Kate Chapman reports:

An announcement will be made this afternoon after the Cabinet makes its final decisions.

One of those will be whether to dual-list stock on the New Zealand and Australian stock exchanges, as indicated by an Australian media report on Friday.

To do so would fly in the face of the Government’s promise that Kiwi mum-and-dad investors would be at the front of the queue.

It won’t, but it may be perceived as doing so. In reality dual listing is unlikely to greatly change the proportion purchased by New Zealanders. The impact is more likely to be on price.

Business commentator Rod Oram said the Government faced a dilemma.

“On the one hand it wants to get the best price it can for the shares, but in terms of stimulating demand, it’s going to run into political flak.”

Australians can buy shares on the NZX, but listing In Australia would make it easier and increase demand.

Rod Oram is correct. Dual listing will increase the price, but also that Australians can buy shares directly on the NZX also.

I own a number of shares that are listed on the ASX only – and I’m not Australian.

It would also create demand from institutional investors that did not trade in New Zealand.

That would drive up the price and ensure the Government got the maximum benefit from the sale, Mr Oram said.

“The counter of that is, in doing that, they would be guaranteed to increase the foreign proportion of shares held in the company.”

There would be some impact, but the Government’s allocation model will be the prime factor. They are very focused on over 80% being NZ owned.

Dual-listing would also seem to fly in the face of the Government’s argument that the asset sales would boost domestic capital markets.

“Listing in Australia does somewhat undercut that,” Mr Oram said.

A fair point.

Labour MP Clayton Cosgrove said the four state-owned energy companies that the Government planned to sell down would inevitably end up in foreign ownership.

A stupid point. This is literally impossible under the law passed by Parliament.

The graph above shows the average of all the public polls since the 2011 election.  Have just published Curia’s monthly newsletter:

February saw just five political polls published in New Zealand – one each from Colmar Brunton, Reid Research and Ipsos and two Roy Morgan polls.

The average of the public polls has National 14% ahead of Labour – the same as January. The seat projection is centre-right 61 seats, centre-left 57.

Australia has Labour and Gillard in trouble. The Coalition lead by 9% to 10% and for the first time Tony Abbott has overtaken Julia Gillard as Preferred Prime Minister.

In the United States Barack Obama’s approval rating is at +8%, and the country direction is -23%. The generic congressional poll average has the Democrats 3% ahead of the Republicans.

In the UK the Conservatives are now 11% behind Labour. They came third in the recent Eastleigh by-election. The Lib Dems retained the seat but the UK Independence Party came second.

In Canada the Conservatives are on 32%, NDP 28% and Liberals 25%.

The normal two tables are provided comparing the country direction sentiment and head of government approval sentiment for the five countries. New Zealand continues to top both by considerable margins.

We also carry details of polls in New Zealand on Hekia Parata, asset sales, four year term, Christchurch jobs, David Bain, same sex marriage, adoption plus the normal business and consumer confidence polls.

The full newsletter is only available by e-mail.  If you would like to receive future issues, please go to http://listserver.actrix.co.nz/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/polling-newsletter to subscribe yourself.

Wall Street has an article with the estimated net worth of US Presidents in current dollars. These are the ones that were worth over $50 million.

1. John F Kennedy $1,000m (family trust)
2. George Washington $525m
3. Thomas Jefferson $212m
4. Theodore Roosevelt $125m
5. Andrew Jackson $119m
6. James Madison $101m
7. Lyndon Johnson $98m
8. Herbert Hoover $75m
9. Franklin Roosevelt $60m
10. John Tyler $51m
11. Bill Clinton $50m

I wonder what the NZ equivalent list would look like!

The HoS reports:

University Students Association president Pete Hodkinson said graduates with loans would spend less and businesses would suffer.

The changes to loan repayment rates mean someone earning $1000 a week will pay an extra $658 a year. “This, for most people, will mean things like not going out to dinner (as often),” Hodkinson said.

Oh dear, the grind of poverty. Someone on $52,000 won’t be able to go out to dinner as often.

“If 200,000 people are now not spending money in an industry like hospitality … think about the economic impacts.”

Oh Good God – save us from wannabee economists. They are repaying student loan debt. This means the Government is not borrowing so much money. Debt fueled consumption is not sustainable.

People choosing to pay back loans quickly will no longer be rewarded.

Currently, people making voluntary payments of $500 or more a tax year on top of obligatory repayments earn a 10 per cent bonus, credited to their loan account.

Auckland University Students Association president Daniel Haines said scrapping the bonus was “unfair and harmful” to students.

This is ironic. Do you know why?  When National announced this voluntary repayment bonus policy, it was attacked by NZUSA. They said:

“We question why National has created such a narrow policy that will merely reward the rich and leave everyone else to struggle”

So let’s be very clear. NZUSA attacked the policy when National announced it, and now attack National for scrapping it.

This confirms my perception that most of the time NZUSA is not about actually advocating for the welfare of students, but promoting Labour and advancing the political careers of wanabee Labour MPs.

The HoS reports:

Paula Bennett’s reputation for being tough on beneficiaries is in jeopardy as figures reveal record high numbers on state financial support.

Labour spokeswoman for social development Jacinda Ardern said the highest unemployment numbers were at around 10 per cent in the early 1990s but support for solo parents and invalids have hit record highs during Bennett’s reign as Social Development Minister.

“When it comes to the worst DPB, sickness, and invalid benefit numbers, these have all been since 2010 and under Paula Bennett,” Ardern said. “Interestingly, the two highest figures for the DPB were both after the introduction of Bennett’s welfare reforms, which mostly targeted DPB recipients by increasing their work obligations.”

Ardern provided the Herald on Sunday with figures which showed:

Between January 2009 and January 2012, the number of people on the DPB rose by 13.2 per cent. During the same period, the number of people on the unemployment benefit rose by 82 per cent. “The Government seems to be clamping down on DPB mums in an effort to show ‘action’ to mask their ‘inaction’ in employment and job creation,” Ardern said. “But neither figure will budge unless the core issue of job availability is first addressed.”

The moment I saw this story, I had a fair idea of what the actual data would show. Yes more people on those benefits between those two dates, but not a linear pattern. Of course Jan 2009 was as the GFC was in full force, and hence job losses occurring.  Also the comparison stops 12 months ago. Why?

Let’s look at the actual data, in terms of increase or decrease each year. For DPB they are

• 2008 +2,128
• 2009 +9,007
• 2010 +3,576
• 2011 +1,365
• 2012 -5,112

I think we now understand why Jacinda left the 2012 figures off. What I don’t know is why the Herald on Sunday did.

Let’s do the same with Invalid’s Benefit numbers.

• 2008 +3,419
• 2009 +1,537
• 2010 +67
• 2011 -1,062
• 2012 -472

And for those interested in the Unemployment Benefit.

• 2008 +7,760
• 2009 +35,820
• 2010 +756
• 2011 -7,120
• 2012 -6,217

They all show the same thing. The increase in benefit numbers started in 2008 (under Labour) and worsened in 2009 as the Global Financial Crisis struck.  Despite patchy economic growth since 2009, benefit numbers in all three categories have fallen in the last two years.

One has to congratulate Jacinda for getting the Herald on Sunday to run an entire story based on selective cherry-picked data. That’s a good achievement for an Opposition MP.

Stephen Franks blogs:

Marcus Lush recorded an interview at 5-50am this morning with me on the pros and cons of banning foreigner purchases of houses here. …

I realised that the issues could be summed up simply. Prices go up when supply can’t increase to respond to demand. There is no a shortage of building supplies, or builders. So foreign buyers’ money can only affect prices if there is a shortage of land to build on. But New Zealand is not short of land. It is short of consents to use land. And probably more important than the supply of new land, is the cost, delay and risk in trying to intensify the use of land that is already built on, nearer the centre of our cities.

We need to build both upwards and outwards. We do need to intensify, but we also need more rational urban limits.

In other words, our housing problem is the inevitable consequence of the political success of selfish middle and upper class families, working with  their stupid green children. They enforce their aesthetic preferences for the status quo (labelled as ‘heritage’) by locking newcomers out of their leafy and quaint inner suburbs. The RMA has frozen the dynamic processes of rebuilding and intensification that have created all great cities (and our own towns and cities up till 3 decades ago. The result is that poorer people must pay for more expensive housing ever further from where the work is.

To blame the resulting prices on foreign money is a nice distraction from their own culpability, for the selfish generations, and the councillors and MPs who pander to them.

Nicely put. Blaming house prices on foreigners is just blatant xenophobia.

Whale has done some good research on a family highlighted in the media as being unable to afford a house. He did some basic research and found out they did have enough money for:

• booze
• pets
• cigarettes
• Playboy branded paraphernalia
• iPhones
• tatoos

He also reveals that they simply paid no rent at all at the place they were previously living at.

The Dom Post reports:

A waste of time and money is what some are labelling Wellington City Council’s $40,000 review of traffic congestion solutions at the Basin Reserve after it found in favour of a flyover. …

Ms Wade-Brown and transport portfolio leader Andy Foster presented the findings to the Transport Agency board yesterday.

Their study weighed the flyover option (Option A) against proposals from Auckland architect Richard Reid (Option RR) and the Architecture Centre (Option X), both of which had been previously dismissed by the agency as unworkable. Option X sent traffic underground through a cut-and-cover tunnel while Option RR focused on widening and upgrading the existing roads.

A copy of the council’s findings, obtained by The Dominion Post, says the flyover “provides the broadest range of improvements”. Journey times, the reliability of public transport, accessibility, and opportunities to promote cycling and walking would all improve.

Option X and Option RR were found to have little or no improvement in those areas.

Option X had the potential to hurt the traffic flow of surrounding roads, which could be “problematic” if a light rail system was ever introduced.

Option RR was found to have similar outcomes to doing nothing at all.

So what did those Councillors who voted to change their mind achieve? $40,000 of wasted money and an unnecessary delay.

Geoff Cumming at NZ Herald reports:

It is the holy grail of New Zealand tourism: easing the path to Milford Sound for domestic and international tourists without destroying what lures them there in the first place – its scenery, ecological value and remoteness.

For decades, tourism entrepreneurs have laid schemes at the door of the Conservation Department without quite prising it open, from a coastal road defying engineering conventions to a gondola.

Now, DoC has allowed two proposals a foot in the door – one a bus-only tunnel with approach roads through two national parks; the other a “back-country experience” involving boat, 4WD bus and monorail. Both promise to cut in half the circuitous 4hr road journey from Queenstown to Milford around Lakes Wakatipu and Te Anau. The applicants plan international marketing to bring an estimated 20,000 extra visitors a year to New Zealand, targeting time-poor tourists who want the greatest hits at speed.

I would have thought environmentalists would be keen to support a tunnel that means that you don’t have scores of buses driving several hundred extra kms a day. But the reality is that many of them are preservationists – they oppose all change.

Opponents argue that getting there is half the fun: the existing route takes in outstanding natural landscapes

It’s simple. If there is a choice of routes, then everyone can be happy. It is true there are some good stops on the way, but the four hour trip back doesn’t see anything new. Some operators could do a loop – drive down via Te Anau but come back directly. That would mean that tourists would gain an extra two hours in Milford itself.

NZ Herald quiz is here.

The old Stuff website allowed you to customise your frontpage so you can choose which sections to see. This allowed you to remove the Stuff Nation section so that you wouldn’t see it unless you wanted it.

That ability seems to have disappeared. Or maybe it is just me. Does anyone know if there is a way to hide Stuff Nation?

Sam Sachdeva in The Press reports:

Less than a week after being dumped from Labour’s top 20 MPs, Christchurch East MP Lianne Dalziel is putting on a brave face.

The week before the announcement, Labour leader David Shearer took her aside for a “long chat” about the decision and explained the need for rejuvenation in the ranks.

This is the rejuvenation that saw Annette King promoted, despite entering Parliament in 1984.

Lianne got demoted because she is in the wrong faction.

A much-discussed mayoral bid still appears highly unlikely, with Dalziel concerned about the potential disruption a by-election in her electorate would cause.

While it is unlikely, it is still not off the table, not yet anyway.

“Like I said to someone the other day, my answer is 99 per cent no. Is 1 per cent wiggle room?

“I suppose it is, but I’m really not thinking that’s what I want to do.”

Watch that 1% become, 2% and 3% and ….

Hank Schouten at Stuff reports:

United States embassy staff are to be protected behind blast walls built as part of a major upgrade of the Wellington complex, costing up to $60 million.

The walls, designed to protect against missiles and bomb blasts, will further beef up security at what is already one of the most heavily protected diplomatic posts in New Zealand.

They’re spending $60 million on walls to protect against missiles??

I have to say I don’t see a lot of missiles in Thorndon.

Embassy spokesman David Edginton said the upgrade work followed a seismic-risk assessment.

Whenever work was being done at an embassy, the State Department required it be brought up to worldwide standards for safety and security.

It’s their money, but personally I think it is rather stupid. The security needs in Thorndon are rather different to Kabul.

The State Department’s bureau of overseas building operations is looking for suitable contractors.

Good for the NZ economy though!

Stuff reports:

Kim Dotcom’s fight against extradition to the United States looks set to go to the Supreme Court after losing his latest legal battle.

The Court of Appeal has overturned a High Court decision that ordered the disclosure of the documents that are the basis of the case against Dotcom.

The court said extradition hearings were not trials and the full protections and procedures for criminal trials did not apply.

US authorities want to extradite the German-born internet entrepreneur to stand trial on criminal charges alleging copyright piracy and racketeering.

Dotcom’s lawyer, Paul Davison, QC, said his legal team would seek to appeal to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court will need to give leave to appeal, as this would be the third appeal. The original ruling was in the District Court.  The first appeal was to the High Court and the second appeal to the Court of Appeal.

David Cunliffe blogs at Red Alert:

Resolve is building to save our trees

Resolve is really building in West Auckland to stop National’s chainsaw massacre in the Waitakere Ranges.

Te Atatū Labour MP Phil Twyford, Labour’s Environment spokesperson Maryan Street, Councillors, Local Board representatives and ratepayers groups are all backing the community’s determination to save our trees – which together we surely will.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again every time this misinformation is promulgated.

THEY’RE NOT YOUR FUCKING TREES.

There has been absolutely no change in laws around trees on public or Council land.

The law change is around whether a home owner can trim or fell a tree that they own on their property.

And the law still allows Councils to protect individual trees of high value. What the law change does is stop Councils from doing blanket protection orders.

The misinformation and misleading language used on this issue is deliberate. The vast majority of the public don’t want to have to pay hundreds of dollars to Councils just for permission to trim their own trees.

I’ve just updated at Curiablog the full poll results from the One News Colmar Brunton poll and one of the issues they polled on was a four year term. The question they asked was:

“The current term of Government in New Zealand is three years, after which a general election is held.
Recently some politicians have suggested increasing the term from three to four years. Do you support
increasing the term of Government to four years?”

The results were:

• 56% yes
• 40% no

That is a welcome sign that a referendum in 2014 on the issue could succeed. I think it would be important that any change would not come into effect immediately but after the 2017 (or even 2020) election. That way it is not a poll on an extra year for the current Government.

The Parliamentary Library has also just published a research paper on parliamentary terms.

If you are in Wellington next Friday, there is a comedy night at the Grand to raise funds for a team doing the Oxfam Trailwalker.

Further details are on this Facebook page.

Catherine Delahunty blogs:

A quiet road outside Hamilton, the Hukanui Marae car park is full of journalists. Hone Harawira, David Clendon, I and a few others are welcomed on by Ngāti Wairere. This is Tame Iti’s mother’s marae so on the first day of freedom he comes here to start his journey home. Tame is in the wharekai with his sons, mokopuna, sister and other whanau and his lawyer. He is looking great, very calm and tranquil but there is something in his eyes, this strange new morning without bars.

It’s nice a couple of Green MPs have the time to welcome a convicted criminal upon his release from prison.

The Press editorial:

Getting a clear and accurate picture of the housing market in Christchurch since the earthquakes is not easy.

Anecdotal accounts of a shortage of houses available to rent or buy and of rocketing prices abound, but there have been few hard figures about the wider reality.

The problem with this is that alarmist talk risks generating its own reality and will certainly spread unnecessary despondency.

That would be a pity for an investigation, published by The Press this week, shows that in fact, while the housing market in Christchurch has become more competitive and rents and prices have risen affecting low-income families in particular, talk of a general “housing crisis” is not borne out. …

The suggestion by some that a few desperate cases of hardship represented a wider crisis was not accurate.

The best way to help with the rental challenges is to get more houses built.

The Press reports:

The Heart Foundation is suggesting to low-income parents that they send their kids off to school each morning with cottage cheese pita pockets, celery and hummus, sushi, couscous, leftover chop suey, and chickpea curry.

If any parents actually try sending their kids off to school with that for lunch, I predict a rise in paternal and maternal homicides!

Ryan Boswell from Sky News tweeted:

Asset sales protest outside Parliament. Labour, the Greens and Mana were invited but a no show. pic.twitter.com/bR4S1kLX9O

Anyone have a count for how many turned up?

The Dom Post editorial:

The Government now has the authority to sell a 49 per cent share in the power company. To those who say the public are opposed to the process, Prime Minister John Key and his ministers can offer a simple rejoinder: “We said we were going to do it before the last election; if you really didn’t like it you shouldn’t have elected us.”

It’s a difficult argument to counter and the referendum the Green Party and Labour are promoting will change nothing. Nor should it. Whatever the pros and cons of selling state assets, governments are elected to govern. If governments were only able to do things that had popular support at the time they were done, New Zealand might never have given women the vote, decriminalised homosexuality or made the wearing of seatbelts compulsory.

The referendum is an abuse of what is meant to be a law to allow citizens to petition Parliament to get a referendum. It has been hijacked by the parties that lost an election to try and over-turn the election result.