A feature of Labour conferences for the last three or four years have been the new thinking workshops. These began under Phil Twyford’s time as Policy Council secretary. They are a chance to discuss in-depth new and challenging policy ideas, with outside experts, who often have ideas that are not comfortable for many in the Labour Party. They are now the most anticipated part of conference. Two journalists noted to me that the National Party just don’t do this kind of thing. I took that to mean the workshops and the thinking!
This year there were two new thinking sessions on the economy. The first was with Ganesh Nana, John Whalley and Selwyn Pallet. The second had Bernard Hickey. I was at the first, and heard many reports from the second. The distinguishing feature of them both was that the lesson of the global financial crisis and of our sluggish recovery is that we can not keep doing what we have always done if we want a more productive economy and better standard of living. To a person the presenters have recognised that the policies of the past need to be changed, and for some like Bernard that is a huge shift in thinking.
I think this is the bit that David Farrar and other commentators on the right do not get about Labour’s new economic policy. The world is responding to the economic crisis by thinking again, challenging the assumptions and the orthodoxy. That is also what Labour is doing.
Not everything that the speakers at these workshops said will become Labour policy, but the idea as noted at the first workshop that TINA (There is No Alternative) ,the mantra of the neo-liberal thinking of the 80s/90s, has been replaced by TARA (There are Real Alternatives) is exactly where we are going.
As John Armstrong notes in the NZ Herald today Labour is setting the ground for a real economic debate in 2011. From Labour you have already heard about monetary policy, taxation and overseas investment, and there will be more to come on these issues as well as savings and job creation. From National, what will we see? If its more of the same old, visionless thinking then that, while being bad for New Zealand, will give voters a stark choice in 2011.
@grant – so which policies that labour have announced will get us out of the stalled economy? Is it restricting foreign investment? Stopping foreigners buying land? Exempting fruit and vege from GST? Scrappping 90 day? Increasing the current 1.2billion spent on early childhood? Or increasing tax on those that pay 7/8s of the tax take and are the ones that are still spending? Or are these all extremely expensive policies, that sound ok in the headlines, but won’t help the economy or unemployment?
“who often have ideas that are not comfortable for many in the Labour Party”
The best sentence fragment to come out of the conference so far. If people don’t challenge themselves with ideas they aren’t comfortable with, they never change, and just wander around intellectually looking for things to confirm what they already think.
“Thinking” and “Doing” are entirely different things. Raise taxes? Try that and see how far you get towards being accepted as a viable alternative Government.
@Richard the First
It gets you into government: see Labour platform, 1999.
Grant
I am so pleased that Labour is finally coming to its senses around all of this and exploring new ways to approach economics.
Weekly, in almost every OECD country economists as public intellectuals (most notably Paul Krugman from Princeton) are challenging the Neo-Liberal assumptions of the 1970s. I attach an article from this weekend’s New York Times business section for your edification.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/17/business/17view.html?hp
I think it is a scandal that the varsity economics depts in this country have betrayed and let down the public by failing to play the role of “critic and conscious” during the GFC. A recent study at Victoria University highlighted this. There is a simple solution to this: make that role open and contestable. If our universities do not want to do the role: empower and fund appropriately others.
I guess the Axe the Tax bus has been repainted?
Too right, buddy –
, it ought to now say G 
FF 2 
11
Is Spud a Wordpress plugin?
Much of the shift in Labour policy is due to the intelligence and passion of Phil Twyford as mentioned above by Grant Robertson – his session on Local Body Politics at the Labour conference was one of the highlights – he is certainly one of the new bright hopes for a Labour victory in 2011.
PS…. And to see what needs to be done as far as children at risk are concerned – watch Native Affairs tonight on Maori TV.
Aw, Decanker is wondering if he can purchase me online
I saw the billboard used for the 2010 conference
“Higher Incomes”
“Better Jobs”
But you missed a bit…
“More Taxation”
So how much better or worse off will people be with your new taxes, guys…?
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2010/10/a_nice_table.html
Not a lot else really needs said
Bill English clearly doesn’t have any new ideas, the economy is teetering, unemployment up. What are his plans to assist the growth in jobs and incomes …Nothing
National is old economy – they will invest in building a road to perpetuate reliance on the imported car and fuel but won’t invest in more state houses – despite future rent income to repay the debt and lower first home costs (more housing increases supply and reduces demand cost).
“There’s a whole lot of things we have to do for people of lower and middle incomes,” he said. “We are looking at either redistributing those tax cuts, directly or by improving the services that middle and low-income people rely on.”
just read this on Stuff from Phil .. let me distribute my tax cut myself thanks Phil.
Id rather have decent hospitals, an ACC system that isn’t in Claim denial mode, a school system that works.
Instead of borrowing for tax cuts that are only going to benefit the few.
Interesting how the Righties are all hitting the issue of higher taxation. Yeah fellas Labour is examining the issues around higher taxation for the truly wealthy and fairer taxation for those earning less than $100K p.a. This is going to be a major election year issue, and Labour is going to bring the fight to NAT.
what do you call fair Colonial?
and yes tax is a very touchy subject because it’s OUR money, we EARNED it. “Lefties” have a jealously cell which causes them to call people with lots of money as “rich pricks”. The biggest laugh about that term is that is was made by a multiple millionaire about someone who had more than he did.
I agree Grant. I was on the Policy Council when Phil came on. It was like a whirlwind had hit it and we were actually expected to facilitate policy discussions with members and the community. Workshops were organized, retreats and papers! Experts were used for ideas. Some felt uneasy about it and Phil had to fight for the ground. This weekend was what we had in mind and it made for an interesting and innovative conference. Most of all we have some great new policies. Congratulations Phil.
Hi jabba
Offset by the simple fact that you earned it working within the societies infrastructure and using those services and that you actually need to pay for them now that you’ve used them. Stop trying to justify theft.
@Helen Kelly – I’m a fan of yours
Phil is great and finally others are starting to see it
@Others – I told you so!
I spud, good to see you on form.
DTB .. can’t steal my own money. I have worked non stop since Jan 1974. We raised 3 kids, mainly on one medium income for 20 years with a high (18%) mortgage and apart from a couple of years when we got a small family benefit for 1 of the kids, we had NO .. NO help (subsidies, working for families etc)so had to be frugal with our money which we were. We were raised on personal responsibility for our actions.
Don’t accuse me of being a thief of taxes.
The tax cut that we have just received is the 1st assistance (if you can call keeping more of our own earnings as assistance)that we have received for 10 years or more
Thanks for the behind the scenes insight Helen. I agree, an awesome conference in the weekend, and great to see all the affiliate delegates on stage flanked by Phil and by Trevor.
Better get it into your head that every person who works out there works not just for themselves, but for their communities and for their country..
Yeah, we EARN our pay, we do it so we can live in a civilised SOCIETY, which together we PAY for.
Those on the highest incomes can afford to pay proportionately more towards that WHILE still enjoying all the finest things in life.
Phil and Trev!
!
Jabba. Where did the roads you used, the school your kids went to, their doctors visits, the free dental care etc, etc etc come from.
You have been receiving assistance from the community all your life. Richer people use more of the communities resources so should pay more.
Or like many RWNJ’s do you think only the poorer people should pay taxes.
I am well into the top tax bracket. One thing I have noticed is every time taxes are reduced my spending money is also reduced. Because every reduction in Government spending has been offset by increased costs (power and school fees being just two examples) and lower wages.
You want all the services that society provides and you don’t want to pay for them. You try to justify this attempted theft by saying that it’s OUR money.
@CV what part of Tao Wells’ “art” contributed to our civilised society..? That we paid for from what we earnt…
I’m curious, when America had 1% federal taxes in the late 1800s were they not a civilised society..?
Jeremy, late 1800’s you are referring to the times of the american Robber Barons, also the times of many US ‘financial panics’ (depressions). I don’t know, do you reckon it was civilised for the ordinary hard up worker? There was no middle class, life was very tough for the ordinary man. The top 5% in society had it sweet of course, caviar and champagne all through the ups and downs.
As for art – its art. I don’t frakin get it either. But I suppose its good to have our own orchestra and ballet company. A few prizes for authors and the like.
@JMH
America during time was an era of monopolies, robber barons, high crime, mass poverty, corruption at the local level and loop side development. You also forgot to mention that they had to pay state taxes as well.
High civilised society with a dirty underbelly.
@All
I think we need a better tax system. Instead of putting any one who earns just over $70,000 is some how rich. Well off yes, but not rich, rich is more like $100,000 a year! So I think we need new tax brackets. What I basically saying a tax system is to simple and inefficient. Those who earn $250,000 have to pay the same rate as those who earn $70,000, that’s hardly fair.
$2000 – $15,000 = 10%
$15,000 – $29,999 = 18% (minimum wage area)
$30,000 – $49,999 = 20%
$50,000 – $69,999 = 25%
$70,000 – $99,999 = 30%
$100,000 -$149,999 = 34%
$150,000 – $199,999 = 38%
$200,000 – $249,999 = 40%
$250,000+ = 45%
Plus a capital gains tax of 20% and a higher with holding Residents Withholding Tax for those who earn over $30,000 a year in interest and/or dividends!
Aussie top rate is 45% and many EU nations 50%! So I don’t know why we are bitching about NZ being over taxed, if anything where under taxed! Also most EU nations have vat (gst) around the 20%.
Also back in 2001 the OECD report described the New Zealand tax system as one of the most neutral and efficient within its membership, even under labour higher tax rates. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/29/27/1891375.pdf
And don’t forget the Estate Tax.
If it could be afforded, even lower tax rates in the lowest and middle income brackets would be useful.
Basically people are not leaving NZ because we have high taxes, it is because we have low incomes.
Grant: Do you have anything to say about Gareth Morgan’s article in yesterday’s NZH?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business-editors-picks/news/article.cfm?c_id=1501981&objectid=10681447