three waters g otto on luxon...

Spearing Chris Luxon's contradictions over Three Waters

CHAPTER 1

When Christopher Luxon took up the job of CEO of Air New Zealand back on 19 June 2012, John Palmer the Chairman of the Board who appointed Luxon only had a year or so to go before he resigned in September 2013 and buggered off in March 2014.

It's fair to say that Chris Luxon and John Palmer spent quite some time together for over a year professionally and knew each other pretty well. I'll come back to John Palmer - so just remember this.

Before John Palmer buggered off out the door following Rob Fyfe's footsteps - Luxon sought a new Chief People Officer.

Luxon looked all around the globe - and eventually he found an Australian named Lorraine Murphy who had worked at Campbell Soup in the USA ( country of choice at Air NZ lol ).

Murphy brought the cultural upgrade Air NZ needed after decades of Punch and Judy fighting in the courts between highly paid Executives with seven houses, multi million dollar salaries, stock options and flash cars - and Unions made up of Engineers, real people seen at The WareHouse, expert tradespeople - who were just trying to keep their bloody job after years of training and experience around Jet Aircraft while marketing and finance people ran the show.

The poor workers were always fighting the rich for a few lousy dollars more and were often thrown crumbs from their master's table after expensive court cases, blood, sweat and tears.

Ligation costs were through the roof, it was almost as bad as the National Party.

As many of these Air NZ workers aged and specialised in their skills - being made redundant in some flash Harry restructure was the last thing they needed - especially as life was getting tougher in general.

There was a bit of survival mentality amongst the workers or some rich tosser will kick you to the curb with all your work mates.

There was a culture of distrust and compliance and I am just doing my job to keep my job at Air NZ. The staff had an "I rely on luck" or "I rely on you ( management )" culture at Air NZ.

HPE would transform a person's attitude so they relied on the team - and looked out for all the team yadda yadda ...

Yes the Unions ( seen at K-Mart being frisked by security ) and the Upper Class ( seen at the best restaurants and on super yachts drinking Champagne with Jane ) had been smashing each other in the face for years at Air New Zealand.

Imagine Punch smashing Judy over and over with a big corporate stick until Judy hauled Punch off to court only to lose again most of the time.

But the fighting at Air New Zealand was expensive, draining, limiting productivity and a small microcosm of the growing divide that wealth inequality and forces like the National Party brings to a society ( lol ).

A deep level of distrust as the rich hide their wealth behind high security gates, cameras, and foreign trusts.

Christopher Luxon liked the new High Performance Engagement ( HPE ) approach that Campbell Soup's Murphy brought to the table a great deal - and he wanted to reduce the cost of so many court cases - so Luxon soon began to wax lyrical to Union bosses about how we can keep on doing this - or we can try something new.

"We sat down with our union partners and asked how can we do this differently, we're all exhausted. As Christopher said, 'It's like the Punch and Judy Show. I hit you, you hit me, we throw a tantrum, you throw a tantrum,'," said the Australian-born Murphy, who came to the airline from the Campbell Soup Company.

Sound familiar?

Yes it is.

Luxon is almost a religious disciple of HPE - High performance Engagement with its four principles and also something called Interest Based Problem Solving.

Under Luxon's rule - Air NZ soon became so indoctrinated with HPE techniques that the Air NZ Board and the Executive Team even called themselves the HPE Leadership Team lol.

The four principles of HPE are :

1. ) Those closest to the issue should be involved in solving it along with subject matter experts

2.) Transparently share and understand the interests of all shareholders

3.) Transparently share the information needed to address the issue

4.) Follow a systematic problem solving process that seeks a consensus solution

At Air New Zealand number 4.) was called Interest Based Problem Solving and this involved four steps :

Step 1: Define the Problem

Write an issue statement "How can we ..."insert problem to be solved?" --- but don't boil the ocean - by leaving the definition too broad and don't make it so narrow you miss part of the issue.

Step 2. Determine the Interests

By discovering the interests relating to an issue statement and identifying common interests a foundation for a win/win situation is created. A key aspect of understanding the interests is to identify the stakeholders.

Step 3. Develop Options

Step 4. Craft Solutions

Traditional problem solving will often lead a team straight to Step 3 and 4. With "interest based problem solving" most of the time is spent in Step 1 and 2.

You can imagine it at work with Luxon during the Leadership talks while Judith scowls and hisses in the crypt.

"So Simon what do you want exactly - what are your interests?" - said Luxon to Bridges behind closed doors.

Then Luxon said - well here are my interests and here is an issue statement I started - maybe you can edit it with me....

"How can we agree about the leadership role we both want?"

Luxon definitely worked out some options with Simon...and of course the win/win was never a public deal they were going to confess to the Press.

Not to Jenna Lynch, not to Jessica MuckInMyEye and not to Henry Cooke.

Predictably the big brain on Bridges - seeing a pathway for himself to get everything he wanted one day - came out endorsing Luxon as leader.

"Eye fink he wool be brulliant as Loyder and as Proyme Munster", said Simon.

Luxon then shut down all questions about what his plans were with the Press - if he was to lose the 2023 election.

"I am not talking about that", said Chris to the journalists.

G News has trawled through some Air NZ PowerPoints from 2016 and 2019 in some back alley ways and discovered HPE at Air NZ often started with - a RESET. ( OMG )

The Reset asks - do you want to start over?

This is exactly what the public witnessed when Luxon stood before the press and said we are reseting the National Party and turning the page.

"How can we do this differently?" - said Mr Luxon as part of his formularised HPE line to each National MP back in November 2021.

"What are your interests? Let's draw up some options...", said the wonder Kid repeating the systematic problem solving technique with the four step formula to define the problem and then define the interests and then some options, before crafting that solution.

This way of thinking was bloody new to dumb old National MPs ( especially Simeon Brown, Simon, Erica and Bishflap ) and it's fair to say Nicola Willis shivered with admiration for this technique as Luxon explained it was a new way of thinking to Jessica in the Rose Gardens on One News.

But it was not new at all - it was old from 2013 - it was about unlocking collective intelligence in a team - and it was all just simple text book HPE in motion.

( NB : Not only that but Luxon loves the HPE based words "Let's supercharge ...this" and the words "Supercharge vaccinations" can be found in National's "Open Up Plan" that Luxon co-authored". )

The Air NZ HPE way of thinking was really about getting highly engaged teams to work together and this HPE mindset is engrained in Luxon's psyche after Lorraine Murphy brought the method to him in 2013.

Naturally this little set of HPE programs in Luxon's mind had not escaped the attention of world famous PM Jacinda Ardern who made the following remark in her speech to the Council of Trade Unions Conference in October 2017:

“We know that when business and workers join together, we can achieve great things. Just look at the Air New Zealand agreement – the model of high performance, and high engagement cooperation between workers and employers. Unions and the business took a situation where a company was losing money and looking to cut jobs, and turned it around so that jobs were saved, they were made more productive, and the future of the business was transformed.”

Saving those jobs was a good thing.

Knowing all of this now about Luxon's four step HPE method - what about Luxon and his positions on Three Waters taken up in September and October 2021?

CHAPTER 2

On the 29 September 2021 John Palmer former Chairman of Air New Zealand lashed out in Stuff about Three Waters Reform.

He said some pretty wild inflammatory things like :

"“It is obvious that the solution in broad terms has been designed politically, to satisfy the Government’s intent of centralising core functions, to appeal to Māori interests and pressure from the Māori caucus, and then finding a mechanism to fit that brief,” Palmer said.

“In short, water reform is a poster child for state control of key resources, with a real possibility of community assets being taken by the Government without proper consultation or compensation.” - went on Palmer to the press.

Ha ha the water pipes and infrastructure will stay in the ground and service the same people.

The minutes of Tasman Council on 10 September 2021 show - Palmer's words were at odds with what the Government was actually telling councils in writing for example this clause :

"While the Government’s starting intention is for publicly-owned multi-regional models for water service delivery (with a preference for local authority ownership), final decisions on a

service delivery model will be informed by discussion with the local government sector and the work of the Joint Steering Committee."

The Joint Steering committee is made up of about 13 Local Council Mayors and Chief Executives - as well as half a dozen people from the Department of Internal Affairs and of course a representative from the new water regulator.

That kind of co-operation between all those close to the issue didn't sound much like state control or - the Labour Maori Caucus exerting pressure - instead this sounded a great deal like HPE ...the High Performance Engagement model used by Chris Luxon at Air New Zealand and later with the National Party - :

1. ) Those closest to the issue were involved in solutions ( Local Government and the DIA, manawhenua, the regulator etc )

2. ) Transparently share and understand all the interests of the shareholders ( dozens and dozens of workshops over years now )

3.) Transparently share the information needed to address the issue ( A four year process of review so far , workshops, meetings, with all stakeholders )

4.) Follow a systematic problem solving process that seeks a consensus solution...

You can seek consensus - but as with Unions and Air NZ Executives that was sometimes easier said than done.

The Government has given the Local Councils the opportunity to participate in the initial phase of the three waters reform programme. In return for that participation, the Government

allocated to the Council a stimulus funding package to invest in the three waters activities.

Sounds pretty HPE right there....

Obviously John Palmer was playing muck racker here ( he waded in with loads of negative criticisms of councillors quite a lot about a dam project he had an interest in ).

Palmer's words about a state takeover of council control fitted like a glove with those being quoted by Christopher Luxon throughout September and October 2021 and even as early as June 2021.

Luxon played up the same state control narrative... and amplified fears and any conflicts, undermining the work in progress by suggesting there be no move to regional co-operation or joint council ownership. Instead capability would just happen "organically".. :

"We believe we should be enhancing Three Waters capability and incentivising change where it is led locally and able to happen organically – not mandated by the Beehive. These reforms are showing the same ‘we know best’ attitude and amalgamation agenda that we’ve seen from the Labour Government in vocational education and DHBs. Change must be led by councils and communities." - said Luxon on 30 June 2021.

Luxon started up a petition to stop Three Waters, wrote a letter to all councils on 10 September 2021 urging them to not go ahead with the process and to agree to stall - and Luxon even appeared on Q&A with Angry Jack Thunderbird 1 on 20 September 2021 where he repeated the words of his letter - to the letter - verbatim ...as if he had memorised it and rehearsed it over and over.

Luxon was playing the role of disrupter here.

Instead of asking for an issue statement to be jointly defined, working it through with all the interests clearly identified, going through the options and crafting a solution ...Luxon was claiming none of that had happened already here ...

But it had happened and the process was in progress.

Luxon did not understand the estimates about the future investments we may require - which were worked up off several reports done by expert groups in co-operation with expert advice from Scotland where they had undertaken major water reforms similar to what New Zealand now was facing.

Luxon's Letter disrupting and sowing division amongst Local Councils can be found on Facebook and suggests when a problem comes up that a small council cannot afford - it simply magically enters into a co-funding agreement with a "National Infrastructure Bank" that National would set up with their banking buddies ( Sir John could advise here ) and presto - Local councils will keep control of water assets and as the debt mounts blah de blah.

But National had no firm model of its own - no crafted solution - no alternative option - just that paragraph in a two page letter about National's position.

Positions that are not based on all of the interests lead to win / lose outcomes.

It's highly likely that Christopher Luxon and his old buddy John Palmer - former Chairman of Air NZ have been in touch in some fashion about their almost exact same narratives at the same time - as they both launched them into the press at the same time.

Crazy wild inflammatory rhetoric about state control, asset theft, centralisation and weak arguments feeding dischord into councils - while offering nothing like a detailed alternative to any of them.

This was not the HPE way.

This was the National Party way.

So much for a RESET.

CHAPTER 3

National had failed to propose - and only opposed - and in this case intervened in the process directly.

National had not proven there was anything wrong with the assumptions made in the estimates but National had suggested they must be wrong while wailing about the theft of assets and state control and centralisation.

That objection by Luxon was in direct contradiction to the way he 100% accepted the "centralised" regulator and what about the National Party's proposed "Centralised" National Infrastructure Bank?

Lots of centralisation right there from National.

It seems National and Luxon were contradicting themselves all over the place with nothing concrete to show for themselves apart from a two page letter after months of sitting around warming a back bench seat.

Luxon claimed co-operation and cross subsidisation between councils will be "organic" and will just happen willy nilly as the need arises.

However our experiences in New Zealand suggest otherwise.

After two decades of underinvestment in water infrastructure in New Zealand - and with population growth, urgent climate change action upon us, daunting asset maintenance, future proofing of infrastructure required, new infrastructure requirements for housing developments - all on the near horizon - Luxon's willy nilly organic solution approach seems like an unlikely dog's breakfast.

A recipe for more higgelty piggelty council led variation and tail chasing up and down the nation as some regions have great water assets and in others well - don't drink the tap water okay.

Luxon should be helping bring everyone together - like Labour is trying to do with it's very HPE based process - rather than muddying all hope of working through the process and - addressing all interests, defining options and crafting solutions.

With the dissent National have managed to whip up ( much like with Groundswell ) it's all just a more difficult process and the greedy eyes of those who would privatise our water assets are egging the Fabergé Egg onwards...what about a mixed ownerhsip model Chris with some Mum and Dad investors?

The messy criticism of Three Waters I have heard is light weight, ideological, without evidence and without a detailed alternative proposal that involves no cross subsidisation - and no loss of local control and influence - and no centralisation.

Three Waters as proposed is about regional co-operation and public ownership with council influence being collectively shared - to get better long term results for all of us.

The stakeholders are defining all their interests and options are being looked at.

That's the heart of High Performance Engagement

Luxon has demonstrated he is in complete contradiction with everything he believes in over Three Waters.

Luxon's talked a great deal about proposing not just opposing but after months and months - he's delivered bugger all really.

Spearing Chris Luxon's contradictions over Three Waters

G