English can’t help himself digging deeper in his hole.
Caught out in Question 4 today at Question Time contradicting himself on whether the economy was growing or shrinking, he fell back on challenging the truth of the quotes.
Here they are, both sourced from Hansard:
“Because we did not think either policy was appropriate in the circumstances of what, under his party’s management, was a very poorly performing New Zealand economy, which was then hit by the global financial crisis”(Question 2, 23 February 2010)
‘Yes we could make substantial gains in the integrity of the tax system. Under the previous Government the number of people paying tax on $4 million did not change in 10 years even though the economy grew significantly” (Question3, 23 February 2010)
His main thrust, however was to repeat old lines that “the tradeable sector had been in recession for five years”, because the economy was “unbalanced” – ie NZ does not export or save enough and consumes and borrows too much.
Leaving aside his use of language – let’s be clear that Labour agrees that the economy is currently unbalanced (I blogged as much last week)
The key issue is what the government is doing about it, or not doing. On this commentators are scathing:
- Bernard Hickey said the PM’s opening speech to Parliament “did nothing….worse than nothing. He shut down the debate… saying ‘tough. My backers own property….I’m not brave enough to challenge them’…”
- The Manufacturers and Exporters Association said the government “would do no more than tinker” and noted “How the PM expects a broken tax system to be fixed without any changes is beyond me”.
- John Armstrong said “Yesterday’s programme is a tax cut package masquerading as an economic growth package….Those expecting something special will be disappointed”.
So, has Mr English deliberately set out to embarrass his leader by reminding everyone how weak, shoddy and indecisive his government is perceived to be right across the political spectrum?
Or is it just another “accident” in what was a slow motion train wreck of a week for National in the House.
Blinglish is getting sloppier and sloppier.
“English can’t help himself digging deeper in his hole.” He’s a tunneling to China.
It doesn’t sound good.
It hasn’t been a good start to the second year for National… I thought they would have had their s*** sorted out by now…
National has had 10 YEARS to come up with some ideas for the economy. Instead they have relied on their old chestnut of tax reductions to ‘solve’ all the problems (more to to come at Budget time).
They haven’t a clue!
You have to wonder why a government comprised of National and ACT have not introduced the kind of far-reaching changes to the tax system they were so intent on when in opposition. I remember ACT’s support collapsing at one stage when Don Brash was riding high on the coat tails of deep tax cuts.
It is, in fact, an opportunity of a lifetime for those parties to show us once and for all that their flat tax, education vouchers, all private hospital system and minimal bureaucracy (don’t ask me exactly what that means)is the pathway to our economic Shangri La.
Personally, I could do with decent tax cuts right now and I am happy that we would fare OK under such a system – which is not to say I don’t think it may have deleterious effects on society as a whole that would outweigh any personal benefits.
Then again, it may not, but how will we ever know now?
And have posted on this over on Kiwiblog, challenging them to demand from Key and Hide the tax cuts they thought they were getting, but met with a deafening silence – except for one wag who opined that it was a bad time for tax cuts, indicating that the Brash/Key/Hide act is a fairweather option only.
Should this be the death knell of the far right (which over at Fox News is actually the far left!)?
What load of Rubbish David.
you remind me of thta puupet Zippy from Rainbow.
In 1999 National left Labour with a strongly growing economy, falling unemployment, low interest rates, and low inflation.
Today’s DEFU tells us what Labour has left National. And my God it is bad:
» Unemployment to hit 6.4% (and maybe 7.2%) within 15 months
» Gross debt to increase from under 20% to a massive 33.1% (and maybe 38.6%) by 2013
» OBEGAL deficits of $23 billion over next four years
» Cash deficits of $48 billion over five years
This is appalling. Even the “upside” scenario sees a massive increase id debt, deficits and unemployment.
Deficits of up to $6 billion are just unacceptable. If we do not improve from the lgeacy Labour left us, we will be leaving the next generation with a mountain of extra debt.
It gets even worse over the ten year horizon:
» The costs of all the borrowing basically fuck the economy. We end up with a permament structural deficit with the books Labour have left us.
» Even after 2019, the crown will be running an permanent OBEGAL deficit of 2% of GDP, or $4 billion a year. Even the “upside” scenario sees an ongoing deficit of 0.7% of GDP. So Labour have left us with an economy that is stuffed, even under the more optimistic scenario. We just can not run a decade of deficits.
» Gross debt is now projected to hit 57% of GDP in 2023. Do you remember Helen and Michael telling us that hitting 22% of GDP would be reckless. Well they have left us with a debt on track to hit 57% of GDP!!!
» Even net debt, which had reached zero, is projected to rocket up to 47% of GDP
This is a set of books, every bit as bad as those left behind by Labour in 1990. They are horrible. Bill English has the toughest job in NZ for the next few years.
The task for the National-led Government is to improve on this. DEFU is basically what would happen if you continue with Labour’s policy settings. The tax cuts were fiscally neutral so don’t affect things. Over the next few years we should always refer back to this DEFU as what we would achieve under Labour. National has to deliver smaller deficits and less debt than DEFU is projecting. That is their challenge.
Really> I guess that would make Blinglish a liar, then?
Matt, today’s DEFU has been superceded by the HYEFU. Its post the GFC. Labour’s record is generally a very strong one, although I accept the property and current account imbalances grew in the last year or two.
I’d rather talk abouthte future. Interesting that Bill English can’t or doesn’t want to.
David, good point.
when, in the future, are we going to point out to super and low that there power and fuel is going up by at least 10% due to the emissions scam? and add that to GST rise?
my family are very concerned by this.
thanks
Matt, was there also a recession in the 1990′s, or did Labour cause this too? I for one am please to see some detail coming out in David’s arguments, at least it gives us something to chew over.
“You have to wonder why a government comprised of National and ACT have not introduced the kind of far-reaching changes to the tax system they were so intent on when in opposition. I remember ACT’s support collapsing at one stage when Don Brash was riding high on the coat tails of deep tax cuts.”
My brother has been an ACT voter, switched to party vote National 2008, electorate vote Hide. I was having dinner with him the night before Key’s speech. He was serious when he said both would lose his vote next time IF there was something substantially different,what he called fundamental change to the tax system. He said this was “Key’s last chance” to prove he really stands for change.
Anecdotal only, but of some import I would think given his voting patterns and electorate he is in. he was looking for the promised “tax overhaul”. At least he says that is what he thought voting ACT/National would create.
good point tracey
but, some still miss it. not one suggestion from national, act, or us resolves anything. we are chewing over the same rotten meat.
yes, i too wonder why the far reaching changes haven’t been made. i wonder why nobody is going to be honest about the emissions scam. including us. we talk about travelling about on a bus claiming horror at gst but, we are not warning about the big wreck coming from ets (10% +)
for when the dust settles come end of 2010, all of this puffery will prove economically and socially no one is stepping up and making for basic common sense decisions.
Simon
I feel your point about the ETS is a very important one, and for whatever reasons it is being brushed under the carpet. The entire “climate change” “debate” has become one-sided with the naysayers being sidelined or treated as fascist or idiots. Chris De Freitas makes for good reading.
David.
We claim horror over GST. We are not mentioning the cost impacts of emissions scam?
we serve to disadvantage those we claim to care for
Please shed any light on why we are not calling time on the ETS? This noting there is no warming according to the UN, the main guy Phil Jones and Nasa.
Simon, we made a huge deal about the ETS when the Bill was still live – its now passed so the next venue for debating the cost will be in the Budget context. Don’t worry – we won’t miss a $110 bn issue!
Thanks. Good. I just hope that the focus is to scrap it. For if we are to get out of the polling doldrums, we need to fall on our swords with some dignity on this one.
Agreed Simon.
David are you saying Labour has re-thought its entire previous held stance on ETS?
I’m not 100% sure what David Cunliffe was referring to, but I suspect he was talking about the relative personal and corporate responsibilities for carbon emissions (correct me if I am mistaken) . I would like to say that an ETS isn’t my preferred method of dealing with the issue (I would have preferred a carbon tax, but National (and others) scuppered that), but also that no major, reputable scientific organisation has claimed that anthropogenic climate change is not occurring – and please provide quotes or links from the UN, NASA or Phil Jones to prove me wrong.
Tracey, I sympathise with your view that nay-sayers are pushed aside, and agree that this would be terribly unfair if they had any substantive criticisms – as always, i wait to be corrected, but the majority of the “skeptics” I have heard from are either tinkering around the edges regarding the magnitude or speed of warming, or are ignoring some basic facts. The majority of Chris de Freitas’ argument, as I have read it, is not so much that AGW is not occurring, but that it won’t affect NZ so bad as claimed, or that the expense of stopping it is not worth it.
However, possibly the most convincing argument for implementing credible measures to mitigate AGW (and the environmentalistists probably won’t agree with this) is that our largest trading partners have done so, or are in the process of doing so, and will be more than happy to penalise up for not playing our part. So whatever simon may think, binning the ETS is no quick fix to our economic troubles.
I realise that this comment doesn’t address the main thrust of the original post, which I hope to address in another comment soon, but since simon had been so insistent I thought I should comment on this first.
P.S. I hope my last comment posted alright, and without too many errors – I’m writing on a mobile phone, and the technology remains a bit iffy, and less than completely user friendly
Daneil. three points; first – even if carbon was a problem (which most now refute) the ETS offers NO solution to carbon emissions whatsoever. go search for yourself the main nasa views on this.
second, the economic devasation starts july 1st. low, super and everyone gets knobbled with an extra 10% or more on power and fuel. no one, including our people, are being honest about this.
three; phil jones (the main guy behind it) east englia uni and the UN guy (now being investigated too) have all said warming does exist. they have admitted to fudging the books. go do the research.
view: based on anyone one of these points, you pick, tell me why we should make life extremely hard for people. can you think how difficult its going to be for folk doing their sums this winter and wondering why they can’t pay the power bill because ets is keeping them cold and global warming isn’t there?
in summary, there is no warming. i’m not sending you links as i’ve over 4000 of them. i stress to you to do it yourself as following what someone else wants you to believe is tantermount to why the world has been duped by this thing.
we however, if we ever want to be trusted, need to give it up, say sorry and do what matters.
also very few trading partners have undertaken any meaures.
australia won’t do it as the public know it’s a scam
uk will bin it as the public are waking up to the scam
us will never do it as the public know it’s a scam
china will never do it as they acknowledged in copenhagen that the science was fake
we are in a serious place of economic inbalance as a result. we need using this as front message not calling horror on gst but then still penalising people anyway with ets
how you think that looks. very silly
Daniel, my take on Chris’s work is that he absolutely accepts climate change he does not accept that humans are causing it. Ergo, he cant see how reducing human activities will have any impact on it. At least that is my understanding, for those parts where he accepts warming.
Simon, I would be surprised if the US public knew it or anything is a scam… I take your point however
yes, actually fair view tracey. some do say the US has been dumbed down quite a bit over 20 years. however, there is plenty of fervent communication suggesting the sentiment of realisation is there, strong and growing. the numbers, not sure. however, this being on a public and political level.
yes, we need to be aware of pollution, absolutely. but, wonderful news is global warming isn’t happening:
the ice sheets are growing
the polar bear numbers are increasing
the hima’s are not melting in 5 years as al gore lied about. they are safe for now 350 years they ‘guess’ but, that may change as they say the world is cooling
seas are not rising
Niwa still refuse to provide the data
Niwa seem to have ‘lost’ a lot of it
Niwa admit to fudging much of it
however, we can all breath a sigh of relief, we can now pause or scrap ets to save people some money and hardship, for that is what we are supposed to be about!
we can then take a breather. we can then do a stock stake on clear character flaws in our own human nature. these flaws clearly exist to devise, lure, scam and cause harm from such scams. we need to fix those flaws before we try to save the world.