PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Posts Tagged ‘select committee’

Democracy denied by smug Nats

Posted by Chris Hipkins on August 12th, 2011

Earlier this year Phil Goff and I accepted a petition signed by almost 6,000 Kiwis concerned about the government’s cuts to compensation to those suffering from work-related hearing loss. Thanks to National, people with hearing impairment are the only group of New Zealanders required by law to demonstrate a particular percentage of disability before rehabilitation will be offered under the ACC scheme.

At yesterday’s Transport and Industrial Relations Select Committee meeting National members voted en-bloc to report back the petition of Louse Carroll and 5857 others to the House without hearing a single piece of evidence. That’s undemocratic and a slap in the face to all those who sought to have their concerns heard by their House of Representatives.

Having actively discriminated against those with hearing loss, the National government is now turning a deaf ear to their concerns. They aren’t even willing to allow them to come to Parliament and have their say. That’s frankly disgraceful. If almost 6,000 people were willing to take the time to sign a petition to Parliament, the least their elected representatives can do is allow them the courtesy of a hearing.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: ACC, democracy, parliament, petition, select committee
30 Comments

Will submissions change the government’s mind?

Posted by Darien Fenton on September 15th, 2010

According to the CTU, an estimated 6000 submissions have been forwarded on the government’s antiquated Employment Relations Amendment Bill (No 2) to the Transport & Industrial Relations Select Committee.

This is the bill that :

• Extends the 90 day no rights trial period to all workplaces

• Restricts the right of workers to have access to their unions at work

• Weakens fair processes where workers actually manage to get a grievance hearing

among other things.

Submissions hearings begin tomorrow in Wellington, and are likely to take up a lot of time in the next few weeks.  The Select Committee will travel to other places (to be determined) and also meet during House Sitting time to get through the very tight timeframe of reporting back the bill by 7 November.

I’ve read some of the submissions so far and the arguments are comprehensive and convincing.  With unions planning a national day of action in October, it will be interesting to see if the National Government members, who have the majority on the committee, are prepared to listen – and if necessary convince their Minister to change her mind.

We’ll see – but not holding my breath.

These are public hearings, so come along if you can.

Tags:
Filed under: 90 day trial period, Employers, Holidays, jobs, labour, parliament, regulation, sick leave, workers rights
8 Comments

The proper role of an MP

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 3rd, 2010

I think Key, Hide & Co are beginning to feel the heat. After a week and a half of submissions on the third super city bill it is clear Aucklanders are as opposed to this assault on democracy as they were when the Nats did their last impression of listening to the public halfway through last year.

But when the Herald gets stuck into them. And all the mayors. And the Employers and Manufacturers Association. And the Chamber of Commerce. Surely it gets a little harder to write off the critics as rent-a-mob? Perhaps not. Rodney Hide was on the radio this morning criticising yesterday’s rally outside the select committee hearings which was attended by Labour and Green MPs, and calling the 150 Aucklanders who protested ’sad’.

They are sad alright but not in the sense Hide means. They are really sad about what this Government is doing to our democracy.

Hide accused me of politicising the select committee process by organising the rally. He is joined by ACT supporter Michael Bassett, himself a former Minister of Local Government, who has written about all this, kindly sending me a copy, in which he says it is a constitutional outrage that an MP on the select committee should be taking part in a public protest outside the committee’s hearings. He is also unhappy with the Herald’s coverage.

My first response is that it is rich beyond belief for Hide to accuse anyone else of politicising the super city process. Hello Rodney? Aren’t you the guy who denied Aucklanders a referendum on the super city? Who invited them to make submissions on Maori representation when your threat to resign had already convinced John Key to drop Maori seats as an option? Who rammed the first two bills through under urgency? Who gets the power under this third bill to hand pick the directors of the powerful commercial structures who will run 90% of Council operations?

Secondly, I have always considered it an MP’s job to fight for what the people want. The select committee is not a court, and I am not a judge. When a Government blocks its ears to the public, I think it is perfectly in order for MPs and citizens to take up the right to peaceful protest.

What do you think?

Click this next link to see Michael Bassett’s comments in full.

(more…)

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, select committee
67 Comments

The future of our ports

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 1st, 2010

Today at the select committee hearing public submissions on the third super city bill, we had the mayors and ARC chairman Mike Lee in. There were some great submissions and useful debate. In amongst it all I took the opportunity to ask several of them their view of the provision in the bill which repeals the requirement for a binding ballot of Aucklanders before the Ports of Auckland can be sold off.

Mike Lee, Bob Harvey, Andrew Williams and Len Brown all gave unambiguous answers that the binding ballot requirement should stay.

I didn’t however get a straight answer out of John Banks after three attempts. In reply to my first two attempts he said how opposed he was to asset sales but steadfastly avoided my specific question. On my third attempt he just looked away.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, select committee
10 Comments

Time to stand up

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 27th, 2010

Sick to death of National and ACT’s Frankenstein vision for Auckland?

Tired of their fake listening campaigns, and bogus assurances they are going to ‘put the local back into local democracy’?

Join the protest outside the select committee hearings this Tuesday lunchtime.  Let Key, Hide & Co know that Aucklanders deserve and demand better.

12 – 2pm  Tuesday 2 March   Quality Hotel Barrycourt, 20 Gladstone Road, Parnell

If you care about:
* the corporatisation of our local democracy
* the loss of local voice
* moves to make it easier to sell the Ports of Auckland and other assets
* unfair boundaries and inadequate representation
* undermining protections for the Waitakere Ranges
* tokenistic representation for Maori
* the rushed and undemocratic process the Government is using to push the super city through
…then join this lunchtime rally and show the Government Aucklanders won’t take the super city lying down.

Spread the word – send this facebook link to all your friends.

All political parties, groups, individuals welcome to attend. The rally will be peaceful and orderly.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, protest
9 Comments

Make a submission but never submit

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 11th, 2010

APN’s community paper The Aucklander has consistently campaigned against the super city fiasco.

It has now taken the unusual step for a newspaper of making a submission to the select committee considering the third super city bill.

It begins with a reference to the Government’s confiscation of Aucklanders’ right to a referendum on this forced amalgamation:

First, this Bill should restore the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 which have been outrageously overridden by the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Act 2009. That the people of Auckland should be denied the rights to democratic local governance is unconscionable and despicable.  Read more.

The paper’s editor Editor Ewan McDonald and Chief Reporter  Edward Rooney have asked to present their submission in person. I can’t wait.

You too can make a submission.  The deadline is 5pm tomorrow Friday. You can do it on line. See Labour’s submission guide for tips. And don’t feel you have to write a lengthy technical submission. Keep it simple, and don’t forget to tell the committee you would like to speak to your submission in person.

A number of people at our recent public meetings asked whether making a submission makes a difference. It is a worthwhile political act. During the hearings on the second bill last year one submitter after another ripped into the Government’s plans for at-large councillors and toothless local boards, embarrassing the National and ACT committee members and ultimately leading to Government U-turns on those two issues (even though they are yet to come good on their promise to empower the boards).

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, local government
2 Comments

Food for thought#3

Posted by Brendon Burns on January 3rd, 2010

How safe  is the food we eat? I’ve related my Dad’s story of twigging 50 years ago to why his Canadian-resident mate’s sex drive had shrivelled; it was due to the estrogen being pumped into battery-raised chickens. Until last year,  I would have thought that such practices were a thing of the distant past. But as a member of the Primary Production Committee, I got to ask some questions mid-year of the  NZ Food Safety Authority.

Information provided to the committee told us that NZFSA was doing some studies about the use of antibiotics in factory-raised chickens. (Large amounts of antibiotics are required when chickens are stacked three and four a time into cages with an A4 size of space.) The NZFSA officials said that the studies they had done were not “conclusive” about whether the antibiotics used have any impact on human health. So what,  I asked, where they doing to provide some assurance to us as New Zealanders who eat dozens of kgs of chicken per capita every year. The NZFSA’s anwer was that it was doing some more studies!

Forgive the pun, but isn’t this rather putting the egg before the chicken? Should we be eating chicken  fed antibiotics if it is inconclusive that this will not do us any harm? I didn’t ask the question of NZFSA about whether estrogen is still fed to chickens here. Others might know? 

 I plan to follow it up, most especially since my good buddy Moana Mackey’s post about the guy in Louisiana who developed breasts and lost facial hair because he was eating chicken necks. The supposition is that because these include thyroid glands, this might be where estrogen is concentrated. I know from reading The Omnivore’s Dilemma that estrogen is fed to beef cattle in the US. This and the use of corn on feedlots has seen the average age of cattle at slaughter in the US reduce from perhaps 4 years a century ago to 14-16 months.  Chickens, be they US or NZ, are raised in a matter of weeks. Yes, it does provide cheap food but it seems to me that animial welfare and human welfare are both short of what they deserve.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Consumer Affairs, agriculture, environment, science, select committee
8 Comments

What a shemozzle

Posted by Phil Twyford on September 14th, 2009

On the Back Benches super city special tonight, former Royal Commissioner David Shand described the Government’s handling of the super city as a shemozzle.

Noun 1. shemozzle – (Yiddish) a confused situation or affair; a mess

It’s a good description of the rushed, half-baked process Rodney Hide and John Carter have run over the past few months. It has left Aucklanders feeling distinctly uneasy: no consultation on the findings of the Royal Commission, first bill pushed through under urgency, Aucklanders’ right to a referendum legislated away, a compressed select committee process.

So far three big climb-downs (presumably as a result of the rush):

  1. toothless local boards – junked
  2. councillors elected at large – junked, but multi-member wards are a similar thing through the back door
  3. today’s coup de grace: an 11th hour U-turn on the northern boundary. Instead of cutting Rodney in half now it’s all in.

And still so much that is wrong with it. More detail here.

The Bill is back in the House tomorrow and the Government is, wait for it…going to push it through under urgency. Two bills on the biggest constitutional change to our system of government since the introduction of MMP, and they ram them both through under urgency.

If you want to follow the debate on Parliament TV, it is likely to be first up after Question Time tomorrow/Tuesday (sometime after 3pm).

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government, public services
22 Comments

Day of reckoning for Auckland

Posted by Phil Twyford on September 4th, 2009

Local government’s worst kept secret has finally been revealed with the tabling in Parliament of the Auckland super city committee’s report. Major decisions have already been announced by Government (powers for local boards, Maori seats) or leaked (the carve up of Rodney), but check out the bill and commentary to see just how badly this has turned out.

It’s a shocker.  After the Royal Commission’s marathon and widely praised effort, and months of public debate and select committee hearings, the Government is offering up a flawed, unbalanced and undemocratic super city model.

Key elements:

  • Too few councillors – only 20 to represent 1.4 million people.
  • Councillors elected from multi-member wards that will be so big as to be at-large under another name.
  • Executive powers for a mayor that will unbalance the relationship with councillors.
  • Local boards – too many and too small, chopping up established communities of interest like Manukau and Waitakere.
  • The denial of Maori representation.
  • The carve up of Rodney and Franklin that will put the Hunua dams, the northern beaches and precious regional parks outside the city.

Nothing to protect public assets from privatisation. Nothing to give 6500 local government staff any assurance about their jobs.

The whole process has been mishandled from day one: first the Nats’ breaking their campaign promise to consult Aucklanders on the findings of the Royal Commission; then the first bill rammed through under urgency; the confiscation of Aucklanders’ right to a referendum on the changes; and then a compressed and rushed select committee process; topped off by Rodney Hide’s resignation threat scuppering a proper decision on Maori seats.

What should have been a bright new day for Auckland local government has been tarnished. So flawed is this bill that Labour will be voting against it.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
35 Comments

Speaker changes mind on Banking Inquiry rooms

Posted by David Cunliffe on August 7th, 2009

Yesterday we announced that the Speaker, Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith, had changed his mind on whether or not to allocate Parliamentary space for the multi-party banking inquiry.

We had initially requested the use of Select Committee rooms, as these were well set up with tele-conferencing facilities and were an appropriate size and format. He declined that request because he didn’t want to give the impression it was a Select Committee inquiry, he said, and further argued that a multi-party inquiry was not, in his view, part of the business of Parliament.

Jim Anderton, Russel Norman and I took this up with him in discussion. We provided him with past precedents from when the Committee rooms had been used on many occasions by everyone from lobbyists to Parliamentary friendship groups to multi-party announcements to who knows what, including private social functions. We argued based on recent Business Committee decisions, that legitimate Parliamentary business is broader than just the meetings of the House in full session or its Committees.

MPs are rightly accountable to the public for their work around the country in their electorates and on issues of public policy and importance, whether it is inside the Chamber or out. There is no doubt that the issue of bank interest rates is of significance when up to a billion dollars is at stake and it raises important questions about monetary policy and supervision of the system.

We are pleased that on reflection Speaker Smith has changed his mind and now allocated some excellent space on the second floor of the Beehive, which will be ideal for our purpose

Thank you Dr Smith. Your decision has saved a more extended debate on the constitutionality of Parliamentary business at this time.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: bank, finance, parliament, select committee
4 Comments

The people are speaking

Posted by Phil Twyford on July 8th, 2009

Aucklanders are communicating loud and clear with the select committee on the super city which is now into its third day of hearings. Assuming these three days are somewhat representative of opinion across the city, and bear in mind the committee has been sitting in central Auckland and is yet to move around the cities and districts, a number of themes are emerging:

1. People are grumpy about the rushed process.

2. Rodney Hide’s toothless local boards are getting the big thumbs down. People want community councils with the powers and resources to carry out local tasks. Many have argued for the principle of subsidiarity, that is that unless there is a sound reason for putting a task at the top level then it should be done at the second tier. There is quite a range of opinion on the question of how many community councils there should be.

3. Of the individual submitters a strong majority are in favour of all councillors being elected from wards, as opposed to at-large councillors.

4. Most submitters in favour of special Maori representation. (A sub-committee is spending several days hearing submissions on marae but Maori submitters can also choose to address the full committee.)

5. Many submitters in favour of STV as the voting system especially for the mayor but many arguing for it across the board.

6. Particularly from individual submitters, a lot of scepticism about the proposed package of mayoral powers and the ’strong mayor’ model.

7. And although not everyone keen on my member’s bill requiring a referendum before any assets are sold, a strong common view in favour of keeping local government assets in public ownership.

There is plenty of argument and opposing views as you’d imagine. But I have to say it is heartening listening to so many thoughtful and heartfelt submissions by people who care passionately about our democracy. The powerful current coming through from individual submitters today is people wanting a strong local voice, and wanting their politicians to be accountable (not elected at-large, fewer powers for the mayor). Good democratic impulses I’d say.

The Nats are signalling they are ready to move towards empowered community councils. It will be interesting to see how they handle the pressure on Maori representation and at large v.ward-based councillors.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
15 Comments

Nothing paltry about this

Posted by Brendon Burns on July 2nd, 2009

New Zealand’s Food Safety Agency says it is going to do more work on “inconclusive’ research on whether our health might be at some risk from the routine use of antibioticsfed to chicken on poultry farms.  But it has no plans to alert us to this.

This emerged when the Primary Production select committee this morning quizzed Food Safety Minister Kate Wilkinson on her departmental estimates.  It seems NZFSA has twice reviewed the widespread use of antibiotics on poultry farms and whether this might have impacts on humans. Today an official could only say the results were inconclusive and more research will be done. Though not urgently, perhaps starting in six months.

Some might consider this to be playing chicken with peoples’ health?

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Uncategorized
12 Comments

A bunch of old bankers

Posted by David Cunliffe on July 1st, 2009

I’ve seen some extraordinary manouvers in Select Committees – but few as brazen as the Government’s moves today to block the proposed Banking Inquiry in the Finance and Expenditure Committee.

Here’s the sequence of events, which until today were under privilege and could not be told.

On 12 March the Reserve Bank cut the Official Cash Rate, but the major banks didn’t. Governor Bollard was clearly concerned and said so. I questioned him at the time at FEC and publicly called on the major banks to pass through the full cuts.

The Finance & Expenditure Committee issued a strongly critical report on 9 June which gave rise to wide public debate – not only on short term rates but also on trans-Tasman equivilence of lending terms and the overall $4.5 billion banking profits at a time when businesses are failing and ordinary hard working Kiwi households are struggling.

At his next appearance at FEC the Reserve Bank Governor supported the proposal of FEC conducting an inquiry into these issues.

The Chairman, Craig Foss MP, proposed that the possible inquiry be into “The Relationships Between the Official Cash Rate and Short Term Interest Rates”.

On behalf of Labour members I proposed a somewhat broader topic – An Inquiry Into Recent  Banking Practices, Including a Particular Focus on Retail Interest Rate Margins. In doing so, our aim was to ensure an holistic view was taken of banking practices, margins and profits.

Interestingly several major banks publicly expressed support for the inquiry, and on its broader terms.

The FEC then called in the Reserve Bank again to get further advice on the issues. While its detailed reports remain confidential to the Committee the Reserve Bank has also publicly stated:

1. OCR cuts have not been fully passed through to short term variable interest rates – either to businesses or households.

2. Medium term loan costs may reflect the higher costs of domestic and offshore borrowing.

In order to progress the inquiry, Labour and Green members expressed willingness to work in a bi-partisan way and proceed on the basis of National’s narrow inquiry topic.

National tried to delay further, but I proposed that a vote be held on the National Chair’s narrower topic.

National voted against their own topic. ACT and their new best friends in the Maori Party followed suit.

I then sought to adopt National’s inquiry topic by amendment into my own motion.

National and friends blocked that.

National, ACT and Maori (NAM) then blocked the original Labour inquiry topic.

In other words, despite all their public posturing National did a back flip and blocked its own inquiry as well as Labour’s.

The Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance roared like lions in public.

English confirmed he then had meetings with various senior bankers.

National then killed the inquiry dead.

Go figure.

Can they really continue to profess they have the interests of ordinary Kiwis at heart?

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: finance, select committee
33 Comments

Banks off the hook

Posted by Brendon Burns on July 1st, 2009

There will be no inquiry into bank interest rates by the Finance and Expenditure Committee. This afternoon  it voted by a majority Government decision not to proceed with an inquiry into bank  rates, notably short term.

No real surprise here. After breathing hot on the issue a few short weeks ago, the Government has for some days been blowing cold. I was at John Key’s Christchurch forum only three weeks ago today when he stated banks could try harder to cut rates. Bill English was saying similar things. Cue to Parliament a few days later and English was praising the banks to the hilt. Questioned as whether he’d met the banks in recent days, he agreed he had.

So Reserve Bank governor Alan Bollard might say the banks are not doing all they could to assist New Zealand’s recovery, but English just said in the House that these are not matters that a Parliamentary committee of ‘backbenchers ‘could assist. Much better to leave it to him and his various positions, obviously

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: national, select committee
1 Comment

Pigs may yet fly free

Posted by Brendon Burns on June 25th, 2009

Many of us were horrified at the recent footage of pigs in sow crates shown on TVNZ. A day or two later, MAF visited the farm in question. The Levin farmer declared he’d been given the all clear. Not necessarily so, it seems from this morning’s Primary Production select committee. MAF officials said they will in the next few days issue their decision on that issue. Meantime, Agriculture Minister David Carter said he is hoping that NAWAC (national animal welfare  committee) will by year’s end issue a review of welfare codes. I put to him that it may not be helpful for MAF’s chief vet Dr Peter O’Hara to continue to chair NAWAC after he’d appeared on TVNZ saying there was no evidence of the Levin farm’s pigs being in distress. Mr Carter didn’t seem to see any issue here…

Tags: ,
Filed under: select committee
30 Comments

Auckland’s Big Pay Out?

Posted by Brendon Burns on June 24th, 2009

Interesting appearance at Finance and Expenditure committee this morning from Auditor General Kevin Brady. He mentioned the last major local govt reforms in 1989 not all being plain sailing. I picked up his cue and asked if this meant he had concerns of a repeat of “technical redundancies.” These saw senior local government staff leave one council on a Friday with a huge redundancy cheque, then start the following Monday at the reshaped new council, sometimes in the same job! Ratepayers were rightly outraged. Might we see the same of someone leaving Manukau or North Shore and joining Auckland Super City Council with a few hundred thousand in the bank? Mr Brady confirmed he and his deputy only yesterday began discussing this risk. They will report further on this issue.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, local government, select committee
9 Comments

Keep an eye on the Commerce Commission

Posted by Clare Curran on June 24th, 2009

Rodney Hide’s appointment as Associate Minister of Commerce  (responsible for the Commerce Commission) was announced very quietly. Mark Berry’s appointment as Commission Chair received more attention because of his background.

In the telecommunications area of the Commission’s work (which I am spokesperson for) I’ve been paying attention because of the important regulatory reforms driven by the previous Labour Government (and former Minister David Cunliffe). The role of Telecommunications Commissioner has been vacant for more than nine months (because the commissioner Dr Ross Patterson has been on medical leave) and there has been concern consistently expressed to me within the industry about the vacancy given the number of telecommunications issues that require attention. Dr Patterson commands widespread respect and many have been speculating why the position has remained vacant so long. I understand he has fulfilled the terms of his medical leave (and has done for some time) and the question needs to be asked what would be holding up his reappointment? A political reason maybe?

Last week I asked Commerce Minister Simon Power a series of questions in the Commerce Select Committee to try to clear things up. The story only seemed to become more opaque. And today’s NBR takes it further. I think the government has to tell us what’s going on.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: comms & IT, regulation, select committee
3 Comments

What is a trustworthy news source?

Posted by Lianne Dalziel on June 24th, 2009

I have taken strong exception to the Christchurch Press publishing my denial about running for Mayor next year, because the only basis for the “story” was a right wing blogger who (when you read the original blog) had a particular motive for making up this nonsense. The resultant snippet of my denial has fueled the so-called ‘rumour’. I don’t read this particular blog – but have had to check it out (for the first and last time) to establish what possible motive there is for this malicious behaviour. And there it is, the defence of National MP, Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga, who continues to serve as a city councillor in Auckland despite being elected as an MP. Everyone knows he is not doing justice to either job and that he should resign his seat on the council. I wonder where the Press got the tip off to read this blog-site; probably the same place as the blogger got details of comments I had made in a closed session of the select committee that I chair – guess who my deputy chair is.

P.S. Sorry this is somewhat obscure, but it’s my first blog and I cannot bring myself to mention the blogger’s name, let alone link to his blog-site!

Tags: , ,
Filed under: democracy, local government, national, select committee
18 Comments

The power of grog

Posted by Brendon Burns on June 18th, 2009

I’ve just had the unusual experience as an MP of appearing before a Select Committee. I presented an oral submission in support of the  Sale of Liquor and Liquor Enforcement Bill.  All very,er cordial even if my own bill on television advertising issues was defeated last night by a block ”conscience’ vote by the Nats.  Here’s another, if unrelated, curious thing.  A previous submitter told the Committee of someone who tried to put an advert in a Christchurch newspaper promoting concerns about alcohol advertising and availability. The newspaper reportedly said it would not carry the advert because it might offend alcohol advertisers! Not that the Nats would have been similarly influenced…

Tags: ,
Filed under: parliament
3 Comments

English: Lion to Lamb

Posted by David Cunliffe on June 18th, 2009

Well, today in Question Time Bill English had an attack of honesty. He confirmed that over the last week he had received representations from almost all of the major banks, and that preceded his change of emphasis from demanding full pass-through of interest rate cuts to struggling households and businesses, to emphasising the need for a stable (and profitable) banking sector as “the government’s top priority”.

As such he has left the banks in no doubt they have a free hand to withhold interest rate cuts – despite the substantial taxpayer subsidies involved in retail and wholesale guarantees, and provide tens of billions of dollars in banking assets underwritten via the Reserve Bank’s balance sheet.

In so doing his government has sold out struggling Kiwi families and businesses paying more than they should for mortgages and loans. In the last year only 449 out of 575 basis points of OCR reductions have passed through to home mortgages and only 243 of 574 basis points have been passed through to short term business loans.

What is now on the public record is this sequence of events:

Last week John Key said: “Our big aim is that if the Reserve Bank Governor does cut rates tomorrow that actually flows through to what consumers are paying, because in the last cut that Alan Bollard delivered it ended up with the banks and not with the consumers” (June 10, One News, 6pm)

Last week Bill English said:

10 June 2009 – NZ Herald – ‘”Taxpayers are supporting the banks, and we want the banks to be able to demonstrate that they are going to support businesses and households through a tough time in the economy, even if it affects their profits a bit”.

10 June 2009 – NZ Herald – “Remember, these are organisations with hundreds of thousands of customers, and those customers are keen to see they are treated fairly.”

Then “three, if not four major banks” paid them a visit or made well placed calls.

On Monday 15 June at his post-Cabinet press conference John Key said:

“I am not sure an inquiry will achieve a  lot. Labour have been making a lot of noise on this issue but actually when they were in government lending rates were much higher than they were today.”

And on Tuesday 16 June Bill English told the House:

“I must say to members that in the face of those adverse circumstances a parliamentary inquiry might be interesting, but it is not exactly clear to me how it would help those people who are feeling the pressure.” (Question Time, 16 June)

If the government was relaxed about banks withholding interest rate cuts, they should not have pretended to be lions last week and reveal themselves as lambs this week.

The net result of this sorry charade has been to demonstrate the decisive influence of the Aussie banks over the New Zealand National government. Where is the economic sovereignty in that?

I have issued a statement on National’s weak-kneed double-talk, which can be found here.

Action now turns back to the Finance and Expenditure Committee possible inquiry into banking. Watch this space.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: parliament, select committee
11 Comments

« Older Entries