About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

April 23, 2005 7:12am by David Farrar

Petrol Tax Billboard

This is the billboard which has gone up in Auckland. I think it is great – people will see it every day as they are stuck in traffic.

Share this:

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Reddit
WhatsApp
More

Pinterest
Print
Tumblr

Like this:

Like Loading...

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment68

Uncategorized

Related Stories

Just $70 will keep a billboard alive for another day
The billboard probe
Auckland building owner threatened over billboard

Comments (68)

Login to comment or vote

johnie

Who’s the gnome in the bottom right corner?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 8:15am
dim

No kidding. I think it’s a great ad – certainly the right approach for National – but the photos simply make it look deceptive and clumsy.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 8:59am
Murray

Who’s the troll at the bottom left corner?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:17am
road2ruin

Well actually all the petrol tax will go to roads after 6 YEARS.
Misleading advertising !!. Whats the number of the advertising standards board.
But wait Labour has allready been funding about $100 million extra from the consolidated fund, national stealing labours policy again !!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:33am
tim

Useful information

The Secretary, Advertising Standards Complaints Board
PO Box 10-675, Wellington, NZ
Tel: 64 4 472 7852
Fax: 64 4 471 1785

Website with searchable database of decisions since 2000 and how to make a complaint( yes billboards are included)
http://www.asa.co.nz/

Thanks for the computer image, it will be very useful for above
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:40am
tim

Let me think about the ASCB and its code of conduct on Comparative Advertising

CODE FOR COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING
17 July 1989

Comparative advertising, or advertising that identifies a competing product or service, is characterised by three distinct features:

It should be factual and informative.

It should explicitly or by implication make clear what comparison is being made.

It should not mislead the consumer about other products or services with which comparisons might be made.
Advertisements should not unfairly attack or discredit other products, advertisers or advertisements directly or by implication.

GUIDELINES FOR COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING
Comparative advertising should be factual and informative and should offer a product or service on its positive merits. The intent and connotation of the advertisement should be to inform and not to discredit, disparage or attack competitors, competing products or services directly or by implication.

Comparative claims should be unambiguous and clearly understandable so that there is no likelihood of the consumer being misled as a result of the comparison.

Where an advertisement makes a comparison, whether explicitly or implicitly, it should be clear with what the comparison is being made, i.e. price to price, dimension to dimension, feature to feature.

The competition should be fairly and properly identified but never in a manner or tone of voice that degrades the competitive product or service.

The identification should be for honest comparison purposes and not simply to upgrade by association.

The subject matter of a comparison should not be chosen in such a way as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser or so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is actually the case.

Where appropriate, comparative advertising claims must be supported by documentary evidence which is easily understood. Where technical data is submitted it should be accompanied by a summary of the relative comparative points, written in layman
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:47am
moth

What a sad boy you are Tim – get a life, please!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 10:46am
Michael

Bloody brilliant – if it upsets the lefties it must be a direct hit.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:06am
Murray

Better still, get your own bloody site Tim instead of hijacking other peoples bandwidth for your protracted drivel.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:08am
Gooner

It’s not an ‘ad’ numbskull, it’s a political billboard. DUH!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:31am
Paula

So is it National policy not to actually do anything about the petrol tax? Except for correct allocation (if the billboard is not misleading)?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:34am
rightkiwi

Great ad … but it is obscured on the motorway by road works!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:34am
tim

Of course its an billboard, which the owners of the billboard come under the advertising code of conduct. The the client is the national party, is niether here nor there. political ads are treated no differently from dog food or hair transplants.
The political billboards you refer to are those elected “”very near”” to election time , usually on council owned land which dont seem to be covered by the BSCA, but are regulated by local councils anyway.

The last laugh , for you Wellington drones , is that the Spgahetti junction in Auckland is a sea of construction, and has been for the last 2 years. You spend too much time Gooner ,following 4th rate English soccer clubs to know anything about Advertising (self)regulation
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:45am
Jordan

What’s funny about this is the placement – i.e. Auckland – the city where spending on roads has increased from $1m a day in 1999 to $5m a day currently, and is increasing all the time.

Where Aucklanders groan and are yet pleased because of the disruption caused by road works all over the city.

Besides the small fact that the amount spent on transport is the same as the amount raised by the petrol tax.

As Pete Hodgson noted, this creates a $4b hole in the public finances, because it creates a massive transport spending increase on top of those already agreed. What is going to be cut to achieve this?

If this is the best you guys can do… roll on the election 🙂
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:52am
kakariki

Wow what vision! Tell me, if National builds roads all over the place will there actually be any room left for stuff like, oh I don’t know, maybe schools, homes, hospitals, parks and rivers? Or should we just build roads indiscriminately everywhere because they are *good*?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 12:58pm
EDH

Well done, very good peice of comparative politics.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 1:19pm
AL

Ohhhh poor widdle wefties can’t handle the wittle billboard. Now they’re cwying for mummy wovernment to welp them.

When is the Shrek sign coming from the Maori Party?
http://sirhumphreys.blogspot.com/2005/04/shrek.html
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 1:40pm
gazzadelsud

yup, reading the comments from the usual suspects, sounds like a bullseye!

excellent work

🙂

(ps., hope its true! – please, please keep this promise)
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 2:13pm
David Farrar

Kakariki – come on please, roads all over the place – all people want are roads that will allow people to get from point a to point b in a reasonable period of time. Unless you are going to ban cars, you need to invest enough in roads to keep traffic flowing. The pollution from cars stalled in traffic jams shoudl be a concern to you!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 3:31pm
Adolf Fiinkensein

Bloody Good!! By the time the lefties lodge a protest, and the Gnats indulge every available delay, iven if it has to come down, every Aucklander will have the message, loud and clear.

Just wait until they do the movie “Berryman’s Bridge” for release in JUne.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 3:35pm
johnie

Funny – I drove into Auckland today. I didn’t see the billboard, but I did see lots of roadworks at the end of the Northwestern. Could it be that the national party is not telling the truth? Surely not!
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 3:43pm
Davros

Is the prisoner compo thats being paid out anything to do with the regime of torture that existed in the early 90s under National’s watch? Whoops I think that had to be paid out in 2000 after the torture had been swept under the carpet for six or seven years.

Should be noted prisoners who were kept too long in jail (by a couple of months) got compo in the 90s and National never bothered plugging that particular gap.

Maybe the sensible sentencing trusts referendum in 1999 was brought about by National punishing prisoners with excessive sentences. wait A minute it was the opposite wasn’t it.

That $20,000 buck hip hop tour sure could have built a fair few motorways though.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 4:08pm
Tonto

Bit disturbing that nobody can express an opinion without some legalist searching to find something legally wrong with. Is this fascism or what?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 5:04pm
Whig

Brilliant! If this is any indication of how National is going to campaign then we will have a new government by spring.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 5:08pm
johnie

The other interesting thing…if the billboard is anything like the photograph, what drivers will see is a photo of Helen against the red background. Most won’t notice the words, or the gnome against the blue.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 5:10pm
Murray

No not at all. A fascist is someone who dissagrees with a leftie.

Did n’t you get your copy of liberal to English dictionary?
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 5:11pm
Tonto

Make sure you put your commas and full stops in the right places otherwise some sensitive person might get offended by it and start looking for a government agency to punish you. PC is fascism.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 5:29pm
tim

A few cold hard facts, the Advertising Standards Board is an industry organisation that has nothing to do with the government. There is no legislation that enforces any of the codes. Advertising is big business which needs to maintain its credibility or its just money down the drain. So in that sense the industry is more important than some halfwit with a pot of red and blue paint.
Whether the ads will improve nantionals poll ratings one little bit is a bit far fetched, but they are desparate and need first to keep up the morale of the 20% who vote for them ahead of feeding for their own children. It obvious that this little jpg has ended up in the emails of national devos, to keep the flame burning while the vast majority ignore it. I mean to say didnt Banks & co lose heavily in Auckland of all places while driving a roading bulldozer into the council elections.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:20pm
Paul

Sad lefties, get a life, its a friggin billboard for f**k sake, tim, please don’t attempt to lecture us on the BSA’a authority, you’re wasting your time. Go complain about McDonald’s wrappers for all we care. Its always nice to see the left in tail spin over stuff like this, bring on more I say.

I’d be keen to see “111 Emergency Sercives – Yeah Right!” “Want to ‘Upsize that you bad boy'”
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 9:33pm
Graham watson

This sort of political advertising is highly effective.

At a time when many of the voting public see labour and national as different shades of much the same thing this sort of message brings in to stark contrast some of the distinctions between the two.

Surely even Labour hacks will agree it is effective?

I wait in anticipation for more of the same.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 10:35pm
tim

Yes the nats have a lot to learn about billboards. last election they forgot to put VOTE NATIONAL on all the local electorate posters and billboards which meant that Labour won the Party vote in EVERY electorate but 4.
They are heading that way again by the looks of it
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 10:37pm
Tonto

While not totally agreeing with the rights economic
ptivatisation New Zealand is stuffed if Helen and the crew win the next election. There will be a exodus of people because of the drift to totalitarianism. A stock market crash is inevitable, oil prices are expected to double and crime is going to increase so it does not look good. The right can have the same bad effects on the average person as the left and there does not seem to much toleration for the middle ground.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:00pm
ZenTiger

Very good billboard!

Still, I thought the lefties would have been pleased to see an advertisement proclaiming just how much value the petrol tax provides if you vote Labour. You get a whole bunch of extra stuff, not just roads.

Don’t see why they don’t throw in a set of steak knives and make the whole package irresistable.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:39pm
kakariki

Banning cars, now that’s an idea…
Let’s start with those driven by fossil fuels. Sure the kids in Iraq would appreciate it.
0 0
Report
April 23, 2005 11:59pm
David

Full marks for whoever thought this message up. It is punchy. But surely they could have found a worse photo of Clark? I’ve seen some shockers in the media and on the web, and they deserve to be repeated.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 12:01am
Stuey

You need to learn a bit about internet graphics 101 in the National Party obviously. That JPG is a horrendous example of JPG compression artefacts – don’t the horrible blurry edges around the writing on the red side look horrible to you?

That image should have been saved as a GIF or PNG to achieve a smaller file size and no blurring.

cheers
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 2:12am
David

And we all know that JPG compression artefacts can decide an election.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 2:39am
David Farrar

David – If one deliberately chooses a very bad picture of Clark, then the choice of picture becomes the issue, rather than the message about petrol tax.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 7:17am
kiwi bob

What a missed opportunity for National. It shoud have said National would remove the taxes.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 7:36am
David Farrar

Bob – what do you mean? Are you suggesting that the taxpayer rather than road users should fund the roads? I think the policy is spot on. Over time I would like a more sophisticated system of congestion charging but until we are at that stage, petrol tax is the best way to fund roads.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 8:25am
johnie

So you’re saying, David. that immediately a national government took power, all petrol tax will be spent on roads?
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 8:31am
gazzadelsud

getting funnier and funnier, this is clearly a direct hit! wonder what the next one will be, maybe higher (sic) education, or health – where did all the money go? or maybe NZ the unhealthy country – where did all the sickness beneficiaries come from?

or how about the RMA – you didn’t really need that electricity did you? What is the current monthly average power bill anyway these days, and what was it in real terms in 1999?

the opportunities are endless….

David you could start running competitions for the funniest potential ad slogans

🙂
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 9:18am
David Farrar

No Johnie. The policy is to implement it over six years by $100/m a year. This is for the very simple reason that an immediate doubling of the construction budget would exceed capacity and just drive up prices, rather than result in greatly increased construction.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 9:25am
phil u

frogblog does a very efficient demolition job on this bit of fluff from national…you can see how starved the right are for ideas/policy when this pathetic illogical/inaccurate whimper has the troops on their feet baying….

y.i.a.m. (whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 10:50am
johnie

Very good, David. So, is the billboard strictly truthful? No, it’s not!
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 11:24am
Lawrence

Excellent comments and as Phil say, it
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 11:42am
David Farrar

The level of whining from certain people indicates this must be one of the best billboards either. This new standard that you can not mention an election pledge if it to be phased in, is a wonderful invention.

And as for Lawrence taking refuge in that more money is being spent on roads then ever before. Every year that can be claimed. Has nothing to do with whether that is enough.

The simple fact is that National will spend $2.1B more over six years and then an extra $600m/year than Labour will. Now if like the Greens you do not want roads, and thing traffic jams will force everyone onto bikes, then vote centre-left. However if you want a Government which will properly fund the roads so that we have safer and less congested roads, then don’t vote for them.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 12:19pm
Gooner

Tim – you can say what you like about my posts, but don’t EVER call Arsenal 4th rate! 🙂
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 12:55pm
tim barclay

They are continuing to underinvest in raods because they still pay about &600, per year into the general spending and wasteful spending. their answer is to have that stupid twerp their minister of Transport pile on more and more restrictions on raos unsers instead of investing in raods to make them safer. there are votes here.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 2:00pm
gazzadelsud

yeah lawrence, i do know a lot more about electricity pricing than I suspect you do, i am also well aware of the Bradford reforms (must say didnt really agree with them at the time, but they were designed by people far smarter than me – so what would i know), but of course having been in power only since 1999 means that labour has been powerless (sic) to do anything about long term electricity generation doesnt it?

all i see is Hodgson farting around trying to be a hero and made up reports from MED saying that micro-generation, conservation and wind will save us – just like it hasnt saved any other country! i think the greens have stuffed energy policy just as convincingly as they have stuffed roading.

so your point was again?
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 4:20pm
johnie

Weren’t the bradford reforms meant to allow the market, that magical instrument so beloved of the right, to reward investors in new generation? Ho, hum, the market fails again. What a surprise!
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 5:23pm
phil u.

dpf “..Now if like the Greens you do not want roads, and thing traffic jams will force everyone onto bikes, then vote centre-left. However if you want a Government which will properly fund the roads so that we have safer and less congested roads, then don’t vote for them..”

i’m not sure why you lot get locked into this either/or debate re roads/cycleways/public transport etc..
surely to the rational mind any solution is a combination of all three..

and speaking as an aucklander who has just given it a fair crack and used public transport, feet, and bicycle for the last 18 months..public transport in auckland both sucks and blows….i’m defeated; i’m going to get a car..soccer has been the tipping point..
i look at envy at christchurchs’ $3 ride all day fare…this $9 one up here is just a fucken joke..

to take my boy to practice two nights a week and to a game (if it is within two bus zones only) costs me just under $25..not to mention irregular service, a in many cases sullen and underpaid workforce..and don’t get me started on the fucken joke that is the link..you haven’t lived till you’ve waited eons for one of these suckers; then gone one stop down the road, where the bus sits waiting for another 5-10 mins, under the control of some unseen and unheard lord of the link..aarrgghh!

so, speaking as a deep green i must say i want the motorway link finished to allow an alternative route through/into auckland,(i disagree with green givens on this one), but most of all we need a decent/cheap public transport system..and yes david, cycleways too; what can you have against cycleways? it’s like being against motherhood..cycleways are so passive and unthreatening..so nice..

y.i.a.m (hoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 5:58pm
phil u.

dpf “..Now if like the Greens you do not want roads, and thing traffic jams will force everyone onto bikes, then vote centre-left. However if you want a Government which will properly fund the roads so that we have safer and less congested roads, then don’t vote for them..”

i’m not sure why you lot get locked into this either/or debate re roads/cycleways/public transport etc..
surely to the rational mind any solution is a combination of all three..

and speaking as an aucklander who has just given it a fair crack and used public transport, feet, and bicycle for the last 18 months..public transport in auckland both sucks and blows….i’m defeated; i’m going to get a car..soccer has been the tipping point..
i look at envy at christchurchs’ $3 ride all day fare…this $9 one up here is just a fucken joke..

to take my boy to practice two nights a week and to a game (if it is within two bus zones only) costs me just under $25..not to mention irregular service, a in many cases sullen and underpaid workforce..and don’t get me started on the fucken joke that is the link..you haven’t lived till you’ve waited eons for one of these suckers; then gone one stop down the road, where the bus sits waiting for another 5-10 mins, under the control of some unseen and unheard lord of the link..aarrgghh!

so, speaking as a deep green i must say i want the motorway link finished to allow an alternative route through/into auckland,(i disagree with green givens on this one), but most of all we need a decent/cheap public transport system..and yes david, cycleways too; what can you have against cycleways? it’s like being against motherhood..cycleways are so passive and unthreatening..so nice..

y.i.a.m (whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 6:00pm
pundito

what are you on about johnie? If the energy market was subject to free market conditions, then investors would relish the opportunity to invest in new generation schemes. The problem however is that Green measures initially started as an ideal to protect some environments have morphed and mutated into beasts way more obstructive than originally intended. Take for example the RMA. This is the primary reson in NZ why investment in electricity generation has not gone ahead at rates that the market would deem reasonable. There is no problem with profitability, in fact, the market is too heavily tilted towards profiteering (led in no small measure bythe fact the govt owns 80% of generation and distribution), and as such there is plenty of scope for a new profitable enterprise to start generation. However any attempts to initiate new generation projects are delayed and massively beauracratically expensive in terms of time and money in order to meet stupid rules. This same scenario applies to roading. Many worthwhile projects are delayed due to pandering to wowsers with secret agenda.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 6:55pm
James

A “Free Market” in Electricity under Bradford…> Yeah right!
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 7:08pm
johnie

Why, then, did bradford inflict these reforms on us? Was it just national party stupidity? How can we guard against a repetition? Oh – the answer to that is obvious, eh?
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 7:17pm
Gaz

Would cyclists want to pay for cycle lanes? I think not. Road users pay more for their roads than they get in return, it should not be so. Cycleways shouldn’t be paid for by drivers, neither should public transport.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 7:35pm
Paul

Gaz, thanks for a comment of resason, if drivers must pay tax for roads, surely cyclists and walkers pay a tax for cycleways and footpaths huh, HUH?? Friggin greenies always want something they want paid for by some one else.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 9:21pm
AL

Keep it up lefties. May I suggest you ring Newstalk ZB and clearly remind New Zealanders how righteous your repeated petrol tax increases are? Trust me, New Zealanders like to be reminded how you’re sucking the lifesblood out of their families in the name of centralisation and socialism.
0 0
Report
April 24, 2005 10:11pm
phil u.

gazz and paul…still running with the most simplistic user pays formula you can find huh?..

(and of course you apply that formula to all aspects of your lives, eh? can’t have you dipping into the common good/pool now, can we?..must live the dream, eh?..or else it’s all just a load of piss and wind, eh?)…..

still, saves taxing the old grey matter eh?..no need to try and find solutions..just do as most of your lot do..survive on simplistic slogans,(this example being “build more roads”), without an ounce of rational thought to back them up…(see false and misleading billboard as the latest cracker example)

national is not a political party..it is fast becoming a big joke (almost embarassing even for opponents to gaze upon) ..and to make the joke complete why not give the don the flick (it’s not working, even to the untrained eye), and install the heir apparent ‘jolly’ gerry brownlee..then we could all guffaw away together..

al..if you think these increases are rough, you are in for a huge shock…the one thing you lot are all forgetting is the greenie component of this argument..namely “hey, guess what? you know that stuff we use to drive/run our society? we think it’s going to run out in the forseeable future, so maybe we could/should start looking at alternatives to what we have always done?..whaddaya reckon?”..

but no, just keep your heads in the sand, maybe it won’t come to pass like the bad, silly greenies say..

y.i.a.m. (whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 6:40am
Gaz

Phil – It’s not western countries like NZ that have to worry about oil running out, cos we will still pay for the dregs until a suitable alternative comes, because we can. The evidence regarding the oil running out is shaky at best and like global warming cannot be proven.
I also didn’t say “build more roads” – I said that motorists shouldn’t pay for cycleways or public transport. I don’t think that the cyclists would like it if their cycle lanes were tolled any more than motorists like paying tolls, but hey it’s an idea. Remember that tradesmen can’t lug hundreds of kilos of tools around on a bike.
And I think your tune will change come September. Then the joke will be on you. Ha ha ha.
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 6:48am
phil u

gaz..”..And I think your tune will change come September. Then the joke will be on you. Ha ha ha…”

what’s going to happen in september?..apart from the don having to dig out his c.v…?..and you guys/gals having to be peeled off the walls..? prozac all around..

tell me you aren’t still living the delusion..

“..I don’t think that the cyclists would like it if their cycle lanes were tolled any more than motorists like paying tolls, but hey it’s an idea…”
i like it, we could have fit and able pensioners/solo parents/at home mums, and other wastrels gainfully employed collecting tolls..the more fit of these could ride pursuit bikes to chase toll-runners and to look out for signs of intoxication etc, and to generally keep order..(i thought you duded and dudettes were for less government/governing, but hey, go with what feels good/right)

and as for the whole user pays concept so beloved of the right, you just haven’t got it yet have you? the greens key policies of polluters pay to fund cleaner alternatives is user pays in it’s purest form, eh?

so, get on board..

y.i.a.m. (whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 8:52am
Charles

Boy, Tim is upset isn’t he? He must enjoy paying (and paying and paying) tax. I think it’s a great billboard and gets right to the heart of the matter – the wastage of the amount of revenue the present administration extracts from its citizens.
I mean, just on Friday, a story came to light about another $1 million given away to “artists.” Creative NZ has absolutely no friggin’ idea who got the money, where they are now and what they have done with it. Perhaps we’ll see the resignation of the arts minister over this? Not!
Now where can I get some copies of this in an appropriate size to use as car stickers?
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 1:55pm
Michael

Phil U(seless) – I cycle regularly from Lower Hutt to Wellington and don’t use the cycle lane (which incidently was paid for out of regional rates.)

The damn thing is so rough, potholed and mud-clogged it is unusable. Which is why 99% of cyclists use it for two days then go onto the nice, smooth shoulder for the rest of their lives.

What a waste of money that cycle lane was – I say rip the damn useless thing up and build a six lane highway!
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 7:26pm
Paul

Phil, I’m not sure why you couldn’t work it out, I wasn’t being particularly oblique, but to make it really simple I was saying that if its good enough to tax road users for roads, then its good enough to tax others who choose other forms of transport to pay for the infrastructure that support their mode, thats all. Why not, one rule for all surely. But extra-slow lanes for dope-smokers with extra tolls for wasting social fabric, now that has real appeal.
0 0
Report
April 25, 2005 9:45pm
phil u

michael..so because it needs a bit of a tidy up we’ll just rip it up and throw it away…now there’s the musings of a rational mind..national/act supporter/voter?..

paul..that was a weak attempt, (on my part), at pushing the humour/irony button to attempt to point out the distortions of apparent tunnel vision, and sloganspeak on your part..and how so many of you lesser government/governing types are so gungho for bringing in new controls/governing/beaurocrats..

y.i.a.m. (whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Report
April 26, 2005 8:26am
Kevyn Miller

It’s a pity the billboard doesn’t include “Lending money to Transit for ALPURT B2, giving money to RailTrack.” I bet a private roading company would have both the Commerce Commission and the Serious Fraud Office all over them if they charged a toll to repay money that they have borrowed from their own exhorbitant profits.
Incidentaly, please note that the MoT study referred by Pete Hodgson is GST EXCLUSIVE… and apparently trucking companies don’t pay any tax! Nor do petrol companies!! Nor Panel beaters. In fact, according to this study, the only tax paid by road users is the petrol tax. No wonder they come to the conclusion that road users aren’t paying their way. Oh, and they also insist there should be a capital return on the land occupied by our roads even though nobody ever paid for the land in the first place because the land was reserved for roads when the land was sureveyed for settelement decades before the motor car was even invented because our pioneers new the land would have no value if you couldn’t get to it. Petroltax.org.nz has some good photos of what our roads would still be like if the petrol tax hadn’t been introduced to pay for highway improvements.
0 0
Report
May 12, 2005 3:32am
Kevyn Miller

It’s a pity the billboard doesn’t include “Lending money to Transit for ALPURT B2, giving money to RailTrack.” I bet a private roading company would have both the Commerce Commission and the Serious Fraud Office all over them if they charged a toll to repay money that they have borrowed from their own exhorbitant profits.
Incidentaly, please note that the MoT study referred by Pete Hodgson is GST EXCLUSIVE… and apparently trucking companies don’t pay any tax! Nor do petrol companies!! Nor Panel beaters. In fact, according to this study, the only tax paid by road users is the petrol tax. No wonder they come to the conclusion that road users aren’t paying their way. Oh, and they also insist there should be a capital return on the land occupied by our roads even though nobody ever paid for the land in the first place because the land was reserved for roads when the land was sureveyed for settelement decades before the motor car was even invented because our pioneers new the land would have no value if you couldn’t get to it. Petroltax.org.nz has some good photos of what our roads would still be like if the petrol tax hadn’t been introduced to pay for highway improvements.
0 0
Report
May 12, 2005 3:33am

« The Register on police porn scandal

NZH: Time for Hawkins to perf »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Top Stories

General Debate 25 April 2024
Hysterical Hipkins
General Debate 26 April 2024
High Court quashes Waitangi Tribunal summons
Remembering the war dead
Three Strikes saw lower reoffending
Should media practice what they preach?
Literature and Males
Possible changes to End of Life regime
Two Ministers lose portfolios

Recent Posts

Possible changes to End of Life regime 26 April 2024
General Debate 26 April 2024 26 April 2024
Three Strikes saw lower reoffending 26 April 2024
Hysterical Hipkins 25 April 2024
General Debate 25 April 2024 25 April 2024
Remembering the war dead 25 April 2024
High Court quashes Waitangi Tribunal summons 24 April 2024
Literature and Males 24 April 2024
Should media practice what they preach? 24 April 2024
Is the Commerce Commission for consumers or suppliers 24 April 2024
Two Ministers lose portfolios 24 April 2024
An awful idea 24 April 2024

Never miss a post

Email Address

Recent Comments

Possible changes to End of Life regime
Berend de Boer
General Debate 26 April 2024
Libertarians are right
General Debate 26 April 2024
kiwikidsnz
General Debate 26 April 2024
peterwn
General Debate 26 April 2024
lifesgood
General Debate 26 April 2024
sungsamning
General Debate 26 April 2024
sungsamning
General Debate 26 April 2024
Steve Otto(North Shore)
General Debate 26 April 2024
lifesgood
Possible changes to End of Life regime
krazykiwi
General Debate 26 April 2024
sungsamning
Possible changes to End of Life regime
WorthwhileAucklandInitiative
Possible changes to End of Life regime
Odakyu-sen
General Debate 26 April 2024
lifesgood
General Debate 26 April 2024
surfing

Links

Professor Robert MacCulloch: NZ's Worst PM Ever - Chris Hipkins
Breaking Views
"Fascism and communism are not two opposites, but two rival gangs fighting over the same territory"
Not PC
Has he only confirmed the suspicions?
No Minister
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
US v. Google: do complaints have to be internally consistent?
Utopia
Eruption of pro-Palestinian protests on American Campus evidence of a conscience – the difference between Anti-Semites and Anti-Zionism
The Daily Blog
Open mike 26/04/2024
The Standard
Maori Party (with “disgust”) draws attention to Chhour’s race after the High Court rules on Waitangi Tribunal’s summons
Point of Order
"Comity" versus the rule of law
No Right Turn
Jacinda’s legacy – Increasing number of abortions
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
REEFTON – THE NEW PARIS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

© 2003-2024 David Farrar

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d

%d