Another stolen policy
Labour’s stolen adopted another policy from National. Yesterday they announced that all money from petrol taxes would go into the Land Transport Fund instead of the consolidated fund.
This has been National policy since 2005. This is what Pete Hodgson said at the time in response:
Transport Minister Pete Hodgson says double the $546 million diverted from fuel tax into the Crown Account is spent on the transport system and – as a recent Transport Ministry survey shows – road users are not even paying their way.
“The argument around the diversion of fuel duty into the Crown account is meaningless … shifting it around does not alter the fact that the amount shifted does not cover costs,” he says.
If National wants to spend an extra $4 billion on transport over nine years it must say whether it will be taking the money from education or health.
So should we ask Pete how many hospitals will close due to this move, or does this magically only happen if National does it?
This is a good reminder why National has to be careful not to release all of its policy too early. Labour are adept at damning it one month and adopting it the next.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:12 pm
Just shows why National should be govt. Labour are implementing their policies anyway, may as well have the real thing rather than the imposter.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:32 pm
How sad for Labour Blue
July 26th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
It is totally pathetic that National is so similar to Labour that they are scared Labour will steel their policies. National should sets itself appart and start telling people what it will do for them and the country.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
It’s fiscally neutral by and large, as Labour was spending all of the fuel tax revenue on transport anyway – it just moves from annual appropriation to a guaranteed flow of money. A good move, if only because it makes it harder to reverse.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:45 pm
It is totally pathetic that Labour are so desperate to retain power that they will steal National policies even though they disagree with them. Labour should stand up for their values even though NZers no longer want them.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
2002 – Boxing?
2005 – Tax cuts, one law for all, welfare reform…
July 26th, 2007 at 7:46 pm
It depends very much on what the definition of “transport activities” is. Already road users are heavily subsidising other modes of transport, where the Government is investing huge amounts of roadusers’ money for no economic return.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
“Labour should stand up for their values”
Get real. Labour have no values. They only have their obsession with power. Gerry Brownlee refused to appear on Agenda with Hodgson because in Jerry’s opinion, Hodgson was “a platitudinous fuckwit”, and he’s damn right. Kyoto Pete is an arrogant politically one dimensional moron, and if our media wasn’t a pathetic bunch of Labour party arse lickers they’d ask Hodgson to account for the words he previously spoke on this issue. Watching the obsequious commie try and squirm his way out of it would be something worth seeing.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:53 pm
This is good sense…if only it was done years ago. It will mean that petrol consumption is directly responsible for subsidising transport infrastructure upgrades, including public transport. The latter will take steady investment over a number of years to bring it up to the sort of capacity and capability we need for the “Energy Constrained Future” we have ahead of us.
July 26th, 2007 at 7:55 pm
Porcupine says: “National should set itself apart and start telling people what it will do for them and the country.” I disgree. National should just do what it takes to win the fucking election and get rid of Clark and the rest of the crooks. Nothing else matters.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:02 pm
Unfortunately anon you have a point. In this case the ends does justify the means.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
There is no mortgage on policy.
Just like when National stole Act policies in 2005 and polled 38%.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:19 pm
as libertyscott said – this was effectively happening anyway. AND this measure was announced in the Budget, its just taking effect now… keep up
July 26th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
So if anyone needs any more convincing on why National doesn’t release more specific policies then we now have the answer. Any time they release one Labour – who is totally bereft of ideas first criticise it, then copy it once they think people have forgotten.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:39 pm
Why doesn’t National release a policy that is not quite genuine and let the liars from Labour pick up on it and dig the hole deeper?
So many tennis balls, not enough tournaments
July 26th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
Is someone actually seriously suggesting there is meaning in this government?
There’s zero integrity – no standard of behaviour means anything. We’ve had bribery, assault, misleading the house, prima facie criminal cases made… none of which have led to the expulsion of ministers from cabinet in recent years.)
We’ve had complete backflips on so many positions, including ones that Labour was extremely heated up about – this one, anonymous donations, and don’t forget “closing the gaps”.
When was the last time Labour had a policy that genuinely helped the poor (and wasn’t extended to rich people like WFF)? How about helping Maori – DPF posted the other day that they’ve had pathetic progress on treaty issues compared to the National government. What about health? There’s no real progress on fixing the health system at all – waiting lists are as long as ever, and don’t forget how they tried to shorten them by just throwing people off!
What about renewing themselves? Don’t make me laugh! Labour still have the same front bench that they had when they were in opposition. Sure, a few have moved on but none anyone actually cares about. Read hansard from 1992 and see how many names you recognise.
What about the surplus? How much money does the government have to have sloshing around in the coffers before they offer a bit of relief for Joe Taxpayer? 5 Billion, 10 Billion, it’s never enough?
Ministerial responsibility is out the door – just blame the nearest staffer. Inconvenient question in the house? Don’t bother answering at all. In fact, Labour have ministers asking questions to fellow ministers. How pathetic is that!
Independence of offices like the Auditor General has been seriously compromised. The electoral act is being changed explicitly so that “attempted rourts by the opposition” cannot be used again – except those supposed rorts aren’t even the biggest problem to come out of the last election, and they aren’t even being banned anyway. The foreign minister’s position is a joke – the representative of our government to the world isn’t even in the government, nor is the revenue minister. Oh, appointing your best friend as speaker, regardless of her experience, does put you in the “old boys club”.
Did we mention it’s ok to steal taxpayers money? Forge signatures? Have people break the speed limit to get to a rugby game? Using a bent cop as a source to shut down criticism that the cops are bent?
And the scary thing is, that’s not even the beginning.
Nope. There’s no meaning to anything this government does.
July 26th, 2007 at 8:57 pm
You’re depressing me scrubone
July 26th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
Steve said “So many tennis balls, not enough tournaments”
Oh very good riposte Sir! Captures the mood of the day very nicely!
July 27th, 2007 at 8:14 am
“Transport related activities” Hmmmmmmm I feel a HUGE advertising campaign coming on next year.
“travel by roads that are brought to you by Labour”
“Catch the bus – subsidised by funds allocated by this Labour-led Government”
“20 Free bus rides – you are better off with Labour”
But it is LTNZ that is doing the advertising you idiot – this is not party political or election related.
Yeah Right
July 27th, 2007 at 11:40 am
“Labour’s stolen adopted another policy from National.”
You mean ’stolen’ in the same sense as Dan Brash’s emails were ’stolen’?
“
July 27th, 2007 at 11:42 am
“National should sets itself appart and start telling people what it will do for them and the country.”
They are far different to Labour – you just won’t no how different until after they’ve won an election
July 27th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Anon said “National should just do what it takes to win the fucking election and get rid of Clark and the rest of the crooks. Nothing else matters.”
Sounds like someone has been sittng in on National strategy meetings – honestly what kind of people are you that you think hiding your agenda then doing whatever the hell you want is a moral way to behave? Surely, if your ideas a valid the public will back them.
DPF -
A fiscially neutral change to transport funding, that’s the one example you can point to of Laobur taking natioanl’s policy – in the reverse direction, right of the top of my head there’s:
- 4 weeks annual elave
- kiwisaver
- no nukes
- Working for Families
- the Cullen Fund
- no further asset sales
- no strike wing for the airforce
- Kyoto (ok National was for that before they were against it before they were for it, kinda, again, but still)
and any day now
- interest-free loans
July 27th, 2007 at 8:37 pm
And National stole it from NZ First, who proposed it a whole ten years earlier in 1995.
While you’re right and it’s clearly evidence of a drought of new ideas in this government, I’m glad to see it adopted as policy by both the major parties. Perhaps now it’ll actually happen.