Open mike 03/11/2011

89 comments on “Open mike 03/11/2011 ”

• Comments are now closed

1. vto 1

   3 November 2011 at 7:01 am

   82% in a poll reject foreign ownership of our land. (btw, the chinese do not let foreigners own their land)

   “A UMR Research survey, commissioned by a North Island farmer group trying to buy the in-receivership Crafar dairy farms against a Chinese bid, showed 82 per cent of 500 respondents believed foreign ownership of farms and agriculture land was a “bad thing”. Only 10 per cent believed it a “good thing” and 8 per cent were unsure. ”

   But deceptive bastard Bill English deceptively confuses the issue of foreign ownership of land with foreign investment in business…. “We recognise the important contribution foreign investment can make to New Zealand”

   Foreigners can invest in business, they just cannot own land. It is a fundamental so that we are owners of the land on which we live. An absentee landlord is weak for the entire community. Tenant communities are weak – examples abound, domestically and internationally.

   Foreign investors can lease land. There are plenty of instruments for dealing with a business which requires land to operate on without having to own the land.

   Why do they want to own it anyway? They claim they are incvesting in the business, not the land… rats smell.

   This splitting of the two issues should be raised with the public…. foreign investment in business is entirely different from foreign ownership of land.

   My vote swings on it. 2c. Actually, 2,000,000c.
   • dave brown 1.1

     3 November 2011 at 7:39 am

     Land should be nationalised and users no more than leaseholders held to public account for its conservation.
     That would give the right something to think about.
     It would also give the left something to think about.
     • vto 1.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 8:12 am

       Well, yep, that’s further along the spectrum but definitely worthy of consideration.

       Another colossal benefit of either idea is that land prices would fall, which means less of our daily toil has to go into paying for the land on which we walk and rest, leaving more available for actual real costs like food, housing, health, etc. And I challenge anybody to explain how that is not a good thing …..

       I also challenge anybody to explain how high and rising land prices is a good thing ….
     • uke 1.1.2

       3 November 2011 at 11:58 am

       This is a good general approach.
        
       A majority of voting NZers will not sanction it, however, until they become landless serfs (which is probably about 3 or 4 generations away at the rate we’re going). The “Quarter Acre King” meme is too deeply programmed as a kind of “New Zealand Dream” . For settlers coming here in the mid-19thC, cheap land was a solution to the problem of land unavailability in Britain. But it was ultimately an evasion not a solution to this problem, because the same set of problematic values got imported. It all began when common land in England began to be enclosed in the 15thC.
       • Draco T Bastard 1.1.2.1

         3 November 2011 at 6:06 pm

         For settlers coming here in the mid-19thC, cheap land was a solution to the problem of land unavailability in Britain. But it was ultimately an evasion not a solution to this problem, because the same set of problematic values got imported.

         I remember reading Anne McCaffrey’s Dragonriders of Pern series and in one of the books she mentioned the same problem (although, as she’s a RWNJ, she classed the problem of the rich sons not having any land to rule over). Her “solution” was opening up of the massive Southern Continent which, as you point out, just puts problem off for a few more generations.

         It all began when common land in England began to be enclosed in the 15thC.

         Privatisation of the commons was certainly part of the problem and needs to be addressed but the bigger one is actually uncontrolled population growth. Excess population growth will always result in too little land but the capitalists want it anyway because it’s from the work of others that capitalists get their wealth and the more people there are the more wealth they’ll have.
2. mickysavage 2

   3 November 2011 at 7:13 am

   So John Key wants this campaign to be all about economic credibility.

   He should rethink this.  After all his Government:

   1.  Has overseen two recent credit rating downgrades.
   2.  Is responsible for the biggest budget deficit in the country’s history.
   3.  Intends to sell assets to pay for operating costs.
   4.  Has at various times said that the asset sale proceeds will be used to reinvest, to pay down debt or to pay for operating costs.
   5.  Has not taken the income dividend out of the financial forecasts even though it has included the sale proceeds in the same forecasts.
   6.  Has allowed for a billion dollars of savings on operating expenses in the latest budget even though the government does not know where these savings may come from.
   7.  Failed to convince IRD to accept in its entirety its financial forecasts.

   Key is quickly becoming the worst overseer of the economy since Rob Muldoon.

   And if Labour nails its presentation of its costings he is in trouble this election. 
   • Pete George 2.1

     3 November 2011 at 7:16 am

     And if they don’t nail their costings?
     • mickysavage 2.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 7:37 am

       Petey

       The costings have been done and I am assured are bulletproof.  Perception of course is everything.

       If not the perception will be that National and Labour are both pushing dodgy figures.
     • Lanthanide 2.1.2

       3 November 2011 at 9:45 am

       Does UF have costings on it’s tax-splitting bribe for working families?

       The one where many families will get $5,000-6,000/year and some will get up to $9,000?

       More tax cuts for the well-off. Pity John Key already ruled out more tax cuts.
       • aerobubble 2.1.2.1

         3 November 2011 at 1:37 pm

         A tax free threshold basically simplifies a number of welfare policies that
         sees many getting benefits in and out of work, you simply can’t have missed
         the obvious that working for families won’t cost as much if it doesn’t have
         tax removed, similarly benenit. fact is a bennie pays 20% tax unlike a
         bennie in OZ, so when some bennie fraudster is caught they are actually
         force to pay back not only the amount they stolen but the tax they
         paid on it unlike in Oz. Weird that, bennies pay more tax, suffer stiffer
         penulaties if they steal than in Oz, and if they move to oz they aren’t
         even afforded welfare!!! who stacked those decks!
         • Lanthanide 2.1.2.1.1

           3 November 2011 at 4:07 pm

           I don’t know what you’re talking about.

           I’m talking about UF’s policy of splitting the income of a parent with children with their partner for tax purposes. Eg instead of being taxed on your $100k income, it would be split between your partner and yourself and only taxed as if you earned $50k each.
3. Hilary 3

   3 November 2011 at 7:27 am

   This was posted on the Standard recently from a contributor from an Asian country, and deserves better coverage as many people take astrology seriously.

   “I’ve been catching up with a few Feng Shui masters and astrologers here, including those who do their castings based on the Vedic system.
   Key is inauspicious for National and for New Zealand. Given his birthdate/year and his face reading (Mian Xiang) and if he clings on to power, there will be another lot of bad news arising before Christmas 2011.
   Am told that Goff has castings that are better for the country as his aura is that of a guardian (as compared with Key’s being a parasite).
   If astrology is your thing, good luck with your vote.”
   • felix 3.1

     3 November 2011 at 7:44 am

     I’m not one for astrology, but there’s no denying that Key is a bad luck PM.
     • Lanthanide 3.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 9:46 am

       No, Key is not a “bad luck” PM, that implies that it’s all out of his control.

       He’s just a bad PM, full stop.
       • Vicky32 3.1.1.1

         5 November 2011 at 1:01 am

         No, Key is not a “bad luck” PM, that implies that it’s all out of his control.
         He’s just a bad PM, full stop.

         With a bit of bad luck fu on top of it all! 🙂
   • Colonial Viper 3.2

     3 November 2011 at 7:44 am

     +1
     • mik e 3.2.1

       3 November 2011 at 6:51 pm

       jinxed key
   • swordfish 3.3

     3 November 2011 at 4:54 pm

     I probably didn’t need astrology to tell me Key’s a parasite.
4. Nick 4

   3 November 2011 at 7:49 am

   I’m confused:

   National claims that partial asset sales will bring in 5 – 7 billion (and have already banked this money in their forcasts to return to surplus).

   Labour claims that these same assets brought in $900m in dividends last year

   National claims that the average is more like $300m

   I’m no rich financial trader so I might have my figures wrong, but:

   1. If the assets bring in $300m a year, and they are going to sell half, investors will be sharing $150m in dividends per year.

   2. At a 5% p.a. return that makes them worth $3b (not 5 or 7). At less than 5% then a savings account is better for these (mythical?) ‘mum and dad’ investors with billions in the bank, and there are plenty of investment oppurtunities that can return more than this.

   3. Some have argued that private ownership is more efficient and would make more money than they do now, the implication being that its worth paying over the odds because the power companies will make much more money with shareholders than they do at the moment.

   4. Even if it was true that private run companies are more efficient and make more money the Government is retaining a controlling stake. Won’t this negate the effects of private ownership? Either the Government already has the capability to run these assets more efficiently (and could return more money to the government coffers as Labour is arguing) or is already doing the best job possible and $300m on average is what investors can expect see point number 2.

   In short, who is going to be buying these assets? And are they really going to be looking to put $5 – 7bn into them and be happy with their investment making 2.1% a year?
   • Colonial Viper 4.1

     3 November 2011 at 8:00 am

     Meridian made $659.9M profit in the last year, by itself.

     http://www.nzherald.co.nz/2011-financial-results/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503017&objectid=10747012
     • higherstandard 4.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 9:54 am

       I only skimmed through the article you linked to bu doesn’t the bit below impact real returns on an annual basis…… I could have misread.

       “During the year Meridian sold the Tekapo A and B power stations on the upper Waitaki to Genesis Energy in a reshuffling of the state-owned enterprise’s generation portfolios intended to boost retail competition.

       Of the $830 million sale price, the Government receives a special dividend of $531 million, boosting the total dividend to the Crown for the year to $685 million.”
     • In Vino Veritas 4.1.2

       3 November 2011 at 10:00 am

       Colonial, try this link. You’ll get to read something by an extremely bright man.

       http://rogerkerr.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/the-truth-about-privatisation-14-dividends/

       I’d recommend reading some of the other references there as well.
       • Draco T Bastard 4.1.2.1

         3 November 2011 at 12:14 pm

         Anything written by Roger Kerr is designed to benefit Roger Kerr and no one else.
         • McFlock 4.1.2.1.1

           3 November 2011 at 12:23 pm

           his regular opinion pieces in the local paper were most irritating, so I stopped even reading them for “alternative points of view”. Not worth it, and frequently missing the main point (which generally involved caring about those who are less well off)
       • mik e 4.1.2.2

         3 November 2011 at 6:55 pm

         propagandist kerr no real economic facts to back his BS All he has proved is those with money and power have a bigger say in the running of it and us citizen should shut up work for next to nothing and be grateful.
   • Tigger 4.2

     3 November 2011 at 8:09 am

     This whole thing is a hoodwink and the media are complicit. We need far more analysis, instead they’re shilling for Key.
   • Lanthanide 4.3

     3 November 2011 at 9:48 am

     You’re right to be confused. That’s how National like it.
   • Nick 4.4

     3 November 2011 at 10:49 am

     I have a further question I might ask John Key myself (though I doubt he’ll answer).

     Is he going to be buying shares in these assets?
5. felix 5

   3 November 2011 at 8:03 am

   Is there video or audio of last night’s debate anywhere?
6. Colonial Viper 6

   3 November 2011 at 8:03 am

   Team McMillan BMW donates $35,000 to National

   http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/campaign-trail/5898672/Campaign-donations-favour-the-Right

   Money rolls into Right Wing parties
   • In Vino Veritas 6.1

     3 November 2011 at 10:01 am

     And not much into Labour, since they allow their donors details to be laid bare to anybody that feels like looking.
     • Draco T Bastard 6.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 12:15 pm

       Which is exactly how it should be so that corruption can more easily be detected. NAct don’t like this idea though as they’re inherently corrupt.

       BTW, As businesses are not people and don’t vote they shouldn’t be donating to political parties at all.
   • Ianupnorth 6.2

     3 November 2011 at 1:12 pm

     Phone team MacMillan, ask for a test drive, can you bring it to my work; drive car badly for an hour or so, then politely ask about who they sponsor and when they admit national tell them where they can stick their car.
      
     A couple of local businesses have National hoardings, tempted to do similar!
7. Colonial Viper 7

   3 November 2011 at 8:05 am

   ACT and National Gaming It: ACT steps down in Waitakere and New Plymouth to give NATs clear run

   http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10763541
   • mickysavage 7.1

     3 November 2011 at 10:05 am

     The silly Herald says ACT obtained 1,072 party votes last time but should have mentioned that John Riddell, ACT’s candidate, only obtained 482.  A lesser number although still relevant.
     • Tigger 7.1.1

       3 November 2011 at 11:11 am

       More relevant of course since candidates not standing would logically only be handing across their personal vote.

       So is this more tory spin or just poor journalism? I’m picking the former.
   • The Voice of Reason 7.2

     3 November 2011 at 11:26 am

     Interesting that ACT are still running in Palmerston North. Clearly, the right are conceding that Iain Lees Galloway is going to retain the seat for Labour. New Plymouth is also interesting and the withdrawal there suggests that the Nat’s polling is showing that Andrew Little has his nose in front. Given that there were only 100 or so votes in it last time, it could be the last seat to be decided, with specials making the difference.
8. vto 8

   3 November 2011 at 8:21 am

   unexpected earthquake observation #007;

   All the recent immigrants leave and go back home. England will have experienced a recent reverse influx.
9. just saying 9

   3 November 2011 at 8:33 am

   http://www.tumeke.blogspot.com/

   Finally – protest music. Love this song. Hope it gets airplay.
10. Rodel 10

    3 November 2011 at 9:00 am

    Debate

    Coverage of last night’s Christs College debate by Jon Hardfelt or whatever and Small Vernon in the Christchurch Press was unbelievably biased in favour of Key, ‘ journalism’ reminiscent of Fox News.
    Journalism… That’s a laugh! I’d like someone to do a detailed analysis of their language but couldn’t stomach reading their partisan fabrications again. Maybe they were at a different debate.

    I once knew a sub editor on a Christchurch newspaper who was so right wing he couldn’t help inserting his sometimes unconscious but usually conscious prejudices into any headlines to do with Helen Clark.The partisan saga continues.

    On the inside pages of today’s Press there is a carefully selected unflattering photo of Goff together with a couple of Christ’s boy sycophants assuring us that Key ‘won’ the debate….Surely not something to do with the $$$$millions previously gifted to private schools by Key?

    This paper is so blatantly partisan that Fairfax has to be renamed Fairfox!

    Good on Goff for fronting for a debate up at the bastion of those ‘born to rule.’

    I wonder if Key would front up for a debate at Aranui High school. Ha! Not likely.
    • Draco T Bastard 10.1

      3 November 2011 at 12:21 pm

      This paper is so blatantly partisan that Fairfax has to be renamed Fairfox!

      FauxFax?
      FairFaux?
      • Rodel 10.1.1

        4 November 2011 at 8:26 am

        Maybe “unfairfax?”
        Or ‘fair balanced and full of b***sIt!’
        • Carol 10.1.1.1

          4 November 2011 at 8:27 am

          fearfix
    • insider 10.2

      3 November 2011 at 1:58 pm

      Yeah the right wing nickname for Vernon Small isn’t ‘comrade’ for nothing…
    • mik e 10.3

      3 November 2011 at 6:59 pm

      the $17 billion lie KEY made up has come back to bight Key he is constantly lying.All the radio statios today are getting phil goffs rebuttal labour borrowing $2.6 billion more than national but paying off debt sooner and holding onto income generating assets
11. Puddleglum 11

    3 November 2011 at 9:42 am

    Good grief!

    Tell me it’s not so. A war with Iran is all the world needs.
    • Lanthanide 11.1

      3 November 2011 at 9:51 am

      The sooner the US cuts itself loose from Israel, the better.
      • Vicky32 11.1.1

        5 November 2011 at 1:13 am

        The sooner the US cuts itself loose from Israel, the better.

        Exactly!
    • Carol 11.2

      3 November 2011 at 9:58 am

      Puddleglum, that was precisely my thoughts when I heard this news on ALjazeera this morning – very scary.
      • thejackal 11.2.1

        3 November 2011 at 11:02 am

        Don’t tell me you didn’t expect it… the US has been providing New Zealand’s MSM with plenty of propaganda to try and justify yet another one of their unjust invasions for a long time now.
    • Draco T Bastard 11.3

      3 November 2011 at 12:35 pm

      Instead, Obama administration staff briefed privately almost immediately that a military response was not being contemplated, not even sending more naval vessels to the Gulf or announcing new military manoeuvres in the region.

      No, the US sending more naval vessels into the Gulf would just be giving Iran more targets.

      Then there’s the obvious point. If Iran is attacked Iran will turn off the oil to pretty much everyone except possibly China which is where they’ll be buying up to date military hardware.
      • AAMC 11.3.1

        3 November 2011 at 1:29 pm

        War with Iran will bankrupt USA. If they go convention not Nuke that is.

        They’ve been 10 years in th 5th poorest country in the world with no progress, the last few months the bloodiest.

        Iran will fight back hard, and will likely be joined by Iraq having brought them
        onside via Sadar.

        Will the f16’s end up being used against their master?
        • Draco T Bastard 11.3.1.1

          3 November 2011 at 6:10 pm

          The USA is already bankrupt and has been decades. The reason why this hasn’t been a problem is because the governments of the rest of the world have been ignoring this fact, kowtowing to the lone “super-power”.
12. Penny Bright 12

    3 November 2011 at 9:59 am

    YouTube video link

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2w5X-SFllQ

    March on banks – Queen street Auckland – 29 October 2011

    ANZ financing Lockheed-Martin cluster munition exposed

    National bank occupied

    John Key’s Wall Street ‘BANK$TER’ background publicly exposed.

    Penny Bright
    Independent Candidate for Epsom
    Campaigning against ‘white collar’ crime, corruption (and its root cause – privatisation), and ‘corporate welfare’.
13. thejackal 13

    3 November 2011 at 10:57 am

    National Cuts Funding for the Arts

    Today, National announced they will continue the same policy that was announced prior to the 2008 election… which means no increase in funding for the arts. However without any increase to match inflation, such policy amounts to a cut…
14. Rodel 14

    3 November 2011 at 11:08 am

    Bank News………..RNZ news at 11am today.

    Westpac & ANZ Bank profits up 41% this year.
    Requests for help at NZ food banks up 30%.

    I’d say the Aussie banks are winning.
    • randal 14.1

      3 November 2011 at 12:08 pm

      two things here.
      New Zealanders know that only the Labour Party can do a fair deal rebuilding Christchurch.
      If National get their hands on it, it will all be corrupt and jobbery.
      and
      There is no leaders debate.
      the moderators are not letting the debates develop.
      too many ad breaks and opinions from the sidelines.
      and the commentators, especailly claire robinson, are telling the viewers what to do before they text the online polls.
      You have to watch these people because they are very sneaky while pretending to be objective.
      fire claire robinson.
      NOW!
15. uke 15

    3 November 2011 at 12:04 pm

    A Portrait of America in Decline
     
    Some highlights:
     

     
    According to figures published by the Social Security Administration on October 20, the median income for American workers in 2010 was $26,364, not much more than the official poverty level of $22,025 for a family of four. Given that a family making even twice the official poverty level faces real hardship and insecurity, it is no exaggeration to say that the SSA report shows that the “poor,” by any reasonable definition, constitute the absolute majority of the American people.
    On the other side of the spectrum, a Congressional Budget Office study released October 25 shows that the richest 1 percent of US households saw a 275 percent increase in their income between 1979 and 2007 and more than doubled their share of the national income. While the income of this layer nearly tripled, the income of the middle 60 percent of the population rose only 40 percent over 28 years, and the income of the poorest 20 percent rose by only 18 percent.
    Some other revealing statistics:
    The unemployment rate for workers aged 55 or older has doubled since 2007, and the average period spent jobless has tripled. One-third of employed workers 65 and older make less than $11 an hour, while the rates of poverty and food stamp dependence have increased sharply for this sector of the population.
     
    The dollar amount of student loans taken out in 2010 topped $100 billion, the largest ever total for a single year, and total student loan debt has passed the $1 trillion mark in 2011, exceeding the total of credit card debt. Students are borrowing twice as much as they did only ten years ago to pay for their college education.
    • aerobubble 15.1

      3 November 2011 at 1:50 pm

      Never be a debtor be. The only debt anyone could argue have is a
      mortgage but even that is dumb when job insecurity is hailed as
      the goal. Retraining essentially is a way to push costs onto
      employees and allow employers to push down wages, retraining
      for what exactly? another shallow career that has no value
      in the economy. Watered down professional class directly
      part of the demolishing of the middle classes. Money talks
      and money men went negative, shifting risk onto the masses
      when we were promised they’d produce positive outcomes,
      they have in fact left the world in a worst state. how is
      it we are the fifth best place to live, not because we did
      anything, but becuase so much of the world ran its affairs
      like John Key does, same thinking same dismal economic
16. Ianupnorth 16

    3 November 2011 at 1:10 pm

    Asked this two days ago, no response!
    Anyone care to comment on the legal status of the following?

    1) National banners nailed on to the fences of public reserves? (Is it legal for my local MP to have around 50 banners nailed to the retaining walls of roads, fences on public reserves? If I was selling a car, promoting an event or anything else similar I suspect the council would not be impressed – can I ask the council to get them removed?)
     
    2) National MP’s agents sending out recommendations to government departments to purchase this programme? http://www.eatforkeeps.com/
    • Bob 16.1

      3 November 2011 at 2:17 pm

      I know in my electorate that before a sign can be erected on a persons property, they have to sign a declaration showing where the sign will be situated . This is lodged with the council for the duration of the campaign period . From what i understand councils can vary on rules and periods of display times.
      There used to be signage on council reserves, but not anymore in my electorate . It would be worth ringing up the council to check on the guidelines .
17. Ianupnorth 17

    3 November 2011 at 1:39 pm

    Unemployment rates up (again!!)
     
    http://media.nzherald.co.nz/webcontent/document/pdf/201145/HouseholdLabourForceSurveySep11qtr1.pdf
     
    I particularly like the graphs on p.9 and 10; look at the employment rates from 2001 – 2008 and then look at the decline – did something happen to mess things up?
    • aerobubble 17.1

      3 November 2011 at 1:56 pm

      yes forecasts of National easy return for a second term. The body scanners
      at Auckland airport have been cliking over something rotten
      • aerobubble 17.1.1

        3 November 2011 at 2:02 pm

        every conumer lost to au, every renter, every parents whose child was taught by
        a teacher, or seen by a doctor, is a loss of more employment to Nz
    • insider 17.2

      3 November 2011 at 2:06 pm

      Well given the decline started in late 07 early 08 it must have been something Helen Clark said. 🙂
      • Ianupnorth 17.2.1

        3 November 2011 at 4:15 pm

        Look again – you mean there was a dip in June 07, returning to 66% by mid 08, then down to 64% – it rose from 62% to 66% during nine years, dropped 2% in three – you figure the relationship.
18. vto 18

    3 November 2011 at 2:24 pm

    aaaarrrggh !!!!

    every bloody year the morwesters arrive in force and smash by beautiful vanilla essenced wisteria to smithereens. Even the roses and their delicate petals get ripped and strewn all through the house.

    it’s just not fair.
    • McFlock 18.1

      3 November 2011 at 2:37 pm

      Lol. I’m not a gardener, but my parents would commisserate. They’re replacing oft-destroyed trellis with corrugated iron for a similar reason. Hopefully the roses will be able to deal with the tin.
19. Uturn 19

    3 November 2011 at 2:33 pm

    Interesting to see the nervous Right commenting today. They must be rattled.

    They want numbers, Numbers! Anyone not speaking numbers should be excluded from life!

    They want to turn the clock back 50 years to a time when the system wasn’t so obviously flawed. They’d do it right, this time. Please believe them.

    They want to gift us our individuality. Oh dear. They just haven’t been watching the news. People have woken up to the fact they already have it.

    3 more years, they cry! Because it’s all just a race to the grave with the most toys… and then … nothingness.

    They’re so alone, so scared of being individuals.
    • McFlock 19.1

      3 November 2011 at 2:40 pm

      Yes – they’re slowly returning to normal after the abysmal start that was the Nat’s opening address. A bit like a student in evening-wear creeping through the botanic gardens on a Sunday morning, the walk of shame” that they hope nobody will notice.
      • Tigger 19.1.1

        3 November 2011 at 4:26 pm

        The tory owners of the Herald and Stuff are whipping their journos into a frenzy as well. A lot of subtle spin going on (okay, some of it isn’t so subtle as well). Funny how they’re giving Key lots of air on Labour’s costings when they haven’t hounded him and English on their shonky, shonky figures.
        • thejackal 19.1.1.1

          3 November 2011 at 6:46 pm

          They’re even republishing articles that they’ve already published before. Lazy spin isn’t going to win elections NZ Herald… room full of typing monkeys who can’t do basic math.
20. Penny Bright 20

    3 November 2011 at 3:58 pm

    FYI – given that mainstream media seem a bit allergic to publicising this issue? 🙂

    Perhaps monies saved by ‘CUTTING OUT THE CONTRACTORS’ on ‘corporate welfare’ would help release more public monies for ‘social welfare’ – including the cost of superannuation?
    ________________________________________________________________________

    PRESS RELEASE: Independent Candidate for Epsom Penny Bright:

    “How many billion$ of public monies could be saved by ‘CUTTING OUT THE CONTRACTORS’?

    3 November 2011

    Where’s National’s ‘corporate welfare’ reform?

    Which of the maor political parties are pushing for ‘corporate welfare’ reform and shrinking the long-term dependency of the private sector on our public monies?

    Where is the ‘devilish detail’ at both local and central government level – which shows EXACTLY where our public rates and taxes are being spent on private sector consultants and contractors?

    Why aren’t the names of the consultant(s)/ contrators(s) – the scope, term and value of these contracts, published in Council or central government Annual Reports – so this information on the spending of OUR public monies is available for public scrutiny?

    Where are the publicly-available ‘Registers of Interests’ for those local government elected representatives, and staff responsible for property and procurement, in order to help guard against possible ‘conflicts of interest’ between those who ‘give’ the contracts and those who ‘get’ the contracts?

    Where’s the ‘transparency’?

    Given that New Zealand is ‘perceived’ to be the least corrupt country in the world – along with Denmark and Singapore, according to Transparency International’s 2010 ‘Corruption Perception Index – shouldn’t we arguably be the most transparent?

    Going back a step – where are the New Zealand ‘cost-benefit’ analyses which prove that the old ‘Rogernomic$ mantra – public is bad – private (contracting) is good’ can be substantiated by FACTS and EVIDENCE?

    At last – someone – somewhere has actually done some substantial research – which proves the opposite.

    That ‘contracting out’ services that were once provided ‘in-house’ is actually TWICE as expensive.

    “USA Project On Government Oversight (POGO)[1] decided to take on the task of doing what others have not—comparing total annual compensation for federal and private sector employees with federal contractor billing rates in order to determine whether the current costs of federal service contracting serves the public interest.

    http://www.pogo.org/pogo-files/reports/contract-oversight/bad-business/co-gp-20110913.html
    Executive Summary

    Based on the current public debate regarding the salary comparisons of federal and private sector employees, the Project On Government Oversight (POGO)[1] decided to take on the task of doing what others have not—comparing total annual compensation for federal and private sector employees with federal contractor billing rates in order to determine whether the current costs of federal service contracting serves the public interest.

    The current debate over pay differentials largely relies on the theory that the government pays private sector compensation rates when it outsources services. This report proves otherwise: in fact, it shows that the government actually pays service contractors at rates far exceeding the cost of employing federal employees to perform comparable functions.

    POGO’s study analyzed the total compensation paid to federal and private sector employees, and annual billing rates for contractor employees across 35 occupational classifications covering over 550 service activities. Our findings were shocking—POGO estimates the government pays billions more annually in taxpayer dollars to hire contractors than it would to hire federal employees to perform comparable services. Specifically, POGO’s study shows that the federal government approves service contract billing rates—deemed fair and reasonable—that pay contractors 1.83 times more than the government pays federal employees in total compensation, and more than 2 times the total compensation paid in the private sector for comparable services. ”

    The implications of this both nationally and internationally are HUGE.

    If NZ central government figures are comparable with those of USA Federal Government – could the current NZ $82 billion central government spend be sliced in half by $40 billion ‘CUTTING OUT THE CONTRACTORS’?

    http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/2011/estimates/est11sumtab.pdf

    Which political parties / candidates are focussing on the SPENDING of public monies, rather than debt and borrowing?

    If central and local govt departments /SOEs / CCOs / Crown Research Institutes are all defined as ‘PUBLIC- BENEFIT ENTITIES’ as defined under NZ Equivalents to International Financial Reporting Standards (“NZ IFRS”) – then their primary objective is to provide services and facilities for the community as a social benefit rather than make a financial return.

    So – how come so many services that USED to be provided ‘in-house’ are now contracted out to the private sector – whose primary objective is most certainly to ‘make a financial return’?

    What magic is this that transforms public (ratepayer and taxpayer) monies into private profit?

    WHERE IS THE NZ EQUIVALENT OF ‘POGO’ the USA ‘Project On Government Oversight ‘ which has just completed first-ever research which proves that private contractors cost twice as much as ‘in-house’ providers of Federal Government services?

    HOW MUCH MONEY could be saved in NZ at central and local government by cutting out all the private ‘piggies in the middle’ with their greedy snouts in our public troughs?

    Why aren’t the statutory ‘third party’ Public Watchdogs, as well as other major political parties demanding this accountability?

    How much public money at central and local government level could be saved by ‘CUTTING OUT THE CONTRACTORS’?

    Who else is even asking this question?

    Penny Bright
    Independent Candidate for Epsom (nomination accepted today 🙂
    Campaigning against ‘white collar crime’, corruption (and its root cause – privatisation) and ‘corporate welfare’.

    “Anti-corruption campaigner”.
    Attendee: Australian Public Sector Anti-Corruption Conference 2009
    Attendee: Transparency International’s 14th IACC 2010

    [email deleted]
    • Draco T Bastard 20.1

      3 November 2011 at 4:36 pm

      What magic is this that transforms public (ratepayer and taxpayer) monies into private profit?

      In economic terms it (private profit) is called a dead-weight loss as monies given for one purpose are subsumed to another in cases like this just to make an individual richer. In real terms it’s private tax on our public monies.

      The government doing the job in house is more efficient than getting contractors in part time. The part time contractors have to charge to cover their own over-heads and the times that they’re not working which pushes the costs up. A government employee working in the normal building that the government owns (if they really are looking for efficiency and cost saving they’re owning and not renting (which would be another example of private tax on our public monies)) on the other hand just has to paid their normal weekly pay.

      Everything about private contractors to do government jobs and privatisation in general is about shifting more of the communities wealth into private hands. There’s no benefit achieved (in fact there’s often a decrease in service) but it always costs more.
21. Tigger 21

    3 November 2011 at 4:28 pm

    Farrar doing some lovely racist dog-whistling about the Maori Party potentially holding the balance of power.
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/blogs/david-farrar-by-the-numbers/5901028/The-October-polls

    What the fuck are you worried about Farrar? They’ve shored up this tory lot for three years, why use them as a whistle for racists to get stuck into MMP? Oh that’s right, you’re a whore to FFP and National.
22. ianmac 22

    3 November 2011 at 4:30 pm

    Have come home and read many of the comments and that is a lot of interesting reading!
    Body talk. Last night when Phil started his remarks about the young Morgan not paying any tax, it seemed to me that John Key suddenly stared at the ground. Often when people do that it is an indicator of guilt. Maybe. S’pose we will never know how much tax Key pays on his millions.
23. thejackal 23

    3 November 2011 at 6:32 pm

    A fantastic report about fracking causing earthquakes on 3 News tonight. Labours upcoming environment policy announcement will be one to watch. I’m interested to see the balance Labour has between our environment and industry.

    With the majority of people recently polled saying the environment is their number one concern, it looks like Labour is playing their cards well while National are just reacting with spin.
24. Kty 24

    3 November 2011 at 6:58 pm

    Reminding everyone that there is a debate with Bill English, David Cunliffe, Russel Norman, Pita Sharples and Stephen Whittington. Starting at 7pm on Radio Live tonight, dont think its being streamed or Televised.
25. ianmac 25

    3 November 2011 at 9:18 pm

    And last night on Campbell Live John interviewed Paula Bennett on Beneficiary reforms. He pointed out that nothing had changed in three years and that John Key’s statement on the subject was identical to that he made in 2008. Campbell pinned Bennett down quoting her words back to her and she just sort of grunted. He gave good weight to the question and pointed out that nothing had or would change.
    This good interviewing is why Key and others do not usually appear before JC.
    http://ondemand.tv3.co.nz/Campbell-Live-Wednesday-November-2-2011/tabid/59/articleID/4584/MCat/73/Default.aspx (Part 1 of Wednesdays Campbell Live.)
26. joe90 26

    3 November 2011 at 9:32 pm

    Someone’s succeeded.

    JERUSALEM — Israel’s summertime protest movement, which was occupying “Wall Street” before it was cool, can now celebrate their first major tangible success.

    At a Sunday cabinet meeting the government approved the restructuring of Israel’s tax system, shifting a few degrees of the social burden onto corporations and the very rich.

    On Monday, during the opening day of the winter session of parliament after a three-month summer break, legislators received the new tax plan for approval, alongside a lengthy list of demands for financial reform and social justice that were nonexistent when the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, was last in session and which have been catapulted to the forefront of a pre-electoral year.

    As lawmakers gathered it became clear that Likud, the party of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, hoped the government’s imprimatur of approval on significant changes in taxation would shift credit from the young protest leaders to the party itself.
27. Draco T Bastard 27

    3 November 2011 at 9:37 pm

    More bank profits while the economy stagnates and unemployment increases.

    The largest bank in New Zealand made a $1.085 billion profit even as lending contracted.

    How is it that the financial sector, which is the cause of the GFC, is making record profits while the majority of people are seeing wages and salaries decreasing?
28. thejackal 28

    3 November 2011 at 10:25 pm

    Worst Blog Post of the Year Award

    And yesterday, sulky pants decided to write another pathetic post in yet another failed attempt to discredit Trevor Mallard, by claiming he couldn’t spell…
    • Salsy 28.1

      3 November 2011 at 10:50 pm

      I sort of feel sorry for Cam. He overwhelmingly strikes me as someone on the wrong side of the political paradigm. He has a weird vulnerability, and too much anger… I used to enjoy his strange friendship with Bomber and how they seemed to get on despite hating each others politics.. Until Bomber accused him of being a right wing gun totin’ fundy.. He put his sulky pants on then too..
      http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/tag/citizen-a/
29. jaymam 29

    3 November 2011 at 10:40 pm

    Does anyone know if National have paid for the music they are using in their TV adverts?
    It appears to be The Feelers – Stand Up and be Counted, and royalties should be paid for that.
    You all remember how embarrassing and costly it was for National last election when they used Coldplay Clocks without permission, and they had to withdraw tens of thousands of DVDs.
    • The Voice of Reason 29.1

      3 November 2011 at 10:49 pm

      Given how naff the Feelers are, I imagine they think it’s kewl that Key is a fan.
      • jaymam 29.1.1

        3 November 2011 at 11:20 pm

        Well I’m not an expert on The Feelers and have not got a recording of the National Advert.
        But knowing that last election National had a complete idiot adviser who made slight changes to a Coldplay song then all the Nats said there was no similarity, maybe they’ve done it again.
        • just saying 29.1.1.1

          3 November 2011 at 11:32 pm

          I read that the feelers were glad of the money National was paying for their music. Claimed to be non-political though, (where have I heard that before?)
          But yeah, their music is naff, and is a perfect match for the purpose it is being put to.
      • thejackal 29.1.2

        4 November 2011 at 4:49 pm

        Yeah Nah VoR. It’s purely a business deal that is negotiated between the Feelers admin and the Natz… I don’t think the band has an opinion, although some have speculated that they are happy to make some cash.

        Right here right now… fucken epic fail!
30. Alex 30

    14 November 2011 at 12:14 pm

    You folks are nutters, do any of you actually work?

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS