The Herald reports:

Fisher & Paykel Appliances, the home-appliance maker acquired by China’s Haier in 2012, is seeking some 40 workers for research and development after opening a new design centre at its Auckland headquarters.

The company spent about $5.5 million on the new Auckland facility with another $1.5 million still to be invested, and is spending some $2.5 million to fit out its Dunedin R&D facility. F&P Appliances has hired 80 engineers and designers in the past 18 months. It is now one of Haier’s five global ‘centres of excellent’ for product development in the group.

Haier New Zealand Investment Holding, which holds 80 percent of F&P Appliances, invested $36.3 million on property, plant and equipment in the nine months ended Dec. 31, 2013, and $7.9 million between Aug. 29, 2012 to March 31, 2013, according financial statements lodged with the Companies Office. Its accounts show it had revenue of $777.1 million through the final nine months of 2013.

Haier New Zealand incurred research and development expenses of $17.9 million in the 2013 period, and $7.2 million in the 2012 reporting period. The other 20 percent of F&P Appliances is held by another Haier unit.

The Chinese company effectively rescued F&P Appliances in 2009 when it acquired a 20 percent stake as part of a capital raising that let the company refinance its debt. The local manufacturer got distribution into China as a result of the deal and the ability to further licence its technology.

And who was against this foreign investment which rescued F&P and has led to more jobs and more R&D? Well TVNZ reported:

The Government is coming under pressure to stop iconic Kiwi appliance maker Fisher and Paykel from falling into Chinese ownership.

Chinese company Haier last week launched a take-over bid for the company but opposition parties say it is the type of innovative company New Zealand cannot afford to lose, and is a further sign of a crisis looming in the country’s manufacturing sector.

“The Government cannot stand aside and watch New Zealand manufacturing ripped out from New Zealand ownership,” said Labour finance spokesperson David Cunliffe.

It is easy to bash foreign investment, especially when it is Chinese. Winston has done it for decades. Labour is joining in. But the reality is that overall foreign investment creates jobs, lifts income, and boosts research and development.

Presumably under Labour, they would have blocked the investment in F&P, which may have collapsed as a company, or at a minimum would not be boosting R&D – as you need investors to do that.

When the Government assumed control of Allan Hubbard’s companies, they were attacked by many in South Canterbury, and beyond. Hubbard was a saint who could do no wrong, and Simon Power was savaged for agreeing to statutory management.

Now Hubbard was a well intentioned individual, but as the Herald reports, his financial management was deficient in recent years:

Allan Hubbard, the late boss of South Canterbury Finance, which collapsed and required a $1.6 billion government bailout, “had little interest” in meeting accounting or legal requirements, and three of his most trusted colleagues went along with the massive fraud, a court has been told today. …

Long-time SCF chairman, Timaru financier Mr Hubbard, who died in a September 2011 car crash, aged 83, ignored various accounting and legal regulations that he was bound to adhere to, the court was told.

One witness described Mr Hubbard’s attitude as being, “Trust me, I know what I am doing”.

“The evidence has been that he had a disdain for disclosing related party transactions, a peculiar view of what constituted one, a penchant for swapping cheques to cleanse the accounts … and took assets off the balance sheet if they were impaired,” Crown lawyer Colin Carruthers QC said. …

The Crown says that on July 25, 2007, the defendants prepared a letter to Mr Hubbard expressing their concerns with the business practices.

“That is an extraordinary document, setting out a long list of issues directly relevant to these charges, from related party advances, the single entity exposure limit, advances being made without security, loan and drawdown authorisation, and so on,” Mr Carruthers said.

But despite the concerns, nothing changed, Mr Carruthers said.

A decision in the trial is due in October.

Telecom have said:

It’s time for a ‘Giganation’ says Telecom as UFB coverage hits 100%

Telecom, soon to be Spark New Zealand, says the time has come for Gigabit per second data download speeds to be available across all of New Zealand’s Ultra Fast Broadband (UFB) fibre network.

Telecom made the call today as its Ultra Fibre products became available in the Taupo area – making it the only Internet Service Provider (ISP) selling fibre broadband services everywhere in New Zealand where the UFB network is currently active.

“When the UFB network rollout began in 2012, the standard download speeds available were 30 or 100 Megabits per second (Mbps),” says Telecom’s General Manager Product and Service Delivery, Lindsay Cowley.

“Since then, we’ve seen encouraging product innovation and speed increases across the four fibre companies who are contracted by the Government to build the UFB network and offer wholesale services to ISPs. Telecom has worked constructively with all LFCs to bring fibre products to people around New Zealand.

“A top download speed of 1000 Megabits, or 1 Gigabit, per second – the maximum technically possible under the UFB network’s current configuration – is now on the table as Ultrafast Fibre Ltd has announced it will launch the product throughout their coverage area of approximately 162,000 addresses in the central North Island.

I agree with Telecom. I love being on fibre and have chosen a 30/10 package as that is all I need for now. But demand keeps growing and we want everyone on UFB to have the option of a 1 Gb/s connection so people can choose the connection speed (and price) most suitable to them.

Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga said:

A report looking at the feasibility of online voting for local body elections has been welcomed by Associate Local Government Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga.

In September 2013, Cabinet agreed to establish a working party to consider the feasibility of online voting in New Zealand’s local elections. The working party met from December 2013 to May 2014 and has now reported back with its recommendations.

Mr Lotu-Iiga says the working party found online voting for local elections is feasible. The report said that online voting has the potential to enhance the operation of local democracy and offer New Zealanders a more accessible and convenient option to cast their vote.

“One of the major benefits of online voting is as a tool of convenience. It would enable voters to act on their intention to vote quicker, easier and in a forum more in line with the modern digital age,” he says.

“We have seen good examples of that recently with the census, where 35 per cent of forms were completed online in 2013, which is up from 7 per cent in 2006.”

I was on the working group that write the report. It was a lot of work, but I’m really pleased with the report.  Very impressed with the DIA staff who supported the working group.

The report makes seven findings. They are:

1. online voting is feasible
2. broad implementation is not feasible in 2016
3. online voting should be trialled in 2016 as part of local elections
4. online voting can improve and enhance the voting experience
5. public trust and confidence must be maintained
6. implementing online voting will require a partnership approach
7. securing online voting is critical, but not easy

Some of the specific recommendations include:

• online voting should be considered complementary to postal or booth voting and not as a replacement to existing voting methods
• Councils and their communities should choose whether online voting is available as a voting method
• In order to ensure that online voting systems are secure enough, the Department should harness the expertise of the wider security community through a ‘bug bounty’ or similar process to attract constructive analysis of proposed systems for vulnerabilities.
• The Department should ensure that any online voting solutions are highly auditable.
• For the 2016 trials, online voting should use the existing postal ballot issue to communicate login details to users, only allow one-time access to the online voting system and use two factor authentication if possible – our preferred option is for the voter to use their date of birth (acquired from the electoral roll) as a ‘shared secret’

The Institute of IT Professionals has welcomed the report:

IITP CEO Paul Matthews, who sat on the working group, welcomed the release of the report today. “This report plots the path forward for online voting in New Zealand, and carefully weighs up the issues around security and other factors”, Matthews said.

During the development of the report, the Institute was heavily engaged and very pleased with the focus of the Working Group and Government on protecting the integrity of voter’s private information amidst the security implications of online voting.

“We especially support the recommendation of a ‘bug bounty’ approach to the online voting system. While bug bounties are used extensively in our sector by most prominent technology companies, this would be a step forward for a Government and is one of the key recommendations from the IT profession to Government last year, following various public sector security breaches.”

“We thank the Minister for looking to IITP and other organisations such as Internet New Zealand to provide independent expertise for this Working Group. As the representative body for the IT Profession, this enabled IITP to work with others to ensure tech-related factors were well considered, independently and without technology bias,” Matthews concluded.

Basically what is needed now is for central and local government to work together to determine how to find the initial costs of developing a robust online voting system. This will have potential for not just local government elections, but also referenda. Note I don’t advocate using online voting for parliamentary elections – just as a complementary option to those systems that rely on postal ballots – as the postal system is basically dying.

The Press reports:

Ngai Tahu is expected to be one of the partners invited to take a stake in the cash-strapped Christchurch City Council’s commercial and investment arm.

The council is considering releasing up to $400 million in capital from Christchurch City Holdings Ltd (CCHL) as part of a plan to reduce its funding shortfall, which has been calculated by investment bankers Cameron Partners to reach up to $883m by 2019.

CCHL owns 75 per cent of Christchurch International Airport and is also the majority shareholder in the Lyttelton Port Company and Orion.

It also owns City Care, Enable and Red Bus Ltd.

The irony is huge. Lianne Dalziel as a Labour MP campaigned against partial privatisations, yet as Christchurch Mayor she may implement the same policy at the Christchurch City Council.

It is the obvious thing to do. When you have huge debt, then a reduction in assets to offset debt is preferable to rate increases of 20%+.

Stuff reports:

They may be faking it but e-cigarette smokers could soon be tarred with the same brush as real smokers.

Invercargill City Council has been asked to consider forcing e-cigarette smokers to stub out their electronic devices as part of its smokefree policy. But a ban on e-cigarettes in parks, reserves and playgrounds is taking political correctness too far, a councillor says.

Councillor and community services committee chairman Lindsay Abbott said he was not happy with the recommendation.

“How politically correct do we get?” Abbott quipped from his chair at the community services committee meeting yesterday.

A smoking habit was harder to kick than a heroin habit, he said. “Smokers are already legislated against harshly.”

Community development manager Mary Napper recommended the use of e-cigarettes be included in relevant council policies.

The use of e-cigarettes continued to normalise smoking, she said.

“It reinforces the practice of smoking as being acceptable and normal. This is of particular concern as it can contribute to young people taking up smoking.”

There was no research available that confirmed e-cigarettes led to young people taking up smoking, however, public health units were keen to normalise smokefree and so were recommending that these products be excluded in relevant policies, she said.

My God, they’re morons. E-cigarettes are what people use to get themselves out of smoking. They are not a gateway into smoking. No teenager decides to start using e-cigarettes. They are what people use to quit smoking, and they don’t kill their users like tobacco does.

But the idiots in Invercargill want to ban them. God save us from these people.

Councillor Lindsay Thomas said e-cigarettes were developed to help people quit smoking. Going cold turkey was very hard so banning the use of e-cigarettes in outdoor areas would not help those trying to quit, he said.

Sensible man.

In May, End Smoking New Zealand chairman Dr Murray Laugesen told The Southland Times normalising smoking was not going to kill people, but smoking a real cigarette would kill people, “in fact, it would kill one in two people”, he said.

Laugesen is NZ’s most experienced researcher on anti-smoking research and policy. He has found e-cigarettes are 100 to 1,000 times safer than normal cigarettes.

This is such an appalling and avoidable waste of money:

Napier’s disastrous art deco buses have been sold for just $25,000 each – meaning the short-lived investment has come at a cost to ratepayers of more than $1.3 million.

The buses were sold at auction by Turners Auctions last week. The Dominion Post contacted the buses’ new owner, who did not wish to be identified, but confirmed he had paid “about” $25,000 for each vehicle.

He said the buses, named Veronica and Belle, were likely to remain in Hawke’s Bay but it was uncertain how or where they would be used.

The council paid $837,000 for the two old US schoolbuses, which were converted into Deco City Discoverer buses in the United States and shipped to New Zealand.

The goal was to provide a tourist link between the popular seaside suburbs of Napier and the city centre.

But when they arrived in Wellington, the buses were found to be unroadworthy, and the council had to repair numerous faults. The total cost, including refitting, shipping, a feasibility study, repairs, bus fittings, and other costs ended up at $1.1m.

NZ has no shortage of tourism companies and private bus operators. If these buses were a good investment for tourism, then a private company would have made the investment. But once again a Council thinks it should compete with the private sector, and the result is a $1.3 million loss for the 22,000 Napier households. That’s around $50 per household gone.

I’ve borrowed this from NBR, as it is so good, it needs more eyeballs. It is written by Chris Keall.

Nigel Latta on his taxpayer funded show moaned about how awful it is that those on the rich list have got richer. I can only presume he thinks their wealth should be confiscated off them and given to solo mums, or some such.

Keall makes the point that the growth in the rich list isn’t coming from people who have inherited wealth. It is often coming from entrepreneurs who have been successful in producing goods or services that people want. They have created jobs, boosted export earnings, and provided great services to families and businesses.

I don’t mind people advocating that we should do more to help vulnerable families. But I almost detest those who think it is a bad thing that people have been successful and got richer, and shock horror, even got richer. They seem to have a mindset that their success has come at the expense of others, and they should be forced to give it up.

The xenophobes are in full cry against the sale of Lochinver Station, because the buyers are a Chinese company. Never do we hear a peep against Harvard University buying farms.

You would think these farms are owned by the Government. They are not. They are owned by a private company, selling to another private company.  Labour, NZ First and the Conservatives would all ban the current owner from being able to sell to the highest bidder. Now let us look at what that means, as reported by Stuff:

Lochinver Station’s current owner, the Stevenson Group, said farming was no longer part of its core business and proceeds from the sale would be used to kick-start its South Drury industrial development.

Stevenson Group chief executive Mark Franklin said the South Drury project could employ up to 8000 people.

So the current owner does not want to invest in the farm land. They want to sell the farm land so they can invest in south Drury – a project that could employ 8,000 people. This is what Labour, NZ First and Conservatives are battling against. They would have you forget the farms have a current owner who should be able to get the best price for the farms, so they can invest that money elsewhere in the NZ economy.

Gary Romano, the Auckland-based chief executive of Pengxin International, said the furore over the sale, which is conditional on Overseas Investment Office (OIO) approval, was surprising.

‘‘Clearly I’m disappointed. Here’s a piece of land, it’s a nice piece of land, but it is underdeveloped. We’ll sit on our credentials with what we’ve done on the other farms,’’ he said.

Pengxin bought 16 farms, covering about 8000 hectares, in the collapsed Crafar group in 2012 for $200m.

The central North Island Lochinver Station comprises 13,800 hectares, but Romano said of that only 9500 hectares were currently viable farmland and Pengxin would look to improve grass pastures.

Romano said Pengxin were prepared to make a ‘‘very significant investment’’ in the property to improve its environmental, community and productivity profile.

Unwilling to quantify how much Pengxin was planning to spend on Lochinver, Romano said its application to the OIO included plans to fence and undertake planting on streams leading to Pouarua Lake and eradicate wild pines and gorse.

Constructing a publicly-available underpass on the Taupo-Napier highway, and committing to keep employing all 20 staff working the property was also Pengxin’s intention, Romano said.

And you have the new owner, if approved, wanting to invest in the farmland, to make it more productive. This will result in more tax being paid in NZ.

This is how private business works. The buyer sees greater value in the asset than the seller, so they do a deal where both win. The buyer gets the asset they want, to invest in, and the seller gets cash to invest in other assets. The net winner is New Zealand – and that is the test the Overseas Investment Office is legislated to apply.

Labour, Conservatives and NZ First (Greens are against also, but they seem to be against all farms regardless of who owns them) would have a policy where the current owner is banned from selling to whom they would like – regardless of the net benefit to New Zealand. That’s stupid. Sales should be decided on a case by case basis, with criteria being net benefit to New Zealand.

Incidentally the average amount of land sold to foreign buyers in the last five years has been 390 square kms a year. In the last term of the Labour/NZ First Government an average of 762 square kms a year was sold.

Also note that it is not just one way investment. Fonterra owns* half a dozen farms in China. They have around 15,000 cows, employ 500 staff, and produce 150 million litres of milk a year – with the profit all flowing back to NZ. If you start to get racist and demand China can’t invest in NZ, then logically China should ban NZ investment in China.

* – Fonterra does not own the land, but has a long-term lease for the land. This is because *no-one* in China owns land – it is all the property of the Chinese Government. But Fonterra is able to purchase use of the land in much the same way a Chinese company can.

There are two types of billboard vandals. The (generally) young idiots who just vandalise any they come across. And there are those who target billboards of one party only, because they are partisans for another party.

The level of partisan damage seems to be unprecedented this election. Chester Borrows has facebooked that every single billboard of his in Wanganui City got destroyed overnight. I’ve heard similar stories in several other electorates. I suspect there is a degree of co-ordination occurring here. It’s one thing to opportunistically take a whack at a billboard as you pass it. But to destroy every billboard in a city is a major endeavour that would take a few hours.

Kelvin Davis writes on Facebook:

I was on 3 News tonight because my campaign team had a look at a proposed website designed to take down Kim Dotcom and stop him from buying the seat of Te Tai Tokerau with his $3million dollars.

We explored this concept, debated it, then along with the Labour Party hierarchy decided it wasn’t in line with our Vote Positive messages and ditched it.

It was all about Kim Dotcom.

This is the same Kim Dotcom who donated $50,000 to far-right wing disgraced politician John Banks.

This is the same Kim Dotcom who said the police turning up at his front door was as bad as the suffering Maori have endured for close to two centuries.

This is the same Kim Dotcom had nothing to do with Maori until he found a way to take advantage of some to try to keep himself out of an American jail.

This is the same Kim Dotcom who’s garage is bigger and flasher than 99% of homes in Te Tai Tokerau, and still cries ‘poor me’.

This is the same Kim Dotcom, who if he really cared about the people of Te Tai Tokerau, would have got out with all the Labour volunteers after the floods and storms and distributed food packages to those who needed them instead of staying tucked up in the mansion.

This is the same Kim Dotcom who turned up to hui up north in a limousine while kaumatua and kuia rode in a rattly bus.

This is the same Kim Dotcom whose interference in Te Tai Tokerau politics was described as a disgrace to over 300 people at the Ngati Hine hearings in Pipiwai yesterday.

I make no apologies about looking at a website that asked the public to donate $5, $10 or whatever they wish to koha, to bring down a fake.

I’m just an ordinary Maori living up north trying to stop the biggest con in New Zealand’s political history from being pulled against my whanau, my hapu, my iwi.

I make no apologies if there’s another Maori politician in the north feeling pretty sensitive about all the criticism he’s copping from hapu throughout Te Tai Tokerau because of the con job.

I’m prepared to cop the criticism from him because it’s just the price a person pays when he stands up for his people and his principles.

Great to see Kelvin call it as it is. Hone’s sell out to Dotcom is a turn off for many voters, and if Davis aggressively targets Hone, I have no doubt he can win the seat.

But Labour Head Office told Davis he can’t attack Dotcom, because they may need his pet party to form a Government.

Interesting that Kelvin’s Facebook post has been liked by Chris Hipkins,

Labour won’t allow Kelvin to run a website to fundraise for his campaign against the guy who has spent $4 million trying to get an election outcome to stop his extradition. But he has facebooked his campaign account for those who want to try and balance the fight a bit. Hone has Dotcom’s $4 million behind him. Kelvin only has his supporters. If you think Kelvin Davis will be a better MP for Te Tai Tokerau than Hone Harawira (and I do, regardless of the Dotcom issue) then you can donate to:

38-9009-0235341-01

Account name: NZLP TTT Campaign Acc.

Every $10 or $20 can help.

Stuff reports:

Labour leader David Cunliffe has gone out on the hustings in South Auckland in a bid to convince voters an upset election win is “within striking range”.

Cunliffe said he was optimistic he could be the next prime minister.

“I’m entirely confident we can do this,” he said.

“Nobody said it was easy but it’s doable.”

Cunliffe met voters in Otara, where he said he was maximising party support in the traditional Labour heartland.

He described National’s claims it was gaining ground in Mangere and other parts of South Auckland as “absolute rubbish”.

“Our polling shows the reverse … It’s a desperate PR sideshow from the National Party and there’s no truth to it.”

Cunliffe told a small group of about 12 people who turned up to hear him speak at Manukau Institute of Technology that the best thing for jobs and the economy would be to oust National.

Only 12 people turned up in South Auckland to hear the Labour Party Leader. Wow.

Labour was within 3 per cent or 4 per cent of forming a coalition government, he said.

They are within 3% to 4%, but only if the coalition includes the Greens, NZ First, Mana and Internet parties.

A reader e-mails:

Maybe your  readers can figure this one out….

Labour’s Youth Employment policy announced today includes  the Kick Start Apprenticeship scheme. This will offer a payment of $9,100 ( the equivalent of the dole) each time an employer provides a full time permanent job, salary and training to an unemployed youth who is 18 or 19, been on the dole for at least 3 months and is at medium to high risk of being on the dole full time. 

This might make sense if it weren’t for the fact  that Labour’s Work and Wages Policy will significantly increase the minimum wage and remove youth rates and 90 day trial periods! 

I can just see employers flocking to grab $9k for the privilege of putting huge effort into inexperienced  unmotivated youth with no comeback if they don’t work out, and paying them the same as experienced workers…..Not much chance of government being a player either as Labour has promised that government employers will to pay at least $18.40 to first time employees .  It will be cheaper to leave them on the dole!!!

Very good points. 90 day trials allow employers to take a risk on a young inexperienced voter.

YAUN YOU BUY OUR FARMS?:  Lochinver Station is up for sale and Chinese company & Crafar Farms owners, Shanghai Pengxin, want to buy the land. The potential purchase has reignited the debate over foreign ownership of kiwi land. Do we need to have a limit on what foreign buyers can own? Does it matter what kind of land it is and what it will be used for? Does it matter if it is a home in Auckland or a farm in the Waikato? Does it matter where the buyer is from? Currently, there are no statistics collected on who is buying property in NZ. Does that need to change?

CONSERVATION CORPS:  Labour pledges boot camps will be out and they’ll bring back the Conservation Corps in order to get more young people into work which would mix conservation work with vocational training for 16-24 year olds.  Is this the solution for youth unemployment?


There are two ways to get in on the political pub action:
First, you can join the live audience in Wellington’s iconic Backbencher Pub on Wednesday, 6th of August at 6pm. Filming begins around 6:15pm.

Or watch us that night on PRIME TV at 10:30pm!
http://www.primetv.co.nz/

Plus, Follow us on Facebook (BackBenchesTV) or on Twitter @BackBenchesTV.

Our Panel: Green Party MP Holly Walker, Labour MP Chris Hipkins, and National MP Chris Tremain.

” This show is shaping up to be essential election year viewing ” – Paul Casserly, NZ Herald 3/6/14

To be fair to Grant, it is pretty difficult to stay awake when David Parker is speaking!

Planet Key from Propeller Motion on Vimeo.

Pretty well done parody video and song of John Key.

I had to laugh at the Herald Spy profile of five single politicians, who were asked for examples of their perfect date. ACT’s David Seymour’s response was:

His perfect date would be with someone “who would be a best friend even if there was no romantic interest at all. 

Call me old fashioned but my idea of a perfect date does not include no romantic interest at all!

But this may secure the Vulcan vote for ACT – however I suspect they already had it 🙂

Deborah Coddington writes:

With preschoolers we look around for an early childhood centre we think suits our needs, is convenient in terms of distance from home and work, and within budget – usually in that order. Then the government subsidies per child go to the provider.

When we go to tertiary training we choose where, geographically, we wish to study. If you live in Auckland, you are not restricted to Auckland University; likewise Dunedinites are not zoned for Otago University.  As a tertiary student, you choose, and the government funding for your qualification follows you to the tertiary provider.

But for some reason we do not trust families to choose their children’s primary and secondary schooling. 

I’d abolish all zoning, but have a reserve power for the Ministry of Education to force a school to take a student if there is no other school available within say 30 minutes travel.

The only winners from this policy are property owners and real estate agents.

Zoning means rich families get choices, but poor families do not.

It does not have to be like this. The Netherlands abolished zoning in 1917. The state pays for education while parents choose the school. 

But that will never happen here because of two powerful interest groups – wealthy property owners in grammar zones, and teacher unions. Both have a vested interest in this archaic system.

So governments will continue telling families that bureaucrats know which school is best for their children.

Sadly.

Stuff reports:

Conservative’s chief executive Christine Rankin has confirmed she will stand as the party’s candidate in Epsom. 

The party published the move today on its Facebook page, saying “Let’s support her and see her as the next MP for Epsom.” It was also announced at a public meeting in Auckland.

This is a reasonably cunning move.

At a minimum it gets publicity for the Conservatives as there will be considerable focus on Epsom.

It also means that it could throw the outcome of the seat in doubt. By this I don’t mean Labour or National winning the seat, but is it possible the Conservatives could win it?

Think about this scenario. It is two weeks to go and ACT is polling 1.1% and Conservatives 2.8%. National looks like it will be say three or four seats short of a majority.

Conservatives point out a vote for Rankin gets 4 of their MPs into Parliament while a vote for ACT gets just one MP. Regardless of what National has said, Epsom voters could decide to vote for the smartest tactical option.

So it will be a very interesting seat to watch.

Stuff reports:

ACT says it can boost economic growth by a third with a policy to cut the company tax rate to 12.5 per cent.

Leader Jamie Whyte says this will increase investment, and job and GDP by one third, leading to higher wages.

He would fund the tax cut by slashing “corporate welfare,” worth about $1.5bn a year, and carbon trading, worth $164m.

Excellent. That would attract investment.

European and American studies suggest cutting the rate by 10 percentage points will make economies grow by between 1 and 2 per cent extra a year. Each 1 per cent reduction in the rate boosts wages by between 0.3 and 0.5 per cent, he said.

“No single policy proposal from any party in this election can do more to increase economic growth, create jobs and lift wages,” he added,

Company tax is a “terrible drag” on growth and wages while raising “relatively little” revenue, he argued.

Treasury estimates that every 1% reduction in the company tax rate has a fiscal loss to the Government of $220 million which is relatively modest.

Stuff reports:

The Government is pushing ahead with a child-sex offender register, which could eventually be expanded to include other sexual offenders.

Police and Corrections Minister Anne Tolley has confirmed ministers signed off on plans to establish the database with an announcement expected within the next few weeks. The database will not be open to the public.

It will be managed by the police, and only available to officials with security clearance from agencies such as the Department of Corrections and the Ministry of Social Development.

If National is returned to Government at September’s election, Tolley hopes to introduce the register by the end of the year.

That’s a very worthy thing to do.

I would hope that in time, the public would have access to it also, excluding those with name suppression of course.

In case you had the misfortune to see the Nigel Latta show on inequality, Eric Crampton has the data about inequality that Latta was told about, but refused to include on the show as it didn’t fit the narrative he had decided on.

Crampton quotes the MSD:

Overall, there is no evidence of any sustained rise or fall in inequality in the last two decades. The level of household disposable income inequality in New Zealand is a little above the OECD median. The share of total income received by the top 1% of individuals is at the low end of the OECD rankings.

Crampton notes:

Latta focused a lot on wages at different levels rather than the kinds of numbers above. We do have a reasonably progressive tax system with substantial transfers to the working poor. The numbers above reflect the after-tax-and-transfers income at the different deciles. The tax and redistribution system has worked to maintain pretty stable levels of inequality over the last couple decades on a wide variety of measures of inequality. It is a substantial mistake or deliberately misleading to portray things instead as a rising trend in inequality. And since I’m told that the Treasury Chief Executive told Latta, on footage left on the cutting room floor, that inequality was flat, Latta seems to have been wilfully seeking to mislead the public about the basic facts around inequality during and election campaign on a publicly funded television station. 

Yep, our taxes used to promote misleading coverage.

This is not right. Public broadcasting is supposed to at least give everybody the correct basic facts so that voters can then deliberate about how to interpret and deal with those facts in policy choices. When it instead deliberately misleads the public into taking the narrative pushed by the Labour Party, I start wondering why we have a state broadcaster. Public broadcasting isn’t supposed to make people dumber.

Globally there is a tendency for state owned broadcasters to favour the policies of the left, as bigger Government means potentially more money for them. In NZ, they are funded by NZ on Air, so documentaries that conclude taxes should be higher, and the Government more controlling, always get funded. I can’t recall them ever funding a documentary on the need for RMA reform, lower taxes or the like.

The proportion of low-income households is higher than it was in the 80s but the trend since the mid 90s is basically flat or declining. Is this just me cherry-picking measures? No. You get the same thing on the relative income lines. If you don’t like current poverty or inequality rates, that’s fine. But they’re a “it’s been like this for about 20 years” thing, not a “John Key is Evil” thing. The current state of affairs is roughly the same as it’s been through many terms of both National and Labour. 

Yet these documentaries only appear when National is in office.