Bill Engligh writes:

Labour’s unfunded policy to remove GST from fresh fruit and vegetables would deliver only $1 a week for the average Kiwi – and much less for low income earners, Finance Minister Bill English says.

The estimated $250 million cost of the new policy would have to be paid for by extra borrowing, pushing up already fast-rising public debt. …

The $250 million annual cost of the move, divided among all New Zealanders, is worth, on average, just over $1 a week – less for low income earners and more for high income earners.

“This puts the Government’s tax switch, which will leave the average income earner $15 a week better off, into perspective,” Mr English says.

But here is the real ripper:

“It’s also worth noting that fruit and vegetable prices have actually fallen by 11 per cent since National took office, having jumped 54 per cent under Labour.”

The removal of GST will have a relatively minor impact on overall fruit and vegetable prices and affordability, compared to normal price movements.

This is a point Danyl also makes at the Dim Post:

The real flaw with the policy is that its just a gimmick. I’ve written before about how the price difference between fruit and veges at the supermarket and the farmers market down the road is several hundred percent.

I predict that if Labour ever got to implement their policy, it would have next to zero effect on the uptake of fruit and vegetables.

Bill continues:

“Labour’s policy makes no sense and smacks of political desperation,” Mr English says. “Phil Goff must explain to New Zealanders why he is removing GST from imported, out-of-season raspberries and asparagus, but not from New Zealand frozen peas, which are a nutritious part of many Kiwi meals.

“People would be able to buy GST-free potatoes, take them home and make deep-fried chips. But at the same time, healthy foods like Weetbix, low-fat milk and wholegrain bread would be subject to GST.

Distinguishing between fresh and frozen vegetables is just the start of the stupidities that this policy would lead to.

Bill English has just done a press release (not online yet):

Ministers will have extra flexibility to consider a wider range of issues – including large-scale ownership of farmland – when assessing overseas investment applications for sensitive land, Finance Minister Bill English says.

At the same time, a new ministerial directive letter to the Overseas Investment Office will provide extra clarity and certainty for potential investors about the Government’s general approach to foreign investment in sensitive assets.

“In recent months, ministers have carefully reviewed the current framework for considering overseas investment applications – particularly in light of issues with respect to farmland ownership,” Mr English says.

“Overall, the measures I’m announcing today strike an appropriate balance. They increase ministerial flexibility to consider a wide range of issues when assessing overseas investments in sensitive land, while at the same time they provide extra clarity and certainty for potential investors and the Overseas Investment Office.”

Ha. In my experience wider criteria to decline an application on, will lead to less clarity and certainty for potential investors.

But I guess it will keep the NZ First potential voters happy. I understadn the politics, but don’t like the economics.

Went to the awards night, on Friday evening, for the 2010 World of Wearable Arts.

As always, it was an execellent night out. The show was arguably more energetic than previous years, with a carnival theme for one section, and some gymnasts to keep the audience amused during breaks.

I will say that I thought the quality of the winners was not quite as high as previous years. Still very very good – but not as many designs that have that wow factor.

Photos from Stuff. The supreme award winner.

Now that would be a great outfit for a gaming convention!

The Ring Mistress.

The ever popular bizarre bra section.

I really recommend WOW as a great night out – it is not just a fashion show – the music, the sets, the dancing all combine for a great time.

The Daily Telegraph reports that a London borough is warning against mother-in-law jokes as they are “offensively sexist” and ageist.

Sigh. They should watch Southpark, if they really want to see offensive humour.

and back home, the Dom Post reports:

Islamic community leaders have written to Prime Minister John Key demanding Building Minister Maurice Williamson apologise for jokes he made about Muslims.

The Federation of Islamic Associations New Zealand sent the letter more than a week ago but has yet to receive a response. At the time Mr Key played down the jokes, saying Mr Williamson was known for his humour.

President Anwar Ghani said New Zealand Muslims were “very upset” about the intolerant remarks and were happy the federation was raising it officially.

I’ve often praised the Federation, for their moderate leadership. I think they play a constructive role in NZ society.

But on this issue, I think they are being rather too precious. Let us look at the two jokes Maurice told.

The first was a weather joke about how it was sunni in the morning, and shiite in the afternoon.  Now the joke is very lame, but it certainly can’t be offensive. It is merely a play on how two well known sub-sets of Islam sound.

The second was a joke aimed at both Kiwis and Muslims, saying Kiwis get stoned and committ adultery and Muslims commit adultery and then get stoned.

Now I well accept that many Muslims may have found that joke distasteful. But why? Because, there is a degree of truth to it. In Iran, a woman is facing death by stoning for adultery – underIslamic sharia law.

What is truly offensive is that Iran is planning to do this. Not that on the other side of the world, a joke was made about it.  Should not the anger be directed at Iran for bring Islam into disrespute by such barbaric practices?

Has the NZ Federation of Islamic Associations written to the Iranian Government urging them not to stone the woman to death? Wouldn’t that be far more productive than shooting the messenger?

There is one mildly unfortunate part of the joke – it suggests Kiwis and Muslims are two seperate groups, and of course they are not. There are many proud Kiwi Muslims. But it was a joke, not a speech. Like billboards, you can’t always be precise in a limited space, and the wording is sort of necessary for the joke.Maybe it would have been better as a joke about Australians and Iranians?

But please let us not turn our MPs into drones who are too scared to have a sense of humour.

It is good to be able to laugh at yourself. Compare these two responses to cartoons.

The response to the Danish cartoons featuring Mohammod, was death threats, violent protests, burnings etc.

Th Iranian President then decided to launch a cartoon competition about the Holocaust. He hoped it would show the West is hypocritical. But he was disappointed. Rather than try to stop his cartoon competition, scores and scores of Israeli and Jewish cartoonists entered it. A brilliant response, which totally undermined what the Iranian President tried to do.

The Dom Post reports:

Snapper can now be used to pay for fares on 700 of Wellington’s 1250 taxis, including the Wellington Combined and Hutt & City fleets.

Snapper Service’s chief executive, Miki Szikszai, said people made about 2.5 million taxi trips in the region each year, paying an average fare of $18.

The payment card, which did not require a Pin or signature, could cut the time it took to pay a taxi fare from between 30 seconds and a minute to less than 10 seconds.

“For those of us running late to meetings and to catch planes, that has got to matter.”

Mr Szikszai said the company was talking to councils and transport operators about developing a special version of Snapper for tourists who might be visiting Wellington for only a few days, in time for next year’s Rugby World Cup.

I use Snapper all the time, and find it great. Pleased to see taxis start using it. Now just need to get the trains and a few remaining bus lines use it.

What I ultimately want is an integrated public transport card.

I got sent documents over the weekend from a film industry source, detailing the outraegous behaviour of the Media Entertainment & Arts Alliance, an Australian union.

It seems Disney has already made an unofficial decision, not to shoot anymore in New Zealand, because the union unreasonable blocks immigration permits.

But what is happening with the Hobbit is even worse than that, and may lead to the shut down of much of the NZ film industry – if the Hobbit moves off shore (as reported here as likely).

This union is thought to have less than 90 members in New Zealand, and is threatening the jobs of up to 3,000 people. How do they have such power?

The International Federation of Actors (FIA), of which the vast majority of performer unions around the world are members, resolved that the time had come for performers around the world to support their colleagues in New Zealand and seek a union contract for all performers on The Hobbit.

Yes, this Australian union has arranged a global boycott of the Hobbit.

And what are they calling for?

“Resolved, that the International Federation of Actors urges each of its affiliates to adopt instructions to their members that no member of any FIA affiliate will agree to act in the theatrical film The Hobbit until such time as the producer has entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance for production in New Zealand providing for satisfactory terms and conditions for all performers employed on the productions.”

And here is the irony.It is illegal for Peter Jackson to do what they call for. Why? Under the current law, only a registered union can enter into a collective contract, and the MEAA is not a registered NZ union.

The Employment Relations Act states a NZ union, must be an incorporated society under the Incorporated Societies Act 1908. The MEAA is not. Screen Hub reports:

NZ Actors’ Equity is a trade union in NZ, an affiliate member of the Council of Trade Unions (CTU) under its MEAA name. It was struck off the Ministry of Economic Development’s (MED) Register of Incorporated Societies last week under its registered name of Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance.

So there is no legal entity to negotiate with.

The union has called a meeting tomorrow to discuss their action. It is:

Tuesday, September 28 at 7pm, at Grey Lynn Community Centre, 510 Richmond Rd, Grey Lynn

I hope lots of media attend, and ask questions about why this Australian uion has arranged a global boycott of The Hobbit, on the basis of an illegal demand.

Peter Jackson makes the point:

In a four-page statement last night, the usually media-shy Jackson said he was a “very proud and loyal member” of three Hollywood unions and “not anti-union in the slightest”.

He always honoured actors’ union conditions if they were union members, and the MEAA had a clear agenda “based on money and power”.

“I can’t see beyond the ugly spectre of an Australian bully-boy using what he perceives as his weak Kiwi cousins to gain a foothold in this country’s film industry. They want greater membership, since they get to increase their bank balance.

“I feel growing anger at the way this tiny minority is endangering a project that hundreds of people have worked on over the last two years, and the thousands about to be employed for the next four years, [and] the hundreds of millions of Warner Brothers dollars that is about to be spent in our economy.”

And some useful quotes from Screen Hub:

According to one producer Screen Hub spoke to, the Equity/MEAA approach is akin to sending out suicide bombers. If inbound production diminishes or disappears from our shores, actors will lose work along with everybody else. Given the reliance on inbound production to sustain much of the industry in terms of day-to-day employment of contractors, “We might as well pack up and go home,” said one film industry lawyer.

If this Australian union manages to kill off the NZ film industry, where do you think some of these films may end up? Australian perhaps?

Phil Goff today abandons the concept of a simple all inclusive GST. Taxation experts time after time praise our GST for its relative simplicityand fairness as it applies to everything.

The Herald reports:

A Labour-led Government would scrap GST from fresh fruit and vegetables to encourage healthy eating and help New Zealanders as higher GST on other goods is imposed.

This is an exceptionally bad move, because it is the start of a very slippery slope.

For 25 years, lobby groups have pressed National and Labour for a GST exemption for their pet cause. Up until Phil Goff, major party leaders have had enough fortitude to say no. They have said GST is about having a consumption tax – it is not a device for designating what goods are “good” or “bad”.

Once you concede that principle, you can’t say no to all the other requests. We saw this in Australia, where a Government had to exempts tampons from their GST, because of a campaign.

By saying fruit and vegetables will be exempt (as they are good and healthy), how can a Goff led Government possibly stand firm against say a campaign to reove GST off medicines? I mean, how dare the Government tax people for being sick.

Next to go will be GST off doctor’s visits.

Then my God, how dare you tax the school bus. That must become GST exempt.

But it was younger brother Ed, not the favourite David. This effectively sees the death of New Labour, as Ed Miliband is from the traditional left.

What I find interesting is that breakdown of the voting. UK Labour assigns 1/3 of the votes to the unions, 1/3 to rank and file members and 1/3 to the MPs (incl MEPs).

On the 1st round of voting amongst MPs, David got 42% to 32% for Ed. In the final round he got 53% to 47%.

Amongst rank and file members, in the 1st round David got 44% to 30% for Ed. The final round saw it 54% to 46%.

So how did Ed win? The vote of the union affiliate members.

In the first round they backed Ed 41% to 28%. And in the final round they went for him 60% to 40%.

That gave him an overall victory of 50.65% to 49.35%.

So the new Labour Party leader was not the preferred choice of his caucus, or his members. But he was the preferred choice of union members.

Have a look at the questions asked by the ODT of new ACT MP Hilary Calvert:

• Any convictions you would like to declare now?
• Any misbehaviour, non-criminal, that might come back to bite you?
• Any family members involved in criminal behaviour?
• Could you ever contemplate supporting Heather Roy?
• According to a radio report, you have a pecuniary interest in a licensed massage parlour.

I wonder if the ODT will ask Labour’s new candidate, David Clark, not only whether he has any convictions, but whether he has any family members involved in criminal behaviour, whether he has ever had any non-criminal misbehaviour, could he ever contemplate supporting David Cunliffe and then holding them as a landlord accountable for what a tenant’s profession is.

The Herald reports:

The Labour Party will take action if any of its members were found to have been involved in a possible Auckland Super City voting scam involving the Papatoetoe ward, party president Andrew Little says.

What sort of action? Promote them? Or censure them for getting caught?

The last time a Labour person was accused of corruption, the Labour leadership’s response was to defend him by saying the only thing he was guilty of was working harder for his constituents than other MPs.

So presumably if a Labour candidate is found to be behind the enrolment scam, the line will be that they are just guilty of trying to help people enrol.

The HoS reports:

The Auditor-General has been called in to investigate lucrative golden handshakes being awarded to the chief executives of seven Auckland councils which are expected to cost ratepayers millions of dollars.

The Herald on Sunday has been told council bosses from Rodney to Franklin will receive redundancy packages with a combined cost of about $2.5 million.

Unbelievable. The probability of a super city has been known for three or more years, so prudent Councils would have ensured their CEO contracts do not leave ratepayers with massive golden handshakes to fund.

Auckland City mayor John Banks has released the severance package of his chief executive David Rankin, and said there were no golden handshakes given to him by Auckland City Council. He called on other councils to do the same.

“Rankin will be paid an additional $30,000 because he has stayed on past his contractual arrangement. We didn’t want him to leave halfway through the the year.

Auckland City is the only Council to be transparent on this issue. why won’t Len Brown reveal the size of the golden handshake he agreed to with the Manukau City CEO? Is it because it is so huge? How does this fit in with his TV ads claiming he stands for transparency?

Bernard Hickey writes:

BNZ Economist Stephen Toplis compiled some figures showing New Zealand’s GDP is still 1.5 per cent below its previous peak in late 2007 and is down 4.2 per cent on a per capita basis from the peak because of the migration and natural population growth we’ve had recently.

This is the truly shocking result from the recession and the debt-fuelled growth that preceded it. Per capita GDP in New Zealand is now back at the levels it was at in the June quarter of 2004.

Think about that for a moment. The “stronger for longer” economic growth bragged about by Helen Clark and Michael Cullen from 2000 to 2008 was a fraud.

It was growth built on debt and now New Zealanders are having to consolidate and repay that debt, and doing it on lower incomes.

After the housing boom and years of spending, New Zealanders have seen their per capita GDP fall, but total debt rise $97.5 billion to $246.5 billion in the last six years.

No wonder this recovery feels more like a hangover.

And this isn’t just because of inflation or because we’ve invested heavily overseas.

Our net international investment position, which includes debt and equity owned and owed by New Zealanders here and overseas, deteriorated by $55.4 billion to a deficit of $163.7 billion.

Household debt as a percentage of disposable income rose to 154 per cent from 127.5 per cent in that six-year period.

So what was the point? Now we produce less per person than we did in 2004. And now we have to repay a much bigger debt.

It wasn’t even a wasted six years. We went backwards.

The 2010 budget should help with the re-balancing economists talk about – greater incentives to invest and save, and less of an incentive to borrow and spend.

is David Clark.

He certainly looked the most impressive, based on his CV.

Labour have pledged to make student associations compulsory again, if they win the next election.

Good.

I can just imagine the horror this will cause students, especially at campuses like Victoria, when they realise a vote for Labour means a vote for a compulsory VUWSA.

AP reports:

Iran’s hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad provoked yet another controversy on Thursday saying a majority of people in the United States and around the world believe the American Government staged the September 11 terror attacks in an attempt to assure Israel’s survival.

He’s gone from holocaust denial to 9/11 conspiracy theorist.

Now he is not the only demented person in the world, who really thinks the Holocaust was faked, along with 9/11.

But he is the only one developing nuclear weapons.

The Education & Science Select Committee has reported back on the VSM Bill.

The Education and Science Committee has examined the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill and recommends by majority that it be passed with the amendments shown.

Yay yay yay. This has been a long time coming. A very good day for freedom and choice, and a bad day for compulsion.

There are a number of changes to the bill. I am pleased to see that they have adopted my suggestion that institutions will still be required to collect fees on behalf of a student association – on a voluntary basis. It would have been impractical for an association to try and solicit memberships itself. This should allow student associations that have a modest fee and provides good services, to still persuade people to join.

The implementation date has changed to be 1 January 2012 – also a change I supported. This give institutions time to modify their enrolment processes and software, and gives associations time to prepare.

My offer at the select committee to work with NZUSA to get a culture and systems change within student associations, so they can maximise membership stands.  I have a number of ideas about how associations, and also student media, can attract income, even without compulsory fees.

Congrats to Heather Roy and Roger Douglas for getting select committee agreement.

There may be some fish hooks in the detailed provisions. If so, I’ll blog some possible changes to be considered at Committee of the Whole stage.

The ODT reports:

Labour Party members in the Dunedin North electorate have a rare chance on Saturday to select a new candidate to represent them at the general election next year.

Well, the members don’t get to select the candidate. They get two votes out of seven – and even then only if not outvoted by “affiliate members” who get trucked in by the bus load.

The union movement has targeted both Dunedin North and Manurewa as seats it wants a unionist to win, to increase the proportion of unionists in the Labour caucus. Phil Goff may not last long after 2011 – even if he wins!

Three candidates have put themselves forward to replace Mr Hodgson – current electorate committee chairman David Clark (37), former electorate chairman Simon Wilson (25) and uinionist New Zealand Nurses Organisation national adviser Glenda Alexander (55).

David Clark has a campaign website. He is Warden of Selwyn College (2rd best after Carrington and Knox). He has been an EMPU member since 2006. On the basis of his CV, looks quite good.

Glenda Alexander also has a campaign website. She has been a professional unionist for the last 20 years.

Simon Wilson is a former President of the compulsory Otago University Students’ Association.

So all three have a union background to some degree – but Alexander by far the most.

It will be interesting to see who wins – they will inevitable become an MP at the next election.

Hat Tip: Homepaddock

Wonders never cease. North Shore Mayor Andrew Williams has complained to the Police because he does not like what Cameron Slater says at public meetings. He has also asked the Returning Officer to remove Slater from the ballot, because it seems Cameron is mean to the poor Mayor.

Williams said Slater’s whole campaign was a form of the “stalking” he had endured for over a year.

“He stands up at a meeting and says ‘I will not urinate on a tree, I will not use a credit card in a Takapuna bar, I will not send drunken texts’.”

What makes the Mayor think they are references to him?

“What he has put in his candidate profile is harassment. His whole campaign is focussed on attacking me.”

Yes it is. Labour’s entire 2008 campaign was focussed on attacking John Key. But I don’t think John Key tried to get Helen Clark arrested or struck off the ballot.

Wiliams urged the electoral officer to strike off Slater as a candidate.

Nice to have a Mayor with such a fine regard for elections.

Police confirmed they had received a complaint against Slater but had undertaken not to make comment to the media.

Here are some good question to ask the Police.

1. How many times in the last month has Mayor Williams e-mailed the Police District Commander urging him to arrest Slater?
2. How many of these e-mails were sent after midnight?
3. How many micro-seconds did the Police spend deciding what to do?

I am a big fan of Sir Roger’s policies. I regard him as the second best finance minister New Zealand has had.

So it is with trepidation, I scrutinise the figures he uses in his brochure below.

I’ll even leave alone the wisdom of claiming a specific level of economic growth, on the basis of proposed policies. All I’ll say is if you are that good at predicting economic growth, you could make a lot of money on iPredict!

The figure I am interested in is the claim “The Tasman Wage Gap has already grown 29% under Key’s management”.

In September 2008, the gross average weekly earnings in NZ were at 85% of Australia’s. So you see a claim of the gap growing 29% and you think, hell we must now be 56% of Australia.

In fact the latest data has us 82.8% of Australia. Yes a decline of 2.2%, but not quite such a scary one is it.

Before I get to how Sir Roger got his 29% (a classic example of correct yet misleading), I’ll also point out that Sir Roger is only comparing before tax wage rates. As a proponent of lower taxes, I am surprised he does not compare after tax wages – because they would show that in face NZ has closed the gap.

But how did Sir Roger get his 29%? Well, I’m not sure. My best guess is he is referring to the relative change (as opposed to the absolute change). But even then it does not quite add up. The nominal gap in Sep 2008 was $133.70 and in Jun 2010 was $169.34 and the relative change is 26.6%.

But I regard talking about a relative change as a percentage is quite misleading. It may be technically accurate, but it is deceptive. Let me give two examples:

• Party A goes in the polls from 5% to 6% and they claim they have climbed 20% in the polls.
• The gap between A and B is 2% in 2008 and 3% in 2010 – you claim the gap has grown 50%. instead of claiming it has grown 1%.

If you look at the position of the arrows it clearly gives an impression of a massive increase in the gap – not a 2.2% change.

The pamphlet would be more defensible if it said that NZ has gone from 85% to 82.8% of Australia.

And the arrows should show both going up – NZ by 7.1% and Australia by 10.0%. Not one going down massively, and one going up massively.

Now I may have interpreted Sir Roger’s calculations incorrectly. I would be happy to have provided how he calculated the 29% – but I am pretty sure is is talking about relative change, rather than absolute change.

National should abolish DHB elections. They are a farce.

I just saw on Backbenches an MP admit they could not name a single candidate for the DHB. Most NZers woud be the same.

Elections required informed voting, and there just simply isn’t enough coverage of DHBs to inform NZers. People win purely on name recognition, or because they are a doctor, or they write a nice 200 word blurb.

I’m about as politically aware as anyone, and my DHB votes will be based on extremely flimsy grounds.

I think it is important to have community representation, but would do it via indirect elections.

In each DHB area, have an electoral college consisting of the local Mayors and Deputy Mayors. People can apply to them to be a community representative, they can get interviewed by the electoral college, and then choices are made.

NewstalkZB report:

MP Chris Carter evaded reporters camped outside his Parliamentary office yesterday in an unusual fashion, allegedly climbing out his office window

MP Chris Carter may have gone to unusual lengths to evade the media at Parliament yesterday.

Reporters spent most of yesterday camped outside his Parliamentary office seeking comment over his plans after he returned to work following two months sick leave.

Somehow and despite his office having only one door, Mr Carter managed to elude reporters and leave Parliament unseen.

Parliamentary sources say he climbed out his office window and found an alternative exit.

I wonder if he had a rope ladder also?