Originally Posted by
Blue Skies
Peter Dunne is hardly an impartial commentator so take what he says with a grain of salt.
As usual things aren't always as they appear if you dig a little deeper.
Entrenchment is normally needing a 75% threshold.
The Threshold on this clause was only 60% so it would only need a couple go MP's from the Opposition to overturn the law, not Entrenchment in the normal sense of the word.
Now Constitutional Law experts love to get excited about this sort of thing, but in practical terms, once an asset like Electricity or Water is sold off, it can never be nationalised again, its a one way street so unlike other laws which can easily be reversed e.g. 3 Strikes, in a practical sense it's better not to have something as vital as water, vulnerable to the whim of a wafer thin 51% majority..
Look at the disaster of Brexit which should never have happened, but can't be reversed.