The Kaipara Konnection - Kaipara Konnection - Dargaville.BIZ
The Kaipara Konnection - Kaipara Konnection - Dargaville.BIZ
The Kaipara Konnection - Kaipara Konnection - Dargaville.BIZ
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
A terrorist is someone who has a bomb<br />
but can’t afford an air force. --William Blum<br />
An Observation from Aardvark<br />
Free water, pay here<br />
<strong>The</strong> Prime Minister has told us that water is not “owned” by<br />
anyone -- it is owned by everyone. This will undoubtedly come as<br />
very good news for those who are forced (by threat of harsh legal<br />
penalty) to pay for the water-rights they need to irrigate their<br />
land or whatever. I guess that if the PM is true to his word, local<br />
authorities and environmental bodies will now be powerless to<br />
charge anyone for this resource.<br />
Cue Tui’s ad.<br />
I suspect that the PM really means “water is not owned by Maori,<br />
it’s owned by the government of the day”.<br />
That is very different to what he’s been saying and I see the magic of political spin being used to its fullest extent here.<br />
Would it be right to grant Maori “ownership” of the water under the provisions of <strong>The</strong> Treaty? Well perhaps they ought to<br />
own the water that was in our lakes and rivers at the moment <strong>The</strong> Treaty was signed - but I suspect that water has long<br />
since evaporated or flowed out to sea. If Maori can find and identify that water, they’re welcome to it. However, since the<br />
contents of our lakes and rivers are constantly renewed, I would argue, like the PM, that *everyone* owns the fluid that<br />
now fills those waterways.<br />
Which raises the issue of whether the government (central or local) has any right to charge for the use of a resource<br />
that we already own. Whether it’s a water-right for power generation or a water-right for irrigation, an admission by the<br />
government that “water should not be owned” indicates that there can not be any charge for its use. Yes, if you live in a<br />
town where there is reticulated water then the company which provides that *service* is entitled to charge you for your<br />
connection -- but they ought not be able to charge you by the litre -- since that’s charging for something the PM says<br />
“should not be owned” and, if you don’t own something, how can you sell it - that’s fraud.<br />
I’m a little torn over this whole issue -- on the one hand, I’m tempted to support any initiative that will halt the partial sale<br />
of state-owned assets in the way that the government is planning. On the other hand however, I don’t think that Maori<br />
can sensibly claim ownership of something that has long-since left the building.<br />
And remember -- if government is prepared to be so hypocritical as to sell something that it admits ought not be owned<br />
by anyone - how long before it decides to sell our water to offshore ownership in a poorly planned attempt to balance the<br />
books.<br />
We’re constantly being told by futurists that water will soon become the most precious commodity in the world. How long<br />
before we’re buying *our* water back from the Chinese, USA or other “owner” I wonder?<br />
I have to admit I’m getting seriously pissed off at the antics and stupidity of our politicians.<br />
<strong>The</strong> Ink Spot<br />
Phone: 0800 INK SPOT E-Mail: darginkspot@slingshot.co.nz<br />
http://inkspot.nscoc.com