Chris Trotter has an intellect and insight I truly respect but his article on 29 November ‘Has Labour Become a Co-Governance Party?’ is strong on imagery and historical sound bites but light on 3 Waters.
Firstly, 3 Waters is not just about co-governance. It is about rescuing the New Zealand people from our local bodies inability to look after, or afford to look after our water infrastructure. People have died and others damaged health from poor quality water. Some areas just can’t afford the rates to upgrade sewage systems.
The current local body practice of borrowing against the asset value of the water infrastructure just to run local bodies and their pet business friendly projects is just setting up a rates nightmare into the future. They aren’t spending the borrowings just on waters. These borrowings risk our water assets being sold in the future to overseas entities to pay for debts local bodies can’t sustain. And those foreign entities will charge through the nose for an essential service like water and sewerage.
3 waters is a vital, well thought out in its principles, vision of how to look after New Zealanders. Real people helped and everyone will benefit. The assets are simply transferred from a local level to a National/regional level in terms of accountability. Nothing is stolen as local communities continue to have full use of the infrastructure. And they have as much democratic input as currently.
This is why 3 waters is being done.
Co-Governance is at the very least a simple recognition of the private property rights clearly written into the Treaty. The english wrote the treaty and they were clearly thinking of it as giving Maori private property rights, and all the rights of British subjects to have those protected with an extension to include even communally owned property, which includes waters. Maori owned the water just like some businesses do today. Tribes have property rights over waters, at the least.
Equal representation on regional boards is a simply recognition of those property rights, and Treaty rights. If the boards start disadvantaging people there would be a media response on the practical event and what was happening. There would be accountability through a national response.
Chris heralds electoral doom for Labour, and this may be true but on the point of 3 Waters it would be because of rampant misinformation and hysteria.
Where is the threat to democracy? Nobody’s vote is removed. Because if 3 waters which protects private property rights in an equal partnership of Maori and other New Zealanders is somehow anti-democratic then where are all the other articles about private property rights destroying democracy. I’m sorry Chris but your article was too light on detail about what the problem is. It just promotes electoral fear.
Note: Current Labour like Helen Clark did with the Foreshore and Seabed, is not standing up to rebut the crazy ideas. It looks weak, as if you aren’t sure of the rightness of your position. It makes the other side look right. It lets the alternative narrative and facts fill the gap. Labour should be leading in this issue from the top at every press conference to rebut every misleading story or feature. And repeat the benefits of three waters.
“I am proud of Labour’s initiative on 3 waters and Co-Goverance”
I suppose there had to be one!
Something like what Aldous Huxley said.
It’s the unelected other half of the co-governance aspect of 3 Waters that is of concern. Who are these people? Who hires them? Who vets them? How did we get rid of them if they underperform, are inept, or plain bad? Who do they answer to? Why is this even being considered as acceptable?
Although we live in a “democracy” the truth is we get very little say and it’s only election day that we get to hold the feet of those who govern us to the fire. And they know it!
That’s the concern. These unelected untouchable people who hold such sway over the people can do what they want and there is nothing we can do about it. There are plenty of examples of how bad it gets with the unelected model. And relying on the media to protect us is no substitute to the vote!
Sort that aspect out and I think few would have an issue with 3 Waters.
Yes , you are setting up a climate for Maori demigods to rule by proclamation
Well articulated XRAY .I and many like me see the creep of this government taking more and more control of our lives with little opportunity for us to have imput other than at the ballot box. Water hospitals roads are all on the block .It is not just those on the right are concerned.
Reply to Xray at 6.58am. Hi, you are overworrying how Maori will be elected. In some ways it’s not your business. There are lots of similar examples. e.g. We don’t have a say over who gets elected to boards of private companies. A representative of a company can go onto an advisory board and we don’t have a vote on that. Maori are doing nothing different than our democracy currently gives to private companies that own private property. But this is waters and there will be public scrutiny of actions, and of outcomes. If there are incompetent people then issues will be publicised. MR Underpants for example.
You’ve made a false equivalence: water services aren’t private companies.
Hi Stephen
I’ve lived with Aucklands Council Controlled Organisations (CCO’s) in action, Auckland Transport being the main culprit and we can’t unelected them either and when they do what they want, and they do, it’s bad. Best we can do is boot the mayor out but it’s not a guarantee much will change and its not exactly democracy!
Watercare so far have been okay but I do not want any further degradation of the control public utilities to unelected untouchable individuals from who knows where!
And if you are referring to Tuku, he’s got a John Wayne swagger riding into town to stamp his claim with 3 Waters and that concerns me greatly!
It is most certainly our business when water is an essential commodity which, unlike eg electricity, we have no choice about which provider we can use.
We pay for this service via rates or otherwise, and we can out- vote city councillors and regional councillors if their performance or management displeases us.
Further, we can write to councils, table correspondence to be read at meetings, attend some council committee meetings, make representations to council committee meetings, phone mayors, request meetings with mayors and attend their clinics, all of which I and others have done, over the years.
Disagreeing with you does not make me racist.
Rates don’t pay for the 3 water works. Old right wing mayors and Councilors campaign on keeping rates low so can’t pay for essential works – kickcan down the road. An example, exclusive Auckland inner suburbs have combined sewer/stormwater that create overflow of sewer during heavy rains. After main interceptor is completed where is Council getting funds to separate the lateral mains. Methinks the ratepayers of south and west Auckland will pay for it. I will fully support the 3 waters legislation.
You may well be right @ JM. Management of water does need a new vision, a set of sound principles to protect the resource for future use of all New Zealanders. That much I agree with. I also acknowledge the recognition of the private property rights clearly written into the Treaty. That is who we are as a people, or should be, a positive legacy to our colonial past.
But there’s an ancient story worth recalling that speaks metaphorically of a strategy to trick unsuspecting folk of the city to accept what appears to be well intended. Isn’t that what people are cautious of? More so given the lack of transparency.
@ SM
Anna Lorke labour MP stated it is not 3 or 5 waters. It is all water.
No discussion, no select committee, 80000 submissions discarded without their contents being recorded, constitutional coup without even discussing it with the party leaders
This has passed the co-governance bus stop and is rapidly heading to Maori control
Reply to Tribal Scot at 7.35am. I’m surprised at how willing you are to show how scared and afraid you are. ‘Maori control”? There are still elections. Maori have 7 Maori seats out of 120 (approx). This is about the administration of water – ‘coup without even discussing it with the party leaders’. Party leaders have had plenty to say. The issue is being fully discussed like here. There are always different ways to discuss in a democracy. Except where are your facts?
Why does he need facts? That’s a colonial concept. This is his way.
You say, “There are always different ways to discuss in a democracy.” Sure there are different ways to discuss but then the decision is put to a vote. One man, one vote. Not seeing democracy in action here. Its not water for electricity or the so called right to pollute that people are concerned about it is their loss of control of their drinking water and the drinking water assets they have paid for and built up over 150 years.
Joseph It’s every drop of water in ponds, parks, lochs, botanical gardens, council reserve land, and utterly preposterous for Maori to claim a special affinity when man’s relationship with water predates their arriving upon these shores by eons, and well documented in Greek mythology, celebrated in stupendous orchestral music, and a basis for time-honoured poetry and drama, although Hone Tuwhare did write a nice poem about rain.
These people are trying to obliterate other people’s European cultural heritage, and one of my Maori relatives said that they make half it up as they go along.
“Co-Governance is at the very least a simple recognition of the private property rights clearly written into the Treaty.” and “Maori owned the water just like some businesses do today. Tribes have property rights over waters, at the least.”
I agree with that however
“It is about rescuing the New Zealand people from our local bodies inability to look after, or afford to look after our water infrastructure.”
That’s why the select committee recommended 3/5 waters extends to coastal waters?
“3 waters is a vital, well thought out in its principles, vision of how to look after New Zealanders. Real people helped and everyone will benefit.”
Now who is light on detail and I’d add, heavy on wishful thinking. The only people I’m sure will benefit are a few well heeled individuals who will be granted carte balance/veto powers with mana o te wai statements. Presumably we can trust to altruism because no one would use such powers to leverage special interests right?
As it is so “well thought out” how does one party with veto power constitute an equal partnership, what happens when MOTW statements come into conflict with each other, how do you prevent ‘capture’ of individuals responsible for MOTW by corporate interests and lobbying?
I’m sure you will gloss over, to paraphrase as ‘operational details better addressed in submissions to the select committee’. Would that be the select committee that appears to have ignored the general sentiment of roughly 88,000 submissions?
“These borrowings risk our water assets being sold in the future to overseas entities to pay for debts local bodies can’t sustain.”
And 3 Waters does not prevent this, consolidation to fewer entities facilitates it.
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/07/19/guest-blog-niki-gladding-how-3-waters-becomes-a-blueprint-for-water-privatisation/
If it does not privatise resources it will privatise profits and nothing stops those profits flowing overseas with an opportunity to clip the ticket on the way out.
“Labour should be leading in this issue from the top at every press conference to rebut every misleading story or feature. And repeat the benefits of three waters.”
What does it say that Labour, with a media savvy leader who is an excellent communicator, combined with all those new PR people have chosen not to front-foot this?
Agree Tui
Reply to Tui at 7.47am, Hi, the only problem with your talk about well heeled people is that this is what is happening now with local body control. So everything you say about going to overseas interests applies equally with the current local body control. Local control has failed. Half the complaints could be from people worried they might lose a contract to milk the local council – but are they going to say that?
And what about the legislation to prevent private sale.
Your comments are ignoring the current people benefiting and ‘welfare-ing’ off council contracts. You fear a future but ignore the current failure.
In other words, Stephen, you’re saying that if current systems are not good enough, there’s no merit in being concerned about future systems not being good enough either. That looks pretty defeatist to me.
Stephen+Minto you don’t seem to be listening to anything anyone is saying…
Consider this, humans have been in NZ for 800-900 years. We broke off from Gondwanaland 85 million years ago and became a seperate land. Who owned the water for the other 84.99 years? Surely its arrogance in the extreme to say Maori own the water?
Meh. No one can “control” nor have “power” over water. Infrastructure, yes. But our drinking water is controlled by planet Earth and macro energies beyond our control. Good eh? 🙂
Sinic. Nice one. Thanks for a wry and gentle smile – needed. By the way, are you racist, or homophobic or anything like that ? ( Rhetorical question. )
Someone sane writing about 3 waters – thank you. Excellent article – let’s hope this type of article has an impact on the ‘white genocide’ and ‘threat to democracy’ hysteria being peddled by the right and some closer to home.
If you think ‘white genocide’ and ‘threat to democracy’ is all that is wrong with 3 Waters then you havent read enough on 3 Waters. There are so many things wrong with it, any sane person would run away screaming. It’s debt provisions are so appalling that it is either going to fail or if not fail, then increase the cost of water many times over. If it does fail, it is nicely parcelled for sale and don’t even go there with the entrenchment provisions.
Seriously dude, you need to go read beyond the rhetoric and any race assumptions that you have and see that if our water needs fixing this is absolutely not the way to fix it. i am not saying the status quo is perfect but I am saying there are a handful of other options, all of them far less risky than what is going on here.
You would hope so but it appears that most people are happy to believe the scare campaign and no amount of evidence would change their mind. Obviously the Co governance aspect is a major problem as people fear a group they are not part off having some power over them.
“Firstly, 3 Waters is not just about co-governance” Yet your first point was about co-governance.
If it’s not about co-governance, remove co-governance from the legislation? Why the left want to die on this hill astounds me. Is Labour truly beholden to its Maori caucus, or are you just sick of being in power? NACT will repeal this anyway!
The hatred of Maori is so evident in these responses.
Agreed and its hysterical and scary. People who don’t have anything real to complain about so they have to latch onto something and make a mountain out of a mole hill. Reminds me of Brexit in the UK – take an underlying current of hatred and make it big enough to destroy your countries economic future.
No ,the cornerstone of democracy is accountability , co governance has no checks and balances for inept, corrupt , cronyism, nepotism and transparency. At the top should be govt , then cultural and religion beneath that , otherwise you end up with Iran and Afghanistan supreme leaders
Sounds like the Key’s National Party coalition with the Maori party, carte blanche.
Good piece by Stephen Minto. NZ Labour needs to sell the useful reforms they have done more often, and promote 3 Waters in a positive way.
The only people that will “steal the water” are private capital!
Having been an indoctrinated to believe civil servants are there for the good of all I can understand your attitude to them getting more power add Maori input to this and you have a dream team in the eyes of most of the left. When you see the mess that civil servants have placed the health and education sector I have no faith in them controlling my water .At the moment if I have a problem I can ring the council if I get no joy I can contact my councillor if all else fails I can go in person to the council chambers. If I need to contact Wellington I can expect a few hours wait on the phone and talk to someone who will make promises and who will not give me this name and nothing will get done .
As I say this will hopefully be fixed at the next election .
Too right mate.
Thank goodness for this post. Sensible, informed and right.
You first write :
“If the boards start disadvantaging people there would be a media response on the practical event and what was happening. There would be accountability through a national response.”
And then go on to ask :
“Where is the threat to democracy?”
Do you not see the irony of that question?
You are literally asking the entire nation to rely on media response rather than agreeing to have them democratically appointed!
This interpretation of the treaty is just wrong!
An argument about the treaty is becoming like an argument with an American gun nut!
The treaty didn’t factor in immigrants!
Immigrants from the past 100 years run this country & pay a much bigger share of taxes than Maori yet they are out of all governance discussion, why? Just because a few English people signed a piece of paper 180 years ago!!
As your messiah would say “I reject your logic!”
Question. Will 3 Waters result in higher water bills for the ordinary bloke and ordinary sheila whether they be maori or pakeha?
Question. Will 3 Waters result in the privatisation of water infrastructure?
I’m willing to bet the answer is yes and yes. S.Minto would you be willing to bet that the answer is no and no?
Joseph. Well when they separated the power lines companies we were told, I think by Max Bradford, that it would result in cheaper electricity for the ordinary bloke and sheila. In fact some rich people have gotten much richer, councils and rate payers, incredibly, contribute to the maintenance of the power lines which the off-shore rich boys profit from, and the ordinary bloke and his ageing pensioner parents can no longer afford to keep their homes warm, evidenced by the fact that government – aka the taxpayer- forks up for pathetic keep-warm payments in winter for some persons. Nothing ever results in cheaper.
Will they fork up water subsidies too, in face of the health impacts which mushroom when families have to pay for the water which they use ? We can’t even go down to the river to bathe any more, and tap into artesian water or dig your own well, and these water greedies will do you for that too. It’s a ruthless scenario, not just haphazard.
And the door is just ajar,as those enterprising farm fence and small inlet communities with the aid of corporate leaning political parties,free market,our water rights,the same wankers mainly milkers,polluted our rivers,still for most not swimable for our kids and grandchildren.
Comments are closed.