The Committee to inquire into and report on:
The provision of urban water* infrastructure in New South Wales, with
particular reference to:
Factors (historical, social etc) which have led to current systems of
centralised reticulation infrastructure for the delivery of urban water services
Age and expected life of this existing infrastructure
Full replacement cost of this infrastructure
Environmental, economic and social performance of these systems
Alternatives systems and approaches which can provide high quality water-related
Services to the community at a lower cost and with better environmental
outcomes. For example:
smarter engineering solutions, including decentralised water supply and waste
water treatment and management
water sensitive urban design principles
adoption of modern biological treatment processes
Environmental, economic and social performance of such alternative systems,
particularly:
potential cost savings of alternative approaches (including capital and
operating costs)
advantages of better integrated administrative and policy arrangements
recognising stormwater and waste water as a resource rather than a problem (for
disposal)
financing options
Strategies for introducing alternative systems as existing infrastructure
approaches the end of its design life
Any other related matter
* 'water' is taken to mean water supply, sewerage and stormwater and 'urban'
includes all urban areas (not just major metropolitan areas)
In developing the terms of reference, the Committee has been guided by the
following considerations:
The Committee has become aware of concerns expressed in various forums over the
last few years that, in many urban areas, the water-related infrastructure is
reaching the end of its life and will need, at considerable cost, to be
replaced.
This is, potentially, a very significant ongoing capital works issue, which
warrants an evaluation of the state of the current infrastructure and the
identification of the most suitable courses of action to ensure the continued
provision of high quality water services in a cost-effective and
environmentally sound way, should that infrastructure need to be replaced.
In this regard, the following questions present themselves
How do we provide urban water infrastructure at the moment? (centralised large
scale engineering reticulation schemes with little integration)
Why do we do it this way? (historical, social factors)
Are there problems with this approach? What are they? (age, costs - replacement
and ongoing, environmental concerns)
Are there alternative approaches with as good, if not better, outcomes?
(non-engineering/ smart engineering/decentralised/localised/on-site)
Why are they better? (costs savings - capital/operating; better for
environment; utilisation of resources - not disposal of problems)
Do they have disadvantages? What are they?
If change is warranted, how can it be achieved? (incentives, policies,
structures and roles) Do we need to identify a range of solutions for a range
of situations?
In dealing with these questions and issues the Committee is aiming to identify
a range of options for Government within an integrated, conceptual framework
for service provision.
