Stacey Kirk writes:

The Government could well be on a hiding to nothing here, made worse in part, by a deft political move from Bridges. 
Labour has promised tax reform, in particular a capital gains tax. It will be the centrepiece policy in a report from an expert working group the Government convened, in part to keep the recommendation of such a tax at arm’s length.
Labour wanted to be able to say, in effect, “it’s what the experts recommend”.

But it isn’t. There was no consensus from the actual experts. It is a majority decision pushed through by the politician appointed to chair it.

And in his opening salve, Bridges ran the ball straight up the guts and hit the Government where it hurts by committing to a policy of indexing income tax brackets to inflation. 

It’s widely accepted as good policy – the Government had the option of endorsing it or rubbishing it. Finance Minister Grant Robertson has chosen the latter, which will make for an interesting contortion should the tax  working group recommend it. Which it may well do, because it’s an inordinately fair tax policy. 

National will be campaigning on no longer taxing people more due to inflation. Labour will be campaigning on a platform of not just retaining the tax on inflation, but also wanting to tax you more if you have KiwiSaver, own a business, own a bach, own a lifestyle block or have parents who die.

Which one is fairer?

There’s no grey here, this has the potential to be disastrous for the Government if it cannot get on top of construction and start putting nails through wood. 
But Ardern is surely fuming that minister Phil Twyford made the admission when he did, that the Government didn’t have a hope in hell of reaching its first target – now abandoned. 
Overseas and unable to manage the fallout of Twyford’s verbal diarrhoea, Ardern was left to feebly refer only to the 10-year target of 100,000 houses – probably a moot point given failure is directly proportionate to the prospects of a second and third term. 

Maybe they’ll just cancel elections, so we don’t have any until 2029?

Stuff reports:

Victoria University of Wellington remains tight-lipped on whether it will continue its fight to change its name – despite overwhelmingly negative public sentiment and government disapproval of the plan.
During the institution’s first council meeting for the year, held on Monday, members were asked “to consider” the decision by Minister of Education Chris Hipkins not to approve a change of the university’s name to the University of Wellington.
What that period of consideration did not do, however, was make any decision on whether the name change fight would rage on or be dropped entirely.

The Council need to accept reality. A legal name change is not happening and won’t be approved. Even if they were mad enough to try and judicially review the Minister’s decision, at best they’d get a decision saying the Minister has to reconsider. And do they really think it would be a different decision second time around?

If they do decide to fight on, then it will be time for a new Council.

The Herald reports:

The controversial Saudi sheep deal been shut down, which the Government says will save about $1 million.
The deal was made to set up an agribusiness hub in the Saudi desert for Saudi businessman Hmood Al Ali Al Khalaf, which would be used to showcase innovative New Zealand farming operations.

Good. This was one of the more dubious decisions made by the last Government. Labour were right to criticise it, and right to halt it.

The Herald reports:

Diplomatic links with China appear to have plummeted to a new low as Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern is given the cold shoulder by Beijing and a major tourism promotion is postponed by the superpower.
Ardern was scheduled to visit China early this year but the invitation has been put on hold.
The 2019 China-New Zealand Year of Tourism was meant to be launched with great fanfare at Wellington’s Te Papa museum next week, but that has been postponed by China.

The initiative was announced by the Key Government almost two years ago when Chinese Premier Li Keqiang was in Wellington.

Richard Davies, manager of tourism policy at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment, said: “China has advised that this event has had to be postponed due to changes of schedule on the Chinese side.”
Officials are now working with China to reschedule the opening.
Ardern said after the Cabinet meeting yesterday that the official visit to Beijing is being worked on. Late last year she was on standby to visit but said they could not co-ordinate their diaries. New Zealand sources in Beijing say her first visit to China is not expected any time soon.
The decision by the Government’s chief spy agency, the GCSB, to axe Chinese telco giant Huawei from the Spark 5G broadband rollout is seen by China as New Zealand taking sides with the United States. The Trump Administration publicly asked its Five Eyes partners not to do business with Huawei.

It was naive to think that the Huawei decision would not have serious consequences.

Huawei is arguably China’s most successful company. It is a world leader in technology and shows that China is not just good for cheap manufacturing but also innovation and technology.

Shutting Huawei out of a country is seen as nothing less than an act of economic sabotage against China. Especially when the ban is not predicated on any actual behaviour from Huawei, but simply because it is a company based in China and owned by Chinese.

A smart Government can navigate the challenging relationship between the United States and China. John Key formed incredibly strong personal and professional relationships with both the US and Chinese presidents.

The Ardern-Peters Government has done the opposite. We’ve had the US impose tariffs on us, and China will not be advancing the enhanced FTA negotiations anytime soon. In fact I am sure we will see more and more trade barriers emerge.

Sources in Beijing say China plans trade retaliation and the turning back of an Air New Zealand plane at the weekend may not have been a coincidence. Sources say the airline has been trying to secure extra landing slots in Shanghai without success.
Two-way trade with China trebled over the past decade to $27 billion. “The implications for New Zealand are dangerous at every level,” Burdon said.

And danger that we have imposed on ourselves.

The Herald reports:

A mother in the UK was arrested in front of her children and locked up for seven hours after referring to a transgender woman as a man online, the Daily Mail reported.
Three officers detained Kate Scottow at her home before quizzing her at a police station about an argument with an activist on Twitter over so-called “deadnaming”.
The 38-year-old, from Hitchin, Hertfordshire, had her photograph, DNA and fingerprints taken and remains under investigation.
More than two months after her arrest on December 1, she has had neither her mobile phone or laptop returned, which she says is hampering her studies for a Masters in forensic psychology.

Writing on online forum Mumsnet, Scottow – who has also been served with a court order that bans her from referring to her accuser as a man – claimed: “I was arrested in my home by three officers, with my autistic ten-year-old daughter and breastfed 20-month-old son present. I was then detained for seven hours in a cell with no sanitary products (which I said I needed) before being interviewed then later released under investigation … I was arrested for harassment and malicious communications because I called someone out and misgendered them on Twitter.”
Confirming the arrest, Hertfordshire Police said: “We take all reports of malicious communication seriously.”

What’s sad is this is not some unrealistic future fiction. This is actually happening. You get locked up in jail because you called someone a man on Twitter.

The Herald reports:

Six new affordable KiwiBuild houses in the expensive Wanaka market remain unsold despite being marketed since October for just $565,000 to $635,000 – around $100,000 cheaper than other similar places in the same area.
Homes are being advertised in the alpine settlement and its subdivision Northlake, being developed by private capital specialists Winton, trying to draw buyers: “Live the Wanaka lifestyle in an architecturally-designed and affordable KiwiBuild Home. View our first 10 KiwiBuild homes.” …

Clint Smith, a KiwiBuild spokesman said “as with all property sales, some of the time purchases don’t end up being completed” but for privacy reasons, he declined to say why sales did not go ahead.
The 10 homes were initially offered in a ballot but did not sell.

This suggests we should not just be looking at how many houses get built, but how many actually get sold and occupied by a first home buyer?

Four of the 10 were sold off the plans. One is occupied, two are complete and awaiting council sign off, and one is due for completion late in February.

So in fact only one out of ten occupied.

The latest poll is Newshub Reid Research.

The results are:

• National 41.6%
• Labour 47.5%
• Greens 5.1%
• NZ First 2.9%

I understand the poll wasn’t done last week but is mainly from January. It is curious they waited so long to release it, if that is the case.

January was of course when the PM had huge attention at Davos and issues such as the Kiwibuild meltdown had not really gone full frontal. Governments often get a bump in January as it is the quiet season and there is no Parliament.

So I’ll be more interested in the next poll.

But what is very interesting is that NZ First are below 3% and well on their way to being outski at the election, and also the Greens are also hovering on the verge of outski also.

The next few months will be interesting as both minor parties scramble to get above or stay above 5%.

The Herald reports:

An online petition is pushing for a firefighter fighting the Nelson blaze to be spared deportation.
The petition ‘Stop the Deportation of Steve Webster from NZ’ was set up on Change.org yesterday by friend and former volunteer firefighter Ken Mahon.
Mahon said he began the online petition at 3pm yesterday – without telling Webster – after he saw new social media photo of Webster all dirty from fighting the Tasman fires and decided he had to do something.
“Here’s this guy busting his gut for a country that wants to throw him out. I just thought I’ve had enough of this good guy being treated badly,” he said.

Mahon said he has known Steve Webster for three years through his involvement in the fire service.
“He is a real top bloke,” he said.
Mahon said that as well as Webster being a volunteer firefighter, he would help anyone with anything – from fundraising to shifting house.

He should have been a drug dealer instead of a firefighter. Then he’d get residency from the Minister instead of deportation.

The Guardian reports:

Sir Lynton Crosby offered to work on a campaign to cancel the 2022 Qatar World Cup and get it awarded to another country in return for £5.5m, according to a leaked plan that gives a rare insight into the activities of one of the world’s best-known political operatives.
The detailed pitch document – “a proposal for a campaign to expose the truth of the Qatar regime and bring about the termination of the 2022 World Cup in Qatar” – was written in April last year and personally signed by Crosby.
He said that if engaged, his lobbying firm, CTF Partners, would require £300,000 a month for 18 months to focus on efforts to delegitimise the Qatari government and put pressure on Fifa to “restart the bidding process” and award the World Cup to another country.

Lynton must really not like Qatar as his quoted rate of £5.5m would appear to be heavily discounted.

Normally he would charge over £10m to get the decision of a global body overturned.

The Herald reports:

Numbers published on the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE)’s website show more than 10,000 jobs are expected to be created as a result of Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) announcements made last year.
Of that, 7000 – almost 70 per cent – are estimated to come from just one project: The East Bay of Plenty Regional Development Project Implementation.
This project was allocated just under $240,000 for “funding a position to manage and report on 65 key economic development projects”.

This almost rises to the level of fraud.

Claiming 7,000 jobs are likely to be created by one $240,000 grant is voodoo economics. Hell even voodoo doctors are not that fraudulent.

I’m surprised they didn’t also try to sell them a bridge at the same time.

The latest political party has an initial website here and is seeking 500 members so they can register.

They explain their background:

We believe it is time for a new political party that champions a politics of sustainability.

Sustainability is based on the principle that everything we need for our survival and well-being depends on our natural environment. It means meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Our focus on sustainability means that we would be able to work with political parties on the left or right of politics to ensure that the environment is always a top political priority regardless of who makes up the government.

Our primary focus is on environmental matters such as clean water, sustainable oceans, protection of our native species, dealing with climate change

They explain that only minor parties in the centre get political power under MMP:

The Mixed-Member Proportional (MMP) system means that minor parties can have a major influence on a government as part of a coalition. The coalition arrangements of the current government allocated billions of dollars to political trophies and slush funds – the price of NZ First support for a Labour-led Government. We have also seen the scrapping of important environmental initiatives like the mandatory installation of cameras on fishing boats because the fishing industry are key NZ First donors and supporters. MMP should deliver better outcomes than this.

NZ First has also stopped the largest marine sanctuary in the world, in the Kermadecs.

The Green Party has made a deliberate decision not to use the leverage that comes with the number of MPs they have in Parliament. Instead of negotiating with both major parties, they have made a decision to always support the formation of a Labour Government meaning that Labour can take them for granted. This is no way to get the best deal for the environment.

Having given away their negotiating advantage, they are in a weak position to demand funding for cleaner beaches and rivers, for modern sewage infrastructure in major cities, for sustainable management of our fisheries, a major upgrade in predator control, nor for the significant increases in science and research funding that will underwrite a modern, sustainable economy.

It is obvious to everyone that NZ First has massively more influence than the Greens, despite getting only slightly fewer more votes. The reason is because they have political leverage.

The Greens have a historic tendency to be suspicious of scientific innovation – particularly in biotechnology – and hostile to business. New Zealand deserves a political party that will work together with the innovators in business and science who will lead the way through the complex and interconnected sustainability challenges of the coming century.

An environmental party that will work with both science and business would be welcome.

If you want to see a party in Parliament that puts the environment first – that is prepared to deal with either National or Labour – and puts clean water, sustainable fisheries, protection of our native species, climate change and a sustainable economy and society at the top of the political agenda, please register your details below.

From what I can tell this is not a blue-green party, Nor it is the red-green party of The Greens. It is a green-green party,

Hamish Rutherford reports:

Inland Revenue has admitted it was wrong to ask for New Zealanders’ political persuasions in a survey they are carrying out for the Government on the eve of the release of a crucial tax reform report.
The taxman is researching the public’s views on globalisation and fairness in the tax system. Questions had included where respondents sit on the political spectrum, prompting questions of whether taxpayers are funding sensitive political polling.

After days of defending the research, Inland Revenue conceded on Saturday night that it was wrong to ask the political question. 
“We should not have included the question about political spectrum,” group head of communications and marketing Andrew Stott said, adding that the department would not include the question in its research. 

So the question now has to be, why did they include that question on where respondents sit on the political spectrum? Who proposed it? Who was consulted? Who approved it?

If I was National, I’d be filing an OIA request asking for all correspondence around the question design. I’d be very interested in whether the Minister’s office was consulted.

Inland Revenue was forced to reveal details of the $125,000 research project it is undertaking with polling company Colmar Brunton, after repeatedly playing down its significance.
Around 1000 people are being asked questions about their views on Inland Revenue, whether they are generally trusting, believe what they read in the media, pay too much tax or whether public services should get more funding.

This must be a mistake. There is no way a 1,000 person poll would cost $125,000. Not even a Government Department could be so wasteful.

Even if it was a 30 minute survey, that would be a cost of $250 per calling hour.

I can only presume the $125,000 is for a wider piece of research, of what the poll is a small part.

Inland Revenue initially refused to release the polling questions. Group head of communications and marketing Andrew Stott denied the poll included political leaning questions. “I’d be incredibly amazed if there was,” Stott said.
He later admitted he had not checked the poll.

So IRD denied they had asked such a question. You really should check before you deny.

National’s finance spokeswoman Amy Adams planned to complain to the State Services Commission.
“It is deeply concerning that IRD is doing overtly political polling on the eve of the release of the Tax Working Group’s final report,” Adams said.
Adams said the survey needed to be examined independently.
“Given the implications of politicisation this raises, it is something the State Services Commissioner Peter Hughes should investigate and confirm that the IRD are not carrying out political services for the Government.”

There is nothing wrong with the IRD doing research on tax policy. But when the questions are about where people sit on the political spectrum, that becomes very different.

David Farrar, managing director of Curia Research, a polling company best known for its work for National, said the polling could be highly valuable for ministers to inform political decisions.
“I cannot recall a government department ever asking questions before which effectively are political rather than policy questions,” Farrar said, especially if the polling allowed ministers to target the views of particular parts of the spectrum which were likely to be swing voters.

I’ll be very interested to read, if it comes out, how this occurred. Was it just an over eager staffer, or was there someone asking for this info?

Newshub reports:

Newshub understands the Government will ban smoking in vehicles if children are present, with Associate Health Minister Jenny Salesa making the announcement on Sunday morning.

I support this. A car is a very confined space and kids shouldn’t be exposed to second hand smoke. If there are no kids present then people should be able to smoke in their own cars. But toddlers and children should not be in cars with someone smoking.

Some may not have caught up with what is happening in Virginia. It’s crazy.

The Governor, Ralph Northam, is under huge pressure to resign after it emerged his yearbook page has a photo of two men – one wearing blackface and one dressed in KKK robes. He initially apologised for being in the photo, and then the next day claimed it wasn’t him. No one believes him. He has also admitted to doing blackface once before to dress up as Michael Jackson (wouldn’t whiteface be more appropriate for that? 🙂

Maybe the blackface photo is survivable, but being in a photo with someone in KKK robes is not. One is merely offensive, while the other is hateful. It’s like dressing up as a Nazi, and send that in as your yearbook photo.

The Lieutenant Governor is Justin Fairfax. Also a Democrat and incidentally African-American. Normally the Governor would resign and he’d take over.

But a Democratic activist who is now a university professor accused him of sexual assault at a democratic conference around 15 years ago. There are no witnesses. Do all the Democrats who demanded one believe the Kavanagh accusers, now look the other way for Fairfax?

And now a second woman has come forward, accusing Fairfax of rape.

But it doesn’t stop there. The third in line of succession is the Attorney-General, Mark Herring. He called on the Governor to resign for the blackface/KKK photo. Now he has admitted he also dressed up in blackface. Arguably could normally survive that, except he had explicitly called on the Governor to resign.

If all three Democrats resigned, then the 4th in line is the Speaker of the Virginia House of Delegates – Republican Kirk Cox.

The Democrats won’t want that, so if all three men have to go, they may arrange the order so the Lieutenant Governor resigns first, the Governor appoints a replacement. The Governor then resigns and the new Lieutenant Governor becomes Governor.

But all such a mess. Almost unheard of for the the top three people in a state to all have their careers crumble at the same time.

Radio NZ report:

The 21-member working group set up to advise the government’s response to the mental health inquiry has been replaced with several more working groups.

This could almost pass for a parody, if it was part of a novel.

First of all Labour has no mental health policy except they will hold an inquiry, which is basically get a working group to tell us what our policy should be.

Then they get the results of the inquiry and rather than just accept the recommendations, they set up a 21 person working group to second guess the inquiry and come up with their own ideas.

And the 21 person working group is now going to have nine working groups replacing it, all trying to decide something.

And no doubt then they will need a further working group to collate all the material from the nine working groups.

It’s nuts.

But mental health advocates have said the process runs the risk of unnecessarily repeating the inquiry.

No kidding.

Mental Health Foundation chief executive Shaun Robinson raised concerns.
“Part of our feedback was you have to be really clear what it is you’re asking people, otherwise this could look like the inquiry is just carrying on. When do we stop talking and start doing?

Doing? Talking and empathy is surely enough.

Maybe the Government could set a ten year target for something, and then abolish all interim targets.

Troy Bowker writes:

If you add up the number of people who have retirement savings, own small and medium size businesses or own part of a family bach, it  covers the vast majority of the all important middle class in New Zealand society.
Approximately 2 million New Zealanders have Kiwisaver accounts or invest in other managed funds. 
There are 600,000 small and medium size business owners in New Zealand.  There are over 250,000 baches, often jointly owned by families.

Yep, every small business owner in NZ will get caught. Every bach owner. Every person with any capital investments. Anyone who owns a lifestyle block over 4,500 square kms.

Oh, and on top of all that, anyone who has parents who die.

You may not get caught by the CGT initially, but you will eventually. The old saying is that nothing is certain except death or taxes. Well Cullen’s CGT will make that doubly true by taxing you when your parents die (unless you move into their old house).

The Herald reports:

A stoush has broken out between Northland regional transport committee chairman John Bain and Regional Economic Development Minister Shane Jones, with Jones stating Bain “has had his day”.
The war of words started yesterday at a sod turning for upgrades to the Loop Rd and State Highway 1 intersection south of Whangārei.
During his speech, Jones turned his attention to the much discussed four lane highway between Whangārei and Auckland, and said he and Bain were on “different sides of the debate”.

Everyone up north is on a different side to Jones.

Whangārei’s National MP Dr Shane Reti pointed out all of the Northland mayors and the regional council chairman travelled to Wellington last year to lobby Transport Minister Phil Twyford for the four lane highway.

Giving them some chicken feed money for some minor roads, while refusing to fund the main access road, is not popular up north. Every local Council says a proper access road between Auckland and Northland is what is needed, but Jones can’t deliver it because of the Greens.

A guest post from Bryan Leyland:

The West Coast District Council has asked the government to provide evidence that demonstrates that the policies claimed to reduce New Zealand’s emissions of carbon dioxide and agricultural methane are justified.
 
They are right to do so.
 
Recently, the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition formally asked the Royal Society of New Zealand to provide evidence based on observational data that man-made greenhouse gases cause dangerous global warming. They were unable to do so. We persuaded them to consult Prof James Renwick who was also unable to provide the evidence. All they did was refer us to the IPCC reports.  Scientists with the Climate Conversation Group are reviewing the latest IPCC report for convincing evidence of dangerous man-made global warming. They hope to announce their results in the near future.
 
Careful scrutiny of the reports found many statements that were not supported in the technical reports and revealed several references to the fact that there were major uncertainties in many of the critical factors fed into the computer models that, alone, predict dangerous global warming. None of these models have been validated, and none has made an accurate prediction. Over the last three years, world temperatures have dropped by 0.3° and, according to the satellites, are the same as they were in 2002.
 
If man-made global warming is found to be real and dangerous, the government’s “carbon zero” policies will fail dismally unless they result in a reduction in worldwide emissions at a reasonable cost. A close examination of these policies indicates that they will lead to an increase in worldwide emissions, higher electricity prices and do serious damage to many of our efficient and productive industries.
 
The ban on future gas and oil exploration has paralysed the industry and is likely to mean that we will have to start importing gas and increased imports of oil and coal will be needed to make up for the gas shortfall and to keep the lights on in a dry year. This will result in higher costs and increased emissions. Higher gas prices will lead to a major increase in electricity prices such as we have seen over the last four months, when problems with gas supply more than doubled wholesale electricity prices. Continuing gas supply constraints indicate that the high prices will continue for several months.
 
The most critical factor in power supply in New Zealand is keeping the lights on in a dry year when hydropower energy generation drops by 10% of total demand. Transpower has already warned of a high risk of dry year shortages. To mitigate the dry year risk Huntly needs to have 1 million tons of coal on its stockpile as a national insurance policy. This will only happen if Genesis is compensated for the annual cost of maintaining the stockpile. The embargo on gas exploration rules out gas storage at Ahuroa even though it could provide the dry year reserve with less emissions.
 
Increasing the tax on CO2 emissions will further increase the cost of power from Huntly. Whenever it is burning coal it is likely to be the most expensive generator and this will jack up the wholesale price that is paid to every generator. Hydro and other generators will reap windfall profits. Every dollar paid in CO2 tax by Huntly will provide something like $10 in windfall profits. Even Genesis will be better off because it also owns hydro power stations. So the perverse result will be that consumers will pay a lot more for electricity and the generators will have a financial incentive to make sure that Huntly continues to burn coal!
 
The policy on agricultural emissions does not make sense. There is considerable debate worldwide on whether or not methane is a significant greenhouse gas. Some estimates say that it has about 80 times the effect of the same weight of CO2, NIWA says 25, others say that it is only 6 and some are sure it has no effect. If it the effect is small, it is not worth bothering about because methane emissions are much smaller than those of carbon dioxide. This must be resolved before any action is taken.
 
If, as the Green Party hopes, government actions constrains dairy production to reduce methane emissions the shortfall will be made up by less efficient and more expensive production overseas. So the net effect will be an increase in worldwide emissions.
 
Wind and solar will do little to mitigate CO2. The records show that wind power is least during the critical autumn and early winter period and solar power is least in the wintertime. If the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine for several days we will be burning more coal and gas and could easily have massive blackouts. Wind and solar can only make a useful contribution if, for instance, we spent something like $3 – $5 billion on the pumped storage facility that has been identified in the South Island. This is likely to meet strong opposition from the Green Party and getting it through the Resource Management Act would be a nightmare. Maintaining a million tonne coal stockpile would do the same job for about 10% of the cost and without an unacceptable 10 year time delay.
 
Policies encouraging electric cars are likely to have little effect because most of the power they need will come from increased generation at gas and coal fired stations. Also, battery manufacture causes significant emissions of CO2 that take years to recover.
 
If the government really wanted to reduce emissions from power generation, it would be seriously considering nuclear power generation. Small modular nuclear reactors that are inherently safe and produce cheap and reliable power will soon be available. Worldwide, 170,000 MW of nuclear generation is under construction or proposed.
 
Bearing in mind the tiny effect New Zealand can have on global emissions and the huge uncertainties surrounding almost every aspect of “climate change”, any rational government would concentrate on policies that would reduce worldwide emissions in a cost effective manner. 

Bryan Leyland MSc, DistFEngNZ, FIMechE, FIEE(rtd), MRSNZ, is an electrical engineer with 60 years experience worldwide in electricity generation, transmission and distribution. He and his wife are majority owners of a small hydro power station.

The Herald reports:

The National Party says the Government’s plans to reform polytechnics and institutes of technology will lead to 1000 job losses, a radical centralised model, and the closure of polytechnics in the regions.
But Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern has rubbished these claims, adding that the Government needs to intervene in order to save polytechnics in the regions and stop job losses.
Education Minister Chris Hipkins, however, conceded that the proposals had “implications” for people’s jobs, but it was irresponsible to speculate about job losses.
This morning, in her State of the Nation speech to a business audience in Auckland, Ardern said the vocational education sector needed urgent restructuring, and that Hipkins would release a consultation document next week.

But National Party leader Simon Bridges said National had been leaked details of the document, and it recommended abolishing regional polytechnics and centralising a number of functions into four regional hubs.
He said it would also lead to 1000 fewer jobs and a “very radical, nationalised” model more typical of Venezuela, which would take control away from communities.

No matter what the problem is, Labour’s solution is centralisation and giving more powers to bureaucrats and less to communities.

Liam Hehir writes:

The Parliament of the European Union has recognised social democrat Juan Guaidó as the interim president of Venezuela, in accordance with the country’s constitution. In doing so, it joins a number of individual European states as well as most of Venezuela’s neighbouring countries. This should make it harder for New Zealanders to dismiss what’s happening in that benighted country as a “yankee” coup. Hatred of Donald Trump really ought not to excuse toleration for the actual tyranny of Nicholas Maduro, who has assumed dictatorship over the country.
 
Chris Trotter, a veteran commentator from the Left, has a long piece out that kind of defends the Maduro government, while admitting some mistakes. He argues that you can’t blame nationalisations for the disintegration of the country since the sector was first nationalised 40 years ago.
 
This half-hearted talking point, which has made the rounds on social media, flies in the face of the recorded facts of what has happened in Venezuela. Here is a list of what Chavez did to business in his country up until 2012, when things started to fall apart. By 2015, more than 1,200 private firms had been seized. There is a reason why Venezuela languishes near Cuba, North Korea and Zimbabwe in most indexes of economic freedom.
 
So what’s caused the collapse? Trotter lays the blame at the shrinking oil prices which have damaged but not destroyed other oil dependent countries, conspiracies by internal saboteurs and, of course, the evil United States and its wicked sanctions.
 
Ken Livingtone, a former UK Labour MP and mayor of London, also blames the US and appeared on the BBC to defend the Maduro regime. He spoke for many New Zealand defenders of “21st Century Socialism” when, on the BBC, he laid the blame for the catastrophe on US sanctions. And like those New Zealanders, he couldn’t name the sanctions in question.
 
When it was pointed out that sanctions against Venezuelan oil were only imposed very recently, he pointed to other, old sanctions. It was pointed out that the first US sanctions levied against the country were imposed by Barack Obama in 2015. This was well after Venezuela had started to disintegrate and, in any event, only targeted regime leaders.
 
“Red Ken” had no answer to this, unsurprisingly. In the end, he had to fall back on a claim to have been briefed by the regime’s ambassador in London, who blamed the United States. Naturally.
 
It would all be rather funny but for the scale of the human misery on display. The economic policies of Chavismo has created a refugee crisis unlike any other in the Western Hemisphere. Children are dying of hunger in one of the most resource-rich countries in the world. The fact that no Green Party MPs aren’t really interested in it doesn’t mean it isn’t so.
 
Thus far, the New Zealand government has held out against the tide of liberal nations recognising Guaidó’s government (or, at least, calling for new elections). This passive support for Maduro has been justified on a principle of non-interference with the domestic politics of other countries. As with all principles, adherence to this “prime directive” seems to be somewhat selective.
 
Guaidó has called for humanitarian aid to relieve the suffering of his compatriots. The regime refuses to allow aid in. Which side sounds like it has the best interests of a suffering people at heart?
 
Whether we recognise his administration or not, New Zealand should respond to Guaidó’s call to alms. As I pointed out last week, the country has made a lot of money out of selling milk powder to Venezuela in the recent past. Quite apart from your stance on the politics of the situation, it is right and just that we come to their aid in their hour of darkness.

Newsroom reports:

The Opposition is taking aim at the Provincial Growth Fund for employing more than twice as many bureaucrats in Wellington as jobs it has created in the regions.
The Provincial Development Unit, which is part of the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, currently has 118 staff. Eleven of those staff are based in the regions, the rest in Wellington. 
This contrasts with the 54 jobs National says the fund has so far created in the regions, according to information obtained by the party’s Regional Development spokesperson Paul Goldsmith. 
“It stretches credibility if it’s creating twice as many bureaucrats as new jobs,” Goldsmith said. 

118 more MBIE staff – that’s definitely what provincial New Zealand needs.