The 3 Waters legislation is still a dogs’ breakfast and now a Select Committee has realised it

Remember when those of us critical of the 3 Waters legislations were saying that we were not being listened to? Well now a Select Committee has unanimously said the same. I remember making a presentation to the Select Committee and the Labour MP for Fendalton standing up and leaving the meeting as I started. I worry about MP’s accepting advice in a blind manner from their government departments.

My observation, and that or many others, has been that there has been an incredible rush to pass the 3 Waters legislation. It has essentially been written by outside parties, like Infrastructure NZ, Water NZ, and other bodies with vested interest in gaining private benefits from the legislation. Internal Affairs has been weak and basically absorbed the thinking of others.

The article below starts with this:

Faceless Internal Affairs officials went behind the backs of MPs to make “unauthorised” changes to the bills setting in place the Government’s Three Waters reforms, a Parliamentary select committee says.

The breakdown in relations between the department and elected representatives is being described as unprecedented by some MPs.

The unanimous rebuke from Government and Opposition MPs is grounds for concern about the relationship between the executive and Parliament, says Wellington constitutional law expert Graeme Edgeler. “Very much so,” he says. “More so than in other cases, because what has happened is obviously worse than has happened in other cases.”

“This is the shot across the bow. It’s indicative of the ongoing problem we have in New Zealand, that Parliament is highly dependent on the executive for advice on bills and drafting. The people who are amending the bill don’t work for Parliament, but for the Government.”

The finance and expenditure select committee is chaired by the Labour MP Ingrid Leary, and a majority of its members are from the Government, yet they have united with Opposition members in rare agreement over problems with officials capturing the process – a criticism that has previously been levelled by opponents of the Three Waters reforms.

One of the commentators at the bottom of this article summarised my thoughts best:

This proposed legislation is a total overkill, dogs breakfast suggested by consultants and bureaucrats with agendas that will simply channel more of our money in the trough for the snouts to guzzle up.

The debate on this legislation has been more acrimonious than almost any other than I can recall in a lifetime of interest in politics. It is theft on grand scale of water services from those of us at local level by Central Government. It is comforting to read of a Select Committee unanimously making the same observation as many of us as we criticised poorly promoted legislation.