The battle of duelling responsibilities is unfolding before our eyes and I can't work out whether it all ends in tears. 

On one hand you've got the Local Government Minister off to Cabinet with his rates cap plan for councils. The average rate rise is almost 10%. Inflation isn't. 

It's not good enough. They are out of control and Wellington is going to do something about it. 

But then on the other hand we have Local Water Done Well, the new Government's replacement for Three Waters. 

You can buddy up with a group of councils and areas, or you can go it alone. 

For example, Gisborne District Council has decided to go it alone. Is that a good idea? Not according to Internal Affairs, who have written to them, having seen their plans. 

They have also written to five other councils with similar ideas and said to them that you don’t seem to have the capacity and wherewithal to pull this off. 

So, what if they're right? 

What if they don’t and the whole thing goes tits up? 

How is it a Central Government on one hand is setting the rules of engagement on rates for fear of things getting out of control, yet letting councils, who their own people are suggesting aren't up to it, loose on water infrastructure that may well end up putting them in the poor house? 

It's that complex, angsty line between freedom and control, local and central. Where is that line drawn? 

If you don't trust them on rates, is water so simple and cheap and easy that they should be fine? 

Then you get to the bit about voters and local democracy. Gisborne claim they’ve consulted and the community is behind them. 

That almost certainly isn't true, given the consultation would have involved the usual handful of those actually interested, as opposed to the majority who wont be remotely aware, or care, until of course it all goes wrong. At which point there is all hell to pay. 

So who is right?  

Central Government getting control of the out of control, or letting the out of control dabble elsewhere and going into it with a red flag? 

There seems a stark inconsistency in approach from Wellington because both approaches can't be right.