Red Alert

PM’s Statement

Posted by Trevor Mallard on February 9th, 2010

Is that it John?


28 Responses to “PM’s Statement”

  1. Andy Fraser says:

    I might have missed it – was there an update on the cycleway?

  2. Gary Jones says:

    Hmm … for those of us expecting a sizzler, he has served up what’s more like a fizzler.

    I’m not sure if I can fall for his move of offering personal tax cuts/increases in beneficiary, pensions or WFF payments with one hand, while taking that away with another hand with GST increases :-(

  3. bikerkiwi says:

    It was just what NZ needed. I thought Goffs comeback was very childish and ‘limp’.

  4. Spud says:

    I think we get the Gi$T of it. :-(

  5. Gooner says:

    He’s not noted for being a policy wonk…..and it showed. Very broad with the detail to come……hopefully.

  6. Notice how the Maori Party didn’t applaud at the end…

  7. Banksie says:

    Get a load of Bernard Hickey’s reaction! Easily the most critical assessment of Key to date.
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10625085

  8. Anne says:

    bikerkiwi says “… I thought Goff’s comeback was very childish and ‘limp’”. These wingnuts are a humorous lot. They convince themselves black is white and vice versa. That was a great speech by Goff and left Key for dead. You only had to look at the sour expressions on the faces of the Nats while he was delivering it. Congratulations to Phil. :D

  9. Sean says:

    Good Lord. Bernard Hickey is remarkably critical.

    Increasing the cost of Living by uping GST. I guess that is all John has to show. Big Tuesday?

  10. Spud says:

    Hi bikerkiwi long time no see. :-)

  11. Spud says:

    @Anne agreed :-D Phil kicked butt!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  12. jennifer says:

    I can’t wait to see Guyon and Duncan sing Key’s praises and give the speech 8 out of ten, and run the GST increase as the silver bullet to close the gap and make us all richer and happier. I’ve set the video so I don’t miss it.

  13. TopCat says:

    Did he even mention unemployment? Is he interested in bringing it down?

  14. Cactus Kate says:

    Twas rather like sex without the orgasm.

    Not worth bothering about. Would rather keep watching the Cricket.

  15. n0exit says:

    predictable speech

  16. jarbury says:

    Is there cricket on Kate?

  17. Akldnut says:

    I just finished work – where can I find his speech and Goffs reply??

  18. wtl says:

    Aklnut: try http://inthehouse.co.nz/video_archive
    Goff’s speech only seems to be half there though.

  19. ParkDrive says:

    Trevor

    If Nacts do remove tax concessions for rental properties, it is worth noting that the largest group of people who rort the system are those with more than 1 rental property.
    Those who got into rental properties after 87, or who only have 1+1 (home+rental) should not be affected by any tax changes.

    As well, any law that is applied needs to take into consideration the number of titles a persons name is on. If someone is on 200 titles, then they should be counted as having a share in 200 properties. Conversely if someone is only on 2 titles, then 1 property should not be counted for any tax purposes.

    Thus ensuring a more equitable system and fewer scummy landlords putting rents up 20%. A $66 per week increase on rent for a $330 property? A lot of people will be seething.

    Disclaimer: I just have a mortgage on my own home.

  20. Akldnut says:

    They’re pulling the ladder out once they’ve climbed up.

    They have their slice and now they’re going to make it harder for anyone else to share it with them.

    Who is going to want to invest in rental properties now?

    I can imagine a host of wildfire property sales coming up, flooding the market with cheap properties, killing the building industry.

  21. Akldnut says:

    just my thoughts (albeit suspicious)

  22. A Mother says:

    Now I’m depressed even though I knew more or less what would be said.
    Sigh.

  23. millsy says:

    Millsy too personal. Clare

  24. Gary Jones says:

    @ Andy Fraser: cycleway update? Hmm, I’ve started to browse through John Key’s speech and parts of it read like they have been re-cycled!

    Quite a let down from when he conveyed in his 12-minute DVD he would be “Ambitious for New Zealand”, and when he repetitively invoked the word ‘fresh’.

  25. James says:

    Trevor,

    Did you hear Simon Power’s speech?

    Trevors Mallards obviously much more interested in blogging than his own leaders reply speech, as Trevor was sitting on his laptop reading blogs on his laptop!

    *Possibly slight variation, but you get the drift.

    Another thing I found amusing was that Jo Goodhue (National Junior Whip), made all the MP’s come really close together, so when one of them was speaking, it looked like they had the whole caucus! It won’t have been viewable from PTV, you could only see it if you were in the gallery.

  26. Trevor Mallard says:

    Didn’t hear it but i know they were very unhappy that I read the fact that Kiwiblog gave the package a B grade before the Key speech was more than a minute old – Phil used that in his speech and I did by way of interjection on Key.

  27. jennifer says:

    Surely it stands to reason that changes to the tax treatment of residential rental property that makes it a less attractive investment will shrink the size of the private residential property market and increase rents? Some say rents could go up by 20 percent. Any takers?

  28. Mr February says:

    Trevor,

    Did you notice that Key’s statements justifying additional mining in conservation areas are factually incorrect and obviously sourced from the mining industry?
    Key said “Mining in New Zealand uses just 40 square kilometres of land, less than 0.015 percent of our total land area,” therefore implying that mining in conservation areas is fine.
    Gerry Brownlee said exactly the same area on 15 September 2009, 40 square lilometres.
    http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/Business/QOA/0/4/e/49HansQ_20090916_00000001-1-Mining-Minerals-Stocktake-in-Conservation.htm
    Brownlee must have got it from the New Zealand Mineral Industry Association. See this statement on their website; “Current mining activities area disturbing an area of less than 30 square kilometres and mine sites are being rehabilitated progressively.”
    http://www.minerals.co.nz/html/main_topics/overview/mining_other_land_uses.html

    Jan Wright the PCE says there are 111 mining licences WITHOUT resource consents which cover a total licence area of 20,784 ha (207.84 km2), of which 3,019 ha are within conservation land. (30.19 km2)
    http://www.pce.parliament.nz/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/4527/Detail_of_old_mining_operations.pdf

    According to MED’s Crown Minerals annual report (page 16) there are 508 mining permits/licences.
    http://www.crownminerals.govt.nz/cms/about/resolveuid/caedf7ba6c36608d2ee5d2762b0799fc.
    If 111 licences involve 207 km2, then 508 must cover a whole lot more area than 40km2!
    So Key’s “fact” – ‘mining is only 40km2′ is wrong – just as his ‘value judgment’ that mining can be done not only without environmental effects but in a way that benefits conservation.

    Can you use this information to really stick it to him?

Leave a Reply