General Debate 10 November 2022

12 candidates for Hamilton West

The Electoral Commission has received 12 nominations for the Hamilton West by-election.

The Greens are not standing, and ACT is, which helps Labour in their efforts to retain the seat.

There are quite a few candidates from parties on the right or anti-government. And even if they only get 1% each, that may make a difference. You have:

  • National
  • ACT
  • New Conservative
  • NZ Outdoors and Freedom
  • Vision NZ

There are no real left parties standing except maybe ALCP.

TOP are standing, and may take votes off both sides.

And of course Dr Sharma is standing again. Will he attract people who voted for Labour last time, or will he split the anti-Labour vote?

DeSantis wins huge

Most people were expecting Ron DeSantis to be re-elected Governor of Florida, but not by a massiv2 20% margin. Florida is (or was) a swing purple state.

In 2018, DeSantis won by 0.4%. In 2014 it was a 1.0% margin. In 2010 just 1.2%.

DeSantis won all but five of the 60+ counties. He won in rural areas by 39%, in suburbs by 17% and in cities by 11%,

He won with men by 27% but also won women by 5%.

But what makes him so attractive to the GOP as a whole is he won Latinos by 15% – 67% to 42%. And he won with both Latino men (14%) and Latino women (17%). This wasn’t just Cuban Americans. He won Puerto Ricans in Florida by 11%.

He did narrowly lose with under 40s, but his margin with over 50s was 25% or so.

And finally he won college educated voters by 9% and non college educated by 20%.

The GOP would be nuts not to select him as their presidential candidate in 2024.

Changes to Tax Rates or Thresholds

This post is by PaulL, a regular commentor and occasional contributor. It is the twelfth post in a series on the financial incentives to work and the impacts of our tax and transfer system on household formation, and the fifth post on the “what could we do” subsection. The index to all posts in the series can be found here.

If a tax free threshold isn’t a solution to incentives to work, are there changes to tax rates and thresholds that could improve incentives? The two biggest contributors to the effective marginal tax rate for those coming off a benefit are the benefit abatement itself, and the tax rate that they’re on. Today we look at the tax rates and thresholds.

For our sole parent with two children, their taxable income is in the $18K to $52K range (from 0 hours of work to 40 hours of work). The tax brackets we’d look at are therefore the 17.5% rate and the 30% rate. The thresholds for these are due for inflation indexation, which would change the picture a little.

Continue reading »

Live blog for 2022 US mid-terms

Judith’s tech summit

Judith Collins has been doing a great job in her role as Spokesperson for Innovation, Technology and Artificial Intelligence. Almost every day she is meeting and championing various companies active in this space, and this Friday she is hosting a tech summit whose purpose is to look at how to create a policy environment where successful companies can scale up and what the challenges and opportunities are.

I understand the venue is already at capacity but those interested can follow a livestream here.

The summit is in Parnell on Friday 11 November from 1200 to 1715. They have some amazing panelists from the Agritech, Fintech and AI sectors. It’s a great example of how to be an effective opposition spokesperson – bringing stakeholders together like this.

Guest Post: Playing the man not the ball clouds truth of black-market tobacco

A guest post by John Mitchell:

Reading the most recent piece by Otago University’s Nick Wilson and Richard Edwards reminds of how Socrates wrote “when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.”

They claim the industry-commissioned (KPMG) studies that estimate New Zealand’s illegal tobacco trade at 11.5% of total consumption are exaggerated and discredited.  

Such claims, while good for a headline, are quite frankly mischievous and rely on ad-hominem arguments.  The KPMG studies haven’t been discredited.  Nor do they claim to be the sole arbiter of truth on the matter.  What they do provide is some useful longitudinal information, using consistent methodology, on an issue that isn’t all that well understood in New Zealand.

Over successive years, the report shows the illicit tobacco trade is growing.

It is not a perfect measure. As Customs NZ recently told the New Zealand Herald, the illegal tobacco trade is, by nature, very difficult to quantify.  But it is some of the best data available to New Zealand right now.  

In fact, the cited Otago University study’s number for imported illegal cigarettes via litter pack surveys (5.4%) is not far off the figure found from the same surveys in the KPMG reports (6.3%).

What the Otago study excludes, as Professors Wilson and Edwards correctly note, is sales of roll-your-own, homegrown tobacco. 

They claim this would be very modest but offer no empirical basis for that claim.  Their papers also doesn’t include illegal imported roll-your-own tobacco, which the KPMG report shows is growing over time particularly from Pasificka nations.

The latest information from the KPMG reports is that 5.6% of smokers reported using both types of illegal roll-your-own tobacco.  This is the highest level we have measured since we started these surveys.

Ultimately this isn’t a question about data, it’s about the evidential basis for making the claims Otago University has.

Claims must be challenged on the evidence they stand on and stand up to scientific scrutiny.  Peer-review is a very established way to test hypothesis and methodology and, when needed, correct claims. 

Most recently, Professor Wilson and his colleagues had their own 2021 study on vaping peer-reviewed after it claimed users were exposed to 30% of the toxins from smoking combustible tobacco.  The claim was wildly at odds with international scientific consensus.   Peer-review of this study found vaper participants included current smokers, methodology which contaminated the results.

Imperial have a vested interest to prevent growth in the illegal tobacco market and for proper enforcement actions to punish those that profit from it.  It is also in New Zealand’s interest to avoid the problems a black market brings and keep New Zealand smokers operating inside a legal, regulated system for tobacco control.

That is why we commission the research from KPMG to determine the size of the illegal tobacco in countries like Australia, the European Union and New Zealand. 

The KPMG report over many years should give cause for concern.  The growing illegal tobacco trade in New Zealand is not about a few packs of cigarettes in the bottom of a suitcase.  It is large scale with increasingly sophisticated sales and distribution networks.   

New Zealand Customs acknowledge there’s complexity behind importation by criminals who have honed their skills on harder drugs.  Customs has been doing an excellent job with the limited resources it has.  It has made notable seizures at the border in the past 12 months, but acknowledge the trade is growing and getting harder to control.

So what can New Zealand do?

First, we need to acknowledge the problem exists and that it is worthwhile solving.  It requires recognition that an unfortunate downside of well-intentioned tobacco control policy has been the creation of a black market for tobacco.

And just like policies and laws for drugs, an effective policy response must deal both with both demand and enforcement. 

Demand is important as Parliament considers the Government’s Smokefree Environments (and Regulated Products) Bill.  In what amounts to de facto prohibition of tobacco, we have cautioned MPs about the likely growth in demand as smokers seek out more easily available illegal tobacco.

No one can accurately predict how much this could grow by.  What we do have is close to a centuries’ worth of scientific studies on the behaviour of addicts from forced withdrawal.  As ASH NZ have told MPs, the market will always find the consumer. Common sense tells us demand for illegal tobacco will increase.

The other side of the equation is tougher sentencing and enhanced surveillance and enforcement.

In New Zealand illegal tobacco is a high yield, low-risk enterprise for criminals.  Customs NZ have said in news media interviews that they have anecdotal information that profit margins from tobacco are eight times that of cocaine.  The maximum punishment in New Zealand for importation of illicit tobacco is 5 years imprisonment.  In contrast, supply and manufacture of Class A drugs is punishable with a maximum life sentence.

New Zealand could learn from Australia.  In 2018, they expanded enforcement and increased criminal penalties for all activity relating to the sale and supply of illicit tobacco.  Since then, by treating illicit tobacco trade as a law-and-order matter, Australia have substantially curbed the flow of profits to organised crime syndicates.

Despite this, the illegal trade has continued to grow exponentially.  Senior Australian Border Force figures describe the illegal tobacco trade as close to uncontrollable and that the Federal government was too late to act. 

To their credit, the New Zealand Government is acknowledging there is a problem and has started to dedicate resources into combatting the illicit trade.  The worry is that it is likely too little.  

It would be a mistake to assume New Zealand is different from Australia.  New Zealand can avoid the same problems if it commits resources to combat the illicit tobacco trade now.

John Mitchell is the Corporate and Legal Affairs Manager for Imperial Tobacco

General Debate 09 November 2022

Labour says blame us for inflation

By reappointing Adrian Orr as Reserve Bank Governor, Labour have done the political equivalent of hanging a “kick me” sign on their backside.

When voters can’t afford to fill up their car, when their weekly groceries costs $40 more etc they want someone to blame. Most voters are smart enough to know you can’t blame it all on Putin.

By reappointing Orr, on whose watch inflation smashed through the 3% limit he is contracted to keep it under, the Government is telling voters that they think he has done a great job, and they want more of the same.

So voters will no longer blame the Reserve Bank for high inflation, they will blame the Government that effectively said they think it has done a great job.

Huge own-goal.

Tax Free Threshold

This post is by PaulL, a regular commentor and occasional contributor. It is the eleventh post in a series on the financial incentives to work and the impacts of our tax and transfer system on household formation, and the fourth post on the “what could we do” subsection. The index to all posts in the series can be found here.

Apologies for the delay in this one, real life things intervened. Since I last posted it seems that the Ardern government has been reading Kiwiblog, and has provided some tax and transfer changes relating to child care. Knowing that they are avid readers and are taking my advice (albeit only partially) it is probably time to move on to the next set.

Twitter is currently full of discussion about tax free thresholds, and TOP have announced a tax-free threshold as part of their policy set. Prior to commencing the analysis for this series I was reasonably in favour of a tax free threshold.

A tax free threshold provides everyone in the country with income higher than that threshold with a tax cut. It provides the same amount of tax cut for everyone. As a method of delivering a tax cut it is politically attractive because it isn’t vulnerable to the accusation that it’s a tax cut for the rich.

As a method of addressing incentives to work it’s very poor. It doesn’t change marginal rates for anyone who earns more than the threshold. Any affordable change would have a threshold in the $10K – $15K range, anyone in receipt of the main benefit has total income of $18K or more, and therefore their incentives won’t change.

Continue reading »

Hooton on Labour’s biggest bungle?

Matthew Hooton writes:

The Ardern regime’s inability to deliver has become a national joke, with KiwiBuild the punchline.

But the endless failures, especially in sensitive areas of social policy, including mental health, have real-world consequences.

As Newshub’s Imogen Wells revealed this week, just short of a year ago no less than Ardern herself launched a National Strategy and Action Plan to Eliminate Family and Sexual Violence. “As Prime Minister, I take responsibility of lifting the wellbeing of our tamariki and their whānau,” Ardern told the assembled social workers, policy analysts, dignitaries and media called to Te Papa’s Rongomaraeroa for the historic event.

In support of the new strategy, the Government announced a $20 million fund to support victims of non-fatal strangulation. It was meant to fund 870 expert medical witnesses to help the Crown prosecute or secure early guilty pleas from sexual offenders.

In fact, it has been used in only 86 cases. Worse, more than half of those experts ended up being hired by defence lawyers to support not victims, but alleged offenders.

It is difficult to comprehend that any government could be so incompetent as to announce plans to help 870 victims of sexual crime and instead end up helping alleged perpetrators.

Of their many many failures, this could be the worse. They announce $20 million to help victims of strangulation and in fact most of the help goes to the alleged stranglers!!!!

When asked about the debacle at an event promoting their hate speech legislation, the Prime Minister said that neither she nor former Justice Minister Andrew Little was responsible.

It seems the Prime Minister only regards herself as responsible for Government programmes when launching them before the TV cameras, not for whether they happen or, in this case, don’t.

Precisely.

Another contributing factor is presumably that no one in the Beehive kept the pressure on the bureaucrats with weekly meetings to discuss progress, the way a Joyce, Cullen, Birch or Hipkins might have.

Yep, a strong Minister will be on top of this.

Audrey rates the Ministers 2022

Audrey Young has done her usual ratings of the Ministry. The summary is:

  • 9/10 – Damien O’Connor (nc)
  • 8/10 – Grant Robertson (-1), Carmel Sepuloni (-1), Michael Wood (nc), Ayesha Verrall (+2)
  • 7/10 – Jacinda Ardern (nc), Chris Hipkins (nc), Stuart Nash (+1), Peeni Henare (-1), Willie Jackson (nc), Jan Tinetti (+1), Kiri Allan (nc), James Shaw (-1)
  • 6/10 – Kelvin Davis (nc), Megan Woods (nc), David Parker (-1), David Clark (nc), Priyanca Radhakrishnan (nc), Kieran McAnulty
  • 5/10 – Andrew Little (-3), Nanaia Mahuta (-2), Poto Williams (+1), Aupito William Sio (-2), Meka Whaitiri (-1), Phil Twyford (-2), Marama Davidson (-1)

Somewhat surprised that no-one is ranked below 5/10!

General Debate 08 November 2022

The 2022 US mid-terms

We should get results from the US mid-terms from midday Wednesday. Here’s how things stand for now.

The House

  • 538: GOP majority 83% likely. Median projection is 229 GOP, 206 Democrats (218 is a majority)
  • RCP: 242 GOP, 193 Democrats
  • RacetoWH: GOP majority 68% likely, 224 GOP, 211 Democrats

The Senate

  • 538: GOP majority 54% likely. Median projection is 51 GOP, 49 Democrats (51 needed for GOP)
  • RCP: 53 GOP, 47 Democrats
  • RacetoWH: GOP majority 48% likely, 50 GOP, 50 Democrats

Key Senate Races

  • Georgia – 538: GOP 57% to win, 0.5% margin; RCP: GOP win by 0.4%
  • Pennsylvania – 538: GOP 46% to win, -0.6% margin; RCP: GOP win by 0.1%
  • Nevada – 538: GOP 57% to win, 1.0% margin; RCP: GOP win by 2.4%
  • Arizona – 538: GOP 34% to win, -2.2% margin; RCP: Dems win by 1.0%
  • New Hampshire – 538: GOP 27% to win, -3.7% margin; RCP: Dems win by 0.7%

The GOP need to win three of those five for a majority.

So the GOP is highly highly likely to win the House but the Senate is going to be very very close, if the polls are accurate.

Newsroom should know better

https://www.newsroom.co.nz/pro/future-for-local-government-draft-report

If you read the full story you will see that the data on the left is from a self-selecting online survey targeting young people.

To do a graphic where you contrast a non-representative self-selecting poll with a scientific one is terrible. And to use it to claim young people do support lowering the voting age is worse, as the scientific poll (done by Curia) found only 23% of under 40s support it.

What voters think about Jacinda

Stuff reports on a poll which asked voters how Jacinda Ardern and Christophe Luxon make them feel. The top three for Jacinda were:

  1. Disappointed 35%
  2. Concerned 33%
  3. Angry 28%

The top three for Luxon were:

  1. Concerned 32%
  2. Nervous 27%
  3. Hopeful 25%

Of interest is 26% of people who voted Labour in 2020 said Ardern made them feel disappointed.

General Debate 07 November 2022

Guest Post: A letter from the Kingdom – Part I

A guest post by David Garrett:

I have recently returned to the Kingdom of Tonga, after a long absence; I last did significant work here representing the Tonga Ports Authority at the Princess Ashika  enquiry back in 2011. (Both I and the then CEO of the Ports Authority subsequently  got fired. My crime was “aiding and abetting Lupeti Vi to undermine the government”. In Lupeti’s case, his crime was  being brutally honest about failures of the Marine Department, particularly saying that the vessel was a “rust bucket” which ought never to have been given a Certificate of Seaworthiness. Only in Tonga, as the Tongans themselves say often).  

While much remains the same in Kingdom – efficient bureaucracies being the exception rather than the  norm being one notable example – there has also been significant social change. The most obvious is that everyone – at least everyone under 30 – has a cellphone seemingly surgically attached to their hands, just as in New Zealand.

An even bigger and more surprising change is the use of cellphones  by older people – even in church. Such behavior would have almost certainly resulted in severe sanction at the very least 10 years ago; expulsion from the church would not have been out of the question, and expulsion from one’s church is akin to death for many Tongans.   But no, when you see Tongan church services on local TV – and there is nothing else on a Sunday – it is now common to see even middle aged Tongans using their cellphones during services. Sacrilege!

Another obvious social  change is that  it is now not uncommon to see two or more women – unaccompanied by men – drinking  in bars. While this was not unknown 11 years ago, it was certainly frowned upon, and such women were regarded as “loose” at the very least. While a single woman drinking alone would probably still attract unfavourable attention from most Tongans – including other women – the assumption that the woman was a “working girl” – or perhaps just  an enthusiastic amateur –  may well now be wrong.

One thing I have noticed with considerable sadness is that the school kids here are thoroughly indoctrinated regarding climate change. The idea that the behavior of 105,000 Tongans could affect the climate is utterly ludicrous – the behaviour of 5.5 million of you down there in NZ won’t have diddly squat effect on the climate, even if the change which is undoubtedly occurring is  indeed man made, which to my mind is far from certain. As an aside, I see no evidence of sea level rise here, and I am very familiar with the shoreline on many islands.

It is also glaringly obvious that for the foreseeable future, fossil fuels will be essential unless Tonga wishes to return to the Stone Age. While there are some sizeable solar panel arrays contributing power to the local grid, 90% of electricity is still generated by diesel generators running 24/7. Tongatapu, the main island, is as flat as a pancake, as are the majority of the other 170 islands that make up the Kingdom. There are no rivers or lakes on any islands, which means hydro is simply not an option.

I am unsure what potential there is for wind generation; the prevailing easterly which blows gently most days may be an unexploited resource. How practical wind power is for Tonga – i.e. costs v. benefit – is unknown to me; perhaps someone with greater knowledge of wind generation  may enlighten us. I would imagine a major obstacle to wind power would be the devastating cyclones which periodically cause huge damage to buildings and structures in Tonga.

One thing that hasn’t changed is the widespread use of cash; many businesses and government departments will not accept cheques, which are still widely used. Even the Supreme [High] Court still requires filing fees to be paid in cash. On the other hand, the country remains the country of huge contrasts that it has always been – at least in my experience; many people are thoroughly familiar with both phone and internet banking, and ATM’s are widespread.

The political changes since half of Nuku’alofa was destroyed in riots in 2006 have been both profound, and less than would have been expected. Prior to 2006, the Tongan parliament was effectively a rubber stamp for the King. While the common people and the Nobles had the same number of representatives, the King could appoint however many people he liked to his cabinet. Since none of the cabinet wanted to lose their relatively well paid jobs, they and the Nobles representatives almost always voted as a bloc in support of the King.

After 2006 control of the Tongan parliament moved to the commoners – but with surprising results. Of the four (I think) prime ministers elected since 2006 two have been Nobles, and two commoners. The prime minister is elected by his fellow MP’s, not by voters. The most notable commoner PM was one Akilisi Pohiva, a former teacher and long time irritant for the government and the Royals. Over many years he brought many court cases against the government, a number of which were successful and created new precedents.

From what I can tell talking to Tongan friends, Pohiva as widely regarded as a useless, if not a complete  disaster as prime minister. He was in many ways very like Winston Peters – a publicity seeker and far more comfortable in opposition than in government, where he actually had to do  something. I well recall him being interviewed on TV when I was first  here 20 years ago. When asked what system of government he wanted, he could only repeat “democracy” over and over; he was quite unable to enlighten viewers as to the type of democracy he had in mind. He seemed not to understand that there were huge differences between the political systems of Britain, the UK, and Commonwealth countries such as New Zealand. For all the changes I have noticed since returning, some things remain the same: Tonga is the fascinating country of huge contrasts that it has always been, and the people are for the most part, warm and friendly. One hears laughter everywhere. I

Newshub Reid Research Poll November 2022

Newshub has released their November Reid Research poll.

Party Vote

  • Labour 32.3% (-5.9% from April)
  • National 40.7% (+0.2%)
  • Greens 9.5% (+1.1%)
  • ACT 10.0% (+3.6%)
  • NZ First 3.3% (+1.6%)
  • Maori 1.9% (-0.6%)
  • TOP 1.2% (+0.3%)

Seats

Governments

Preferred PM

  • Jacinda Ardern 29.9% (-6.4%)
  • Christopher Luxon 21.5% (-2.4%)
  • David Seymour 7.3% (+2.2%)
  • Winston Peters 4.2%
  • Chloe Swarbrick 2.4%
  • Nicola Willis 1.5%

The real power in Three Waters

Graham Adams writes:

In fact, Three Waters goes much further than that. While it prescribes 50:50 co-governance at the overarching strategic level of the four Regional Representative Groups, iwi will have a dominating influence all the way down through the subordinate levels of management.

While the mainstream media snoozes, independent blogs and news sites are pointing out that the principal mechanism for such comprehensive control are the Te Mana o Te Wai statements, buried deep within the Water Services Entities Bill.

And it is clear these statements — edicts that can be issued at will by iwi and hapū and are effectively binding on the water services entity in their region — have no limits or restrictions on what may be included in them.

The bill simply states: “Mana whenua whose rohe or takiwā [territory] includes a freshwater body in the service area of a water services entity may provide the entity with a Te Mana o te Wai statement for water services.”

Anything that an iwi or hapū decides is consistent with their view of matauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) or tikanga (customs) may be used as a basis for making a binding order.

The statements have been described accurately by the pseudonymous citizen journalist Thomas Cranmer as handing “unbridled power” to iwi.

Kaipara’s former mayor Dr Jason Smith put it bluntly in mid-June in a tweet: “Whoever gets to write Te Mana o Te Wai statements gets control of water, land, planning rules and regulations, land use… TMoTW statements will cover every pipe, river, creek, farm pond or fresh water body.”

This is very important. Even if you get rid of co-governance of the entities, you will still have this statutory power which will give effective full control of every aspect of water to local Iwi and hapu.

Guest Post: Chris Finlayson on National Day Celebrations

A guest post by Chris Finlayson:

A few days ago I attended  Hungary’s National Day celebration at Victoria University .  After the usual formal speeches, there was an excellent concert.  Because of my love for Béla Bartók’s music, I made sure I was there.  The Hungarians always have a good party.

When I was in the Key Administration from 2008 to 2017, Ministers always spoke on behalf of the New Zealand Government at these functions.  Today those speeches are given by some functionary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.  I think Ministers should be present and the decision of Winston Peters as Minister of Foreign Affairs to stop Ministers giving speeches is unfortunate. I don’t know why he changed the practice- perhaps he didn’t want Labour Ministers speaking.  I used to enjoy receiving a draft of an insipid speech from MFAT a day or two before the function. These were generally dreadful, full of tiresome banalities and irritating references to rugby. I would delete the piffle  and redraft  them to ensure I said what I wanted to say.  I always  enjoyed watching our diplomats squirm as I went ‘off piste‘ , especially at the Polish and Israeli functions.

I was pleased to attend the Hungarian function because it was also the 66th anniversary of the Hungarian Revolution when,  in 1956, that country rebelled against Soviet tyranny and tried to jettison Communism. Unlike with Ukraine today, the West did nothing to help other than waffle in the United Nations. Eisenhower was more concerned with the imminent Presidential Election in the United States  and the British were preoccupied with the Suez Crisis. On 4 November 1956, the Soviets marched into Budapest and crushed the Revolution.  The Prime Minister Imre Nagy was executed in 1958 after a show trial and the Cardinal of Budapest, József Mindszenty, who had helped lead the revolution, took refuge in the American Embassy where he stayed until exiled to the Vatican in the early 1970’s. Some may have seen the film , Children of Glory, which recounts the famous water polo match between Russia and Hungary at the Melbourne Olympics in December 1956. This became known as the Blood in the Water match after after a Soviet player hit his Hungarian opponent. Hungary won 4-0.

 New Zealand Government took  some refugees and the Hungarian community today is a vibrant one, making a great contribution to this country but also loyal to the traditions of the  home of their ancestors. They will never forget 1956 and the sacrifices of their parents. The rest of us should also remember the bravery of the Hungarian people, in the face of Soviet tyranny, who fought for freedom, alone and unaided. Though the revolution was crushed, their spirit wasn’t and  they finally expelled the bear in that glorious month in 1989 when the countries of Mitteleuropa escaped Communism and the evil it had imposed for all those years after Yalta where they had been betrayed by the victorious West.

Last week ,there was a poignant reminder of Hungarian valour. In October 1956, Freedom Fighters cut out the hammer and sickle from the Hungarian flag ,restoring it to its traditional self. This  became the symbol of the 1956 Revolution and  a flag with a hole in it was prominently displayed at the Hungarian function.

I think it is very easy to criticise countries like Hungary.  I was disappointed at an article written by Catherine Schaer which recently appeared in the Listener. She asked the question whether we should care about some bolshy Eastern backwater getting bags of EU cash.  I wouldn’t characterise Hungary in that way at all.  Hungary is a country which bled for the West for many centuries.  As I have said, it also endeavoured to face down Soviet tyranny with little help from the West at the time.  Given its history, and particularly the tragic events of 1956, it’s not surprising that Hungary has  particularly strong views about immigration and outside influences.  One may disagree with some of the policies of the current government, but to deride a proud and strong country like Hungary as some kind of bolshy Eastern backwater is extreme and unfair. 

NZ 4 years on, Bitter/Sweet – Part 3

This is the third and last post of my recent NZ experience. Again, please note that these are my personal observations and opinions and not those of Kiwiblog.

4 – HEALTH CARE

Since living in the US, it has been interesting to compare the American and NZ health care systems. We are taught in NZ that our universal taxpayer funded hospital system is fairer and more equitable and ensures access to all, rich or poor, versus the costly US system that excludes the poor and those with pre-existing conditions who can’t get coverage. The truth is neither system lives up to the stereotypes. In NZ we ration by waiting list and I know three people who have died on waiting lists and others denied certain treatments due to age and medicines due to cost whereas the US has the world’s best quality healthcare, but it is rationed by price via the clumsy employer funded health insurance model. However, various safety nets for the poor in the US do exist as does government sponsored health insurance for those with pre-existing conditions. The problem is that despite millions spent on health bureaucrats, NZ is not keeping up with other first world countries. This gap was exposed during Covid with NZ having the fewest ICU beds per capita in the OECD at the start of the pandemic. We were told the stringent lockdowns then border closure (that for almost a year enabled NZers to function without restrictions whilst the world struggled with various restrictions to try and slow the spread), was to enable the health system to improve capacity once Covid eventually breached the border wall. Over a year later as Delta then Omicron spread, the health system had not improved capacity in any meaningful way despite the billions spent on the Covid response. The running down of the healthcare system combined with NZ’s overly strict Covid isolation rules has led to large swathes of the population having to isolate at home and with the 10% of the health workforce dismissed due to not being vaccinated, has led to a crisis of capacity and capability in the NZ healthcare system that means at times and in certain places, the quality of healthcare received is bordering on 2nd world quality. My family saw this inability to be able to commit adequate staffing and other resources firsthand with our family member who died in hospital. Whilst none of us blame the system for the death, nonetheless I wondered what the outcome might have been had the greater resources of hospitals in other 1st world countries had been brought to bear.

5 – CRIME

For some time now, NZ’s non-homicide crime statistics have been high. By this I mean burglaries, car thefts and assaults. Yes, most American cities feature much higher levels of gun related homicides, but these crimes are comparatively rare compared to the big 3. If you take out the badly run liberal cities in America like LA, Portland, Seattle, Minneapolis, Washington DC, Philadelphia and Baltimore etc. where crime rates across the board are very high, smaller/mid-sized US cities (that approximate the size of NZ’s cities) feature non-homicide crime rates that are significantly lower than NZ. It is a long-held myth that NZ is a safe place with low crime and that the US is a crime ridden nightmare. Aside from the exceptions I mentioned, this has not been the case for decades and this trend has only accelerated in recent years. When you combine the cost-of-living crisis with Labour’s soft-on-crime approach (cancelling 3 strikes, not reigning in gangs and hamstringing the police with PC directives), NZ is seeing an explosion of gang related crime, youth crime being at the most pointy and public end with the explosion of ram raids on dairies and other shops. Only a few miles from where I was having lunch in Auckland, in broad daylight armed thieves robbed a jewelry shop in St Luke’s Mall during shopping hours. This is 3rd world gangster level brazenness. I visited two shops in the Grey Lynn area that advised they were no longer taking any cash payments due to incessant robberies. I suspect this trend will accelerate. In my childhood some American cities WERE dangerous places, whilst growing up in NZ we could go on holiday leaving the house unlocked and I’d often cycle past cars parked by the local dairy or fish and chip shop empty with the engine running. Those days are long gone.

6 – ANTI DEMOCRATIC INSTINCTS

Of all the things to surprise and even shock me the most, it is the rise of so many anti-democratic behaviours in current/recent NZ society. If you asked me five years ago whether there was any functional difference on the ground and in everyday life and society between the Westminster style Parliamentary democracy as found in NZ and the US style Constitutional Republic, I would’ve have said no. Back then I felt that both offered: largely free and fair elections, freedom of speech, freedom to protest peacefully, freedom to worship as you choose, freedom of the press, free movement of citizens and equal opportunity under the law. I no longer believe this to be true because some of these freedoms in New Zealand were abrogated, curtailed and suspended by the NZ government during the pandemic in ways utterly antithetical to the tenets and ideals of freedom we once held dear in what I believed was a free and democratic society. Here are some examples of what I speak.

(i) Scrapping of the DHBs – whatever the drawbacks of New Zealand’s health system (and they are many and varied), the District Health Board model featured elected Boards that were accountable to the local electorate every three years. Major reforms and innovations at the local level had to pass muster at the ballot box and obviously poor performances meant voters could punish Board members by voting them out. That democratic check is now completely gone, and in my opinion, this is a retrograde step by removing an office of a vital service that we used to be able to vote on.

(ii) 3 Waters – I mentioned 3 Waters earlier in the context of excessive Maori control, but its most insidious anti-democratic provision is removing the control of vital water assets from locally elected Councils to an unelected and unaccountable appointed Board. This is billions of dollars of vital community used assets soon to be run by people no longer accountable to voters. Poor performance concerning this matter did lead to the ousting of elected officials. This will no longer be possible if 3 Waters passes into law.

(iii) Education curriculum – this point is a little more obscure. When I first moved to the US, I thought its system of separate School Districts for each city and town (meaning in large metropolitan areas sometimes over a dozen separate school districts as most major metro areas in the US comprise of one core large city after which it is named but a myriad of smaller separate suburban cities and towns that are each autonomous although contiguous to the metro area – e.g. greater Seattle comprises Seattle, Bellevue, Renton, Everett, Kirkland, Redmond, Kent, Tacoma etc.). Each School District’s Boards are elected and decide on holidays, the grade makeup of schools (some Junior Highs are 7th, 8th and 9th grade others are just 7th and 8th) and the curriculum. This seemed chaotic and a duplication of administration compared to NZ’s single national Department of Education that essentially decides on all major issues of curriculum, school holidays and with NZQA administering a single national qualification. But as we watched the inexorable march of progressive left woke ideologies invade the classrooms of our children with such things as Critical Race Theory (and its attacks on western civilization and promotion of so-called White Supremacism, racism and colonialism) and the wave of bending to aggressive and influential transgender activists allowing teenage boys who identify as girls to compete in girls’ sports despite the obvious physical advantages of entering male puberty and to be allowed to enter and change in girls only spaces, I realized that the American system of local control of school districts and the concept of elected Boards whose progressive and damaging policies could be overturned by the recall of existing board members and the election of new members who better reflect the concerns and views of a majority of parents, actually gave far more power to parents than the NZ system where the only option if a family objects to the new woke progressive curriculum is to home school your kids. Right now, a huge revolution is going on across the US in school district after school district where parents first come to public Board meetings and hold board members accountable and if the worst excesses of the Social Justice Warrior left are not removed, then those who support such policies are being voted out!

(iv) Inhibiting free speech – Few people in New Zealand have much knowledge or a working understanding of the Government’s Public Good Journalism Fund (PGJF). Labour made $55 million available to be paid to media organisations to promote “good journalism”. The problem is that the definition of “good” is very much in the eye of the beholder, in this case the most left leaning Labour government in a generation. Anyone with any familiarity with the profitability (or mostly lack thereof) of NZ media companies will know that turning a profit in the NZ market is hard. If you divide $55 M between the likes of NZME (owner of the NZ Herald), Stuff (formally owned by Fairfax), Media Works and Fairfax, that’s an amount tantamount to profit in a good year. For some media outlets, getting the grant from the PGJF could have meant the difference between profit and loss. At first the influence was to ensure journalists wrote mostly puff pieces about Jacinda but as the pandemic bit, the lockdowns kept dragging on, protests against the Covid regime erupted and people began to fight against the vaccine mandates and tried to report on vaccine injuries, the kind of agreements struck between the PGJF and editors and owners, even if nothing was explicitly stated in writing, the inference was that if the party line on Covid was not stuck to, shame about that PGJF grant. How democratic is for Hipkins, Bloomfield and Ardern to say from the Beehive pulpit that, “we are your one source of truth” and to threaten consequences for spreading “disinformation”. What happened to investigative journalism where the rich and powerful were held to account in a Woodward and Bernstein type Watergate ‘truth to power’ moment? Yes, some opposition to various aspects of Covid policy did seep through. One was the plight of Grounded Kiwis and the ravages of MIQ and in this instance, the media spotlight onto some of the egregious stories of NZers locked out of their own country led to a PR nightmare for the government and soon after, the MIQ regime was largely ended. The media dutifully discharged its obligations under the PGJF by suppressing footage of the Freedom Convoy. Had you not been familiar with alternative social media sites such as Rumble, Odysee, Bitchute, Telegram and Gab, you’d be right in thinking all the Freedom Convoy was good for was traffic disruption and yet the ACTUAL footage, posted by hundreds of NZers from Cape Reinga to Bluff, showed extraordinary scenes of multiple towns on SH 1 where, lining both sides of the street, sometime two or more deep from one of end of the town to the other, were protestors and many motorway bridges in Auckland and Wellington were packed with sign waving protestors. A family member who is part of Voices For Freedom manned a spot on the roundabout at the end of the Northern Motorway in Christchurch near the Pegasus subdivision. It took 1 hour and 15 minutes for all the vehicles in the South Island portion of the Freedom Convoy to pass! In a normal era, a protest this large would lead One Network News’ 6pm broadcast and be on the front pages of every newspaper. Finally, Jacinda Ardern’s speech to the United Nations about regulating ‘hate’ speech on the internet was quite widely panned by mainstream conservative media in the US as being an example of the Orwellian controls some on the left are prepared to turn to in an attempt to silence dissent from the progressive liberal world view. Ardern’s government’s instincts in this regard are utterly antithetical to robust discussion of all matters, regardless of how controversial they are, in the public square as they move to introduce their ‘Hate’ Speech legislation later this year. Readers of this blog would do well to follow David’s admonition to join the Free Speech Union to fight these attempts at stifling free speech, one of the great hallmarks of modern democratic societies that NZ is trying to retreat from.

(v) Freedom to demonstrate – this freedom has been an integral part of any free and democratic society. How the government handled the February anti-mandate protest at Parliament is another example of anti-democratic sentiments taking hold. Media reporting of the types of people on the grounds of Parliament were a classic case in point. Were there crazy conspiracy theorists there? Absolutely, but they were a tiny minority but the government, the police and the media focused on the actions and comments of a tiny unrepresentative fraction. A good friend is senior with MFAT and commutes by train to central Wellington and so visited the site of the protest every day. He wondered around everywhere and spoke to various of the protestors every day of the protest and formed the view that it was a harmless cross section of provincial NZ with an atmosphere of celebration, cooperation and no sign of violent or malign intent other than to object to the vaccine mandates. He allowed his teenage children who attend central Wellington schools to visit without any fear of being mistreated. David Farrar’s own Curia poll of the types and motivations of the protestors underscored the broad coalition of town and country, vaxxed and unvaxed across the political spectrum. But yet this group was vilified by MPs calling them a “river of filth” and this vilification was amplified by the media. The footage of the eventual police action to clear the site was skewered and biased and when you view the hours of amateur footage posted, the actions of a few likely inserted masked provocateurs who perpetrated the violence and the fires is blatantly obvious. Had the government and police simply spoken to the protestors, a traffic management protocol to avoid disruption could’ve been negotiated and as long as the hygiene and safety of all were maintained (which the self-sufficient protestors and their financial supporters across the country ensured), they could’ve been left alone. With no external provocation by police or nasty vilification from the Prime Minster on down, I’m sure the protest would’ve gradually fizzled out. The final anti-democratic capstone came when the Speaker attempted to ban Winston Peters from Parliament’s precinct for the crime of …… speaking to the protestors!

(vi) MIQ – New Zealand’s Managed Isolation Quarantine regime has been shown to be thoroughly and utterly anti-democratic and anti-freedom. NZ was the only country in the Anglophile and Western European 1st world to prevent its own citizens from entering their own country in direct violation of clause 18 (2) of the NZ Bill of Rights Act 1990. At first there were pretty much slots available in MIQ for most people that wanted to come home early on in the pandemic but as time went by, the numbers of offshore kiwis that wanted to emigrate back to NZ or to visit loved ones who were dying or for major family events like weddings and funerals began to rise and the numbers of government sponsored hotel rooms soon could not keep up and so at first people would spend hours refreshing computers in the vain attempt to secure a slot. When people circumvented this by using bots to programme computers to do this work automatically, MBIE came up with the clunky lottery system that shepherded those wishing to obtain a slot in MIQ into a set virtual lobby every 6 weeks when rooms were released and, after a one hour registration window, all who registered for that lottery were issued a random place in the queue and each person was allowed into the booking section of the computer in order. Each lottery registered on average 40,000 participants competing for around 4,000 rooms so you had a 1 in 10 chance of success. Those of us who endured this indignity knew via various Facebook pages set up to help with all things to do with MIQ, that you had to get a number of about 5,000 to stand any chance of getting a room. I tried four times and then gave up but there were about 10 lotteries until it was abolished and most times, you’d get 15,000 or 23,000 or 9,000. I once got 4,300 and actually got in and the only rooms available by then were 3 days later, not enough time to arrange a flight as back them, Air NZ was only flying twice a week and a single flight from just LAX. I was part of the famous Grounded Kiwis Facebook page and the hundreds of heart wrenching stories of kiwis stuck overseas trying to get a humanitarian exemption to attend a funeral was massive. People had sold houses, cancelled leases and quit jobs and actually had a job to go to in NZ but were forced to stay with friends and family and rely on charity of others for months at a time as they were unable to get an MIQ slot. It was one of the most egregious breaches of human rights of the citizens of this country in the history of NZ and it was one that was never ever attempted in the US as it would be found instantly, by any Federal Court regardless of the ideological leaning, to be a breach of the US Bill of Rights. Many other countries drew the same conclusions and allowed their own citizens to return and made isolation slots available … but not New Zealand. A needless authoritarian abuse of governmental power that eventually the High Court found many legal problems with. The government finally scrapped it but only once media publicity on the cases of widespread hardship of stranded kiwis began to grow and grow.

(vii) Vaccine mandates and passports. My family were willingly vaccinated with all the major childhood vaccines partly because they had proven to be effective and safe but also because we’d lost a great grandfather to tetanus and a grandmother crippled by polio in the pre-vaccine era. Yes, there has been a tiny rump of anti vax activists for years but we were never one of them. But alarms bells rung when I saw many people I know in the US who contracted Covid but who were able to obtain Ivermectin from Mexico or a few doctors and whose symptoms were largely gone within days and yet the medical establishment across the world, in conjunction with government officials and backed by the media, vilified a drug that had been awarded a Nobel prize for Chemistry in favour of the only preferred treatment for Covid – a vaccine that had been rushed to market with minimal clinical trials. I took hydroxychloroquine when I had Covid (which was the Delta strain and was like a flu that took one additional week to get over) and my taste and smell returned within 24 hours. This was another treatment banned in many countries including New Zealand. Suspicion heightened when the efforts to get people vaccinated took on Orwellian proportions with massive multi million dollar advertising campaigns, a full court press against alternatives and in favour of an experimental mRNA treatment (only the Johnson and Johnson Covid shot was a true vaccine – the Pfizer, Moderna and Astra Zeneca shots are classified as gene therapies). Next thing governments were introducing mandates to force people to be vaccinated on pain of job loss and electronic passes were being introduced to prevent the unvaccinated from going anywhere except essential visits to supermarkets and medical facilities. The Nuremberg Code, adopted by all democratic countries post World Wat 2 as a response to the horrific forced medical experiments conducted by the Nazis, enshrined freedom of choice for medical treatments. Jacinda Ardern even explicitly promised there would be no mandates and yet there we were in the latter part of 2021 with people across NZ being fired because they preferred medical freedom and a pernicious system of medical apartheid was set up across the country backed by hefty fines on employers who would not comply. Yes, such mandates were attempted in the US but they soon run up against America’s constitutionally guaranteed freedom to choose and so were progressively peeled back. I watched in horror from across the Pacific at the dystopian nightmare of medical tyranny unfolding in NZ and heard from the ground what life was like for the unvaccinated. You can support a vaccine like the C19 shots and still be appalled at the abrogation of freedoms that were unleashed across many countries. I thought, surely NZ’s Bill of Rights that enshrines medical freedom would protect this overreach by the government but no, the Courts proved largely toothless on the fundamental question which was, does the government’s emergency Covid legislation override the BORA 1990. Whilst some aspects of mandates were pegged back (e.g., the military), on this fundamental issue of whether this legislation protected NZers from a power-hungry government, the answer in New Zealand’s case was sadly no.

CONCLUSION

It has been incredibly difficult to write this last post. Some may object and say, just stay in the US. Most expat kiwis are asked by friends and family when they visit, “are you ever going to come back to live in NZ?”. For those of us currently happy in their new country of domicile, we usually say things like, “maybe, but right now I’m happy where I am but I love NZ and it will always be home”. On this trip when I was finally asked, I paused and reflected on many of the things I’ve discussed in these posts and I became a bit emotional because of the tragedy of what I was obliged to say which was, “I will never live in this country because the protections of freedom and liberty that I thought were present proved to be not worth the paper they were written on to protect from the medical tyranny that prevailed in NZ whilst in the US, the Constitution lived up to its promise and actually did protect us from the same attempts at medical tyranny”. Needless to say, those gathered were shocked but sadly, it is the truth. As I ponder on that response and whether it was intemperate or I got carried away in the heat of the moment, I thought about the sad reality that is modern NZ. Millions of my fellow countrymen went along with this regime of medical apartheid and mocked and criticised on public forums those who disagreed. The major opposition party 100% backed the regime and probably would have administered it more efficiently than Labour. Libertarian darling David Seymour and his freedom-oriented party went along with it. The media supported it. All the elites of society at every turn supported it. And whilst the worst aspects of the regime have been dropped, the freedom constraining anti-democratic legislation remains on the books and were a fresh pandemic to sweep the world, governments in NZ at least would be legally empowered to repeat the coercion and we now know the courts won’t stop them and most of the country won’t care. This is how a democracy dies.

General Debate 06 November 2022

Australia has had an independent review into their Covid-19 response

Despite it being the most costly event in modern NZ history, both fiscally and in terms of deaths, Labour has not set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry into NZ’s response to Covid-19. I suspect at some stage they will succumb to the pressure, but of course they will hand pick reviewers who will be favourable to them.

In Australia civil society decided not to wait for the Government to do a review, and three foundations funded an independent review, which is here. Wouldn’t it be great if in NZ we had NGOs willing to step up and do the same?

A summary of the findings in Australia were:

The review has found that key groups were excluded from financial support, some lockdowns and border closures were avoidable and schools should have remained open. It sounds a warning to governments against the perils of overreach when dealing with future health crises. Low socio-economic families, women, children, aged care residents, people with disabilities, temporary migrants, multicultural communities, and others already experiencing disadvantage bore the brunt of the pandemic.

I can only imagine what a NZ review would find!

Reserve Bank focused on …

https://twitter.com/EricCrampton/status/1582867050250133504

Isn’t this chart from Eric Crampton fascinating.

In the last three years the Reserve Bank annual reports have mentioned climate change more often than inflation. And by coincidence inflation is at record levels.

Maybe they should job swap. We could put the Climate Change Commission in charge of monetary policy and leave climate change to the Reserve Bank?