Minute 10 of Commissioners - Preliminary Recommendation and summary of conclusions and reasoning in relation to the proposed Waianiwaniwa reservoir and dam and the upper Waimakariri intake (pdf 524 kB) (uploaded 14 July 2009)

Minute 9 of Commissioners relating to application to take water from the Waimakariri River (pdf 1.02 MB) (uploaded 7 July 2009)

Minute 8 of the Commissioners - Directions relating to and independent review of nutrient and other contamination issues (pdf 50 kB) (uploaded 24 June 2009)

Minute 6 of the Commissioners - Decision as to continuance of hearing and request for further information (pdf 128 kB) (uploaded 20 May 2009)

Minute 7 of the Commissioners - Reasons for decision as to continuance of the hearing (pdf 333 kB) (uploaded 20 May 2009)

Memorandum of Counsel for the Applicant-May 2009 (pdf 705 kB) (uploaded 5 May 2009)

  Minute of Commissioners regarding reconvening of Hearing (pdf 399 kB) (uploaded 3 April 2009)

Summary of Minute of Commissioners (pdf 96 kB) (uploaded 3 April 2009)

Following the pre-hearing meeting of December 18, the starting date for the hearing for the Central Plains Water Trust applications was considered by the commissioners. The hearing began on 25 February 2008.

The Minute/Directions of Commissioners from the 05 June 2008, 06 June 2008 and 14 August 2008 hearings are available here:

05 June 2008 (Direction Number 3) (pdf 168 kB)

06 June 2008 (Direction Number 4) (pdf 23 kB)

14 August 2008 (Direction Number 5) (pdf 4 kB)

Commissioners

Four Commissioners have been appointed for the hearing.

• Philip Milne – Solicitor/Partner Simpson Grierson
• Bob Nixon – Planner, Director Planit Associates
• Andrew Fenemor – Hydrology/Ecology, Team Leader with Landcare Research
• Ray O’Callaghan – Risk Assessment/Dam Issues, Director Truebridge Beach Calendar

Submissions

Directly affected submitters will be heard on 24 and 25 July and 5 August 2008 in Darfield. Remaining submitters will be heard on 11 to 15 August 2008. Bookings for all remaining submitters who want to be heard should be made with Johanna Christensen as soon as possible and at the latest by 31 July 2008, to enable organisational details.

The Commissioners have determined the following protocols in relation to the presentation of submissions at the hearing:

That:

• Submissions dealing with similar topics should be grouped together wherever possible;
• Extensive repetition of submissions or evidence common to more than one submitter will not be allowed.

Submission groups

To help facilitate groups of submitters in making contact with each other, individuals are encouraged to volunteer to be the point of contact for other submitters with similar concerns. The volunteer would help co-ordinate the group of submitters who could then appoint a representative to agree on a combined submission to be presented at the hearing.

Common topics raised in the submissions include (but are not limited to):

If you wish to volunteer to be the contact person for any of the above topics (or any additional topics), please contact Donald Fraser. Volunteer contact details will be posted on this website as soon as they are available.

Pre-hearing meeting topics

The main topics raised at the meeting and under consideration by the commissioners were:

Timing

What time period would be reasonable between the exchange of evidence/information (expected to occur around the end of January) and the start of the hearing. Also under consideration is what time period is reasonable between the presentation of the applicants' case and the next phase of the hearing which would hear submitters and expert witnesses and then finally, how long would be allowed for the applicant to prepare rebuttals and supplementary evidence.

Should evidence be read in full or taken as read?

Whether all evidence should be read out in its entirety (due to technical nature and need for explanation), at the discretion of the evidence provider or only when requested by the commissioners. The decision on this could have a significant bearing on the length of the hearing.

Should the chair have a casting vote?

In the event the panel cannot come to a consensus and there is a 50:50 split on any matter for decision, should the chair have a casting vote? Environment Canterbury will instruct the panel on this matter prior to the hearing. The current view is that, under the RMA, a split panel would result in a decision to decline that application or part of an application. This is being looked into before final advice is provided to the commissioners

Non-technical submissions

The commissioner felt that it would be desirable for submitters to be given the opportunity of grouping together and electing a spokesperson where submissions were identical or very similar. To this end, Environment Canterbury was asked to look at how submissions might be grouped and how such groups could be brought together prior to the hearing to discuss whether the election of a spokesperson to represent the group would be appropriate.

Site visits

All parties who spoke at the pre-hearing favoured providing the commissioners with opportunities to visit affected areas within the catchment - including the Waianiwaniwa Valley in the Malvern Hills, the proposed sites for infrastructure such as canals and intakes through to lowland streams and Te Waihora/Lake Ellesmere.

Decisions on the above and the many other points presented and discussed will be released through a commissioners' minute as soon as it is made available. It was the chair's intention that a minute would be circulated before Christmas if possible.