Heather du Plessis-Allan: Labour’s errors draw attention to Three Waters bill

Many will have a sense that something is off with Three Waters. There is too much haste, backtracking and quick fixes.

For a government desperate to get Three Waters off the agenda, they sure are drawing a lot of attention to it.

This week it was the entrenchment issue. The Greens wanted to make it harder for Parliament to privatise water assets. Labour joined them and voted for it. The amendment requires 60 per cent of Parliament - more than the usual majority - to vote for privatisation for it to pass.

Noble intentions. Bad call. Entrenchment is used very rarely for constitutional matters, like the voting age. And there was no pressure to change the convention. No one’s even seriously talking about privatisation.

Labour would probably have white-knuckled this out if wasn’t for the fact that it upset the public law professors. Those guys have too much credibility for the PM to do the usual scoff and bat them away. So Labour buckled and sent the entrenchment off to be reconsidered.

Last week it was the Te Mana o te Wai statements. These statements are declarations that will be issued by mana whenua about water quality in their local area. The statements give local iwi a helluva lot of power. Water authorities have to “give effect” to the statements. That doesn’t give water authorities latitude to have a listen, have a think and then do something else. They are required to do what they’re told.

Trouble is, the boundaries of exactly what these statements can apply to was very vague. Some critics worried mana whenua would be able to dictate what farmers could do with the ponds on their private land. After a bit of media attention, senior Labour MPs realised there was trouble and asked the responsible minister, Nanaia Mahuta, to insert a tighter definition into the law.

She did it in a hurry. Within a day it was ready.

Most voters won’t understand the detail of these problems. Even most media don’t really. But many will get the sense that something is off. There is too much haste, backtracking and quick fixes. It feels dodgy.

And frankly, it is dodgy, and has been from the get-go. There was something very wrong with Three Waters from the very start when we learned Mahuta and Cabinet had secretly decided to confiscate water assets from councils, while Mahuta still led them to believe they could join voluntarily.

Labour is very lucky the Opposition is off its game on Three Waters at the moment. Act and National are either bored or have given up fighting Mahuta on this. No one in either party picked up the Greens’ entrenchment amendment before the law professors did, nor did they quickly spot the addition of geothermal and coastal waters after the select committee process.

The most problematic wrinkle yet has hardly got any coverage. The Te Mana o te Wai statements in Three Waters are inspired by the Te Mana o te Wai principles in the RMA’s National Policy Statement for Freshwater. But under the RMA, both tangata whenua and local communities get a say. Under Three Waters only mana whenua do.

The inconsistency has never been explained. If we all care about, use and need water, why not let everyone have a say, rather than just some of us?

Again, Labour is very lucky the entire opposition is off its game.

Labour’s clearly trying desperately to get this bill passed before Christmas so it’s off the public mind in election year.

It’s a wise political move and generally, it’s one that works well. But Labour’s errors are making sure it gets a lot of unnecessary coverage first.

Heather du Plessis-Allan Drive, Newstalk ZB, 4pm-7pm, weekdays.