Kiwiblog

Well John Key did it, he has 70 votes to 52 in Parliament, and has forged an agreement with the Maori Party that makes Labour’s chance of winning in 2011 a lot harder.

The agreement is here.

• Establish a group by 2010 to review constitutional issues, including Maori seats

Oh this will be fun. I love constitutional issues. There are so many – the Crown, the Treaty, the Bill of Rights, a written constitution, the Electoral Act etc etc.

• National not to remove the Maori seats without the consent of Maori, and the Maori Party not to seek to entrench them in the current term.

Absolutely predictable.

• Review the Foreshore & Seabed Act by end of 2009. If there is a repeal, All NZers will be guaranteed access to foreshore and seabed.

Labour’s legislation was wrong. I will not be surprised if the eventual agreement is to scrap it, but to legislate for access rights for all NZers.

• Pita Sharples to be Minister of Maori Affairs, and Associate Education and Corrections
• Tariana Turia to be Minister for the Community and Voluntary Sector, Associate Health, and Associate Social Development and Employment

I think Sharples will be a very good Maori Affairs Minister. There is some potential for conflict in Corrections between what National/ACT want to do, and what his instincts might say. But also areas of commonality such as the privately managed prison that had rave reviews from local Iwi.

• Maori Party to agree on Chairperson of Maori Affairs Select Committee, who will be a National MP.

If Georgina and Tau both make Cabinet, then I would guess this could be Hekia. But if one of the two existing Maori MPs misses out, then that one.

Incidentially there may be five Maori Ministers – Georgina, Tau, Paula, Pita and Tariana.

• All Maori MPs and MPs with an electorate larger than 20,000 sq kms to get a third Out of Parliament staff member

I would rather decisions like this are made through the Parliamentary Service Commission. But this was recommended by the Goulter review, and two offices are not enough for some of those large electorates.

Quote of the day goes to Hone Harawria:

“In three days, National offered us more than Labour did in three years,” said one of its MPs, Hone Harawira.

If Labour had gone with the Greens and the Maori Party in 2005, they wouldn’t have had to put up with effectively condoning Winston’s antics.

The National – United Future agreement is online here.

• Peter Dunne to be Minister of Revenue and Associate Health

Good. He can keep pushing for flatter taxes from there.

• Maintain Families Commission

I just knew that would be there!

• Reduce elective surgery waiting lists by greater utilisation of private hospital capacity, in a planned way where this cannot be met by the public hospital system

Excellent – no arguments at all.

• Progressing the long-term medicines strategy for quality use of pharmaceuticals in the health sector
• Support Public Private Partnerships for major roading infrastructure developments such as the Transmission Gully highway

I’ll celebrate the day the first car drives along it, but not before!

• The government notes that United Future has been committed to income splitting as a key part of their tax policy and agrees to support appropriate legislation to First Reading in Parliament.

Where parties can’t agree on something, an agreement to support to select committee is quite sensible, as it allows the public and other parties to consider their positions and submit on it.

• Establish a Big Game Hunting Council as part of a national wild game management strategy

I guess that came from the Oudoor Recreation Party they gobbled up a few years ago.

I did note one section in the agreement:

Cabinet Manual

The Leader of United Future agrees to be bound by the Cabinet Manual in the exercise of his Ministerial responsibilities, and in particular agrees to be bound by the provisions in the Cabinet Manual on the conduct, public duty, and personal interests of Ministers.

This is what you would call the Winston clause. Helen allowed Winston to trample all over the Cabinet Manual – he didn’t get permission for travel, he ddn’t declare gifts, he didn’t get the PM’s permission to keep gifts etc. John Key is signalling he will expect a higher standard of integrity from his Ministers than Helen Clark did.

National has put the coalition confidence and supply agreement online (staff are working long hours!).

• goal of closing the income gap with Australia by 2025
• require a sustained lift in New Zealand’s productivity growth rate to 3% a year or more
• agreed on the establishment of a high quality advisory group to investigate the reasons for the recent decline in New Zealand’s productivity performance
• Rodney to be Minister of Local Government, Minister for Regulatory Reform and Associate Minister of Commerce and a member of the Cabinet Expenditure Control Committee

Very pleased to see Rodney get Local Government – he will be a champion for ratepayers.

• Heather to be Minister of Consumer Affairs, Associate Minister of Defence and Associate Minister of Education

Also good to see Heather get more than Consumer Affairs. I hope she can keep her role in Territorials despite being Associate Minister – the Forces will appreciate a Minister who is one of them! Education will also be a key area for change, if we are to close the gap with Australia.

• National agrees to introduce the ACT Three Strikes Bill
• National agrees to a review by a special select committee of Parliament of the current Emissions Trading Scheme legislation and any amendments or alternatives to it, including carbon taxes, in the light of current economic circumstances and steps now being undertaken by similar nations

Having it reviewed by select committee is sensible as that gives a voice to all parties. And the ETS legislation was so complex it needed another look by select committee anyway.

• National further agrees to pass forthwith an amendment to the ETS legislation delaying its implementation, repealing the thermal generation ban and making any other necessary interim adjustments until the select committee review is completed
• Establishing a series of Task Forces that include private sector representatives and private sector chairs to undertake fundamental reviews of all base government spending in identified sectors, and to report findings progressively to the cabinet control expenditure committee and relevant ministers.

This should have been happening for the last nine years. The status quo is not an adequate reason to keep funding something. Public funds should be spent on areas where they actually achieve good outcomes.

• Support, within six months, the referral of ACT’s Taxpayer Rights Bill to the Finance and Expenditure Committee of Parliament as a government measure with the aim of passing into law a cap on the growth of core Crown expenses.
• National and ACT note that United Future favours reducing and aligning personal, trust and company taxes at a maximum rate of 30%. They agree that such a tax structure is a desirable medium-term goal.

Who would have thought – United Future gets to se the tax policy for the nation

• National and ACT agree that the government will establish a task force to carry forward work on the Regulatory Responsibility Bill considered by the Commerce Committee of Parliament in 2008.
• National and ACT agree that the National-led government will explore the concept of a New Zealand Productivity Commission associated with the Productivity Commission in Australia in order to support the goals of higher productivity growth and improvements in the quality of regulation.

I can’t stress how important this might be. However to be truly successful, it would need bipartisan support. It is in all of our interest to improve productivity – even if not always popular with every lobby group. National should try and work with Goff and King to get their support for such a Commission.

• The National-led government will establish a high quality advisory group to recommend short-term amendments to the RMA, including but not confined to those which National has put forward, as a basis for select committee consideration early in 2009.
• National and ACT have agree to set up an inter-party working group, which shall be resourced as necessary to consider and report on policy options relating to the funding and regulation of schools that will increase parental choice and school autonomy.
• National has identified the initiatives on National’s “My key commitments to you” and “National’s Post-Election Action Plan” publications as priorities for them. ACT agrees to support the legislation required to give effect to these policies. These publications are attached as Appendix 2.

This means National can implement its key manifesto items.

• ACT agrees that it will support the government on procedural motions in the House and in select committees unless ACT has previously advised that such support is not forthcoming. National agrees that it will operate a no surprises policy with ACT on procedural motions it intends to put before the House or a select committee. If National fails to give ACT 48-hours notice of intended procedural motions, ACT shall not be bound by its obligations under this heading.

And means ACT will generally support National on procedural motions, so long as they are given enough notice to decide. There will inevitably be urgency to deal with the 2008 legislation that has an election mandate. I do hope in future urgency is not used too often – or if it is, only to increase sitting hours, but not to rush laws through more than one stage.

Rodney has delivered a good agreement for his supporters, and he also did well in taking ACT from two MPs in 2005 to five MPs in 2008. That gave him the increased clout he needs.

Key has also done well. He has secured support for National’s key manifesto items, and many of his own supporters will welcome the concessions to ACT. Yet nothing there to really scare away the centrist voters – at this stage – that will depend on how certain items are implemented. Issues around the ETS should not be allowed to drift for too long.

Not online, but a PR from Rodney on the coalition confidence and supply agreement with National:

I see National and ACT’s Confidence and Supply Agreement as a victory for democracy.
A week ago New Zealand voted for a Centre-Right government and today, with this historic agreement, we have one.

Yep 64/122 seats.

Agreement was achieved at an unbelievably quick pace. Tremendous ground was covered as a result – and only because – of the tremendous spirit of good faith and trust built up between my self and John Key during his time as Leader of the Opposition, and throughout the past week when he gained enormous respect from me with his openness and willingness to see the other’s point of view.

All our discussions this week indicate we have the basis for a long-lasting and fruitful relationship based on that mutual respect.

Sounds good.

John Key and I have set the big goal of New Zealand closing the income gap with Australia by 2025. We aim to catch and match Australia. That’s a stretch. It’s what we need to do to bring our kids home.

Heh, always set a goal that you can’t fail at while still in office

That’s a wee bit cynical. People won’t expect much progress in the first term as we recover from the inherited recession, but will expect progress in subsequent terms.

We share the view of the need to make New Zealand safer. That’s why ACT’s ‘Three strikes and You’re Out’ Law & Order policy for violent offenders will have National’s support to a Select Committee. We look forward to New Zealanders getting behind this measure that will save lives.

A sensible compromise is having it go to select committee.

On Climate Change we will review New Zealand’s response with agreed draft terms of reference. The implementation of the Emissions Trading Scheme will be delayed until the review is completed, and the thermal generation ban will be repealed.

ACT did not get the ETS scrapped, just reviewed which was going to happen anyway. And the thermal generation ban was loopy.

On spending, we will establish a series of task forces to undertake a fundamental review of base government spending in identified sectors. Capping core government spending will receive Select Committee consideration.

Yes and yes. Both good.

We have set a medium-term goal of setting the top rate of tax at 30 percent. In doing so, we have made the clear statement that New Zealand now has a government that will reward and celebrate success – not punish it.

United Future also supports a 30% top tax rate. It won’t happen in the next three years but is a good goal to aim for.

National and ACT are committed to combating the red tape that’s tying New Zealanders in knots, with John Key appointing me Minister of Regulatory Reform. We will establish a task force to carry forward work on the Regulatory Responsibility Bill, and we will explore the concept of a New Zealand Productivity Commission.

The NZ Productivity Commission is a very worthwhile concept. The Australian equivalent has been very successful in attracting bipartisan support for its ideas. Phil Goff could be smart here and support this.

Rodney as Minister in charge of reducing regulations also a win-win.

I’ve yet to see the full agreement, but what Rodney has mentioned sounds very good – some real wins for ACT supporters but nothing that National would be uncomfortable with. The biggest risk area is around delaying the ETS too much – it would just give ammo to Labour/Greens – but if the outcome is a better designed ETS, then that is good.

Winston Peters has made it clear on Radio NZ he will not step down, so Clark has to decide today whether to sack him or not. It she does, it sounds like NZ First will regard it as a breach of their confidence and supply agreement and withdraw confidence.

Some people think that just because no formal confidence vote is scheduled, the Prime Minister can remain in office without having the confidence of the House. This is not so. No Right Turn has a good post on this issue. You need to have the confidence of the House, even without a formal vote scheduled. Jenny Shipley in 1998 was able to show she did, after also sacking Peters.

If the PM sacks Peters, she should ask for a confidence vote on Tuesday.

If she does not, the Opposition could write to the Governor-General and point out that the Prime Minister now only has 54 votes for confidence (incl Copeland and Field) and 57 votes against confidence plus 10 abstaining. The GG could then ask the PM to demonstrate she has the confidence of the House.

If NZ First abstain on supply and confidence, rather than vote against, the Government would survive 54 – 50. So the key question is Clark sacks Peters is will she call a confidence vote (only Monarchs govern without consent) and how will NZ First vote on that confidence vote?