Government of Fantasyland

Written By: - Date published: 3:38 pm, November 18th, 2009 - 16 comments
Categories: uncategorized - Tags:

This is Nick Smith in Parliament yesterday, replying to a question on Treasury’s re-calibrated $50 billion costs of Nationals ETS Bill:

Hon Dr NICK SMITH: That number is a fantasyland number. Let me tell the member why. The member opposite wants to give great credence to what might occur in 2050. It is not rocket science that if, in the assumptions, one doubles the carbon price from $25 to $50, surprise, surprise, the cost goes up.

He should apply that logic to the supposed costs of fully funding ACC. Those are fantasyland numbers too.

16 comments on “Government of Fantasyland ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. mickysavage 1
    18 November 2009 at 4:00 pm

    “He should apply that logic to the supposed costs of fully funding ACC. Those are fantasyland numbers too.”

    Butt that would require a consistent principled approach.

  2. tc 2
    18 November 2009 at 4:05 pm

    If the opposition can’t get Nick Smith accurately portrayed and understood by wider NZ as: untrustworthy, deceptive, dishonest and not caring about each taxpayers long term committment to the ETS/ACC shambles into the bargain……there’s little chance in 2011 for anything other than more of the same.
    This joke of a cabinet minister presents so many opportunities that even the media are starting to voice concern…..wow shock horror !
    Nice comments yesterday about Bikoi yet once again Goff chooses rhetoric leaving Barker to make a bigger impact by being brief…..keep it simple Phil !

  3. fizzleplug 3
    18 November 2009 at 5:17 pm

    In Nick Smith’s defence (probably the only time I’ll defend him) his last sentence makes sense. Which is a step up from most of what he says.

    • pete 3.1
      18 November 2009 at 8:11 pm

      It only makes sense if we’re subsidising polluters so that they aren’t reducing emissions.

      • fizzleplug 3.1.1
        19 November 2009 at 8:50 am

        Leave the rhetoric and read what he said. If the price doubles, costs go up. What part of that doesn’t make sense to you?

        • felix 3.1.1.1
          19 November 2009 at 9:26 am

          Um, just the part where you find it praiseworthy that a Minister of the Crown – a supposedly grown and educated man – has managed to utter a short sentence without either deliberately lying or being completely and laughably wrong about anything.

        • pete 3.1.1.2
          19 November 2009 at 11:06 am

          The cost of subsidies goes up if two things happen:

          a) the price increases
          b) we are subsidising polluters

          If (b) doesn’t happen, there’s no cost increase. The price of carbon credits doesn’t matter if we’re not buying credits to give away.

          • fizzleplug 3.1.1.2.1
            19 November 2009 at 12:58 pm

            Step back. Look at the general gist of the third sentence. On it’s own, out of context. It makes sense. That’s all I was saying. Polluters weren’t mentioned by me at all, nor was carbon trading (even if the good Dr I-Can’t-Really-Fix-Anything-I’m-Not-That-Kind-of-Doctor did mention them). The. Sentence. Makes. Sense. It’s not hard to grasp (for most people).

            And Felix, also read my whole original post. I don’t intend to praise him, and if I do, I condemn him with faint praise.

            And now I feel stupid for arguing on the internet. At least I’m reminded why I don’t like people.

            • felix 3.1.1.2.1.1
              19 November 2009 at 1:12 pm

              So if you take his words out of context they more or less form a sentence?

              Is that what you’re saying?

              I don’t know why you bother either.

  4. Bored 4
    18 November 2009 at 5:24 pm

    I have not yet decided whether Nick Smiths Docorate is proof that:
    A. The education system has failed.
    B. Hard out parroting of recieved wisdom gets results.
    C You can buy a Doctorate online.
    D. All of the above.

    • TF 4.2
      18 November 2009 at 11:08 pm

      E. the people of RICHMOND are mad
      (Nelson is leftwing)

    • prism 4.3
      19 November 2009 at 9:50 am

      B. Calling people Doctor, without further information is so useless and confusing. Why not have some letters or a word that go with it? DrE Nick Smith would indicate that he had an engineering degree. This of course makes him appropriate person to do anything in business or politics.

      We have had a Chief Executive of Social Welfare who was a ports manager. He introduced the priority list, so that Welfare dealt with the biggest emergency first and let others slide until they became emergencies. Presumably eventually people who became too damaged would be taken out to sea and scuttled.

  5. frog 5
    18 November 2009 at 5:57 pm

    He should apply that logic to the supposed costs of fully funding ACC. Those are fantasyland numbers too.

    As I have argued here, John A. He can’t have it both ways with the twin debacles he is piloting through Parliament.

The server will be getting hardware changes this evening starting at 10pm NZDT.
The site will be off line for some hours.