“The existence of persons and property preceded the existence of the legislator, and his function is only to guarantee their safety.”

– Claude Frederic Bastiat

The quote of the week is brought to you by the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union. To support the Union’s campaign for lower taxes and less government waste, click here.

Trans-Tasman sums it up nicely:

Usually it has been Labour, going back to then party president Mike Williams’ infamous 2007 “H Fee” Sydney trip, which has persistently taken the view Key is a crook and if they keep digging for long enough they will find something on him.

Ten years is a long time to run the same strategy when it isn’t working but, after apparently ditching it earlier in the year, Labour is back with a vengeance

Hopefully Labour will ignore this and continue on with their ten year strategy and make it a 20 year strategy.

Stuff reports:

A Wairarapa council has approved the appointment of unelected iwi representatives, with voting rights, to its standing committees.

Masterton District Council voted on Wednesday to appoint representatives from Wairarapa’s two iwi, Kahungunu ki Wairarapa and Rangitane o Wairarapa, each with speaking and voting rights, to its policy and finance, and audit and risk, committees.

They also have speaking rights at full council meetings, which ratify the recommendations from the two standing committees.

I think it can be a good thing to have Iwi representatives as non-voting members of appropriate Council committees, or even of the Council. It can be an effective way to make sure they are consulted. I think Iwi do have special interests in certain areas of natural resources.

But I am totally against voting rights. Doing so undermines democracy. You should not have unelected people voting which means a majority vote may only be achieved because of them.

Stuff reports:

Microsoft’s Internet Explorer is no longer king of the browser hill.

That distinction belongs instead to Google’s Chrome, which according to NetMarketShare.com, registered a collective desktop market share for all versions of the browser of 41.67 per cent in April, nipping IE, which had a 41.37 per cent share.

The market share for Microsoft Edge, Internet Explorer’s successor, is included in the tally.

Mozilla Firefox (9.76 per cent), Apple Safari (4.91 per cent) and Opera (1.89 per cent) round out the top five.

I’ve have not used IE for 15 years or so. Netscape Navigator and then Firefox for many years and Chrome for the last few.

On Kiwiblog the browser breakdown is:

• Chrome 44%
• Safari 27%
• IE 11%
• Firefox 11%
• Edge 3%

Stuff reports:

A major announcement on the future of media company NZME – publisher of The New Zealand Herald – is expected by Wednesday.

Shares in its parent, APN News & Media, are in a trading halt on the Australian Stock Exchange pending details of a “potentially material transaction’ for its New Zealand media arm.

The Australian reported APN and Fairfax Media were both considering spinning off their New Zealand media businesses which could then be merged, citing unnamed sources.

Wow, that would be huge. If the two media operations merged, I imagine there would be massive job losses as you would presumably have one combined news desk, press gallery team, website etc etc.

It would be very bad for media competition. However there is already limited competition at the print level, as every city has pretty much one daily newspaper only. I imagine the Sunday newspapers might rationalise also.

Fairfax Media acknowledged The Australian’s report in a statement to the Australian stock exchange but did not confirm its content.

“Fairfax continues to explore options for all its businesses including Fairfax New Zealand, but at this time there is nothing to disclose,” it said.

Hardly a denial.

For the second year in a row Labour has received fewer donations than the Greens. This shows how much trouble Labour is in when basically no one will donate to them. There’s money out there for left wing parties – but it is going to the Greens.

Total donations (over $1,500) in 2015 were:

1. National $1,400,896
2. Greens $407,978
3. Labour $279.134
4. ACT $162,067
5. NZ First $79,620
6. Conservatives $39,360 (plus loan of $99,000)
7. Maori Party $28,085
8. ALCP $1,492
9. Internet Part $677

I understand Labour is so broke they are forcing their MPs to pay a levy to fund the likely Mt Roskill by-election.

Major donors are:

1. National – Gallagher Group – $60,000
2. Conservatives – Colin Craig – $39,300 (and $99,000 loan)
3. ACT – Dame Jenny Gibbs – $33,589
4. National – Adrian Burr – $27,350
5. National – GMP Dairy – $25,338
6. National – Garth Barfoot – $25,000
7. ACT – Heather Anderson $24,448

Rosemary McLead writes:

I am bored with the Sounds murders. I’ve had it up to my nostrils with them. I am bored with Scott Watson. I do not count him as a martyr to the justice system, but as a convicted double murderer. Which is reasonable, because that is what he is. As far as I’m concerned he doesn’t deserve your sympathy, or mine.

I think of Ben Smart and Olivia Hope, two young people with their whole long lifetimes before them, whose existence was snuffed out – a jury agreed – by this man, who now merits my tax dollars being squandered on him in the name of fashion.

It is fashion, of course it is, because documentaries that cast doubt on criminal convictions are beloved of kindly people who believe the justice system is an evil thing about which they cannot bring themselves to be kind. Many nice people like to believe the world is an evil place, and that dark forces drive the police to frame the innocent. Yes, it happens, but this is how often in this country: not much.

There would be no documentary to establish Watson’s guilt for a million dollars.

No ratings in a show saying the Police got the right person. But maybe Ian Wishart should apply for funding for a documentary backing his book that concluded Watson did do it.

These documentaries are made because kindly people, people with good hearts, just cannot bring themselves to believe that a man who says he’s innocent could lie. Or that his lawyer most likely crafted a defence without knowing the whole truth any more than you or I. Or that everybody’s family believes them to be innocent and will say so, repeatedly, as Watson’s father does. And rather than sit through the tedium of a long trial, which Watson – and his jury – did, they would prefer to believe a documentary that sweeps aside inconvenient detail and spells out a story in words of one syllable, between ad breaks, in a commercial hour.

Will this documentary show the evidence that supports Watson’s conviction, or only the evidence that supports their contention? Will it be advocacy or factual?

Stuff reports:

The Labour Party would ban foreign trusts to protect New Zealand’s reputation as the Panama Papers saga continues.

God, is Labour incapable of any form of considered decision making.

There could well be some changes needed to foreign trusts, and John Shewan is reporting back exactly on that.

But a trust is not some evil thing. Half the Labour caucus have a trust. Anyone who has a will has a form of trust. And having a foreign trust is not proof of wrong doing or tax evasion or even avoidance. To quote Roger Thompson:

Wealthy people in other countries have these same reasons for using trusts. There may also be a prevalence of kidnapping and blackmail in their country of residence, forced heirship laws (lack of freedom to choose who inherits their wealth when they die) and possibility of arbitrary state seizure of assets. The family and their businesses may be spread geographically and be subject to multiple laws in multiple countries. These are all situations where a trust can offer protection and flexibility.

However many countries do not have laws which enable the creation of trusts. Trusts are typically only found in countries that have adopted the English common law type systems such as UK, commonwealth countries and the USA.

For people in countries that do not have trusts they will need to consider trusts established in other countries that do have laws under which trusts can be created.

Any party that doesn’t make up policy based on is it a good soundbite would look at a proportionate response to the issue of whether some foreign trusts in NZ has been mis-used. Do we need changes to disclosure, to how they are taxed, to what level of details are provided. Do we need a central register? These are all legitimate and worthwhile questions.

But just coming out and saying all foreign trusts are bad and evil and must be banned from New Zealand is hysterical populism that just shows how desperate Labour is.

Banning something should be the last resort, not the first resort.

Stuff reports:

Plans to buy up property in rural Marlborough to make way for a hydroelectric scheme have hit a road block, with one man refusing to leave his home.

It’s not his home. He was renting it and the rental agreement has expired.

Wairau Valley man Kieran Venning said he had no intention of leaving his rented property, about 40 kilometres west of Blenheim, despite being served an eviction notice.

Power company TrustPower tried to remove Venning on Friday by sending a bailiff round to his house, but he locked the doors and told the bailiff he was trespassing.

Actually Venning is trespassing.

TrustPower community relations manager Graeme Purches said the company bought the property Venning lived on along with several others in preparation for the scheme.

So it is Trustpower’s house.

Purches rented the house to Venning on a periodic tenancy agreement, he said.

When Venning did not leave after 42 days’ notice, Purches went to the Tenancy Tribunal to have him evicted.

“We’ve tried all the reasonable approaches with this guy. We’ve been dealing with this guy for over two months,” Purches said. 

Rural constable Beau Webster, of Blenheim, said he accompanied the bailiff on Friday to “avoid animosity”.

Venning told Webster he had lodged an injunction in court to stop his landlord evicting him.

A court officer had no record of the injunction, Webster said.

So he is a liar also.

Venning said he had lived in Marlborough since November 2011. 

The Wairau Valley was already being “desecrated” by vineyards and he wanted to stop further destruction, he said. 

“The eco-system and the environment can’t sustain or withstand it.” 

Those desecrating vineyards provide jobs to thousands of people. Also some pretty good wines.

Since the Budget last year I’ve been compiling a list of spending demands made by various MPs, unions, NGOs and others. For each spending demand I’ve calculated a ballpark annual cost of the demand, once fully implemented to see how much taxes would need to increase to fund the demands.

Well as of today the spending demands in the last year have topped a massive $14 billion. That would require the top tax rate to go from 33% to 100% to fund it.

And the scary thing is I have probably missed a few of the demands. This is just something I have done in my spare time. I’m hoping the Taxpayers Union will take up this task after this year’s Budget and keep a more robust check on things.

So what are the biggest items called for:

1. 60,000 more state houses – $1.8 billion a year
2. Eradicate all pests from the mainland – $1.47 billion a year
3. Abolish tertiary fees – $1.2 billion a year
4. Increase aid to 0.7% of GDP – $1.14 billion a year
5. Change early childhood teacher ration from 1:5 to 1:3 – $1.04 billion a year
6. Pay a community wage – $1.04 billion a year
7. $1 billion a year for public housing  – $1 billion a year
8. Increase welfare spending by $1 billion a year – $1 billion a year

Now these costs are not the work of hundreds of hours of economic analysis. They are a superficial ballpark estimate. In the case of the 60,000 more state houses, presumably there would be some rental income to offset them which I’ve not yet calculated. But there would also be ongoing repairs and maintenance and rental expenses. So again this is just about showing the huge amount of spending demands made by politicians and lobby groups, and how any Government that gave into them all would bankrupt the country. I’m sure people can and will quibble over individual cost estimates.

The spreadsheet of the demands is here –Spending Costs

I’ve broken down the demands by who is making them. Again this is incomplete. I suspect most of the stuff Labour MPs has called for, the Greens support also. So this is probably under-states the level of demand each group has made:

1. NGOs – $5.54 billion
2. Individuals – $3.51 billion
3. Labour MPs – $2.47 billion
4. Media – $1.56 billion
5. NZ First – $1.44 billion
6. Unions – $611 million
7. Green MPs – $406 million
8. Govt agencies – $181 million

Now again this is based just on if I have seen it in a news story. I’ve not gone through press releases from MPs, in which case I think the totals would be even higher.

Bob Jones writes in NBR:

Let’s get some facts straight, once and for all on this matter.  First, most house dwellers in Auckland are owners.   Make no mistake, it’s no crisis in their eyes.  Good luck to them for this wealth windfall. 

Prime Minister John Howard summed it up beautifully a dozen years back.  He listened patiently while a current affairs television journalist berated him about house prices.  “Listen,” he said, when the bore finally finished.  “Over the past three decades I’ve been harangued from one end of Australia to the other on every imaginable subject, with one exception. No one yet has complained to me about their home’s rising value.”

Secondly, Auckland is today and has been for the last decade or so, Australasia’s fastest-growing city.  In a nutshell, that’s the market, otherwise known as the public, voting with their feet – a huge compliment to the city.  With that rapid population growth comes unavoidable baggage, namely transport congestion and housing shortages. Nothing is free but what’s undebatable from the continuing inflow, not just from abroad but also from within New Zealand, is that those problems are a price people are willing to pay. That’s not opinion but logic; otherwise they wouldn’t keep coming.

Land re-zoning, house, road and rail construction to resolve these demand pressures can’t be achieved with a wave of a wand. They not only take time but lots of it.  More important, they’re all happening in Auckland right now. No one is sitting on their hands, despite the newspapers’ tiresome handwringing.

This situation is a global one with other cities experiencing similar inflow booms. London, Hong Kong, Sydney, New York, San Francisco and many more, are all having the same growth problems, without the accompanying tedious journalistic infantilism we are enduring.

Bob Jones is right that these large increases are occurring in many major cities around the world.

And there is a huge amount happening on both the demand and supply side, which I detail below. But the one thing which would make the biggest difference – a major shift in the urban boundary for Auckland rests with the Auckland council, not the Government. If you want cheaper land in Auckland, vote for a Council that will make the land available.

What has been done though is:

1. Tax changes so any sale of an investment property within two years gets fully taxed
2. Houses no longer depreciated for tax purposes
3. Reserve Bank introduced restrictions on the number of mortgages a ban can offer with less than 20% capital (and in Auckland less than 30%)
4. Obligation for all buyers to have an IRD number to track if foreign demand is significant and needs a policy response
5. New home construction in Auckland up from 3,579 a year to 9,566 in the last year
6. The KiwiSaver HomeStart scheme which allows more KiwiSaver members to use their savings and a grant of up to $20,000
7. A Government building programme in partnership with Auckland Council through the Tamaki Regeneration Company building 7,500 homes
8. The fully Government owned Hobsonville Land Company building 400 homes
9. Almost 28,000 new houses and sections consented in Auckland through the Special Housing Areas and a further 28,000 likely
10. RMA changes which have reduced some consenting costs

Stuff reports:

Another Countdown supermarket in Blenheim has been banned from selling booze, meaning all three Countdown supermarkets in town are alcohol-free. 

Countdown Springlands, on Middle Renwick Rd, cannot sell alcohol for five days, from May 20-25, after failing a controlled purchase operation in September last year.

Countdown Blenheim, on Arthur St, is serving a 42-day suspension after it was caught selling to minors for the fifth time in same police sting.

As I have said before, Countdown seems to have a real problem here. It is good the law is being enforced.

In the controlled purchase operation in September, two boys, aged 16 and 17, visited seven off-licence premises including Countdown Springlands and Countdown Blenheim. 

The boys gave identification showing their real age to checkout staff and still walked away with alcohol at three stores.

That’s even worse that not asking to see the ID – they saw it, and didn’t even look at the date of birth (or ignored it).

Countdown area manager Joanne McNaught said her team was very disappointed the stores failed the police sting.

“We apologise to our customers again for the inconvenience.”

All checkout staff at Countdown Springlands were re-trained after the sting.

The store hired more supervisors, stopped selling alcohol through self-checkout, and started asking people who looked under 30 for identification instead of people who looked under 25.

Useful steps but why do these breaches keep happening? Not rocket science to check ID.

The Herald reports:

Students accepted into teaching degrees have some of the lowest entrance scores across all bachelor programmes, prompting calls to mandate postgraduate entry to lift teacher status and quality.

Education leaders from seven New Zealand universities wrote a joint letter to government last week recommending the move, in a bid to get the “best and brightest” graduates into classrooms.

I think there is merit in this. The current requirements are seen as an easy option by many.

Professor Moltzen said the deans group had come up with seven recommendations on how to lift the prestige of the profession. These included requiring a postgraduate qualification before registration, and raising entry requirements to teaching courses.

“We felt it was important to be proactive. There have been concerns about the status of the profession for as long as I can remember, but I think it’s probably lower now than when I started,” he said.

“I think we can always improve our performance and improve the quality of teachers going into the profession – but I don’t think there’s a message there the profession is failing. The vast majority of teachers care deeply about their students and work incredibly hard.”

Lifting the prestige of the profession would be a good thing. Other initiatives such as Teach First can also help attract people to teaching.

The Herald reports:

A New Zealand-born Chinese teenager has blasted the attitudes of some Kiwis towards her, saying they see her as “just another foreigner” here to buy their houses.

The 17-year-old student, who wanted to remain anonymous, said she now felt unwelcome in the country she was born and raised in.

Her experience is felt by many young Chinese, a community leader has revealed.

In an open letter sent to the Herald, the Auckland teen spoke about the influx of foreign buyers in the New Zealand housing market and how she now felt as if ordinary Kiwis blamed her because of her ethnic background.

“Just recently, I no longer feel like I am welcome in the country I have lived in for my whole life. I am viewed daily as just another foreigner who is here to take houses away from local New Zealanders.

“Despite how much I love the land I spent my childhood in, I get annoyed glances because people who share the same blood as me are taking away opportunities that rightfully belonged in our society.

“Except these opportunities are taken from me too.”

The teen lives on the North Shore, where she attends high school.

She said she is proud to be born a Kiwi, that she had been schooled in New Zealand and hopes to contribute to society one day.

Contrary to what people believed when they looked at her, she did not come from a very wealthy family and her parents – immigrants – had worked hard after arriving in New Zealand with almost nothing, she said.

But according to Labour she no doubt has a foreign sounding surname.

Anyone born (legally) in New Zealand is a New Zealander. It is a real shame that certain politicians are trying to make the issue of housing about ethnicity.

The Herald reports:

Auckland mayoral candidate Vic Crone is promising to look at relocating the city’s port, saying its current downtown location is obsolete.

The port, she says, will be unable to keep up with the growth of Auckland in the next 50 years unless is expands further into the harbour.

“The community has spoken loudly and clearly,” Ms Crone said in a speech to the Committee for Auckland today.

“As mayor I will commit to leading a robust decision-making process to seek out a new home and transition our port there.”

A Future Port Study set up after last year’s public furore over wharf extensions into the harbour by Ports of Auckland is currently underway to look at the economic, social and environmental impacts of the port on the wider city.

The study has short-listed the Manukau Harbour, Firth of Thames and Muriwai as possible options for a new port.

Ms Crone said ports were a critical piece of infrastructure for any major city, but questioned the economic value of its 77ha footprint and its dividends with the economic return of similar land in the Viaduct Harbour and Wynyard Quarter.

Arguably the most expensive and valuable land in Auckland is being used as a huge car park. It’s madness. The short terms costs of moving are considerable, but the long-term costs of not moving are greater.

“By 2040 the Wynyard Quarter waterfront redevelopment is expected to contribute $4.3 billion to Auckland. The Auckland port dividend of around $50 million pales in comparison,” Ms Crone said.

Once a new home was found for the port, she said, the city could turn its mind to the exciting possibilities of transforming the largest piece of land on the waterfront, not just economically but socially.

Ms Crone’s port policy is similar to her main political rival, Labour MP Phil Goff, who opposes further expansion into the Waitemata Harbour for port use.

Goff has said he does not support expansion but has not said he supports moving it.

On mayoral politics, there is also a good interview with Mark Thomas on The Spinoff.

Newshub reports:

Andrew Little says it’ll only be “greedy landlords” who hike rents on the back of his proposed Bill to insulate and warm homes.

This reflects the mentality of someone who has never run a business. Like many unionists Andrew seems to think that it doesn’t matter if costs go up, as owners can wear it and won’t increase their charges.

The history of the world is against this. Economics 101 is that if costs increase, charges increase.

But Mr Little rejected suggestions the new requirements would lead to an increase in rents, saying landlords will have plenty of time to absorb the cost.

“That in my view, is a cost landlords will be able to bear over that time, given the increasing value the property will enjoy over that period.

“This does not need to lead to hikes in rents, and only greedy landlords will be seeking to hike rents for this reason.”

Again Little doesn’t understand cashflow.

Sure your property may increase in value, but that doesn’t give landlords any cash. They need income from their properties to pay the mortgage, pay rates, repairs, maintenance etc.

If you force landlords to spend $5,000 more on a property, then that cash needs to come from somewhere.

Stuff reports:

Tackling health and education issues facing vulnerable Kiwi kids is the best way to keep them out of the country’s prisons, Justice Minister Amy Adams says.

A new approach to New Zealand’s justice system could also lead to judges making sentencing decisions based on data analysis of the most effective approach.

Adams launched the “investment approach to justice” on Monday morning, saying it was “quite a revolution” in the way the sector worked.

The better information we can give Judges, the better the decisions they can make.

An early “investment brief” also showed strong evidence that cognitive behaviour therapy helped to reduce crime, as one out of every five to 15 people would not reoffend after receiving treatment.

There are some criminals who won’t respond to anything. They’re simply bad or mad. And they need to be locked up. But many can be rehabilitated.

An early piece of analysis showed that people fined for offences like assault, shoplifting and drink-driving, were less likely to reoffend and access benefits than similar people sentenced to community service.

While judges were entirely independent and had ultimate discretion over sentences for criminals, Adams said they had similar motivations to reduce reoffending which the data analysis could help.

It’s a very good initiative.

The Herald reports:

Principal Youth Court Judge Andrew Becroft has been appointed the country’s next Children’s Commissioner with a brief to monitor massive changes to Child, Youth and Family.

That is a great achievement to get the Principal Youth Court Judge to agree to become the Children’s Commissioner.

Social Development Minister Anne Tolley said Judge Becroft would be seconded from his duties as a judge for an unusually short two-year term as Children’s Commissioner.

“His input will be invaluable as we transform our care and protection system through the radical changes I recently announced, to focus on the short and long-term well-being of our children through to adulthood,” she said.

“Judge Becroft’s experience of dealing with troubled and at-risk young people will be vital in the development of a youth justice service aimed at preventing offending and reoffending as part of the major overhaul.

Again great to get such a high quality appointment.

Stuff reports:

Labour’s children’s spokeswoman Jacinda Ardern said it was “brilliant” news.

“A proven advocate for young people & a great appointment,” she tweeted. 

Green Party co-leader Metiria Turei said he was a “fantastic appointment”. 

This shows the respect Becroft has across the spectrum.

Max Rashbrooke writes:

New data from the IRD shows that the share of taxable income going to the richest New Zealanders has not changed under National. However, that share is still very large, indicating significant income imbalances.

The IRD data shows that the richest tenth of taxpayers got one-third of all taxable income in both 2008 and 2014. Within that, the richest 1%, about 34,000 people, got over 8% of taxable income.

In contrast, the poorest tenth got just 0.4%.

The income shares are broadly the same in 2014 as they were in 2008. This would suggest that pre-tax inequality has not increased under National.

It’s interesting data, but also limited as it is about individuals, not households. Someone in the bottom 10% of income earners may be married to someone in the top 1%. Also those retired or studying will of course have little income compared to those in FT work.

But what does the data show:

• Taxable income of the top 1% has gone from 9.0% of all taxable income in 2008 to 8.4% in 2014
• Share of income tax paid of the top 1% has gone from 13.1% in 2008 to 13.7% in 2014

So the top 1% are earning slightly less income (share) under National than they were under Labour, and they are paying a greater percentage of total income tax.

This goes against what you hear from Labour and Green MPs.

A rare good Dom Post editorial:

The use of drugs by favourite childhood characters is likely to encourage impressionable young people  to see drug use as funny and cool, the office finds. That is surely right. So now the firm will face serious trouble if it allows these vans to hit the road again. 

It’s hard to object.

However, this finding deals only with the drug-themed camper vans. The sex-themed ones will be dealt with separately, and they might prove a tougher nut to crack. If there is no kind of incitement to breaking a law, for instance, the case against them becomes harder to sustain.

And here the argument for finding them objectionable and in effect banning them becomes more fraught. To repeat, even oafs have the right to express themselves, even when they are just using their freedom of speech to manufacture outrage in order to make money.

In this case the company’s “jokes” are disgusting and anti-women and many people have taken offence at them. And of course anyone travelling along the highway can’t avoid seeing them. They are not like sexually explicit or offensive material available in private to consenting adults.

It is also true that the material is arguably far more offensive than anything else on public display. But does that mean they must be banned in the way that the company’s drug-use material has been?

That is a tough call for a liberal society.

And one that should not be made, and if so would probably be illegal.

Yes they are offensive, but it is not the role of the state to ban things merely because they are offensive. The test is objectionable which is far higher – torture, rape, child abuse etc.

I’m all for private citizens and business owners putting pressure on Wicked Campers to remove the offensive slogans. Campgrounds can refuse to allow their vans to camp in them. Petrol companies can refuse to serve them. That is the way to deal with them. Having the state ban a sexist slogan is not a power we want to encourage.