Power: saving money too expensive

Written By: - Date published: 8:08 am, February 12th, 2011 - 7 comments
Categories: Economy - Tags: ,

The government is pleading poverty thanks to the tax cuts for the rich (and even though government debt is under control). This is their excuse for welfare and spending cuts and asset sales. This is shown to be pure spin by the fact that they’re passing over the opportunity to save the economy $75 million because they won’t spend $28 million.

From Stuff:

“Under the regime, businesses would use a standard language to report financial information, making it easier for government departments and businesses to electronically import and analyse data, cutting firms’ compliance costs.

Mark Hucklesby, national technical director at accountancy firm Grant Thornton, said a 2008 study found that if New Zealand spent between $18m and $28m implementing the programme over three years, the estimated annual savings to businesses would be between $55m and $75m a year.

He believed those estimated savings were conservative and it was disappointing that the Government had shelved the programme – on which about $4m had already been spent – in last year’s Budget.”

This would be a geniune gain for the economy. We would be getting an enhanced government service and spending less as a nation to get it – we invest $28 million ($4 million already sunk cost) through our government and save $75 million in business costs. Brilliant, eh?

Unfortunately, Simon Power says no:

“Mr Power said a board made up of Inland Revenue, ACC, Statistics New Zealand and Economic Development Ministry staff had determined the regime would provide businesses with substantial benefits, but the Government could not meet its costs.”

This dumbarse thinking reminds me of the Kiwirail decision. The government was told it could add $500 million to the economy (nearly as much as the Rugby World Cup), create thousands of jobs, and net itself over a hundred million in tax if it spent a little more on having Kiwirail build its new electric rail units here, rather than buying them from abroad. But Steven Joyce insisted this government entity act as if it were an independent company and only consider its own bottom line.

Pity we have a government that thinks along the narrow commercial lines of small business owners, rather than understanding that the State’s role to tailor its activities for the benefit of the country as a whole.

Oh, and the government won’t fund locator pendants for dementia patients with a history of wandering. In a trial in Auckland, they’ve saved huge amounts of Police and Search & Rescue time, and maybe lives. But $280 each is too much.

7 comments on “Power: saving money too expensive ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. johm 1
    12 February 2011 at 8:44 am

    The refusal to invest in your own people and country but give away money to the rich who don’t need anymore is pure NeoLiberalism. Look what a disaster the U$ economy and society is now in having to implement fascist social control to keep order. ACTnat have adopted this incredibly nihilistic destructive ideology for their own,they really are too stupid to understand that we don’t have to copy the failed society of the U$.

    • marsman 1.1
      12 February 2011 at 9:19 am

      johm. They are stupid but also fully aware of the destructiveness of their policies and they don’t care. Destruction is all part of the neoliberal plan.

    • Draco T Bastard 1.2
      12 February 2011 at 10:46 am

      The refusal to invest in your own people and country but give away money to the rich who don’t need anymore is pure psychopathy.

      FIFY

  2. Blondie 2
    12 February 2011 at 9:45 am

    This is so incredibly stupid, I can barely believe it. Surely there is more to this story- or are our govt really that short-sighted?

    On the face of it, this reminds me of some business owners who refuse to invest in MYOB or Xero (or any other accounting software) because they think they can make do with a handwritten cashbook. Except, of course, this is on a much larger scale.

    Most likely, in a few years time, they’ll end up purchasing said programme anyway – at which point they’ll realise just how beneficial it is, and wonder why they didn’t do it sooner. Dumb, dumb, dumb.

    • Draco T Bastard 2.1
      12 February 2011 at 10:49 am

      Surely there is more to this story- or are our govt really that short-sighted?

      Oh, I’m sure that there is more to the story. Using standardised bookkeeping practices doesn’t allow as much creativity in your tax accounting.

  3. Colonial Viper 3
    12 February 2011 at 10:58 am

    Wow…The Standard has post tags labelled “ideological stupidity” 😯

Links to post