KEY POINTS:
Organisers of the Government's re-election campaign have probably hauled someone over the coals for the news that the Department of Building and Housing is about to restrict our hot showers. At least we hope so. There seems no limit to the impositions on life that may be made in the name of climate change, not to mention other causes close to the Government's heart.
This one has probably taken Helen Clark by surprise as much as anybody. Even a Prime Minister of her command could not be expected to know of all regulations bubbling up through the bureaucracy. But she cannot escape responsibility for it. This sort of nonsense happens when a regulatory culture is encouraged from the top.
The bathroom shower is about to be restricted by a new building standard governing the efficiency of water heating. As Green Party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons explains it, builders and householders will have a choice of how they comply with the standard. Solar panels or a heat pump or wood-fired wetback will automatically comply. So will a well-insulated cylinder or a house designed with a short distance between the cylinder and taps.
But the builder or owner will need to check an on-line calculator to ensure those design elements comply. The shower-head is a simpler option, Ms Fitzsimons says. As long as it restricts the flow to 7.5 litres a minute in a small house, or 6 litres a minute in a larger home, it will be approved.
The average shower gives 13 litres of water a minute. They commonly range up to 24 litres and some blasters deliver 35 litres. The limit to be imposed in February on those who do not install one of the approved heating and piping systems in new homes will reduce the shower to a miserable spatter.
This is the sort of thing that powerfully antagonises people at the best of times. An election campaign is not the best of times from the Government's point of view. It has been accused of invading the nation's bathrooms and people wonder what next.
Labour cannot entirely blame the Greens either. The responsible minister is Labour's Shane Jones, who defends the proposed standard on the grounds that those who comply will not only save electricity for the country but save money for themselves. Let people make that decision for themselves. This country is not so short of electricity that it needs to restrict anyone's shower.
In fact, it is not short of electricity resources at all. It has ample hydro generation for normal times and oil, gas and geothermal stations that take up the load in dry spells. Investment in new generation has been delayed in recent years by the Government's climate change response, culminating in a moratorium on new fossil-fuelled plants, and the demands of the Resource Management Act. Both are artificial constraints and both could be lessened by a change of government.
The widespread perception of petty personal bossiness, the "nanny state", is Labour's Achilles heel at this election. It has been carrying the label at previous elections but people are in a more decisive mood of rebellion now and petty restrictions like the shower will weigh more strongly.
The planet can surely be saved without treating people like children (or teenagers whose showers are definitely excessive).
Energy-efficient home appliances and house designs carry their own incentives in lower operating costs. They do not need to be enforced by punitive measures on life's little indulgences. Or is that the real purpose of environmentalism? Rules such as this make us wonder. And tempt us to enjoy a good strong shower somewhat more.
