The Independent Review of the Victorian Public Service, widely known as the Silver Review and published in December 2025, proposed one of the most ambitious shifts to Victoria’s water governance since the creation of the state’s modern water corporations.
At the centre of the debate were recommendations for metro–regional water partnerships that would have dramatically reshaped boundaries, responsibilities and shared functions across the sector. The government responded by firmly rejecting compulsory mergers, leaving the sector to consider what comes next for collaboration, capability, and long-term planning in the face of rising climate and population pressures.
- Want more information on what Inside Water is up to? Sign up for our weekly email, landing in inboxes with the latest news.
- Do you want the magazine delivered to your letterbox? Sign up here to subscribe.
What structural change did the Silver Review propose for water?
The Review’s water proposals recommended forming three large regional partnerships that aligned metropolitan and regional entities into Western, Northern and Eastern groupings. This was presented as a way to consolidate capability and deliver consistent customer and corporate functions across the state.
In practice, the shift would have altered how water utilities work together on procurement, digital platforms, emergency response, and major infrastructure planning. Inside this broad reform, the Silver Review water focus highlighted the potential for shared services to ease administrative duplication and increase technical resilience across organisations of different sizes and capacities.
The suggested model drew heavily on the idea of a metropolitan hub that would take responsibility for statewide corporate services and strategic planning. This would have expanded Melbourne’s role beyond its current boundaries and placed greater emphasis on whole-of-system thinking.
In theory, a hub structure could streamline investment planning and align asset management frameworks across similar operating environments. For regional corporations, the proposal also promised access to deeper technical support and stronger backup during periods of operational strain.
Why did the government reject compulsory mergers?
These proposals were designed to generate savings from consolidated back-office functions and rationalised boards, although the Review acknowledged that reforms would need to be phased to meet local circumstances. The government’s response took a different view.
It emphasised that water corporations hold deep community connections and that local variation is essential to regional service quality. It therefore rejected any compulsory mergers of water entities. The government instead encouraged voluntary shared service arrangements and improvements to governance and oversight. This means the structural status quo remains, but the pressure to collaborate more extensively persists.
The government argued that existing frameworks already allow corporations to collaborate on procurement, technology, and planning without redrawing boundaries. Many water corporations have demonstrated the value of joint approaches through VicWater programs, digital transformation initiatives and collective investment in climate resilience.
Yet the Silver Review raised the question of whether such voluntary arrangements are enough when climate shocks become more frequent, and customers expect greater consistency in service quality and digital access. That question remains unresolved.
What challenges and opportunities remain for the sector?
Under the Review’s model, the metro–regional partnerships would also have supported more integrated catchment and land management reforms. Although this aspect is addressed separately in another editorial, the potential for shared water and land planning shows how structural change in one part of the system influences another.
The same applies to digital reform and workforce capability, which are also discussed in later pieces. This first editorial’s focus is the structural layer that underpins many of these broader proposals.
For now, the government’s position locks in the existing corporate structure. It also offers scope for expanded collaboration without formal consolidation. That gives water corporations opportunities to strengthen shared digital systems, procurement programs and statewide emergency arrangements. It also means any future government could revisit elements of the Silver Review if sector pressures intensify.
The pathway for structural reform will therefore be shaped by voluntary collaboration rather than mandated change. That makes the next few years a critical period for testing whether shared initiatives can deliver the resilience and efficiency that large structural reform aimed to address.