Budget Reactions
May 29th, 2009 at 8:50 am by David FarrarNational’s first Budget has accomplished its mission of avoiding a costly credit-rating downgrade. …
It may not be a black Budget but it is definitely a grey one.
It meets the first test of not doing any harm, in that it averts a credit rating downgrade.
Even if we had not had to worry about the rating agencies, the case for getting a grip on a scary projected debt and hauling it down was compelling for its own sake.
But it has come at a price. The Government has had to lock itself into a sort of fiscal chastity belt by slashing the allowance for future spending increases.
Tough, but fair. Tough enough to have satisfied, nay, perhaps even pleased the solemn-faced foreign financial gnomes from Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. Yet not so tough as to scare the living daylights out of the average punter back home – at least not until he or she reads the fine print.
Finance Minister Bill English’s first Budget is not an economic game-changer but the first move in a Great Survivor exercise to get New Zealand’s creaky balance sheet into shape.
So far, English has succeeded. …
But nowhere is there any evidence (yet) of the bold growth-focused policies that must be developed if more companies are to be persuaded to build their international empires from New Zealand and more talented Kiwis are to be attracted to either stay or return here to build their careers.
The budget Bill English delivered yesterday was a difficult one not for the reason he gives, the global recession, but because the outlook in recent weeks has brightened a little. …
Mr English said the Budget’s aims were to “cushion the immediate impact [of recession] on New Zealanders and enhance future growth”. But he has gone mainly for the cushions. Growth-enhancing measures are modest by comparison with the deficits he projects for the next nine years and the debt that he will allow to rise to levels last seen in the mid-1990s. …
The recession has shown Labour’s spending levels to be unsustainable, and the more since Labour and National have indulged in a round of tax cuts. Hard decisions on welfare entitlements for the well-off, interest-free tertiary loans, free childcare and the like – decisions Mr Key and Mr English were proud to avoid yesterday – will probably have to be made. Maybe next year.
Nine years of deficits is simply too long. The world economy will surely have recovered in half that time. The Government needs to be looking beyond its cushions. The country needs to be awake and well geared for the first signs of recovery.
When Mr English was done, Labour leader Phil Goff stood. It took only two minutes of wrath before his face went a florid red and a vein in his forehead started popping. …
Prime Minister John Key was having none of that. He had a new nickname for Mr Goff – “whack it on the bill Phil” – and for Labour, “the credit card Opposition”.
“Whack it on the bill Phil would have seen us run up a quarter of a trillion of dollars of debt by 2023.”
The Government had a real opportunity with this Budget to show some political courage and make the hard decisions that would set a clear course towards higher productivity and a stronger society.
Instead, the Government has delivered a Budget that works on cost control across the board, without the more deep-seated changes in spending priorities needed to invest behind growth, and invest in people to avoid a social deficit.
I’m in meetings for the next six hours, so reactions from Stuff/Fairfax later in the day.
Related posts:
- Labour on budget
- Most important budget since 1984
- Bernard Hickey on the desperate and dangerous budget
- Obama’s Budget
May 29th, 2009 at 9:01 am
Goff on National radio winged on the cost of unemployent he cited at $900m but failed to mention the $600mm saved from a credit downgrade – obviously arithmetic his not his strong subject, neither is presenting his alternative. Pity the interviewer did not ask if Goff would have canned tax cuts and spent up on reducing unemployment and if so were the money would come from – Tax increases/cuts to Welfare/Health/Education – sound like an echo Phil – ringing in the empty cavity between your ears
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:03 am
“whack it on the bill Phil”
Funny.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:03 am
What? No reaction from Roger Douglas?
Who needs a crystal ball for NZ economic future when they had the televised footage of Roger Douglas giving his rebuttal to the beige budget to an almost empty debating chanber. No wait, Tariana Turia was there.
To me it said: NZ is going the way of socialism, regardless of Labour or National being in power.
For all the squeals of the left who say our democracy must listen to minority views, everyone refused to listen to Roger’s – the only dissenting voice with an alternative. Shame on our parliament and it’s spin doctors.
Yesterday, when the budget was released, the justification for its banality was that the situation had changed since National started its election campaign. Now this morning, the situation has brightened. Overnight. How long do you think NZders will continue to tolerate these lame tricks? Do you reckon they’re still listening? Helen and Cullen strung us along for 9 years. Now National have made the mistake that they can do it too, playing the cynical game that we now have no choice. National have saved us from equal rights for those who tend toward beastiality, and we can have a pie if we like, or use an incandescent, but other than that, it’s business as usual. We should be greatful for our tax cuts so far. How dare we suggest National lied! Naughty children! Don’t we know National Knows what’s best for us and our money?
NZders may have short memories, but they aren’t goldfish. Less than a year ago we gave the boot to a crowd with the same attitude.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:20 am
“whack it on the bill Phil”
Petty. Smarmy. Arrogant. Tory.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:25 am
‘Whack it on the bill Phil’ is very bloody funny. Village Idiot probably preferred ‘Rich Pricks.’
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:31 am
“Petty. Smarmy. Arrogant. Tory.”
Or to simplify:
Labour. Labour. Labour. National.
I also liked the JK line about “Visa-nomics”
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:48 am
village idiot said ““whack it on the bill Phil”
Petty. Smarmy. Arrogant. Tory.”
Isn’t it interesting that the left is quick to abuse and mock (remember “cancerous and corrosive”, “rich pricks” and “chinless scarf-wearers”?), but they don’t like it up ‘em when someone retaliates in kind. Doubtless the psychologists would suggest that such faux outrage is a classic syumptom of a bully, who can dish it out but can’t take it.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 10:12 am
Goff is a dick
Vote:Why the hell would he think a good political strategy would to become the Anderton of the 2010′s?
May 29th, 2009 at 10:20 am
Here’s an interesting take on the budget from the Right …
http://www.interest.co.nz/ratesblog/index.php/2009/05/28/opinion-this-budget-does-not-compute/
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 10:37 am
Phil Goff – MP since 1981 (with the exception of one term when he was archered)
Man of the Future? You be the judge
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 10:37 am
This one is interesting – a survey asking you to rate Bill English as a finance minister compared to Cullen and a range of others, including Arnie Nordmeye. Who could tell? But there’s some other quite interesting questions.
http://www.buzzchannel.co.nz/SE/default.aspx?u=4b5276b823d04cb292e50692d372a9f1
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 11:29 am
gg, you are wrong.
In a democracy, we aren’t forced to listen to anything. The only thing we are guaranteed is that minority voices are allowed the opportunity to be heard. That’s all. If no-one wants to listen, well, that’s life.
The thing that gets me is that parliamentary and council seats are open for anyone who cares enough to run and talented (?) enough to win. THAT is the opportunity offered. There is absolutely no need for any special seats to cater for any particular group.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 11:33 am
Phil Goff is as bland as vanilla icecream on white sandwich bread. The sooner Labour finds a real leader the better.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 11:53 am
Jane Clifton’s take on the Budget in the Dom-Post is well worth a read. She is especially scathing towards Cunners – shame that:
“Mr Cunliffe, hopelessly overstimulated, made bellicose interjections – most of them miles off the immediate topic – all the way through the National speeches, rather like a drunk heckling a council meeting.”
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2009/05/cliftons-budget.html
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Nope, you are wrong, transmogrifier. Our parliament obliges itself to listen to anyone brown, gay, Jewish, communist, Islamic, female, criminal, corrupt and sometimes, just plain insane. And that’s the point. They turn their backs on construtive solutions in favour of destructive attitudes.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 12:12 pm
” Our parliament obliges itself to listen to anyone brown, gay, Jewish, communist, Islamic, female, criminal, corupt and sometimes, just plain insane”
Weird then that most of the MPs remain white men wearing suits.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
DO RESPOND TO SONIC
getstaffed has joined this movement.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Another one too scared to debate?
We should call you the chicken movement, those who have been so shown up so often in these comment threads that they have to run and hide when little old me posts.
Cluckity cluck getstaffed, cluckity cluck!
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:00 pm
Let me speed up your comprehension process sonic. The context is who will stop to listen, rather than flee the debating chamber.
No one stopped to listen to Roger Douglas. Men in suits or not. No one did. They didn’t have to do what he said, but the attitude of leaving the chamber was blind ignorance in action. Helen used to leave the chamber when Key spoke. More ignorance.
Now you watch, parliament will never again make such a collective decision to empty the chamber for the next gay rights bill; the next treaty debate; the next religious diversity debate; the next discussion about families; the next eco/AGW discussion; the next debate over benefits. Regardless of what is said, those things will be heard collectively.
The actions of this current crowd, yesterday, of both Labour and National have illustrated their lack of discipline and unwillingness to change.
Whatever is said can now be retracted and turned illogically on it’s head and resold to the same buyers. Nothing, not one word of political theory can trump an actual event. Not one word, not one promise, not one debate, not one smile of assurance from a new leader, nothing. I’m looking forward to the amount of energy it will free up for me to think about useful constructive things instead.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:02 pm
“No one stopped to listen to Roger Douglas.”
Or any of the minor party leaders (Green, Maori, Progressive or United Future)
So I find it difficult to see your point goodgod.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Phil Goff-leader ,pull the other one.
As for THE EX MOARI AFFAIRS MINISTER, attacking his replacement of a “paultry sum” being spent on moari in the budget,well if the downtrodden masses dont want it, hell give it to me.
Vote:After all my wife is maori,as are my 4 kids, I can assure you if I catch any of them with a hand out they wont touch the ground for a week.
Bloody handouts, christ be responsible,tidy your selves up and praise not only your kids but others who are doing well, not like my large extended WHANAU who constantly refer to my children as plastic.
Well atleast they contribute, all under 16 and have afternoon work and work saturday afternoon as well after sport.
In ten years time the masses will still be moaning and you ,I and my kids will be paying for it.
What a load of shit they talk.
Cut the dole after 6 months by 5% every three months ,take children out of homes wrecked by P and other stimulants, might as well they arent going anywhere staying with the the family.
If I see another haka it will be too soon.
May 29th, 2009 at 1:35 pm
How’s it going sonic?
Quite fun to watch all the right-wingers scream and yell at each other over losing tax cuts isn’t it?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:52 pm
Hey Leftys hows the opposition benches treating you? must be pretty maddening to know you are missing out on the biggest excuse this century will see to create the architecture for a new, new deal.
Looks like Labour in the UK are going to take the biggest hiding seen in a century as well, maybe in another decade you will get a shot at power providing of course the rest of the world doesn’t turn on you.
Oh well as someone once said …. diddums
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:55 pm
Since when was UK Labour a leftwing party?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
Stop being racist Jarbury.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
“sonic (2286) Vote: 2 3 Says:
May 29th, 2009 at 12:28 pm
Another one too scared to debate?”
If you put up comments that warranted debate then I am sure people would debate you. Instead you put up obtuse statements that treated with the disdain they deserve.
It doesn’t take anyone with too higher an IQ to see that there is much more diversity in parliament today than white men wearing suits. You are just being silly.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
JACK5::::::::: I thought Hickey’s comments the most accurate assessment of the situation………Roger DOUGLAS in his speech was right, but it would be too painful and a recovery would only be as rapid as he asserts if our trading partners were able to buy our increased production……..My biggest disappointment was that no action was taken to reduce the number of children a solo can claim the DPB for. Many young singles will see childbirth as a solution to their reduced circumstances and the result will be more ‘Nia Glassie” cases for the unfortunate souls yet to be born……….I think the Herald is wrong when they claim the recovery will be complete in four years. The debts being incurred by American and European Socialist Governments will depress them for many years. Hopefully Asia will be more practical and dynamic and will lead the recovery…The Government is right to suspend the Superannuation fund until the accounts are in surplus and generally are dealing with the recession in a careful and responsible manner.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:32 pm
racist???????
When the heck did I mention anything about race?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:35 pm
lol, what a homophobe.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:37 pm
Oi Ryan stop it! I know you’re a leftie at heart.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Heck yes I am, you ageist.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Racist, homophobe, ageist….. sexist next I guess?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 3:14 pm
Nice try, classist.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 4:18 pm
Don’t know why Goff and Cunliffe are so upset, this budget could easily have been delivered by them. Top 3 headlines were- No Tax Cuts, No cuts to WFF or student loans and home insulation package. None of these are particularly ring wing ideas. Can anyone describe to me what the difference is?
Vote:I suspect this what you get with MMP, everybody crowding into middle then arguing trivia.
May 29th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
“there is much more diversity in parliament today than white men wearing suits. You are just being silly.”
What are the proportions?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
In their defence, Kimble had spent the day in the House yelling, “ROGER DOUGLAS IS A TROLL. TODAY IS A DAY OF NOT LISTENING TO ROGER DOUGLAS.”
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 5:40 pm
“Nope, you are wrong, transmogrifier. Our parliament obliges itself to listen to anyone brown, gay, Jewish, communist, Islamic, female, criminal, corrupt and sometimes, just plain insane. And that’s the point. They turn their backs on construtive solutions in favour of destructive attitudes.”
Since when was being female a menace to society (don’t refer to HC, she ain’t a woman)? I think you should be looking for the National Front blog, if there is one.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 5:49 pm
Ophiuchus,
That was the only item from the list you pulled out?
Nothing particularly destructive about being brown, gay, Jewish, communist or Islamic.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 7:06 pm
David you missed John Mintos comments about the increased budget for Private Schools.
He tried to make out they had a massive disportionate increase compared to public schools, but failed to mention that this is only catching the private schools up to about 1995 funding levels.
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Why the heck is the government funding private schools anyway?
Vote:May 29th, 2009 at 10:04 pm
They fund private schools because they take the money away to provide schools that are below standard so people try to find other choices for their children so the government then gives back a little of what they take to a school which if some people are lucky maybe within their reach.
The question is why do they own schools?
But back to this crap budget. I honestly thought key might have some idea but I’m quite surprised how lacking in vision national is. If English wanted to impress the ratings agencies he should have included Somalia and North Korea in the mix then we would be rated AAA+
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 12:15 am
“Ophiuchus, That was the only item from the list you pulled out? Nothing particularly destructive about being brown, gay, Jewish, communist or Islamic.”
Only agree with the first two there Sproull. Hardline Communists (Stalin), Jews (can’t think of any right) and Muslims (Bin Laden) want homosexuals dead. ‘Course there’s nothing destructive about being gay, but there is something a little bit counter-productive about murdering someone in the name of God or communism based on sexual orientation.
Vote:May 30th, 2009 at 1:05 am
Wrong Focus, should have been on jobs, not standard and poors credit ratings.
This was a “standard but poor” budget.
*shakes head*
Vote: