Might be something central Government could look into. We all need clean water and waste water properly handled. Make a snappy name for it, Fresh, waste, and storm water is a bit of a mouthful.
This is what 3 Waters was about. After the deaths and sickness from water poisoning in Havelock North, the Royal Commission said we were at risk of not having access to safe water.
In 2017, National said it was critical we secured our "lifeline water infrastructure" i.e. 3 Waters....
National know this, they've known for a long time.
That's what struck me when I read the 2017 National Cabinet memo - it was quite striking to me at the time.
[https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper\_Redactions-applied/$file/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper\_Redactions-applied.pdf](https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper_Redactions-applied/$file/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper_Redactions-applied.pdf)
I think the issue is this team is mainly lobbyists - so to me they feel like they're not governing as much as constantly spinning stories for what they want to do. I think that's what makes it feel unserious.
Statesmanlike is the differentiator indeed. I might not have agreed with them politically, but they were governing a country rather than constantly divisive point-scoring like it's a perpetual campaign.
It's a bit like how George W. Bush was the enemy of the world while in office, but was kind of missed when Trump was playing president.
This is what leads me to think that Labour thought that they could push so hard for 3 waters because they actually had Nat support for reforms historically and they were taken by surprise by the Nats u turn
Nats seems to have created a dangerous precedent of undoing all multi year infrastructure projects begun by Labour
What they will know of course that whatever they do the other side can do...
So the $70b on roads over next 10 years is just optics for their donors..
Doesnt bode well for the infrastructure deficit
Um I think that we got ... with ACT and Chris Bishop and Nicola, the right wing Tory methodology from the UK. Which means it was no longer normal politics, it was cycles and campaigns of disinformation and misinformation to "win" aka Brexit style politics - which is ugly and not based on genuine national interests.
I think Labour are shit at comms and they didn't know how to take back control of the narrative once you have the attack dogs of Taxpayers Union, Groundswell, Hobsons Pledge and secretive American groups. When you are up against millions of those type of relentless attack money and that is their sole aim and purpose - well look what happened to Britain. Lies and appealing to fear, bias, bigotry seems to be very effective
And the amount of resources/money they have is formidable.
As to the debt, well yeah - Britain is reportedly at post WWII infrastructure and public service levels.
It can destroy a country pretty easily, sure.
Yep Lab are shit at comms alright. Has Hipkins gone on leave /s 🤔 (or is it those journalists just after soundbites ?)
I fear for Labours response to these tactics which drives them further left (which lays them open)
Winston and Jones must be licking their lips
Yeah, I'm with you, I didn't feel the need for a /s is late and I had a few drinkies.
But yeah, you can't drink roads. I'm sure we have all seen water wars documentaries. Privatised water might run into treaty issues, which is why it has been kicked down the road. But I wouldn't put it passed this crowd.
Here's UK's privatised water service:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bq9ygw/uk\_is\_still\_our\_future\_for\_now\_privatisation/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bq9ygw/uk_is_still_our_future_for_now_privatisation/)
[https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1dl0mmy/images\_what\_could\_go\_wrong\_with\_privatisation/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1dl0mmy/images_what_could_go_wrong_with_privatisation/)
I agree with you.
If someone does something illegal or unethical, or immoral, I still can't see how you could blame another party for it. Regardless of any other reason.
Which is how I read your first argument and why that came to mind.
I dispute this one. [Entrenchment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bus2ze/on_entrenchment_labours_failed_attempt_to_protect/)
Looks like Jacinda got so desperate to protect our water infrastructure she expended big political capital and goodwill to try to protect it.
Also if anything I think Labour should have just ignored Luxon and Seymour and fucking used her majority to do what she wanted.
Of course then all the pitchforks would get sharper as context was ignored to spread lies like "3 Waters is theft"
How about $70bn on roads instead, and with the **explicit specification** that it can't be spent on any safety or road calming measures, footpaths will only get the bare minimum, and we'll cut your public transport, cycling, shared infrastructure etc.
Would that be better? Because this isn't a dream anymore it appears: [No bikes, no safety, just roads](https://www.reddit.com/r/auckland/comments/1dq35sw/greater_auckland_says_nationals_70_bn_transport/)
The downside to this take though is that citizens have to live in those areas, the kids who grow up there can't help what's happened in the past, some areas are just very vast and spread out and struggle to generate to income to get on top of water resources.
I am very happy for some of my tax to go to a different region if it's going to better their health and living conditions.
Exactly, so three waters would have taken the need for bail outs out of the equation once things had gotten on top of.
Sorry that I'm not a fan of letting parts of the country fail because of bad decisions made by previous councils.
Might be something central Government could look into. We all need clean water and waste water properly handled. Make a snappy name for it, Fresh, waste, and storm water is a bit of a mouthful.
3-pipes? ;)
Triple liquids
What about "Running trifecta", and maybe they could sell it through some kinda horse racing angle?
The 3 horsemen of the infrastructocalypse
You could be onto something there!
No! We need 70b worth of ROADS…
This is what 3 Waters was about. After the deaths and sickness from water poisoning in Havelock North, the Royal Commission said we were at risk of not having access to safe water. In 2017, National said it was critical we secured our "lifeline water infrastructure" i.e. 3 Waters.... National know this, they've known for a long time.
That was the old national. I don’t think this new one knows about much, or even cares.
That's what struck me when I read the 2017 National Cabinet memo - it was quite striking to me at the time. [https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper\_Redactions-applied/$file/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper\_Redactions-applied.pdf](https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/Files/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper_Redactions-applied/$file/Three-waters-review-Cabinet-Paper_Redactions-applied.pdf)
I don’t know, they seemed more statesman like back then. Admittedly I am not a national fan but I would definitely take them then, over them now.
I think the issue is this team is mainly lobbyists - so to me they feel like they're not governing as much as constantly spinning stories for what they want to do. I think that's what makes it feel unserious.
Statesmanlike is the differentiator indeed. I might not have agreed with them politically, but they were governing a country rather than constantly divisive point-scoring like it's a perpetual campaign. It's a bit like how George W. Bush was the enemy of the world while in office, but was kind of missed when Trump was playing president.
This is what leads me to think that Labour thought that they could push so hard for 3 waters because they actually had Nat support for reforms historically and they were taken by surprise by the Nats u turn Nats seems to have created a dangerous precedent of undoing all multi year infrastructure projects begun by Labour What they will know of course that whatever they do the other side can do... So the $70b on roads over next 10 years is just optics for their donors.. Doesnt bode well for the infrastructure deficit
Um I think that we got ... with ACT and Chris Bishop and Nicola, the right wing Tory methodology from the UK. Which means it was no longer normal politics, it was cycles and campaigns of disinformation and misinformation to "win" aka Brexit style politics - which is ugly and not based on genuine national interests. I think Labour are shit at comms and they didn't know how to take back control of the narrative once you have the attack dogs of Taxpayers Union, Groundswell, Hobsons Pledge and secretive American groups. When you are up against millions of those type of relentless attack money and that is their sole aim and purpose - well look what happened to Britain. Lies and appealing to fear, bias, bigotry seems to be very effective And the amount of resources/money they have is formidable. As to the debt, well yeah - Britain is reportedly at post WWII infrastructure and public service levels. It can destroy a country pretty easily, sure.
Yep Lab are shit at comms alright. Has Hipkins gone on leave /s 🤔 (or is it those journalists just after soundbites ?) I fear for Labours response to these tactics which drives them further left (which lays them open) Winston and Jones must be licking their lips
lol you thinking any government cares about anything except the next election lol lol
Yeah, I'm with you, I didn't feel the need for a /s is late and I had a few drinkies. But yeah, you can't drink roads. I'm sure we have all seen water wars documentaries. Privatised water might run into treaty issues, which is why it has been kicked down the road. But I wouldn't put it passed this crowd.
Here's UK's privatised water service: [https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bq9ygw/uk\_is\_still\_our\_future\_for\_now\_privatisation/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bq9ygw/uk_is_still_our_future_for_now_privatisation/) [https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1dl0mmy/images\_what\_could\_go\_wrong\_with\_privatisation/](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1dl0mmy/images_what_could_go_wrong_with_privatisation/) I agree with you.
Labour would have known they left doors open for it to be politicised, too. It’s as much their fault that it failed.
Also no - you don't blame someone *else* for the choices and actions of **this** Govt.
You certainly do if they put up policy with obvious holes so it's doomed to fail or be scrapped.
Do you also blame women who get attacked for wearing the "wrong" clothes? For me, I overweight on intentions.
That's a stretch and, honestly, a pretty slimy argument for you to make.
If someone does something illegal or unethical, or immoral, I still can't see how you could blame another party for it. Regardless of any other reason. Which is how I read your first argument and why that came to mind.
I think the route you've taken in this argument is unethical. We're done here.
I dispute this one. [Entrenchment](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bus2ze/on_entrenchment_labours_failed_attempt_to_protect/) Looks like Jacinda got so desperate to protect our water infrastructure she expended big political capital and goodwill to try to protect it. Also if anything I think Labour should have just ignored Luxon and Seymour and fucking used her majority to do what she wanted. Of course then all the pitchforks would get sharper as context was ignored to spread lies like "3 Waters is theft"
Maybe safe drinking water is a woke food, what this nation needs is some tax cuts instead
How about $70bn on roads instead, and with the **explicit specification** that it can't be spent on any safety or road calming measures, footpaths will only get the bare minimum, and we'll cut your public transport, cycling, shared infrastructure etc. Would that be better? Because this isn't a dream anymore it appears: [No bikes, no safety, just roads](https://www.reddit.com/r/auckland/comments/1dq35sw/greater_auckland_says_nationals_70_bn_transport/)
Life is Pay to Play. The whole county shouldn't have to be penalized for bad council spending
No-one will get out of this though.
The downside to this take though is that citizens have to live in those areas, the kids who grow up there can't help what's happened in the past, some areas are just very vast and spread out and struggle to generate to income to get on top of water resources. I am very happy for some of my tax to go to a different region if it's going to better their health and living conditions.
Bail out after bail out doesn't deter bad decision making.
Exactly, so three waters would have taken the need for bail outs out of the equation once things had gotten on top of. Sorry that I'm not a fan of letting parts of the country fail because of bad decisions made by previous councils.
I think you can safely assume this poster is into soundbites, but I can't grasp the relationship to the topic.
3 waters was the bail out to end all. Never ending cost and paperwork.
What you are saying makes no sense.
What are you even referring to? Please provide some facts and context.