Summarised by Centrist
Commentator Grant Duncan on the National party’s move to repeal Labour’s Three Waters governance restructure asks if Labour’s plan was all that bad and can National do better?
Labour’s plan aimed to address water service issues by transferring asset ownership from local councils to larger Water Services Entities. These entities would then use these assets to secure funding for necessary upgrades.
This approach was criticised for the potential loss of local control, the unfair distribution of costs among councils, and the introduction of a complex bureaucracy including a co-governance model with mana whenua that many saw as unnecessary.
Duncan writes: “Labour leader Chris Hipkins told the AM Show that ‘some political parties chose to play the race card over water issues’ – meaning that Labour’s local authority/mana whenua co-governance model came under attack. Arguably, Labour’s own ‘race card’ was first on the table; the others just played one in a different suit. But what was Labour’s big restructuring of water governance supposed to produce?”
In contrast, National’s proposal seems to favour a more localised approach, allowing councils to collaborate while maintaining control, potentially offering a more straightforward and less contentious solution.
