De Facto State Funding
Otago University Political Studies Lecturer Dr Bryce Edwards blogs on the move by Parliament to legalise pledge card type expenditure, labelling it as de facto back door political party state funding.
The illegal misuse of taxpayer funds by parliamentary parties to pay for their 2005 election campaigns was the biggest scandal to come out of that election. The Auditor-General Kevin Brady made a ruling – based on Crown Law advice – that $1.2m of taxpayer money had been illegally spent by most parties (and in particular the Labour Party). Despite promises to fix this problem to prevent it happening again, the Government has just announced a backroom deal has been reached that will actually make the matter worse by allowing the parliamentary parties even more scope to misuse the funding.
It was public outrage that caused Labour to pay back its pledge card and associated illegal expenditure, and to also drop plans for full state funding of political parties. The challenge is to get the public to realise that Parliament is about to both legalise future pledge cards, exempt them from spending limits and allow for much greater abuse of parliamentary funds.
Bryce goes on to explain:
The Labour Government has cobbled together the support of a number of minor parties to push through new parliamentary spending rules that will ensure that the millions of dollars of taxpayer funds can more easily be used for party political purposes without the Auditor General being able to prevent or complain about their use.
And then Bryce looks at the overall effect of what Labour is doing:
The upshot of all of this – in the context of the current attempts to ‘reform’ political finance in NZ – is that it seems that the Labour Party and its supporting parties are combining three strategies to ensure their own advantage: [1] increasing their state funding; [2] ensuring the rules for the use of the funding still facilitate its party political use; and [3] using the Electoral Finance Bill to clamp down on any other groups spending their own money on politics. Combined together, these strategies are a formidable attempt to tilt the playing field in a certain direction whereby the Labour Party win and many others lose.
In other words, they are worried they can’t win a fair election, so they are changing the rules to ensure an unfair contest they can win.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:58 am
Indeed, an unfair contest. So when is National getting that message out to the people, David? They need to know that Labour is digging into their pockets against their will to fund their political ambitions.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:59 am
It is unbelievable that there is no public debate on this corruption. Are National doing a bad job in not ensuring that this is a high profile issue? I think they are – but I am not sure how it can become a mainstream issue. Certainly it should be.
Or is the powder being kept dry?
Labour are corrupt and this (and the EFB) proves the point.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:05 am
This would clearly go down with the electorate like a cup of cold sick … if they knew about it.
So where are MSM???? Are they eunechs???? National Radio had their political reporter talking about this this morning and I’ve got to say he did a very below-average job of explaining what was going on. And Sean Plunket didn’t push it very hard either. And the other MSM aren’t any better. Are they complicit in all of this?
Which leads you to ask … who would benefit from thrusting this issue into the public gaze? Well, I’d have thought the National Party could benefit from a tide of public opinion swinging against Labour for being seen to be rorting the taxpayer funding while imposing “un-Kiwi” restrictions on public speech.
But I don’t think the National Party could organise the proverbial booze up in the brewery let alone mount a concerted multi-week campaign on a single issue like this.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:07 am
I cannot see what is so difficult about getting the word out. Is the vrwc mailing list still up and running?
November 7th, 2007 at 10:10 am
Monty, I don’t think National have the luxury of keeping their powder dry any longer. These changes will be locked in place in the next few months. If National want to make an issue of it they should be doing it now, otherwise they’ll be perceived to be just playing political games if they try to beat the drums after the bills have been passed.
Look back at yesterday’s thread on Wayne Brown’s actions as Mayor of the Far North. I think there’s a big political gain to be made by being seen as the “honest broker” type bringing the political system to rein. National … if you want a “dog whistle” type vote swing then here’s one staring you in the face. Grow some balls.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:11 am
That’s because the MSM is running scared, bucnh of losers.
November 7th, 2007 at 10:18 am
Thanks DPF for the mention.
If anyone wants to read any further blog posts that are specifically on party finance issues in NZ, go to:
http://liberation.typepad.com/liberation/party_finance/index.html
I’m very happy to engage in any questions or disagreements.
Bryce
http://www.liberation.org.nz
November 7th, 2007 at 10:34 am
Gerry Brownlee gives National’s view here:
http://national.org.nz/Article.aspx?ArticleID=11358
November 7th, 2007 at 11:08 am
Daivd
- how does it feel now that it turns out National has been secretly supportive of the EFB all along – their only issue is with the Jan 1 vs 3 month cap period, and that’s only becuase National has too much money to spend before the cap comes in?
Because I thought it was all about free speech and it turns out National is only interested in gaming the system so that it, with its rich backers, gets a bigger vioce than everyone else.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:12 am
Hellen is throwing the rule book of OUR democracy out the window page by page.
I agree with Virtualmark, National cant wait till the ink is dry on the legislation before objecting. They need to be taking action now.
I’m beginning to doubt if national have the balls to win the election next year.
Hellen will confuse the nation next year with lies and mirrors and between her, the greens, anderton and dunny she will screw us. The Maori party will hold the balance of power. All abetted by the EFB
Will John Key please report for action
November 7th, 2007 at 11:13 am
What should the new name for the Labour Party be?
I want an accurate descriptor, i.e. not silly names like Mugabe Party.
Anyone with a good knowledge of political history have a suggestion?
Would Marxist Party be accurate?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:14 am
The problem is not that National is not getting the message out. The problem is that the MSM is concerned with ratings and pretty faces, and not with the sort of investigative hard-nosed confrontational journalism that would keep this country’s politicians honest.
Where are the front page headlines saying “Labour to legitimise own rort”?
Where was the outcry from the media when Labour retrospectively legalised a theft of $800000 to win an election? Do many people outside these circles realise that one effect of the retrospective legislation was that HC was able to avoid a court case against her?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:16 am
Didn’t Gerry say something about a “supporting a rollover” if the period was changed. That doesn’t sound like he explicitly said that National backs the EFB except for the period. What’s a “rollover” in this context? A return to select committee or something?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:17 am
Yes, the EFB was Labour ’spitting the dummy’ after the state funding thing folded, and the new approach is a back-door attemtp t get their way.
Second day in a row, that National is being criticised for its pathetic showing as opposition. They might actually take this once in a lifetime political gift from Labour and turn it into a way to actaully lose their own voters!!
On their showing so far, my vote has gone…How many more will follow.
Wake up National it’s just getting plain embarrassing.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Sam Dixon, it is possible that National do want this law.
Have you asked yourself why that might be possible?
And yet still you keep hammering home the idea that if National want it it’s corrupt, but if Labour wants it, it’s good?
What kind of logic is that?
By the way I had a look at the ‘Very Double Standard’ and read Tane’s write up about what Brownlee said. Talk about a non-story!
Still whatever floats your boat….
Let’s all be friends and vote for the EFB together. Our children will thank us.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:23 am
Sam.
Most of us, me included, have stated that there should be limits on what all third parties can spend. National have been in favour of regulation in principle. The issue is that a $60000 limit over an 11 month period is patently excessive, especially when compared to the UK and Canadian law the EFB is supposedly based on.
$60000 over 11 months would result in no organisation being able to adequately involve itself in the democratic process during an election year, particularly in the face of well funded New Zealand Government multimedia information campaigns, which, even though they won’t specifically mention labour, a person would have to be living under a rock not to make the connection.
As I have said on other forums, to make the philisophical argument, If a person engaged is free political speech, and no-one is there to hear it, does he or she make a noise?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:26 am
Ross
How about The Benefit Party
” Vote for us, we can benefit YOUR life”
November 7th, 2007 at 11:26 am
What should the new name for the Labour Party be? … Would Marxist Party be accurate?
You obviously don’t know much about the Labour Party or Marxism, do you Ross?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:27 am
Ross
How about The Benefit Party
There were more people on benefits under National than there are under Labour. Around twice as many actually, if we’re to go by the unemployment stats.
I’m frankly amazed how long the meme of “Labour wants everyone on a benefit” has lasted in an era of record-low unemployment. You’re stubborn, you Tories, I’ll give you that.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:33 am
FFS Tane, The Benefit Party has moved people to al sorts of benefits to make unemployment look low and taxed the living crap out of the lower/middle class to make them dependent on WWF.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:33 am
Around twice as many actually, if we’re to go by the unemployment stats
let’s not consider the host of other state-welfare dependency mechanisms lets it burst that bubble. and msd classifies ‘job seekers’ and ‘unemployed’ differently even though both receive the unemployment benefit. the numbers of reported unemployed do not reflect the number of people receiving the ueb.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
Tane, I think what Ross is getting at is that the Labour Party is now showing the sort of corrupt self-interest “rort the masses” type of behaviours it was supposedly setup to break.
H1 and H2 have turned Labour into a parody of its original philosophy.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
National has not asked any parliamentary questions today about the Electoral Finance Bill or the new plans for de facto state funding of the Labour Party. They clearly do not think these issues are political winners for them. Whose polls are they reading?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:34 am
The MSM bastards wont print any letters to the editor on the subject. Not only are they not raising this constitutional corruption but they are silencing those who are.
The MSM are now clearly in the pockets of the Socialists frightened that Clark and Wilson will repeat the 2002 affair
Remember the one where they threatened the press if they printed anything against the Socialists. It was quietly dropped but Id say its been raised and the editors have been told by H2 shut up or else.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:38 am
dpf – is there a General Debate post today?
ot: What should the new name for the Labour Party be?
How about :-
- The Power Party
- The Control Party
- Manipulaion NZ
- NZ Socialist Party
- Socialist Unity Party (nope, that one’s been done)
November 7th, 2007 at 11:40 am
We should take a leaf out of Graham McCready’s book, where after he launched a private prosecution against the demoted Minister Trevor Mallard, a Wellington District Court judge had issued a summons.
His object is to show that members of Parliament are not above the law, and would be especially applicable in this instance: “the Government has just announced a backroom deal has been reached that will actually make the matter worse by allowing the parliamentary parties even more scope to misuse the funding”.
This is a criminal conspiracy for Members of Parliament to advantage themselves to the disadvantage of Joe Blogg (Voter)
Surely we can get a fighting fund to drag these law breakers before a judge. Are we so steeped in corruption that we tolerate such a blatant hijack? Yes we are. The proposed School Curriculum needs to include our Electoral System, which is rorted by the above criminal measures devised by Parliament, to ensure corrupt methods of Parliamentary election are the norm.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:40 am
For crying out loud NATIONAL – stand up and start the fight you dullards – this fight is the one you have been waiting for.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:41 am
The Brainless Party!
November 7th, 2007 at 11:42 am
How about the “We’re the Government and we’re here to help” Party – they could even make a movie about it. What’s that? Oh, that’s right, they already have!
http://www.stuff.co.nz/thepress/4263999a6009.html
Interesting too – a New Zealand film, and Judith Tizard wasn’t at the premiere – funny that!!
November 7th, 2007 at 11:44 am
So is the consensus that Labour will be able to get this legislation passed because the MSM and Labour are in a conspiracy to enable it?
National aren’t interested in mounting any more than a lip-service opposition to the EFB and Pledge Card Appropriation thingy?
Are we all wasting our time here DPF?
You implied yourself yesterday that the National strategy is less than effective.
Are we all been taken for a ride?
It is starting to feel like it.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:45 am
It must be said re National and campaign funding etc when English was tearing that dullard Burton apart day after day in Parliament over the EFB the MSM didn’t exactly fall over to give it much coverage especially the TV news channels.
I think the MSM reason this is a complex ‘beltway’ issue that they don’t want to cover.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:46 am
Good point Lee
Come on David lets hear your point of view.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:52 am
Lee, my concern is that National thinks it might be good for them if Labour push these changes through, so that National can benefit from them when they’re next in Govt. That’d be one rational explanation for National’s inertia on this issue.
I believe the EFB and the changes to parliamentary budget appropriations are very chilling and unconscionable changes to the broader New Zealand environment. But National may well be thinking that long-term they’re to National’s benefit too.
I’d like to think National would have a broader interest in the public good. But politicians of all stripes have shown themselves to be venal and self-serving – just look at their history of voting on their superannuation schemes.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:54 am
Lindsay so the press consider the kiwi reader to be so f**n stupid it can’t read?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:54 am
I’m noob, what is the MSM?
November 7th, 2007 at 11:54 am
Interesting “taxed the crap outta the lower and middle class and made them dependent on WFF”.
WFF actually gives many people more money than they would get if they had to pay no tax.
Also, we used to a means-tested family benefit for all, but after National scrapped it in 1991, and drove lower and middle income parents into poverty, and thus extra work.
Labour re-established the family benefit in a way to apply to working families only so that there is incentive to have it all – the children and the job. People aren’t forced to choose.
Bwakile – how many people do you actually know who receive WFF? For those I have spoken to it has a massive help. You can’t be bitter simply because something doesn’t apply to you. That’s what targeted welfare relief is all about. Money is money however you are paid it.
WFF money is still acceptable at all retail outlets, and is exchangable for non-PAYE or PYOT deducted money.
November 7th, 2007 at 11:56 am
MSM = Main Stream Media
November 7th, 2007 at 11:58 am
complex ‘beltway’ issue
How complex is it to report on taking taxpeers money to spend on your own end
They deal with theft reports everyday
November 7th, 2007 at 12:00 pm
This is a test for National and I am starting to have serious doubts that they are up to anything. The Missus has a job opportunity across the Ditch and for the first time ever we are having a serious think about a move. We are not alone in those thoughts in the group of people we know. It is a very sad reality.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:02 pm
So why are the MSM not picking this up then? TV3 use to burn the govt, but they seem to be dodging everything lately.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
I am with you casual.
I have recently been looking at jobs in the uk and aussie. Possibly looking to go around mid next year.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:04 pm
PP
what I object to is that WWF is recycling money through a bloody great inefficent system so that the government can maintain controls on peoples lives.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
casual watcher – i don’t believe Labour are concerned about loosing tax paying non-labour supporters via emigration. these people are replaced by immigrants who are happy to secure a ‘better life’ in nz, incl some state support, which constitutes benevolence beyond description for many. they express their gratitude with votes thereby helping entrench the oligarchy.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:11 pm
“Money is money however you are paid it.”
Great line PP but I think you missed a few words out
I think you meant to say
Your money is my money however you are paid it.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
infused said “So why are the MSM not picking this up then? TV3 use to burn the govt, but they seem to be dodging everything lately.”
Remember last year infused? The Herald took on the government about the pledge card rort and the AG’s finding of electoral overspending, and Cullen’s response was a very clear threat about tax
“And after the Herald condemned retrospective legislation, Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen hinted that retrospective tax legislation before the House, benefiting the Herald’s owners, APN, might be in jeopardy.”
Here’s the link:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=111&objectid=10397217
That’s the kind of power that this supposed “working man’s” government possesses. And most of the MSM know which hand feeds them, so don’t bite it!
November 7th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
PP
actually money is earned
To pay is just a verb to describe the transfer of money for services rendered.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Absolutely spot on. We are manipulated.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Absolutely spot on. We are manipulated.
KK, you’re on a three figure salary. Stop acting like you’re oppressed.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:25 pm
virtual mark, it is true that the average National supporter does not appear to share the average Labour supporter’s blind loyalty or feeling that their own party is purer than pure…..
I’m worried that if this is passed, and National or any other party get in, they will be able to exploit it to the hilt. For me it is a onstitutional issue, not a party political one.
I thought that National were opposed to the EFB as a matter of principle. If they are not, but only pretending, then we are being played.
If the National Party strategists are so sure they will win the next election that they need not so anything to stop the EFB and Appropriation Bills then I advise them to be taken out the back and shot, because they would serve more use as door-stops than they would as poitical strategists.
Summary.
Labour Party too stupid to draft a decent Bill?
National Party too stupid to oppose it?
Voters too stupid to understand it?
MSM too stupid to realise it will affect them too?
Lefties too stupid to see it is undemocratic?
Righties too stupid to mount an opposition?
People like me stupid enough to waste my thoughts and efforts on kiwiblog?
Is this what the brain-drain has done to New Zealand?
Perhaps for my sanity I should consider joining it.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Tane – if KK is earning a three-figure salary (less than $1k pa), you and your union mates should be rushing in to help him – he’s clearly being oppressed!!!
November 7th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
poor tane, confuses oppression and manipulation, then claims they can’t co-exist. and then thinks that wealth is a ticket to freedom from both. doh!
November 7th, 2007 at 12:33 pm
Like I said the MSM is shitting itself that if it slices and dices the EFB then Clark and Wilson will bring in the legislation they threatened in 2002.
So like the good little poodles they are you wont hear anything from them and the bill will be passed before Xmas
November 7th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
So, WFF is about getting more money than you EARN, at the expense of those who EARN more than they get, right?
Well, my wife and I EARN so much that we have to pay full price for Doctors Visits, Full charges on Prescriptions, and we get not one cent from WFF because we were responsible and only had 3 children.
We are the middle class who have been supporting the surplus, and who are about to be disenfranchised by this abominable bill.
Who speaks for us?
November 7th, 2007 at 12:36 pm
Tane
Most of us believe in wealth creation through work as we see it as a means of improving our lives.
New Zealand has wealth coming out our ears which everybody is entilted to share in.
Low income people in my world would just pay no tax rather than paying and then having it given back. That is hugely inefficient and give the pricks who govern us the opportunity to rort us ALL with our own money.
You should want everybody in NZ to be on a 3 figure salary, but that will only ever happen if the govt get out of our lives.
That is the LAST thing that Labour want.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:48 pm
Re the presses reluctance to discuss slam criticise the EFB and Appropriation Bill
I mailed you with a question about why the Herald seems so reluctant to take the Government to task over the EFB while yo were in Tonga and you did not reply.
Inventory I just emailed Audrey Young about this:
Here is a theory about that same question posted in ‘kiwiblog’ today: –
Inventory2 Says:
November 7th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
infused said “So why are the MSM not picking this up then? TV3 use to burn the govt, but they seem to be dodging everything lately.”
Remember last year infused? The Herald took on the government about the pledge card rort and the AG’s finding of electoral overspending, and Cullen’s response was a very clear threat about tax
“And after the Herald condemned retrospective legislation, Deputy Prime Minister Michael Cullen hinted that retrospective tax legislation before the House, benefiting the Herald’s owners, APN, might be in jeopardy.”
Here’s the link:
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/topic/story.cfm?c_id=111&objectid=10397217
That’s the kind of power that this supposed “working man’s” government possesses. And most of the MSM know which hand feeds them, so don’t bite it!
Is this an accurate description of the situation in your opinion?
If so, is the press to be muzzled for the indefinite future, or just until the government lets it off the hook?
With regards
Lee Clark
If I get a reply (don;t hold your breath!) I will post it here.
November 7th, 2007 at 12:52 pm
You got it RoW. I don’t live with the mother of my children, so I don’t qualify for WFF. Despite that, I have paid probably $70k in Child Support since first being assessed in 1993, and do so graciously. In addition to CS, I have supported my children materially, educationally and in many other ways throughout that time. They both know they are always welcome in my home (which translates to in my fridge, in my pantry etc etc) Throughout that time I have NEVER earned as much as $50k pa, often substantially less. Conversely, I have NEVER been eligible for any tax relief as I am not part of a “family”. Cuts in business tax will have minimal effect, as my wife and I run our ECE service at break-even at best (which worries our accountant!), and we are already making KiwiSaver employer contributions on behalf of five new employees, even though we are not obliged to until 1 April 2008. The only tax break that will benefit me personally is a cut in PAYE, or a realistic increase in the 24% and 33% threshholds. Am I holding my breath for a Labour government to deliver on this? Yeah, right!
November 7th, 2007 at 12:58 pm
Lee
I am pleased you bought the word stupid up.
I know I’ll be called a racist for saying this ( couldn’t give a shit) but worldwide white people are being stupid.
By embracing multiculturism we are shitting in our own nest.
The dumb thing is that no other culture does it.
Like the rise and fall of the Roman empire I think that white cultures are now falling. It will take time as we have huge wealth but this is the beginning of the end.
The successful people in the future will be the Asians as they are prepared to work harder and educate their kids properly
They see places like NZ as a land of milk and honey just as our fore fathers did.
Apologies here to Maoris as if you think you got a rough deal by us whites just wait and see what the asians will bring to the table.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:09 pm
Helen Clark just views asians as votes for her twisted regime of corruption .
November 7th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
bwakile Right on. My late Dad used to say that the Maoris wont know whats hit them when the Asian arrivals decide they have had enough of their whinging.
They will tell the Waitangi Wailers Tough shit We didnt do the deal in 1840 so its nothing to do with us.
And Yes the Wests cringing fawning forelock tugging to other cultures will back fire big time. They all think we are a bunch of fruit loops.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:15 pm
Policy Parrot said:
And here was Tane just explaining how its not actually welfare…. And Helen Clark is actually explaining how its a tax cut (how can a tax-cut result in more money back than tax paid?)
November 7th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
Spam – WfF is primarily tax credits.
Oh, and total benefit numbers are down under Labour, simple as that.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:38 pm
To understand why National is making very little headway against these awful bills you only have to listen to National Radio’s supposedly neutral editor Brent Edwards. Listening to this joke of an editor anyone would think National has had a say in the writing of these two bills. When they have barely been consulted. No wonder Catherine Ryan never uses Edwards on her programme.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
TC, yes I heard Brent Edwards this morning too. That’s 5 minutes of my life I’ll never get back …
I couldn’t believe how he could (mis-)represent the issue in that way. And I was disappointed Sean Plunket didn’t press for more information.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Well it was RNZ what do you expect
November 7th, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Sam Dixon – Bullshit Just because the Government in its infinite wisdom decided to funnel welfare payments through the (highly expensive) taxation system, it doesn’t make it a tax cut. Credits to the tax account from, yes, deductions for expenses incurred, no, reduction in the tax scale, no, applicable to a very specifically defined group of taxpayers, yes,
It is almost identical to the family benefit except for the mechanism of delivery.
November 7th, 2007 at 1:57 pm
Oh – and Sam, please enlighten us about the size of Vote Social Welfare year by year since 1999!
November 7th, 2007 at 2:11 pm
WFF are tax credits?
Well, what the hell are my Tax Credits doing on someone elses pocket then! Or are my three children not worth the government’s time?
November 7th, 2007 at 2:12 pm
david – Kiwiblogblog has the numbers http://kiwiblogblog.wordpress.com/2007/11/07/the-benefits-of-statistics/
Just lookin at Vote Social Welfare would be retarded because it includes Superannuation.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:13 pm
“Just because the Government in its infinite wisdom decided to funnel welfare payments through the (highly expensive) taxation system, it doesn’t make it a tax cut.”
That’s something for the neoliberal ideologues – I don’t think the average low income family gives a toss about thy get the money through tax reduction of government transfer – it amounts to the same thing for them.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:17 pm
bwakile and gd you forgot to mention that political correctness is just a form of intellectual laziness.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
How about the median low income family? Call it a government transfer or a vote buying bribe – it amounts to the same thing for me.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:18 pm
RoWiWoR – tax credits are recieved by those who apply ofr them and qualify. As you have three kids, your family income must be above the cut off for WfF. They are not ‘your tax credits’ any more than any credit or deduction you do not qualify for it ‘yours’.
The WfF tax credits are targeted to give the most tax back to the poorest families with children, and amount received abates until a cut-off point determiend by the number and age fo the children.
Now, I’m sure you’re going to plead poverty ‘we’ve got three kids and its not easy making ends meet’… and I’m sure you’re not living in the lap of luxury but consider then how life must be for those families with three kids and far lower incoems than yours. They must expereience real hardship, that’s why the Government targeted WfF at them.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:19 pm
edited version:
That’s something for the neoliberal ideologues – I don’t think the average low income family gives a toss about whether they get the money through tax reduction, or government transfer. It amounts to the same thing for them.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
perhaps. and perhaps that’s part of the problem. their meagre income is taxed and then part of that tax goes towards propping up a bloated, overengineered and inefficient taxation recycling scheme. everyone should be concerned about that wastage. was it the MoE that had 18% increase in staff and 156% increase in total payroll over the same period? bloat. wastage. and the average low income family doesn’t give a toss. what a tragedy.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:34 pm
low income family gives a toss about whether they get the money through tax reduction, or government transfer
Roger
They should give a toss as the mechanism of delivery can have a huge impact on their financial wellbeing over time.
The “dont give a toss” throwaway line is a sign of poor education.
Oh I forgot piss poor education is required for the masses
November 7th, 2007 at 2:35 pm
“Call it a government transfer or a vote buying bribe – it amounts to the same thing for me.”
It’s bad for our country to have kids growing up in poverty .i.e. poverty is associated with poor outcomes in education, crime, health etc… – that’s what it’s about, getting people off to a decent start in life so they have the full opportunity to reach their potential. So it’s good for the individual and it’s good for society as a whole. Now you may not care about these things, nut I believe that most New Zealanders do, and that’s why WFF has been such a popular policy.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Roger with your logic you had better start earning more because you are going to have a lot of people depending on your potential for their outcomes.
Dont worry about us stupid people as we will be gone.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:43 pm
“They should give a toss as the mechanism of delivery can have a huge impact on their financial wellbeing over time.”
Whether they receive the extra money as a tax credit or as a cut in taxes is really immaterial the amount they get is the same, they just recieve it in a lump sum and a slightly different time.
The matter of churn is a valid point though – but it’s hardly a huge problem. i.e. if you were to calculate the administration costs of WFF accounts it would amount to what? 0.00000001% of GDP?
November 7th, 2007 at 2:45 pm
David? No answer?
November 7th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
You really treat people as thick dont you Roger
The Stupid point is that it is the creation of money( wealth) that is the key
You may as wel lmake it easy and teach people that money comes from an ATM machine.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
“Roger with your logic you had better start earning more because you are going to have a lot of people depending on your potential for their outcomes.”
That’s ludicrous – New Zealand still has one of the most inequitable income distributions in the OECD, even after WFF has flattening it out a little bit where it really counts – i.e. children.
November 7th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
“You may as wel lmake it easy and teach people that money comes from an ATM machine.”
That’s silly bwakile – WFF is only available to couples who work over a combined total of 30 hours. You must work to be eligible for it – the fact that the tax credits areis received in a lump sum rather than small regular amounts is immaterial.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
No they’re not – they’re tax cuts. Helen said so, and she wouldn’t lie to the house. They’re tax cuts that go so deep that people get more back than they put in.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:09 pm
You are right Roger
I was never much good at pushing shit up hill.
I’m off now to finalise the plans to move my business to Oz
All the best
November 7th, 2007 at 3:11 pm
From the Bryce Article linked above:
“It takes the previous vague and flexible rules that existed before the Auditor-General intervened, and explicitly endorses those rules so that the Auditor-General is not able to complain. More than this, the Bill also inserts a ‘get out of jail card’ in the rules by stating that even if such spending is found to be illegal the parties will be explicitly exempt from paying the money back.”
Bingo!
Is this where Winston’s support for the EFB was purchased?
If he waits long enough, will the present overspend be
i) exempt or,
ii) easily ‘clawed back at the next election?
November 7th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Sam, they can either have less children, as I did, upskill, as my wife and I did, work harder, as my wife and I did and still do.
Why should my tax be used to subsidise the poor choices made by others.
I am sick and tired of my good choices being used to subsidise thier bad ones, but then that all comes down to personal responsibility and taking ownership of one’s own life, and that is the LAST thing this Labour Government wants. Whatever next, will the masses start to think for themselves, heaven forbid!
November 7th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Worst case scenario for Winston under this is he gets to keep the interest on his overspend account.
Pricelesss.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
WFF must be applied for which means the recipient must become a beneficiary of the State to receive it – a tax cut means you keep more of what you earn without having to go cap in hand to the State to get the same net of tax income. Labour loves this because it wants the people of NZ to be pathetically grateful for its beneficence. I much prefer the US system of low overall taxes
November 7th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
Its this simple- cutting tax is returning overpaid tax to those who have paid it. WFF is only giving tax back to Labour voting toadies, not those who have paid it. It is a perversion of democracy- but then that’s just the fucken left all over.. any fucken immoral act is OK as long as the outcome is more power to the left..
November 7th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
kia – the percent of GDP in tax is similar to NZ once you include the states – and you get a crappy health system with tax money, so most people have to pay for private health care, which they don’t here.,. pay basically the same get less.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Thanks KIA and RB
I knew there was a simple way of putting it
Could you please explain that to Roger but in simpler terms
November 7th, 2007 at 3:27 pm
” crappy health system”
I agree Sam Dixon , indeed Labour have ruined the Health system . Its rather sad isn’t it ?
November 7th, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Policy Parrot:
It doesn’t take long for socialists to show their true colours. You just can’t stay on the Labour Party message, can you? Describing WFF as “targeted welfare relief” may be technically accurate, and is a closer description to anything that’s been penned since. And it is clearly targeted welfare, since it involves channelling money through in through the tax system, and then out through the tax system again, to people who specifically apply for it.
But you’re not singing the Labour Party song, PP. Helen Clark, Michael Cullen, and all of those delightfully erudite and well-mannered chaps at the Standard are now labelling WFF as TAX CUTS.
Because tax cuts are en vogue in labour party circles now, PP. Ever since fiscal surpluses became structural. Which was last week.
So sing the song properly, PP. It’s a bitter way with Labour.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:33 pm
You see what I’m getting at, is given Winston’s support for the EFB and the Appropriation Bill there must be something in it for him. How much did he owe after the last election? If you go to him and say “WInston, support out Bill and we will get you that overspend money back, one way or another.”
That would do it wouldn’t it?
So on yet another level, it might be demonstrated that its all about the money.
Val Sim nice little promotion = Positive Bill of Rights advice
NZFirst – Nice little clawback of overspend = Support in the House
Labour Party = unlimited election fund + unlimited Government cash to promote policies.
Others – reduced freedom of expression and criminalise them if they argue with the government
But look on the bright side, it will certainly stamp out the corrupting infuence of the Exclusive Brethren!
November 7th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Sam – nice try. Mean or median incomes in the US are significantly higher than NZ and taxes even with state taxes are lower and then there are substantial tax deductions for children and home mortgage interest that (other than WFF) don’t exist in NZ. These more than compensate for any top up cost of medical insurance
November 7th, 2007 at 3:39 pm
Hey Lee
JoHn Key has just made the headlines
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10474474
Well done John
How about a new party next year
The Exclusive Brothers Party
November 7th, 2007 at 3:48 pm
bwakile:
I can see where you’re coming from, I just think that you’re over-stating the importance of the issue.
November 7th, 2007 at 3:49 pm
Sorry Lee I got excited
I thought he was talking about democracy but it was only fireworks
November 7th, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Too late Roger
I’ve made the phone call
Gone by next March
Keep up the good work and chin up
November 7th, 2007 at 3:51 pm
Tax + private health insureance in the US – 36.6% in 2006 (OECD)
Tax in NZ = 36.5% in 2006 (OECD)
I’m well aware that US incoems are higher, that’s not the topic.
D4J – I’m tlaking about the public health system in the US.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:09 pm
“I’m tlaking about the public health system ‘
I think I understand you Sam ?
November 7th, 2007 at 4:26 pm
My wife and I have combined income on the threshold for WFF, That is, just high enough to not get a single cent of govt support. An average mortgage on a average house in our area would require 71% of our JOINT income to service it.
We have 1 child.
We get no assistance.
If my wife gave up work, we get no assistance, unless we pump out another sprog.
What we have done is our choice, but we find ourselves having to subsidise the choices of others, who see children as a path to income.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:30 pm
Sam – pretty soon you are going to be the smartest guy left in the country and one of the few with English as a first language. Then you will very quickly find out whether the crap you advocate works in practice or not.
DPF – can you impart anything on National initiatives, thinking, …whatever !! Are they thinking about anything ??
November 7th, 2007 at 4:31 pm
And if anyone thinks Slightlyrighty and I have very similar stories, that would be because he and I are twins!
November 7th, 2007 at 4:36 pm
Wake up, rightwing conservatives. What is happening to democracy all over the western world is that leftwing politics has taken over the media and the education system, plus Socialists have become the “natural party of government” and 30-40% of voters are in their pockets and they know it. They can get away with gradual progression to dictatorship without any risk of losing this safe core vote.
Bainamarama may introduce some sort of constitution in Fiji that actually prevents this integrally corrupt form of creeping totalitarianism by stealth.
There are parallels all over the place, that democracy isn’t the solution any more. Lefty liberals love to tell us this about the Bush doctrine and US attempts to spread democracy in the Muslim world. Militant Islamist parties like Hamas are the natural party of government when the mass indoctrination of everyone with sharia law has preceded democracy by decades. Utterly corrupt socialist governments like those of Chavez in Venezuela, Quarase in Fiji and Clark in NZ are the parallels in the western world.
By the way, Winston Churchill always referred to the Labour Party as “the Socialists”, not the “Labour party”.
I think we’re stuffed. What the Exclusive Brethren did at the last election was what the “right wing” should have been doing all along. But it was too little, far too late, and the wrong people to do it. Decent Kiwis only hope is that Aussie doesn’t succumb, so we can escape there. Maybe Bainamarama’s Fiji will be not a bad place either.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:38 pm
And along with Michael Moore, if you really think the way “health” works in the U.S.A. ISN’T the best in the world at actually giving the most people treatment when they need it, you’re the “sicko”.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:42 pm
Well bwakile – It certainly had me going. Great to see Key stepping up to th plate and putting it out there on the real important issues of the day.
Great to see him ’sticking it’ to Labour.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
When’s your flight?
November 7th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
casual watcher – “Sam – pretty soon you are going to be the smartest guy left in the country and one of the few with English as a first language.”
I like the racism that sneaks through in the end there.
November 7th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Should rename them the ‘Narcoleptic Party’
November 7th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Sam
Go and learn the true definition of racism not the PC crap that you obviously sponged up at school
November 7th, 2007 at 5:11 pm
Sam – open your eyes and ears – a different language does not necessarily come with different coloured skin. You are stereotyping and guilty of a very narrow line of thought. It seems your idealogy has limited your ability to think clearly and you are not getting out enough to realise just how diverse NZ has become.
November 7th, 2007 at 7:40 pm
Don’t bother casual watcher they are not worth the effort, the bastards pretend to have half a brain but are in fact brainwashed lemmings to stupid and blind to see the evil that rules us.
November 7th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
Yeah, go on Sam. Explain how Casual Watcher was being racist. My wife has English as a second language, but that’s to be expected as she’s Swedish, so I’d like to know how he’s being racist toward her.
Sam, you weren’t inferring, in an off-hand way, that ‘cw’ thinks that non-English speakers must be non-white (and therefore undesirable immigrants) were you? ‘Cos that sounds a little racist in itself. On your part.
November 8th, 2007 at 8:32 am
Philbest.
The change is happening. I note that the socialists have been given the boot in France.