Prof Peter Skelton’s follow-up investigation of the council found no reason for the council to need an extension for its land and water plan, due at the end of next year.
Additionally, in his investigation report, released yesterday, the former chief freshwater commissioner for New Zealand expressed concern that "key staff" at the council were having difficulty doing their jobs because of councillor conduct.
Staff told him councillors were trying to "trip staff up", delay decision-making and were unwilling to accept staff advice.
"I have a real concern that if councillors’ conduct towards staff is not improved, the council risks losing staff and undoing the capability and capacity progress that has been achieved to date," Prof Skelton said.
His follow-up investigation was ordered by Mr Parker after chairman Cr Andrew Noone wrote to the minister to ask if he would discuss an extension to the deadline for the plan.
The deadline was imposed by the minister after Prof Skelton investigated the council in 2019 and found it was at a "critical juncture", facing many challenges.
The follow-up investigation report was made public about two weeks after the High Court informed the council its supporting planning document, the proposed regional policy statement, was headed down the wrong track and could not, in its entirety, be put through a new fast-tracked freshwater process as planned.
In a letter to Cr Noone on Friday Mr Parker said the High Court judgement required the council to renotify parts of its proposed regional statement appropriate for the new fast-tracked process and he wanted that done by September 30.
After both the investigation and the High Court judgement, he remained firm on the recommendations and timeframes set three years ago, he said.
"Prof Skelton’s report raises some concerns regarding councillors not making decisions on freshwater management matters where they appear to be supported by an appropriate level of scientific evidence," Mr Parker said.
"I do not propose to take that issue further at this time, but highlight the issue for you to consider for the future," Mr Parker said.
In a joint statement yesterday, Cr Noone and interim chief executive Dr Pim Borren said they accepted the outcome and remained committed to the deadline for the plan.
Cr Noone said he accepted "some of the issues" raised in the report, including "some of the challenges" around tension between councillors and senior staff.
However, "we believe that we have now moved past those," he said.
Prof Skelton said the council had made good progress on some of the minister’s recommendations, including creating interim consents to replace historic water permits and adding to the staff’s capability.
Prof Skelton found "no consensus position" among councillors as to why an extension was necessary.
He further referred to a meeting on August 25 last year when councillors were presented with a staff recommendation to note proposed minimum flows for the Manuherikia River.
Prof Skelton said staff referenced 10 scientific studies, specifically done to inform their recommendations, as well as consideration of a range of planning matters.
Councillors did not note minimum flows for the river.
Instead, they argued over whether there was a "robust, fit-for-purpose and defendable rationale" underpinning the proposed minimum flows.
Some said there were gaps in the science, notably with hydrology and habitat modelling.
Others accused their counterparts of delay tactics.
Prof Skelton appears to side with the latter in his report.
"While it is appropriate for councillors to question staff recommendations, it is hard to accept, in the light of the information provided by staff, that this decision was solely due to concerns around the science as recorded in the council’s agenda and minutes," he said.
Following the councillors’ direction last year, the Manuherikia technical advisory group’s report is due to be presented to councillors at a committee meeting next week.
