Written By:
- Date published:
6:00 am, February 9th, 2026 - 53 comments
Categories: open mike -
Tags:
Open mike is your post.
For announcements, general discussion, whatever you choose.
The usual rules of good behaviour apply (see the Policy).
Step up to the mike …
Can someone please describe, in two or three sentences how 3 Waters was to work?
My understanding was that the state was to take responsibility for drinking water and water treatment.
Because of the Wellington sewerage disgrace, I anticipate a few debates with some tories and tory adjacent folk in the next few days.
I put your question to Google's AI: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=describe+in+two+or+three+sentences+how+3+Waters+was+meant+to+work+in+New+Zealand
Regionalising water management is sensibly Green: nature creates water conservation locales (lakes & ponds) and distribution (streams & rivers) on a regional basis. Mediating from 67 orgs to 4 and then 10 suggests a compromise at the design stage that may not have suitably reflected the state of affairs in our regions. Since Labour never tried to explain this to the voters, I assume their intent was to obfuscate.
"increase investment capacity" means the proposed regional entities could borrow at cheaper interest rates, rather than councils (who are already being downgraded by the international rating agencies, pushing up their borrowing costs which impacts what services they can afford to provide and the rates they will have to charge).
Okay, I get that. Seems like applied economic policy on a sensible basis, yet it presumes that interest rates will conform to the prescription of efficiency (if you allow that efficient = cheap) which the market has rarely been famous for providing to governance systems…
I could never see how they expected the borrowing charges, ie interest rates, to drop. The State didn't seem to be standing behind the loans and a failure to pay them when due looked as if it would simply fall back on the ratepayers from the local bodies.
That appeared to me to be the worst of both worlds. Appointed groups were going to borrow and spend the money and when they couldn't pay of the loans the costs would fall back on ratepayers who had no control over picking the people on the organisations that had spent the money.
If I, as a ratepayer, is to be responsible for paying of the loans I want to be able to have some say in choosing the people who are going to choose where to spend the money.
Water is back[ed] 100% with [by] Local Government (Councils & water CCOs) after CoC repealed the water reforms of the previous Government. Ironically, financing will come for a large part from central government (taxpayers) through NZ Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA).
https://www.lgfa.co.nz/about-lgfa/news-and-market-announcements/lgfa-financing-local-government-water-services-january
test, using that AI URL
can you please open your link, and then copypaste the links associated with it. I want to see if that's what other people get from your prompt.
Sorry Weka, I don't understand what you mean by that. A typical user doesn't grasp technicalities under the hood, and I'm typical in that respect…
the link in your comment
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=describe+in+two+or+three+sentences+how+3+Waters+was+meant+to+work+in+New+Zealand
click on it
once it has opened, you will see the references that google's AI is using.
I see them on the righthand side of the screen, as title, website, image etc. The title is a clickable link. You may have to Show All. If you're not sure who to ocpy those, then open each link and copy from the address bar for each.
copy and paste those links to a new comment here.
once it has opened, you will see the references that google's AI is using.
I see them on the righthand side of the screen, as title, website, image etc.
I don't see any of that! If it helps, I use an HP desktop running Firefox, which searches via Google but eliminates all the ad crap that the corp tries to con us with (due to an innate aversion to cultural pollution).
Happy to help with clarifying your tech point tho if there's a way…
that's interesting. Can you please tell me:
3. The results page features the summary from Google's AI at the top, so I copied that paragraph into my comment.
do you see anything that says Show More? or Dive Deeper in AI mode? Still no links?
This may help: https://thestandard.nz/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Screenshot-2026-02-09-at-16-14-10-Describe-in-two-or-three-sentences-how-3-Waters-was-meant-to-work-in-New-Zealand-Google-Search.png.
are you thinking the links could be hidden on some systems?
I’m no IT specialist but I suppose it’s possible that some ad blocker might do some weird stuff to Google AI Overview. But this would defeat the purpose of using it!? And why would it let through the summary and not the links!?
In any case, if DF doesn’t check the summary, for whatever reason, I think it should be handled accordingly, i.e., [delete].
I’m quite frustrated with DF’s commenting, and this has been building over some time, but it’s rapidly reaching the end of the line with me. For example, when DF said “Ain’t enough time in my day.” (https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-09-02-2026/#comment-2055799), I almost lost it; does he think it’s okay for others to waste time on his unchecked copy-pasta?
No links evident. I never use those showmore/divedeep options. Ain't enough time in my day.
They did
As you would
Keep up the negative bias and spouting of factoids and false information in Election Year.
I seem to remember they did, too. Unfortunately opponents of the scheme were allowed to frame it – and go on framing it – as an asset-grab, and to "sell" it as such to a largely ignorant populace.
The whole thing made perfect sense to me. Water is essentially a national asset, much like electric power, and ought to be managed as such instead of as a cash cow for private interests.
Huh. I agreed with the notion and said so onsite here many times, whilst continually querying Labour's lack of explanation of how it would work. I recall no other commentators ever pointing me to a public explanation from them.
I'm aware that memories are flawed (inherently), so have no wish to contradict you – just that I worked hard trying to flush that out, over a long period of time, because I cared. Left-wingers not doing what was obviously necessary has been a constant feature of my life for too many decades already!
Let me re-fresh and re-sharpen your memory.
You said on 12 July 2023 (https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-12-07-2023/#comment-1959131):
Your infamous unchecked copy & paste job from your AI gizmo @ 1.1 (https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-09-02-2026/#comment-2055762) explained nothing of the sorts and you provided not a single link (because you claim they are not ‘evident’; WTF does that even mean?) yet you felt compelled to attack Labour yet again, and again, and again.
Tedious, isn’t it?
Indeed, they did, or at least they tried to explain (e.g., https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/major-shakeup-will-see-affordable-water-reforms-led-and-delivered-regionally, incl. Related Documents at the top RH side), contrary to Dennis Frank’s claim, but they turned an already-complex issue into a Gordian Knot to hang themselves with in a protracted tortuous PR nightmare. One cannot blame opponents to cease the opportunity and spout their usual RW rhetorical BS with the typical misunderstandings and misrepresentations (e.g., even today, see https://thestandard.nz/open-mike-09-02-2026/#comment-2055779, but no point responding to that because it’s water under the bridge now) about the eye-watering sums of money required, ownership, and governance models. Combine that with NZ’s antagonistic partisan politics and the recipe was ripe for repeal by the CoC, as was the case.
Basically, Three Waters was about moving water assets and responsibility from individual councils into larger, publicly owned regional entities that could borrow and operate at scale.
The goal was to deal with the looming infrastructure replacement wave. Something many councils were structurally unable to fund because of debt caps, political resistance to rates increases, and post-COVID cost escalation. And also, something Central Government was unwilling to pay for directly.
National’s approach instead allows councils to retain ownership but encourages separating water services into CCOs or joint arrangements, rather than mandating a nationwide restructuring.
Which leaves us with most of the complexity of separation without necessarily gaining the full scale or financing advantages.
Thanks Res. It does sound familiar but I couldn't recall it.
Our former Mayor went to town opposing 3 Waters, cruel irony as the Oroua, my river that flows through Feilding, is in the bottom 25% of rivers in the motu.
Auckland mayor Wayne Brown just now on Morning Report: `The govt doesn't quite know how to do economic development.' Ingrid: "So you think they dropped the ball?"
Wayne: "No, they didn't pick it up. They don't seem to know where it is." This view of his seems remarkably in accord with my own and that of many commentators here.
Tbf, I guess Lux would say `hey, we're just here for window-dressing. We set the parameters for the macroeconomics of the thing. Then it's up to animal spirits."
Such classic neolib doctrine is admirable to many still. You can see them standing around admiring it in the media often. Maintaining orthodoxy reassures sheeple, so poseurs must pose, and politicians do that professionally. Cultic.
National have wasted nearly all their time on ACT's vanity projects that go nowhere.
All National have done is cancel things at considerable cost in money, time, safety and diplomacy eg ferries; or cancel things for the benefit of donors eg smoking laws, trucking laws, ECE laws, land laws…
Zero imagination, zero performance, zero integrity.
You’re setting up a straw man again, which you use often to launch one of your more bizarre theories or reckons. None of this is consciousness-raising, quite the contrary.
BTW, TBF means something different to you than to most of us …
I wish Kevin well in his new role. Never met him, but he always came across in public as more like Labour than Green to me.
On the basis of that clarity of vision, I think he'll be reliable. I've never seen him paint the deep Green picture in his public relations (and this ain't the role for it) but at least we can expect managerial competence from him. He's right about the coach thing: who else is gonna build team spirit when the system promotes primadonnas?
I have met him several times when he was a list MP based in West Coast Tasman. He is a very nice man, articulate and able to contribute to discussions across the political divide.
I talked to him on a number of occasions and he always came across as you describe him. He always came across as talking sense and of knowing about the topic. That isn't always the case with an MP of any denomination. I thought at the time Norman quit that Hague would have been a better leader that Shaw, but he wasn't picked.
He was probably closer to the Party line in 2015 than to the policies being pursued by the Green MPs today though. He should at least give them some skilled management. He had been CEO of the West Coast Health Board and avoided any blow-ups there so he must have been pretty good at it.
@ Dennis @ 1.1
Thanks Dennis (and AI), I hear the PM wants an enquiry to answer questions.
I'm confident that 3Waters wouldn't have bedded in enough to stop the Wellys issue but would stop the next one.
The official they interviewed on MR earlier told them Wellingtonians must avoid the harbour for months. Bit of a downer for locals, huh?
He did agree that chronic under-investment created the situation. Someone may publish a list of all the Wellington mayors responsible for that. Or, if you prefer reality rather than sham, irresponsible. Blaming the leaders may seem unfair since councillors have been just as irresponsible. A cabal of useless pretenders.
Oh wait! All were doing the ritualised obeisance to neolib orthodoxy thing: the perfect excuse. Ratepayers hate spending on infrastructure, so their paid servants must obey their masters to accord with democratic tradition. Phew! Dodged that bullet!
Did he say "the harbour" or did he say "the south coast"?
As of yesterday the south coast from Breaker Bay around to Owhiro Bay was closed to swimming and fishing. The harbour was not and people were swimming at Karaka Bay and at Scorching Bay which are inside the Harbour and quite close to the entrance. They were also swimming at Evans Bay and Oriental Bay which are well inside the harbour.
The pollution didn't seem to have entered the actual Harbour. If the person you quote said "avoid the harbour" it would sound as if they expect the area to increase, which would affect people a great deal more than merely closing the South Coast. The South Coast would really only affect surfers a lot. There is some, but not a great deal, of swimming on the coast as the water is very cold there.
The conversation seemed non-specific to this listener. I suppose from a risk-management perspective it depends on any flow effect from the pollution area to within the harbour, and authorities may be using the precautionary principle.
Instead of leading Alwyn and us down the garden path with your theories of risk management and waste water spread in coastal waters, why don’t you, at least, provide a link to the interview?
https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/audio/2019022229/hopes-the-extent-of-moa-point-damage-to-be-known-this-week
Start with the facts, check the facts (careful analysis and critical thinking), and stick to the facts, especially when you don’t know [much] what you’re talking about. When using an AI gizmo this applies even more so.
For swimming recommendations, see https://www.lawa.org.nz/explore-data/swimming
For comment on the plant management, see: https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360944023/veolias-failures-flagged-years-wellington-sewage-spill
Sadly many people will not be able to see them of course – paywalls are destroying our maintaining an informed public . . .
New Zealand is large enough to develop our own experts in water management, but the urge to send profits to private shareholders and overseas is too great for the far-right. A team of engineers could provide expert services to different regions, for development of appropriate systems in different areas. Funding is best done by central government – why pay an extra 0.25% to 0.5% by getting smaller entities to try and borrow with a lower credit rating – even if central government provides a guarantee. Some aspects of development will vary around regions, but most will be similar enough that a New Zealand team can best provide design for different NZ areas, with construction also undertaken using locals who can then best turn to maintenance and on-going management. The costs in different areas will vary considerably in different parts of New Zealand, and the highest per capita costs may well not be affordable if each region is required to cover all costs from the local population. That suggests we are heading towards a single price for water, with all consumers metered for chargeable volumes of water used – that may well encourage more water tanks from roof run off, possibly together with solar panels . . .
Such a logical system will not come from ACT/Nat who want rewards for cronies, including subsidies for farmers; or from New Zealand Last while Peters and Jones are involved – we need a change of government as soon as possible.
The failure of the Labour Gov in England to govern properly and competently is an example of what happens when leadership is replaced with excessive caution and an excessive fear of making mistakes.
However Starmer's unfortunate reign is only a subset of the wider issues that have benighted England for a long time.
First Past the Post and the absence of a written constitution have led to a dysfunctional Westminster and Whitehall. That has resulted in giving space to dilusional thoughts on its place in the world and Brexit. Its long continual trajectory of decline in comparison to its near neighbours is a source of the rise of far-right authoritarian Reform.
That the two main parties that have dominated England since WWII are being superceded in many constituencies by the English Greens and Reform and even the hopeless LibDems.
Norther Ireland has a Sinn Fein leader, and it is effectively in the EU Arrivals Lounge. Scotland will elect an SNP Gov again on the 7th of May while Scottish Labour & Tories are vying for third, fourth or fifth place. ALL of the WM seats Labour won 18 months ago, when Scots voted to get the Tories out, look like they will be lost if a WM election was held today! Labour in Scotland is mortally wounded. Independece will have a strong mandate in May.
Wales looks like it will make Plaid Cymru its largest party in the Senedd for the first time ever.
Hubris, Boosterism, Exceptionalism have led to this breaking up of the current 103 yr old United Kingdom. All its components countries will benefit from this break up. United Ireland and Scotland will be at the centre of the EU. England/w will go through a very rough cathasis before finding its own identity and growing up.
The idea of an English parliament and move to a more federal system for the UK has been around for some time.
1.A Tory alternative to Brexit.
https://englishcommonwealth.net/2024/12/04/the-conspiracy-of-silence-and-how-the-tories-screwed-england/
2.Post Brexit ideas in the Labour Party
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainer/labours-constitutional-proposals
I really like the idea of a new second house.
NZ could do with an elected 2nd House. Maybe one with people elected from some regions, but different from the current Local council areas? Maybe a couple of people per region?
It is their move to a federal system.
Here the concept would connect to Whatarangi Winiatia's concept ("accountability" of the parliamentary majority to the indigenous people)(the Don Trow associate)(iwi settlements, the balance sheet preparation for the age of UNDRIP).
Useful post and subsequent discussion on X today . It initially lists a range of search engines as alternatives to google. Some are topic specific eg economics and related science; free ebooks.
In the discussion under it, some add other engines they use. people seem to agree that Yandex is a Kremlin controlled engine.
Some claim DuckDuckGo is google owned (others provide evidence it's not), others say DDG censors info. Others say it was censoring Russian disinformation.
Some say the Brave search engine censors stuff.
So councils have a rate increase cap because they ‘need to focus on the basics’ but the Government that is selling itself on ‘doing the basics brilliantly’ spends $5m on getting the State of Origin here. I love league but the hypocrisy is amazing.
//
Kent Duston
@kentduston.bsky.social
Follow
Just a reminder: the reason the Auckland Harbour Bridge was under-specced with only four lanes and needed the clip-ons added within a decade was because of the very first National government. These people haven’t changed one iota in 60 years.
https://bsky.app/profile/kentduston.bsky.social/post/3meat7v7jws2m
Initial structure
edit
The recommendations of the design team and the report of the 1946 Royal Commission were for five or six traffic lanes, with one or two of them to be reversed in direction depending on the flow of traffic, and with a footpath for pedestrians on each side. The latter features were dropped for cost reasons before construction started, the First National Government of New Zealand opting for an ‘austerity’ design of four lanes without footpaths, and including an approach road network only after local outcry over traffic effects.[13] The decision to reduce the bridge in this way has been called “a ringing testament to […] the peril of short-term thinking and penny-pinching”.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auckland_Harbour_Bridge#Initial_structure
Dunno if it's think big, think small, or think somewhere in between, but there's a hint of intelligent design: https://www.1news.co.nz/2026/02/09/taranaki-gas-import-facility-expected-to-save-nz-millions/
Seems a resilience design on the face of the thing, but I'm no expert in energy policy. Wait for critics to pick holes in the scheme. TV news coverage tonight had photos of my local port, just down the road from here, so it must be front-runner. NP could vote their current rep back in on that basis, unfortunately. He's so clueless he authorised large posters of himself wearing a glassy-eyed fake smile that are still to be seen downtown.
The government plans a levy on power users to fund a $1B spend on importing gas – building a terminal in New Plymouth.
It's a so called reserve that apparently allows existing generators to continue as they are (the government as a 51% shareholder).
They say they will only import gas, if and when they need it.
Labour has an easy play – lower power prices by opposing the project.
1.no levy
2.increase non hydro supply (and have more of that as a reserve).
(an arrangement with Methanex to provide a reserve (for awhile*), turbines off Taranaki, battery storage, solar and later thermal*.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/business/360945927/government-plans-levy-power-users-pay-lng-import-terminal
60 60 poll
The governments Trumplike election changes to cheat a win from a close race may be decisive.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/politics/360946082/new-poll-shows-hung-parliament-green-party-bolster-left-bloc
One overhang seat for TPM should suffice.
The risk is the impact of lack of special votes (Green seats).
Yup, special votes will be really special this time.
fuck, it's going to be a long election year if the Post put so much content behind an unbreachable paywall.
Luckily, there still is publicly-funded RNZ: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/586335/new-poll-predicts-hung-parliament
This perception outlines an approach for Labour.
The over 55's are complacent – Gentailer shareholders, property owners who have helped their children into homes (no gift duty).
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360934909/nz-turned-late-middle-aged-hellscape
https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/360936021/nz-hellscape-middle-aged-people-what-stuff-readers-think