Govt ‘going for growth,’ but is stopping building new state houses; Govt goes for population growth without investing first or asking permission; Jobs recession grinds; Ominous new climate paper
I've lived through some bad NZ governments & read about others. I have to say that this is the most godawful government in NZ's history - a combination of the mad & the bad.
I remember Bernard & Cathrine discussing the sulphur content of shipping oil being reduced, which unintentionally made the heating of the atmosphere worse. They discussed it in one of the climate wrap episodes. That was really fascinating, but is also indicative of how the climate situation has become way more complex because humans can't get their "A" into "G" when it comes to actions on climate change.
As many have said before: growth for its own sake is like cancer. This government is wilfully blind to the harm they are causing. A couple of books that address the climate change issue: Juice by Time Winton and The Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson. Both offer a lot of food for thought and some ideas for action.
This country has been a tourist destination for I'm going to go with 25 years.
During this time we'd have had millions of visitors, all of whom will have spent billions and paid GST on everything they did, so where exactly has all the money gone?
Can appreciate it goes to central government, but it seems odd that none of it got reinvested into infrastructure to support an export industry
Great question—this comes up often in discussions on the value of tourism, both domestic and international. The answer isn’t straightforward. Surprisingly, if you look at this 2020 report by Tourism New Zealand, you’ll see that GST is just one of many ways tourism contributes to government revenue, but also shows some of the negative impacts such as increased carbon footprint. Nor does the article really get get into who owns the tourism infrastructure in a region - central government through it's agencies and departments makes a considerable contribution to visitor infrastructure.
For example, much of New Zealand’s visitor infrastructure is on DOC land, and tourism operators pay concession fees for access. Visitors also contribute directly through hut fees, while DOC receives government funding to support visitor services. The report highlights these contributions and makes for an interesting read.
Another key issue is that international visitors, domestic travellers, and local communities all rely on the same infrastructure—roads, water, and waste management—often funded through local rates. In high-demand tourism regions with small rating bases, the cost burden can be significant. While central government has provided contestable tourism infrastructure funding in the past, it argues that it already funds state highways and other national infrastructure that support tourism.
Local governments, on the other hand, have long advocated for a share of the GST collected from visitors, but successive governments have rejected this. As a result, some regions consider alternative funding mechanisms, such as bed taxes. Local councils also typically fund Regional Tourism Organisations, though funding models vary.
Ultimately, the issue is complex—it's not as simple as redistributing GST to the region where it was collected. As the report shows, the GST contribution per day varies significantly between local, domestic, and international visitors, which is why central government values international tourism so highly.
That is my big question. Where is the money going???
In an interview on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSleTSTFKDI , Wolfgang Streeck, a German economic sociologist, comments that the billionaires of America have been created since the imposition of neoliberalism in that country.
I think we are missing the stats that indicate the real goals - who and how many are gaining what wealth. All the government yabber is just yabber.
As the Democrats in America have failed to combat the upward flow of riches, so sadly have our Labour party.
Brilliant Bernard. I feel like the world is going to hell in a hand basket as my mother used to say. Trying not to get too obsessed with the nightmare that is Trump at the moment and it is good to be reminded that we have our own hell developing here in Aotearoa.
Disappointing (understatement) that senior MPs fixate on debt when the assets created >> the debt incurred (state housing) - such a level of financial ignorance? or is it just ideologically convenient to fixate on debt?
(It is even more dire that that because we are a sovereign currency issuing country meaning it is not necessary to borrow to build up our public assets - that fact being several steps too far for neoliberal politicians.)
It fits their political agenda to fixate on the level of debt while ignoring the context of the KO balance sheet. Apart from the financial aspects (housing assets exceed liabilities) there is the social outcomes that should also be considered.
The PwC report provided in a link immediately under Chart 4 in Bernard's soliloquy is essential reading and proves how exceedingly nasty and cruel the current government is.
As someone smarter than me said yesterday: political decision making - not economic, and definitely not based on kindness
I've lived through some bad NZ governments & read about others. I have to say that this is the most godawful government in NZ's history - a combination of the mad & the bad.
agree, a "unique" blend of malice & incompetence.
and arrogance!
I remember Bernard & Cathrine discussing the sulphur content of shipping oil being reduced, which unintentionally made the heating of the atmosphere worse. They discussed it in one of the climate wrap episodes. That was really fascinating, but is also indicative of how the climate situation has become way more complex because humans can't get their "A" into "G" when it comes to actions on climate change.
Quality journalism thanks Bernard
As many have said before: growth for its own sake is like cancer. This government is wilfully blind to the harm they are causing. A couple of books that address the climate change issue: Juice by Time Winton and The Ministry for the Future by Kim Stanley Robinson. Both offer a lot of food for thought and some ideas for action.
A quick question about tourism in NZ.
This country has been a tourist destination for I'm going to go with 25 years.
During this time we'd have had millions of visitors, all of whom will have spent billions and paid GST on everything they did, so where exactly has all the money gone?
Can appreciate it goes to central government, but it seems odd that none of it got reinvested into infrastructure to support an export industry
Great question—this comes up often in discussions on the value of tourism, both domestic and international. The answer isn’t straightforward. Surprisingly, if you look at this 2020 report by Tourism New Zealand, you’ll see that GST is just one of many ways tourism contributes to government revenue, but also shows some of the negative impacts such as increased carbon footprint. Nor does the article really get get into who owns the tourism infrastructure in a region - central government through it's agencies and departments makes a considerable contribution to visitor infrastructure.
https://www.tourismnewzealand.com/assets/insights/industry-insights/tnz-te-ohanga-report-2.pdf
For example, much of New Zealand’s visitor infrastructure is on DOC land, and tourism operators pay concession fees for access. Visitors also contribute directly through hut fees, while DOC receives government funding to support visitor services. The report highlights these contributions and makes for an interesting read.
Another key issue is that international visitors, domestic travellers, and local communities all rely on the same infrastructure—roads, water, and waste management—often funded through local rates. In high-demand tourism regions with small rating bases, the cost burden can be significant. While central government has provided contestable tourism infrastructure funding in the past, it argues that it already funds state highways and other national infrastructure that support tourism.
Local governments, on the other hand, have long advocated for a share of the GST collected from visitors, but successive governments have rejected this. As a result, some regions consider alternative funding mechanisms, such as bed taxes. Local councils also typically fund Regional Tourism Organisations, though funding models vary.
Ultimately, the issue is complex—it's not as simple as redistributing GST to the region where it was collected. As the report shows, the GST contribution per day varies significantly between local, domestic, and international visitors, which is why central government values international tourism so highly.
That is my big question. Where is the money going???
In an interview on https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QSleTSTFKDI , Wolfgang Streeck, a German economic sociologist, comments that the billionaires of America have been created since the imposition of neoliberalism in that country.
I think we are missing the stats that indicate the real goals - who and how many are gaining what wealth. All the government yabber is just yabber.
As the Democrats in America have failed to combat the upward flow of riches, so sadly have our Labour party.
incidentally - do we have any sociologists here?
Brilliant Bernard. I feel like the world is going to hell in a hand basket as my mother used to say. Trying not to get too obsessed with the nightmare that is Trump at the moment and it is good to be reminded that we have our own hell developing here in Aotearoa.
I considered one comment replying to that climate change discussion to be quite apt:
"In a planetary hospice, it is important to be updated with the latest vital signs."
A great watch BTW with some interesting conflicts regarding best actions to be taken but all agreed that fossil fuel use needs to cease.
Thank you so much for all your mahi, Bernard !!
Many thanks. We’re over 100 likes so I’ve opened it up for all.
Disappointing (understatement) that senior MPs fixate on debt when the assets created >> the debt incurred (state housing) - such a level of financial ignorance? or is it just ideologically convenient to fixate on debt?
(It is even more dire that that because we are a sovereign currency issuing country meaning it is not necessary to borrow to build up our public assets - that fact being several steps too far for neoliberal politicians.)
It fits their political agenda to fixate on the level of debt while ignoring the context of the KO balance sheet. Apart from the financial aspects (housing assets exceed liabilities) there is the social outcomes that should also be considered.
The PwC report provided in a link immediately under Chart 4 in Bernard's soliloquy is essential reading and proves how exceedingly nasty and cruel the current government is.