General Debate 1 July 2010

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment250

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (250)

Login to comment or vote

side show bob

Quite right Petey, the Dear One and Shane XXX would have never have stooped so low, I shall say three hail Marys and one Our Father tonight for imitating lefty’s.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 8:18pm
francis

lol the Speaker today telling folks to use outdoor voices “big voices” esp after having been moved farther away!!!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 8:32pm
philu

crikey..!..the drooling knuckledraggers are having a go at the dog…?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 8:55pm
big bruv

Phool

Perhaps you missed my earlier question, What supplements do you feed your dogs to make up for their vegan diet?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 8:59pm
angie stone

On 1 April this year Mercury increased electricity charges by a ridiculous amount and now they are sneaking in another 3.3%.

When I die and come back in another life remind me to be an exec in a utility company. Smile to the bank every single day.

http://www.angel-charlene.com
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:08pm
Tauhei Notts

Sid Show Bob at 7.46 p.m.
Weyerhauser (spelling, I’m sorry) have big forestry investments not far from Motueka. Did they buy those forests from a man with a doctorate in geodesic engineering? Buy from me because I am in a position to help you, big time.
This plot is beginning to thicken.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:11pm
philu

http://whoar.co.nz/2010/mps-to-tighten-their-beltsthey-will-forgo-their-travel-perkfor-just-a-ten-percent-increase-in-their-salaryi-dunno-about-youbut-it-does-gladden-my-heart-to-see-them-sharing-the-painlike-they-doeh/

“…The committee, chaired by former speaker Sir Douglas Kidd …

… suggests scrapping the international travel rebate for MPs and their partners ….

… and giving them a 10 per cent pay rise instead…”

(should we all have a whip-around for them…?..)

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:11pm
Viking2

Rudd might not have his ego intact but he does have a nice retainer for a rainy day.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/money/money-matters/kevin-rudd-leaves-with-600000-pension/story-fn3hskur-1225885913980
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:16pm
philu

“..What supplements do you feed your dogs to make up for their vegan diet?..”

flax meal..yeast..brewers yeast..sunflower..flaxseed…spirulona..kelp…vitamins…minerals..antioxidants…yucca..omega 3 …omega 6..linolec acid..essential fatty acids…aa..dha…epa..vitamin c prebiotic and probioticstaurine…l carntine..amylase…

mmm’kay…?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:24pm
kaya

There is no doubt the ETS is a dog. It is a tax, it will not help any perceived problem. Polluters will still pollute.
So why doesn’t the Government use the carrot approach instead of the big stick ETS shite? Re feed in tariffs.

A Feed-in tariffs “is a policy mechanism designed to encourage the adoption of renewable energy sources and to help accelerate the move toward grid parity.

“As of 2009, feed-in tariff policies have been enacted in 63 jurisdictions around the world….”

full piece here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feed-in_tariff

I’m not saying it is the answer, I’m saying if you think this climate change is an issue then why not punish the polluter, reward the people who make an effort and stop fucking lying to bring in another bureaucratic, non producing, parasitical piece of dog tucker? For only one reason, you can tax it. If you actually managed to encourage some people to take pressure off the grid by generating some small amounts of their own power and feeding it back in then you can’t clip the ticket, can you Nick Smith? Thieving fuckers.

From Wikipedia:

“Feed-in electricity tariffs have been introduced in Germany to encourage the use of new energy technologies such as wind power, biomass, hydropower, geothermal power and solar photovoltaics. Each technology is eligible for a different feed-in rate. The aim is to meet Germany’s renewable energy goals of 12.5% of electricity consumption in 2010 and 20% in 2020. The policy also aims to encourage the development of renewable technologies, reduce external costs, and increase security of energy supply.[1]

In 2005, 10 per cent of electricity in Germany came from renewable sources and 70 per cent of this was supported with feed-in tariffs. The Federal Environment Ministry estimates that this will save 52 million tonnes of carbon dioxide by 2010. The average level of feed-in tariff was €0.0953 per kWh in 2005 (compared to an average cost of displaced energy of €0.047 kWh). The total level of subsidy was €2.4 billion, at a cost per consumer of €0.0056 per kWh (3 per cent of household electricity costs).[1] The tariffs are lowered every year to encourage more efficient production of renewable energy. As of 2008, the annual reductions are 1.5% for electricity from wind, 5% for electricity from photovoltaics, and 1% for electricity from biomass.

There are about 170,000 people working in the renewable energy sector in Germany, which has an industry turnover of €8.7 billion.”

Stupid idea huh?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:40pm
side show bob

Obscene isn’t it V2, I bet the Aussie public are not amused.

Tauhei Notts, if there is something amiss and the useful idiot has being less then honest the ramifications would indeed be huge. But he would have to be criminally insane to go down that path, then again…………
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 9:41pm
Manolo

“DPF hasn’t found the time to create a post on National’s Big New Tax.”

Not surprising but following strict orders from National Party political bosses. The silence is deafening.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:02pm
kaya

And another major indicator the world economy is in full recovery mode:

“Yesterday, the United Nations released a new report suggesting it’s time to stop using the dollar as the world’s single major reserve currency, noting it has shown “not to be a stable store of value,” and recommending its replacement with the IMF’s currency basket, called special drawing rights (SDRs).”

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65S40620100629?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

Woohoo! Time to get another credit card! Might as well, the “money” is going to be as good as Disney dollars soon enough.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:07pm
Rod

After reading this extreme U turn in policy there is no possible way I can vote for the current National team ever again:

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Debates/Debates/3/2/8/47HansD_20050510_00001115-Climate-Change-Response-Amendment-Bill-First.htm

I especially like John Key saying: “This is a complete and utter hoax” which is exactly what his ex-supporters have been trying to say to him over recent months, only to be ignored. How inexplicable is that? And I really thought he was going to be good for NZ. What a disappointment he has turned out to be. Just another politician show pony turning up to World Cup matches, Queenstown winter festival, etc. in the hope that high exposure yields votes.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:10pm
Manolo

Thank you Rod.
Absolutely incredible (frfom Hansard):

“JOHN KEY (National—Helensville) : I rise on behalf of the National Party to give the good news to the people of New Zealand—that is, the Climate Change Response Amendment Bill is a load of rubbish and the National Party will not be supporting it, for very, very good reasons indeed.

I want to start off with a broad-ranging discussion, if I may, around the Kyoto Protocol and the absolutely nonsensical road that this Government is taking New Zealand down. I know we have a Prime Minister who is very confident, and all the rest of it, but maybe she would like to step out of her office on the 9th floor and realise which planet she is on. She is on the same planet, she may be surprised to learn, as India, China—

JOHN KEY: And Mugabe, yes—and a lot of other countries out there that have ratified the Kyoto Protocol. And why would they not, because they have absolutely no requirements on them, whatsoever. Yet here we are down in New Zealand, a very little country with about 0.2 percent of the world’s emissions, putting a self-imposed straitjacket on our businesses, and waving a huge flag that says: “Foreign investment, don’t come anywhere near us. Australia is over there—the West Island. Go over there to pour your dollars in.” To the Chinese we are saying: “Come in and buy as much coal as you like from our West Coast. We’ll sell it to you and you can burn it without a carbon charge—but, by the way, to those back here in Aotearoa New Zealand we will be slapping on a carbon charge and you won’t be able to operate.”

This is a complete and utter hoax, if I may say so. The impact of the Kyoto Protocol, even if one believes in global warming—and I am somewhat suspicious of it—is that we will see billions and billions of dollars poured into fixing something that we are not even sure is a problem. Even if it is a problem, it will be delayed for about 6 years. Then it will hit the world in 2096 instead of 2102, or something like that. It will not work.

Let us have a look at the Government’s response to the Kyoto Protocol. Our friends in Australia said they do not want a bar of it. They do not want to know anything about it; neither do our friends in America. I saw George W Bush, the President of the United States of America, talking about the Kyoto Protocol on CNN one night. George Bush is not necessarily known as the most eloquent speaker in US history. He is a fairly straight shooter, but he is not necessarily seen as being one of the great orators of all time. I plugged in the TV set, turned it on, and what did I see? There, on CNN, late at night, at about 11.30, was George Bush saying that America would not be ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, because it is not good for jobs and it is not good for the American economy. I understood that. I got it. Then I saw John Howard, the Prime Minister of Australia, addressing the Australian people and saying the same thing—that it is not good for jobs and it is not good for the economy. So when I turned to New Zealand TV and found out that we not only would be ratifying the Kyoto Protocol but in fact would be the first country in the world—that is right—to be blazing a trail to put on a carbon tax, I was somewhat astounded.

Now, I should not have been quite so worried, because when we questioned the Convenor, Ministerial Group on Climate Change last week, he said not to worry. He said that the carbon charge was not a tax increase; it was a tax shift. I was beside myself, as members can imagine, because I just could not understand it. So the next day I asked the Minister of Finance to point out to me what the discernable difference to the average New Zealand worker would be when they received about $400 less from an average, run-of-the-mill tax increase. I might add that this Government has had about 35 of those in the last 6 years, but that is another debate that we will come back to. I asked him what the difference would be between the $400 less they will get because of a tax increase and what they will get from a negative tax shift. Dr Cullen is no slouch in the House, is he? He is no slouch in the House, but he gave a sort of garbled response. We raised a point of order and he had another bit of a go at it, but that was a complete and utter failure. Then he came out with the real doozy. I said to him: “You know the carbon charge that you’re telling us will cost the people of New Zealand $200 a year, based on carbon prices of $15 per tonne of carbon dioxide emissions, or whatever? Well, actually, you have given yourself provision for it to be $25 per tonne. That will actually double the cost to about $400 per household, especially when you add in all the second-order effects, because supermarkets are going to have higher prices for its electricity, and more for a sink.” “No!”, said Dr Cullen. “You’re wrong!”, he said to me. I asked the Minister of Finance, Dr Cullen, what role he played in devising the carbon charge. He replied that he was responsible, along with the convenor. Well, that is very good. I thought to myself that a new member like me could possibly be wrong—I mean, I do not want to question the Minister of Finance, after 30 years—”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:16pm
mattyroo

Thanks for that link Rod,

This quote from the brainless Smith sums up his policy, never mind he was talking about Labours policy at the time:

……Government has no right to play games of experiments with the livelihoods of the key industries and the families of New Zealand. It should be an embarrassment that the Government is experimenting with the New Zealand economy.

……..It is high risk, it will have a negative impact on the New Zealand economy, and it will be for negligible environmental gain. How many members of this House really believe that the 4c a litre carbon tax will result in any less petrol or diesel being used in New Zealand?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:19pm
kaya

Rod – thanks for that Hansard, fucking incredible. Manolo has pointed out some of the absolute crap, then we have this little snippet from Nick Smith:

“So why is it that Pete Hodgson and the Labour Party want to impose this extra carbon tax on New Zealand business and on New Zealand households, when they know that it will not work? I say to Pete Hodgson that the carbon tax will be as successful as the “fart tax”, and it will not be long before this Government is scurrying off into its hole and apologising for getting this one wrong, as well.

The real difficulty the Government has got itself into with the Kyoto Protocol is going so far ahead of our major trading partners. It is National’s view that New Zealand needs to move in parallel with our most important trading partners, and it was a mistake in 2002 for this Government to ratify the Kyoto Protocol, when neither Australia nor the United States was part of it.

I point out to Darren Hughes, who is trying to interject, that New Zealand’s emissions amount to less than 0.5 percent internationally, and per head of population our emissions are about half that of Australia’s and the United States’ emissions. So why are we going to impose costs, and impose controls, and impose red tape on New Zealanders when countries like China, India, Singapore, Australia, the United States, and Canada do not have restrictions on them?”

What a fucking bunch of hypocritical, lying, conniving bastards.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:20pm
nickb

The question you have to ask is, what has changed?

Why were JK and Nick Smith talking like this before the election, and now the are pushing ahead with this lunacy?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:24pm
mattyroo

Kaya you took the words right out of my mouth with this sentence:

“What a fucking bunch of hypocritical, lying, conniving bastards.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:26pm
kaya

What is it going to take to stop this nonsensical insanity in it’s tracks? We don’t need big marches or letters to MPs or blogs. Waste of time obviously, if a referendum with over 80% support can’t change something what will?

We need to pick a day and time and everyone stop everything they are doing for about half an hour. Send a clear message to these people to fuck right off and remember who employs them.

Along the lines of the truckies proposed vehicle stop? (Except Annette King was cunning enough to cut that off at the pass by pretending to address the problem).
It’s worth a thought, if enough people stop their vehicle wherever it happens to be at a set time on a set date the country will grind to a halt. No permanent damage but a powerful message can be sent to those who won’t listen. Just a thought………shit something has to be done to stop this.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:34pm
nickb

Some political trivia for everyone.

Who said this?

“The madness of the Government’s new carbon tax is that New Zealanders will be the only people in the world paying it. It will drive up the costs of living and undermine the competitiveness of New Zealand business for negligible environmental gain.

“Labour Ministers may take pride in being toasted at International Climate conferences for being so bold and brave, but there is no justification for New Zealand going out in the cold by itself on this issue.

“New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions made up only 0.4% of the global total and on a per capita basis our emissions are half those of countries like Australia and the United States. We are the only Southern Hemisphere country with binding legal obligations under Kyoto and giants like China and India have got off scot free.”

A further concern is its impact on inflation, interest rates and the exchange rate. It will add to the costs of fuel and power and these flow right through the economy to basics like food. This puts pressure on inflation, which in turn drives up interest rates and the kiwi dollar. The Government’s carbon tax is a classic example of the way the Government is making things tougher for the productive exporting sector. The worst aspect of the carbon tax is that it will not make one iota of difference to New Zealand’s emissions.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:34pm
philu

“..The question you have to ask is, what has changed?..”

nothing….didn’t you see/read ‘hollow men’..?

it’s all unfolding as laid out…

and remember…the main hollow-man-theme was/is..

say/promise anything to get elected…

..and then just enact yr secret-agenda…

..and this has come to pass…

..why the surprise…?

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:35pm
nickb

A good post from Dr Muriel Newman:

http://www.nzcpr.com/weekly233.htm

Some excerpts:

Nick Smith’s 2005 statement highlights the monumental hypocrisy of the National Party – back then, when the economy was booming they campaigned against a carbon tax stating that the country could not afford one, while now, in 2010, when the economy is emerging from the worst recession in years, they are claiming that the country needs one. I suspect that if a nation-wide poll was carried out today, National would be shocked to find that public opposition to the ETS is widespread and is undoubtedly contributing to their fall in the public opinion polls.

While the government failed to provide a decent economic analysis of the effects of the ETS, some industry groups have now stepped up. Fonterra, for instance, has calculated that the cost of processing dairy foods is expected to increase by $38 million next year rising to over $100 million a year by 2015, and meat processors have estimated their costs will increase by $10 million from July 1st rising to $20 million a year by 2013. These will directly increase the price of food. In addition, Federated Farmers has estimated that the direct costs to farmers of the power and fuel price increases from July will be around $87 million, but the indirect costs on the whole sector will be in the region of $200 million. Costs of this magnitude will have a dramatic impact on the international price competitiveness of a sector that produces 64 percent of everything New Zealand exports.

In the run up to the 2008 election, John Key accused Labour of trying to lead the world in climate change and promised that under his stewardship a more moderate approach would be adopted: “National believes that the ETS should not attempt to make New Zealand a world leader on climate change. Kiwis simply can’t afford to pay the price for that particular experiment.[3] In light of that election promise, National’s ETS – as described by Nick Smith in Parliament last year – can only be described as a betrayal: “On 1 July 2010 New Zealand will have the first emissions trading scheme up and running outside Europe, and it will cover more sectors than the European scheme does. We were also the first country in the world to include forestry, in 2008, and we were the very first country in the world to have a plan for introducing agriculture, in 2015. If we can settle our emissions trading scheme by December, we will be at the front end of international action on climate change, and will actually have the most comprehensive emissions trading scheme of any country in the world.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:39pm
kaya

nickb – “Why were JK and Nick Smith talking like this before the election, and now the are pushing ahead with this lunacy?”

A very good question, one that has been asked numerous times in the last year and yet to be answered by anyone. My old man always said “if something makes no sense then follow the money”. I personally have no idea where the money leads but I bet it leads somewhere. This shit isn’t proven, we shouldn’t be doing this first.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:42pm
nickb

Boscawen needs to get up in the House and ask Nick Smith and Key to go on record and state that neither them or their family trusts have any financial interests in emissions trading.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:48pm
krazykiwi

@Tauhei Notts 9:11 – Can you elaborate? Did Dr Smith have forestry interests.. or is that speculation?

@nickb – Indeed. And we can supply the JB with the question text!
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:49pm
kaya

philu just for once try and stop scoring some perceived “points” and stick to the issue, it’s a really important one. It doesn’t seem to matter whether the left or right are in power here, they are all sticking to the same script. Now that’s a worry, and not because they are both speaking the truth because as we can see from the Hansard they are liars.

We are starting to face the same shit as the USA, it doesn’t matter who the talking heads are, something else is driving our direction and in a really bad way. In NZ it is ETS, in the USA it is financial market bailouts. Something is really rotten. Your attempted cheap point scoring over “the auld enemy” doesn’t really achieve anything.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:49pm
kaya

Nickb – I can’t imagine them being that stupid ( I know, politicians – stupid – synonymous).
If so then it gets very concerning, bigger agendas. Klark ring any bells?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 10:55pm
mattyroo

something else is driving our direction and in a really bad way. In NZ it is ETS….

Yes Kaya, but what is driving the ETS???

There has to be a reason these bastards are pushing this through. Has the wicked witch signed us up to something with the IMF (or some such institution) that stops them coming knocking?

There is no logical reason otherwise that we should be proceeding with this fucking great handbrake on the productive sector.

I don’t believe there is a monetary interest in it for either Smith or Key. Key is way too smart to have silly little rakes like that lying around to stand on.

There’s gotta be something deeper, that we’re not being told about, and it is probably something the numbskull Smith does not even understand or know himself.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:02pm
kaya

mattyroo – agreed that Smith and Key are not that stupid. Something isn’t right though. I suppose when you are borrowing a billion dollars a month the people you are borrowing from could have some influence on what you do. Who are we borrowing from BTW? It can’t be the USA, they have enough problems of their own. So you have to ask yourself who is solvent enough to lend out money? Or are we selling bonds? Then you have to ask who can afford to buy them?

Too complicated for me, It’ll get sorted eventually.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:11pm
reid

“Yes Kaya, but what is driving the ETS???”

Carbon miles management. It’s the only issue that makes any sense. It’s an issue that appeared last year in the global MSM then disappeared BUT it will keep coming back like a wave coming into shore with the tide, stronger each time.

AGW-ETS management unfortunately for we skeptics, is here to stay. The debate is over. The global politicians have bought this idiocy. So be it.

-or-

We can fight the idiocy and suffer the consequences.

But eventually, we’re going to have to move alongside, anyway. Because we’re not an island. We’re a part of the main.

If I was a lefty, I’d try to ignore unpleasant reality and pretend it didn’t exist. But I’m not.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:12pm
Redbaiter

“But I’m not.”

Yes you are.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:32pm
krazykiwi

Timber company Osmose have been after Smith since March 2008. After him to the tune of $15m for saying nasty things about their products. It would destroy Smith in his own words.

Now, Three weeks before the ETS is implemented and forestry interests in NZ receive a windfall, Osmose settles/withdraws, and Smith relaxes.

Coincidence?

I’m working hard to prove it so.

Oh, BTW Smith’s legal bills are sorted by money from the Freedom of Speech Trust and Parliamentary Services
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:41pm
John Boscawen

To those quoting Nick Smith in opposition I prefer to quote him in government. In fact as Minister of Climate Change on 24 September 2009 during the first reading of the bill modifying Labour’s ETS he said :

” The emissions trading scheme will be the first of any country outside Europe, and on 1 July 2010 will be the most comprehensive by including transport, industrial and energy emissions”. ( Nick knew the EU ETS does not include transport, although a few countries do separately provide for it)

He repeated those claims two months later on 24 November, during the 3rd reading.

Thats pretty clear to me. First outside Europe, and the most comprehensive.

So that makes us a world leader.

His words, not mine. ( given such a momentus occasion you might have thought David Farrar might have put up a separate posting)

Now that Australia has put its scheme on hold until at least 2013 and Copenhagen collapsed he prefers to say “29 countries out of 38” rather than “first of any country outside of Europe”.

To Manolo at 6.50pm Act hasnt pulled its support for National because we signed a Confidence and Supply agreement and we wish to be seen as a stable and reliable partner. However we think National has made a big mistake for itself, and more importantly the people of New Zealand, and particularly those on low incomes and the disadvantaged. ETS and electricity taxes are very regressive.

New Zealanders are not fools. Even if National thinks they are. The cost of $165 or the $3.17 per week is just electricity and petrol. The http://www.mfe.govt.nz website makes this clear. The flow on costs to food etc will add another 75 cents per dollar of direct costs according to the RB.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 1, 2010 11:43pm
Redbaiter

Krazy- A mate of mine owns an area of forest (overseas) that he’s hoping to trade credits on and he’s expecting to collect about $NZ10 million on it. There is big money in this.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 12:10am
Viking2

More National Policy Initiatives.

Bay unemployment doubles
Lyle McMahon lyle@thesun.co.nz
01 Jul 2010

The number of people in the Western Bay of Plenty seeking the unemployment benefit has almost doubled in the past year, according to the latest figures from the Ministry of Social Development.
Figures show there are 1042 people in the region seeking the unemployment benefit, up from 591 during the same period in 2009.

There are 10,500 people in the region seeking government benefits, up from 9159 in 2009.
The two Work and Income New Zealand offices in central Tauranga have seen the biggest increase in the number of unemployment benefits being processed.

http://www.sunlive.co.nz/15707a1.page
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 6:53am
Viking2

So despite manufacturing for export getting its arse kicked oversea’s on a daily basis and English still of the mind that houses are too expensive, (something which Brash showed quite clearly was untrue), Key and English and the funny brat still don’t get it. According to them its then its all the fault of manufacturers being greedy, homeowners for being greedy and they consider there is no responsibility in Govt. to listen to others. No one can explain the rational nor the undue haste behind the ETS, no one can explain nor plan on the rationale of the Reserve bank.
Bollard, Key, Smith and English are compulsive gamblers with w gambling addiction on other peoples money. Oh we don’t discount the left either,(well the other left), Cullen and co were just as bad.
When are we going to start to look out for NZ and NZer’s rather than gamble our futures for politics and places at the UN?

Key rejects monetary policy rethink
By BEN HEATHER – BusinessDay.co.nz
Last updated 05:00 02/07/2010

Working for families tax
credits – what to do

Prime Minister John Key has rejected calls for a radical rethink of monetary policy to help rescue struggling exporters.

In Christchurch yesterday, Key said changing the law to broaden the Reserve Bank targets beyond inflation would not help those exporters struggling with an overvalued dollar.

“Playing around with a few words in the Reserve Bank Act is not going to fix our problems,” he said.

New Zealand’s monetary policy was “best practice”, he said.

The comments were made at an export conference after an audience member raised the views of economist Ganesh Nana, a critic of the Government’s monetary policy, which Nana says has devastated the productive economy.

Nana, and others, have said the Reserve Bank Act should be changed to include broader targets, including employment and growth, and the Government should tilt the tax regime away from property investment.

Key’s comments came a day after Finance Minister Bill English said export jobs were shrinking, with figures showing the manufacturing sector alone had shed more then 35,000 jobs since 2004.

Yesterday, Key said the export sector had been in recession since 2003 but a bloated government sector was to blame, not monetary policy. “That’s hugely problematic for a country that needs to have a positive trade balance.”

Exporters were vital for New Zealand to trade its way out of the biggest foreign debt balance among any of the OECD countries, he said.

The total level of debt, running at 90 per cent of GDP, has began to flow through into increased premiums on foreign borrowing, which were currently running at 1.5 per cent, he said. If total debt rose above 100 per cent of GDP it could affect New Zealand’s credit rating.

New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association chief executive John Walley said the fact Key was responding to Nana’s concerns showed the Government was feeling the pressure for change.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:04am
Viking2

Here’s a good reason to make changes.

Woman who blew whistle sacked
By AMANDA FISHER – The Dominion Post
Last updated 05:00 02/07/2010

SACKED AFTER WHISTLEBLOWING: Lydia Maoate says of blowing the whistle on Allied Security: “I know right from wrong.”
Relevant offers

A security guard who blew the whistle on her bosses for insisting staff cheat on unit standards, for which they received government subsidies, has been sacked.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/3876911/Woman-who-blew-whistle-sacked
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:07am
Viking2

Govt. gives money to do what people should do for them selves. Buy a cold house, live in it and winge until we the taxpayer give some money to you to fix up your own asset. Socialism at its vote making best.

‘One-room family’ comes out from the cold
By DAVID WILLIAMS – The Press
Last updated 05:00 02/07/2010

IN FROM THE COLD: Mat Allen and Miranda Harris with their five-week-old baby, William.
Relevant offers

A Christchurch home that was so cold the owners had “to live in one room” is the 50,000th Kiwi house to be insulated and heated under a government scheme.

When Christchurch couple Mat Allen and Miranda Harris moved into their century-old villa, it was the street’s “ghost house”

the Government subsidy came to $1800 – on floor and ceiling insulation, a new heat pump and installation of an existing heat pump.

Key congratulated Allen and Harris for taking part in the scheme, saying they were doing the “right thing”.

“Your power bills are going to be cheaper, and your home’s going to be warmer.”

OH yeh. you increase the use of energy i.e. power and the bills are going to be cheaper.
I despair about Key. He is becoming irrational.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:13am
Viking2

Another policy initiative. This time from the Police.

New twist in Robin Brooke scandal
By Rachel Tiffen and Vaimoana Tapaleao
4:00 AM Friday Jul 2, 2010

Police are urging the woman who accused Robin Brooke of having sex with her when she was drunk and “comatose” to lay an official complaint.

Like get me a policeman when I do have a crime and he will come sometime. Clearly the unit that went after Veitch has run out of work. Move them on.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:18am
mattyroo

Key said:

The total level of debt, running at 90 per cent of GDP, has began to flow through into increased premiums on foreign borrowing, which were currently running at 1.5 per cent, he said. If total debt rose above 100 per cent of GDP it could affect New Zealand’s credit rating.

The guy’s a fuckin idiot!

The same day he says this, his government implements something (the ETS) that places a huge burden on the productive sector. Impeding the productive sector’s ability to pay down their debt, impeding the productive sector’s ability to create jobs – employing people, so they can pay down their debt.

This country desperately needs a new political party.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:19am
Pete George

Viking2, are you an independent campaigner, or are you acting on behalf of a group with an interest in running the government down?
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:19am
mattyroo

John Boscowen,

I’ve got no problem voting for ACT, but ACT have a problem receiving votes from farmers.

I have a lot of respect for Roger Douglas and his ideas, but, I also believe he is a huge impediment to ACT receiving significantly more votes than they do.

I and many others realise that what he did in the 80′s was desperately needed, and had it not been done, we would now be Haiti of the South Pacific.

You see, my parents are typical NZ farmers, National through and through. They realise that ACT is the only party that has the balls to both say and do what is needed. But, my father would never vote for ACT as long Roger Douglas is part of it. He still remembers the pain that was caused to him as a farmer when Sir Roger was the finance minister, even though this pain was required, and was only an extension of the pain under Muldoon. Douglas’ actions, which were required to fix the Muldoon mess, and as needed as they were, have turned off a lot of these baby boomers.

My mum votes ACT, but only I know that (I think my father suspects it), as she says, if my father found out she voted ACT he would throttle her.

This I believe is entirely psychological, as it is not the ACT party or it’s policies in principle that stop ACT receiving these votes, but Sir Roger’s name. I know other people that would possibly vote ACT, if it wasn’t his name stopping them.

It seems that the loony left have done a great job as using Sir Roger as a whipping boy, and blaming a lot of the late 80′s recession on him, which was caused by Muldoon’s policies creating the share market bubble – which as we all know crashed spectaculary in 87. It was the loss of all this capital then, and all the debt reduction which followed that caused the ensuing recession.

I would hate to see NZ lose Sir Roger’s sensibilities, experience and determination, but I don’t know what the solution is.

This problem also exists to a certain extent with Rodney Hide, where the media have destroyed him, he hasn’t helped that himself though, with the thinking with the little head and not the big head.

How to fix this John?

(edited from an earlier comment where I asked the same questions of Sir Roger)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:20am
Pete George

Douglas in the 80s and Douglas now are quite different. Flirting with his use-by date.

This problem also exists to a certain extent with Rodney Hide, where the media have destroyed him,

I guess you could partly blame the media for the dancing thing (they enabled the show), and it’s probably because of attempted media impact he wears a yellow jacket, but did the media make him take his girlfriend on an international jaunt?

I haven’t written off Hide yet, if he keeps demonstrating he has learnt from his mistakes then he’s ok by me.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:31am
mattyroo

petey boy – seems your reading comprehension skills are as fucked today as they were yesterday.

“he hasn’t helped that himself though, with the thinking with the little head and not the big head.”
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:45am
Pete George

I’ve no idea what you’re trying to get at or where that quote is from mattyroo.

This country desperately needs a new political party.

Very difficult to get anywhere along that route. Better to improve what is already there. Not by trying to trash everyone else.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 7:56am
John Boscawen

Mattyroo, thanks for your comments and your acknowledgement that what Roger Douglas and his colleagues did in the 1980s was absolutely necessary and laid the foundations for a stronger economy ( which has been subsequently frittered away).

It is a huge privilege to a be a member of parliament and I feel doubly lucky to work with Sir Roger Douglas. There would be very few people in parliament, if any, that care more about those on low incomes and the disadvantaged than him.

Just look at what National and Labour did to his Youth rates bill. What employer is going to choose an inexperienced 16 year old year old straight from school when he can get someone offering the reliability and maturity of mid 30 year old with a wife and two children to support for the same price?

You expect Labour to oppose such a bill on ideology. But how pathetic of National. And we wonder why youth unemployment is so high, and why we have so many young maori youth committing crime and going to prision.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 8:22am
Pete George

I agree on youth rates. But why should Labour oppose them on ideology, shouldn’t they be looking for what’s best for workers, no matter what their age? Maybe National think there is a better way (or just their way), and/or better timing, there has to be some explanation.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 8:35am
philu

“..with Sir Roger Douglas. There would be very few people in parliament, if any, that care more about those on low incomes and the disadvantaged than him. ..”

now that is a fucken knee-slapper…!

he ‘cares’ as much about them..as he ‘cared’ for the abused animals/pigs in his (failed) pig concentration camp…

i mean..next you’ll be trying to tell us key ‘cares for the underclass’…

and isn’t just a ‘hollow man’…

phil(whoar.co.nz)
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 8:44am
mattyroo

John B, I was totally disgusted with National when they did not support Douglas’ bill on youth wages, especially when they were so vocally against the original version whilst in opposition. It is unconscionable to think they could vote this down in the face of exponentially rising youth unemployment.

If I had a spiteful side, I would be hoping that John Key’s kids are not able to find a job because of this bill….. But, I’m not like that.

Anyway, back to our original discussion. Roger Douglas’ reputation has been destroyed by the media, we can debate all day about the good things he has done in the past, but there is no recovering for Roger or the ACT party from this point if they persist with Roger in the party and as spokesperson on finance. As much as we espouse the good and hard work he does, it is not going to get through to the voters. And, as I mentioned earlier, as soon as his name is mentioned, farmers turn away with a sickened look on their face.

I believe ACT needs to find a media darling who has pretty much the same economic philosophies as Sir Roger, there is such a person and the media love him – Gareth Morgan. He would however require lobotomising to remove the climate change con from his brain.

I will cross post this on today’s GD, if you are able to reply, appreciate your reply there.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
July 2, 2010 10:00am

More comments:

‹
1
2
3

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Have they read it?

Labour’s Huo on Dalai Llama »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Highlights

The Kiwis are fleeing
Inflation by term
Houston we have a problem
Our immunisation disaster

Never miss a post

Email Address

Links

Professor Robert MacCulloch: How National Can Neutralize Serious Allegations of Corruption
Breaking Views
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
Your New Meme That’s Fun To Be With
No Minister
REEFTON – THE NEW PARIS
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
Political Caption Competition
The Daily Blog
Open mike 24/04/2024
The Standard
More criminal miners
No Right Turn
A Look at the Wacky Transit Industry
Utopia
#CountdownToAnzacDay: On “the last afterglow of the most radiant cultural atmosphere in human history”
Not PC
RMA reforms aim to ease stock-grazing rules and reduce farmers’ costs – but Taxpayers’ Union wants even more changes
Point of Order
United Rugby Championship Predictions for Week 15
Stats Chat
Puberty blocker story backfires
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
Again, hate crimes are not necessarily terrorism.
Kiwipolitico
Despair - construction consenting edition
Offsetting Behaviour
Coalition Promises
NZCPR
Tougher than that
Croaking Cassandra
ABs stripped of 2011 title after try disallowed
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz