A Tapestry of Lies

The Government has delayed Three Waters until early next year.

Labour says it is because they want to wait for a report from their Three Waters Working Group of nine “hand-picked” mayors, nine iwi representatives and two officials that was established last October to advise on how “co-governance” would work in practice.

But in reality, this delay is damage control aimed at quelling the criticism over a lack of ‘consultation’ that erupted once it was realised that the new Three Waters Bill had been scheduled to be tabled in Parliament before the Working Group reported back.

With its restrictive terms of reference, and a membership largely supportive of the reforms, no substantive changes are expected from the Working Group’s February report. However, there’s little doubt it will be ‘spun’ by the Government as an important round of ‘consultation’: “Government listening to the concerns of the people”.

The Minister for Local Government Nanaia Mahuta has advised a draft Bill will be released “in the coming days” to both to the Working Group, and to the public. As soon as it becomes available, we will post it on our NZCPR Three Waters campaign page here: www.nzcpr.com/3waters

In reality, the Working Group report is simply another thread in what has become a tapestry of lies and misinformation to conceal the real objective of the reforms, which is to deliver control of New Zealand’s water infrastructure and services to the Maori tribal elite. It’s part of the He Puapua agenda that Labour – under the direction of the Maori caucus – is rushing through Parliament while it has an absolute majority in the House to pass any laws it likes, and while the Maori caucus has the dominant influence within the party.

Three Waters is the most significant change to local councils since amalgamation in 1989. Despite its significance, Labour’s argument for reform lacks any credible foundation. It is based on, unreliable data, bogus advertising, exaggerated benefits, and a fabricated Treaty ‘partnership’ claim.

As if that is not bad enough, they have even attempted to suppress resistance from local councils by enticing Local Government New Zealand – an organisation that supposedly speaks on behalf of councils – into signing a Memorandum of Agreement to “partner” with central government and promote the reforms.

Furthermore, through their multi-million-dollar Public Interest Journalism Fund, the Government is preventing the media from investigating the Treaty partnership claim on which “co-governance” is based, by requiring those who participate in the fund to proactively promote Treaty partnerships:

“Actively promote the principles of Partnership… under Te Tiriti o Waitangi, acknowledging Maori as a Te Tiriti partner.”

Let’s go through some of the misinformation threads in more detail.

A water contamination incident in Havelock North in 2016, when farm runoff seeped into an aquifer used for town water supplies during a storm causing widespread illness, is being used as the catalyst for the reforms. 

With water supplies governed by the Resource Management Act and regulated by the Ministry of Health, regular surveillance reports from the Institute of Environmental Science and Research (ESR) however, show that overall, councils and other water suppliers largely meet the standards with the incidence of water borne infections through non-compliance relatively minor.

As a result, the Government has used a Ministry of Health report that pre-dates that Havelock North incident by ten years, to justify the Three Water reforms, claiming, “At least 34,000 New Zealanders become ill from drinking tap water every year”.

That 2006 report on the incidence of waterborne gastro-intestinal disease in New Zealand – prepared by the ESR for Helen Clark’s administration – starts off by finding there is no real problem:

“An average of 16.8 waterborne outbreaks occur annually, affecting an average of 145 cases/year… the size of most outbreaks is small, averaging nine cases per outbreak in 2000-2004, and is smaller than any other countries for which data are available.”

But the author was asked to estimate the occurrence of endemic waterborne gastro-intestinal disease in New Zealand, and because of a lack of dependable local data, highly questionable assumptions had to be used to arrive at an estimate of between 18,000 and 34,000 infections a year – with the author noting, “the reliability of this method is questioned by the author.”

In fact, the author had good cause to alert the reader about the reliability of the figures, because they do not pass the common sense test.

On the one hand, the report claims the number of outbreaks in New Zealand is smaller than virtually anywhere else in the world – something consistently found in ESR monitoring – yet on the other hand, it claims tens of thousands of people get sick every year.

With the Havelock North incident affecting 5,000 people making national headlines, surely illness on a scale three to seven times greater would at least gain some attention in the public domain!

The reality is that there is no drinking water quality crisis in New Zealand.

Using a fifteen-year old report that the author admitted was unreliable as the basis of their reforms, the Government’s claim of 34,000 infections a year is dishonest and deceitful.

Then there’s the advertising campaign, which has already been discredited and shown to be false, that cost taxpayers $3.5 million, with a further $500,000 spent on a website. Claiming councils were failing to keep water clean and safe, and implying the answer was amalgamation, it even went as far as depicting green slime coming out of showers, and waterways turning into sludge.

When the ad first screened, the country’s Mayors were outraged that such insulting and alarmist misinformation was being promoted by the Government, and they called for the campaign to be abandoned.

But the Government refused.

Forty-eight New Zealanders also complained about the ad to the Advertising Standards Authority, but they ruled that in the context of advocacy advertising, the ads were neither offensive nor misleading.

Let’s call this “advocacy advertising” what it really is: political propaganda that has no basis of fact and is deliberately designed to scare the public into believing the fiction created by Labour to advance its own agenda. 

And the agenda that underlies the deceit and propaganda – and is the primary motivation for the Three Waters reform – is Labour’s “partnership” agenda, He Puapua. This blueprint for tribal rule over New Zealand by 2040, has Maori control of water as a key objective.

Developed in 2019 under the guise of enacting the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, and quietly rolled out during 2020, the Prime Minister kept He Puapua secret – not only from her Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, but also from voters during the election.

Without a mandate from voters, Labour’s “partnership” plan for Maori control of public services and resources is totally illegitimate. At no stage during the election campaign did the Prime Minister even hint that she was planning to give control of water to Maori – nor that she was planning to undermine New Zealand democracy.

Treaty “partnerships” represent a major erosion of democracy – unaccountable private individuals representing 17 per cent of the population, and acting in their own best interests instead of the public good, commanding 50 per cent of decision-making power and the right of veto.

Using official records, we can follow the evolution of this tribal water privatisation plan.

A Cabinet paper, issued by the new Minister of Local Government Nanai Mahuta in April 2018, simply mentioned the need for consultation with iwi over Three Waters reform:

“This work will be led by the Department of Internal Affairs, and will involve substantial engagement with local government, iwi, and other sector interests.”

By November 2018, Cabinet papers show iwi were being prioritised by the Minister:

“Engagement with iwi is important… because of the significant expertise and experience iwi have in resource management, infrastructure development, and water issues. It will be necessary to engage at the national, catchment, and local levels given the range of iwi interests, and also the different and often localised way that three waters challenges are experienced by Maori communities.”

Fast-forward to June 2020, and a Three Waters Cabinet paper  mentions asset transfers:

“We will need to consider and address Treaty-related rights and interests, and engage with iwi… Further work is required on the impact of the potential of asset transfer and Treaty issues… When engaging with iwi, we will seek to use the National Iwi Chairs Forum.”

With iwi leaders representing multi-million dollar business corporations involved in policy development, once the election delivered Labour the power to govern alone, Treaty “partnerships” became a fait accompli:

“On 14 December 2020, Cabinet agreed that a high-level principle of partnership with iwi will be followed throughout the reform programme, and reflected in the new three waters service delivery system… I am proposing that we commit to a high level principle of partnership in this work, and seek to ensure this approach is reflected in the governance and operational arrangements of the new water service delivery entities and broader regulatory system.”

In other words, with Jacinda Ardern’s blessing, the Treaty has become a partnership, and the partnership has become co-governance and power sharing.

It doesn’t seem to matter that it is constitutionally impossible for the Crown to enter into a partnership with subjects and that the Treaty “partnership” is a big ‘lie’, Labour is pro-actively promoting a 50:50 co-governance Treaty partnership as the truth.

In this environment, democracy is under attack as never before. How can any New Zealand Prime Minister think it’s acceptable to forfeit democratic control of critical resources and essential services to private sector groups operating in their own best interests?

The reality is that we will have to fight to prevent billions of dollars of ratepayer-funded assets being taken away without fair compensation – and without consent. But fortunately, leaders are emerging who have the fortitude to stand up against authoritarian rule.

Bruce Smith, the Mayor of the Westland District Council and this week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator, is one such leader, who has been sharing his Three Water journey with us throughout the year. In this last update for 2021 he outlines the state of play:

“Kiwis will not support the loss of local control. They will not support having the three waters assets owned by Councils placed into a large corporate entity with 50% of the governance Councils and 50% Iwi. They are saying its undemocratic as we are one people not two tribes.”

Bruce outlines the lies and how he and other councils are fighting back:

“Government has consistently maintained that councils will continue to own their water assets and that’s been proven to be a real porkie. Through a Statement of Claim filed in the High Court three councils are asking the courts to provide a legal affirmation of their council’s position and its ownership of assets. This will provide a legal framework of shared understanding for all parties going ahead on the key issues of council asset ownership and its democratic responsibilities. This will assist both parties to understand the parameters of ownership.”

At least one other group has also launched legal action against the Government’s Three Waters plan, with a focus on Maori rights to water.

Without a doubt, Three Waters has become a major battleground between the Government, attempting to elevate iwi into a permanent ruling class, and Kiwis fighting to defend ratepayer rights, democracy, and our way of life.

Labour’s recent slide in the polls shows the public is finally waking up to the damage this Government is inflicting – especially the dangerous and escalating racial divide.

Labour Party voters need to wake up too – are they happy that the Maori caucus is in control and is orchestrating the iwi power grab that is presently underway?   

Mayor Bruce Smith assures us that most local authority mayors are pushing back against Three Waters, but as he reminds us, “the power rests with the people.”

This Week’s Poll Asks:

*Do you believe iwi should have any special role in water management?

Please share this article so that others can discover The BFD.