National’s 1st 100 days
National has laid out its priorities for the 1st 100 days, if it gets elected. They include:
- Tax cuts passed by Christmas
- Appointing a Minister of Infrastructure to begin projects such as ultra high-speed broadband to 75% of homes
- Introduce an RMA reform bill to reduce the costs, delays, and uncertainties in the Act
- Pass into law National’s transitional relief package to offer extra assistance to Kiwis who are worst hit by redundancy
- Instruct public service CEOs to begin a line by line review of departmental spending
No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)
Tags: Election 2008, National
November 5th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Brilliant, we can finally get some transparency and actually see how much money is being wasted. National need to reverse the procurement procedures that Labour has in place, so small businesses don’t go to the wall
November 5th, 2008 at 8:47 am
Labour’s Plan for the first 100 days in opposition.
Clean out offices (including the PM’s office)
Burn and shred all incriminating evidence going back 9 years
Get down to local unemployable office to register for social welfare benefit
Moan abour Mike Williams losing the election (in biggest defeat ever)
Sack Helen Clark and replace with Phil Goff, David Cunnliffe, Charles Chauvel, Trevor Mallard, leslie Soper and then Grant Robertson in that order (ok – but over a longer period than 100 days)
Run around as headless chooks while watching Labour implode
Be shocked as Greenie overtake Labour in opinion polls
November 5th, 2008 at 8:48 am
you missed:
>> Appointing Owen Glenn as honorary consulate for Monaco.
That man truly deserves a DB.
November 5th, 2008 at 8:53 am
…labour’s secret weapon, yet to be used is about to be unleashed…
Chris Knox’s campaign song is due to swamp the airwaves. Devastating success is predicted. Pundits are comparing it to the first use of tanks on the Western front in 1916.
Its success is in the hidden subliminal messages. Played backwards the lyrics chant repetitively I will always love Helen…
Be very afraid…
November 5th, 2008 at 8:53 am
National’s 1st 100 days:
1. Appoint Roger Douglas as Finance Minister.
2. Let ACT run the show.
Every bodies happy now. New Zealand starts to prosper.
November 5th, 2008 at 8:57 am
DPF:
You think we’ll have a govt by Xmas?!?!?
[DPF: Maori Party have talked about a week to consult. The other parties have all indicated their preferences so I expect a Government by the end of November]
November 5th, 2008 at 9:05 am
There’ll be a clear government on 9 November. Can you say whitewash deanknight.
November 5th, 2008 at 9:16 am
A first 100 days strategy.
Sounds like a winning team.
What are Labour proposing to do, you know, kinda anytime – I seem to have missed their plan…
November 5th, 2008 at 9:51 am
Labour’s priority for first 100 days:
Introduce a secret mini budget – details after the election.
Duncan Garner’s not asking about this, as part of his principled drive for balanced, informative, you-the-voters-decide, political reporting.
Helen’s not telling since no one’s asking.
It’s all about transparent, open, no secret agenda, trustworthy, government.
November 5th, 2008 at 10:16 am
So long as Maurice Williamson and Lockwood Smith aren’t in cabinet then it might just work.
Otherwise it’s “back to the 90′s” — and that’s *not* good.
November 5th, 2008 at 10:28 am
What was wrong with the ’90s? New Zealand had higher economic growth back then, and less nanny state bullshit.
As for a “Minister of Infrastructure”, why don’t National just go the whole hog and have a “Minister of Administrative Affairs”?
November 5th, 2008 at 10:56 am
What was wrong with the ’90s?
How fast was *your* broadband connection?
The National government was allowing Telecom to abuse its monopoly left, right and centre — much to the cost of our attempts to create a knowledge-economy. I was running the world’s most widely-syndicated web-based news service and all I could get was a dial-up line that maxed out at 19.2Kbps.
Williamson’s reply was “market forces will sort things out” — but it never did. If government hadn’t stepped in we’d still be stuck with “JetStream” and paying ten times what the rest of the world does.
The best thing JK has done is (apparently) relegate Williamson to the back bench — if he hadn’t, the Nats wouldn’t be getting my vote.
November 5th, 2008 at 10:58 am
these 100day plans are all the rage now!
the dems had one and so did labour in australia.. i think.
good idea.
not sure about the welfare for people that lose their jobs. what is the actual impact on the economy if the welfare isnt there? dime gets to buy a cheap house from the bank?
what can labour offer in their first 100 days??? a mini budget where they will increase taxes.
November 5th, 2008 at 11:14 am
“What was wrong with the ’90s? ”
Not as much as now that is for sure. The music was better for a start.
November 5th, 2008 at 11:46 am
I note Mallard has demanded that National publish the text of the bills it intends to introduce.
Tell you what Trevor, how about you publish the contents of the post-election mini-budget first.
Running a campaign based on “We’ll figure out what to do once we’re elected” doesn’t put you in a position to demand anything from other parties.
Or why not concentrate on getting people to turn up to your street meetings. A nil turnout – oh dear.
http://www.ellisnz.com/
November 5th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Parenthetically, on the tax effect on growth the Dept of Commerce at Massey is hosting Professor Norman Gemmell, (School of Economics, University of Nottingham) next Wednesday.
In short, the paper shows that tax levels do have a negative effect on growth rates. Apparently Cullen may have got this one wrong.
Abstract follows-
The Growth Effects of Corporate and Personal Taxes in the OECD
Abstract
Recent aggregate tests of the impact of taxes on long-run growth rates in OECD countries remain vulnerable to two criticisms. First, they typically use ‘an aggregate average rate, or constructed marginal rate, that probably does not affect the rate that any particular economic decision maker is facing’ (Myles, 2007, p.89). Second, despite increased testing of corporate tax effects, the models tested are essentially ‘closed economy’ in nature despite the fact that corporate tax effects appear increasingly to operate via international competition for firms and investment. Based on an open economy model, we propose a method for testing how far both domestic corporate tax settings, and those in competitor countries, affect individual countries’ aggregate long-run growth rates. We then use data on statutory tax rates (both personal and corporate), and effective average and marginal corporate tax rates, to test for aggregate tax-growth effects. We find robust evidence that (i) marginal rates of personal income tax (as measured by the top personal rate); and (ii) both domestic and foreign corporate tax rates (statutory and/or effective), have affected OECD growth rates as predicted by theory. Our evidence also suggests that there are distinct tax effects on growth through factor accumulation and those operating via impacts on factor productivity.
November 5th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Labour had a plan – it was to elevate NZ into top half OECD. Apparently nine years isn’t enough.
November 5th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Sean – they (Labour) are waiting on 45 other third world countries to join the OECD, and then their dream shall be realised.
November 6th, 2008 at 1:29 am
Ain’t that the truth Sean and coventry.