PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Author Archive

Thoughts on Australia

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 22nd, 2010

This morning Australian’s have awoken to the very real possibility of a hung parliament. While there are still several seats that are too close to call, it looks highly likely that neither Gillard’s Labor nor Abbott’s Coalition will make it to the magical 76 required to form a majority government. To us over the ditch, this is nothing unusual. We haven’t had a majority government since about 1994, and the last leader to govern with a comfortable majority was Jim Bolger from 1990-1993.

Once the final count has been completed the most likely outcome for Australia looks to be a minority government supported by independents. But the real question is who gets to lead that government, does the incumbent get the first chance to have a go, should it be the party with the most seats, should Labor’s loss of majority give Abbott the first chance?

It will be interesting to see how the Australian public react to whatever government emerges from these results. If the government ends up being led by the smaller of the two major parties (even if there is only a seat in it) the voting public may well react against them. There will be lessons for us over here in New Zealand. So far under MMP all of our governments have been led by the largest party in Parliament, but that’s not guaranteed.

In 1996 we could have ended up with a Labour/NZ First/Alliance government, even though National was the bigger of the two major parties. In 2002, despite their disastrous result, another percent or two and National could have led a centre-right coalition despite Labour being the much bigger party. Under MMP we could well end up with the biggest party in Parliament leading the opposition, not the government. What happens in Australia over coming weeks could provide a few clues as to how the public would view that.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Australia, democracy
27 Comments

From the Archive: Peter Fraser

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 22nd, 2010

Yesterday I attended the rally in Civic Square protesting the government’s latest attacks on worker’s rights. It’s always interesting to put events of today into context. This quote comes from Peter Fraser’s speech to Parliament on the Employment Bill back in 1945:

“…if we have learned anything … it is that the worst thing in the world is to go on making a depression worse by reducing incomes. At that time, the whole power of the State should be used to maintain purchasing-power … I declare that as long as this Government remains in office, notwithstanding what happens in the outside world, notwithstanding what happens to prices, even of our own commodities, we can still produce sufficient to house and feed and clothe adequately our men, women and children, and particularly the children. Never again will this country be permitted to return to the terrible conditions that prevailed before this Government came to office.  It is indeed a terrible thing and a reflection on our civilization that, in a land of plenty, children should lack sufficient to eat…”

The old cliche goes that those who don’t learn the lessons of history are bound to repeat them. Ministers in the current National government obviously didn’t pay much attention during their history lessons. Since coming to office they’ve slashed spending on many vital public services, laid off thousands of public servants, and yanked away vital support from many of those who find themselves down on their luck. The purchasing power that Fraser alludes to is being eroded through their GST increase and the inflation it will cause, along with their unofficial ‘wage freeze’.

National’s latest moves to impose ‘fire at will’ provisions on all new employees and sell their holidays will only make matters worse. National promised Kiwis they were ‘aspirational’ – the question is for whom? It certainly isn’t ordinary hard-working Kiwis who are struggling with rising costs, stagnant wages, and lower levels of support from their government.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: Unemployment, history, workforce
9 Comments

National’s double standards

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 20th, 2010

Since they took office, John Key’s National government have been putting our public services under the blowtorch. Most public servants have been refused pay increases and thousands have lost their jobs. But it seems not all spending of taxpayer money is subject to the same level of scrutiny and restraint.

Since National came to power the number of Beehive staff earning over $100,000 a year has more than doubled. Under Helen Clark’s leadership there was only one Beehive staffer who earned over $150,000 a year. John Key seems to think he needs at least 10 of them.

It seems different rules also apply when it comes to pay increases within the Beehive. Questions I asked of Key earlier this year revealed that a number of Beehive staff had been given pay rises, but he refused to release any further information on how big the pay rises were. I asked him again recently and here is his answer:

“I am advised that a small number of ministerial office staff received pay increases, primarily as the result of promotion to new roles in the period 9 February to 5 August 2010. I am not prepared to release specific details about the individual increases.”

Why not? I haven’t asked for any information that would identify individual staff members. All I’ve asked for is information on the scale of the increases and the number of staff who are getting them. National is telling hard-working Kiwis they aren’t allowed pay rises, why should their hired helpers get different treatment?

At a time when many New Zealanders are struggling to pay for the basics like electricity and food, they will find Key’s refusal to front up, justify and explain why he thinks his own staff should be subject to different standards pretty disappointing.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: national, parliament
21 Comments

The role of public health

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 19th, 2010

My good friend Dr Ayesha Verrall has written a really interesting post over at Policy Progress on the appropriate role for the public health system. Ayesha argues that the public health system exists not just to care for the sick, we should also view health as an investment and as a social determinant.

In terms of investment we need to see the value of a healthy population and workforce. Health is a public good and we should see the benefits of health care to our wider society that are far wider than simply ameliorating suffering. Health as a social determinant  looks at the linkages between health and other factors such as socio-economc status, social isolation and so forth.

Ayesha advocates a greater focus on preventative health care, but also points out how this can challenge the agreed role of the state:

“…different approaches to health care may prioritise treatment on the basis of need (the most sick), or treatment based on ability to benefit (often less sick) through to prevention (not sick at all). In extending the scope of the health system to prevention, one intervenes in the lives of the healthy. Those the subject of preventive medicine aren’t sick, don’t feel sick and may not agree with authorities that it is worth their while participating. As progressives seek to do more through preventive medicine, we test the boundaries of the agreed role of the state. The benefits of intervention may take generations to materialise and – when they do they appear as statistical phenomena – represent decreasing rates of disease, rather than individuals who can point to concrete services creating improvement in their lives.”

The last Labour government increased the focus on preventative health care, but many of the steps we took have been reversed by the new National-led administration. I strongly believe that we’re far better off investing in programmes that keep us healthy rather than focusing on putting more ambulances at the bottom of the cliff. But as Ayesha points out, we have to carefully consider where the appropriate role of the state starts and ends.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: health, public services
5 Comments

Effective select committee submissions

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 19th, 2010

Today I’m in Auckland all day with the Local Government and Environment Select Committee. We’re hearing submissions on Rodney Hide’s latest attack on local democracy. We’ve got a bit of a marathon session today, running pretty much non-stop from 9am to 9pm. Even then each submitter only gets 15 minutes to highlight their key points and engage with MPs on the committee.

Reading through the papers last night it struck me how some people or groups are far better than others at getting their points across in a conscise manner. There are literally thousands of pages of submissions for us to work through. I’ve made an effort to look through all of them and I have to say I read some 2 page submissions that were far more comprehensive and valuable than others that were 40 odd pages or more.

I also appreciate those submitters who come well prepared, highlight the 2-3 points that are most important to them and then spend the rest of their allotted time discussing issues with the committee. I’ll never understand why people feel the need to spend their whole 15 minutes reading their submissions aloud leaving no time for real discussion.

I now sit on several select committees and I find the work involved really satisfying and interesting. I admire people and groups who take time to submit and appear before select committees, but I do wonder how we can encourage them to be more effective in the way they do it?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: democracy, parliament, select committee
10 Comments

From the Archive: MJ Savage

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 15th, 2010

This week’s quote comes from the late great Michael Joseph Savage:

“It is just as well for us to turn around and have a look at ourselves sometimes. What is not good enough for me is not good enough for the fellow I am representing in this House, whether it is a house or an income. There is enough of the best for all of us, and I want to bring about security for everyone during illness, whether it be temporary incapacity due to accident, or anything else. I should think it was the inalienable right of every person to be secured against distress of any form. That is only commonsense. I so not know whether I would call it ’sound economics’ or not … I do not think it is any use talking about national wealth unless we can use it for national purposes … In a word or two, I would say that is applied Christianity.”

Taken from the Hansard of debate on the Social Security Bill 1938.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Labour Party, social development
24 Comments

From the archive: Peter Fraser

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 8th, 2010

Last week my post quoting Walter Nash generated some great debate, so this week I thought I’d stick with that era and select a few quotes from another great Labour leader, this time the Rt Hon Peter Fraser. One of the founders of the modern Labour Party, Fraser was our wartime PM and before that, Minister of Education and Health. He appointed C.E Beeby to the Education Department and between them they massively expanded the role of public education in our country.

“The government’s objective, broadly expressed, is that all persons, whatever their level of ability, whether they live in town or country, have a right as citizens to a free education of the kind for which they are best fitted and to the fullest extent of their powers.”

“Schools that are to cater for the whole population must offer courses that are as rich and varied as are the needs and abilities of the children who enter them.”

Both of those quotes are as relevant today as they were back in the 1930s. If we want all Kiwis to have the best possible start in life, then a quality public education system is critical. National’s cuts to early childhood education suggest they don’t agree. The introduction of national standards risks narrowing the focus of our schools, forcing them to adopt a ‘one size fits all’ approach, failing to recognise that different kids learn at different speeds and have different strengths.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Labour Party, education
10 Comments

Armstrong lambasts National

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 7th, 2010

John Armstrong has unusually harsh words for National in today’s Herald column.

“Shame on National. That party’s behaviour in Parliament over the past couple of weeks has on occasion veered close to being a disgrace both to itself and the institution … National has ended up being done like a dog’s dinner over one of its most fundamental planks – the closing of the gap between what New Zealanders earn in comparison to Australians … such has been the comprehensive mauling of the concept by Labour over the past week or so that National will now be loath to resurrect it. It is now a loser for National and looks like remaining so through to next year’s election”

“What has been disturbing in this debacle, however, has been the way National has responded to parliamentary questions about the income gap. The low point came on Wednesday when Steven Joyce briefly deputised for Brownlee … A week earlier, Brownlee had told the House in response to a question from Labour that “yes”, the Government did have milestones by which it would measure the progress it was making towards closing the income gap … So eyebrows shot through the chamber’s ceiling when Joyce made the startling admission that there were, in fact, no such milestones. Even more startling was what Joyce said next. Brownlee had given Labour what was technically known as a “brush-off”…”

“Brownlee’s gaffe about the income gap having narrowed since National came to power prompted a desperate search by National for anything that served as evidence, however questionable, of that being the case. Much of the evidence is to the contrary – including some of the material National has dug up. The upshot is that Labour – almost by accident – has given National an old-fashioned hiding on that most fundamental of all questions: which party can be can best trusted with the reins of economic management. The one compensating factor for National is that all this has happened largely out of public view.”

The government have had an easy reign so far, but as Armstrong has pointed out, the shine is starting to come off. National is reverting to type with their ‘born to rule’ attitude. They brush off serious questions by making wise cracks. Up until now that strategy has served them well, but people (particularly journos) are getting a bit sick of it. Questions are now being asked about what exactly National’s plan for New Zealand is. The answer seems to be they don’t have one.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: democracy, economy, national
26 Comments

Unemployment up, still no plan…

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 5th, 2010

The latest unemployment stats make for grim reading. Over 19,000 Kiwis have joined the ranks of the unemployed in the past 3 months. Since National has been in office unemployment has increased by 53,000. So what’s the National government focused on? Well they’ve spent most of this week trying to doctor figures to hide the fact that the wage gap between New Zealand and Australia has grown during their time in office, despite John Key’s pledge to make closing it his “fundamental priority”.

We should never regard unemployment as merely a matter of statistics. These are real people with real lives, real families, real homes, real mortgages, real bills to pay. The increase in unemployment from 6% to 6.8% in three short months marks thousands of individual tragedies. It’s a much bigger increase than anyone was predicting and highlights how adrift this government have already become.

Back in May John Key was happy to pronounce that his government is on the right track due to falling unemployment, so by his own standard they must have jumped the track in the past 3 months. Where is their plan? The Jobs Summit was a joke. The cycleway has failed to produce the thousands of jobs Key promised. Gerry’s bold plan to mine in National Parks has been stomped on. So what’s next? The thousands of Kiwis struggling to find work are keen to know…

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Unemployment, economy
19 Comments

Today’s Lucky Dip

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 5th, 2010

There are 3 spaces on the Order Paper for a Members’ Bill. There will be a ballot at midday. The following bills are in the hat:

  1. Amy Adams: Land Transport (Admissibility of Evidential Breath Tests) Amendment Bill
  2. Rick Barker: Sentencing Act (Reparation) Amendment Bill
  3. Carol Beaumont: Local Government (Protection of Auckland Assets) Amendment Bill
  4. John Boscawen: Climate Change Response (Cancellation of Emissions Trading Scheme) Amendment Bill
  5. Brendon Burns: Environment Canterbury (Democracy Restoration) Amendment Bill
  6. Cam Calder: Imprisonment for Debt Limitation Repeal Bill
  7. Charles Chauvel: New Zealand Flag Bill
  8. Dr Ashraf Choudhary: Ethnic Broadcasting Commission Bill
  9. David Clendon: Resource Management (Restricted Duration of Certain Discharge and Coastal Permits) Amendment Bill
  10. Hon Clayton Cosgrove: Christchurch International Airport Protection Bill
  11. Clare Curran: Kiwi Jobs Bill
  12. Hon Lianne Dalziel: Illegal Contracts (Unlawful Limitation on Regulators’ Powers) Amendment Bill
  13. Jacqui Dean: Shop Trading Hours Act Repeal (Waitaki Easter Trading) Amendment Bill
  14. Catherine Delahunty: Human Rights (Disability Commissioner) Amendment Bill
  15. Hon Sir Roger Douglas: Kiwi Industry Restructuring (Plant Variety Rights) Amendment Bill
  16. Hon Ruth Dyson: Environment Canterbury (Water Conservation Orders) Amendment Bill
  17. Darien Fenton: Employment Relations (Triangular Employment) Amendment Bill
  18. Te Ururoa Flavell: Gambling (Gambling Harm Reduction) Amendment Bill
  19. David Garrett: Victims’ Rights (Victim Impact Statements) Amendment Bill
  20. Aaron Gilmore: Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance (Break Fees Disclosure) Amendment Bill
  21. Jo Goodhew: Joint Family Homes Repeal Bill
  22. Dr Kennedy Graham: Public Finance (Sustainable Development Indicators) Amendment Bill
  23. Kevin Hague: Animal Welfare (Treatment of Animals) Amendment Bill
  24. Hone Harawira: Parliamentary Commissioner for the Treaty of Waitangi Bill
  25. Hon George Hawkins: Code of Airline Consumer Rights Bill
  26. Chris Hipkins: Environmental Reporting Bill
  27. Hon Darren Hughes: Land Transport (Safer Alcohol Limits for Driving) Amendment Bill
  28. Gareth Hughes: Energy Efficiency Conservation (Warm Healthy Rentals) Amendment Bill
  29. Hon Shane Jones: Waste Minimisation (Priority Products) Amendment Bill
  30. Rahui Katene: Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (1080 Poison Prohibition) Amendment Bill
  31. Sue Kedgley: Consumer’s Right to Know (Country of Origin of Food) Bill
  32. Iain Lees-Galloway: Smoke-free Environments (Removing Tobacco Displays) Amendment Bill
  33. Keith Locke: Register of Pecuniary Interests of Judges Bill
  34. Hon Trevor Mallard: Minimum Wage Amendment Bill
  35. Sue Moroney: Parental Leave and Employment Protection (Six Months Paid Leave) Amendment Bill
  36. Dr Russel Norman: Overseas Investment (Restriction on Foreign Ownership of Land) Amendment Bill
  37. Lynne Pillay: Employment Relations (Protection of Young Workers) Bill
  38. Dr Rajen Prasad: Children’s Commissioner (Reporting on Legislation) Amendment Bill
  39. Hon Mita Ririnui: Electoral (Entrenchment of Māori Representation) Amendment Bill
  40. HV Ross Robertson: Members of Parliament (Code of Ethical Conduct) Bill
  41. David Shearer: Continental Shelf (Oil Exploration Safety) Amendment Bill
  42. Hon Maryan Street: New Zealand Nuclear Free Zone, Disarmament, and Arms Control (Entrenchment) Amendment Bill
  43. Chris Tremain: Wild Animal Control (Increased Fines and Sentence of Imprisonment) Amendment Bill
  44. Metiria Turei: Income Tax (Universalisation of In-work Tax Credit) Amendment Bill
  45. Phil Twyford: Depleted Uranium (Prohibition) Bill
  46. Nicky Wagner: Family Proceedings (Paternity Orders and Parentage Tests) Amendment Bill
  47. Michael Woodhouse: Financial Assistance For Live Organ Donors

Update: And today’s lucky numbers are: 23, 13 and 14 (highlighted above)

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: parliament
33 Comments

Environmental Reporting Bill

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 5th, 2010

This morning I’ve introduced a new Environmental Reporting Bill into the ballot. The Bill does two things. It requires the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment to produce a comprehensive report on the state of the environment at least every 5 years. It also gives the Commissioner the power to establish a standardised set of indicators to assess the state of the environment on a regular basis.

A recent report by the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment found that the quality of data currently available on the state of our environment is patchy at best. Establising a standardised set of indicators will help to remedy this problem. It will also improve the quality of the 5-yearly report the Commissioner will produce.

Improving the quality of information available on the state of our environment has never been more important. We now place a much greater focus on the impact of our actions on the environment. Assessing the effectiveness of our policy responses to issues like climate change will rely on the availability of quality, objective information.

Giving responsibility for establishing what data is to be collected to the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment brings some independence to that process. I think it’s really important that the public can have confidence that the data presented has been selected and collected free from any form of political interference and manipulation.

There are still some logistical and resourcing issues to sort out. The Commissioner currently doesn’t have the resources to do this job effectively, so no doubt that will be the topic of some discussion should the Bill make it as far as a Select Committee. Should it be drawn from the ballot I’m hopefully my parliamentary colleagues will at least support the First Reading so that we can have that debate.

Tags: ,
Filed under: climate change, environment, legislation
5 Comments

More dodgy pokie machine scams

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 4th, 2010

The Otago Daily Times has been hot on the heels of dodgy pokie trust scams for some time. Today they have a story about an alleged “money-go-round” involving several south Auckland pokie machine venues and southern racing clubs. Personally I find the idea that the profits from pokie venues in South Auckland are being channelled to racing clubs in the lower South Island pretty appalling.

Pokie trusts should be investing the money collected through pokie machines back into the communities they are taken from. In recent months we’ve seen countless examples of pokie trusts using money that should have been applied for charitable purposes to compete with each other for venues, refurbish venues, and even wine and dine people at flash restaurants. It’s time to end the rorts.

I questioned the Internal Affairs Minister Nathan Guy about this when he appeared before the Select Committee during the Estimates process. He referred almost every question to officials. When I asked if he thought the legislation needed changing, he said no. In other words, he’s washing his hands of the problem. That’s not good enough. It’s time for him to earn his ministerial salary…

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Uncategorized
15 Comments

A question of priorities

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 3rd, 2010

John Key may not have a plan to catch up with Australia. Gerry Brownlee may not have a plan to achieve the government’s supposed goal of having 90% of our electricity generated from renewable sources. Bill English may not have a plan to pay for the looming baby boomer retirement. Paula Bennett may have no plan for reducing the number of people on benefits. Judith Collins may have no plan to reduce the rate of violent crime in New Zealand… BUT … John Key does have a plan to make himself sound more important. Not content to be merely honourable, he is henceforth to be referred to as the “Right Honourable Prime Minister”. Good to know they’ve got such a clear set of priorities…

Tags: ,
Filed under: national
107 Comments

Poll on electricity generation

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 2nd, 2010

Which of the following statements best reflects your view on electricity generation in New Zealand?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
Tags: ,
Filed under: Energy
22 Comments

From the archive: Walter Nash

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 31st, 2010

I’m a fan of New Zealand history, particularly our political history. I read a lot of political biography and on occasion, when I’m a bit tired and bored in the House I pick up copies of the old Hansard and read what some of our esteemed former leaders talked about (from all sides). A while ago I came across these quotes from the late, great Rt Hon Walter Nash. They sum up pretty well for me what it means to be Labour.

“We have obligations towards the old and infirm because their work in their earlier and more fruitful years has made it possible for us to enjoy the standards we enjoy today – because they have done their share in making our present life possible. We have obligations towards the young because if we fail to provide for them, we fail to provide for the future, because it will be the duty and the privilege of those who are young today to make a still better world for tomorrow.We have obligations towards the sick and the ailing because they cannot care for themselves. And when those obligations have been fully discharged, when those unable to provide for themselves have been provided for, it is our duty to ensure that those who do the useful work of the world enjoy the full reward of their toil”.

“Men and women are not free to develop their own souls, to express their own individual personalities, to contribute according to their individual capacities to the world’s cultural inheritance – they are not free to do any of these things so long as the fact and fear of economic insecurity confronts them. Only when this fear is removed do they become in the fullest sense of the term a free people. We cannot reasonably expect the flowering of the higher attributes of humanity in a society that is diseased at its roots. Squalor, destitution, unemployment, slums, malnutrition, ill health, insecurity – these are diseases of the body politic which must be stamped out fearlessly and without equivocation before we can hope to build on foundations that are spiritually as well as materially secure”.

Filed under: Labour Party
25 Comments

We’ll all pay the cost of ECE cuts

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 30th, 2010

Last night I hosted a public meeting in Upper Hutt on early childhood education. It was very well attended by parents, teachers and concerned members of the public. This is a bit of a sleeper issue that’s going to come back to bite the National government. Around the country early childhood centres are grapling with an impossible choice – do they cut quality or increase fees to parents, thus compromising access? The crunch is still a few months away. A lot of parents aren’t even aware it’s coming yet.

Kindergartens are being clobbered really hard. They’ve already decided they want to stick with having 100% qualified staff, and they don’t charge fees, so they’re going to find it really hard. Where will they find the money? Cuts to teacher professional development, property maintenance, and equipment budgets will be high on the list no doubt. Who loses out? The kids.

If we’re serious about catching up with Australia, if we’re serious about reducing the prison population, if we’re serious about providing security in retirement, we need to take a long-term view. That starts with giving kids the best possible start in life. Kids who attend quality early childhood education do better at school, better at work, better in life. These cuts are just so short-sighted and we’ll all pay in the long run.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: education
30 Comments

The Wage Gap

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 28th, 2010

Before the last election the wage gap with Australia was John Key’s #1 issue. Key even went as far as to say that the ‘fundamental purpose’ of his government would be to narrow the gap. Listening to Gerry Brownlee and John Key in the House today and yesterday, apparently the problem has been solved already.

Yesterday Brownlee claimed that the gap ‘is certainly a lot less than it was when Labour was in office’ despite the fact that it has blown out by more than $50 a week since National took office. In the last quarter, according to official statistics, Australian wages have increased by $17 a week, compared to $3 for Kiwi workers.

Kiwi workers will fall even further behind from October when they will be paying a consumption tax (GST) that is 50 percent higher than in Australia. We have caught up with Australia in one respect though, when National took over we had a lower unemployment rate – they’ve managed to turn that around in 18 months!

So where is John Key’s plan? Smiling and waving for the cameras won’t get us there. As Annette King said in the House yesterday, “It’s time for the Government to stop kicking the tyres, put some petrol in the tank. start the engine and go somewhere!”. Couldn’t have said it better…!

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Cost of Living, economy, wages
22 Comments

Judith Collins: Blame Maori

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 28th, 2010

On Sunday Judith Collins was quizzed on Q&A about New Zealand’s high rate of inprisonment. Here’s an extract from the exchange:

GUYON: …how can it be that we lock up people at double the rate of France?

JUDITH: Well what we have for instance is we have say 15% of the population Maori…

The Maori Party must be so proud every time they vote to prop up Judith Collins and her National government mates.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Māori, law and order
42 Comments

Tax cuts or Super?

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 27th, 2010

Over at Policy Progress David Choat has written up a few observations on the future affordability of New Zealand Superannuation, based on presentations at the recent Retirement Income Policy and Intergenerational Equity Conference. Choat looks at various projections of the cost of the ‘retirement boom’ and some of the alternative options. He concludes by essentially arguing we have a choice: change our current entitlements or increase taxes to keep them as they are.

That conclusion highlights the folly of the arguments people like Don Brash have been putting forward. Brash argues that current Super entitlements are unaffordable. Fullstop. Brash and his contemporaries in National have spent years arguing that massive tax cuts are affordable and necessary. They’ve conveniently overlooked one of the biggest longterm implications – less money to pay for the baby boomer’s retirement!

I want to see New Zealand Superannuation remain as it is, a universal entitlement from the age of 65. But John Key’s promise to resign rather than cut it looks pretty hollow given his total lack of a plan for how to pay for it. In 10-15 years time when the crunch comes, Key will be off sunning himself in Hawaii while future generations work out how to plug the massive hole he and his crew have left us with.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Tax, senior citizens, superannuation
24 Comments

Energy from waste

Posted by Chris Hipkins on July 26th, 2010

I’ve posted several times about the fledgling New Zealand biofuels industry and how I think the current National government have pulled the rug out from under it. In comments people have often raised concern about the potential for biofuels to create other problems such as food shortages. That’s one of the reasons I’m so keen to see a lot more biofuel development that uses waste product as its feedstock.

But the use of waste to produce energy isn’t limited to biofuels. The Dominion Post had an interesting little story today on its Small Business page about Peter Yealands from Yealands Estate. He’s going to be using prunings from his vineyard to provide energy. This will save 22,000 tonnes of LPG and $80,000 during the vintage. EECA has backed the project with a 40 percent ($200k) subsidy.

The prunings will be burned in two boilers with modified doors that are being imported from the US. They burn clean, releasing no smoke and leaving only about 10kg of ash at the end of each bale. That ash will be mixed with mulch made from the rest of the prunings and put back on the land (only about 10% of the prunings will be burned).

This is the kind of energy innovation we should be encouraging a lot more of. Good to see EECA getting behind it. The question now should be – how do we get more of it?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Energy, climate change
18 Comments

« Older Entries