web analytics
The Standard

Show us the money

Written By: - Date published: 11:22 am, June 29th, 2013 - 54 comments
Categories: economy, infrastructure, john key, making shit up, national - Tags: , ,

National’s spend-up promises in Auckland look like panicky policy on the hoof. Where is all this money going to come from?


… ”It’ll be a combination of funding that’ll come from proceeds from the asset sales programme money, that will come from national land transport funding; money that we’ll simply write out an additional cheque for,” he said.

What’s that – the third or fourth time they’ve spent the asset sales money? And the rest – we’ll just write out a cheque? Print some money? Knuckleheads of the media – there’s an open invitation if ever I saw one.

National as a safe pair of hands on the economy – yeah right…

54 comments on “Show us the money”

  1. RedLogix 1

    More to the point … 2020 is three elections away. Key himself is very unlikely to be around to ever deliver on this.

    Key has pulled a brilliant, cynical masterstroke here.

    • And the power company shares would have been sold by then and I am sure the proceeds spent. They will have to start selling the 51% remaining in the power companies. Maybe that is the intent?

      • karol 1.1.1

        Or selling the ports of Auckland

        • BM

          Makes sense, the port land is worth billions.

          • Colonial Viper

            Time to make the port land worth zero, then

            • BM

              Sell it off for housing, take the money and use that for the rail link.
              Does Auckland even need a port.

              • Lanthanide

                “Does Auckland even need a port.”

                Does The Warehouse need cheap imported crap from China? There’s your answer.

                • Colonial Viper

                  lol haha

                  BM only understands the financialised economy, not the real physical economy. Also, I would make that land have zero commercial value through a combination of zoning, covenants and legislative protections.

      • Richard Christie 1.1.2

        And the power company shares would have been sold by then and I am sure the proceeds spent … and so ensuring renationalisation will be totally unaffordable. If the choice becomes renationisation or solving the transport crisis in Auckland, my money will be on the Auckland, any future Govt ignoring it will be sunk.

  2. captain hook 2

    they gonna start taxing plain clothes cops $400 a year on their clothing allowance so I suppose thats a start.

  3. chris73 3

    lol this is brilliant, John Key using the lefts own tactics against it :)

    • RedLogix 3.1

      Yes .. brilliant tactics. But nothing actually achieved for another decade.

      • Colonial Viper 3.1.1

        However as you pointed out, that is part of the right wing brilliance. Heard Len Brown saying this was by far the largest government investment in Auckland for many years, that he was 100% behind it, and that it was a proposal which fully supported the Auckland City plan.

        Well done Key English Joyce et al.

      • Rogue Trooper 3.1.2

        Wonder if that lovely Michael Woodhouse had a hand in this; now if I was a National Party strategist… I see he halved the incumbent’s majority in 2011, “game of two halves” and all that.

  4. Dv 4

    Aren’t some of the long term announcements made by Muldoon due to come on line soon?

    • Colonial Viper 4.1

      Easy to take the piss I know, but Muldoon built a lot of heavy infrastructure for the country. Last time around with Labour we got Te Papa, some minor power generation and a few hospitals.

      • Dv 4.1.1

        Fair enough CV, but the NACTS are leaving a hugely difficult heritage for the next generation.

        Ak upgrade cost
        national debt

        Sold off good income producers

        farm, geothermal,power stations etc

        • Colonial Viper

          have you ever wondered what the point of Labour being good economic managers and surplus builders is, just in time to give the Right Wing all the money and resources they saved up in order for them to spend at will?

  5. Rogue Trooper 5

    -50% from the taxpayer (1/3 nation’s pop. 1/3 GDP)
    -30% ratepayers; 30% rates, 20% alternative sources- asset sales, congestion charges, fuel taxes,tolls, regional charges?
    Man! gonna be expensive to live in Auckland, what with interest rates predicted to rise, falling dollar, rise in import costs. Gee Whizz!

  6. fender 6

    Key gets a free ride with regards to “showing the money”. It goes without saying that if the opposition had laid out these expensive plans there would be a great deal more scrutiny and questioning about how these are going to be funded. He’s been very vocal about voodoo economics and money printing but cheque printing seems to pass his litmus test. The sheeple and the media must think that because he has a bit of money he can conjure up some more out of thin air.

    There will be renewed pressure put on Auckland to sell assets like PoAL etc., so the own everything “investors” will be rubbing their hands together in anticipation.

  7. Rosetinted 7

    Which devil has Jokeyhen and NACT sold their collective soul to? A soul wrenched from a a NZ body that now looks like Munch’s ‘The Scream’.

    And the money, the money pouring like water into a pipe under the harbour, while the rest of us try to manage our poverty and turn it into a noble life. And then have to repair our torn homes and coasts and crops and lives after ‘weather events’ – but not enough money for that folks. But we’ll drop hay and bread and bottles of water from a helicopter if you can get to the drop point.

  8. tsmithfield 8

    Of course, National hasn’t ruled out bringing the project forward. That could make for an interesting conundrum for the left at the next election. Key might budget the proceeds of asset sales to kick the project off earlier than announced. Given the left’s opposition to asset sales, they would have some interesting choices about whether or not to postpone the projects, or find some other way to fund them (i.e. increased taxes or borrowing).

  9. bad12 9

    The fact that the mass media has not seized upon and flayed the Slippery little Shyster for His ”we will just write a cheque” comment when faced with the question of how this National Government proposes to pay for 8 billion dollars of spending just shows us all how bereft of any principles those media organizations really are,

    i would happily see this or any other government simply print the monies needed for these and other major infrastrucure projects,

    Obviously there would be a certain trade off vis a vis the gains and costs of imports/exports should this occur simply because the NZ$ would devalue as such monies were produced,

    However, such costs via more expensive imports from a devalued NZ$ would (a), help NZ Producers and (b), in the case of higher fuel costs any Government indulging in rational ‘money printing’ need only print X amount above the cost of the specific project being funded, the X being the amount needed to lower the 70 something cents of fuel taxes imposed by Government as the devaluation of the NZ$ pushed the price of that fuel upwards,

    However simply ‘blowing off’ questions of how 8 billion dollars of major infrastrucure spending will be funded with the simpering glib piece of Slippery-ness ”we will just write a cheque” simply exposes the present Prime Minister to accusations of being a simpering glib liar…

  10. Ad 10

    Browns alternative funding work stream reports back to Auckland Council July 16th. and the fun begins there. Key doens’t have to defend that – but Brown and now Twyford will have to.

  11. tc 11

    Shonkey, Blinglish and co never get called out on this type of financial BS, Blinglish had a multi billion dollar hole in his asset sales budget and was never called on it, falling crown revenue through tax cuts and guessed the MRP float income even admitted it was a guess.

    Across the ditch he wouldn’t have lasted a month after that yet here in media noddy land it’s bravo double dipton what a genius.

    They take us for fools because the opposition and MSM is pissweak so it’s an easy game.

  12. Melb 12

    All I see in these comments are a whole lot of people that don’t have the slightest grasp of the differences between capital and operational borrowing, and why the first is alright and the second is to be avoided (or at least minimised).

    Not at all surprising on a website where the extent of most commenter’s economic acumen is “spend other people’s money.”

    • Draco T Bastard 12.1

      Not at all surprising on a website where the extent of most commenter’s economic acumen is “spend other people’s money.”

      I know that there’s quite a few RWNJs commenting here but I don’t think that they’re the majority.

    • Murray Olsen 12.2

      Does borrowing in order to cut the top tax rates and bail out greedy speculators come under capital, and is therefore OK? It does seem to build a greedy, entitled, rich bunch of parasites, which RWNJs seem to think add to the national assets. Now make sure you don’t miss any of the online lectures from Hayek/Friedman 101. You never know what else you’ll learn to pass on to us, oh erudite Melb.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere