I accept that dumping “difficult” information in the week after Parliament shuts and immediately before Christmas has been done by many Governments, but the behaviour by the National government this year has been so cynical it is gob-smacking. We have had
- the release of the Hobbit emails
- the first steps towards privatisation of ACC
- the shutting down of TVNZ6
- sale of Whirinaki power plant
- and now the announcement this morning that the $4.8 million that the government gave to the Pacific Economic Development Agency (PEDA) without any tender process in the Budget has now been allocated to several other providers, with PEDA missing out.
The first thing to say is to congratulate my colleague Sua William Sio, other MPs and members of the Pacific community who doggedly pursued this case. It was an outrageous breach of good governance and convention to allocate the money to PEDA in the first place. This was an organisation with no track record, let alone the suggestion of links to National MPs.
The backdown that followed was the right thing to do, even if it took a long time. But there can be no doubting that the timing of the announcement today is deliberate to limit comment on the initial decision and the indictment on the National government that after a proper process PEDA did not get any of the money.
And we politicians wonder why many of the public don’t have faith or trust in us. Disgraceful.
It worries me that you guys cannot tell the difference between opening up for competition and the privatisation of ACC.
I know you believe in the line – keep saying it and people will believe it – but honestly people are smarter than you think.
Well done those Labour MPs who pushed this
The backdown as good as proves they were right
But Grant I expect you to hold your own caucus to the same level of accountability and you can expect me to remind you when you return to the Treasury benches
And that will include prompt OIAs …(no it’s Christmas I am not going back there)
English had the rug pulled out from underneath him re:Peda.
Again, a nat dodgy deal exposed.
Well done to the team for stopping yet another abuse of power.
What do you expect.
This is a government poll driven by spin.
Stick out all the bad news just before christmas when people are in the sunshine.
English was of course behind the dodgy dealings with Donna Huata when he was Finance minister in The Shipley- Prebble -Alamein Kopu government.
She was able to get ‘earmarks’ for her projects by English breaking the rules for Cabinet spending decisions.As we later found out she was diverting the funding for private uses ( along with others)
It seems that Bill English has played fast and loose again.
Some kudos to the Government for taking on board the PEDA criticism and changing their mind?
chris, one of the easiest parts of ACC’s complicated model is being opened up to competition with insurers (please note ACC is not an insurance company, nor is it run as one, nor does it have the same mission). I’m wondering when YOU will get that.
There is just as much credibility to the claim that under private insurers accidents reduce as there is tot he claim that under private insurers the delay of payouts, the refusal of payouts and the pressure from employers on employees to not claim increases. I’m wondering when YOU will get that.
Tracey – I’ll make you a deal – you point out where they are privatizing ACC as said again on this blog then I will bother reading all your other spin.
Chris in other accident systems with ‘choice’ there is the right to sue.
What do you say about all ‘your choices’ not being given back to you?
And of course if the insurance company ‘you choose’ fails, do you expect the government to step in ( as happened in Australia when a large insurer HIH folded)
GREAT point ghost, logically a move back to private insurers would see our right to sue reinstated.
You could add decisions on the ETS review.
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2010/12/climate-change-look-whos-reviewing-our.html#links
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2010/12/climate-change-locking-in-high.html#links
chris, perhaps you could read the words – first steps to privatisation again and understand them this time.
Opening up ACC to competition is an essential first step to later privatisation. That is undeniable.
So making 5 good and popular decisions is disgraceful. Strange use of the English language.
“And we politicians wonder why many of the public don’t have faith or trust in us.”
Really? Were you wondering back in 2008, or have you just recently started?
Blue, Red, Green, Yellow, Brown, Quiff – it’s hard to tell the difference sometimes.
Everything this government has done has been undercover, done by stealth or released when it would be lost in the small print.
Was it made clear that the ‘administration’ savings for the Fruit in Schools programme was in fact the loss of all the professional development for teaching staff in those schools? No, it was ‘an admin saving’
How much publicity was there around the loss of around 300 professional development advisors in University education departments that support teachers? It was ‘refocusing on literacy and numeracy’ – because science, health, physical education and the arts don’t matter
How much publicity has there been around the slashing of spending on public health programmes via public health units and the health sponsorship council? But wait they are investing in more bypass surgery!!
And they still managed to increase support to private schools who were finding it tough during the recession. Paid for by reducing funding to early childhood services.
Ian, “And they still managed to increase support to private schools who were finding it tough during the recession. Paid for by reducing funding to early childhood services”
Doesn’t it bother you just a little that a large number of early childhood service providers are profit-making private businesses? I’m thinking of a word beginning with H.
Even after cutting funding, these private ECE providers will still receive $333/week subsidy for a 3 year old (qualifying for the 20 hours ‘free’ ECE).
@Fi… “So making 5 good and popular decisions is disgraceful. Strange use of the English language”
Could you enlighten me on how its not disgraceful – perhaps a breakdown of each of the 5 ‘decisions’ and how they will help kiwis?
Well done to the Lab Mps who are determined to highlight whats really going on – you deserve a good xmas break!
Pray tell me how you can privatize a scheme that provides coverage for tourists, beneficiaries, sports teams that pay NO premiums. Its a choice thing which lets face it if you ever want to be re-elected you should embrace, why you continue to scream and shout to the 20% who will always vote for you regardless and not start appealling to some of the other 80% is beyond me. How about Labour all read Tony Blairs biography over the long holiday and Iraq notwithstanding, understand how he became labours most successful leader ever.Its the noughties not the 70s we are all smart consumers now.
The PEDA thing is nothing short of cronyism and appalling Nact behaviour buying votes. Choice in ACC you should support, backing the unions over Jackson is suicidal, TVNZ should be flogged off as no one believes it is the BBC and the Nats are scared stiff of doing the right thing and quitting it,you should challenge them on it-they would have nowhere to hide on that one. Flogging off half used power station is hardly a scandal and considering what we endured in your 9 years with price rises and power cuts you should steer clear of electricity.
Is everyone on the right trying to sound like someone on Foz News or talkback radio?
Ahem, then of course there is the MP’s pay increase … .
Was it really this late in the year before this decision could be made, or only this late in the year when it could be announced?
Bet you want us to read Roger Douglas’ biography to learn why he was the most successful (turn coat traitorous) Labour finance minister ever.
I’ve got two words for you: Merry Christmas.
LabRat – the ECE sector does have private businesses, true; there are also Kohanga Reo, Kindergartens and organisations that are run by not for profit organisations, e.g. Barnado’s, Presbyterian Support, etc.
The difference is that the subsidies are to allow ALL families to access ECE services, something that many were unable to afford. Not everyone has the ability (or desire) to send their children to a private school.
@David – Blair WAS a popular Labour leader, who unfortunately swung to the right of Thatcher and even began to hang out with the old bag. I sincerely hope you are not suggesting anyone in NZ Labour should model themselves on him!
Ian – the difference seems to be that while a parent can choose between a private ECE provider and a NFP/state ECE provider, and not see any difference in the level of subsidies, there isn’t the same choice with private vs state schools.
To be fair, I think in NZ the right is trying very hard and doing all it can to avoid sounding like Fox news, it’s natural position.
It’s rwnj by stealth
I notice the PM’s office putting it’s spin on the MP’s raise. However MAYBE if he hadnt tried to influence a board which is meant to be impartial, they wouldnt have given an increase to show they arent influenced by the PM or anyone else.sup
LabRat, the difference is the private schools were given $9million to compensate for reduced rolls; private ECE’s were given the subsidy to provide a service – slight difference.
Tell you what, you get JK to give me $9 million for doing nothing.