Wood interviews Shearer

April 7th, 2013 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

People may be interested in this transcript from Q+A. The video at the link is even better:

On Friday we found out some of the details about the partial sale of Mighty River Power. The price range for the shares estimated to be between $2.35 and $2.80. That should bring around $2 billion into the government coffers.

Good morning, .

DAVID SHEARER,

Good morning, Susan.

SUSAN         $2 billion on schools, on things that are public good. Money well spent?

DAVID          No, because you also miss out on the revenue over a longer period than that, and as soon as you do that, 50 per cent of your revenue goes, and over time, obviously, that’s nonsensical. But the other thing about selling these shares is that a small group are going to get ownership of those shares-

SUSAN         400,000 people is not a small group of New Zealanders.

DAVID          Well, if you actually add it up, it’s going to be well less than 10%. More than 90% of New Zealanders will not have the opportunity to buy shares, and they will lose, in a sense, what they already owned before, which is a national asset.

SUSAN         So without selling assets, and we know you don’t want to, how will you balance the books without borrowing?

DAVID          Well, what we had been saying before is a whole programme of economic development, capital gains tax, and in the short term-

SUSAN         So tell me how you’ll raise $2 billion. This government’s raising $2 billion doing it. How will you come up with $2 billion?

DAVID          Let’s start from the beginning, then. Do we need to have exactly that $2 billion or not? The way the government’s put its books in order, or not in order, is by putting forward an argument that we need to sell our state-owned assets. I don’t believe that that’s the way that we should be going forward. There are other alternatives.

SUSAN         Do you agree, though, that the government should be running a surplus? They should not be in deficit? Households have to tidy up their act. Do you agree that the government books should be in surplus?

DAVID          Well, of course we should be in surplus, and that’s what the Labour government did for nine years while it was in government, and that’s what it handed on to the National government – government books that were in surplus.

SUSAN         Yeah, but to be fair, there’s been a GFC.

DAVID          When you sell a state-owned asset like Mighty River Power you forego the income that that brings in.

SUSAN         I understand that.

DAVID          So what you’re effectively doing- It’s like selling your business, putting an extension on your house – you feel much better for that, but you lose the income from the sale.

SUSAN         OK, but they are getting the books back into surplus. They are getting their house in order. Give me a few ideas of how Labour would get the house in order without borrowing more money.

DAVID          Well, at the moment we don’t have a growth agenda in New Zealand. We are not growing our economy as we should.

SUSAN         But give me some specifics here of what you would do. We know what this government is doing. How would you raise a couple of billion to get the books back in balance?

DAVID          Well, what I’m saying is that what we need to do is to grow the economy in a way that it’s not growing at the moment, and we’ll be talking about Tiwai Point in a little while…one of the big problems about – no, no, let me finish – one of the biggest problems about that is that the exchange rate is so low that we’re seeing many of our businesses actually going out of business because they’re not being able to succeed. We’re not putting our money in the profitable sector; it’s going into the property market because we don’t have a capital gains tax that will help us direct money into those areas. And if you’re wanting to raise money, then at least put money into businesses- invest in businesses through the incentives of capital gains, and that brings, obviously, money into the government as well.

SUSAN         Let’s talk about the GCSB spy boss, Ian Fletcher. Is he the right man for the job?

DAVID          I don’t know Ian Fletcher, but I can say that the way he has been appointed-

SUSAN         No, no, there is nothing negative about him, is there? There is no suggestion that he is not the right man for the job. Let me phrase it that way.

DAVID          Well, let’s put it another way. Just last year, when the whole Dotcom issue was running, Ian Fletcher was the person who went to the prime minister and said, ‘Sign this, because I want to cover up the fact that we’ve been illegally spying on Dotcom.’ That was the ministerial certificate that Ian Fletcher took to the prime minister. Now, I don’t think that was a good move. I don’t have an opinion of him per se, but-

SUSAN         Well, you don’t like that.

DAVID          Of course I don’t. No, I’ve just said that. But what I don’t like is the way that he was interviewed and the process that went through. I don’t like the idea-

SUSAN         But hang on-

DAVID          Hang on, no, no, just let me finish- John Key has shoulder-tapped one person, put him into that position. We now have in our most secret agency in New Zealand a friend of John Key’s who reports directly to him. John Key is the only person who has democratic oversight over that agency.

SUSAN         And it’s his right. It is his right to select whoever he wants for that job.

DAVID          There is a real problem in New Zealand now with the confidence that we have in our intelligence agencies, and if I was coming into office, I would have a full independent inquiry into our intelligence agencies to restore that confidence, because if we don’t do that we will not be able to hold ourselves up as the transparent nation that we are.

SUSAN         Rebecca Kitteridge has been looking into it.

DAVID          That’s an internal report. I would want this to have a terms of reference that would be agreed by parliament. It would report back to parliament so that we all have confidence in it. It’s something the Australians did a few years ago when there was a crisis in their intelligence agencies, and they’ve had regular independent outside reviews going on. Now, we have the SIS at the moment. The SIS is about to look at its legislation, reform its legislation, and I think that we need to have that independent review before we get to that point.

SUSAN         Much made this week of the Prime Minister’s memory loss. You, of course, have had your own memory loss over that $50,000 US or more, how much was it?

DAVID          I’m not going to say. It’s my family business. I don’t talk about my savings online, but I do-

SUSAN         Tony Ryall said in the house it was a couple of hundred thousand dollars US. Is that correct, or is it more than that?

DAVID          I’m not going to say. It’s my family business.

SUSAN         Didn’t you lose your right for privacy around it when you forgot to declare it? When you broke the rules and did not declare it?

DAVID          No, I absolutely did not. I said that I made an error. I myself came forward and corrected that error. I took it on the chin and said ‘here it is’. And I expect that to be the standard by which all politicians operate if they do make a mistake.

SUSAN         That’s what John Key did this week. He said he’d made a mistake and he fessed up. Exactly the same scenario.

DAVID          I think what John Key was doing this week-

SUSAN         He came forward.

DAVID          No-

SUSAN         Yes, he did. He came forward and he said, ‘Actually, I’ve checked by records and I did call Ian Fletcher.’ He came forward.

DAVID          What he was doing this week was that he was deliberately trying to move opinion away from and deflect opinion away from his friendship and relationship with Fletcher.

SUSAN         Is your problem with this money- Is your problem with this more than $50,000 US in the bank, is your problem that there is so much money there that it would not resonate? You would not resonate? I mean, Michael Cullen very famously called John Key a ‘rich prick’. Are you, Mr Shearer, a rich prick?

DAVID          Look, I worked for my money working for the United Nations in Iraq. I put it in the bank. It’s my family’s savings. I didn’t put it on my pecuniary interest. I declared that and I came forward and I was honest about it.

SUSAN         And you were very well paid in that job, sometimes up to half a million Kiwi dollars a year.

DAVID          No, I think you need to do your research on that, quite frankly, Susan. But, look, working in Iraq, where we lost 25 people, there was a- people do get paid hazard money in those situations.

SUSAN         What’s the money sitting there for?

DAVID          Look, it’s my family- Look, people put money in the bank for any- Look, this is my private savings, my family’s savings. Do you ask John Key what he does with $50 million when he comes on to your show?

SUSAN         John Key actually does have scrutiny over his money all the time. There are reports about how much money he has; he’s on the NBR Rich List – all those sorts of things. So, yes, he does have the same sort of scrutiny.

DAVID          Well, I haven’t heard you asking the same sorts of questions-

SUSAN         I haven’t had him on the programme yet, but when I do, I will ask him. So, are reports that it’s around $1 million correct or incorrect?

DAVID          Look, I am not going to put a figure on it, and I resent the fact that you are asking me to reveal how much is in my bank account. Nobody needs to do that. I have done-

SUSAN         You do need to.

DAVID          I have done what I was obliged to do under parliamentary rules, which is to declare any account that had more than $50,000 in it. I did do that. I regret, obviously, not putting that on my pecuniary interests, and that’s where it stops.

SUSAN         So you’re not a rich prick?

DAVID          I’m- Obviously, as a New Zealander, I’m fortunate, but I’m not in the same league as our prime minster, no.

SUSAN         Tiwai Point – what would you do if you were in government?

DAVID          Oh, look, Tiwai Point needs to be negotiated. It obviously needs the government to have a look and see what it can do.

SUSAN         What would you offer, though? Would you be offering Rio Tinto some sort of extra funding to stay here?

DAVID          Oh, look, I think what we would need to do is take a look at what’s on the table, and I don’t know what’s on the table.

SUSAN         Nothing’s on the table. The government’s pulled it off the table, haven’t they?

DAVID          We don’t know how far apart they are. We’ve only just got indications about that. I think what we need to do, though, is look at the national interests about what this means to New Zealand, what it means to Southland, what it means to jobs. And at the moment the government is not in the business of creating jobs. There are jobs going and for Southlanders obviously they are very, very -

SUSAN         I think you could actually say that the government has played Rio Tinto pretty well on this. And the numbers – let’s talk about them. $250 million a year they pay for power. That’s about a quarter of what you pay for power, of what all of our viewers pay for power. They pay one quarter. They then return about $150 million. Effectively, we’re giving them a $750 million discount. Should they even be here? I mean, what are they really adding?

DAVID          Well, that was what they were set up for, obviously, and they were guaranteed that power for a long time. I mean, you have to play out what does it mean for jobs, what does it mean for the Southland economy, what does it mean for our current account deficit? But the bottom line is you would try to, obviously, secure a deal-

SUSAN         Really? Because those numbers I’m looking at there, there are other things you could do. The power could be in other uses.

DAVID          But you wouldn’t be going into a negotiation with a blank chequebook.

SUSAN         And the government hasn’t. They’ve walked away.

DAVID          Well, the government, what it did, was it was trying to-

SUSAN         The government put pressure on Rio Tinto.

DAVID          What the government was trying to do was actually get the sale of Mighty River Power across the line and reduce the uncertainty around the electricity price. That’s what it was trying to do, and that’s why it went into negotiations. Now, it went into negotiations with Rio Tinto aware that the government was wanting to do that. So it went in with one hand tied behind its back.

SUSAN         Well, they haven’t paid it one cent, which I think would be the public mood at the moment – no mood to give a lot of money to a foreign multi-national. One final question – there is some confusion around Labour, and I’ve been trying to press you during this interview about what you would do differently. So let me give you a specific example. You’re a 26-year-old woman. You’re living in Auckland. You’re earning $65,000 a year. You’re paying off your student loan. You’re renting. What would Labour do for this woman that National is not doing?

DAVID          Well, two things – first of all, we would have a healthy home guarantee to make sure that where she’s living, in the rental accommodation that she’s living in, is actually up to scratch; it’s both heated and it’s insulated. The second thing that we would do is we’re building 10,000 houses, affordable homes, a year, and that would enable her to have an opportunity to get on to the housing ladder. So there are two specific things that I believe that would help that case.

 SUSAN         Thank you for your time this morning.

DAVID          Thanks, Susan.

I like how Labour goes from condemning the Government for negotiating with Rio Tinto on Tiwai Point, to complaining they didn’t secure a deal.

Tags: , ,

70 Responses to “Wood interviews Shearer”

  1. hamnidaV2 (247 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 34 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. jaba (2,141 comments) says:

    I can’t believe that Raymond said he thought Shearer did well in the interview .. he was hopeless and not PM material in any shape or form.
    I loved how he stammered over being considered rich .. it’s not a crime David .. Clark and Cullen were millionaires as well by the way

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. PaulP (150 comments) says:

    I love how he says exporters are struggling as our exchange rate is too low. Fine if you want to run that argument but at least know what your argument is. The party line David is that the exchange rate is too HIGH for exporters FFS.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    Captain Mumblefuck Shearer is a tosser, a complete tosser.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. PaulP (150 comments) says:

    At least he admitted “I’m not in the same league as our prime minister”. What a sound bite.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Reid (16,448 comments) says:

    I can’t believe that Raymond said he thought Shearer did well in the interview

    You mean Ray Miller from Akld Uni? His speciality is minor NZ political parties. Perhaps the pol scientists have decided that’s where Liarbore sits. Well, they’re the specialists who study it for a living. They should know.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Johnboy (16,529 comments) says:

    “DAVID Look, I worked for my money working for the United Nations in Iraq. I put it in the bank. It’s my family’s savings. I didn’t put it on my pecuniary interest. I declared that and I came forward and I was honest about it.

    SUSAN And you were very well paid in that job, sometimes up to half a million Kiwi dollars a year.

    DAVID No, I think you need to do your research on that, quite frankly, Susan. But, look, working in Iraq, where we lost 25 people, there was a- people do get paid hazard money in those situations.

    Fuck! I never realised until now that David put his life on the line in Iraq. What a hero. Dodging bullets while that other rich prick Key dodged accountability!

    You’re my man David. Thank God Helen tapped you on the shoulder to save us all from filthy capitalism! :)

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. jaba (2,141 comments) says:

    I ALMOST feel sorry for Mike Williams … he is sitting back watching the present Labour Party “leaders” destroy his future appointments to Govt positions in a future Labour lead Govt

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Nostradamus (3,324 comments) says:

    Hamnida:

    The only thing that stood-out for me in the interview is how Right-wing Susan Wood is.

    The only thing that stands out for me in your comment is that you haven’t substantiated your assertion that Susan Wood is ‘right-wing’.

    Or are you just trolling again?

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. wreck1080 (3,912 comments) says:

    Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.

    Unpopular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 32 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. wat dabney (3,756 comments) says:

    No, because you also miss out on the revenue over a longer period than that, and as soon as you do that, 50 per cent of your revenue goes

    I apologise in advance but what a stupid cunt.

    He is simply looking at (and caring about) the total amount of money that the state receives (higher being better, naturally) and in effect claiming that money extracted from us through high power bills is somehow free money that we won’t miss and won’t notice; as opposed to grabbing it via taxation. He would arse-rape us in our capacity as bill-payers, spend the money on politically beneficial projects, and tell us how clever and caring he is to fund these initiatives without having to tap us – the same fucking people – in our tax-paying capacity.

    What a shyster. We’re the bill payers and we’re the tax payers, Dave, you grasping crook. And the exception to that is the lower-paid, for whom your fraudulent get-rich-quick scheme amounts to a stealthy and hugely regressive tax grab: The poor would be wealthier if the same amount of money were raised via taxation as opposed to fuel bills.

    According to this twat’s logic, if power bills were doubled or trebled (or more!) it would be a good thing, since the state would get a vast increase in revenue (it’s an even greater “asset”!)

    And that’s it.

    That’s his fucking argument.

    No mention or consideration of the fact that all that money grabbed by the state has to come from somewhere and someone.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 33 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    Is anybody going to pull him in his bold faced lie that Labour handed a surplus to National in 2008. Bloody lefties have this dream that over taxing is a valid way to run a surplus… What a twat of a leader … Guess that’s what you get from a party that’s only agenda is power to spend other people’s money.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. Reid (16,448 comments) says:

    He is simply looking at (and caring about) the total amount of money that the state receives

    Yes. Somehow the UN and Iraq etc was able to teach him how to run multi-million dollar whole-of-country operations but it seems this didn’t include teaching him about the elementary economic principle called “cost of capital.” How peculiar. But it would have been good if he’d picked it up along the way off his own bat. Perhaps he tried to once or twice but the book kept getting shot out of his hands. Perhaps that’s why he doesn’t understand what every 5th form economics student knows.

    Is anybody going to pull him in his bold faced lie that Labour handed a surplus to National in 2008.

    Oh they really do believe that burt. But what they don’t mention is that Cullen and Hulun committed every single cent for the forseeable future thus preventing the Nats from having any wriggle-room at all, and they did this deliberately for that purpose and not because it was good for the country or the economy.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. jaba (2,141 comments) says:

    Labour are hanging their hat on a capital gains tax .. they waffle about growing the economy as another way of generating revenue etc but never give specifics

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    Multi millionaires Jaba.

    Clark and Cullen will be shitting money just quietly. Millionaires are two a penny

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. GPT1 (2,121 comments) says:

    The first time that I can recall an interviewer has pushed Shearer on what he would do differently. Still let him away with the “growth strategy” sound bites.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. The Scorned (719 comments) says:

    Thank you Wat!….exactly what I have been saying to all who will listen. “State assets” is just the Broken window fallacy over again…money swiped by the State and spent on one thing while blanking out the tapayer who was robbed and what they can no longer freely choose to spend that money on…slight of hand crookery.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    So let me get this straight… $2b can be made from state run corporations without abusing their monopoly position overcharging for the good and services they provide?

    Look.. It’s ok to use a monopoly position to raise tax revenue because when people don’t have a choice you can tell them state monopolies are good and prove it by investing the revenue into plastic pledge cards with fake pictures of dear leader on them.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. OneTrack (3,092 comments) says:

    Wreck – “She cannot transfer cullens words onto shearer”

    Why not? Is it ok to call other people “rich pricks”, but not members of the Labour party. Members who happen to have millions of dollars stashed in an off-shore bank account. I think Michael Cullen might just categorise those as the characteristic actions of a “rich prick”, maybe even one of the 1%.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Black with a Vengeance (1,861 comments) says:

    Jeez dpf all that and all you got to complain about is he thought it was piss weak not too get a deal with Rio Tinto.

    Not bad Shearer not bad.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 26 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. OneTrack (3,092 comments) says:

    “hamnidaV2 (126) Says:
    April 7th, 2013 at 3:06 pm
    The only thing that stood-out for me in the interview is how Right-wing Susan Wood is.

    You must mean relative to most of the rest of the NZ MSM (certainly television) who are so far left, Mao would blanche. Who, without fail, give Labour, Greens and Mana, a free ride whatever the subject. Look no further than the Rachel Smalley and Grant Robertson interview yesterday – they were virtually slapping each other on the back. They surely popped the cork from a bottle of Chardonnay together once the program finished.

    So, yes, it must have been a shock for you when somebody starts asking obvious questions, giving him time to answer and actually probing for a real answer. You won’t have seen that for a long time, maybe even since before Helen.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. rouppe (971 comments) says:

    When you think about Shearers statement about running a surplus for 9 years, what they actually did was the same as Solid Energy. They committed to a heavy expansion programme believing the revenues would go on forever. Someone should put that to him.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. RF (1,397 comments) says:

    After watching Susan Wood hand Shearer his arse i just cannot believe he is Labours white knight. What a jabbering fuck knuckle !!!!!

    As for the commie whats her name.. ah yes Helen Kelly. Pure evil.

    Vote: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. alex (304 comments) says:

    I have no sympathy for Shearer, but what a dreadfully biased interview. That’s the equivalent of putting John Key on Bomber’s show.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 28 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. Johnboy (16,529 comments) says:

    Quite right alex. Just as well unbiased folk like you are readily available to point out bias everywhere! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. duggledog (1,556 comments) says:

    A CGT is a good policy to hang your hat on because it works a treat with shit-dumb envious people.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. burt (8,269 comments) says:

    rouppe

    They ran a surplus largely by over taxing middle income earners and over charging via monopoly state enterprises. Sure they reduced government debt but they did so at the expense of personal debt. The irony in this is that Labour is apparently the workers party yet they gouged the workers and feathered their own nest to look good. The truly disgraceful thing is that they can’t even be honest about the mess they made.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Johnboy (16,529 comments) says:

    True duggledog.

    There is nothing more repulsive to a socialist supporter than one who happens to make his income from something other than the sweat of his brow unless of course it happens to be one of the stupid fools cheerleaders. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Warren Murray (311 comments) says:

    Thanks DF, didnt watch it, must hv been a farce for those who did. The transcript makes Shearer seem semi coherent, even with the obvious errors, contradictions and inconsistencies.

    Shearer / Labour has a point re sale of income generating assets, esp when the proceeds are then spent on assets that dont generate at least the same level of income. But, of course, they cant pursue that line very far, because the assets being bought (schools, etc) should be funded by taxes. If the government isnt collecting enough taxes it must either borrow or raise taxes. Labour goes v quiet when it comes to articulating alternatives. Susan Wood’s interview demonstrates this.

    A policy platform of new / higher taxes usually isn’t a vote winner, so let’s have a CGT and hope the politics of envy will help win the election. Pity it wont raise enough revenue or dampen house price inflation. Mere details….

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. rouppe (971 comments) says:

    burt

    The truly disgraceful thing is that everybody else can’t see that’s what happened

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. JC (956 comments) says:

    I can understand why he’s mumbling.. there’s very little any Govt *should* do differently to what English is doing. We can argue speed and intensity but hardly direction.

    As for that offshore bank account.. he succeeded in making me feel there’s hundreds of thousands in it at very little interest.. something shonky or very incompetent going on there.

    JC

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. tvb (4,421 comments) says:

    So just what is Labour’s narrative on Tiwhi point?? Keep it open at all costs?? It is fairly long bow to say that the possible closure of Tiwhai point will have much affect on MRP profitability in 5 years time. And what is their narrative on the Fletcher appointment?? Oh dear oh dear. Labour are all over the paddock on the real issues. Still that are firm for Gay Marriage, a really important issue for every day kiwis. Oh wait John Key has spiked them on that as well.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Chuck Bird (4,883 comments) says:

    The party line David is that the exchange rate is too HIGH for exporters FFS.

    And those with overseas bank accounts with a lot of money in them.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. mara (784 comments) says:

    All I could see here was Shearer applying media handling strategies. . And it did not work. Cunliffe must be howling with glee.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Harriet (4,969 comments) says:

    “…….one of the biggest problems about that is that the exchange rate is so low that we’re seeing many of our businesses actually going out of business because they’re not being able to succeed. We’re not putting our money in the profitable sector; it’s going into the property market because we don’t have a capital gains tax that will help us direct money into those areas. And if you’re wanting to raise money, then at least put money into businesses- invest in businesses through the incentives of capital gains, and that brings, obviously, money into the government as well….”

    Hahahhahah….he’s got no idea about business.

    “….one of the biggest problems about that is that the exchange rate is so low…”

    He gets the exchange rate problem wrong – higher is what he meant.

    “….many of our businesses actually going out of business because they’re not being able to succeed. We’re not putting our money in the profitable sector;…”

    He says that the business sector isn’t profitable…then in the next sentance says that they are.

    “….[capital]it’s going into the property market because we don’t have a capital gains tax that will help us direct money into those areas[business]….”

    The cost of capital isn’t sending anyone broke as it’s currently cheap.They’re going broke because of other reasons.

    “….And if you’re wanting to raise money, then at least put money into businesses- invest in businesses through the incentives of capital gains, and that brings, obviously, money into the government as well….”

    He wants US to put OUR money into what he has just desrcibed as ‘many of our businesses actually going out of business because they’re not being able to succeed’.
    And then he describes that what doesn’t deliver to the market place will then deliver money to the government – and we need more of it!

    And all this under the ‘Labour for Government’ banner. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    TVB posted at 5.28:

    …Still that are firm for Gay Marriage, a really important issue for every day kiwis. Oh wait John Key has spiked them on that as well…

    Excuse me for not being up with the play on this issue, TVB, but is John Key opposed to gay marriage, ie is the PM opposed to amending marriage legislation so that it will include marriage by two people of the same sex?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. Pete George (23,560 comments) says:

    Onetrack:

    Look no further than the Rachel Smalley and Grant Robertson interview yesterday – they were virtually slapping each other on the back.

    The backslapping began the day before on Firstline – The Nation producer Richard Harman was doing that in advance of Robertson’s interview: Grant Robertson – pre-interview praise by The Nation producer

    And Robertson had the cheek today to tweet:

    Raymond Millar and Susan Wood really have not been following how John Key changed his story over last week. Why the easy ride on PM?

    http://yournz.org/2013/04/07/grant-robertson-and-easy-rides/

    I thought Wood did a good job with Shearer, it further exposed his limitations. The final question and response:

    Wood: One final question – there is some confusion around Labour, and I’ve been trying to press you during this interview about what you would do differently.

    So let me give you a specific example. You’re a 26-year-old woman. You’re living in Auckland. You’re earning $65,000 a year. You’re paying off your student loan. You’re renting. What would Labour do for this woman that National is not doing?

    Shearer: Well, two things – first of all, we would have a healthy home guarantee to make sure that where she’s living, in the rental accommodation that she’s living in, is actually up to scratch; it’s both heated and it’s insulated.

    I’m sure that would be first on everyone’s list of preferred policy.

    The second thing that we would do is we’re building 10,000 houses, affordable homes, a year, and that would enable her to have an opportunity to get on to the housing ladder. So there are two specific things that I believe that would help that case.

    As others have said, that was simply the rehearsed policy phrases that he hadn’t yet repeated so he used the question as an excuse to parrot them.

    No time left for Wood to pull him up on it, but it closed the interview with an obvious example how out of his depth he is.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Kimble (4,438 comments) says:

    Looking through the comments and I can’t see where anyone has pointed out (apologies if you have said it) what a massive SCUMBAG he is for trying to use the DEATHS OF 25 PEOPLE to distract from a hidden bank account that potentially contains millions of dollars.

    Vote: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Black with a Vengeance (1,861 comments) says:

    Crikey there’ll be some spittle to clean of some keyboards tonight eh fellas?

    Shearer’s got you truly rattled.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 22 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. Johnboy (16,529 comments) says:

    Were you Shearers backup when he ran out of Iraq as well Blackarse with very itchy haemorrhoids? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. Black with a Vengeance (1,861 comments) says:

    What are you on about John you lover of little boys? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 16 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Colville (2,268 comments) says:

    I have no sympathy for Shearer, but what a dreadfully biased interview. That’s the equivalent of putting John Key on Bomber’s show.

    John Key would hand the retard Bomber his (Bombers) arse on a plate.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Bogusnews (474 comments) says:

    When Labour took office in 1999 they inherited a very healthy economy. During the 90’s an additional 283,000 new jobs had been created, personal productivity was at 2.2 (at the end of Labours rein it was down to 0.7), with a 1.5Bil surplus and growth was at just over 3%.

    From 1999 onwards Labour then had the best economic conditions of any generation which included us getting the best prices for our primary produce in over 50 years.

    So yes, with that great foundation they did have regular surpluses. The problem was that even though the economy had grown from 60Bil in 1999 to 100 Bil, Cullen only managed to pay off 7 Bil in our overseas debt (compared to National’s 23Bil approx over their term with about half the GDP.)

    And rather than saving, Labour fell over themselves looking for ways to spend it recruiting a further 24,000 state servants and an extra 16Bil a year spent on the State service. Cullen ended up boasting that “We’ve spent the lot!” Why the hell he thought that was worth boasting about is anyone’s guess.

    So the massive overheads they had added meant treasury was predicting never ending deficits and Labours foolish policies brought other chickens to roost such as the multi billion dollar ACC blowout etc.

    It was an incredibly expensive mistake for NZ’s to vote in that corrupt government. I really hope we are not so bloody stupid as to vote them in again.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    Shearer seems unable to notice things which damage him. If he has 1 or 5 million in the bank then so what, nobody has to defend what they own or don’t own. He seems unable to grasp that being successful or rich is not a turn off for voters. It’s the conflict of the Labour party with their supposed ‘roots.’ Every man and woman works, or should work, to get ahead.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Bogusnews (474 comments) says:

    Should also mention, the 1990’s were “failed policies” according to Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Kimble (4,438 comments) says:

    If he has 1 or 5 million in the bank then so what, nobody has to defend what they own or don’t own.

    It doesn’t matter to you and me N-NZ, we would see it for what it is; the fruits of providing something valuable enough to other people that they were willing to pay a lot for it.

    It matters to the people in his own party who view money as a root of all evil and the amount of money you have as your level of evil. It also kneecaps their usual political tactic; class hatred. Their angle has always been John Key is too rich to be a good PM.

    It matters because he hid it. The more money, the greater the deception. And it is probably A LOT of money.

    And finally, it matters because it makes it obvious he is fake, which contrasts poorly with John Key’s resounding genuineness. Shearer’s paying a mortgage because he is just like you, dear voter, he understands your struggles because he is living them too. Yeah Right.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Nostalgia-NZ (5,202 comments) says:

    He possibly is a fake Kimble. The alternative is that he’s not comfortable with his own position, (of being say rich,) and is therefore so ‘down trodden’ by Labour’s legacy that he first of all has no vision, and no plan to invigorate voters that working hard and getting ahead is the way to prosperity for the whole country.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Anthony (796 comments) says:

    Of course Auntie Helen never shoulder tapped anyone for a job – all the those ex Labour MPs and staffers who have gone to the UN – that’s just a co-incidence isn’t it?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Johnboy (16,529 comments) says:

    Meanwhile back in the real world:

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/8520153/John-Key-meets-new-Chinese-president

    Eat your little, tiny, insignificant hearts out Labour tossers! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. RRM (9,919 comments) says:

    Far out, she threw him plenty of bones in that interview, but instead of seizing the opportunity to perform, he just got all defensive; no no no, I didn’t say THAT!

    So Shearer basically confirmed that in their fifth year in the wilderness Labour still have no idea what they’re doing, all they know is they’re against whatever National said.

    I just scrolled through this thread and JESUS CHRIST – some of you lads are gonna give yourselves heart attacks before much longer. Take it easy ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. HC (154 comments) says:

    Yes, saw it and heard it. Susan Wood can be hard and firm in interviews, and she was this with Shearer on Q+A.

    As I have questioned Shearer’s suitability and capability to lead the main opposition party in NZ, I once more see my reservations and critcism proved.

    Indeed, this interview is yet more proof, that it is time to send Shearer to the back-bench, and to either give Cunliffe the go he deserves, or at least let Robertson have a try now.

    Yes, I know, and you did this on purpose, David Farrar, you like to disect matters, and you enjoy proving that Shearer as Labour leader is the “best” answer for Nationals own problems at present.

    If only the mainstream media would report a bit more fairly and also present other voices and arguments, then it would never have come to this.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. dishy (248 comments) says:

    Harriet: Bless you. Your post should be on ballot papers at the next election.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. UpandComer (536 comments) says:

    Black with a vengeance is the tooliest tool in the tool shed.

    My god, the left get a single interview where the interviewer doesn’t automatically agree with everything they say, praise them effusively, implicitly criticise everything the govt is doing, and actually asks how they’re going to pay for all their shit, and they shit themselves.

    Welcome to reality you political technocrat pricks, you have no policy, no fucking intellectual leadership, no ideas, and haven’t changed any minds for a loooong time. And you idiots still think it’s because of some Right wing conspiracy.
    These people are contemptible.

    Labour have had no one worth a spit since Cullen.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. UpandComer (536 comments) says:

    I’m also enjoying the obvious awareness among the normal people in the world who aren’t gay, or ex student debaters, or black with a vengeance, that almost all of the Labour myths from the 90’s and 00-08 are complete bullshit.

    They paid off fuck all debt, less then a third of what National has paid off, delivered a Greek economy, spent all the money to nastily get at Bill English, broke the public finance Act, lest we ever forget the electoral finance act, fired people for having national boyfriends, funded their party through mike william’s appointments.

    Given all the shit they spout about crosby textor, I found it hilarious how shearer’s answers basically could fill a spreadsheet on media trained inanity on how to answer questions.

    God NZ needs to divest itself of these losers. National’s just made major headway in cleaning up their utter balls of a mess, and we have to stop the cycle of Labour coming in again to reap the rewards of other people’s hard work. Of course, that’s what Labour boils down to – reaping the rewards of other people’s hard work. Tossers.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    Oh my god! This man wants to be Prime Minister and doesnt even have a basic grasp of finance! His claims that NZ’rs will lose 50% of the income from MRP are utterly spurious. Pricing of the shares takes into account the discounted value of all future income. The Government is selling the future revenue and taking it today, rather than waiting to get it in 20 years. Wood should have asked him if he had any knowledge of discounted cashflows, and his responses dictated she should have, then we would have had a stuttering fool to watch. Shearer is a moron.
    And, claiming that Labour (after 9 years of the best economic conditions in a generation) left the books in surplus. Well, lets talk about the small matter of the permanent structural deficit that they left the National Government. There’s also the massive hole in ACC that they left. Shearer has just made a whole lot of stuff up – why isnt he be held to account for this??

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. hannity (152 comments) says:

    lets talk about the small matter of the permanent structural deficit that they left the National Government.

    Yeah and the 5 years National have had to fix it ,but haven’t bothered, prefering to whine ,that its all Labours’ fault
    Key’s finding out, that the ,vacuous inane slogans, he shouted ad nauseam ,when in opposition, dont count for much when in power.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. Cunningham (844 comments) says:

    I just can’t believe Shearer is allowed to continue stumbling along without anyone trying to get him removed. Can the left not see how incompetent he is???

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    Hannity, you seem to be of the Shearer ilk when it comes to finance. National not fixing it? What part of permanent structural deficit don’t you understand? Why don’t you educate yourself and start with Finance 101 and Economics 101, you might surprise yourself.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. TMC (75 comments) says:

    Seems to me Wood missed the point, and most others did too, with the bank account in the US…it’s not that he’s a ‘rich prick’. That’s great. Not exactly the Labour poster boy, man of the people but well done Mr Shearer.

    The point is he could very well be in a position to influence the NZ dollar to his own benefit. What he and Norman are talking about will actually tank the NZ dollar. So it’s no longer ‘family business’ when you’re potentially parking hundreds and thousands of dollars on the sideline, just waiting until you get into office so you can manipulate the dollar to your advantage. Didn’t Labour try to hang Key out on what were shares sold years ago in a BLIND trust?? This is far worse than that.

    I want to hear Wood or someone ask him when he talks about the dollar being too high and Labour and the Greens policies to bring it down, how much will he benefit personally from those policies and a lower NZ dollar. How can he make the right decisions for NZ when in the back of his mind he really wants a lower dollar, screw everyone else, so he can make more of his US accounts?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Paulus (2,627 comments) says:

    I do not like Susan Wood – but it was a strong interview with a poor politician who will not be in that job soon.

    But how would Grant Robertson deal with her, or her with him, as she is surely heterosexual from reputation –

    She also has an MBA, so can compete with any financial dunderhead in Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. beautox (422 comments) says:

    ONe thing to remember about UN salaries is that they are TAX FREE. Yes, all that loot Shearer has salted away, none had any tax paid. I’d like to see a journo put that to him.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Kimble (4,438 comments) says:

    I do not like Susan Wood – but it was a strong interview with a poor politician who will not be in that job soon.

    I have no opinion on Susan Wood. I just think this interview is how EVERY interview with a politician and candidate should be conducted, and every press conference, and every town hall meeting, and every baby-kiss stop along the campaign trail.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. hannity (152 comments) says:

    ‘There’s also the massive hole in ACC that they left.’

    You actually swallowed that , what a dupe,

    Unable and politically unpalatable are two different things.
    as National are finding out.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Manolo (13,767 comments) says:

    There is hope the socialists keep Captain Mumblefuck Shearer until election time, which should see them defeated.

    The poor, hapless, Labour “leader” cannot be more unassertive, inarticulate, and hesitant. He exudes incompetence. On the other hand, and despite his loathsome ideology, Silent T Cunliffe speaks much better.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. hannity (152 comments) says:

    Agreed ,
    Its Nationals’ only chance.
    With the economy tanking and Keys’ dishonesty laid bare, National will need a miracle.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. swan (665 comments) says:

    I wonder if Grant Robertson will let him do any more interviews?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. OTGO (549 comments) says:

    @hannity 12.40 pm
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10875936

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    hannity, given your proven inability to understand basic finance and economics, all you have is name calling, and your comments can be consigned to where they belong.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. hannity (152 comments) says:

    What name calling.

    Anyone who genuinely believes that National inherited ACC in a crisis, then miraculously turned it around, to post a surplus of 2.5 bil in one year is truly a dupe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. In Vino Veritas (139 comments) says:

    Hah hah hannity, you’ve done it again! So, in your world, a one year surplus (due to massive cost cutting) equates to the $12.8bn future balance sheet deficit does it? Anyone who genuinely believes National did not inherit ACC in a crisis is truly a dupe.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote