Dear Editor, To Tatou Vai Board Chair Brian Mason claims that using taxation revenues to pay for the operation of the water authority "...would mean the Pa Enua would subsidise those residing on Rarotonga" ('Water Meters are on their way to homes', Aug 25).

Mr Mason's poor grasp of general taxation is surprising given his background in commercial law. However, he employed the same flawed rhetoric when refuting Te Vai Ora Maori's presentation to the TTV Bill Select Committee in August 2020.

Ultimately tax revenues are allocated according to government priorities. Not on the basis of where the tax is collected.

Via the tax system, the Cook Islands public and business operators /collectively/ fund large-scale infrastructure and public services, across all fifteen islands, for /shared benefit/.

At the vaka consultations, the Rarotonga public were unified in opposing the bill. The grower community has also made clear that metering will hike-up the cost of local produce.

Mason's 'five arguments' do not hold water, but evidence the same lack of localisation that has led to the failed, costly, and bloated Te Mato Vai system.

Andy Kirkwood

Turangi

To Tatou Vai (TTV)'s announcement that it will begin to install water meters and charge for residential water use, and notwithstanding Chairman Brian Mason's "five things" that are said to justify the implementation of charges, can we please have just a few preliminary answers? While it is true that TTV is in the unfortunate circumstance of being handed a complete disaster from the builders of the system (TMV), TTV cannot hide behind that for another day. If you got stuck with a dIsaster, don't pass it on to the consumers. Maybe you need to sue the people who handed over the disaster? You say you don't own the water and so you are only charging for supply. Can TTV justify supplying an inferior product?

Let's begin with question No.1. What evidence can TTV offer that the black plastic water mains are, with scientific proof, actually water pipes and not, as continual rumour has suggested, just utility pipes that might be used to pump crude oil or sewage? If, in fact, the pipes are adding toxins to the water this writer serves his children, shall we pay TTV or should TTV pay us so that we can save up for any medical costs that might arise as our children grow into adulthood?

(Name and address supplied)

To Tatou Vai chairperson Brian Mason responds:

The tender documentation issued by the Government for all contracts involving water infrastructure clearly require the use by the contractor of polyethylene pipes that comply with the standard AS/NZS 4130.  On each pipe there is printed the size of the pipe, the pressure rating, the manufacturer, the standard, the manufacturer's standards mark licence number and the material used.  Other identifiers are the date of manufacture and the place of manufacture. This is shown by a series of alphabetical letters and numbers.  

But this information is not accepted at face value.  All plant and welds are tested. When placing the pipeline in the ground the supervision engineer will randomly select welds to be cut out and sent to the laboratory for testing. This process is a standard clause in all contractspecifications. The specifications are standard in Australia, New Zealand and the Cook Islands.

Those samples are sent to a NATA accredited laboratory such as ExcelPas in Moorabbin, Victoria, Australia. Any pipe or weld that doesn’t reach the standard is rejected and removed. 

These pipes can be utilised for sewage as well as long as they meet the pressure ratings required.  They cannot be used to pump crude oil.  There is no evidence the pipes used for water add toxins although the old deteriorating asbestos pipes which these pipes replaced were, TTV suspects, not so good for public health.