Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

[miket12]

Sigh... I'll use an example that hopefully you can appreciate

Three Waters emcompassed drinking water, stormwater and wastewater

If I do a poo in my toilet, that poo goes down my drain and joins up with a network that is owned by Auckland ratepayers and managed by Watercare. The poo travels down the network to a wastewater treatment centre in Mangere, where, amongst other things, it it oxidised to remove pathogens before it meets the require safety levels to be deposited back into the environment in line with Watercare's resource consent to do so, which it has obtained in accordance with the RMA that requires it to consult with Iwi, and act in accordance with said RC. Watercare is owned by Auckland ratepayers and it is funded by those ratepayers to treat their poo and operate a fit for pupose network. If there is any capex or opex shortfall, this is funded by raising rates and/or taking on debt. If there are any issues with the network or Watercare, these are addressed between a democratically-elected Council that is answerable to the ratepayers, who have the ability to exert control over the asset they own to remove the poo from their homes and treat it before getting rid of it. The process has its faults but ultimately, the operator is answerable to the council, who is answerable to the electorate. As outlined in one of my previous posts, funding could be cheaper if done centrally, but there is clear control, and ratepayers at least have visilbility of how they can influence decision-making

I don't consider my poo a valuable natural resource. Far from it!!! Your mileage may vary. Nor do I consider the wastewater pipes or the sewerage that Watercare operates. Watercare is bound, like any other business, to adhere to its RC, which requires it to obtain consent from the local Iwi to operate the way it does.

You say that the Treaty requires involvement of māori over water as a natural resource. Despite me being such an ignoramus and racist (in your eyes), I agree. I also was educated on the Treaty. In none of my classes was I taught that the chiefs requested the right to partner with the Crown on removing poo from homes, taking it away and doing something with it. Imagine the scenes at Waitangi if they did! The other chiefs would have thought them crazzy. You obviously disagree however, so, in the spirit of @MaybeTop8, please provide facts to identify these individuals

That was one of the many issues with Three Waters. If Watercare needed to upgrade its pipes / treament plant / vans, it should just go ahead and do so and be answerable to the people that pay for it.

Speaking of education, as a field trip in biology, we visited the wastewater treatment plants. Interesting stuff. Despite the sewage being such a valuable resource, I can't remember any classmates stuffing into their pockets, to enjoy on the bustrip back. Your school trips must have been a bit different!

That's also not taking into account that WaterCare have three key partnership elements with local iwi...
1. The Mana Whenua Kaitaiki Forum was established in 2012 to provide input on cultural, environmental, social and economic impacts on all of WaterCare's major projects. Representatives from all 19 recognised local iwi meet regularly to review planned projects and resource-consents.
2. A sub-group of the broader forum focus on regional issues and the largest projects, to ensure māori perspectives at all stages not just of planning but also delievery.
3. Finally, there's a Relationship Agreement with Waikato-Tainui committing WaterCare to provide action plans and annual funding for the lower Waikato River restoration.

The fact is, there has been a huge local māori input into WaterCare.... just groups like the māori Party like to pretend it's not there!!!

 

[Worried2Death]

Sigh... I'll use an example that hopefully you can appreciate

Three Waters emcompassed drinking water, stormwater and wastewater

If I do a poo in my toilet, that poo goes down my drain and joins up with a network that is owned by Auckland ratepayers and managed by Watercare. The poo travels down the network to a wastewater treatment centre in Mangere, where, amongst other things, it it oxidised to remove pathogens before it meets the require safety levels to be deposited back into the environment in line with Watercare's resource consent to do so, which it has obtained in accordance with the RMA that requires it to consult with Iwi, and act in accordance with said RC. Watercare is owned by Auckland ratepayers and it is funded by those ratepayers to treat their poo and operate a fit for pupose network. If there is any capex or opex shortfall, this is funded by raising rates and/or taking on debt. If there are any issues with the network or Watercare, these are addressed between a democratically-elected Council that is answerable to the ratepayers, who have the ability to exert control over the asset they own to remove the poo from their homes and treat it before getting rid of it. The process has its faults but ultimately, the operator is answerable to the council, who is answerable to the electorate. As outlined in one of my previous posts, funding could be cheaper if done centrally, but there is clear control, and ratepayers at least have visilbility of how they can influence decision-making

I don't consider my poo a valuable natural resource. Far from it!!! Your mileage may vary. Nor do I consider the wastewater pipes or the sewerage that Watercare operates. Watercare is bound, like any other business, to adhere to its RC, which requires it to obtain consent from the local Iwi to operate the way it does.

You say that the Treaty requires involvement of māori over water as a natural resource. Despite me being such an ignoramus and racist (in your eyes), I agree. I also was educated on the Treaty. In none of my classes was I taught that the chiefs requested the right to partner with the Crown on removing poo from homes, taking it away and doing something with it. Imagine the scenes at Waitangi if they did! The other chiefs would have thought them crazzy. You obviously disagree however, so, in the spirit of @MaybeTop8, please provide facts to identify these individuals

That was one of the many issues with Three Waters. If Watercare needed to upgrade its pipes / treament plant / vans, it should just go ahead and do so and be answerable to the people that pay for it.

Speaking of education, as a field trip in biology, we visited the wastewater treatment plants. Interesting stuff. Despite the sewage being such a valuable resource, I can't remember any classmates stuffing into their pockets, to enjoy on the bustrip back. Your school trips must have been a bit different!

Quite enjoyed that parable, very educational, I found myself identifying with your poo as the main protagonist.
By the way, do you know who Peter Puffer is?

 

[MaybeTop8]

There are far more efficient ways to raise taxes through gift duties and inheritance taxes than a wealth tax. You do realise that reports like this are supposed to be unbiased don't you.... and not reflect policy of two of the more extreme parties in NZ politics? Just in the same way that reports prepared by so-called independent boards shouldn't follow ACT policy just because the head of the board was an ACT MP!!!

Using his position to push for a tax policy for a party Hague was an MP for is, IMO, just as wrong as tobacco companies pushing their agendas forward for policy.... or the NRA pushing it's version of "gun reform" or Bill English writing a report into KO.... or anyone being surprised that the Terms of Reference for the second part of the COVID inquiry has been turned into a conspiracy theory witch hunt instead of looking at how better to deal with the next pandemic.

Rubbish Mike. The committee and report was commissioned by Ayesha Verrall - https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/new-committee-established-drive-better-public-health-outcomes.

And how is pushing for a tax on sugary drinks and ultra processed food worse or equal to tobacco companies pushing their death products through NZ First and ACT? Not even remotely comparable.

The report talks about using financial levers to reduce inequalities. Your argument, like many on the right, pushes for the retention of the status quo.

As for the covid inquiry that's currently running, it's a witch hunt commissioned by the conspiracy fringe of ACT and NZ First. Look at the current government for that shitfest.

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Contrast that to the fact that Mercury are spending $287 million this year just on the Kaiwaikawe Wind farm near Dargaville and have a total new-renewables pipeline commitment of over $1 billion over the next two years.

NZ is such a bizarre energy market that I actually cant fault much of its infrastructure. If you guys stay away from offshore wind, you might actually do okay. Latitude means your solar generation is limited, meaning you'll have stability and your hydro resources acts a national firming capacity.

If you maintain a solid population growth, your energy should (relatively) become cheaper.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Way more than a 2 decade problem of underinvestment. To blame any single government is just dumb.

The three of you are so inspiring that I just donated to the green party. RIGHT WING SNOWFLAKE TRIGGER WARNING CHLOE

 

[MrFrankWhite]

Sigh... I'll use an example that hopefully you can appreciate

Three Waters emcompassed drinking water, stormwater and wastewater

If I do a poo in my toilet, that poo goes down my drain and joins up with a network that is owned by Auckland ratepayers and managed by Watercare. The poo travels down the network to a wastewater treatment centre in Mangere, where, amongst other things, it it oxidised to remove pathogens before it meets the require safety levels to be deposited back into the environment in line with Watercare's resource consent to do so, which it has obtained in accordance with the RMA that requires it to consult with Iwi, and act in accordance with said RC. Watercare is owned by Auckland ratepayers and it is funded by those ratepayers to treat their poo and operate a fit for pupose network. If there is any capex or opex shortfall, this is funded by raising rates and/or taking on debt. If there are any issues with the network or Watercare, these are addressed between a democratically-elected Council that is answerable to the ratepayers, who have the ability to exert control over the asset they own to remove the poo from their homes and treat it before getting rid of it. The process has its faults but ultimately, the operator is answerable to the council, who is answerable to the electorate. As outlined in one of my previous posts, funding could be cheaper if done centrally, but there is clear control, and ratepayers at least have visilbility of how they can influence decision-making

I don't consider my poo a valuable natural resource. Far from it!!! Your mileage may vary. Nor do I consider the wastewater pipes or the sewerage that Watercare operates. Watercare is bound, like any other business, to adhere to its RC, which requires it to obtain consent from the local Iwi to operate the way it does.

You say that the Treaty requires involvement of māori over water as a natural resource. Despite me being such an ignoramus and racist (in your eyes), I agree. I also was educated on the Treaty. In none of my classes was I taught that the chiefs requested the right to partner with the Crown on removing poo from homes, taking it away and doing something with it. Imagine the scenes at Waitangi if they did! The other chiefs would have thought them crazzy. You obviously disagree however, so, in the spirit of @MaybeTop8, please provide facts to identify these individuals

That was one of the many issues with Three Waters. If Watercare needed to upgrade its pipes / treament plant / vans, it should just go ahead and do so and be answerable to the people that pay for it.

Speaking of education, as a field trip in biology, we visited the wastewater treatment plants. Interesting stuff. Despite the sewage being such a valuable resource, I can't remember any classmates stuffing into their pockets, to enjoy on the bustrip back. Your school trips must have been a bit different!

If it wasn't for colonisation, Māori would have developed indoor plumbing to rival the Romans! (although the Romans did start theirs in 312BC)

 

[defensivebomb]

Quite enjoyed that parable, very educational, I found myself identifying with your poo as the main protagonist.
By the way, do you know who Peter Puffer is?

I do now!

 

[defensivebomb]

The three of you are so inspiring that I just donated to the green party. RIGHT WING SNOWFLAKE TRIGGER WARNING CHLOE

View attachment 14254

“Thank you for your *gift*” - as you’ll receive nothing back

 

[Worried2Death]

I do now!

Is it old Poo Pockets here with his commie pootopia

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

The three of you are so inspiring that I just donated to the green party. RIGHT WING SNOWFLAKE TRIGGER WARNING CHLOE

View attachment 14254

Rather than deflect, can you answer the question?

 

[juju]

Sigh... I'll use an example that hopefully you can appreciate

Three Waters emcompassed drinking water, stormwater and wastewater

If I do a poo in my toilet, that poo goes down my drain and joins up with a network that is owned by Auckland ratepayers and managed by Watercare. The poo travels down the network to a wastewater treatment centre in Mangere, where, amongst other things, it it oxidised to remove pathogens before it meets the require safety levels to be deposited back into the environment in line with Watercare's resource consent to do so, which it has obtained in accordance with the RMA that requires it to consult with Iwi, and act in accordance with said RC. Watercare is owned by Auckland ratepayers and it is funded by those ratepayers to treat their poo and operate a fit for pupose network. If there is any capex or opex shortfall, this is funded by raising rates and/or taking on debt. If there are any issues with the network or Watercare, these are addressed between a democratically-elected Council that is answerable to the ratepayers, who have the ability to exert control over the asset they own to remove the poo from their homes and treat it before getting rid of it. The process has its faults but ultimately, the operator is answerable to the council, who is answerable to the electorate. As outlined in one of my previous posts, funding could be cheaper if done centrally, but there is clear control, and ratepayers at least have visilbility of how they can influence decision-making

I don't consider my poo a valuable natural resource. Far from it!!! Your mileage may vary. Nor do I consider the wastewater pipes or the sewerage that Watercare operates. Watercare is bound, like any other business, to adhere to its RC, which requires it to obtain consent from the local Iwi to operate the way it does.

You say that the Treaty requires involvement of māori over water as a natural resource. Despite me being such an ignoramus and racist (in your eyes), I agree. I also was educated on the Treaty. In none of my classes was I taught that the chiefs requested the right to partner with the Crown on removing poo from homes, taking it away and doing something with it. Imagine the scenes at Waitangi if they did! The other chiefs would have thought them crazzy. You obviously disagree however, so, in the spirit of @MaybeTop8, please provide facts to identify these individuals

That was one of the many issues with Three Waters. If Watercare needed to upgrade its pipes / treament plant / vans, it should just go ahead and do so and be answerable to the people that pay for it.

Speaking of education, as a field trip in biology, we visited the wastewater treatment plants. Interesting stuff. Despite the sewage being such a valuable resource, I can't remember any classmates stuffing into their pockets, to enjoy on the bustrip back. Your school trips must have been a bit different!

Sigh... Why are little private school boys always so fascinated by poo. Truly weird.
Not a good analogy at all, very childish really. You actually approach the topic and the treaty in such bad faith...

Why shouldn't and wouldn't local iwi sit on a board and have a say in the decisions of what happens with sewerage? Especially if there are consequences to the environment if it's not handled correctly?
Where does drinking water come from exactly?
Where does storm water come from exactly?

If you're so educated about the treaty - care to explain Article II of the treaty and what kaitiakitanga means to us all?

What you want to say but are too scared to say is you don't agree with co governance -
Which is essentially promised in the treaty but completely ignored for generations.

The resistance to this particular policy was due to it being explained poorly by Nanaia Mahuta & Labour, a cynical racist dogwhistle smear campaign against and a bunch of National Party aligned mayors pushing back on it.
You your self compared the legal status of māori to Scout Group with regards to this topic. Could you be in clearer of your disdain to māori?

All we've ended up with rates rising and a new government whose water reform that will cost the country more.

 

[Worried2Death]

If it wasn't for colonisation, Māori would have developed indoor plumbing to rival the Romans! (although the Romans did start theirs in 312BC)

Bully has a son named after the inventor of the ancient māori aqueducts

 

[Worried2Death]

Sigh... Why are little private school boys always so fascinated by poo. Truly weird.
Not a good analogy at all, very childish really. You actually approach the topic and the treaty in such bad faith...

Why shouldn't and wouldn't local iwi sit on a board and have a say in the decisions of what happens with sewerage? Especially if there are consequences to the environment if it's not handled correctly?
Where does drinking water come from exactly?
Where does storm water come from exactly?

If you're so educated about the treaty - care to explain Article II of the treaty and what kaitiakitanga means to us all?

What you want to say but are too scared to say is you don't agree with co governance -
Which is essentially promised in the treaty but completely ignored for generations.

The resistance to this particular policy was due to it being explained poorly by Nanaia Mahuta & Labour, a cynical racist dogwhistle smear campaign against and a bunch of National Party aligned mayors pushing back on it.
You your self compared the legal status of māori to Scout Group with regards to this topic. Could you be in clearer of your disdain to māori?

All we've ended up with rates rising and a new government whose water reform that will cost the country more.

Scout leaders, church elders and "eskimos". It's all very weird.

 

[MaybeTop8]

Hey just on this email, what’s your point? Do you think the gentailers should be reinvesting every cent of profitability rather than distribute to shareholders?

Sorry I did miss the question, in my enthusiasm for donating to a party that actually cares about real New Zealanders.

I think the gentailers, who, remember, used to be owned by all New Zealanders until they were sold off and privatised to line the pockets of wealthy corporate donors to National and Act and to fulfil some fantastical trickle down ideology, have an obligation as owners of CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE to invest and maintain existing infrastructure and also through research and development invest in new technologies and renewables.

I don't think that's unreasonable do you?

Because as we are witnessing now, it's a market failure for all new zealanders apart from those receiving the dividends.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

Sorry I did miss the question, in my enthusiasm for donating to a party that actually cares about real New Zealanders.

I think the gentailers, who, remember, used to be owned by all New Zealanders until they were sold off and privatised to line the pockets of wealthy corporate donors to National and Act and to fulfil some fantastical trickle down ideology, have an obligation as owners of CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE to invest and maintain existing infrastructure and also through research and development invest in new technologies and renewables.

I don't think that's unreasonable do you?

Because as we are witnessing now, it's a market failure for all new zealanders apart from those receiving the dividends.

They are investing to maintain critical infrastructure & expand renewable capacity.

 

[MaybeTop8]

They are investing to maintain critical infrastructure & expand renewable capacity.

My power bill has far exceeded last year's, which exceeded the year before that etc etc. Once again we've been sold down the river, which is drying up due to climate change, by neoliberal bullshit that makes the rich richer.

 

[Mr. Brownstone]

My power bill has far exceeded last year's, which exceeded the year before that etc etc. Once again we've been sold down the river, which is drying up due to climate change, by neoliberal bullshit that makes the rich richer.

I’ll double check tomorrow however the industry as a whole has barely grown underlying profitability.

 

[defensivebomb]

Sigh... Why are little private school boys always so fascinated by poo. Truly weird.

I knew it was something you'd relate to

Why shouldn't and wouldn't local iwi sit on a board and have a say in the decisions of what happens with sewerage? Especially if there are consequences to the environment if it's not handled correctly?

There is either a legal right to do so, or there is not. It doesn't matter what I think "should" happen. If there is a legal right, there is no need to change the law. Just implement the law as it stands. Is the law racist? If it is, then your issue isn't with me

There is already process that is in place for stakeholders to ensure sewage (not "sewarage" - that is the plant element) is managed safely

Where does drinking water come from exactly?
Where does storm water come from exactly?

This is about fixing broken pipes... Which ratepayers own and pay to maintain...

If you're so educated about the treaty - care to explain Article II of the treaty and what kaitiakitanga means to us all?

If you are so educated about the Treaty, which chiefs put their hands up to manage the sewage network? If you want a good definition of Kaitiakitanga, David Seymour delivered a speech outlining it (that part is a joke, before you fire up)

What you want to say but are too scared to say is you don't agree with co governance -
Which is essentially promised in the treaty but completely ignored for generations.

I wasn't the only person in NZ that didn't like 3 Waters. Various councils, the Greens and TPM didn't like it either. Nor did plenty of Iwi, who felt it took away their ability to influence local decision-making. But no, they are all wrong and you and Labour are right

The resistance to this particular policy was due to it being explained poorly by Nanaia Mahuta & Labour, a cynical racist dogwhistle smear campaign against and a bunch of National Party aligned mayors pushing back on it.

It was rushed through under urgency, combining its 2nd and 3rd readings. Then entrenched. That wasn't "explaining poorly". "Explaining poorly" would have been following due process and not communicating. What Labour did went a bit further. And for such a contentious legislation. You've previously expressed disgust at this government rushing legislation. But not in this instance? And yes, I agree, there were elements of a smear campaign. There was also a massive publicly-funded PR exercise to announce it, then bribe cash-strapped local councils to accept it. So swings and roundabouts. Doesn't make it a good policy

You your self compared the legal status of māori to Scout Group with regards to this topic. Could you be in clearer of your disdain to māori?

That flew over your head!

All we've ended up with rates rising and a new government whose water reform that will cost the country more.

Local councils are responsible for in managing rates for their respective electorates and comparing the new govt's water reform with a counterfactual is a futile argument

Anyway, we don't have to worry about it anymore. It has gone the way of the dodo

 

[Worried2Death]

Anyway, we don't have to worry about it anymore. It has gone the way of the doodoo

Indeed.

 

[John Nick]

I knew it was something you'd relate to

There is either a legal right to do so, or there is not. It doesn't matter what I think "should" happen. If there is a legal right, there is no need to change the law. Just implement the law as it stands. Is the law racist? If it is, then your issue isn't with me

There is already process that is in place for stakeholders to ensure sewage (not "sewarage" - that is the plant element) is managed safely

This is about fixing broken pipes... Which ratepayers own and pay to maintain...

If you are so educated about the Treaty, which chiefs put their hands up to manage the sewage network? If you want a good definition of Kaitiakitanga, David Seymour delivered a speech outlining it (that part is a joke, before you fire up)

I wasn't the only person in NZ that didn't like 3 Waters. Various councils, the Greens and TPM didn't like it either. Nor did plenty of Iwi, who felt it took away their ability to influence local decision-making. But no, they are all wrong and you and Labour are right

It was rushed through under urgency, combining its 2nd and 3rd readings. Then entrenched. That wasn't "explaining poorly". "Explaining poorly" would have been following due process and not communicating. What Labour did went a bit further. And for such a contentious legislation. You've previously expressed disgust at this government rushing legislation. But not in this instance? And yes, I agree, there were elements of a smear campaign. There was also a massive publicly-funded PR exercise to announce it, then bribe cash-strapped local councils to accept it. So swings and roundabouts. Doesn't make it a good policy

That flew over your head!

Local councils are responsible for in managing rates for their respective electorates and comparing the new govt's water reform with a counterfactual is a futile argument

Anyway, we don't have to worry about it anymore. It has gone the way of the dodo

Still seems to be a problem here in Tauranga. Any thoughts if you are up to date with the local situation please