The way the right have framed 3 Waters as an attack on democracy is a masterclass of propaganda that would make your average Qanon Fear grifter blush.
The reason we have a vast under investment in water infrastructure is because Local Government won’t upgrade a system put under immense stress by Central Government’s open door immigration policy and low wage economy addiction.
Suburban home owners are fine with this mass immigration policy and infrastructure gridlock because it pushes up the untaxed house valuations they have gotten used to gaining year in and year out.
Neither Central Government nor Local Government want to have an honest discussion with voters about higher water rates and higher taxes.
Someone has to come up with the $150billion over the next 30 years to keep up with the expected population growth from the mass immigration policies of both Labour and National.
20% of our water is lost between the tap and its source!
Christ we can’t even debate taxing the fucking banks windfall taxes without the Right clutching their pearls and fainting on behalf of the free market.
The way this refusal to debate the cost of mass immigration policies and the political power of middle class property speculators has been twisted into a racist debate about co-governance and Māori ethno nationalism is gasp inducing in its dog whistling audacity.
3 Waters isn’t about Māori taking over the fucking water, it’s about Local and Central Government refusing to pay for the mass immigration policies that are enriching the property speculating middle classes.
Yes there are issues about possible water privatisation, yes there are issues about how we arrive at Māori voice in these decisions, but ultimately this is all about no one wanting to pay for the mass immigration that is enriching property owners.
I don’t see the Co-Governance issue as the great bogeyman that the Right do. I see it as a simple extension of the Waitangi Tribunal ruling into water rights that was sparked by Key selling 49% of our Hydro assets.
That ruling said Māori water rights existed and that it was up to the Crown and Māori to negotiate that.
How Māori having a say on basic water management (using co-governance models that ACT and National created) has managed to become the target of 3 Waters is further evidence of why we desperately need the RNZ/TVNZ Merger so that these issues can be unpacked and explained on Seven Sharp rather than having Jeremy and Hillary pulling faces on the altar of lite weight infotainment that the 7pm Current Affairs timeslot has become on the Public Broadcaster in this brain dead shallow settler nation of ours.
I said you wouldn’t believe my Public Broadcaster twist at the end!
Our last hope for actual journalism that cuts through the self interested spin lines uncritically broadcast as truth is RNZs smug woke elitism vs TVNZs Fuck Boy Island Ratings crassness.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
It is not co governance. It is Maori control of the water.
Bomber, your failure to address this issue undermines your integrity. Just like Adern and Mahuta never ever discuss these details.
How Tom C? How are Māori going “control” water anymore than their co governers?
Where you burning yourself on the steps of parliament when they passed the Waikato River Settlement Act 12 f’ing years ago?
Under the scheme Iwi can write demands of the governance board, with no restraints. In effect even the governance board doesn’t govern.
Have you already forgotten the roopu veto at Playcentre Aotearoa: https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/10/02/playcentre-aotearoa-urgently-need-to-step-up-or-risk-igniting-co-governance-backlash/
That’s how so-called “co-governance” works. My only criticism of Tom C’s comment is that it’s not “Maaori” control of water – it’s control by an unaccountable iwiocracy. Have you also forgotten that iwi are private corporations with business interests?
On the money again Pope
” That’s how so-called “co-governance” works. My only criticism of Tom C’s comment is that it’s not “Maaori” control of water – it’s control by an unaccountable iwiocracy. Have you also forgotten that iwi are private corporations with business interests ”
YES. Well put.
Bullshit Tom. You are just frightened of any suggestion of co governance because you don’t want to lose your privilege of power.
Co governance was introduced by John Key and Bill English and works perfectly well with the Waikato River, Lake Taupo, Whanganui etc.
Don’t be a fucking scared arse. Change is not always good but in this case absolutely necessary because you racist arses won’t spend money either on things that are absolutely necessary. Where they have they’ve fucked up big time.
Look at Whanganui, two waste treatment plants since 2005. The first failed in 2014 so $42m later (70% taxpayer funded) they have a state of the art system that cannot process waste from the tannery because of heavy metals. They have a legal obligation to accept the waste so the poisonous waste from the plant is being dumped in a big pit . Environmental disaster waiting to happen when the pit leaks. To top it off we pay $350 per year for every crapper we have in the house.
Don’t fucking tell me they have done a good job. They are like most councils only good for painting pedestrian crossings and raping parking meters. Absolutely not the fault of Maori, they don’t even have Maori wards. Ah but they’ve taken $20 plus million of central government funding in the last year to repair infrastructure bute they dy want government involved unless it suits their business and racist agendas.
Yawn. Go stay in a hut in the Ureweras Mike. P.S. take a bivvy sheet.
Yawn, I stayed there recently. I went through the right chanels( iwi) and no issues. I’d suggest your comment is trying the ” country is divided” routine.
Try putting up state housing in Epsom Jason and living there, then you’ll get a better picture of how the right believe in privilege.
Just to add Tom has no credibility given his hypocrisy on Martyns integrity.
Sorry Gus, should have added go ‘next year’ when the huts will be dismantled by Tuhoe. Its not about right and left – its about equal voting rights for all NZ citizens regardless of ethnicity or parentage. Try and put it into your right-left silos if you must but most New Zealanders are starting to see past that.
Keep a LID on your language please, any body would be offended by your lack of decorum. Any way, what i am really trying to say is SHUT THE FUCK UP
tom+c. Dear oh dear oh dear…
As a non Maori farmer can I ask; just imagine how Maori must have felt when us white dopes sailed in and took Aotearoa off them then started to disestablish everything they knew, loved worshiped and respected. And now, today, we not only maintain that self entitled thievery but we patronize Maori now while we do it.
On a personal note: I think three waters is a diversion. It was planned to do exactly what it’s doing. It’s dividing us. There’s a higher power at work here and I think it’s a tactic of Old Stolen Money to scramble focus and while we scrap it out, they’ll make off with our money.
Every time there’s a looming crisis, some confederate pops up with a brilliant idea on how to divide and distract what might be useful, direct and cohesive. This has nothing to do with water. It has everything to do with making sure farmers and non farmers don’t unite against a common enemy and that enemy is the now nine multi billionaires and their long reach back into our post European settlement. Aye Boys? ( How dare you think you could get away with what you get away with for long. There’s only five million of us, our economy is almost entirely agrarian comprised of only fifty or so thousand people and you fuckers are multi billionaires! Did you not think we might ask ” How?” )
How’s that for a wacky conspiracy theory, based on conspiracy fact.
100% Tom
100% Mike Walker
Well said and very true Tom C.
Let’s put some common logic and sense in the argument shall we. Councils have not invested in water infrastructure because:
a). It’s not a vote winner (hey your rates increase is going to fix some leaky pipes)
b). The vast majority of local government staff and elected officials are incompetent left wing bunnies that would rather fund vanity projects.
c). The councils had 20+ years to invest in water and other infrastructure while this population increase occurred – they didn’t. That is on them.
Of course central government (all of them since Lange) are partially to blame. But to frame the local councils as innocents here and using this as a crutch to argue for central government involvement is to let the local councils and their officials off the hook. That should not happen.
We should be also asking why moving the assets off the councils’ hands is so important. HINT: You can borrow against these and if you put them in a SPV they don’t have to be on the government books.
As for co-governance – yes it is the big boogeyman. You implement co-governance you no longer have a democracy where one person, one vote is enshrined. It is that simple.
Maybe the left should have done a better job framing the changes they want to push through when they had a chance, but all they did was yell ‘ no debate’. Well people are debating and they are not waiting for the left anymore to join. Go figure. The left, hoist by their own petard.
” Maybe the left should have done a better job ”
Well if we actually had a Left in this country they would have instead of the current crop of incompetents and people pushing their own agendas they would have had time in opposition to formulate some serious policy work around this and had a plan to sell it to the rest of us and control the narrative.
But we don’t.
Most agree something needs to be done about the Nation’s water system. Labour have served us all badly by combining the changes with involving Maori and trying to say trust us we know best . This attitude is duplicated in health and social care as well .It is Labour governments to explain what they are doing which they have not done swell so far and have just left themselves open to the racist tag
100%
Trevor, ” Labour has served us badly”.
Yet the water systems are fucked now, we don’t know about the future yet. So by your own admission it is National and ACT that have ” served us badly”
A party as diverse as Labour, you describe as “open to the racist tag” is terribly thought out given your National party couldn’t get any whiter.
Thank you.
So Tania Tapsell, Mayor of Rotorua is a racist because she is against 3 Waters?
Can someone please define racist for me, i am getting confused as the words seems to be thrown around like confetti at a wedding.
No she’s against it because of self interest I would think. It’s laughable in Auckland where you have people getting boners over Wayne Brown saying he is going to fire everyone on the councils books but on the other hand screaming injustice at assets being managed by an alternative bureaucracy to the ones that have shown they are not really doing what they should.
Non of that has anything to do with my question. Where is she a racist for not supporting 3 waters?
Tania Tapsell is also against the people living in the motels in Rotorua, but her party sold off a lot of state housing and gentrified many areas putting it out of reach of many Māori people’s hands. I wouldn’t go as far as calling her a racist bigoted maybe.
Being against 3 waters seems to be racist, yet quite a few people who are Maori are also against it. Are they Maori who are racist against Maori?
Reactionary Bratwurst, ‘yet quite a few people who are Maori are also against it. Are they Maori who are racist against Maori?’
Got proof?
Since when have you been interested in “proof” Stephen?
Pope Punctilious, I’m always interested in the truth prove to me when I haven’t?
So that would be a no then Pope, no proof, just plucked from that pie in the sky.
Tania Tapsell for one.
Reactionary Bratwurst, but you said quite a few! And Tania isn’t really representative of Maori broadly it just her opinion and she a politician that plays politics.
This motu belongs to Tangata Whenua, Te Iwi Maori. The Pakeha among us, are here, because Te Iwi Maori allows us to share in this beautiful country. Cogovernance is allowing the invader pakeha species to continue to occupy space in this land, while returning spiritual guardianship to Mana Whenua. As with Bastion Point now Ngati Whatua “owned’, pakeha only understand things in their colonial vocabulary. So 3 waters is iwi versus kiwi, lazy maori stealing our stuff. This country never ceded sovereignty to the crown, yet it remains occupied by the crown. 1835 Aotearoa New Zealand was declared an independent nation, a James Busby signed that document. There have been incredible Pakeha in our past, such as John Logan Campbell, and Jack Tame for a now example. As humans we are one, but to disrespect the right of Maori to take care of this fertile land and sea, is to negate our very right to exist. Ignorance is bliss and bigoted racist sexist backwards regressives love to loud hail their ignorance, without independent research. Hence rabbit holes are so easy to step into, twisting one’s ankle, and blaming Tangata Whenua!
“This country never ceded sovereignty to the crown, yet it remains occupied by the crown.”
Article the first:
The Chiefs of the Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand and the separate and independent Chiefs who have not become members of the Confederation cede to Her Majesty the Queen of England [sic] absolutely and without reservation all the rights and powers of Sovereignty which the said Confederation or Individual Chiefs respectively exercise or possess, or may be supposed to exercise or to possess over their respective Territories as the sole sovereigns thereof.
Selective yes in parts of te Treaty, from both sides when it comes to determining one or other side of treaty argue and ownership. From my understanding, the Pakeha , were only interested in the land and its plunder and ceded all Wai and Waitai and under to te Iwi.
goneby100, that the Pakeha version which only a hand full of tangata whenua signed have you read the Maori version?
Wai waitai, treaty agree,them maori can have,look at our owneship.
Immigrants have been coming here for 500 years in wooden waka, steam waka, deseil waka, air waka. Sure there is a treaty regarding the spirit and ownership of the waters. But the councils built the dams pipe and pump assets and the rate payers paid for them. Any rate payer with a semblance of nous knows as soon as an ownership structure is changed to international watercorp or iwi corp the ratepayer will be reqired to pay for the assets again and the consumers will be charged more because the new owner wouldnt bother going through th process unless they can make a bigger buck.
That’s the facts, Joseph.
Ownership by any entity that is structured to make a return on investment for the benefit of its shareholders is going to be more costly for its customers. The only exception being the case where the customers are the controlling shareholders, i.e. public ownership.
Joseph, more BS pakeha revisionism again I personally wouldn’t put any faith on Pakeha fairytale storytelling
Joseph Yes; Happens with the capital’s electric lines company, now owned by a Hong Kong millionaire, while Wellingtonians live shivering in the cold.
I believe I have just identified the epicentre of Woke World and it’s name is Matthew.
Only to be replaced by James+Browns Woke World.
? I am not woke in the slightest . .
“The Pakeha among us, are here, because Te Iwi Maori allows us to share in this beautiful country”.
NZ Europeans (our as you put it Matthew “invader pakeha species”) are here in NZ because they choose to be and most Maori have no issue at all with our being here.
Similarly those Maori that do have an issue with it have realistically f**k all they can do about it other than moan about it online.
James+Brown, the bigoted pakeha spewing garbage as usual
Fine then Stephen I will play along – exactly what of what I said is garbage?
Do you really believe that NZ Europeans would willingly leave their own country because very few Maori don’t them here?
If so how about you find out where Richie McCaw lives / knock on his door / give him the good news yourself?
Didn’t think so.
Matthew; Sadly you observations represent a pre-colonialist mindsets. There is no going back to those days. Treaty or not.
Many “invaders” are now 10 to 15 generations (based on 20 years per generation) into settlement here. Those “invaders” are not just “Pakeha” but from all over the globe (including Hawaiki).
They consider themselves “Born Of This Land”.
Time to roll back the rhetoric on who is “invaders” and who are “settlers”.
The “settlers are not going anywhere. Now; how to address grievance is a totally another matter.
But to call settlers “invaders” is not helping your cause. And to single out only “Pakeha” invaders and not Asian, Pacific, Indian, etc. is racial discrimination and likely against the to be introduced “hate” speech laws.
NZ is no different to any other colonial conquered land .The British arrived with guns and diseases and between the two they devistated the locals that had occupied the land until then .Some of the smarter ones in various tribes not being aware of the numbers to follow thought they could team up with these invades to beat enemy tribes thinking that once they ruled they would turn on the intruders and kick them out . They soon found out they had misjudged the situation and we’re happy to make the best of it by signing a Treaty. This only partially checked the land grabs and for the last 150 years Maori have been trying to save or get back as much as they can.As times and attitudes change they are doing better than earlier but I feel they will never be happy unless they accept the fact that basically they lost to a bigger team and grow as one .
Matthew . “ Invader species “ ? Grow up. Who invaded this country first anyway ?
Pip, Maori are indigenous there wasn’t anyone else when Maori arrived only the ‘Manu tuku iho mai ra no’ unless you’re one of those tin foil hat conspiracy celtic race theorist were here first meme’s???
It’s framed that way because the instigators have allowed it to be framed that way. How could they not?
1) Boundaries according to 1840 tribal regions.
2) Te Mana o te Wai statements that enable Maori control at the operational level (not just governance).
It sure looks like it’s just as much about Maori rights as it is about water. At the very least it’s poor marketing.
3 Waters is a complex beast and whilst its true no-one wants to pay for it, I don’t think it is as simple as that.
The more layers that are peeled back on 3 Waters, the more you go, why on earth or uh, oh.
Pertinent issues to be addressed amongst others are:
1/ Māori involvement in 3 Waters – once you push the diehard racists out of the room there is still a genuine concern about the cost of all the extra bureaucracy (and there is a lot and its expensive) related to this and the structuring of the agencies along tribal lines not making sense commercially.
The other valid concern is Te Mana o te Wai statements which are described on Internal Affairs website as
“a concept that puts water as a spiritual entity — the value of water — above the needs of people and communities”.
Oddly enough Te mana o te Wai is the only bit of 3 Waters I like – the idea that we dont just bowl ahead without involving local iwi but OTOH, it means that any Hapu can shut down any water project for a myriad of reasons – including spiritual ones. And there are a lot of people out there that think that is an economic no go – and it does happen, remember the Meremere Taniwha that delayed the Waikato expressway by 6? months way back when.
2) Sensible councils are on top of their water situation and have invested heavily (Although I doubt any are perfect) but it really doesn’t feel fair to pay for appalling woke councils like Wellington who fiddled while the water infrastructure burnt.
3) The debt funding system adopted is one of I think 3 possibles and we have chosen the most risky one of all apparently and gone for the highest level of debt ratio? available.
4) The model is not necessarily the best for the job (long story behind that too but definitely some validity around process and cost)
5) 3 Waters will demolish economies of scale in district and smaller councils and they will be forced to amalgamate. So we will lose local representation on more than just water ultimately and critics rightly say that 3 Waters will be an unelected body with say over all our water assets which currently resides with democratically elected local representatives.
6) Taking management of water assets from councils is an issue. You cant just say councils own water assets but are not allowed any of the benefits/liberties? of using those assets. There are court cases proceeding testing that.
So to say 3 Waters is just about racism or just about not wanting to pay for it is a misrepresentation.
Finally, I think it has a lot to do with people feeling pushed and squeezed by the govt with no-one listening to what they want. We have had a lot of that lately. Lets face it, the ink wasnt dry on the Wayne Brown proposal before it was publically ruled out.
Govt flooded the market with cash during Covid, crashed the interest rates, and gave it all to jo public to invest in property. If they had only invested in crucial infrastructure, and given green light for those workers to work during lockdown, instead of sitting at home.
“So to say 3 Waters is just about racism or just about not wanting to pay for it is a misrepresentation.”
But it is a convenient way to shut up debate, after all who wants to be a ‘racist’.
Excellent well informed Fantail.
I would add that surely the most straightforward way of finding water infrastructure is through the issue of Govt bonddd?
Three waters is another example of labour governing by stealth and I know longer trust them
Excellent summary Fantail
Fantail, More anti-Maori BS again! typical pakeha revisionist and spewing the Meremere Taniwha meme as if that was really the main issue only proves that your vitriol towards anything Maori is more evidence of your anti-Maori anything stance.
The thing about you Pakeha’s, that should know better but don’t is that you’ve really never got to know Maori values and beliefs towards the land, water, trees, creatures in its entirety! The first pakeha settlers upon arriving did, which is why they went out of their way to understand how Maori clicked. Even the Tyrant Governor George Grey went out of his way to learn Maori values and beliefs so he could then manipulate his way with the rangatira of the time one being Ariki Te Wherowhero.
Try harder Fantail instead of your boring anti-Maori diatribes.
What a load of rubbish. Sorry but Maori and non-Maori both suffer the human condition of exploitation of their environment. Maori were no better nor no worse than any other people at the time. They literally wiped out countless species in a matter of years, never once thinking of possible farming animals for future food protection. Sorry actually some tribes possibly did think to do that, but they were probably raided by their neighbouring tribe.
BTW they also mined, did the greenstone fall out of the sky?
I get tired of this ‘Maori have a special relationship with the environment’ when evidence says the opposite.
BG, Your tongue is hanging by your feet. ‘BTW they also mined, did the greenstone fall out of the sky?’
The stones were on the fucken top of the land not hundred of metres below the earth. Jeez you think Maori possessed metal before first contact with Pakeha? Duh!!”
‘Maori were no better nor no worse than any other people at the time. They literally wiped out countless species in a matter of years, never once thinking of possible farming animals for future food protection.’
Got proof of the countless species Maori apparently in your opinion wiped out??? For example, a small population of humans was responsible for driving Moa to extinction, however, many birds did not go extinct until after European colonization and still others remain extant today, And don’t conflate european farming practices and colonisation (clearing of large native forest) with Maori burning bushes to clear land, there is no comparison. The lost of native forest that the native species flourished had major impacts on species that’s reflected today.
‘Maori were no better nor no worse than any other people at the time.’
These micro-aggression troupes against Maori is a daily occurance, its never ending you’re one of the many pakeha bigots that push this shit regularly. Its ubiquitous in the pakeha vernacular and there is more of you’s which makes this type of aggression even more problematic.
Fantail,WCC, aka the Coven of Poneke, weren’t fiddling, they had issues with prioritising, but at least the rainbow pedestrian crossing’s getting a repaint job costing enough to feed one hundred hungry families for two years.
LOL
On the button Fantail.
Fantail – good detail but – you I think you miss the key point that Maori are giving greater proportional voting rights on the “overseeing body” than other New Zealanders. Also the problem of Te Mana o Te Wai is that, due to it’s absolute priority ranking, – it allows for destruction of communities and economies if there is ANY impact on waterways – it works backwards not just forwards ( prohibiting further development and degradation). I don’t agree with that- people are important to.
This debate has dragged on for a couple of years now with no end in sight. If the government had simply set up a contestable fund we could have solved many of the critical water infrastructure issues already.
And that is the English version Robber from Wellington as my understanding is when a treaty is signed the indigenous version should take precedent as it is more likely to be the true one and what was originally agreed to. But the English version also declares Maori would have full undisturbed possession of their land, fisheries etc etc and this has never really occurred and when Maori have received anything (like a TOW settlement) it has been a pittance.
And that is the English version Robber from Wellington as my understanding is when a treaty is signed the indigenous version should take precedent as it is more likely to be the true one and what was originally agreed to. But the English version also declares Maori would have full undisturbed possession of their land, fisheries etc etc and this has never really occurred and when Maori have received anything (like a TOW settlement) it has been a pittance.
@CiP agree that te reo Māori version of the Treaty should take precedence, I also I have more confidence in water management with tikanga rather than for example neoliberal principles.
However the lack of checks and balances around the binding Te Mana O Te Wai statements is a concern. It seems naive to assume that all governance at all times and in all places will be managed even for the benefit of all Māori, let alone all people rather than narrow special interests.
The Playcenter and 2 rōpū vetoing 4 other rōpū and the overwhelming majority of parents and staff is a case in point.
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/10/02/playcentre-aotearoa-urgently-need-to-step-up-or-risk-igniting-co-governance-backlash/
The demolition of roughly 50 Te Urewera huts may also be illustrative. It is proceeding without consultation (including of Tūhoe people) under the pretext of poor maintenance. Much is promised in replacements but no plans have been made public regarding timeline or scope.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/476295/te-urewera-backcountry-huts-will-be-gone-by-christmas-critic-says
Lastly as Denny references, the Bill allows entering into contracts with other water services entities which begs the question are Māori capitalists any different than Pākeha capitalists?
Tui, ‘The demolition of roughly 50 Te Urewera huts may also be illustrative. It is proceeding without consultation (including of Tūhoe people) under the pretext of poor maintenance. Much is promised in replacements but no plans have been made public regarding timeline or scope.’
Guess you haven’t been up the Te Urewera using those huts? and those local Maori protesting who weren’t a significant amount probably don’t use those huts on a regular basis which is probably why they’re being dismantled? Do you know how many huts in the Te Urewera??? And the real hunters in that roopu(area) don’t use those huts, they live under tarps, and make shift canopy’s. The people that use those huts are manly tourist, trampers, and that sometimes.
‘ Bill allows entering into contracts with other water services entities which begs the question are Māori capitalists any different than Pākeha capitalists?’
Not a single dollar of Treaty settlement money is passed over to Māori from the government without iwi being required to set up capitalist structures to receive and administer it as part of our capitalist economy. This is a vital pre-condition.
@Stephen
I said ‘may be illustrative’ which means ‘remains to be seen’. Playcenter is a concrete example any comment on that?
“Guess you haven’t been up the Te Urewera using those huts?”
— Only a few times I lack your vast knowledge and experience
“and those local Maori protesting who weren’t a significant amount probably don’t use those huts on a regular basis”
—- Yes those Māori, including Tūhoe kaumatua who disagree clearly lack mana, numbers or use those huts enough to meet the threshold for having a valid viewpoint. If they and the other local protestors used those huts as much as you they would know how little they get used.
“which is probably why they’re being dismantled?”
— Yes that and to “remove the western influences and their imprint within Te Urewera”. Also to “strengthen the connection between Tūhoe and Te Urewera” which is best done by removing huts that Tūhoe people could use while out in Te Urewera backcountry.
“Do you know how many huts in the Te Urewera???”
— About 47 open to everyone, although I don’t know how many of those are included in the 50 or so to be demolished.
And the real hunters in that roopu(area) don’t use those huts, they live under tarps, and make shift canopy’s.
— Real hunters use their bare hands and shit bullets
The people that use those huts are manly tourist, trampers, and that sometimes.
—- Yeah screw those losers. If they or any hunters get lost or injured and suffer or die from exposure during the time it takes to replace those huts (or not) it’s their own fault.
Not a single dollar of Treaty settlement money is passed over to Māori from the government without iwi being required to set up capitalist structures to receive and administer it as part of our capitalist economy. This is a vital pre-condition.
— So you are saying Māori capitalists have no agency, if they behave exactly like Pākeha capitalists that is the fault of the crown?
More word salad Tui! Typical
More insightful analysis Stephen
Go Tui.
Ye Tui, to North Korea or Ukraine, either would be suffice.
Impressive critique NaSC
Its as simple as what you get when you buy or acquire property legally. You get property rights, as per fee simple.
The chattels are described within the settlement agreement(s) and that it.
Whether you agree with what your neighbour does with their property is no business of yours.
At the end of the day. Iwi get forced into a shitty settlement whether they like or not. No more than 2% of the ‘agreed’ quantum. There is no negotiation.
Is water racist?
Overly-Woke Support Group
https://vimeo.com/284986055
Martyn, I see you have relied heavily on Bernard Hickey’s (flawed) assessment of the reasons for 3W.
He claims that the whole point is to place “the council-owned assets into new balance sheets that are also separate from the Crown’s…”
They won’t be at all, of course. This is only the appearance of separation. The debt is still backed by the Crown and taxpayers are still on the hook. Without the implied govt guarantee, the Water Services Entities would have a rating barely above junk bond status.
Thomas Cranmer points all this out at:
https://cranmer.substack.com/p/wayne-brown-lays-down-the-challenge?
So they can fuck this right off out of the proposed legislation!!
“Contracts relating to provision of water services
(1)
Despite section 116, a water services entity may enter into a contract for any aspect of the operation of all or part of water services for a term not longer than 35 years.”
WTF!
@Denny bingo
The government’s three waters proposal is a cloak for imposing far-reaching constitutional changes under “co-governance” and the end of equal rights for all New Zealanders. It involves the confiscation of community-owned assets and placing them under iwi control. Do you understand the function of Te Mana O Te Wai statements as binding directives to water services providers that can only be issued by Maori? The Auditor-General has also ripped into the lack of accountability either to communities or to Parliament in the proposal. Yet this house of cards could in theory rack up $150 billon in debt.
If Maori have a customary right or interest in certain bodies of water they can litigate in the courts or negotiate with government. But this hare-brained scheme needs to be booted out of the park.
Maybe its worth having a read of what the ‘Bill’, the proposed legislation says and then ….
https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2022/0136/latest/LMS534587.html#LMS534627
Part 2
Water services entities
Subpart 1—Establishment of water services entities
10 Water services entities established
11 Objectives of water services entities
12 Functions of water services entities
13 Operating principles
14 Duties to provide funding and information
15 Status of water services entities
16 Shares in water services entities
17 Core things water services entities can do
18 Other things water services entities can do
19 Acts must be for purpose of functions
and then, my fav….
“117Contracts relating to provision of water services
(1)
Despite section 116, a water services entity may enter into a contract for any aspect of the operation of all or part of water services for a term not longer than 35 years.
(2)
If a water services entity enters into a contract under subsection (1), it must—
(a)
continue to be legally responsible for providing the water services; and
(b)
maintain ownership of the infrastructure and assets relating to the water services; and
(c)
retain control over—
(i)
the pricing of water services; and
(ii)
developing policy related to the delivery of water services.
(3)
This section does not prevent a water services entity from entering into a contract with 1 or more other water services entities if the purpose of the contract relates solely to water services.
Compare: 2002 No 84, s 136 …”
Doesnt this say the iwi water entity can sell a 35 year contract for the running of water services to internional watercorp as long as iwi rubber stamp the pricing. Then international water takes out a huge loan to buy the contract and the consumer pays back the loan plus interest for 35 years on top of the normal drinking water system running costs. Seriously I think this is Maori saying you want to live on our land you’ll need water! Its like raiding comanches denying migrating cattle farmers access to rivers in the wild west. 😉
Joseph, rubbish
No. I think it’s an open invitation to multinationals like Blackrock Inc and other vulture capitalists to come and milk us all and then put us deeper into debt with these binding contracts and then place an encumbrance over the assets if ‘we’ don’t pay up! And then we’re fucked good and proper.
The leadership of Groundswell admitted to not having read it when they held their first mobilization. Interview to TV camera.
The issue is that government has mixed in this co-governance concept into a restructure of the water systems.
Two separate things entirely.
They didn’t explain co-governance; what it means, the merits or otherwise. This should be discussed and debated as a completely separate issue to the water systems.
Not stirred in under the cover of darkness. And one daren’t say anything else face the risk of being labelled racist.
No just read Article 2 of the Treaty of Waitangi it spell it out loud and clear!!
Her Majesty the Queen of England confirms and guarantees to the Chiefs and Tribes of New Zealand and to the respective families and individuals thereof the full exclusive and undisturbed possession of their Lands and Estates Forests Fisheries and other properties which they may collectively or individually possess so long as it is their wish and desire to retain the same in their possession; but the Chiefs of the United Tribes and the individual Chiefs, yield to Her Majesty the exclusive right of Preemption over such lands as the proprietors thereof may be disposed to alienate at such prices as may be agreed upon between the respective Proprietors and persons appointed by Her Majesty to treat with them in that behalf.
Where does the revelation that a TVNZ/RNZ merger means (election year) current affairs at 7pm come from?
Conclusion,treaty debate,my whanau,you are not one of us who you,ask my tamariki,wai,and waitai,is our place to enjoy, without ignorance exploit,we farm so waid in our rivers no need to swim just waid,was one of a farmers best fail ministers shipley, that key said gave him insperation.
My god there’s some shit dribbled on here.
Let’s park the Co-Governance for a moment. Ultimately I don’t see it has any merit in the immediate outcome needed. (improved water quality) All it does is raise hackles, and accusations of racism. And as someone posted above: creates both division and distraction.
Most of you are better than that.
What I understand as the ultimate goal of 3W:
– improved and reliable supply of drinking water
– improved and reliable discharge of stormwater
– improved and reliable treatment – discharge of wastewater
Now we have a free and unbiased poll at our fingertips. You lot.
Who could tell us of genuine and on going problems in one of the 3 areas listed above in their region?
Who could honestly say their council has not put any money or resources into improving their water infrastructure in the last decade, and have no plans to do more?
I’m not arguing overall as a country, we haven’t kept up, or abreast with population growth.
It’s clear to all we haven’t. Our population has nearly doubled in 30 years, infrastructure: roading, health, power and water to name a few have not.
Equally we know many of our rivers and lakes are tainted. It’s a different conversation.
But, and here’s the big but…..
How the fuck does giving a few billion dollars to councils all around the country, to take these so called “assets” off their hands, so the “Let’s Do This” party of non delivery, can then spend some more billions, fix it?
And this is without me being cynical and thinking; they spent a billion fixing mental health.
Homelessness.
I’ll stop there.
Let’s put aside my cynicism and imagine for just a moment they’re a super organised party of high achievers. With a proven track record of success.
How does taking these local council LIABILITIES and paying the councils billions for them, provide us with one teaspoon of better water, either going in or coming out?
It simply doesn’t. It’s billions of our taxes down the ironical drain. Billions to BUY the water “assets”
Just give the councils the bloody money!
With strict controls around spend. Dare I say like Winnie’s provincial growth fund. And get the problems sorted. Perhaps there could be a central taskforce, providing central govt assistance, expertise to the various councils to avoid replication provide efficiencies. Coordinate purchasing to use scale for better pricing. Coordinate local resources, so we’re competing with each other for the same resources, instead rolling from region to region. Etc.
It’s not that hard, this sort behaviour and methodology is common place in the real world of multinational business, I’m afraid the butcher, baker and candle stick maker running our country just don’t have the nous.
Lastly stop perpetuating the bullshit around nothing being done. It’s misinformation at the highest level.
Auckland has and is spending billions. Here is just one example
https://www.watercare.co.nz/Central-interceptor
Spend a few minutes researching what Christchurch has done in recent years.
Stop buying into the govt PR machine we’re about to go to hell in a handcart.
Brilliant post Mick!
On that note, the counter-proposal by those big city mayors will pretty soon tell us whether this is actually really genuinely truly honestly about fixing the problems, or if it is about this co-governance thing. Because if Govt doesn’t accept this very doable counter-proposal , then we know don’t we. Although, most of us here know the answer already, don’t we.
Yes SK we are tumbling the Labour Government secret agenda.
Fabulous Mick.
The people running our country just don’t have the nous.
Sounds like it is preparing to be a long-running NZ tv series. First there was Twin Peaks and now Three Waters! It’s got all the ingredients, drama, pathos, the little guy (Councils and citizens) against the big guy with power Big Government, the sort of scenario enacted by the wealth-hungry USA movers and shakers. I think we should make like reef fish in this present world, dart out and organise a raid for what we need then retire to our burrows and get on with living..
such a galvanizing subject this 3 waters thing. I’m almost cynical enough to think this is an orchestrated play to bring out a political issue on the back of the universal human right of access to water. shelter food protection – you know those infallible things to us all.
They could have just put in a framework and sent down edicts and ultimatums. You know – a whole schematic plan as built and where to go from here – this is obviously not an engineering driven thing – is it?
Comments are closed.