The Real Cost Of Cheese

Thanks To SO For The Use Of Her Cartoon!

National’s Policy Development Process (AKA: Swallowing Dead Fish)

National’s Policy On SOEs

Hutchison On NZ Fast Forward

National appears intent on continuing with its ridiculous opposition to the “New Zealand Fast Forward” in what can only be described as an obsessive determination to show Labour as cynical and insincere. An article by National MP Paul Hutchison in Rural News states:

“National does not think the fund as described is the optimal vehicle. We support funding models that encourage partnership between government and industry, but we are not convinced the fund is the best model for achieving this collaboration.”

It is certainly ironic that, given National’s fervent opposition to so-called “nanny statisim”, they are happy to thumb their noses at the large numbers of industry groups which have got behind the fund, and instead take a “National knows best” approach. At times, Hutchison’s article borders on the absurd, at one point stating:

“It is important to remember Labour’s track record. A former Labour Prime Minister stated ‘agriculture is a sunset industry’.”

It certainly shows Hutchison and National are grasping at straws when they have to reach back into history to provide some kind of justification for their stance on this issue.

 

Powered by Qumana

Speaking Of “Media Beatups”….

Kiwiblog certainly seems to have got itself all worked up over an item that featured on One News last night, labeling it a “puerile and almost offensive” media “beat-up”. The item focused on apparent denials of climate change made by Maurice Williamson and Lockwood Smith to public audiences in recent times, which appear to put the two offside with National Party policy as well as John Key. Judging by his strong language, this is an issue which Kiwiblog obviously holds dear, but although he attempts to enlighten us on the political realities of decision making, he conveniently overlooks the somewhat unsubtIe distinction between “private” opinion and public statement.

It is obvious that there will never be an absolute consensus on an issue within a large group, and political parties are certainly no exception to this. The nature of political decision making often requires compromise, concessions, and the sacrifice of personal opinion and beliefs in order to promote the wider collective interests of the party. Indeed, it is often the case that MPs simply tow the party line and put their own views aside, and I doubt this fact is lost on the New Zealand public. Thus, given the range of opinions within a political party, it would be most unhelpful if the media were to go around each MP seeking their “personal” opinion once a party had decided, collectively, to take a particular course of action, as Kiwiblog correctly points out.

However, things change when opinions, which are privately held and have supposedly been set aside in the interests of the party, are expressed publicly by an MP acting in the capacity of a party spokesperson, especially if those statements seem to contradict their party’s policies. In such a situation, there is likely to be both confusion and apprehension within the electorate as to how such opinions will ultimately influence a party’s policies, and it is thus right for the media to seek clarification on behalf of the public. Such clarification is particularly important in an election year when the public is entitled to know how genuine a party is being when they release policy on a particular issue.

It is certainly curious when an MP claims they are committed to party policy, while at the same time dismissing the very foundations on which that policy has been formed. In the case of Williamson, his remarks were allegedly made during a presentation to an Automobile Association meeting. These statements were not made by Maurice Williamson the private citizen, but rather Maurice Williamson the National Party spokesperson for transport, and as such they are open to scrutiny by both the media and the public. To suggest otherwise, as Kiwiblog appears to, is nothing short of idiocy, and it is surprising that Kiwiblog’s rather enthusiastic advocacy of freedom of speech does not quite extend to freedom of the press. Or at least not when the National Party is shown in a negative light. 

Powered by Qumana

April 1 – A Day To Celebrate

Today sees the start of a number of flagship policies announced by Labour in recent times. The minimum wage officially rises to $12, the company tax rate drops from 33 percent to 30 percent, benefits and allowances increase, and employer contributions to KiwiSaver start at 1 percent.

There is certainly something for everyone in these policies, and it is good to see Labour continuing to roll out progressive and substantive policy. I suspect people all around the country will be celebrating today.

 

 

Powered by Qumana

National: Writing Policy On The Hoof Since Ages Ago

The Legacy, Thus Far, Of Helen Clark’s Labour

Since assuming the National Party leadership in 2006, John Key has had somewhat of a dream run with the media and, consequently, the New Zealand public. At the same time, however, scrutiny of Helen Clark and her government has been very intense, and it would appear that the “pack mentality” of the Press Gallery is decidedly in favour of a National Party victory. Indeed, not all media outlets have been so subtle in their desires for such a result. Throughout all of this though, Helen Clark’s approach has been to continue rolling out policy and to simply get on with governing. Such pragmatism has been a hallmark of her leadership.

Now into her 8^th year as Prime Minister, Helen Clark’s achievements are as numerous as they are impressive. Her involvement in New Zealand politics spans more than 30 years, since joining the Labour Party in 1971. During that time she has been both Chair and a member of numerous Cabinet and Select Committees; Minister of various portfolios; Opposition Leader; and of course New Zealand’s ninth longest serving and first elected female Prime Minister. But Clark’s achievements are not confined to New Zealand’s boarders. Indeed, they span the international political stage. In 1986 she was awarded the annual Peace Prize of the Danish Peace Foundation for her work promoting disarmament, and this year received a special award from the United Nations for her work on Climate Change. New Zealand’s 37^th Prime Minister will certainly go down in history as one of our best.

Clark, this year, became the longest serving Labour leader, and is also the longest serving female MP currently in Parliament, earning her the unofficial title of “Mother of the house”.  She is one of the most experienced New Zealand politicians, and her leadership is second to none. Her grasp of MMP politics and her ability to form progressive and lasting coalitions will certainly be one of the many things she will be remembered for.

In a 2006 feature in the Dominion Post celebrating Helen Clarks 7^th year as Prime Minister, Clark said of herself:

“I would like to think that, many years down the track, people would say that I gave it everything I had, that I was very dedicated to the job, that I was pretty accessible and approachable, and got out and about, which I do.”

There is no doubt that Helen Clark will be remembered for exactly that, and much more. New Zealand would certainly be wise to hold on to such an experienced leader. Later this year the public will have the opportunity to give their assessment of Helen Clark’s leadership, and this long weekend provides an excellent time for us all to think about some of the many great things Helen Clark’s Labour has delivered for all New Zealanders. They include, but are certainly not limited to:

• Seeing off 3 opposition leaders (with Key gone by the end of the year)
• The entrenchment of New Zealand’s nuclear free policy
• Working for Families
• Kiwisaver
• Interest-free student loans
• 14 weeks paid parental leave
• Restoration of income-related rents for state houses
• Keeping New Zealand out of the war in Iraq
• Fostering the closest relations with the united States since ANZUS
• Establishment of Kiwi Bank
• Iminent free trade deal with China – the first western country to do so
• Ratification of Kyoto
• 4 weeks annual leave
• More affordable primary healthcare, including cheaper doctors visits and prescriptions
• Biggest upgrade of New Zealand’s public health services ever undertaken
• Making it compulsory for electricity retailers to offer a tariff with a daily charge of 30 cents per day, so that those who use modest amounts of power don’t have to pay a fortune just to keep electricity connected.
• Civil Unions
• Maori Television
• Nationwide FM Pacific Radio Network.
• The Employment Relations Act and the restoration of some degree of equality in employment bargaining
• Economic growth amongst the highest in the world
• The World Bank’s Doing Business in 2005 report showed that New Zealand is the easiest country in the world in which to do business
• $1.42 billion business tax relief package for small business
• The modern apprenticeships programme, which has turned out more than 8,000 modern apprentices
• Establishment of NZ Trade and Enterprise
• Restoration of the married rate of superannuation to not less than 65 per cent of the average net ordinary time weekly wage
• Establishment of the “Cullen” superannuation fund
• Establishment of the $700m NZ Fast Forward research fund
• Increasing Research, Science and Technology funding by 65% percent
• Investing heavily in New Zealand art, culture and heritage
• Funding strong growth in the basic sciences through the Marsden Fund and the New Economy Research Fund
• Establishing the $100m New Zealand Venture Investment Fund
• Increasing the minimum wage every year, due to reach $12/hr in April
• Committed $22.3 billion to address key land transport priorities
• Purchasing back the nation’s rail track and investing over $200 million in maintenance and new capital projects
• Free meningitis vaccinations for all New Zealand children
• Starting work on major Auckland transport projects
• Developing New Zealand’s first ever Rail Strategy, and Walking and Cycling strategy
• Reinstating ACC workplace cover to a full social insurance scheme
• Increasing surgical funding for key operations, such as hip and cateract
• Rebuilding the school dental service
• The implementation of major programmes, such as HEHA, targeting obesity and related diseases
• NCEA
• Increasing investment in conservation and environment policy
• Completing free trade negotiations with Singapore, Thailand, Chile and Brunei and is in the process of negotiating others
• Increasing New Zealand’s international presence, with new embassies in Brasilia, Warsaw, and Cairo
• Committing almost $5b in extra funding for New Zealand’s Defence Force, and radically upgrading equipment, including new Navy frigates and helicopters
• Settling eight major Treaty claims, with at least another 26 in progress
• Delivering rates rebates for older New Zealanders
• Saving Air New Zealand from collapse
• Committing to keeping New Zealand assets in New Zealand hands
• Increasing funding for sport and recreation by almost 20 times its 1999 level
• FORCING NATIONAL TO MOVE TO THE LEFT

 

Powered by Qumana

Bishop John (Tama)Key?

As John Key’s chief press officer is away on holiday at present, you could be forgiven for thinking that Key had employed the services of Brian Tamaki in the drafting of his speech on state sector bureaucracy this afternoon. Indeed, if anything, Key’s declaration of “enough is enough” smacked of the vague, knee jerk babble of Destiny party policy. But sadly, it was the words of a man who hopes to be New Zealand’s next Prime Minister.

Key’s announcement was both confusing and lacking in substance. He first chastised Labour for the number of employees working in the state sector’s “core bureaucracy”, then in almost the same breath effectively endorsed Labour’s policy by stating employee numbers would be capped, not reduced. As is becoming customary, Key provided no substantial plans for improving state sector performance, but did say:

“We are going to make do with the resource we have”

If Key’s vision for New Zealand’s state sector is to simply “make do”, then he is hardly the ambitious leader full of ideas he makes himself out to be.

National’s hypocrisy aside, the actual growth in the state sector needs to be considered in light of the major advancement in New Zealand’s public services since Labour came into office. Indeed, public services were in a particularly poor state during the 90s, and this has required a lot of work by Labour to restore them to a standard that New Zealanders both deserve and expect. Consequently, this work has required a lot of careful planning and management, which goes a long way to explaining state sector growth.

All three areas outlined in Key’s announcement, health, education and social development, have been undergoing particularly large transformations over the past eight years. It’s both sensible and logical that whenever such transformations are undertaken, there should first be careful planning of how this is to occur, and then support and supervision during implementation. This is the role that so-called “core bureaucrats” play, and despite National’s view, it is a very important one. It is quite ironic that National is the first to cry out for accountability whenever something goes wrong, and yet they are trying to remove the very checks and balances which prevent such problems arising.

Let’s take a look at some of the major drivers in state sector employment in the three areas outlined.

Education:

• Development and implementation of NCEA
• Introduction of free early childhood education services
• Overhaul of New Zealand’s education syllabus
• Development of modern apprenticeships
• Establishment of the Tertiary Education Commission
• Introduction of the Performance Based Research funding model

Health:

• Largest upgrade of public hospitals in New Zealand’s history
• Introduction of Primary Health Organizations
• Development of New Zealand’s Cancer Control Strategy
• Heavy investment in improving rural access to healthcare services
• Development and implementation of a number of public health strategies, including HEHA and Mission On
• Re-establishment of the school dental service

Social Development:

• Development and implementation of Working for Families

It is not surprising that massive investment in these three sectors has reaped great rewards. As well as having some of the lowest unemployment rates in the Western world, New Zealanders are healthier and wealthier than they were under the last National government.Those rewards have not only come because of the excellent frontline services provided by our doctors, teachers, and allied professionals, but also because of the diligent planning, development and support of those working behind the scenes. These so-called “bureaucrats” often work without acknowledgement and, as shown today, whilst being harshly criticised.

 

Powered by Qumana

John Key Opposes New Zealand “Fast Forwarding”

Helen Clark has announced a much needed increase in science, development and innovation funding, with the establishment of the $700m “NZ Fast Forward” fund. As was expected, National has totally opposed this initiative, with John Key giving the vague reason that they:

“support funding models that encourage partnership between government and industry but we are not convinced that the fund, as described, is the best model for achieving this collaboration.” 

As could also be expected, National did not elaborate on what exactly was wrong with Labour’s funding model, nor did Key offer National’s alternative. He did say, however, that:

“National will be rolling out a comprehensive research and development policy closer to the election.” 

Of course, what this actually means is that National doesn’t have a policy for moving New Zealand forward, but, having had the advantage of seeing Labour’s, will develop one in the coming months.

The Two Faces Of National

The 2005 general election was perhaps the most polarising and divisive in New Zealand’s history. Voters were presented with two vastly different visions for New Zealand’s future, promoting the contrasting ideologies that underlie National and Labour Party politics. During the election these ideologies were manifested in the policies of each party, perhaps more so than ever before, and vigorously promoted by their members. It is thus very surprising that in little over 15 months since assuming the National Party leadership, and on the rare occasions when he actually remembers what his party’s policies are, John Key seems to be indicating that that ideology has changed.

Key’s bid to bring National policy towards the left and thus make it more appealing to the electorate has seen the adoption of many Labour policies from the 2005 election, and the consequent neutralisation of a number of difficult policy areas. Kiwi Saver, Working for Families, interest free student loans, employment law, nuclear free and climate change are just some of the areas where National has back-tracked in recent times, and Key has been quick to distance his National from that of Don Brash. Opinion polls have suggested that this so-called “new” National has found favour with voters, but can such a dramatic change in core party beliefs be possible in such a short space of time or is National presenting an artificial image to the public?

The answer to that question is perhaps made most apparent in Key’s maiden speech as Leader of the Opposition. In it Key made much of New Zealand’s so-called “underclass”, yet he was the architect of National’s proposed election tax cuts of $10b which, according to the Ministry of Social Development, would have seen child poverty increase by 18-percent by 2007, and which he had been rigorously advocating for just over a year earlier. It is certainly difficult to reconcile these two positions, and the overwhelming inference is that Key’s overtures to the “underclass” were simply a disingenuous attempt to win votes. Similarly, National’s approach to Maori issues has softened, so much so that a coalition with the Maori Party is not being completely ruled out, and the definite deadline for settling historical Treaty grievances, a major driver of party support leading up to 2005, is, as of yesterday, no longer that definite.

Of course, National did gain a number of new MPs in 2005, and Key has been quick to present them as the new, younger, “fresh” face of the “government in waiting”. But the vast majority of National MPs were in Parliament long before 2005. They were the engineers of National’s divisive policies. They were the ones who fought hard to sell them to the electorate, and some of them are still there on the front bench. It is hard to see how any changes in core National Party beliefs and a consequential shift to the left could occur while the McCully’s and Williamson’s of the party still help direct party policy. All of this would seem to suggest that while National presents a very popular centrist visage to the populous, behind that is an ever-present right-wing agenda.

If the National Party has, as John Key claims, undergone a change of direction then one of two conclusions can be made. Either National MPs didn’t actually believe in the policies they promoted in 2005 and simply towed the party line, or their beliefs and convictions are weak and easily changed. Either way, it is worrying that such personalities could be in government post-election 2008.

 

Powered by Qumana