Unless, of course, you're a communist. But most of us aren't - and so anything that looks like it might be riding roughshod over democracy isn't going to go down well with pretty much everyone.
If we were generous, we could possibly describe the legislation passed in Parliament as a new twist on democracy - but I think most people will see it riding roughshod over democracy. And you won't be getting any argument from me on that one.
But even though I think Labour will be punished for it - I don't think it's the main offender here. Just like I think Ngai Tahu shouldn't be copping any blame - it was right behind the legislation, but it wasn't its idea.
No, the outfit I think we should be coming down on like a tonne of bricks, is ECan itself. For several reasons.
The first reason is that it's just not necessary.
Because, already, ECan pretty much doesn't do anything without talking to Ngai Tahu about it first. And if Ngai Tahu puts the kibosh on something, it generally doesn't happen.
This is largely due to the local government legislation that ECan operates under but also due to a formal partnership ECan has had with Ngai Tahu since 2016, which is known as "Tuia".
As ECan says on its website, Tuia is about the regional council recognising that its work is "inextricably linked" - that's the wording it uses - ECan's work is "inextricably linked" with Ngai Tahu and its ancestral land.
And I've got no qualms with that because, of course, ECan exists to oversee the management and protection of Canterbury's natural air and water resources which are sacred to Ngai Tahu.
This is even recognised by Federated Farmers which is saying today that it supports Māori representation on the ECan council.
But, as it's South Canterbury President Greg Anderson is saying, it should be done democratically.
No argument from me on that one. I'd be perfectly happy for there to be specific Māori councillors elected to ECan.
But as well as thinking the legislation is unnecessary, I also think it's wrong because it reinstates an arrangement that was in place when the previous National government kicked out all of the ECan councillors and brought in commissioners.
When that happened, there were a couple of Ngai Tahu reps on board. Which made perfect sense when everyone else around that council table was appointed.
But things are different now - and ECan is being run by elected councillors again. So bringing in a little bit of the old set-up makes no sense. Well, it just doesn't make sense - it's wrong.
But the main reason why I think ECan needs to really be taken to task over all of this is its lack of consultation with the people it serves.
ECan wanted the legislation and went to Te Tai Tonga MP Rino Tirikatene to get it through Parliament. Which, in itself, is fine.
But as National Party MP Paul Goldsmith is saying, the way it went about it was totally wrong. He says it was "pretty rotten" ECan didn't consult the Canterbury people.
Pretty rotten, indeed.
