Another made up figure

January 29th, 2014 at 2:00 pm by David Farrar

Stuff reports:

And Energy spokesman David Shearer said consumers would disagree with the authority’s claim that were fair, after bills had risen 30 per cent in the past five years.

But they have not. The CPI shows the cost of electricity is 19.7% higher than five years ago, not 30%.

In the previous five years under Labour it increased 39.2%

Tags: ,

29 Responses to “Another made up figure”

  1. Daniel (210 comments) says:

    So he just averaged out the price increases… combining the moderate increase under National and the MASSIVE consumer-gouging “who cares about child poverty” prices increases under Labour.

    The authority should be more careful what they say, or they will be banned.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Joanne (177 comments) says:

    Labour has no chance at the election. They are on schedule to go down as the most ignorant Labour Party to contest an election in NZ.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Yogibear (366 comments) says:

    I call on Parliamentary Services to replace the current MP numbers based funding for party research units with performance based party research funding.

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. muggins (3,788 comments) says:

    My power supplier raised the Auckland power price by 9% in one year.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10548168

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. stigie (1,224 comments) says:

    And dont forget, power prices went up 72% under nine years of Liarbour. Fucking hypocrites !~

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Rich Prick (1,705 comments) says:

    Fudging numbers again, deception over the baby bonus, announcing that not doing something you weren’t already doing somehow “frees up $1.5b” … what a mess. Some one please hand Cunliffe two dead fish.

    Vote: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Auberon (873 comments) says:

    So let me get this clear David, you’re saying the rise in electricity costs under National over the past five years is almostly precisely half as much as power bills rose under Labour in the previous five years?

    That can’t be right – Labour’s been saying such different things.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Cunningham (844 comments) says:

    How can the media let them get away with these sort of blatant lies?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Manolo (13,840 comments) says:

    Good to see Captain Mumblefuck Shearer return to his old lying ways.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. muggins (3,788 comments) says:

    Some Genesis customers had their power prices increased by 20% in 2011.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10701800

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 8 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Cunningham (844 comments) says:

    muggins (2,838 comments) says:

    “Some Genesis customers had their power prices increased by 20% in 2011.”

    Maybe but did all bills raise that much? He should state ‘some power bills went up 30%’ but even better he should have said the average increase. The way he worded it was designed to make people think he was talking about the average without saying that so he had a way to back track if someone pointed it out. Its misleading at best but actually more like dishonest IMO. This is going to be a theme of Labour this year by the looks of it.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. muggins (3,788 comments) says:

    Cunningham
    I have a feeling that power bills for private customers over the past five years have increased by a greater % than those for business customers. I will see if I can confirm this.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. SPC (5,644 comments) says:

    A little too convenient a report according to one academic.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9659817/Academic-attacks-electricity-report

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. peterwn (3,277 comments) says:

    muggins and Cunningham – This related to about 800 customers on a domestic day/ night tariff. It seemed Genesis badly under calculated the night rate tariff giving these customers an undue benefit. IMO these customers would have a legitimate grizzle if they were induced into paying $600 – $100 for a meter change on the basis of an over-optimistic savings estimate.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Colville (2,272 comments) says:

    Captian Mumblefuck coming out with dribble surprises me, I had him pegged as fairy decent (however inept).

    I wondedr if this wasnt another item (written by the ABCs) meant to be read aloud by Cun*liffe and was handed to Shearer in error…

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. kevn (2 comments) says:

    What is with labour? They are an embarassment to themselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. muggins (3,788 comments) says:

    Cunningham
    My gas/electricity account for June 2008 was $329.92. For 2013 it was $404.42. About the same amount of power used. So this equates to a 23% increase over five years. But my gas a/c has increased more than my electricity a/c , percentage-wise.
    I must say I am a little surprised as I thought the % increase would be nearer 30%.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. alwyn (427 comments) says:

    You are just being picky, David.
    20%, 30%. They aren’t very far apart and you don’t really expect any better from that pack of economic illiterates do you?
    As far as Cunliffe’s waffle about having $1.5 billion available to spend because they have decided, for the third time I think, not to go ahead with tax cuts they never had any means of funding, they have come up with an even better idea.
    DC will announce that they have decided not to scrap all personal income tax. This he says will give the Labour Party $29 billion more to spend each year.
    When asked where the $29b comes from the answer is the savings they get from not scrapping income tax. Then when asked how the $29b shortfall from abolishing income tax was to be paid he simply says that he doesn’t have to do that as he aren’t going to abolish the tax.
    There, properly confused? DC hopes you, and the rest of the population, will be.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Paulus (2,633 comments) says:

    If Labour can openly lie to the country, and the media supports such crap, what does it matter that it is a lie.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Akld Commercial Lawyer (165 comments) says:

    Almost every point Shearer makes (tries to make) is bogus. The reference to 1907 and picks and shovels being just one. Tellingly, he is making these points as Energy Spokesman. Where is David Parker hiding now? The Power NZ proposal is a big fat lie – based on jamjar economics.

    A personal favourite is that generation from old hydro plants has already been paid for and thus should be costed at zero or that they run at low cost (because the water is free). Sadly, the leftie academic they have been chanting with seems to have a thing about the cost of capital. Take the Clyde High Dam, a legacy of Think Big, whose features include NZ’s most expensive piece of road (ever), because (amongst other things) the dam was reputedly built in the wrong place and a fault line was discovered mid-build. As a result, such dams often had a very high capital cost and/or high ongoing maintenance costs – even if the running costs are low (on the basis that water is, somehow, free).

    All the EA have done, in quite simple and orthodox terms, is model the impact on inflation and some basic assumptions about cost of capital. Even on the basis of quite modest returns, their model shows consumers meeting the costs of supply for only brief windows of time in the 30 years modeled. There is nothing startling in this – it is Year 13 Economics with a bit of Year 12 Maths thrown in.

    Instead, as demonstrated by the challenge thrown down by the irrigation lobby as recently as today, the real debate about those old hydro stations is about water usage. Instead of nationalisation, which is sure to kill innovation and investment stone dead (which Parker must know) some sort of tradeable water rights scheme and/or a cost (rent) for water used in generation seems much more orthodox.

    Equally orthodox, having unearthed the true cost of generation (and delivery – I’m leaving Transpower charges alone for the mo), is that the issue of some households not being able to pay is a welfare issue. This would lend itself better to targeted assistance – and IMHO would be a better target for a beta version of ‘Working for Families’ than poorly-targeted vote-buying childcare payments that are shotgunned to all and sundry but really only needed by a thin and identifiable slice of the audience.

    And then of course, the next challenge is to make sure that the children of those recipient families get the full benefit of the education system and ultimately make it into meaningful employment.

    It is a election year – but we deserve a better Opposition.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    This adequately explains why one leader is a loser, the other a multi-millionaire. Let’s face it, Cunliffe even manufactured his CV!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. OneTrack (3,121 comments) says:

    Labour aren’t very good with these numbery thingamees are they. Too busy in social studies maybe?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    The CPI shows the cost of electricity is 19.7% higher than five years ago, not 30%. In the previous five years under Labour it increased 39.2%

    Clearly Labour have no credibility to be speaking on this issue when, as DPF points out, they allowed power prices to rise substantially on their watch.

    But that doesn’t alter the fact that Bertram’s initial calculations make a fairly compelling argument that we’ve been exploited by electricity companies, many of them foreign owned, paying large salaries and dividends while effectively colluding to ensure that any savings possible from supposed competition were relatively minor, while hiking prices.

    Meanwhile pensions haven’t increased by anything like 60% over the past 10 years, so the savings of hard-working New Zealanders like my parents are eroding at a faster and faster rate.

    The excuse that they need a return on investment on assets which have long since paid for themselves and need very little maintenance is a nonsense, as Bertram points out elsewhere in that article.

    It may be too late to entirely unmake this particular pudding, and National may think they need do nothing on the basis that Labour’s aim is unerringly for its own foot, but government surely has a moral obligation to ensure that an essential utility is affordable to those whose taxes (and sometimes actual hard work – my grandfather worked on some power projects with a pick, shovel and wheelbarrow) created the infrastructure from which others now profit.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “Some Genesis customers had their power prices increased by 20% in 2011.”

    Customers have the power to switch with Powerswitch (catchy huh?)!

    Powerswitch is provided by Consumer NZ with support from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment. Powerswitch aims to be an informative tool for consumers and to encourage competition in the electricity market.
    https://www.powerswitch.org.nz/powerswitch/site-info/about-powerswitch

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. RightNow (6,994 comments) says:

    “government surely has a moral obligation to ensure that an essential utility is affordable…”
    Unless it’s captured by environmentalists who want to ensure prices rise so ‘renewables’ seem cost competitive.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    @RightNow

    Good point. So when Labour/Greens are in, price rises are okay because then it makes unaffordable options appear affordable; when National/UF/whoever are in, price rises are okay because maximum profits can never be wrong. Short version: we’re screwed, and being screwed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. burt (8,275 comments) says:

    Will Stuff give a rats ass and hold him to account publicly – not likely…..

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. burt (8,275 comments) says:

    RightNow

    PowerSwitch will probably be shut down when KiwiPower becomes the only retailer. Then, like the 5 years before the last 5, power prices will be a great source of revenue for the glorious state.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Rex Widerstrom: Labour/Greens will never do a bloody thing to support elderly, being concerned only, with the breeders, getting them on State support, so as to guarantee their votes. Take a look at the horrendous amount being paid in benefits to breeding for financial return recipients, being stuck in place firmly, and unable to be removed. If these goons get the Treasury benches they are going to increase this disgrace!

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