As climate change supercharges our weather, forecasts have become more important than ever. Life savers. Yet, as the fevered energy in our climate system has been building, our official weather forecaster MetService and research organisation Niwa have been busy brewing their own maelstrom.
The antagonism has finally sparked an overdue review of weather forecasting in this country, brought to a head by efforts to get MetService to move to its competitor Niwa’s Wellington site at Greta Point.
Documents show an irked MetService wrote to its minister in December last year asking for action after a government-initiated panel overstepped its brief and suggested the state-owned enterprise MetService become housemates with Crown research institute Niwa.
Within a week, former State-Owned Enterprises Minister David Clark had kicked off the review that many in the weather sector had wanted for close to a decade.
Current State-Owned Enterprises Minister Duncan Webb announced the Project Hau Nuku ("shifting winds") review last month. Its scope includes ensuring a forecasting system that can best deal with extreme weather events, a consideration of "the optimal structural configuration of MetService and Niwa", and looking at ways to improve access to restricted weather data.
But MetService chief executive Stephen Hunt’s suggestion that the public be allowed to have a say in the review was rejected by the Treasury.
Concerns have been rising that Niwa is muddying the waters when it comes to warnings of potentially life-threatening weather.
Taxpayers are now funding two government weather forecasters and there are fears of confusion among the public as dangerous storms, such as Cyclone Gabrielle, become more frequent due to climate change.
Niwa set up its own forecasting business in 2013 without seeking government approval and in the past decade has been using government funding through the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) and sources such as the Strategic Science Investment Fund (SSIF) to help it compete against MetService.
Even with the review about to start, Niwa chief executive John Morgan announced earlier this week a $5 million boost from the SSIF to "accelerate our efforts to increase New Zealand’s ability to respond to and prepare for future extreme weather events".
Ironically, Niwa would not answer questions from the Otago Daily Times on several issues, including if it wanted to absorb MetService or move it to Greta Point, saying it would be inappropriate to comment while the review is under way.
Until now, successive governments have done little to tackle the competition problems or to free up weather data for private forecasting companies to use.
Documents released to the ODT under the Official Information Act from the Treasury, MBIE and MetService reveal the rocky path towards the review during the last two months of 2022.
It was a conscious uncoupling more than three decades ago that has been causing problems one way or another from almost day one.
When the Jim Bolger National government decided to split the old New Zealand Meteorological Service into operations/forecasting and research arms (in the same 1992 science reforms which saw the demise of the DSIR), it is doubtful they could have predicted the repercussions years later.
MetService became the state-owned enterprise charged with forecasting, and Niwa, the Crown research institute, taking on meteorological and hydrological research.
Not only were employees split between the two new organisations, but books and research reports from the venerable library at Kelburn were also divvied up, along with the national observing network.
In 2006, following a lack of collaboration between the two organisations, a Treasury review recommended they merge. Instead, the then Labour government introduced a 10-year memorandum of understanding, which lapsed in 2017. Yet again collaboration had not materialised, according to the Treasury.
Competition between MetService and Niwa has increased during the past decade, even though MetService has the backing of the World Meteorological Organisation and holds a 12-year contract, worth about $26m a year, to provide the Ministry of Transport with severe-weather warnings and public forecasts. This runs for another four years.
In the end, it was MetService’s growing displeasure with the MBIE-commissioned Science City Project, comprising Crown research institutes, universities and Te Papa Tongawera, which kindled the review.
A November 7 email from MetService boss Hunt to, presumably, the chairman of the science city panel, Steve Maharey - the name is for some reason redacted - refers to a phone conversation four days earlier in which that panel member outlined his "recommendation" to Research, Science and Innovation Minister Ayesha Verrall that MetService be included in the Science City development at Niwa’s site at Greta Point.
"You also advised during our conversation that Minister Clark has been informed of the recommendation," Hunt’s email said, before reminding the panel member any such move would be up to the MetService board.
A Treasury briefing for ministers on Science City the following day said the panel thought Greta Point was a "viable site" for development and "MetService’s inclusion could offer critical mass".
"The panel was not clear," the briefing said, "on the benefits of MetService and Niwa co-locating ... besides offering "critical mass" and perhaps receiving Crown funding. The risks may outweigh the benefits, given competitive tension between MetService and Niwa, the culture of both organisations, and independence of MetService’s asset management."
In a follow-up email late that afternoon, Hunt took issue with MetService being "described to ministers as the ‘critical mass’ for the decision to develop Greta Point" in the Treasury briefing.
"If so, would you please forward to me any documents that imply or state that."
The reply from, presumably, Maharey said there were no such papers.
"MetService had always been on the margins on (sic) the discussion. I’m not sure the critical mass phrase is the right one. Perhaps synergy might be better. Anyway, as discussed, nothing is locked [in]."
On the morning of November 9, Hunt emailed MetService chief financial officer Keith Hilligan saying the panel’s reply was "important feedback ... to send to Treasury asap - please ask them to remove the ‘critical mass’ statement".
Hilligan then asked Treasury "if your comms to the minister has not gone yet, we would appreciate you not using the phrase ‘critical mass"’.
Just a week later, MetService pulled out of Science City, expressing frustrations that the panel would make recommendations on the SOE’s location without consulting the MetService board or the minister.
In his December 1 letter to Clark, Hunt said he had told Maharey on November 17 that MetService was withdrawing from its "voluntary and peripheral involvement".
"The result is that the Crown duplicates through Niwa some of the capabilities already available via MetService as the Crown-contracted provider of the national weather service. The boundaries of activities have become blurred over time, and we believe New Zealand’s safety and prosperity may be compromised in a future environment of increasingly severe weather."
Hunt asked for a meeting with Clark and Treasury documents released to the ODT show that, within a week of receiving that letter, Dr Clark initiated the review.
In a December 9 email to Hunt and Hilligan, a Treasury senior analyst said Clark had, the day before, asked Treasury to talk with other government departments to make recommendations to ministers for a review of the forecasting sector.
On March 7, MBIE officials wrote to Morgan at Niwa about the review, asking if he had five minutes for a chat "in relation to the weather forecasting system settings (and we are looking to keep the discussion to a very small number of folks at this point)".
A fortnight later, another MBIE email to Morgan said: "I will be asked what stakeholders have previously said about whether this should be looked at. Are you happy with a statement along the following lines: ‘Niwa has indicated that the current arrangements in the forecasting system should be reviewed’?
"Naturally I don’t want to ‘put words into your mouth’ but I think that was the substance of our recent discussion. We are of course open to alternative wording."
Morgan replied only a few minutes later that "more reflective of Niwa’s view" might be the statement: "Niwa has indicated that it would welcome a review of the current arrangements in the forecasting system with the aim of improving forecasting services for Aotearoa New Zealand."
By April, draft terms of reference for the review had been prepared and MBIE was ready to discuss them with Niwa and MetService bosses. On May 23, Hunt emailed Treasury officials to say the revisions to those terms of reference looked good.
But he wanted to open the review for public submissions.
"Public trust and confidence is a critical component of a national weather and severe weather warning service, and the review is currently a Wellington-centric process that could be greatly assisted by not only Māori being consulted, but regional councils and a period for the general population’s submissions too."
Treasury rebuffed Hunt’s suggestion.
"We do not recommend public consultation as part of the review process. Public consultation would extend the project timeline. We consider that public consultation would have the greatest benefit if there are any recommendations for change following the review."
A joint Treasury-MBIE briefing paper for ministers on May 25, released in part to the ODT, included initial feedback from ministers that change was required and it was "important to have a system with better co-ordination that avoids duplication".
"The review should look at the system more widely and not assume that it is only improving the current model."
Ministers also said access to currently restricted weather data needed to be careful considered as, "due to climate change, it is likely that the public will be more reliant on weather data".
In letters to MetService acting chairwoman Alison Watters and Niwa chairman Barry Harris, Finance Minister Grant Robertson said Cyclone Gabrielle and this year’s Auckland floods had highlighted the importance of a "connected weather forecasting system where intelligence is shared and effectively communicated".
Finally, on July 26, almost eight months after Hunt wrote to Clark about the situation, the government publicly announced the review.
Hunt told the ODT this week that MetService has written to ministers "on a number of occasions" about the "inefficiencies and risks of two Crown weather forecasters, and the risk of public confusion and reduction in safety during severe weather events due to contradictory warnings".
The December letter to Clark had highlighted the need for a better system due to the rapidly growing climate crisis, as the current one will not be suitable.
The competition with Niwa, unintended at setup in 1992, has effectively restricted the ability for the two organisations to collaborate or co-operate efficiently due to competition law, Hunt says.
MetService had only joined the science city project as an "observer".
"We were considering all options for new premises, or to identify a co-habitant to warrant the cost investment for the seismic strengthening of our Kelburn building.
"The project panel recommended that MetService and GNS Science be co-located with Niwa at Greta Point. But MetService was not consulted on that recommendation and withdrew from the Science City Project based on legal advice.
"If co-located, the control mechanisms and barriers required to avoid breaching the Commerce Act would have defeated the perceived benefits."
MetService was also concerned about the robustness of the sea-level Greta Point site in Evans Bay and with being able to carry out essential forecasting services in the event of a major earthquake or tsunami, Hunt says.
The SOE is committed to the review and the outcomes.
"As a nation we need to do all we can to build our resilience in the face of climate change and the increasing severity of weather. Our objective is, as it has always been, the safety and weather-readiness of all New Zealanders."
MetService was recently ranked second equal in overall reputation out of 56 agencies in this year’s Kantar Public Sector Reputation Index, a survey of 3500 New Zealanders. It was second in the separate leadership ratings, and third in the trust, social responsibility, and fairness rankings.
Niwa did not feature in this year’s top 10 agencies for reputation, but in the 2022 survey was in ninth place.
In a generic statement, Niwa’s Morgan says the CRI will support the Treasury and MBIE review.
"It’s time ... to take a broader look at the combined capabilities of Niwa and MetService, and consider how they might deliver better outcomes for New Zealand, which could include putting the organisations back together again."
A reviewer for Project Hau Nuku is expected to be appointed in the next couple of weeks, with recommendations about the future of MetService and Niwa, and the forecasting sector, expected to be with the new government in February.
