation project (note: this has subsequently been postponed).

• Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme (RWSS)

• Improved focus for the Regional Landcare Scheme

• Catchment based Plan changes

Land Science is developing tools (models) to determine the critical source areas of sediment in streams. This allows the HBRC land management team to focus land owners on important areas to fence stock out of waterways and improve general farming practice. This is supported by subsidies available through the Regional Landcare Scheme. New rules will require this in some catchments (Tukituki). HBRC is progressing a plan to ensure all cattle are excluded from entering water from land owned or administered by HBRC as part of flood control and drainage schemes.

The Regional sector is progressing a conversation with owners of “Overseer” regarding its use for regulating nutrient budgeting through Regional Plan rules and policies.

Strategic objective

Council’s strategic objectives of proactive integrated management of land and water will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term of Council)

• HBRC Strategic Plan and Hawke’s Bay Land and Water Management Strategy continue to be implemented.

• RWSS and Tukituki Catchment Plan change continue to be progressed. An Implementation Plan for Plan Change 6 has been adopted by Council for managing non-point source discharges from rural land users.

• Ngaruroro water storage feasibility projects progressed, probably in 2015-16, as the RWSS financial close has been delayed until 30 March 2015.Resourcing and developing tools through research to ensure best ‘bang for buck’ for any on farm initiatives

• New science input continues to be targeted to sensitive catchments and risk areas.

• HBRC Water Initiatives Group continues to focus on water issues.

• Programme of Regional Plan changes and necessary resource requirements are being quantified for further consideration by Council as the LTP 2015-25 is developed.

• More holistic approach to HBRC involvement continues with primary productive sector being taken with objective of reducing impact of sector on water quality.

• Riparian fencing and planting continues to be targeted, incentivised and regulated through HBRC’s Regional Landcare Scheme and Fonterra’s Clean Streams Accord.

• The agreed programme for exclusion of cattle from entering water from remaining areas of land owned or administered by HBRC as part of flood control and drainage Schemes is being implementing.

Risk appetite

Council understands the importance of good water quality in the region’s water bodies, and will continue to seek improvements in water quality where they consider water quality is below a desired standard, or at risk of falling below that standard. Council however, also understands that this needs to be achieved while maintaining and growing the region’s economy. HBRC programmes in the draft Long Term Plan 2015/25 must include programmes designed to achieve the desired water quality in targeted HB water bodies.

What else could be done to reduce the residual risk?

It will take time to give effect to the NPSFM through catchment based changes to HBRC’s Regional Resource Management Plan. Consideration could be given to ‘limited scope’ plan changes if there was a significant risk of water quality degradation in the meantime.

Risk Issue 2

Water Quantity

Risk Statement

If HBRC is failing to appropriately manage the allocation of water such that security of water is provided with a fair balance between protection of environmental flows and adequate provision for irrigation, this could adversely impact on economic growth.

Risk Status

As for water quality, HBRC has recognised the need for ongoing proactive management of water quantity issues. HBRC has a major focus on this issue. HBRC Strategic Plan (Oct 2011) sets out the proposed programme of work. Financial provision to undertake this is provided for in the LTP 2012-22 and should be continued in the draft 2015-25 LTP.

The appropriate allocation of water is a balance between the needs of the public and the regional economy, including domestic users and irrigators, and the needs of the environment. This requires a robust understanding of environmental, agricultural and community needs. During Hawke’s Bay’s dry summers there can be insufficient water to provide for environmental needs of the river environment and for agricultural irrigation needs.

The map below shows that the Tukituki, Ngaruroro including the Karamu, Maraetotara and Pouhokio catchments are currently either fully or over allocated.

The RWSS has the potential to enable this issue to be addressed in the Tukituki catchment. If the project proceeds the RWSS will result in increased low flows in the Waipawa River and Tukituki River below its confluence with the Waipawa, and a secure water supply for agricultural irrigation on the Ruataniwha Plains.

Increased productivity resulting from irrigation will provide economic benefits to Hawke’s Bay Region. In the longer term, HBRC needs to have an effective framework for understanding the water resource and for the management of water allocation for all of the region’s catchments.

This is recognised as a National risk. The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management came into effect on 1 July 2011 to provide direction on the management of water quantity. This requires regional councils to set water allocation limits and minimum flows in regional plans. It also provides for the involvement of tangata whenua in freshwater planning and management.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and Catchment based plan changes.	The Tukituki Plan change (Plan change 6) (PC 6) finally adopted by Council on 24 April 2013 is the first of a number of catchment specific plan changes which HBRC is implementing in accordance with the National Policy Statement for freshwater management	Control can only be effective with effective implementation of PC 6. A broad implementation Plan for PC 6 is being developed but is unable to be finalised. The TANK collaborative project allows the many community views to be expressed and discussed prior to the development of a Plan change for the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro and Karamu catchments.
RWSS	Project now being progressed by HBRIC. Resource consents granted by Board of Inquiry with appeals relating to land use and water quality conditions only. Investment partners and farmer uptake being actively pursued.	If conditions set by Council are met and the project proceeds, it will provide additional water security to existing and new users.
HBRC Strategic Plan and Land and Water management Strategy.	Adopted by Council 2011	Effective in communicating strategy and establishing basis for LTP work programmes and financial provisions.

HBRC strategic objective

Council’s strategic objective of optimisation of water supply and demand, and ecosystem needs for sustainable growth will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term of Council)

• HBRC Strategic Plan and Hawke’s Bay Land and Water Management Strategy continue to be implemented.

• RWSS and Tukituki Catchment Plan change (Plan change 6) continue to be progressed.

• Ngaruroro water storage feasibility projects on hold pending possible on-farm economic study .

• Science input continues to be appropriately targeted to sensitive catchments and risk areas including a review of minimum river flows and allocation limits for ground water and surface water on a targeted catchment basis as well as the development of sophisticated modelling tools to inform future policy discussions.

• Water Initiatives Group continues to focus on water issues.

• Programme of Regional Plan changes to meet HBRC obligations associated with NPSs is being developed for consideration by Council as part of the development of the draft LTP 2015-25.

TANK process is progressing.

Risk appetite

Council understands the importance of a robust knowledge of the region’s water resources and the need for a fair allocation process providing for allocating water for irrigation or other commercial purposes while maintaining appropriate flows in water bodies for environmental purposes.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

A robust understanding of the water resource throughout Hawke’s Bay and appropriate plan changes need to be completed and implemented to provide a management regime within which water can be confidently allocated.

Risk Issue 3

The productive capacity of soil

Statement

If HBRC is not effectively managing the land use and soil, there is the potential for inappropriate land use to adversely impact on water quality in the region’s rivers and reduce the land’s productive capacity.

Risk Status

Improving and sustaining the productive capacity of the region’s soils and managing the potential impact of land use activities on the land, on water quality and quantity, are recognised. HBRC Strategic Plan (Oct 2011) sets out the proposed programme of work and financial provision to undertake this is provided for in the LTP 2012/22 and should be continued in the draft 2015/25 LTP.

The Regional Landcare Scheme has been utilised by farmers to retain their soils and enhance their farm environments for over 15 years, however the benefit of this initiative is spread widely across the region and has not had the benefit of catchment specific research to target the investment. Erosion of hill country continues throughout the region with major impacts in severe storm events. Planting blocks of high unique manuka factor (UMF) manuka is being assessed as an alternative crop with the potential to reduce erosion on steep erodible hill country while providing a financial return to land owners. This opportunity will be fully assessed through the HBRC trial at Tutira in 2018.

Intensive land use, and particularly dairying, is widely blamed for adversely impacting on water quality in rivers throughout New Zealand. There is evidence of this in parts of Hawke’s Bay (HBRC state of the environment monitoring and reporting). The region however, has a broader challenge of managing sediment on the landscape through targeted and fit for purpose actions to prevent the large volumes of deposited sediment entering our waterways and impacting ecological health. Regional councils are expected by the public to be proactive in managing these impacts.

HBRC is required to give effect to the 2014 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management by 2025 (integrated land and water management).

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and Catchment based plan changes.	The Tukituki Plan change (Plan change 6) (PC 6) adopted by Council on 27 Feb 2013 is the first of a number of catchment specific plan changes which HBRC is implementing in accordance with the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management.	Control can only be effective with effective implementation of PC 6. An implementation plan for Plan Change 6 has been adopted by Council. The TANK collaborative project allows the many community views to be expressed and discussed prior to the development of a Plan change for the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro and Karamu catchments.
HBRC Strategic Plan and Land and Water management Strategy.	Adopted by Council 2011.	Effective in communicating strategy and establishing basis for LTP work programmes and financial provisions.
Land Science	Active and increasingly higher profile team focused on tool development for land based issues	Effective in developing tools, but is challenged through the scale of demands before it and relatively low resourcing.
Regional Landcare Scheme (RLS).	Ongoing commitment to RLS signalled in Council LTP 2012/22. Improved focus on RLS to provide for initiatives to reduce P and N entering waterways – key initial target areas are Taharua catchment and Ruataniwha Plains.	Effective in encouraging land owners to undertake soil conservation and environmental enhancement initiatives on their land.
Land Management Operational Plan 2014/15.	Adopted by Council August 2014.	This plan sets out the programme of work for the HBRC land management team for the 2014/15 financial year. A significant focus of the teams work is to mitigate this risk.
High UMF Manuka trial.	Approx. 140ha planted at Tutira Regional Park (5ha 2011; 40ha 2012; 95ha 2013). Trial continues to be monitored. The potential for the trial will be fully assessed in 2018.	Has potential to provide alternative land use for steep erodible hill country.
Ongoing collaborative research programme.	HBRC has supported an increased focus on precision agriculture for the arable sector over the past several years. The Huatokitoki project, funded by HBRC, Sustainable Farming Fund, Landcorp and Hatuma researched ways to improve farm environmental and economic performance. Drylands East Coast project to test and develop novel technologies for more resilient pasture is in progress funded by Beef and Lamb NZ, HBRC and Sustainable Farming Fund.	Projects such as these will continue to be supported where relevant and the science outcomes disseminated.

In addition the following have been initiated to reduce this risk:

• Taharua and Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro, Karamu (TANK) Catchment Plan changes are progressing, with the long term plan to undertake further catchment based plan changes.

• The pan-sector primary industry sector group has been established to provide an effective focus group with which to discuss options and approaches for mitigation, and to gain industry support in promoting those approaches.

HBRC strategic objective

Council’s strategic objective of more viable and resilient farming systems in the region through sustainable land use will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated.

Risk Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term of Council)

• Sednet modelling to examine critical source areas of sediment reaching waterbodies. Broader science input continues to be targeted to sensitive catchments and risk areas

• The Land Management team and its programmes continue to focus on increasing capability of influencing uptake on good practice farming and reducing impact of land use on water quality.

• Strong relationship maintained with primary productive sector industry groups and groups of farmers to encourage the use of best practice.

• The Papanui Catchment Group continues to be committed to improved water quality through on farm management practice changes, this uses an adaptive management approach with standards agreed with community. This is a pilot project which will be replicated in other catchments in the future.

• The Regional Landcare scheme continues to support the HBRC approach.

• Soil mapping of Papanui catchment as a pilot catchment completed.

Risk appetite

HBRC understands to importance of maintaining the productive capacity of the region’s soils in a sustainable manner, however understands that to fully address this issue is a significant task. HBRC does however ensure that cost effective programmes are resourced to work towards this objective.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

Continue to resource cost effective work programmes.

Risk Issue 4

Regional Council functions

Risk Statement

Local government reform could result in significantly reduced commitment to Regional Council functions.

Risk Status

The value to the region of an organisation such as HBRC focussing on long term sustainable management of the region’s resources is not well understood by the public. The risk of the loss of this focus and commitment through local government reform is real.

Local government reform in Hawke’s Bay is currently being considered by the Local Government Commission.

The current focus of HBRC is on

• Natural resource knowledge and management

• Natural hazard assessment and management

• Regional strategic planning

• Regional scale infrastructure and services

• Regional economic development and services

This focus may not be as strong under a structure which may result from possible reforms in HB, which in turn may increase the likelihood of a number of the risks faced by HBRC.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Continued advocacy for a focus to remain on functions currently undertaken by regional councils and particularly HBRC.	Draft Proposal from Local Government Commission for local authority reorganisation in Hawke’s Bay recommends a unitary authority.	HBRC has lodged a submission on the Draft Reorganisation that advocates for a focus on regional council functions.

HBRC strategic objective

HBRC retains its focus on delivering to the community in the areas aligned with natural resource knowledge and management, natural hazard assessment and management, regional strategic planning, regional economic development and the provision of regional scale infrastructure and services.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (current term of Council)

• Regional Planning Committee with equal representation of Treaty Claimant Groups reinforcing the resource management role of HBRC has a regular forward meeting timetable.

• A shared hazard information web-based portal as endorsed by CDEM Joint Committee has the potential for future content covering other local government activities.

• Substantial improvement across regional council sector in collaboration and coordination.

• “Nature Central” a collaboration between Department of Conservation, Horizons Regional Council, Greater Wellington Regional Council and HBRC focussing on the sharing of services and expertise in the areas of natural resource management, community engagement, open spaces and biosecurity has identified a number of opportunities for efficiency gains.

Risk appetite

HBRC has a clear focus on:

· Natural resource knowledge and management

· Natural hazard assessment and management

· Regional strategic planning

· Regional scale infrastructure and services

· Regional Economic Development

HBRC understands the importance of these issues for Hawke’s Bay and wishes to ensure that the importance of these issues to the public of Hawke’s Bay is not diminished by any reorganisation of local government in Hawke’s Bay.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

• HBRC could develop a position paper setting out regional council functions to enable engagement with a transition board should amalgamation occur.

Risk Issue 5

Co- Governance of Natural Resources

Risk Statement

If effective working relationships are not developed and maintained with Hawke’s Bay Treaty of Waitangi settlement groups or with other Iwi organisations this could potentially lead to fragmentation of governance of natural resources regionally.

Risk Status

HBRC continues to develop robust relationships with Māori groups and is working collaboratively towards their increased influence in HBRC decision making.

Constructive and effective working relationships with Treaty Settlement groups in particular and with Maori in general are enabling HBRC to more confidently progress its programmes of work. New groups will establish post settlement and new relationships will have to be formed both between iwi entities and between iwi and HBRC.

A Bill to establish the Regional Planning Committee has commenced its Parliamentary process. The Act once legislated will provide the ongoing certainty sought by the Treaty claimant groups for cultural redress through co-governance of natural resources.

HBRC and Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Inc (NKII) have committed to establishing a formal relationship at a governance level.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Establishment of the Regional Planning Committee.	Established and operating effectively.	Provides a formal forum for effective Maori input into HBRC policy making.
Proactive involvement in Treaty Settlement negotiations with individual claimant groups	Ongoing.	Effective in developing strong working relationship between HBRC and Ngati Pahauwera and Mangaharuru – Tangitu as they have worked through their Treaty negotiations. HBRC continue to work with these and other groups as they progress their negotiations.
Ongoing liaison and relationship building by staff with individual hapu on issues that affect, or have the potential to affect those hapu.	Ongoing.	Staff deal with individual hapu on numerous issues. Staff aim to develop strong long term relationships with hapu in order to inform them of the role of HBRC and to give them a point of contact within the organisation through which to raise issues. Over time Maori understanding of HBRC role has improved as have relationships.
Establishment of a relationship agreement between NKII & HBRC.	Ongoing.	Still in early stages.

HBRC strategic objective

Council’s strategic objective of mutually dependent relationships created that will endure over the long term and, in so doing, deliver outcomes that better achieve HBRC’s vision and purpose will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated. HBRC wants to increase the scale, speed, efficiency and positive impact of HBRC on the sustainable development of the region.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term of Council)

• Regional Planning Committee continues to undertake HBRC’s statutory resource management functions, with equal representation of Councillors & Treaty Claimant representatives.

• HBRC holds central government funding to work on an agreed programme with Ngati Pahauwera around the management of the rivers in their rohe.

• National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management came into effect on 1 July 2011 and was recently amended in 2014. It provides for the involvement of tangata whenua in freshwater planning and management and this will be undertaken primarily, but not solely, through the Regional Planning Committee.

• Discussions are progressing with Maungaharuru Tangitu Trust (the post settlement organisation) to effectively utilise the surplus money earned from the Tangoio Soil Conservation Reserve for environmental enhancement work within the Esk, Te Ngarue, Waipatiki and Arapawanui catchments.

Risk appetite

HBRC wishes to maintain and grow robust relationships with Maori in Hawke’s Bay. HBRC acknowledges the significant opportunity that exists for Hawke’s Bay as Treaty Settlements. HBRC does not wish to have a fragmented approach to the management of natural resources in Hawke’s Bay.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

• Work with NKII, the HBRC Māori Committee and the Regional Planning Committee to clarify roles and responsibilities for each of these groups.

Risk Issue 6

Investment Portfolio

Risk Statement

If HBRC’s investment portfolio is not effectively managed both long term financial returns and economic development in the Hawke’s Bay Region will not be maximised.

Risk Status

With the establishment of the Hawke’s Bay Regional Investment Company (HBRIC Ltd), this risk has an effective governance and management framework for its mitigation.

HBRC’s investment portfolio is set out below. Some of the investments are managed through HBRIC and some through HBRC.

Investment

Owner

Approx. Value 30 June 2014

Port of Napier

RWSS

Forestry

Lease hold land

Bank deposits (Investment only)

HBRIC

HBRC

$177 million

$14 million by financial close

$3.5 million

$57.4 million

$70.0 million

HBRC holds a portfolio of approximately $318m of investment assets. These include leasehold land in Napier and Wellington, cash reserves, and HBRIC Ltd [which holds the shares in Port of Napier Limited (PONL)]. HBRC’s strategy is to invest in regional scale infrastructure and assets to deliver sustainable regional growth.

HBRC is reliant on income from investments to meet operational costs. There will be a period of several years while HBRC transfers from traditional investments to new investments aligned to its investment strategy of increased investment returns in those areas that will be of direct benefit to growing the Hawke’s Bay GDP.

During this period there needs to be careful management of investment returns and cash flows. The risk to HBRC cash flows arises with the long development phase of large projects such as the RWSS.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Establishment of Hawke’s Bay Investment Company.	Established and operating under agreed governance structure.	HBRC’s major investments are being managed through HBRIC Board which is made up of independent professional directors. It may be that Council should seek a greater understanding of the risks associated with all of its investments.
RWSS.	Project under the control and management of HBRIC. Project now subject to Board of Inquiry EPA process. The BOI decision is currently under appeal.	Project is in its development phase. Financial close now delayed until 31 March 2015.
Sale of residual cash flows from the Napier leasehold portfolio.	Cash Flows now sold.	Investment held by HBRC as bank deposits.

HBRC Strategic Objective

Council’s strategic objective to better utilise the HBRC investment portfolio to encourage economic growth in Hawke’s Bay and use the return on these investments as the primary funding sources for new investments will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term in Council)

• RWSS project is being progressed. In June 2014 Council agreed to invest up to $80M in the project subject to specific conditions being met.

• Trial area of high UMF manuka being monitored.

Risk appetite

HBRC wishes to better utilise the HBRC investment portfolio to encourage economic growth in Hawke’s Bay and use the return on these investments as the primary funding sources for new investments. To do this HBRC needs to ensure that the risk of ownership of any of its existing assets are well understood and appropriately mitigated. HBRC needs to determine what financial risk it is willing to be exposed to when investing in projects which may bring significant economic benefits to Hawke’s Bay.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

Ensure that appropriate systems and procedures are in place to effectively monitor the management of HBRC owned assets and specifically request HBRIC to better define the risks associated with the assets under its control.

Continue to consider assets on the Councils books that might benefit from being located in a tax efficient structure as per HBRIC Ltd especially where there is development risk.

Periodically review the balance of assets across its entire portfolio both in respect of risk and regional costs/benefits.

Risk Issue 7

Ruataniwha Water Storage Scheme

Risk Statement

There is potential for adverse economic and environmental benefits to Hawke’s Bay if the RWSS does not proceed, or if it does proceed but fails to perform as expected.

Risk Status

Financial risks associated with this project are mitigated through its governance under HBRIC Ltd.

Ongoing risks include;

· Risk of resource consent conditions being untenable

· HBRIC are unable to secure contractual commitment for 40 M m³ of water

· Investors are not attracted to fund the project.

· A contract for construction of the project which adequately addresses construction risks is not secured.

The project is being assessed for resource consents through a board of inquiry under the EPA process. This process is considered to be transparent and provide certainty. While the Board has now made its decision, this is currently under appeal.

If this project does not proceed, HBRC will need to consider writing off the expenditure incurred on feasibility studies etc.

The project has provided significant value through a greater understanding of the importance of water to Hawke’s Bay and strategies to manage potential impact of intensive land use on water quality in the region’s water bodies.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	Status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Consent, final design and construction phase be managed and funded through governance and organisation independent of HBRC.	HBRIC established and project being managed through this organisation. HBRC agreed to invest up to $80M in the project in June 2014.	HBRC agreed to invest subject to: · Risk of resource consent conditions being untenable · HBRIC are unable to secure contractual commitment for 40 M m3 of water · Investors are not attracted to fund the project. · A contract for construction of the project which adequately addresses construction risks is not secured.
Communication plan in place to manage dissemination of decisions made regarding future of project.	Plan in place. Key milestones for decision making on the project are: · Decision of appeals to the Board of Enquiry · Final decision by HBRIC on whether project should proceed to construction	Project is progressing with regular reports back to HBRC.
Robust feasibility study and supporting reports.	All potential impacts of the project, (including damming of the Makaroro River and intensification of land use as a result of irrigation) identified and addressed. Financial advice to assess commercial feasibility in detail has formed part of feasibility study.	Council appointed Deloittes to complete an independent assessment of the RWSS business case.

HBRC Strategic Objective

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term in Council)

HBRC agreed to invest up to $80M in the project subject to specific conditions being met.

The Board of Inquiry completed its hearing and issued its final decision. This decision is now under appeal. HBRC is a party to the appeal.

Risk appetite

HBRC wishes to better utilise the HBRC investment portfolio to encourage economic growth in Hawke’s Bay and use the return on these investments as the primary funding sources for new investments. To do this HBRC needs to identify, investigate and progress opportunities. This may include significant projects such as RWSS. HBRC needs to determine what financial risk it is willing to be exposed to when investigating projects which may bring significant economic benefits to Hawke’s Bay.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

Continue to monitor the project as it progresses towards financial close.

Risk Issue 8

Natural Disaster, Biosecurity & Human Health Risks

Risk Statement

A major natural disaster, biosecurity or human health event will have a significant impact on the Hawke’s Bay region and HBRC activities.

Risk Status

HBRC is limited in its ability to influence an improvement in resilience of the Hawke’s Bay community to natural hazards biosecurity or human health risks through the Regional Policy Statement. However as a member and administrating authority of the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergence Management Group (HBCDEMG), HBRC is responsible with the four territorial local authorities (TLAs) to deliver comprehensive emergency management outcomes to the Hawke’s Bay community.

Specific land use zoning decisions are made by the region’s TLAs. HBRC in conjunction with the HBCDEMG will advocate for appropriate risk analysis and response by TLA’s in making these decisions. HBRC staff continue to work at a national level to seek ways to encourage better interpretation of hazard information and risk mitigation approaches through holistic planning. HBRC also work closely with Ministry of Primary Industries to understand how they will wish to utilise regional resources should there be a major biosecurity event in HB.

HBRC staff involvement in a biosecurity or human health event will mean that a number of work programmes set out in the annual plan or LTP will be delayed. The impact of a human health event on HBRC staff capacity may also adversely affect work programmes.

HBRC is the administering authority for Hawke’s Bay CDEM Group. HBRC are proactive in seeking to improve resourcing of CDEM in HB. The recent capability assessment by the Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Management identified a number of issues which the Group has started to address through the implementation of the recently reviewed Group Plan. Some new or enhanced initiatives have been identified to achieve the responsibilities of the Group and some thought will now need to be given to how these are funded.

The Hawke’s Bay region is at risk from flooding, earthquake, tsunami, coastal erosion and inundation and volcanic ash fall. The Heretaunga and Ruataniwha Plains are protected from flooding from the major rivers running through them by stopbanks with a 1% annual exceedance probability (100 year return period) design capacity. This level of service is predicted to reduce over time as a result of climate change. A number of reviews are in progress for the Region’s flood control Schemes to mitigate increased flood risk due to climate change.

HBRC has an ongoing programme of natural hazard research with new information communicated to the region’s territorial local authorities, emergency response organisations and engineering lifelines providers.

Major events, including severe flooding and earthquake have impacted on the region in the past and will again in the future.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Maintenance of an incident response structure and procedures which activates with the threat from any significant natural hazard, biosecurity or human health event.	Ongoing.	Numerous events and potential events are effectively and efficiently managed annually.
The CDEM Group, a joint committee including mayors of each of the region’s TLAs and chair of HBRC is facilitated by HBRC. HB CDEM Group resource includes a dedicated group controller.	Ongoing.	While the maintenance of a CDEM Group is required by legislation, the region has increased the resource dedicated to CDEM activity. This has resulted in greater preparedness of the region, however there is still room for improvement in terms of better coordination and working more closely together.
Insurance to assist in meeting repair costs of infrastructure assets is in place.		HBRC have a tiered approach to covering the financial risk associated with the potential impact of a disaster on its infrastructure assets.
An ongoing programme of natural hazards research maintains knowledge of natural hazards with the potential to impact HB up to date.	Ongoing based on a research strategy adopted by the CDEM Group. This strategy is reviewed every 3 to 5 years.	HB is recognised nationally as proactive in hazard research and leading in terms of integrating hazard research with CDEM objectives. As a result HBRC able to encourage researchers and attract funding to undertake specific research projects in HB.

HBRC strategic objective

Council’s strategic objective for people and businesses feeling safe and willing to invest in Hawke’s Bay will be progressed if this risk is effectively mitigated. The community is informed about the risks and satisfied with the level of protection provided through both planning and physical protection works.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term in Council)

• Ongoing natural hazards and coastal hazard research and is recognised nationally as proactive

• A review of the HB CDEM Plan has been completed.

• As a result a structure and resourcing review is currently underway to enable the objectives of this plan to be achieved.

• HBRC staff are involved in a number of national and local initiatives associated with natural hazards readiness, reduction and response planning.

• Staff facilitate regular meetings with the HB planning group (including TLA and RC planners) to ensure common and thorough understanding of hazards and a common approach for risk reduction through planning mechanisms.

• HBRC has a business continuance plan setting out how it will continue to do its business if staff are unable to access the office. The plan is regularly updated.

• HBRC is working with Napier City and Hastings District Councils on the development of a Strategy for the Coast between Clifton and Tangoio.

HBRC has consulted on proposal to increase the level of protection provided by the Heretaunga Plains Scheme – Rivers to the Heretaunga Plains from the current 1% Annual Exceedance probability (AEP) standard to a

0.2% AEP standard, and committed in its LTP to that project commencing in 2015/16.

Risk appetite

HBRC understands that there are significant risks to the Hawke’s Bay environment, community and economy from a major natural hazard, environmental or biosecurity event. HBRC acknowledges that when such an event occurs the impact has the potential to be severe. HBRC will however continue to focus significant resource into assisting the public understand these risks and where practical increasing the communities resilience to such an event.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

Continue to improve external organisations’ and the public understanding of the risks to which HB is exposed to and what actions they need to take to be more resilient.

Risk Issue 9

HBRC planning framework and its flexibility to adapt to new technology

Risk Statement

The impacts of new technologies with the potential to be used in Hawke’s Bay are unable to be effectively managed as they were not foreseen in the development of Regional Plans and/or policies.

Risk Status

New technologies will continue to be developed that challenge established resource management approaches.

There is uncertainty around allocation of responsibilities between central and local government for regulatory management of some new technologies

HBRC Plans may not be sufficiently flexible to enable an effective response to environmental, economic, social and cultural risks arising from new technologies. These include hydraulic fracturing and genetically modified organisms

• A report has been prepared by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment on the oil and gas industry, its risks and regulation, including the use of Hydraulic Fracturing.

• Ministry for the Environment have produced a guideline for Local Government (Managing Environmental Effects of Onshore Petroleum Development Activities (including Hydraulic Fracturing))

• Potential environmental risks arising from the petroleum industry generally and the use of hydraulic fracturing specifically have been investigated through:

o Participation in working groups coordinated by the regional sector, MfE, MPI and MBIE

o Working closely with other regional councils and Ministries, developing guidance, sharing experiences and best practise options.

o Investigating approaches taken to regulate the activity internationally.

• Potential environmental and economic risks from genetically modified organisms are addressed under Environmental Risk Management Agency legislation. The potential advantage to the Hawke’s Bay economy of remaining GE free was raised in submissions on HBRC draft LTP 2012/22.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Maintenance of a watching brief on new technologies that could be used in Hawke’s Bay, including out to the 12 nautical mile limit offshore which is within the HBRC area of jurisdiction.	Ongoing.	HBRC supports central government’s proposals for legislative amendments that: o Further simplify and streamline preparation and amendments of regional plans and policy statements under the RMA. o Consolidate regulatory intervention via national planning instruments (such as Regulations and/or National Environmental Standards) for effects of activities (including emerging activities) where appropriate. These changes will enable HBRC to be more responsive to new technologies.
Active participation in discussions and national working groups to develop stronger and more coordinated regulatory frameworks for the petroleum industry	Ongoing	Have been active in the development of the MfE guidelines and more recently engaged in the development of guidelines for land farming (led jointly by MfE and MPI)

Mitigation measure

status

Self-Assessment of effectiveness

Maintenance of a watching brief on new technologies that could be used in Hawke’s Bay, including out to the 12 nautical mile limit offshore which is within the HBRC area of jurisdiction.

Ongoing.

HBRC supports central government’s proposals for legislative amendments that:

o Further simplify and streamline preparation and amendments of regional plans and policy statements under the RMA.

o Consolidate regulatory intervention via national planning instruments (such as Regulations and/or National Environmental Standards) for effects of activities (including emerging activities) where appropriate.

These changes will enable HBRC to be more responsive to new technologies.

Active participation in discussions and national working groups to develop stronger and more coordinated regulatory frameworks for the petroleum industry

Ongoing

Have been active in the development of the MfE guidelines and more recently engaged in the development of guidelines for land farming (led jointly by MfE and MPI)

HBRC Strategic objective

HBRC strategies and plans are providing a strategic framework for natural resource and hazard management and regional scale infrastructure, and are therefore ahead of trends.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term in Council)

• The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment has completed and published a report on Drilling for Oil and Gas in New Zealand. HBRC are considering the implications with regards to its Resource Management Plans.

• Funding provision made in 2014-15 for the commencement of an Oil and Gas Plan Change

• The Parliamentary Commissioner invited to talk to Council (not available until early 2015)

HBRC joined with Hastings District Council to host a public forum in October 2012 covering a proposition that Hawke's Bay be ‘GE Free’.

Risk appetite

HBRC understands

· That new technologies will continue to evolve and individuals or organisations will wish to utilise them in Hawke’s Bay.

· That the public of Hawke’s Bay may hold a range of views on the appropriateness of these new technologies in today’s society and how their use may adversely impact their lifestyle or the environment.

· That the public of Hawke’s Bay will have an expectation that an organisation such as HBRC will have appropriate policy and planning provisions in place to manage the potential and/or perceived adverse effects of such technology.

· That the legislation under which HBRC operates requires HBRC to have fully and professionally assessed such technology and worked through a prescribed process involving significant public input to determine an appropriate policy for the management or regulation of it.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

Continue to maintain strong links to central and regional government who may have processes that are dealing with such issues, and continue to advocate for appropriate ways to streamline planning processes under which such technologies can be managed or regulated.

Risk Issue 10

Operational Risks

Risk statement

Financial, health and safety, contractual, and other operational risks are not effectively managed and controlled.

Risk Status

Operational risks are managed through established protocols, procedures and processes. These must be reviewed, and where appropriate improved, to ensure operational risks continue to be effectively mitigated.

HBRC is exposed to numerous financial, health and safety, contractual and other operational risks associated with the delivery of its functions.

Risk Mitigation – Key controls

Mitigation measure	status	Self-Assessment of effectiveness
Implementation of numerous controls and systems for management of operational risks. These include: • Established corporate structure with clear responsibilities, established levels of expertise and experience, and performance expectations, including for emergency response situations. • Financial – levels of financial delegation, regular and transparent financial management reporting, and annual audits. • Health and Safety – Codes of practice for activities commonly undertaken by staff, the provision and use of appropriate personal safety gear, an active Health and safety committee. • Adequate budget provision to enable an appropriate level of expertise, review and peer review for projects and activities.	Ongoing Performance monitored through established management systems. A number of practices are in place to manage financial risks. HBRC are audited by Audit NZ annually. Tertiary level of WSMP in place. Internal H&S Committees are active covering organisations activities. Staff with relevant qualifications, expertise and experience employed. External input commissioned where appropriate.	Effective ongoing management of operational risks essential. While internal systems for the management of operational risks are in place, the Office of the Auditor General is suggesting that Council should have greater involvement in the management of organisational operational risks. Council may wish to consider the establishment of a audit and risk committee.

Mitigation measure

status

Self-Assessment of effectiveness

Implementation of numerous controls and systems for management of operational risks.

These include:

• Established corporate structure with clear responsibilities, established levels of expertise and experience, and performance expectations, including for emergency response situations.

• Financial – levels of financial delegation, regular and transparent financial management reporting, and annual audits.

• Health and Safety – Codes of practice for activities commonly undertaken by staff, the provision and use of appropriate personal safety gear, an active Health and safety committee.

• Adequate budget provision to enable an appropriate level of expertise, review and peer review for projects and activities.

Ongoing

Performance monitored through established management systems.

A number of practices are in place to manage financial risks. HBRC are audited by Audit NZ annually.

Tertiary level of WSMP in place. Internal H&S Committees are active covering organisations activities.

Staff with relevant qualifications, expertise and experience employed. External input commissioned where appropriate.

Effective ongoing management of operational risks essential.

While internal systems for the management of operational risks are in place, the Office of the Auditor General is suggesting that Council should have greater involvement in the management of organisational operational risks. Council may wish to consider the establishment of a audit and risk committee.

HBRC Strategic Objective

A responsive organisation that meets changing needs in a timely manner and delivers on organisational needs efficiently.

Mitigation actions completed since October 2013 (this term in Council)

• Tertiary level of WSMP maintained.

• Draft 2013/14 Annual report adopted for audit in August 2014.

Risk appetite

HBRC understands that there are many risks associated with the activities of the organisation that must be managed. HBRC wishes to ensure that operational risks for the organisation are effectively managed.

What else needs to be done to reduce the residual risk?

HBRC should consider whether they wish to establish and Audit and Risk Committee.

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Corporate and Strategic Committee

Wednesday 10 September 2014

SUBJECT: Human Resources Update

Reason for Report

1. This agenda item is to provide Council with a brief overview of the key human resource metrics recorded for the year 1 July 2013 to 1 July 2014.

Key Metrics

Staff Numbers (Previous year in brackets)

2. As at 1 July 2014 172.22 FTE (176.25 FTE). Made up of:

2.1 Dalton Street (including Wairoa and Waipawa offices) - 144.21 (146.25) FTE

2.2 Works Group (Taradale and Waipukurau) - 28.01 (30) FTE.

3. Staff turnover for the year ending 30 June 2014 was 9.7% (2013 – 9%). A total of 18 staff left during the year including 3 retirements (excludes 1 staff on parental leave). Seven staff achieved career development through internal promotions into new roles within Council – a very positive result for Council.

4. The level of staff turnover continues at an acceptable level and compares favourably to the national average for equivalent local government entities as assessed against data provided by the Lawson Williams/HRINZ NZ Staff Turnover Survey which stands at 12% for local government and 17.2% across all categories.

Staff Leave Usage

5. For the year ending 30 June 2014, the average number of Sick Leave days taken was 6.3 days up from 5.4 days in 2013. There was a decrease in the percentage of staff taking more than the annual allocation of 10 days, down to 15% from 18% in 2013.

6. The total number of Sick Leave days continues to trend upwards and for 2014 stood at 986 days. Interestingly since 2002 the total number of days off has invariably increased year on year. The total sick days taken in 2002 were 545 for Dalton Street staff.

7. Annual Leave average usage dropped slightly to 19.5 days for Dalton Street staff down from an average of 22 days the previous year.

Average Age/Tenure

8. For the year ending 30 June 2014, the average age of Dalton Street staff was 44 and the average number of years with Council remained at 10 years.

9. For the same period the average age of Works Group staff was 51 and the average number of years with Council was 12 years.

10. Staff Age Profile

	20-25	26-30	31-35	36-40	41-45	46-50	51-55	56-60	61-65	65+
Dalton Street	6	10	19	15	28	22	17	15	10	2
Works Group	0	1	2	1	4	4	7	8	0	0

11. A conscious process of succession planning is undertaken for key roles to minimise the disruption from the loss of ‘institutional knowledge’.

Health and Safety

12. There were 29 work related accidents recorded for Dalton Street staff, resulting in 42.6 days off work.

13. There were four work related accidents at the Works Group, resulting in 18.5 days off work.

14. The majority of the work related accidents resulted in no time off work.

15. There were no accidents during the period that required notification to MoBIE as a serious harm accident.

16. There are two health and safety committees that meet on a regular basis and are made up of representatives from the work force. The committees review any relevant accidents or near miss reports as well as other health and safety issues brought up for consideration.

17. The Council are part of ACC’s Workplace Safety Management Practices (WSMP) programme and receive a 20% discount on our ACC levies having achieved tertiary level. This was reviewed and renewed in June 2014 with the auditor commenting positively on Council’s commitment to health and safety.

18. The main risk areas for Council staff can be broadly covered by: vehicle use; environment, e.g. waterways, remote work sites, weather, biological; office based, e.g. work station; machinery (Works Group); and construction (Works Group).

19. Vitae, a workplace support organisation that Council uses has, in the last 12 months, twice sought an increase in hours they attend the workplace due to a rise in self‑referrals. An initial increase in support time has seen a further request for another increase in time.

20. While there has been an increase in the number of personal issues the support person has dealt with, she has also reported an increase in staff concerned about workplace stress and while individual concerns are confidential, the quality and integrity of their work being questioned in public forums and the impact this has had on their confidence and commitment has been a recurring theme. This was particularly indicated in the support statistics for May, June and July this year with a significant increase in the workplace stress related self-referrals.

21. A couple of staff exit interview forms have also indicated this sentiment. While not being a prime reason for leaving, it is a cause for concern.

22. The proposed new legislation changes will ‘shift’ the emphasis for workplace stress into the health and safety realm and away from the direct employment law focus; and it is in this context that this report highlights these aspects. Under the new health and safety legislation, it is the responsibility of ‘officers’ to manage all aspects of health and safety. Failure to do so could lead to action by WorkSafe against the workplace and individuals.

23. ‘Officers’ is a key concept of the proposed new legislation and encompasses both due diligence obligations and the liability of directors and senior management

Staff Training and Qualifications

24. The overall training budget for the past year was 2.3% of the salary budget a slight rise on the 2013 figure (2.2%).

25. The focus of corporate training has again been to enhance leadership skills for staff with the potential to fill leadership roles.

26. In a survey of qualifications taken in which 123 staff replied, Council had 8 staff with a PhD, 19 with a Master’s degree; and 53 with a relevant degree. The balance of those responding have a diploma or certificate relevant to their work.

27. We have had a staff secondment agreement with DOC for a Council staff member to work on a project for them for three months which has worked well to the extent we will explore further such opportunities.

Industrial

28. All Managers are on individual employment agreements (IEAs).

29. There are two collective employment agreements (CEA) in Council. The Dalton Street Salaried Staff Collective Employment Agreement was ratified for a further three years in July this year as was the Catchment Staff Collective Employment Agreement. Approximately the same number of Dalton street staff, whose work is covered by the CEA, have chosen to be on IEA rather than on the collective agreement.

Decision Making Process

30. 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.

Recommendation

1. That the Corporate and Strategic Committee receives the “Human Resources Update” report.

Viv Moule

Human Resources Manager

Paul Drury

Group Manager

Corporate Services

Attachment/s

2013-14 HR Report Highlights

[1] Using the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) Spectrum of Engagement

[2] 2013 Regional Resident Survey, SIL Research, confirmed post/ mail, phone, newspaper and email as most preferred

This Committee advises its comments on the draft Significance and Engagement Policy, recommending that the draft - subject to amendments - be adopted for consultation	10 September
Councillor comments having been amended into the draft Policy, the draft Policy is adopted by Council for public consultation	24 September
Council seeks community feedback on the Policy over a 20 working day period	29 September – 24 October
Staff collate feedback - from letters, emails and social media. Staff review the draft Policy and report back to Corporate & Strategic Committee for their consideration, and any further amendments	12 November
Council adopts the Significance and Engagement Policy	26 November

Health Checks	Eye Tests	Flu Injections	Buccaline Berna
3(5)	19 (23)	67 (62)	28 (28)

Salary Band	No of Staff Receiving Total Remuneration in this Band
<$60,000	58
$60,000 - $79,999	48
$80,000 - $99,999	35
$100,00 - $119,000	16
$120,000 - $199,999	11
$200,000 - $399,999	2

	Average Age	Average Tenure (Years)
Dalton Street	44	10
Works Group	51	12

	20-25	26-30	31-35	36-40	41-45	46-50	51-55	56-60	61-65	65+
Dalton Street	6	10	19	15	28	22	17	15	10	2
Works Group	0	1	2	1	4	4	7	8	0	0