Editorials 17 March 2010
March 17th, 2010 at 12:34 pm by David FarrarThe Herald is not a fan of money for the All Whites:
John Key said the money given to New Zealand Football would help it capitalise on the All Whites’ qualification for the World Cup finals and promote the game domestically.
More specifically, he mentioned the hiring of a temporary media manager, the revamping of the NZF’s website, a series of soccer fun days, and the identification and training of talented 17 and 18-year-olds.
None of this bears a skerrick of analysis, not least because NZF will receive a $10 million windfall payment from Fifa, the game’s governing body because of thanks to the All Whites’ qualification for the finals.
That will be supplemented by the host of sponsorship opportunities opened by New Zealand’s second appearance on football’s biggest stage. It also follows close on the heels of a US$1 million ($1.4 million) payout from Fifa for the All Whites’ participation in last year’s Confederations Cup. In sum, that money has put NZF’s previously shaky finances on an even keel.
Have to say I agree more with the Herald.
The Press looks Trans-Tasman:
Although former deputy prime minister Sir Don McKinnon has said that at some point a merger is inevitable, current Prime Minister John Key says the debate is pointless, as a merger is simply not going to happen.
Clearly, opposition to New Zealand losing its status and identity as an independent sovereign nation would be a formidable barrier to merging with Australia in the short to medium term.
It is more likely that this prospect will be seriously debated when both nations consider whether to move from being constitutional monarchies to republics – and there appears no huge groundswell for this to occur in the near future in either country.
In the meantime, the priority should be continued efforts to harmonise the two economies, including further developments that will bring a common border, a common currency and more consistency in our tax systems. On the latter front, there could, of course, be developments in this year’s New Zealand Budget.
I commented on Radio NZ that I might support NZ joining Australia, if each of our islands could e recognised as a state. This would allow us to gain control of the Australian Senate 
The Dom Post opposes funding elderly daytrippers:
By all accounts the SuperGold Card has been a godsend for the elderly. Pensioners who have not ventured far from their homes for years are using the free public transport component of the card to visit family and friends and generally get out and about.
The card has proved particularly attractive to elderly residents of Auckland’s Waiheke Island and their contemporaries in Auckland who fancy a harbour cruise. Pensioners, or rather the Government on their behalf, spent $2 million on Waiheke Island ferry travel in a 12-month period. That’s 11 per cent of the $18m spent on the scheme in total.
Undoubtedly the scheme has been good for the elderly, not to mention Fullers, the ferry company that operates the Waiheke service. It is effectively receiving a $2m subsidy from the Government for services that were already running.
The transport operators have been the real beneficiaries. Because it is for off peak travel only, it means that they have merely soaked up unused capacity, and not led to any extra services.
In other words, the transport operators are getting $18 million a year for providing the same services at much the same cost. The subsidy level of 75% is ridiculously generous, and I can only presume that whomever negotiated it, also negotiated the KiwiRail sale.
However, there is a question to be asked about whether the Government should be subsidising the discretionary travel of elderly daytrippers while it is rationing healthcare, stinting on teacher pay and putting the squeeze on Government departments.
Of course not. It’s obscene we spend $2 million a year on the wealthiest elderly people in Auckland to go to and from Waiheke etc. But once a subsidy is in place, it is politically lethal to remove it.
Quotable Value puts the median value of a three-bedroom house on Waiheke Island at $650,000. Just because the owner of such a home wishes eventually to pass that property on mortgage-free to his or her heirs is not a reason for a Porirua mum, living in rented accommodation and working nights to put food on the table for her children, to subsidise the pensioner’s discretionary travel.
The Government has aptly read the political winds. Working New Zealanders and their children are the losers.
Absolutely.
The ODT looks at youth offending:
While the 156 offences involving shoplifting might be considered nothing out of the ordinary, what should the community think of the nine assaults with a weapon, the single instance of threatening to kill, the five caught in possession of cannabis, the 34 arsonists? These all involved older – but still primary school-aged – children, and there were among them those with severe behavioural problems.
Yet efforts by the police youth services, schools, Child, Youth and Family and parents have led to a decrease in the number of very young offenders.
Ten years ago the numbers were twice those of the past year, which surely reflects the subsequent success of co-ordinated intervention.
Even so, it is a disturbing reflection of modern society that more than 700 young children were considered sufficiently delinquent to justify police apprehension for criminal offences.
Related posts:
- The soaring costs of the SuperGold Card
- Editorials 12 March 2010
- Editorials 16 March 2010
- Editorials 10 March 2010
March 17th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Simple story but 700 kids out of how many in that district?
Are their families repeat offenders?
Love to know the profiles and histories of the families as background.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Sadly DPF missed the best bit of the ODT article, give the reporter a chocolate fish.
In truth, a community gets what it asks for.
It asked for the freedom to gamble 24 hours a day; it asked for alcohol to be sold to anyone over 18 years at any time; it turns a blind eye to minor drug use, ignores or tolerates minor offending; permits the proliferation of offensive imported popular culture likely to influence the behaviour of indiscriminate and uncritical mentalities, and repeatedly elects governments which resile from giving the highest priority to confronting and correcting the attitudes of the illiterate and the unthinking towards our most precious national resource: our children.
If every child is to be safe – and safe from crime – every citizen must make safety in all its senses their priority.
Strong, loving and safe families and neighbourhoods – not the over-burdened State – will guarantee a healthy future for our children, and we must never forget that all children are our children.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 12:53 pm
How does that Porirua mum, who with working for families will likely be paying no net tax, subsidise anything for a pensioner?
The conclusion may or may not have merit, but this argument is bunk. Anyone arguing against Government spending because it affects the poor who pay tax should really be having an argument about the tax system.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
“It’s obscene we spend $2 million a year on the wealthiest elderly people in Auckland to go to and from Waiheke etc.”
That’s a bit of a shorthand argument really. We’re spending $2 million on ferry services, but not just for the “wealthiest elderly in Auckland”. I know several OAPs who don’t come into that category who like to be able to have a day trip to Waiheke or Deveonport and wouldn’t be able to without the super gold card. As a taxpayer I don’t begrudge them their trip, given that they’ve spent much of their lives paying tax.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
MikeNZ 12:47 pm,
Well spotted, sir.
I think the reporter deserves a whole box full of chocolate fish!
When do we hear such statements coming out of the MSM:
Certainly not the usual Marxist crap we have come to expect from the MSM.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
After reading the press article on NZ becoming the 7th State, my suggestion, which I intent to put forward every chance I get, is that the South Island should vote to leave NZ and become the 7th state of Australia!
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
Trans-Tasman:
No politician in office is going to say NZ should join Australia.. (Garrett excluded).. because they now it would be political suicide.. even though they know its best economically for NZ.. we will be a republic some day.. but tell the NZ voter that…again political suicide.. most NZ voters cut of their nose to sight their face.. Politicians know the average NZ voter is politically stupid.. so pacify us by telling us what we want to here.. This is never in the nations interest,, its merely self interest of politicians need to stay in office..
What about a youngcouples/card thats what we need in NZ if we are to keep paying for the gold/card.
Instead of looking at youth offending, we neede to be looking at youth spending.
National is cutting social spending.. not capitalised spending.. go the All Whites:
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
What a mean spirited piece from the DomPost, based, as Graeme points out above, on hyperbole and nonsensical reasoning. What happened, did the Dom’s editorial writer get stuck behind an old man in a hat driving into work today, and just decided to vent his or her spleen at pensioners generally?
If some “rich” pensioners are abusing the travel subsidy, then close the loophole. For many on a pension, struggling to make ends meet as utility and other prices are allowed to go through the roof – people like my parents – the thought of losing the transport subsidy is causing very real distress.
And nice to see the ODT desperately struggling to whip up a “our yoof are all dangerous” story out of something which should have read “Coordinated intervention halves youth crime” and gone on to acknowledge and praise those who are working on such interventions for their success. But that doesn’t fit the “anyone in a hoodie is a thug” meme I guess.
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
I think instead of nailing old age pensioners every which way as at present we should honour them for what they’ve put in over the years.
Vote:we can start by not charging them tax on their income for starters.
March 17th, 2010 at 5:22 pm
I found the dom-post editorial a bit weird.. They open with this:
And later, say:
Sounds like money well spent!
Vote:March 17th, 2010 at 7:58 pm
The Fullers’ thing from Winston Peters point of view can be easily afforded so it should continue. I guess the only way this can be dealt with is to grandfather existing users and the rest can have some access but with a cap.
Vote:March 18th, 2010 at 2:08 am
“And nice to see the ODT desperately struggling to whip up a “our yoof are all dangerous” story out of something which should have read “Coordinated intervention halves youth crime” and gone on to acknowledge and praise those who are working on such interventions for their success. But that doesn’t fit the “anyone in a hoodie is a thug” meme I guess.”
Typical of the ODT, I have to say. They hate the youth, even if they provide all their town’s money. (slight exaggeration, but come on, Dunedin is a University town…)
Vote:March 18th, 2010 at 8:34 am
The Dom Post & NZ Herald are proving particularly miserly & I’d argue short sighted here.
Vote:NZF deserves way more than 300k for getting to the World Cup finals, the publicity alone will dwarf than amount, I’d have said 3 million would have been better & I hate Soccer.
It’d be interesting to have research on the healthcare costs of the elderly who are partaking in the subsidised transport, I’m willing to wager the savings would again dwarf the expense, I think it’s a great idea.
There are things Govt should can, WFF is a damn good start, closely followed by Public sector incomes higher than equiv private sector, but I think some caution is needed & money well spent should be encouraged & if in the process of spending some of that money, somebody makes a profit, even better in my book.