Ian Harrison at Tailrisk Economics critiques the modelling done by the Ministry of Health.

His key takeaway:

When we ran the Covidsim model we found credible paths that could reduce the pace of infections to sustainable levels. Deaths in the range of 50 – 500 over a year are more realistic numbers. 500 deaths is around average for the seasonal flu. We found that the higher OCRG numbers were mostly generated by their assumption that tracing and testing would be abandoned.

This OCRG assumption is almost incomprehensible, unless there was a deliberate attempt to blow up the numbers. Whether the Ministry was ‘in on it’, or simply didn’t understand what was being reported to them, we do not know. We have attempted to discuss the issue with the OCRG but have had no response.

So the figure of potentially 14,000 dead was not at all robust.

This is why we must have a Royal Commission to study all aspects of the Government’s response to the pandemic, including the quality of the modelling and advice.

Worth reading the full paper. It is very easy to follow.

The NY Times reports:

The New York Times spent weeks following women inside the country’s health care system, which has been crippled by a broken economy overseen by an increasingly authoritarian government.

That is Venezuela of course.

For many Venezuelan women today, the defining feature of childbirth is the ruleta, or roulette: The gruelling process of traveling from hospital to hospital, trying to find one that is equipped to help them.

They sometimes hitchhike, or walk for miles, or take buses over roads whose ruts and bumps seem designed just to torture them. In rare cases, they are rejected over and over until finally giving birth in the street, on a hospital’s steps — or in its lobby.

Roulette for childbirth – true equality.

In his many televised speeches, the country’s president, Nicolás Maduro, has characterized the country’s health system as facing challenges but generally doing well. As recently as March, he encouraged women to “give birth, give birth,” saying that every woman “should have six children” for the good of the country.

He really is nuts.

The Herald reports:

Auckland Council is backing off the idea of a 3.5 per cent by asking ratepayers if they want to go with that figure or a 2.5 per cent rates rise from July 1.

The decision follows a marathon 10-hour meeting of council’s emergency committee yesterday at which councillors also agreed to waive the bed tax on the struggling hotel and accommodation sector for three months.

Ratepayers experiencing financial hardship from the impact of Covid-19 will also be given the opportunity to defer payment of the fourth and final rates instalment this year.

Auckland Chamber of Commerce chief executive Michael Barnett said more than 80 per cent of businesses responding to a survey gave the thumbs down to a planned 3.5 per cent rates rise.

“Businesses have no income, ballooning debt and ongoing costs from paying employees and trying to keep them on the payroll to rental and tax obligations,” he said.

What part of ratepayers can’t afford a rates increase, can’t the Council understand?

Why is the Council too scared to consult on a rates freeze? Is it because they know the feedback would be overwhelmingly in favour of it?

Mayor Phil Goff said councillors were unanimous the council needed to take decisive steps to reduce the pressure on residents and businesses facing economic hardship, while ensuring it could protect and maintain the essential services.

“I think Aucklanders want their council to understand the hardships that some people will be facing and show compassion and flexibility around that. There will be a range of measures to target support through deferral and postponement of rates for those facing genuine hardship and unable to pay their rates in the current circumstances.”

Compassion isn’t sticking rates up 2.5% and deferring payments (which just means you pay even more later). Compassion is living within your means.

The Herald reports:

The central Chinese city of Wuhan has raised its number of Covid-19 fatalities by 1290, with state media saying today the undercount had been due to the insufficient admission capabilities at overwhelmed medical facilities at the peak of the outbreak.

Wuhan’s revised death toll of 3869 is the most in China. The number of total cases in the city of 11 million was also raised by 325 to 50,333, accounting for about two-thirds of China’s total 82,367 announced cases.

There is considerable evidence the actual death toll in Wuhan was in the tens of thousands. This latest number is no more trustworthy than the previous number.

At the end of the day you can’t trust any data from authoritarian countries where the public service is not allowed to freely report the truth.

Newsroom reports:

A private sector proposal to produce and distribute five million Bluetooth-enabled credit card-sized contact tracing tools at a cost of $100 million is one of “a wide variety of technological solutions to contact tracing”, a spokesperson for the All of Government Covid-19 response team has confirmed.

The idea, branded CovidCard, is one of a handful that the Government is considering as it moves to settle on a digital solution for contact tracing.

Carry around a card that will let the Government see where you’ve been and who you’ve met.

Sure I’ll carry that around, once the Government convinces Nicky Hager to carry one also.

This week we have a back to back episodes of Taxpayer Talk.

In our first episode, what is quantitative easing, and why are markets in New Zealand and abroad seen a recent bounce after dramatic falls due to COVID-19? For an in depth look at how markets are responding – including their implications on housing and inflation here in New Zealand, Jordan and Joe are joined by Bevan Wallace, Executive Director of Morgan Wallace. Bevan’s recent explainer on QE and inflation is available here.

In our second episode, the conversation around how and when to raise the lockdown has generated some unenviable problems for policy makers, none more so than how to value the lives of those saved by lockdown versus the jobs and businesses it will destroy. Dr Bryce Wilkinson joins the podcast to discuss his latest paper, which helps to shed some light on how these calculations of life and death are made. You can read Dr Wilkinson’s paper here.

You can subscribe to Taxpayer Talk via Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Google Podcasts, iHeartRadio and all good podcast apps.

Support the show (http://www.taxpayers.org.nz/donate)

Simon Chapple writes:

The readiest tool in the box and the most equitably appealing solution here to share the burden of the virus is simply legislating for more temporary steps in the personal income tax system and a more progressive marginal income tax rate. We could have, for example, an income tax rate of 40 cents in the dollar from 70K (up seven cents in the dollar), 50 cents in the dollars from 100K (up 17 cents in the dollar) and 60 cents from 150K (up 27 cents in the dollar). 

Cutting spending or raising taxes in a recession both have the effect of making the recession worse, and last longer. So Chapple’s proposals would see the recession deepen.

His proposal is one of the stupidest I have seen in recent times, especially as he targets personal incomes not household incomes.

Let’s take a household (two children) where both parents were working – one earns $90,000 and one earns $60,000. The one on $60,000 loses their job. They can’t claim the dole. That family has lost $48,000 in income.

Dr Chapple thinks that isn’t enough and wants to increase the tax on the remaining parent by $1,400 a year!

He also thinks we can have a 60% tax rate and it won’t lead to an exodus of staff and huge tax avoidance. Why do so many people think returning to Muldoon era tax rates is a great idea?

My proposed taxation rise would, as emphasised, be temporary. 

Muldoon claimed that also.

High income earners, let the prospect of lower after-tax income concentrate your minds! You have lost nothing but your regular winter holiday in Bali.

Fuck isn’t that the most sneering out of touch thing you have read?

He thinks anyone who earns over $70,000 has it so great that the only effect the pandemic has had on them is their Bali holiday.

There will be small business owners who have suddenly lost the $500,000 of reserves their business has built up. But hey if in a year’s time they’re still making $80,000 a year, never mind the $500,000 loss of their life savings.

There will be the two income families who have to sell their house as they have lost their second income and can’t afford the mortgage. But hey you’re unaffected right – just your Bali holiday, as one of you still earns $75,000 a year.

The Representation Commission has announced final boundaries for the 2020 and 2023 general elections. There will be 72 electorates, meaning normally 48 list seats.

In terms of of it affects prospects in each electorate, the major changes (based on previous voting patterns) are:

• A new South Auckland electorate called Takanini, which should be marginal and competitive.
• New Lynn is now National on paper
• Banks Peninsula (was Port Hills) is now National on paper
• Maungakiekie goes from marginal to relatively safe for National
• Dunedin South goes from safe to marginal for Labour

These final boundaries will now allow parties to complete candidate selections, and then do list rankings.

Some excellent ideas from Rod Drury on how we move forward:

In Queenstown, tourism has just stopped and the airport is closed. The construction sector, which is underpinned by tourism, will fall next. So how can we get Queenstown’s economy back into action?

One of the things I learned from running a global company is understanding New Zealand has a unique set of values. Environment obviously is one. Equality is a value felt much more strongly here than in most of our close neighbours like Australia and the USA. We see this reflected in our recent policies, like when the Government banned the sale of property to foreigners – partially justified on the basis it would help solve our housing crisis.

So while we may not like the idea of overseas people coming here and buying houses, in places like Queenstown, Hawkes Bay and Northland, in a post-pandemic New Zealand, would we allow areas to be designated as okay for overseas ownership and construction? We could make 1,000 sections available for, say, $5 million dollars plus construction project costs, therefore adding $5 billion of residential construction and jobs to our economy this year. How do we feel about that now?

This is a great idea. Let wealthy foreigners pay a huge premium to be able to own a section here. You could then use that $5 billion to fund local infrastructure, thousands of state homes etc etc.

We’ve seen working from home actually working because of New Zealand’s massive investment in ultrafast broadband (UFB). Our domestic internet is the envy of Australia and even the USA. Treating fibre to the home as essentially public infrastructure any Internet Service Provider can connect to, and innovate over, has been an unqualified success.

As we move into the realm of 5G we could do the same. Let’s treat 5G towers as public infrastructure that any number of telco businesses could provide mobile services over.

I’ve been an advocate of this for many years. It is silly to have each retail mobile provider built their own towers. I’d have Chorus (who provide the fibre backhaul anyway) build all new cellphone towers and open them up to all mobile companies. Towers are infrastructure and the UFB project has shown us you need to seperate out the infrastructure layer from the retailers.

While we’re at it, let’s use this time to get the courage to finally fix our domestic payments networks so we can be completely contactless. This just requires courage from the Minister of Commerce to front up to the Aussie banks and lay down the law. That will spur further investment in banking and payments technology that can be taken to the world.

Basically what we have at the moment is the banks all charge each other a big fee to accept payments from other bank’s cards. This means they all reap in huge fees.

This is akin to what mobile phone companies used to do. They charged high termination fees so it was massively more expensive to call Vodafone from Spark or vice versa.

Paywave fees especially are massively high. Many retailers can’t afford to accept paywave.

Rod also looks at the future:

China is rolling out tens of thousands of electric buses per month. Almost everyone in Auckland has a phone to connect to transport network information and anonymously share their transport usage. We could build the smartest city network of autonomous buses chained together with software that dynamically configures the network each day so you no longer have to drive to park and ride. In Auckland, small buses could pick you up near your home in Albany and as your bus nears the bridge other buses are software chaining together, stopping briefly to allow you to change from bus B to E to take you to Westmere.

The future will be this far more than trains that can only go from Point A to Point B.

The current Green Party list is:

1. Marama Davidson
2. James Shaw
3. Jan Logie
4. Eugenie Sage, 25% male
5. Teanau Tuiono, 40% male
6. Julie-Anne Genter, 33% male
7. Chloe Swarbrick, 29% male
8. Golriz Ghahraman, 25% male
9. Elizabeth Kerekere, 22% male
10. Ricardo Menendez March, 30% male
11. Steve Abel, 27% male
12. Lourdes Vano, 25% male

But the silly Green Party rules have a quota for men. They say no matter how talented the female candidates are, male candidates must make up at least 40% of the list at every level (after the top 3).

So if this list was their members elected list, the list moderating committee would have to over-rule it and change it as thus:

1. Marama Davidson (F)
2. James Shaw (M)
3. Jan Logie (F)
4. Teanau Tuiono (M), 50% male
5. Eugenie Sage (F), 40% male
6. Ricardo Menendez March (M), 50% male
7. Julie-Anne Genter (F), 43% male
8. Steve Abel, (M) 50% male
9. Chloe Swarbrick (F), 44% male
10. Golriz Ghahraman (F), 40% male
11. Next bloke on list, (M) 45% male
12. Elizabeth Kerekere (F), 42% male
13. Next bloke on list, (M) 46% male
14. Lourdes Vano (F), 43% male

So Genter will be forced out of the top six, which means she is out at 5%. Swarbrick will be knocked down two places and need 7% and Ghahraman down two also and needs 8%.

The guy ranked 11th, will be pushed ahead of them into 8th place purely because he is a man – but that is what their rules require.

Peter Williams at Newshub makes the point:

So the Prime Minister, the cabinet and the heads of Government departments are taking a pay cut. It will be a 20 percent cut and will last for six months.

That’s great. I applaud Jacinda Ardern for doing it. It shows that people at the top, the well paid, are prepared to do what the rest of us are doing and taking a drop in income.

But I think she was pushing the envelope a bit when she said it was about leadership. 

No it wasn’t. It was anything but leadership. In fact, it was about being a very slow follower.

The leadership on pay cuts came from the private sector. 

From Chief Executives to those on the factory floor or behind the wheel of the delivery truck, people have been taking pay cuts for at least two weeks, if not three.

Remember the bosses at Mainfreight and Fletcher Building, not to mention Air New Zealand taking their big cuts? 

They were doing it because their company income is going to drop dramatically. 

Well guess what? The big company called New Zealand Inc is going to have its income slashed by billions this year too as the tax take falls well short of what it was last year. 

That means the government workers should be just like the rest of us and take a paycut too. 

Leadership from the Prime Minister would have been joining that trend two weeks ago, not yesterday, and not after constant badgering from the media and the Taxpayers’ Union.

A fair point that the decision did lag the private sector and only came after a concerted campaign.

There are vast swathes of the public service who are not doing much at the moment, and the pay rates should be adjusted as such. Or at least a firm stake should be put in the ground to say no public sector pay increases this year. 

There’ll be virtually none in the private sector.

And if the Prime Minister and Cabinet are taking a cut, why not the rest of the MPs? It can’t be that hard to arrange. 

 Under the emergency powers the government has at the moment, arranging a pay cut for 120 MPs should be really easy. 

Very easy.

Fran O’Sullivan writes:

A proposal for New Zealand to attract 2000 foreign high-net worthers to invest at least $50 million each here to create jobs in return for a New Zealand visa is gaining momentum.

The concept was originated by investment banker Troy Bowker. It comes down to: first, squash the coronavirus completely, then announce to the world that New Zealand is free of Covid-19 but it’s come at a great cost economically. Follow through by announcing that New Zealand will launch a scheme whereby (say) the first 2000 people who comply with strict investing criteria can relocate here with their immediate family.

The proposal would inevitably appeal to US investors unnerved by the chaotic devastation that the Covid-19 virus has wreaked on their own country, and, Asian investors seeking to take part in the NZ recovery in an environment where the Government is committed to keeping the coronavirus under control. …

Bowker suggests high-networthers should have a proven good character and a successful investing track record; must invest, say, $50 million of capital, (equity not debt ) into productive New Zealand-based assets and employ more people.

The capital should be invested within a year of arriving otherwise their special visa is cancelled. All investors would be quarantined on arrival. If they follow through, comply with requirements, stay five years and prove their worth, they get a New Zealand passport.

The heart of the argument – which I support – is that New Zealand business does not need to drown in a tsunami of debt – and that with some ingenuity and significant multi-billions of dollars investment from international investors tempted by the NZ brand story (as well as more from NZ high-networthers) there is a much brighter future ahead that does not have to mortgage the future of younger generations.

A damn good idea. We will be a hugely attractive destination for many, and we will need capital. Let’s do it.

Ananish Chaudhuri at NZ Herald writes:

It has recently been reported that Air NZ management is planning to lay off nearly 400 pilots and around 1500 cabin crew. I think Foran and others in Air NZ’s senior leadership team are making a mistake. …

Recessions pass. In fact, large scale lay-offs often make recessions worse. Workers who are laid off are pessimistic about their chances of getting work in the future. Even the ones who have work are afraid of losing their jobs and therefore cut down on spending. This exacerbates recessions.

This argument would hold water if this was a normal recession where some external event unrelated to travel caused a recession such as a financial crisis.

But this recession is caused by a pandemic which will mean minimal travel for 18 months or longer.

Quite simply there are no flights, so of course Air NZ has to lay off staff. I guarantee you there will be more to come. They have no choice. You can’t pay pilots an cabin crew to staff non existent flights.

Bob Jones writes:

Have an election today and the government would bolt in, primarily because of Jacinda’s star power induced by the media’s obsession with her. But the election is six months away and then, I’m picking a change of government.

First, to clear the air, I like Jacinda and don’t wish the government’s demise. Long before there was any thought of her rise I admired her and Julie Anne Genter more than any other MPs. That’s because when I occasionally tuned into Parliament and they were speaking they did so enthusiastically, arguing for initiatives they thought beneficial, without ever resorting to the customary and tiresome abuse of the other side. This I found refreshing.

Second, perhaps surprising imagery-wise, I’ve voted National once in the last 40 years, that in 2014 as I was alarmed at the prospect of a Cunliffe Prime Ministership so don’t assume I’m writing this as a closet Nat.

So apart from 2014, Sir Bob last voted National in 1978!

HOW HAVE WE DONE?

Contrary to some of our Jacinda-obsessed non-analytical media, not very well.

We’ve wrongly followed overseas practices to the letter, indeed mostly to a more extreme degree. The advantages we started with meant we need not have gone that far and the economic cost will be enormous.

When the lockdown ends our major employer category, namely small and medium sized businesses will not simply start up again. Instead, a high percentage will have gone broke.

A Dominion-Post investigation revealed 400 Wellington restaurants are pulling stumps for example. They’re broke.

But economically it’s far wider than cafes. Everyone other than company receivers will suffer. The tourist related businesses; hotels, flights, travel agents, motels etc. etc. employing circa 300,000 people are gone. That’s not the governments fault but all the more reason for some common-sense with the balance of our economy which was sadly lacking.

Some economists are talking 10% unemployment. I hope that’s true but will be very happy if it’s only 25% although I expect for a time, an even higher figure.

Sadly many businesses will close and never reopen. Very sad for the staff but even sadder for the owners who may lost their life savings which they have invested in their businesses.

LOCATION – You must lockdown in your home but not a holiday home. Why on earth does it make any difference? It certainly does for the occupants as a change helps tolerating it. Instead the police inspected cars over Easter, turning back those with suitcases.

EXERCISE

1) You may go for a walk but only in the vicinity of your home. What bloody difference does it make if you walk for an hour round and round the neighbourhood or a more interesting one of changing scenery. So too with cycling.

2) You cannot go swimming in beaches. Why? Because you’ll tie up police resources if you drown. Someone drowns roughly once a week in New Zealand, mostly in summer and in boating mishaps or rivers. So dozens of policemen have roamed our beaches to watch out for sinners. Madness! In the hugely improbably event someone drowned in Mission or Oriental Bay it’s an ambulance issue.

This is a fair point that the Police have used up far far more Police time on stopping people swimming than they would use up if people actually could swim.

PURCHASING – You may buy food but only in supermarkets. The result; all day queues. Obviously the more food outlets the better but the half-witted government had butchers, corner grocers and the like closed. In the process they’ve destroyed numerous small businesses.

DRIVING – You must only drive for an approved purpose, i.e. food or pharmacy purchasing. What nonsense! Thus slowly going mad, confined in a small house families, were denied the relief, while still maintaining their bubbles of an outing in a car.

FISHING – Banned. Why? We’re not told. So a bloke surf-casting alone on a beach, apart from the mental relief of escape, and the possibility of fresh food, constituted a massive health threat to the community. It should have been encouraged.

GOLF –  Ban the groundsmen working despite them sitting alone on tractors in a massive land expanse. They doing that was ludicrously deemed a health threat to everyone. Golf courses already struggling now faced ruination.

The Government should have been more flexible with the focus on social distancing, rather than preventing people driving or fishing etc.

The IMF say the world is heading into a 1930s depression. I believe them.

By the time the elections arises we’ll be wallowing in despair with numerous small and medium sized businesses (our major employers) destroyed and unemployment levels that don’t bear thinking about.

Borrowing billions to dish out is no substitute for people working.

I’m not going to predict any election outcomes. I think it is hard enough to know what will happen next week let alone in five months.

Stuff reports:

The Māori Party has announced John Tamihere and Debbie Ngarewa-Packer as its new co-leaders as it seeks to improve its support after failing to make it into Parliament in 2017.

The pair are both set to stand in the next election and Stuff understands their leadership bid was uncontested.

Tamihere was confirmed as the Māori Party’s candidate for Tāmaki Makaurau at an event on March 7, challenging Labour MP Peeni Henare who currently holds the seat.

Ngarewa-Packer will stand in Te Tai Hauāuru, which is held by Labour MP Adrian Rurawhe. Under the party’s constitution it has to choose two co-leaders – one woman and one man.

Tamihere is well known. Ngarewa-Packer is the CEO of Taranaki-based Ngati Ruanui. She has an MBA and has studied at Stanford. She is a former Deputy Mayor of South Taranaki and has been working since she was a solo mum at age 19. She started as a hospital cleaner and now has an MBA and is a very successful CEO – a real role model.

The Herald reports:

There are 20 new coronavirus cases in New Zealand as Jacinda Ardern reveals all Government ministers and public sector chief executives will take a 20 per cent pay cut for six months.

Ardern said the pay cut was about leadership and also reflected what was happening in the private sector.

Good to see this leadership from the Government. Private sector incomes are plummeting, so this is a good move – even if in response to calls from ACT and the Taxpayers Union.

It is interesting however that it only applies to Ministers. Couldn’t the PM get her caucus to agree to it?

Next up should be all MPs, Mayors and Council CEOs and their senior managers.

An insightful analysis by Castalia who have studied how the NZ response to Covid-19 compares to the five main Australian states.

Their summary is:

From this comparative analysis, Australian policies appear, on the limited evidence, to be effective with fewer negative impacts on wider wellbeing. Australia also appears better placed to rebound when restrictions are lifted. New Zealand’s policies have contained people to household “bubbles” with consequential impacts on activity such as work and education. New Zealand may have more difficulty rebounding.

The States and New Zealand are good comparators because all have similar urbanisation rates (between 86 and 90 percent), demographic profiles, cultures and legal systems.

I was supportive of us going to Level 4, but it is too blunt a tool to remain in use for more than four weeks. Going forward we should have a more flexible response, as Australia has.

They key difference:

In summary, while borders are generally closed:

Australia’s restrictions are activity based. Activities are limited where people can randomly encounter one another, but most workplaces are able to continue operating subject to compliance with social distancing rules

New Zealand’s restrictions confine each household to their own “bubble”. Leaving home is only permitted for acquiring essential items and for exercise. A limited set of essential services and businesses may continue.

So Australia hasn’t closed all the education facilities, just required them to operate with distancing rules. Same for businesses – they can operate if they have distancing rules. They also have allowed very small weddings (max 5 people) and funerals (max 10). Also Australia allows you to leave your home provided you do social distancing.

They compare the known infection rates:

And even more interesting is the cases since the respective lockdowns:

So as I said I think the Level 4 lockdown was a good call for the four week period. But this analysis shows that going forward we don’t need to be as restrictive, and can still achieve equally good health outcomes.

Stuff reports:

Controversial television presenter Paul Henry says he has charged a fraction of what he usually would to bring Kiwis a programme about what life will be like after the coronavirus lockdown.

Three announced today that Henry would host a “hard hitting” show, remotely interviewing people about where the country is as it comes out of alert level 4 and what lies ahead.

Rebuilding Paradise with Paul Henry will cover business, global impacts on New Zealand, moral conundrums, health, changes to human behaviour and what the country’s future may look like.

Finally an upside to the pandemic – Paul Henry is back on TV!

Stuff reports:

Wellington’s embattled mayor has suffered a rare and public defeat at the hands of his own council after trying to deliver free city parking till winter.

The winners will be community groups such as Sexual Abuse Prevention Network (SAPN), who now look set to keep council funding that would have been cut to pay for the parking.

As I will show you, this is a red herring.

Wellington City Council has been looking at how to find $1.5 million to fund free parking in the city till June 30.  

Mayor Andy Foster’s preference at Thursday’s virtual and extraordinary meeting to discuss its pandemic response plan was to fund the free parking, which – some councillors argued –  could be better spent.

Now I’m not in favour of the free parking. Unless there is strong empirical evidence it increases retail spending (in which case the free parking should be funded by a targeted rate on CBD retailers), we should recognise it costs money to provide parking, and people should pay for it.

So I’m not in favour of what the Mayor proposed. But what is telling is that the Councillors are not saying “Hey maybe if we don’t fund this, we don’t have to whack rates up by 5% in a recession”. Instead they’re saying “Let’s spend it over here instead”.

This is why they have no credibility when they claim there is just simply no way they can avoid a huge rates increase. Of course they can. It just involves some fiscal discipline, which they seem incapable of.

Councillor Fleur Fitzsimons, who was among those opposing Foster, said the Sexual Abuse Prevention Network faced the possibility of shutting without the funding. 

This got me curious so I looked up how much funding SAPN got from WCC last year. It was $22,500. That is around 4% of their total revenue so hardly huge. And I suspect that the Mayor was in no way planning to propose cutting their $22,500 of funding because frankly it is peanuts compared to the $1,5 million cost. I’m certainly not advocating their funding be cut, I’m just saying that this is a red herring.

SAPN chief executive Fiona McNamara said the organisation, which focused on prevention of and education around sexual abuse, was facing a $400,000 loss this year, largely due to the Covid-19 shutdown. While it was not clear how much of the $1.5m it would get, it would help keep the organisation afloat, she said.

So actually what they are talking about is a massive increase in the funding of SAPN, rather than a cut.

Now SAPN, like the other 27,000 charities in NZ no doubt does good work. But it is not the job of WCC to bail out charities. Every charity in NZ is probably hurting right now. Will WCC bail out the Red Cross? Salvation Army? IHC?

The central Government has rightfully put in place a wage subsidy scheme that will help charities in the short term. This is an appropriate thing for central Government to do.

What the Council however should be doing is recognising that many families and businesses of Wellington have had a massive income drop and can’t afford to have a big increase in their rates bill. If the Council decides not to do free parking, then it should not spend the money elsewhere, but instead not hike up rates so much.