Dear Friend,

Chris Hipkins scraps "Three Waters" by changing its name 🤦‍♂️

I’ve seen politicians try to stretch the truth before, but watching Chris Hipkins with his new Local Government Minister, Kieran McAnulty, claim with a straight face that their Three Waters "refresh" is an improvement on Nanaia Mahuta’s version was a new low. 

As you'll see below, his claims that there is no "co-governance" and that communities will "own" water assets rest on the assumption that he will be able to mislead New Zealanders but do a better job of spinning, sorry, "explaining" his policy than Nanaia Mahuta could. Under the hood though, almost nothing has changed.

The team and I are just back from the Wairarapa where we watched the announcement. It was bizarre. The Prime Minister had about 20 officials there (they nearly outnumbered the handpicked media in attendance), who looked extremely uncomfortable with your humble ratepayer representatives turning up. 

The local mayor (who is actually one of the few who support of the changes!) was shafted. They didn't invite him to speak and when I said "let's hear from the local Mayor" the Prime Minister and Minister of Local Government said he could use the podium and they literally got in their ministerial car and left! The irony of the Prime Minister's message that today's announcement protects local voices was not lost.

What’s changed:

The name

Despite all those tens of millions spent on TV ads, “Three Waters” branding and consultants, the main announcement today was a change to the name. We are now meant refer to the changes as “Affordable Water Reform” (it must poll better...).

But as you'll see below, Chris Hipkins' policy is misleading in its name. The "Affordable Water Reform" is just a more expensive version of Three Waters!

The number of entities

Instead of forcibly removing waters assets from local councils and transferring them to four unaccountable, co-governed entities, we should all be grateful that the Government will now only forcibly remove water assets from local councils and transfer them to ten unaccountable co-governed entities. 

Council representation

All councils will now have the right to have at least one representative on the Regional Representative Groups, but in some cases this will mean at least 13 representatives, which will have to be matched by a further 13 mana whenua representatives.

And remember the 75% majority clause for decisions where consensus cannot be reached?  That still applies!

Instead of scrapping the controversial 50/50 co-governed regional representative groups, Chris Hipkins' "compromise" is to add six more!

The start date

Instead of coming into effect next year, the implementation has been delayed until 2025/2026. Far from putting Three Waters on the policy bonfire, Mr Hipkins' has just rebranded Nanaia Mahuta's leftovers and popped it in the fridge.

What’s staying the same:

Property rights still don't count, with "ownership" meaningless

Assets paid for by ratepayers will continue to be transferred to regional entities and councils will lose the traditional rights associated with ownership. 

Democratic accountability undermined

Your local council will continue to be a very small voice on Regional Representative Groups of whom half will be unelected mana whenua appointees. While the co-governance might be more localised, it certainly isn't local democratic control.

Local control lost

Councils will still lose their ability to set the level of water charges and make decisions on investment. Voters/ratepayers can't sack those who will run the assets they've already paid for.

No ability to opt out (or leave)

Communities still won't be able to remove themselves from failing entities.

Chris Hipkins has hatched the same policy, but backs himself to spin it better

The Prime Minister really doubled down on the claim that councils will "own" the water assets under this "refreshed" model. But this is just recycling Nanaia Mahuta's old lines. It is a legal fiction – all of the normal rights of "ownership" are being extinguished.

Similarly, Mr Hipkins looked into the camera today and said that this isn't "co-governence". But in terms of the structure of the entities (boards appointed by 50/50 Regional Representative Groups requiring 75% majority, and subject to Te Mana o te Wai statements issued by iwi or hapu) nothing has changed!

The economics of fortune telling

The whole basis of the Three Waters reforms for the last 18 months has been an argument that "bigger is better" and more efficient. Here at the Taxpayers' Union, we've been extremely sceptical of that argument – not just with the experience with Auckland's "super city" but the advice the Government relied on was riddled with errors.

But even the Government's own analysis said that once you get past eight entities there are probably no efficiencies. The Government now wants 10, but still claims it's about saving money.

The reforms will continue to prioritise unnecessary bureaucracy and gold plating over what is the most appropriate water infrastructure for your local area while meeting health and environmental standards.

In fairness to the media, they did ask the Ministers whether ratepayers can expect to get rate decreases as a result of these changes. The Government's argument is that rates will "go up less" with these reforms and therefore households will be better off.

But the "savings" numbers are based on 30-year projections! Officials getting cost projections right over a three year period are like putting a finger into the wind. To extrapolate and summate "savings" out to 2054 isn't worth the paper it's written on.

Chris Hipkins is relying on Kiwis believing that centrally controlled, co-governed, water entities with no restrictions on gold plating, and no ability for voters to hold to account will save money. And, that the money "saved" by councils will be returned to you in the form of lower rates. Yeah right...

A name change is not enough – force Chris Hipkins to listen

Friend, since we launched our Stop Three Waters campaign 18 months ago, we turned Three Waters into the main obstacle to the Government's re-election. Public polling shows that we have demonstrably shifted opinion, with Three Waters being the number one policy Kiwis want Chris Hipkins to scrap.

Chris Hipkins' decision to double down and just slap a new name on Three Waters could be his biggest mistake to date. He's relying on being able to frame opponents as being against "affordable water reform" and questioning their motivations.

We need to step up to the challenge and hold the Prime Minister to account. Can we count on your supprt ?

We want to hit the media in coming days to ensure Kiwis understand that so-called "affordable water reform" is just spin for "Three Waters". But up against a Government funded rebrand we are relying on your support to hold them to account.

When we said Scrap Three Waters, we didn’t just mean scrapping the Three Waters name. We need a new approach to water reform that makes it easier for councils to work together and addresses funding concerns while still retaining democratic accountability and local control.

Friend, we've won over the public, but Wellington has not listened. Now let's hold them to account and finish the job.

>> Make a confidential donation <<

Thank you for your support.

Jordan Williams Executive Director New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union.

ps. We had intended to launch our RMA / Stop Central Planning Committee campaign this week. Given the events of today, that will likely be next week now. Watch this space...

pps. No one likes to have to ask for money. But our work is 100% funded by our supporters like you. While Chris Hipkins has the might of the Government purse and machine behind him, our ability to reach millions of New Zealanders depends on your support.