Labour’s attempt to entrench the need for a 60% majority to privatise water has been frowned upon by the anorak train spotting brigade.
Sure Labour and the Greens shouldn’t be entrenching legislation BUT you just can’t trust National and ACT when it comes to privatisation and it’s important to ensure they can’t privatise our water once it’s brought together in 3 Waters.
ACTs first attempted change to 3 Waters at the first reading was to recommend Public-Private-Partnerships to run water so you see why the Left want to entrench against water privatisation when the first suggestion to 3 Waters is Public-Private-Partnerships!
From the beginning for me, 3 Waters needed to do 3 things.
1 – Provide fresh clean water to everyone in NZ.
2 – Ensure water can never be privatised.
3 – Stop foreign company water bottling.
It’s questionable 3 Waters can do the first, it’s moot if it can do the 3rd, yet it seems to do little to prevent the second!
Queenstown Lakes District councillor, Niki Gladding, has given a brutal assessment of how the technical changes in the legislation are open to an interpretation where our water could be privatised.
I urge the Government’s immediate attention to this.
Because there’s no way we can allow any mechanism that makes potentially privatising our water a possibility!
In my thinking, we should just Nationalise the Water and see Co-Governance as a brake peddle to any future privatisation.
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.
Using the existing co-governance infrastructure developed by ACT and National, 3 Waters is the expression of that entire process.
If ACT, the Taxpayers Union and National all dog whistle long enough on this and win the election, they’ll cancel 3 Waters which will lead to an immediate challenge in the Waitangi Tribunal where Māoridom will argue they negotiated a deal, as the Court had stated and then the Crown dumped it. The Court will rule in Māoridom’s favour and Luxon will face his own Helen Clark moment and just try to confiscate the water legally.
This of course will spark one hell of a violent protest response.
So before we get there, how about we get this right and entrench Public ownership around our water. Seize it under the Public Works Act if you need, but just get it done, because we can’t in good faith accept an outcome where privatisation is easier.
Explain the need for co-governance to provide the essential hand break to stop white rich people selling our water off to corporations.
This all seems moot because any Parliament with 51% majority can pass legislation to over rule any entrenchment of policy.
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 going into this pandemic and 2020 election – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media.
60 percent majority nowhere near the mark make it over 95 percent if they’re actually serious.
A better response to Key selling 49% of our Hydro assets would be:
A) nationalizing them without compensation
B) trying Key for treason and giving him the traditional punishment
You do realise that the Government is getting more money from the 51% dividend than when it had 100% ownership.
So it would get almost twice as much now if it had the other 49% as well.
meanwhile infrastructure goes to shit–literally tom
You still don’t understand Martyn.
For many NZers it’s not what it is how.
To make such massive societal changes you should not be doing it in such a sneaky arrogant underhand manner with zero public knowledge or input. If your plan is so good and needed the public will support you, if your plan is akin to a regurgitated dogs breakfast no one really knows or understands, inc those in Govt, then they won’t.
Exactly Peter
Once we become a republic after the neoliberals convince us to spit in the face of the Crown, this will be the new normal. You got a roof? Then you’ll also need a rain harvesting license to collect the water off it. You like breathing air? You’ll need a permit to puff while running. How about walking? You like walking? Better get a permit to use the surface of the Earth which will soon belong to the likes of Elon Musk-rat… You like looking there and over there, and there too? Then you’ll need a peering ticket to cover the costs of views. Views don’t come cheap you know. Pretty soon we’ll need a permit to drop dead.
And guess what CB, with all of that comes a state sector that will employ 1,000.000 people or more. Martyn’s idea of heaven. That leaves just you and a few other productive farmers to carry an entire country full of pigs in the trough.
Old news. There are already councils contemplating putting water meters on both rainwater collection and private wells/bores. No joke!
Yes, just like TUT (Tuhoe) saying that they only want you to experience an authentic Tuhoe experience – which as you say – wont come cheap! Exactly what we were told wouldnt happen when Te U was handed back.
Looking at our brand new NZ there CB. Another good comment from you.
I’m sorry but a super majority clause for ideological laws without agreement of the majority of MP’s is plain stupid and it opens up one hell of a Pandora’s box for any other government to do the same. And even though the Greens are thick, I can’t help but wonder who was pulling their chain with that little gem! No debate, no public feedback. Imagine if National did similar!
3 or 5 Waters, or whatever Jacinda denies it is appears little to do with water quality and everything to do with control, let’s be very honest. As much as the government denies it, its about unelected no name people from nowhere having huge control over ALL water over the democratically elected and potentially holding us all to ransom with that power.
The more the government tries to sneak this through the more it looks like a flea ridden mangy dog. The super majority yet another example of the bullshit that this undemocratic legislation has to use to get its way.
The entire 3 Waters policy has stunk from the beginning and it reeks of dishonesty because it masks its true intent. Jacinda may be useless and definitely leading her government to defeat anyway but unless she takes control of this dog and some of her more shadowy Ministers, it’s going to sink the Labour Party permanently. And although I don’t quite think that’s what she on mind by being transformative, she is set to do just that if she passes 3 Waters!
“Let’s be very honest.” Very honest???
Many years ago I learned never to believe anyone who uttered the phrase, ‘Let’s be honest.” A flowery cascade of pure bullshit-spin was sure to follow.
Congrats, XRAY
You just believe it’s all about the water quality In Vino. And Santa Claus!
You must love how Jacinda claims you never lie then.
Well it was actually the greens.
“appears little to do with water quality”
Because it has absolutely nothing to do with water quality, the water quality ministry has already been created – this is the second stage. Three fifths waters is literally just who governs local infrastructure, quality standards will come at them from elsewhere.
While I am with you on most of it. I don’t support the proposed 60% entrention at all. Sage and Labour have put us all on a slippery course where this will just become the norm for both sides going forward. The Te Man O Wai statements also need to be removed as they in effect grant 100% governance to Maori and it is not Co-Governance at all.
Many people (~ over 90% at the last justice referendum) will have no problem with National+Act entrenching 3 Strikes next time they can. We might even move back to public executions some day.
Labour+Greens undemocratic action (no surprises there) will open a festering can of worms.
Why would Labour need to entrench anything???? Surely, surely, they are going to win the election.
Cabbage, that’s beside the point really. The huge issue here is entrenched legislation, which Parliament has traditionally been reluctant to enact because they’ve not always been dumbos like they are now. It binds future legislators, and can be almost impossible to change, when change may in fact be a better or more equitable option, in different circumstances.
Why will there be violent protests if “co-governance” don’t get their hands on half of Watercare? Protests about what?
While the water assets are owned by, is it 100, councils up and down the country its very difficult for International Water Inc to overide local councillors and voters and gain control. Four regional water entities is just the
method to make privatisation easier just like Roger Douglases state owned corporations Telecom and Electricorp. Co governance just means maori who from what I can surmise dont have a lot of experience operating water infrastructure will lease out their water rights to corpoarations in the same way that maori not having experience of operating factory scale fishing leased out their fish quota. This whole neoliberal bigger better more efficiency bs is the same scam that has seen higher consumer electricity prices and higher super city rates. There is absolutely no doubt that 3 waters will result in everyone paying more for their share of the rain.
Yes ultimately I suspect it will be about 3 times more. Exactly what happenned with electricity when it went out of Council control it doubled. This will be worse because Labour has bribed councils with $1.5 billion with money borrowed from international lenders so it will start with millions of dollars in interst debt from Day 1.
” I can’t help but wonder who was pulling their chain with that little gem! No debate, no public feedback. Imagine if National did similar! ”
Yes given there own control of parliament with a friendly National party speaker with David Carter parliaments 29th speaker who agreed with Stephen Joyce with his ” its nearly legal ” argument with controversial and blatant interference in the rule of law and the outcome of their own corrupt controversies and showed their own arrogance for democratic practice to run the country only for them and their wealthy donors.
This is excellent news. Can’t wait for a future Nat/ACT government to use the same stunt to enact the following:
– Employment Contracts Act 1991
– Flat income tax rate at 20%
– Time restricted welfare benefits.
– Government shall not own any businesses that competes with any private sector business.
– Invite oil, gas and coal mining companies back and make a law to prevent their drilling and mining rights from being interfered with ever again.
🙂
NACT have always relied on Labour not having the balls or idealogical will to reverse their privatisation agenda – eg we’re still fuming about the sham electricity market and Key’s asset grab but we know that nothing will ever be done to right these wrongs.
Co governance is a terrible idea but on the plus side who would buy a privatised entity that comes with a vocal obstructive rabble as part of the deal?
Tom you might consider , on your surname, dropping the H and replacing it with a C.
20% flat rate on a pittance of a salary. And wankers from National wonder why every one leaves for Australia and beyond.
3 waters was shit show from the start and its getting shitter by the minute. No other way to describe it.
What a load of shit. Its the 35 year contracts dummy!
Whoever owns the contracts, owns the water, infrastructure and services that goes with and they can be paid 480B+ FOR IT!
Apparently, the new laws have an amendment this week that takes the 35 year thing down to 15 but they are now talking 20 just BTW
Ken gets it. The end justifies the means is never accepted politics. This is much bigger than privatisation.
Inept and dangerous foolishness from Labour and Greens. And today we see Ardern and Hipkins claiming they didn’t even know there SOP had been inserted! Just who is running Labour?
its an absolute outrage.
Our constitution is based on Parliamentary supremacy. It is the only way people in NZ have a voice especially when you have a rogue government like this one. Entrenchment like this is a filibuster to rival the most corrupt US Republican tactics. I’m not buying that Eugenie Sage who has a particular demographic and is on her way out of politics just happened to dream this up now.
There are signs that this was being considered several months ago before the consultation documents were in so to say it’s a result of overwhelming requests via the consultation process to protect water from privatisation isn’t credible.
Also if it’s so important that it has to be entrenched why the 60% threshold and not the 75%? Could it be because that this is the current majority of this government but a majority unlikely to be reached by a Right leaning Govt under MMP especially with approaching demographic changes.
Entrenching legislation like this will destroy our democracy as it will be used by both sides to corrupt parliamentary supremacy. We will end up like the US with a democracy in name only.
Well said Fantail.
The problem here is the precedent being set.
If this is allowed to proceed what would stop a future Government of any stripe claiming entrenchment provisions on any of their pet policies.
Democracy was certainly the loser in this debacle.
What’s worse is Ardern lied about knowing about this move by Sage/ Mahuta to introduce entrancement into the 5 waters policy.
Ardern was in the caucus meeting when it was discussed!
Ardern is not to be trusted… To much spin, lies and deception.
Comments are closed.