National released the RMA policy yesterday. The key aspect is a six month deadline for local authorities to consent medium-sized developments. This will be welcome by anyone whose had to waits years to get a yes or no to a development.

The policy will not change the criteria on which local authorities decide. It will just penalise them (by rebating the consent fee) if they do not decide in time. This is a win-win, as if the answer is a no, it is better to find that out earlier, and if it is a yes, then you can proceed.

Already late consents have fallen from 31% of all non-notified consents under Labour to 5% today.

Today’s science announcement is also a good one, in my opinion:

The Government will boost investment in the science sector to transform Industrial Research Limited (IRL) into an advanced technology institute, which will function as the ‘high-tech HQ’ for New Zealand, Prime Minister John Key announced today. …

“Over the next five years, we will effectively double the size and capability of IRL, transforming it into an advanced technology institute with up to 700 staff and with a far greater reach than at present.”

The institute will have a strong business-focused culture, will have a nation-wide remit and will be close to where the country’s high-tech businesses are located. The institute will have facilities in Auckland and Christchurch, and will retain the existing Gracefield facility in Lower Hutt.

Two useful posts by Whale on a couple of polls.

First he comments on the Horizon poll that the Maori Party is encouraging their activists to sign up for the poll. It is quite possible they are not the only minor party to be doing so. This is one of the weaknesses in allowing people to sign up for a poll.

It can make a lot of sense for a minor party to do this. If the poll is of 1,000 people, then just 10 activists can get you an extra 1% if they are all selected for the poll. This is why it is desirable to have a huge sample size for your online panel (YouGov in the UK have hundreds of thousands), so you can minimise impacts like this.

Whale also comments on the poll done that alleges Colin Craig is leading in Rodney. I had been critical of this reported poll also as the report published by the Conservatives does not include the actual question asked. Anyway, Whale reveals that the director of the firm which did the polling is a candidate for the Conservatives. This should have been revealed at the time, in my opinion.

This does not mean that the poll results are or are not valid. As I said, validity is based on knowing the question asked and the methodology. You can poll for an organisation you are involved with. For example, Curia does an annual poll for the Republican Movement on whether people want NZ to become a republic when the Queen dies. Now I am on the Council of the Movement, but this doesn’t influence the results. The key thing is I have publicly disclosed my involvement. Incidentally we found this year a quite large drop in support for becoming a republic – I suspect a consequence of the royal wedding. So poll results are not always pleasing to the client.

I think it is safe to say that Gordon Campbell is not a right wing commentator or a former staffer for Jenny Shipley. He may of course be a member of the VRWNLLWC, but isn’t everyone. Here’s his opening lines today:

Any points Phil Goff may have won in the television debate a few days ago went west during last night’s public debate in Christchurch – which, as Vernon Small says, had turned into something close to a rout by night’s end.

The centre-left can feel justifiably furious at Goff and his minders for going into this debate without a narrative (much less a credible defence) for Labour’s election costings. Sorry, but “We’ll have them for you by the end of the week” doesn’t really cut it.

The problem with Labour is their tax cuts for everyone policy. It will require borrowing for the next six to seven years unless they cut spending elsewhere to pay for it.

Did you know under Labour’s tax policy, 40 out of the 43 Labour MPs will get an income tax cut? Yes, seriously. They are promising to borrow money for tax cuts. And this is based on their own costings.

My prediction on how Labour will suddenly balance their books? Look for them to find a way to get businesses to pay for it. For example, with some tweaking you can make money out of the ETS, so that businesses and hence consumers will pay for Labour’s tax cuts and spending promises.

The other way they might try and make their books balance is to assign their spending promises to the “future contingency” allowances in the Budget. Now this is legitimate to do to a point. But it loses credibility if you assign too high a proportion of the contingency allowance in advance, as that is saying there will be no room for any other spending in the next x years, such as public sector payrises.

I blog at Stuff on the October polls, showing the gap which had been widening for six months has started to turn. I comment:

If Parliament is 122 seats again, then a government needs 62 seats to govern. That blue line is at 69 seats. If it drops to below 62, then you will have a hung Parliament. A drop of eight seats is a drop of around 6.5 per cent, so that is effectively the target for the left – to have National drop 6.5 per cent in the last 23 days. Not impossible at all, but easier said than done.

For Labour to be able to form a government in its own right without needing the Maori Party, it needs to gain 12 seats, or around 10 per cent in 23 days. That seems less likely.

If the Maori Party does look as though it will hold the balance of power, could this affect the MMP referendum? Do you think having the Maori Party decide the government would be a fair result?

The issue is how much will National drop in these next 23 days. Here’s the last two months in 2008:

Sep 2008 – 50.6% N and 35.4% L = 15.2% gap
Oct 2008 – 47.5% N and 35.3% L = 12.3% gap
Result – 44.9% N and 34.0% L = 10.9% gap

Labour need the gap to close by 13% from 23.6% to around 10%, assuming all else stays constant (Greens at 10%, no NZF etc).

I got sent this by e-mail, and amused me enough to share:

These four older ladies who lived in Yugoslavia, always sat outside together near the church and chatted about when they were younger.

One month ago, they pooled their money and bought a laptop.

Never having been there, but having heard about Florida, they happened to click on St Augustine, FL. They read about the “Fountain of Youth”, as claimed by the Spaniards when they arrived.

They collected up all the money they had left and sent for four bottles of the miracle water.

As soon as it arrived, they drank as directed.

The rest of this story will make you a believer, because here they are today…

No!! …This is TRUE, really!! Would we lie to you?

We have a limited supply of this miracle water available at the incredibly low low price of just $1,999.95 per bottle, plus G.S.T.

HURRY BEFORE STOCKS RUN OUT !!

Make cheques payable to:

New Zealand Labor Party
160 Willis Street
Wellington

I didn’t watch it, but saw John Pagani tweet:

Huge win for Goff tonight at the Press debate. One sided – he absolutely smashed it.

Sadly for John, he seems to be a minority of one. Fairfax’s Vernon Small who actually attended the debate wrote:

Who won?

On first and final impressions from someone typing madly in the front row?

Key had the audience eating out of his hand – a showman in top form.

A clear victory for the PM.

I presume Trevor Mallard won’t attack Vernon as a tool of the vast right wing conspiracy.

John Hartevelt tweeted:

A clear win to Key tonight. Proud that The Press hosted such a great debate.

Many people said the format was much better.

ZB’s Felix Marwick:

Calling tonight’s debate for Key. Goff undercut himself by not definitively answering the $ question

And the Herald’s Claire Trevett:

What a jolly Press debate that was. Both entertaining – Goff stood ground till Key Jerry McGuired him, good and hard.

I am deeply disturbed by Claire’s choice of metaphor.

Vernon Small goes further today:

If the first TVNZ debate was a narrow-points victory to Phil Goff, last night’s Press debate was not far short of a rout by John Key.

The next time John Pagani calls something a huge crushing win for Goff or Labour, I’m going to buy National win shares on iPredict!

Funnily enough when judging a debate, I tend to be harder on those whose arguments I agree with. The reason why is because I know thee arguments so well for “the right”, that I’m always thinking (or yelling at the screen) “You should have said this …..”

UPDATE: Danyl at Dim-Post notes:

Goff couldn’t respond. He couldn’t account for the $14 billion shortfall. Instead he prevaricated. He talked about asset sales. He talked about tax evasion. Key continued to press him, and Goff insisted we’d get a spreadsheet ‘soon’, which explained everything. Then he spent the final quarter of the debate insisting that he’d already explained where the money was coming from, while Key and the audience simply laughed at him.

It was a humiliating defeat. And totally unnecessary. Three-and-a-half weeks from the election and Labour’s leader can’t produce a credible budget.

I suspect we will see Labour’s costed budget later today or tomorrow. I also predict it will miraculously balance and show no extra borrowing needed. What will matter is whether Labour’s figures hold up to scrutny. Anyone can make a budget balance by just fiddling with assumptions, such as saying “Our policies are good for the economy, so we predict economic growth will be 05% higher which means this much more tax revenue”.

Stuff reports:

Tauranga businesses will receive compensation from the Government, if they can prove that their company has been affected by the Rena grounding.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett announced today that small businesses would receive some support.

“This Rena Support Subsidy will give the worst-affected businesses, which rely on the sea and coastline, a hand to keep paying their staff,” she said.

The business must operate within or near the maritime exclusion zone to be eligible.

They would need to show that they have already used any insurance cover and were unable to relocate their operation.

“From Monday, businesses that meet these criteria and have no other way to pay their staff can apply for the six week support package,” Bennett said.

The package included a $500 subsidy for full-time staff and $300 for part time staff. It was only available for sole traders and small businesses with fewer than 20 employees.

Sounds very reasonable.

Katie Chapman at Stuff reports:

National MP Michael Woodhouse could be fined up to $40,000 after he allegedly broke election campaign rules.

The party’s campaign manager Jo de Joux confirmed Woodhouse, who is the Dunedin MP, was being dealt with by police after a complaint was received regarding two advertisements that did not carry promoter statements.

Everything a candidate puts out should pretty much have an authorisation statement. Could be an expensive lesson. The likely fine, if changed and found guilty, is a few hundred dollars.

The Electoral Commission has them here.

Party Names and List Sizes are:

• ACT 55
• Alliance 14
• ALCP 28
• Conservative 30
• Democrats 24
• Greens 61
• Labour 65
• Libertarianz 27
• Mana 20
• Maori 17
• National 65 (in fact is 74 or 75 I think, but only top 65 get listed)
• NZ First (33)
• United Future 17

The Herald notes:

Thirteen political parties and 544 individual candidates will contest the November 26 election. …

While there were 19 parties in 2008, only thirteen have registered this year. …

The nominations also showed a drop in the number of individual candidates, with 544 this year compared with 682 in 2008.

There are 91 list-only candidates, 73 electorate-only, and 380 standing for both. Thirty candidates are standing as independents or representing unregistered parties.

The most sought after seat is Wellington Central, currently held by Labour’s Grant Robertson, which 12 candidates, including Mr Robertson, will compete for.

The number of men competing for a place in Parliament is more than double the number of women, with 397 compared with 147 women registered.

The Herald reports (from AFP):

Women are closing the gender gap on men in health and education but still cannot get a firm foot in the political and business doors, an international study says.

And the situation hasn’t got better for New Zealand women.

Nowhere at all in this highly negative article do they mention that NZ is ranked 6th top in the world and top in the Asia/Pacific region. But it gets worse than that.

Women hold less than 20 per cent of key national positions, said the World Economic Forum in its Global Gender review of 135 nations.

This is referring to the average for all 135 countries. But if you look at the article, many would read that as referring to NZ, and in fact we are double the average.

Less than 20 per cent of ministers and national MPs are women, said the report.

Again not entirely clear that this relates to the world average, rather than NZ. NZ is 29% for Ministers and 34% for MPs.

The report is here for those interested. We are 8th/135 for political empowerment.

In the not too distant future I hope to blog about STV and show off how it may have worked in 2008. Part of this involves dividing NZ into 25 “multi-member” electorates by combining existing electorates together. We then project what the results in each electorate would have been.

What would be great, if if someone with better skills than me could do maps of NZ, Auckland, Christchurch and Wellington showing the boundaries for the STV electorates, based on which electorates are combined together.

If this is something you can do quite easily, then please e-mail me. You’ll be helping increase the awareness of Kiwis about the electoral system referendum, so less likely to spend centuries in purgatory 🙂

Enjoy!

The Herald reports:

At last year’s local body elections, he promoted Manukau’s policy of a fixed charge for wastewater, saying adopting the Auckland City system of user pays would lead to increases of $1000 a year for some households.

Mr Brown has not modelled Manukau’s wastewater system of a fixed charge for households and a fixed plus metered charge for business.

Instead, he is proposing part-fixed and part-metered charges for households and businesses.

Yesterday, Mr Brown said he believed during the election campaign that the fixed charge was the fairer way to go, but now as mayor for all of Auckland it had become evident to him that a part-fixed, part-user charge was the fairest system.

To be consistent, I now expect Phil Goff to denounce Len Brown as a liar.

Chris Finlayson announced:

Arts, Culture and Heritage Minister Chris Finlayson today announced the establishment of a 76 hectare reserve for the people of Wellington and New Zealand on the iconic Miramar Peninsula.

The new reserve area, known as Watts Peninsula, is a prominent Wellington landmark at the northern tip of the Miramar Peninsula and a historically significant part of New Zealand. …

The land is currently owned by the Defence Force and is home to a number of historic military gun emplacements, pa sites and former ammunition magazines.

Work is under way to develop the land as a public reserve.

Reserve status will retain the land in public ownership and also ensure the area receives full heritage protection, Mr Finlayson said.

In addition it will enable the preservation of indigenous flora and fauna, such as native orchids, skinks and little blue penguins.

This is a great decision. I am probably one of the most frequent visitors to Watts Peninsula. Used to camp next to it, and have spent many a day exploring it.

The area has a lot of historic gun and battery emplacements. Most of them are in the open, but there are some hidden ones also. In the pine forest, there is one old battery which is very hard to locate. The entrance is a fairly narrow steep hole in a bank, but then it opens up to various rooms and tunnels down below. I’ve even slept overnight in it.

This area is above and near the Massey Memorial. It provides some of the best views of Wellington Harbour. I’m really pleased to see it made into a reserve. It is one of our better hidden secrets, and it will be cool if more people over time get to enjoy it.

Local Government Online had a nifty portal last year for the local body elections. Well they have used that template to do the same for the general election – at vote.co.nz.

They list the candidates for every electorate, plus all the parties and their lists. Parties and candidates can upload material to it, and you can ask questions to the candidates.

I found their sister site for local body elections really useful, and this one should be a great resource also.

There are three documents. The release, the speech and the Q&A. Key points:

• A new jobseeker support benefit to replace the dole, sickness benefit, widows, women alone and DPB (if children over 14)
• part-time work expectation for sole parents with children over 5 years
• full-time work expectation for sole parents with children over 14 years
• Sole Parent Support to replace DPB
• new Supported Living Payment to replace Invalid’s Benefit and DPB care of sick and infirm
• A sole parent who has another child while on a benefit will be exempt for one year, in line with parental leave, before work obligations resume
• Aim is to move 46,000 off welfare
• Cost of $130m over four years
• Estimated savings from welfare reduction – $1b over four years

This is a huge shake up. It is an end to being on the DPB meaning no need to look for work for decades, but the changes go well beyond that.

Currently 1 in 12 people of working age are on welfare. Over half have spent greater than five years on welfare.

The sickness benefit changes are also significant. If you get sick or injured, then you get a temporary exemption from job seeking obligations. But you don’t just get left on the sickness benefit for years as a de facto invalids benefit.

The Invalids Benefit basically does not change, apart from the name (which is a sensible change as the name is demeaning, as the criteria includes those terminally ill etc).

The cost of the policy at $130m is a lot, but a worthwhile investment. This will mainly be costs of helping get people into work with assistance for childcare, training, workplace support etc.

There’s also a nice incentive for those who return to work before they have to (for sole parents). If they do, then they’ll carry on getting the benefit for a number of weeks (declining at $100 a week).

I saw last night on Twitter, several attacks on Massey University’s Claire Robinson. Trevor Mallard and Deborah Mahuta-Coyle had a go at her, presumably because she was critical of Phil Goff’s performance.

Claire blogs a summary of what was said:

During last night’s TV One debate, Richard Pamatatau, whose decribes himself as “Programme Leader Graduate Diploma Pacific Journalism. Auckland University of Technology” tweeted “Claire Robinson was a private secretary to Jenny Shipley – hmmmm”. This was retweeted many times, and a lot of abuse was subsequently directed at me.

 It was felt that the fact that I worked as a Cabinet Minister’s Private Secretary 20 years ago should (a) be a disqualifier for being a political commentator — Trevor Mallard tweeted “if this is true than expect TVNZ resignation”; (b), that it meant that I couldn’t provide objective commentary  — Glenn Williams “Wammo” called me a  “ boil on the political commentary landscape “and (c) that I must be a National plant. Deborah Mahuta-Coyle tweeted “just take your national party rosette out of your pocket and slap it on your forehead.” Even TV3 reported hearsay as “fact” on their website this morning that I had once been a press secretary for Jenny Shipley.

Now I was puzzled by this because I did work for Jenny Shipley when she was Prime Minister. And I don’t recall any Claire Robinson. It turns out they were referring back to 1991, when Claire was the Women’s Affairs Private Secretary to Shipley, who was then the Minister.

The moment I read that, I realised how nasty they were being, because a portfolio private secretary is not a political role. In fact normally they are bureaucrats, seconded from departments. I didn’t know for sure whether Claire was a secondee or not, but here’s what she says:

In 1991 I worked as the Women’s Affairs Private Secretary in Jenny Shipley’s Office. I was a departmental official on secondment from the Ministry of Women’s Affairs. I was appointed by Dr Judith Aitken, the then Secretary of Women’s Affairs.

This is Erin Leigh all over again. Robinson has never ever worked for National, or in a political role. Seconded bureaucrats do not necessarily share the political views of their Ministers.  Isn’t Labour meant to be the party that defends public servants? yeah, right.

Claire’s crime was to give an honest opinion on the debate. Because she dared to criticise Phil Goff, Mallard and lackeys jump in and stick the boot in. And her Massey website states she was a private secretary, so Mallard knew that she wasn’t a political advisor.

And here’s the really interesting part:

I voted Labour in the 1990 general election, just prior to taking up my role. I voted Labour in the 1993 general election, after I had left the role.

Erin Leigh was a Labour voter also.

Tweeters from the left may not like some of the things I say, but I speak not from any political bias, but from 12 years of studying and understanding what works and what doesn’t in political communication. I have been equally critical of National in the past when it has missed crucial communication opportunities.

Criticising other parties is okay. It’s when you criticise the nasty party you become a target.

Over at Stuff, I note party lists are due in today at midday, and look at all the minor parties I think will be contesting. They are:

• ACT
• Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party
• Conservative Party of New Zealand
• Libertarianz
• Mana
• Maori Party
• New Zealand First Party
• The Alliance
• The Greens
• The New Zealand Democratic Party for Social Credit
• United Future New Zealand

I give a paragraph on each and what I think would be a good and a poor result for them

Labour have announced:

Kiwis will be asked to help shape a new, non-commercial, modern public broadcaster to be established under a Labour Government.

Labour said it would bring together elements of non-commercial public broadcasting that already exist, including the statutorily independent functions of TVNZ7 and Radio NZ, to both strengthen and broaden them in the digital environment.

The new broadcaster, which may also include a nationwide news service, will be based on the outcomes of a nationwide public debate, to be completed within one year of Labour winning office.

This is not so much a policy, as a concept. No details, and no costings.

I actually do support the concept of a unified public broadcaster, if it can be funded from existing budgets. I blogged in September how the current spend is $233 million a year.

But Labour are talking of having Radio NZ retain its own seperate board and structure. Hello, you can’t have a unified national broadcaster without a full merging of television and radio together. BBC Radio does not have its own board separate from the BBC.

After full public discussion, Labour will have a clear view of how to proceed and will implement the new model.

This sounds like they just had this idea at the last minute. A decent policy would at a minimum have a budget and set out two or three distinct models for consultation.

There has been an ongoing debate in New Zealand for some time around volume and consistency between featured programmes and commercials on TV, where there are concerns that the audio of television commercials are broadcast at louder sound volumes than the television programme
material they accompany.

You are kidding me? Labour thinks the Government should intervene over the the audio level of advertisements?

Can they also do something about the static on the radio?

Just heard that Winston Peters has chickened out of standing in an electorate, and will be List only.

Now political parties are obliged to follow their own rules, and file the most recent copy with the Electoral Commission. So let’s look at those rules at the Electoral Commission.

Rule 46(b) is explicit:

A List candidate must first be selected as an Electorate candidate

So NZ First seems to have the same regard for their constitution, as Winston does for the truth.

UPDATE: Winston told Q+A in July that the party had changed the rules to exempt the Leader and Deputy. The trouble is they have not filed those new rules with the Electoral Commission, if they have changed.

UPDATE2: Oh my God Andrew Williams is No 3 on their party list. Need I comment.