• Re: Water - should you be boiling water before drinking it?

    From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 19 11:00:04 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 19 10:55:47 2025
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 19 11:51:14 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:00:04 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings

    Thanks to the uncharacteristic courage of National, the 3-waters
    reforms have been dismantled and the provision of water services
    returned to democratically-elected local or regional government. This
    will naturally have an affect on rates (as it always has) but if I
    recall correctly spending on 3-waters needs to come from ring-fenced
    water revenues.

    Many councils have in the past managed their water services well and
    face little impact from regaining operational control of 3-waters, but
    some (including my local council) have some issues to address. These decisions, thankfully, will be taken by my local council whose
    headquarters are in a nearby small town. Under Labour's 3-waters
    reforms, Water Entity A would have been in charge and would have
    effectively been an Auckland-based and focused organisation with 1.7
    million people out of 1.9 million in their service area being in
    Auckland.

    So those in Gore faced with nitrate issues, the solution is in the
    hands of their elected council, and if I were them I would be glad to
    be able to hold my local council to account to get the problem fixed,
    because this has happened only because of a change of Government.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sat Jul 19 04:15:47 2025
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the way the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years ago of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to their spending so let's hope that now stops.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 19 17:06:56 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:51:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:00:04 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings

    Thanks to the uncharacteristic courage of National, the 3-waters
    reforms have been dismantled and the provision of water services
    returned to democratically-elected local or regional government. This
    will naturally have an affect on rates (as it always has) but if I
    recall correctly spending on 3-waters needs to come from ring-fenced
    water revenues.

    Many councils have in the past managed their water services well and
    face little impact from regaining operational control of 3-waters, but
    some (including my local council) have some issues to address. These >decisions, thankfully, will be taken by my local council whose
    headquarters are in a nearby small town. Under Labour's 3-waters
    reforms, Water Entity A would have been in charge and would have
    effectively been an Auckland-based and focused organisation with 1.7
    million people out of 1.9 million in their service area being in
    Auckland.

    So those in Gore faced with nitrate issues, the solution is in the
    hands of their elected council, and if I were them I would be glad to
    be able to hold my local council to account to get the problem fixed,
    because this has happened only because of a change of Government.

    From the second link I posted:
    "Councils do not treat for nitrates at present, and removal was a
    difficult and complicated process, Prickett said.

    Estimates from the Waimate District Council were between $500,000 to
    $750,000 plus ongoing costs to treat one scheme that supplied just 600
    people, while the Selwyn District Council estimated finding and
    establishing a new, lower nitrate water source could cost $400million,
    and work done for the Christchurch City Council put the price of
    denitrifying the city's drinking water at $830millon to $1.5billion."

    So those estimates of $0.5m to $0.75 m were for a supply to 600
    people; how relevant that is to Gore we do not know. We do know that
    years ago there was little need for nitrate removal; that has been a
    recent development. Gore has a population of about 8,400, so they may
    need a slightly more expensive scheme, but that may depend on what
    places like Tapanui, Riversdale, Lumsden and Kingston do. May of the
    farms on higher ground will not be affected by town problems - but run
    off from their farms is clearly affecting the need for water
    treatment. We also don't know to what extent Gore can set limits on
    water quality discharged from outside their boundaries.

    Clearly water meters will be used within town boundaries (or perhaps
    more widely to include any entities outside town boundaries), which
    may help, but it certainly looks like water will become expensive for
    towns that are being affected by run-off from farms outside municipal boundaries that are only affected by government limits on their
    emissions. Gore will not be the only town needing to find a water
    quality solution - perhaps they will want to cooperate with other
    towns in the area - perhaps even the whole water catchment area that
    includes Invercargill) to reduce average costs for everyone (except of
    course the upstream farms that create the problem in the first place.

    Now I doubt the town of Gore has enough money to meet even $0.5
    million, let alone pay for the planning and other project costs. Will
    the government lend them the money?

    Perhaps there are still a few questions . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Euall B. Tode@21:1/5 to All on Sat Jul 19 16:24:49 2025
    Rich80105 wrote:

    Subject: Water - should you be boiling water before drinking it?

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates - as the link tells you.

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates.


    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that [...]

    Nitrate contamination of water is not a new issue.

    Gore sources its water supply from two wells. Nitrate contamination of aquifers has been common in Southland for decades.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Tony on Sat Jul 19 06:04:40 2025
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to their spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the necessities first and not on the nice to haves.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Gordon on Sat Jul 19 06:25:34 2025
    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the >>way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the >> governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years >>ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Gordon@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sat Jul 19 06:21:19 2025
    On 2025-07-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:51:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:00:04 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings

    Thanks to the uncharacteristic courage of National, the 3-waters
    reforms have been dismantled and the provision of water services
    returned to democratically-elected local or regional government. This
    will naturally have an affect on rates (as it always has) but if I
    recall correctly spending on 3-waters needs to come from ring-fenced
    water revenues.

    Many councils have in the past managed their water services well and
    face little impact from regaining operational control of 3-waters, but
    some (including my local council) have some issues to address. These >>decisions, thankfully, will be taken by my local council whose
    headquarters are in a nearby small town. Under Labour's 3-waters
    reforms, Water Entity A would have been in charge and would have >>effectively been an Auckland-based and focused organisation with 1.7 >>million people out of 1.9 million in their service area being in
    Auckland.

    So those in Gore faced with nitrate issues, the solution is in the
    hands of their elected council, and if I were them I would be glad to
    be able to hold my local council to account to get the problem fixed, >>because this has happened only because of a change of Government.

    From the second link I posted:
    "Councils do not treat for nitrates at present, and removal was a
    difficult and complicated process, Prickett said.

    Estimates from the Waimate District Council were between $500,000 to
    $750,000 plus ongoing costs to treat one scheme that supplied just 600 people, while the Selwyn District Council estimated finding and
    establishing a new, lower nitrate water source could cost $400million,
    and work done for the Christchurch City Council put the price of
    denitrifying the city's drinking water at $830millon to $1.5billion."

    So those estimates of $0.5m to $0.75 m were for a supply to 600
    people; how relevant that is to Gore we do not know. We do know that
    years ago there was little need for nitrate removal; that has been a
    recent development. Gore has a population of about 8,400, so they may
    need a slightly more expensive scheme, but that may depend on what
    places like Tapanui, Riversdale, Lumsden and Kingston do. May of the
    farms on higher ground will not be affected by town problems - but run
    off from their farms is clearly affecting the need for water
    treatment. We also don't know to what extent Gore can set limits on
    water quality discharged from outside their boundaries.

    Clearly water meters will be used within town boundaries (or perhaps
    more widely to include any entities outside town boundaries), which
    may help, but it certainly looks like water will become expensive for
    towns that are being affected by run-off from farms outside municipal boundaries that are only affected by government limits on their
    emissions. Gore will not be the only town needing to find a water
    quality solution - perhaps they will want to cooperate with other
    towns in the area - perhaps even the whole water catchment area that
    includes Invercargill) to reduce average costs for everyone (except of
    course the upstream farms that create the problem in the first place.



    Now I doubt the town of Gore has enough money to meet even $0.5
    million, let alone pay for the planning and other project costs. Will
    the government lend them the money?

    Perhaps there are still a few questions . . .

    From the Gore District Council web site

    https://www.goredc.govt.nz/services/3-waters/water-notice



    "UPDATE Saturday 19 July 11:00am

    Please continue to use bottled water for drinking in Gore today, as a precautionary measure, following yesterday's testing that showed nitrate
    levels slightly above safe limits.

    Staff are continuing efforts to reduce nitrate levels by diluting the
    supply at Cooper’s Well, Gore’s primary water source.

    In addition, targeted sampling is being conducted at the East Gore Water Treatment Plant to confirm that dilution has lowered nitrate levels.
    Following this work, samples will be taken across the water supply network
    to ascertain when the water is safe to drink.

    Please note that the water tankers will need to leave periodically throughout the day to be refilled. However, there will always be tankers available in
    town to ensure continued access to safe drinking water.

    Here are the tanker locations- you will need to bring you own container.

    Eccles Street Playground
    Hokonui Drive (near the fire station)
    Grace Church, Hamilton Street
    East Gore School, Wentworth Street
    Gore Trout Statue

    Do not boil the water - this doesn't make it safe to drink and can increase
    the concentration of nitrate."

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to Gordon on Sat Jul 19 20:44:00 2025
    On 19 Jul 2025 06:04:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the >> governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >necessities first and not on the nice to haves.

    What should Gore be spending less on, Gordon, so that they can afford
    to deliver safe water?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Sat Jul 19 20:46:41 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the >>>way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >>> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the >>> governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years >>>ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in
    emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to euser@mail.invalid on Sat Jul 19 20:42:58 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 16:24:49 +1200, "Euall B. Tode"
    <euser@mail.invalid> wrote:

    Rich80105 wrote:

    Subject: Water - should you be boiling water before drinking it?

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates - as the link tells you.
    Well done! In fact I would it expect it to make the situation worse -
    nitrates would be more concentrated. If boiling was adequate it would
    be far less expensive than the processes that have been necessary in
    many places that did not previously need water processing . . .

    So the obvious question is what has to be done? And will legislating
    to reduce rates increases help?

    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    Not related to your subject line of boiling water.
    Boiling water does not remove nitrates.


    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time
    that [...]

    Nitrate contamination of water is not a new issue.

    Gore sources its water supply from two wells. Nitrate contamination of >aquifers has been common in Southland for decades.

    But getting significantly worse in recent years - although not
    necessarily at the same level as Canterbury . . .




    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to Gordon on Sat Jul 19 20:45:13 2025
    On 19 Jul 2025 06:21:19 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

    On 2025-07-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:51:14 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 11:00:04 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings

    Thanks to the uncharacteristic courage of National, the 3-waters
    reforms have been dismantled and the provision of water services
    returned to democratically-elected local or regional government. This >>>will naturally have an affect on rates (as it always has) but if I
    recall correctly spending on 3-waters needs to come from ring-fenced >>>water revenues.

    Many councils have in the past managed their water services well and
    face little impact from regaining operational control of 3-waters, but >>>some (including my local council) have some issues to address. These >>>decisions, thankfully, will be taken by my local council whose >>>headquarters are in a nearby small town. Under Labour's 3-waters >>>reforms, Water Entity A would have been in charge and would have >>>effectively been an Auckland-based and focused organisation with 1.7 >>>million people out of 1.9 million in their service area being in >>>Auckland.

    So those in Gore faced with nitrate issues, the solution is in the
    hands of their elected council, and if I were them I would be glad to
    be able to hold my local council to account to get the problem fixed, >>>because this has happened only because of a change of Government.

    From the second link I posted:
    "Councils do not treat for nitrates at present, and removal was a
    difficult and complicated process, Prickett said.

    Estimates from the Waimate District Council were between $500,000 to
    $750,000 plus ongoing costs to treat one scheme that supplied just 600
    people, while the Selwyn District Council estimated finding and
    establishing a new, lower nitrate water source could cost $400million,
    and work done for the Christchurch City Council put the price of
    denitrifying the city's drinking water at $830millon to $1.5billion."

    So those estimates of $0.5m to $0.75 m were for a supply to 600
    people; how relevant that is to Gore we do not know. We do know that
    years ago there was little need for nitrate removal; that has been a
    recent development. Gore has a population of about 8,400, so they may
    need a slightly more expensive scheme, but that may depend on what
    places like Tapanui, Riversdale, Lumsden and Kingston do. May of the
    farms on higher ground will not be affected by town problems - but run
    off from their farms is clearly affecting the need for water
    treatment. We also don't know to what extent Gore can set limits on
    water quality discharged from outside their boundaries.

    Clearly water meters will be used within town boundaries (or perhaps
    more widely to include any entities outside town boundaries), which
    may help, but it certainly looks like water will become expensive for
    towns that are being affected by run-off from farms outside municipal
    boundaries that are only affected by government limits on their
    emissions. Gore will not be the only town needing to find a water
    quality solution - perhaps they will want to cooperate with other
    towns in the area - perhaps even the whole water catchment area that
    includes Invercargill) to reduce average costs for everyone (except of
    course the upstream farms that create the problem in the first place.



    Now I doubt the town of Gore has enough money to meet even $0.5
    million, let alone pay for the planning and other project costs. Will
    the government lend them the money?

    Perhaps there are still a few questions . . .

    From the Gore District Council web site

    https://www.goredc.govt.nz/services/3-waters/water-notice



    "UPDATE Saturday 19 July 11:00am

    Please continue to use bottled water for drinking in Gore today, as a >precautionary measure, following yesterday's testing that showed nitrate >levels slightly above safe limits.

    Staff are continuing efforts to reduce nitrate levels by diluting the
    supply at Cooper’s Well, Gore’s primary water source.

    In addition, targeted sampling is being conducted at the East Gore Water >Treatment Plant to confirm that dilution has lowered nitrate levels. >Following this work, samples will be taken across the water supply network
    to ascertain when the water is safe to drink.

    Please note that the water tankers will need to leave periodically throughout >the day to be refilled. However, there will always be tankers available in >town to ensure continued access to safe drinking water.

    Here are the tanker locations- you will need to bring you own container.

    Eccles Street Playground
    Hokonui Drive (near the fire station)
    Grace Church, Hamilton Street
    East Gore School, Wentworth Street
    Gore Trout Statue

    Do not boil the water - this doesn't make it safe to drink and can increase >the concentration of nitrate."

    Thanks for that - a good emergency measure, but the long term still
    needs fixing - and they are not the only town with problems . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sat Jul 19 20:22:59 2025
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the >>>>way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >>>> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded >>>>the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened >>>>years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in
    emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?
    Piss off you little twerp, I am advocating nothing of the sort - you are a cretin.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 20 15:36:21 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the >>>>way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >>>> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in
    emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 20 15:33:43 2025
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:44:00 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On 19 Jul 2025 06:04:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:

    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be >>> properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the >>> governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.

    What should Gore be spending less on, Gordon, so that they can afford
    to deliver safe water?

    That is for the local council to determine and that is precisely the
    way it should be.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 20 17:32:12 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>>>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in
    emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 20 07:18:51 2025
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working >>>>>>the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will >>>>>>be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded >>>>>>the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened >>>>>>years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>>>>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?
    They are not pushing for a zero increase in rates. That is a deliberate mistatement.
    They are looking to cap them. A very different thing. You are such a liar.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 20 21:27:21 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 17:32:12 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether >>>>>or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates

    I am aware of efforts to impose rates caps but no-one is advocating
    this. I oppose rate caps on the basis that central Government should
    not impose limits on democratically-elected local bodies.

    - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?

    That is an issue for the ratepayers in that council. I am not one of
    them.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Sun Jul 20 23:16:52 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:18:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working >>>>>>>the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will >>>>>>>be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded >>>>>>>the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened >>>>>>>years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>>>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?
    They are not pushing for a zero increase in rates. That is a deliberate >mistatement.
    They are looking to cap them. A very different thing. You are such a liar.

    There have been a lot of different people making statements - and
    capping rates at current levels is the same as a zero increase in
    rates.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to All on Sun Jul 20 23:15:47 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 21:27:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 17:32:12 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to >>>>>>>their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the >>>>>>necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track.

    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates

    I am aware of efforts to impose rates caps but no-one is advocating
    this. I oppose rate caps on the basis that central Government should
    not impose limits on democratically-elected local bodies.
    The ACT Party have been talking about imposing a rates cap - frozen at
    this years levels. Whether it gets through is another matter, but it
    is being advocated. I agree with your opposition to such a universal interference with local rates.


    - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?

    That is an issue for the ratepayers in that council. I am not one of
    them.
    It may affect your local council though . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Sun Jul 20 19:57:49 2025
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:18:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working >>>>>>>>the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils >>>>>>>>will
    be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have >>>>>>>>persuaded
    the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened >>>>>>>>years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect >>>>>>>>to
    their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to >>>>>>>whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the
    necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track. >>>>>
    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think >>>that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?
    They are not pushing for a zero increase in rates. That is a deliberate >>mistatement.
    They are looking to cap them. A very different thing. You are such a liar.

    There have been a lot of different people making statements - and
    capping rates at current levels is the same as a zero increase in
    rates.
    Nobody has credibly said that, you made it up. There is no zero rates proposal from government, none.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Crash@21:1/5 to All on Mon Jul 21 08:24:42 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 23:15:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 21:27:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
    wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 17:32:12 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning >>>>>>>>>>on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils will be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have persuaded the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect to
    their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the
    necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track. >>>>>
    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer
    there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates

    I am aware of efforts to impose rates caps but no-one is advocating
    this. I oppose rate caps on the basis that central Government should
    not impose limits on democratically-elected local bodies.
    The ACT Party have been talking about imposing a rates cap - frozen at
    this years levels. Whether it gets through is another matter, but it
    is being advocated. I agree with your opposition to such a universal >interference with local rates.


    - do you think
    that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or
    should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government
    would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?

    That is an issue for the ratepayers in that council. I am not one of
    them.
    It may affect your local council though . . .

    So? Of course there may be issues with 3-waters with every local
    body. Thank goodness local control (and accountability) has been
    restored.


    --
    Crash McBash

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Rich80105@21:1/5 to lizandtony@orcon.net.nz on Mon Jul 21 09:58:09 2025
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 19:57:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:18:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government working
    the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils >>>>>>>>>will
    be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have >>>>>>>>>persuaded
    the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have happened >>>>>>>>>years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect >>>>>>>>>to
    their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to >>>>>>>>whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on the
    necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending.
    Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track. >>>>>>
    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer >>>>>there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think >>>>that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding
    installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or >>>>should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>>>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government >>>>would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?
    They are not pushing for a zero increase in rates. That is a deliberate >>>mistatement.
    They are looking to cap them. A very different thing. You are such a liar. >>
    There have been a lot of different people making statements - and
    capping rates at current levels is the same as a zero increase in
    rates.
    Nobody has credibly said that, you made it up. There is no zero rates proposal >from government, none.

    I agree that there is no zero rates proposal - it is a zero _increase_ proposal. "Capping" rates is not the same as reducing them to zero.
    You appear to have taken too many stupid pills today, Tony . . .

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Tony@21:1/5 to Rich80105@hotmail.com on Mon Jul 21 07:13:58 2025
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 19:57:49 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 07:18:51 -0000 (UTC), Tony
    <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sun, 20 Jul 2025 15:36:21 +1200, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid> >>>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 20:46:41 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>>>>>wrote:

    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 06:25:34 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:

    Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
    On 2025-07-19, Tony <lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
    Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
    On Sat, 19 Jul 2025 10:55:47 +1200, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
    wrote:
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/567362/gore-residents-told-not-to-drink-tap-water-due-to-high-nitrate-levels
    https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/national/544734/academics-call-for-urgent-action-on-nitrate-pollution

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noykSN0KWu4

    So now water is becoming a local authority issue, at the same time >>>>>>>>>>>>that a few Nat/ACT supporting candidates are returning to >>>>>>>>>>>>campaigning
    on expecting zero rates rises . . .


    Sorry, I meant to include this article as well: >>>>>>>>>>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/567339/local-democracy-under-threat-officials-warn-against-removing-council-four-wellbeings
    Thanks for the cites. It is good to see the current government >>>>>>>>>>working
    the
    way
    the electorate asked it to. It is even better to see that councils >>>>>>>>>>will
    be
    properly held to account for doing what we pay them for.
    As a bonus it looks like the Taxpayer's Union just might have >>>>>>>>>>persuaded
    the
    governmment to cap rates before Christmas - that should have >>>>>>>>>>happened
    years
    ago
    of course but at least it could happen now.
    Many councils, with a few exception, are out of control with respect >>>>>>>>>>to
    their
    spending so let's hope that now stops.

    Capping, I am all for it. However the question still remains as to >>>>>>>>>whether
    or not those councils who are out of control will be able to spend on >>>>>>>>>the
    necessities first and not on the nice to haves.
    Always a risk, after all most coucillors have a limited knowledge of >>>>>>>>governance. But better than the current overspending. >>>>>>>>Ultimately it is up to the electors to keep the councillors on track. >>>>>>>
    So are you advocating that Gore should just keep takers bring in >>>>>>>emergency supplies? What is "on track" in this instance?

    That is for the local council to determine. Are you a ratepayer >>>>>>there? If not it is none of your business.
    The government is pushing for a zero increase to rates - do you think >>>>>that may affect decisions made by the Gore Council regarding >>>>>installing nitrate extraction equipment for their water supply? Or >>>>>should they be able to increase rates to fund the need that has been >>>>>identified? Or alternatively, are you confident that the government >>>>>would meet any shortfall if they imposed a cap on rates . . .?
    They are not pushing for a zero increase in rates. That is a deliberate >>>>mistatement.
    They are looking to cap them. A very different thing. You are such a liar. >>>
    There have been a lot of different people making statements - and
    capping rates at current levels is the same as a zero increase in
    rates.
    Nobody has credibly said that, you made it up. There is no zero rates >>proposal
    from government, none.

    I agree that there is no zero rates proposal - it is a zero _increase_ >proposal. "Capping" rates is not the same as reducing them to zero.
    You appear to have taken too many stupid pills today, Tony . . .
    Ah so you finally caught up. I made a slip and you pounced like the feral ass that you are, well done.
    There is no zero rates increase proposal, there is a capping proposal they are different - dumbo.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)