One of my friends recently found that when tree roots cut off the sewer and wastewater pipes it takes very little time for life to become unpleasant indeed.

Warning number one came right at the start of a major bout of winter ‘flu in the home.

Pre-schoolers with “sicks” were already putting pressure on the washing machine when the water from a family wash came back up the drain and over the backyard.

While this was a bother, it was also at least just the “grey” water that some conser vation-minded homes already put on their gardens.

Warning number two — that tree roots were at work — was not nearly as pleasant.

As my friend, said there is nothing like a rogue toilet to remind those with a sense of history of one of the main reasons why city councils were set up in the first place.

With one failed flush they had an individual problem that, left alone, would have rapidly turned into a collective health problem.

It was an instant health hazard that required immediate action.

One tree root-eating-machine visit from a plumber and $70 later the problem was solved. Normal service has been resumed.

As my friend, said it was a sharp reminder of how in a city with quality infrastructure and services we can all tend to take key services for granted.

Until the service stops.

It also stood as a good reminder via one household of the collective problems and issues we face as a city about how we deal with our wastewater disposal.

As we prepare to re-visit this issue I think it is wor h saying publicly that, for a variety of reasons, our original aim got lost in the debate.

We did not succeed in getting our key message across.

To put this message in context I’ll remind you all that last year the American “Governing” magazine rated Christchurch as “the best run city in the world’’.

That was a verdict from people with no axe to grind and no aim but to look for the best example to show to their global readership.

It was a huge honour.

One that I believe we earned in part because of our great infrastructure and commitment to quality.

Our key aim in the original plan for our wastewater and sewerage disposal was to focus on quality, not cost.

While cost must be a consideration it cannot be allowed to eclipse quality as our first aim.

As a city I think we have made huge strides forward in how we view our lives as part of the whole environment rather than apart from it as in the past.

The passion the public have shown for recycling shows me that the will to do our best for our corner of the planet is strong and growing.

We will need to show the same commitment to doing the right thing as we work our way through to a fresh solution to our waste disposal issues.

Perhaps in the long haul it will turn out to be no bad thing that our old “flush and forget” attitude has been challenged.

But while we look in some ways to be back at the start line with this issue it is also worth pointing out that we have learnt a lot scientifically and socially along the way.

Our collective knowledge about the science and mechanics of wastewater disposal has been greatly increased.

We have also seen vividly how passionate people are about their natural environment in this city.

I think it is vital, as we start again, to emphasise once more that we share one common goal in all this. That is to make this first and foremost a debate about quality, and then cost.

Our moral duty to the past, present and future of Christchurch and its superb natural environment means that this must be our approach.

www.christchurchmayor.org.nz