Silly Russel Norman doesn’t want us doing movies in NZ. He is opposed to the grant that got Avatar here.
He prefers low tech low skill low wage jobs – or none at all.
Silly Russel Norman doesn’t want us doing movies in NZ. He is opposed to the grant that got Avatar here.
He prefers low tech low skill low wage jobs – or none at all.
This entry was posted on Sunday, January 24th, 2010 at 9:56 pm and is filed under economy, productivity. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
The Greenies are oposed to everything – they are completely economically illiterate and always prove themselves to be fools by spouting off positions before they consider the consequences or impacts of their policy (released on the hoof)
I get the impression from them that they come up with a position of nearly everything just so they can be seen in the media. If any voter actually thought about the consequence of a decision the Greenie support would drop well below 5%. Shame they are given any media time at all if this is the sort on nonsense they come up with.
Trevor again I am agreeing with you – does this mean you are shifting over the right?
I would like to think that Russel was thinking deeper here and was as bewildered as everyone else – why a prop up for Hollywood and not for other industries?
Regardless of the industry, anything that generates a net benefit that large for out economy is surely a good thing.
According to that article, “Economic Development Minister Gerry Brownlee said today the grant delivered more than $307 million in expenditure to the New Zealand economy.” – I’d say that’s a pretty good return on a $45 million investment.
Yes, I believe Russel was bewildered…
Complicated stuff, as it’s not a market failure situation. Other places offer the subsidy so, if we don’t, there’ll be little chance of any possible net benefit. Equally, however, the calculation of the net benefit is often deeply flawed – for example, the potential for double-counting and spurious inclusion of benefit are great. And who gets the benefit, in cases where business can manipulate tax payments, for example? Then there is the calculation: what level of subsidy compared with other attracting qualities eg skill available? Then there are the extended, long-term spin-offs of a sector which is both subsidised but also generates its own income. And on it goes……we end up back at the first argument – they do it, so we do.
I think Avatar got done here because it was the world best CG team, not some grant. Don’t belittle Weta buy saying it was a grant that got Avatar here.
Sorry Mr Mallard but there much more usefull industries for our taxpayer money than 3D movies. How about renewable energy? Public Transport? No you want to give hand outs to American buisness. Don’t insult MP’s who have integrity and sense, who care about the issues that matter.
My respect of you just dropped, somewhat.
Regards,
Jack
I agree he is foolish but only because we made more money from Avatar than we spent. If it was costing us money to create the jobs it makes much more sense to create lower level jobs because quite simply you can help more people with the amount of money you are using.
get your head out of the sand jack, avatar only got about as much grant as they would have paid in gst, the government still gets paye and makes a lot of money from all those people employed in nz because of avatar. trev did a great job with this when he was minister, we should have more of it. shows that foreign investment creates jobs and helps new zealand
That sounds like the perfect description of National.
No, it doesn’t show that. It shows that people spending money in the economy keeps the economy going.
draco avatar was a FOREIGN INVESTMENT that helped new zealand!
… they are completely economically illiterate and always prove themselves to be fools by spouting off positions before they consider the consequences or impacts of their policy (released on the hoof)
That sounds like the perfect description of National.
Sounds to me like the perfect description of a politician, regardless of party colours.
A word of advice, Draco; if you’re going to get all smug and know-it-all on us, at least pick your battles with something that doesn’t make you look like an unloved angry little man.
Labour agreeing with National.
ACT agreeing with Greens.
That’s when you know you’re wrong Trevor.
subsidies are a very expensive way to ‘buy’ jobs. Why does this industry get support, and others don’t? In the past it was so Helen could be lauded by the luvvies…. but now, mid recession, why are we giving money to American multinationals? Is it so some Wellington creatives can order expensive cocktails at Matterhorn?
Try telling some hard working business owner, struggling to pay tax and make a buck, that a portion of his/her efforts go to support Weta. If Weta can’t stand on their own two feet by now…. then perhaps they need to look at their business model.
Wellywood – more like welfarewood if you ask me.
To be fair he is an Aussi…
@Charles + peteremcc Every now and again you can shut your eyes ignore the accent and hear the words of Roger Douglas circa 1987.
@ Patrick – and if a pile of creatives cause some second or third round growth why shouldn’t they do it in NZ. Nothing wrong with the Matterhorn. Do i denote a bit of envy there?Isn’t the test whether there is a net gain to the taxpayer – which there certainly is on GST and PAYE alone, and whether jobs, in this case lots of good jobs, are created.
Trevor this is avery surprising view coming from you but i support you on this.Good Job Mate!
The Greens are definitly Deluded if they Think that Russel Norman’s comments will increase their Popularity or Votes come next Election… Although I do wonder.. are you becoming more centrist then you previously have shown in your political career?
@Matt Not much danger of me being centrist. You shouldn’t be surprised – I worked on this package as well as Americas Cup and RWC. I know a fair bit about cost/benefit stuff from reading long and sometimes turgid reports. And asking lots of questions.
But the short story is that if policy is well designed it can make a difference. And doesn’t matter whether it is Cameron, Jackson or Taylor they will all tell you that notwithstanding the superior skills here and the fact that Wellington is great place to live and work – Avatar (+ Kong inter alia) wouldn’t have been here without the grants.
too true trev, to those who say weta would have got the work anyway that’s not true, the avatar guy said in the herald this morning “Asked in December why New Zealand was chosen as the film’s production location, Avatar producer Jon Landau said: “To be honest, we went for the tax credit.”
i don’t know why basher brownlee is getting all the credit when it was the last labour government who put up this tax credit for film makers, it has been great for industry and great for jobs and you should be proud trev
Trevor, you have it backwards.
I completely accept that those movies wouldn’t have been there without the help that Labour gave them.
But they only needed that help because of all the restrictions and regulations put in place everywhere else.
If getting rid of those restrictions is so good for the movie industry, why don’t we do it for everyone else?
How many other industries could thrive in NZ if we didn’t have those restrictions and regulations in the first place? No politician can know (or make policy to support) that!
sorry…
“But they only needed that help because of all the restrictions and regulations that Labour put in place for everyone.”
peteremcc – name one restriction or regulation that Labour put in place between 1999 and 2008 that adversely affected the film industry.
Still waiting peteremcc – a silence from Act – most unusual – scrambling are we or waiting for your research team to get to work.
I agree with you Trev but are you honestly surprised by the silence your receiving from that person?…it is a common trait in those who support more right wing economic policies to make statements without backing them up with any concrete evidence to support their arguments
Um I don’t think that is what Russell Norman wants at all. I don’t have to be a Green voter (and I’m not) to know that Russell Norman is questioning a very large sum of public money being handed out to a private sector company, per se. That is because the Greens are well known for their left wing view of such things.
It’s the role of the opposition to ask questions like this. Obviously Labour is not, and Trevor wouldn’t give out any useful answer if he was the Minister.