Labour leader widens debate to include size of Government, as well as debt and capital/wealth taxes, arguing an ageing population makes it inevitable; 'Infra boy' Chris Bishop has shackled himself
Keep on keeping on please, I as ordinary political nerd have noticed more radio/tv challenges to current mad austerity. RNZ is asking the verrry rich what they think will listen with hope.
I think of more significance than how the rich might feel about a wealth tax (turkeys, Christmas, Scrooge), is David Parker's statement that 'Treasury estimated 3 percent of our capital would leave and 97 percent would stay'.
However, the best wealth tax will always be a tax on land, because it's pretty hard to pack land up and take it with you if you decide to be a tax fugitive.
Bishop to infra guys “ how did they do it?” Surely the follow up is so how do they fund it? Press him on the suite of options that NSW employs to gather revenue. Isn’t this what they are stuck on? Oh that’s right they don’t want to hear the answers to those questions…
Your piece on 30% limit on borrowing matches my own view. Especially because government can borrow at lower rates than banks thus making PPP proposals more expensive for taxpayers. Especially over time.
It would be good to see a comparison of the final ultimate costs of Transmission Gully using the already established ppp and using government funding plus reasonable tolls. My experience was that the Ministry of Works and Development were very capable of building road structures equalling in both cost and quality those of the private sector.
Hipkins' division of NZers into "the working age population" and "the population over the age of 65" is correct in terms of eligibility for NZ Super but arbitrary in light of the fact an increasing number of over-65s are choosing to continue to work - sometimes out of financial necessity but also because of a desire to stay engaged etc. Our 79-year-old Foreign Minister is an example.
My thought about people staying in high paying jobs is that they are preventing the next generation moving up to take the reigns for their time. The effect ripples down the generations. Unsurprisingly it is Boomers who able to do this.
2. Greatly increase the investment in the NZ Superannuation Fund by taxing sources of unearned income: capital gains tax (including realised gain less inflation on sale of the family home), inheritance tax, and gift tax. The NZSF is doing well, but needs far more put into it than the current $2 billion a year, and should not itself be paying tax as it now absurdly does:
Yup, the right are going to try & re-frame this debate in any which way, personal or otherwise. I hope Uncle Chippy stay stead fast & pry open that Overton window. The right will try to shut it firmly.
It's cool that this is even being discussed publicly.
So Hipkins wonders about the 30-30 numbers, nek minit Andrea Vance (little miss journalistic integrity) does a piece on ‘tax doom loop’. The Atlas operation swings into action…
I read the piece on vehicle size in relation to deaths with interest this morning. I'd have thought it was a no brainer. I was glad to see it because it brings another perspective to the issue of road crashes causing injury & death. Speed limits are a huge conversation atm & i can't help but feel that lowering them is somewhat of a silver bullet response. I think the issue is way more complex & the more perspectives we can bring, the more likely we will minimise death & injury on our roads. I offer this perspective from my own experience; I grew up in West Auckland, surrounded by car culture. My father drove professionally & fast. You could even say aggressively. We imbibed his driving style early in our childhoods. For years this was just normal for us. As age & wisdom arrived I began to see how, it wasn't just unsafe to drive like that, it stressful & hard on my body. I then had to wrestle with my psyche to unfold narratives I learned early about 'sissy driving' & to change unconscious habits. I know I won't be alone in having had the experience of learning an unhelpful driving style. The psychological messages we receive both individually & collectively are highly impactful & we seem to be slow to reframe the idea of driving sensibly & with consideration. I constantly see people driving with unfunctioning indicators. Perhaps it's time for some communication upskilling across the whole subject of using our roads. And by everyone who uses them, regardless of their transportation mode. We may find there are multiple responses that could be much more constructive & even, heaven for fend, remove some of the polarisation from the speed limit conversation.
After years of living in cycle dominant cities I find the open roads here quite terrifying as it seems that the major goal is to pass other cars even when it's obviously dangerous to do so. I think we need more traffic calming measures, better road design and more driving instructors (not parents or siblings) more & cheaper PT (to get people out of their cars) and better rules and regulations. Such as trucks stay in slow lane on motorways (that's a no brainer). There should be more defensive driving training and learner licences could involved a half day's training in how dangerous driving really is. Our road culture is not good and I also think we
require a law of vulnerability in terms of pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and those with mobility devices. We have so much to do but education about sharing the road would be a start. And as our track record shows, it's time to look at that now. Also time for the Minister of Transport is be held to account for his "infestation" remarks and lack of knowledge in terms of road safety.
I drove mindlessly as a youth - which I think is the default style after the initial cautiousness while learning has passed. We then sold our car before doing an OE, which was an eye opener. 30 years later I still do not own a car and so drive less than 1,000km annually. And always in a very aware / conscious manner.
Unfortunately our kiwi culture still equates cars with freedom. I just see it as siphon in your wallet.
Well look at that, two systems related responses & one individual values related one. The possibilities of addressing this issue in a nuanced way is boundless.
I constantly see people driving with unfunctioning indicators - yes. Or functioning indicators that only seem to get switched on once the manoeuvre is already underway.
I was recently the passenger in an electric car. I was sat in the backseat and was on high alert for the entire journey as the driver was "playing" with the centre control panel the entire time. 😳
I commented that the screen was large and asked if ( implied that ) it might be causing a distraction.
The driver didn't take the hint. I found alternative transport home.
The screen was the size of an Ipad and the driver may as well have been on their phone - such was the level of distraction.
I did wonder how many people would pass their drivers test if they were doing this....?
I agree absolutely. I actually think the whole rego system should be overhauled to take account of all road users’ safety and also things like emissions (including NO² to avoid the perverse “clean” diesel issues in Europe), weight, etc.
Unfortunately, the ANCAP system is extremely flawed because it allows gizmos to compensate for unsafe vehicle design (a Ford Ranger gets a 5 star rating!? 74% in vulnerable road user category) but it could be a starting point.
This is really insightful and something I think about often too. Your level of awareness in changing your approach to driving is really admirable and it made me want to write a comment back to you. Like you, I learned to drive in West Auckland and I had to drive everywhere to get around. Fast forward to my twenties, I moved to a smaller, more compact city and bought a bike. Despite never having cycled on a road, it soon became my (typically joyful despite zero infrastructure) way to get everywhere, however I was blown away at the aggression some drivers showed towards cyclists and the driving behaviours around someone whose only protection is a usually just a plastic helmet. Did they really want to find out what would happen if they knock me down? It made me think that driving must activate a constant low level fight/flight response while we do it, based on the potential for it to erupt into more animal kingdom-type behaviours when drivers feel threatened or encounter obstacles: screaming and shouting, tail gating, swerving, cutting others off, speeding… leaving their vehicles and physically attacking other drivers or even just vociferously opposing new infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists if it means a transfer of the (public) space they need for their cars to other modes… You're absolutely right, driving a car is deeply embedded in our psyche, so much so that we don't seem to question it in the way that you admirably did. I think until we do, we will be stuck with the status quo of car-dominant cities and a road toll that keeps breaking Kiwi hearts.
The old brain reactions we see def will keep us in the status quo. I really do think the psychological aspect of our relationships to each other on the road are under-recognised & a rich vein worth investigating.
Thank you, as always Bernard. Kaka readers, if they haven't yet, may want to see this article in the Int Guardian, describing a time bomb healthwise in NZ, and it pertains to several health items in the Kaka today. The context is of extreme acceptance in NZ relative to other advanced countries of vaping by both major parties still, while eg over 20% 18-24 yr olds regularly vape is important. https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/sep/08/vaping-damages-young-peoples-lungs-as-much-as-smoking-study-suggests
Size of government needs to grow - kiwis want to make sure their kids and grand kids stay in Aotearoa - sounds like Chippy has been listening kind to the Kaka!
My worry about Bishop's positioning of the need for 'bi-partisan' action on infrastructure is Labour (and the 'electable left' in general) continue to demonstrate they are perennially incapable of the same kind of "ratchetting" that the right shamelessly use. National will leverage Bishop's sympathetic call for infrastructure to plan decades of stupid, ROI-deficient roads, mines, and other PPP boondoggles, and then Labour will be too timid to just cancel them when they are next in power, trapping us in even more wasted decades.
If by bi-partisan it is "you agree with what I prioritise" then Labour should not sign up for it. Bi-partisan needs to happen after an honest discussion about what projects are to be the priority.
I have one to start with - re-introduce the i-Rex ferries.
These awful days I do not laugh out loud all that much...but a drunk kaka has made my morning. I was nearly dive-bombed by a drunk kereru having trouble gaining height after it fell out of a tree!!! But that photo is marvellous!!! Thank you and I so appreciate the information in your work.
Is it hope on my part, or am I dreaming, but the early signs are appearing of different Local Councils telling the Minister of Speeding that he's not correct about raising the speed limits everywhere. This will be the start. Eventually more and more Councils will assist the Government to understand what the "localism" they rabbited on about during the last election really means.
Public consultation on the draft has closed and Brown says thousands of people had their say. “I think 65 per cent of people who submitted said they support the reversals,”.
Has the result of the submissions been publicised? I made a submission but have been waiting to see what the outcome was. Also, dodging the cost to local councils question is par for the course with this minister.
A long way to go but Hipkins' interview on Tova was already more heartening than anything Labour came up with in the last campaign. Easier to do in opposition two years out from an election I suppose though...
Definitely this post needs to be seen by as many NZers as possible. Especially about the capacity for the govt to borrow for necessary infrastructure, for public transport, at lower rates than PP arrangements ( Transmission Gully an example). And the information about the lack of evidence for raising speed limits. Simeon Brown’s reasoning is bizarre.
I do remember Grant Robertson in the election debate with Nicola Willis say that any government spending under 35% to GDP was austerity. Maybe I understand this wrong but I thought he chellenged Nicola on 30% to GDP target. I thought he was an incredible Finance Minister.
Here’s Grant defending Labour’s push to get Govt/GDP back down under 30% again in Parliament in 2022.
“We are up around the 35 percent of GDP level—that is a similar level to what the National Government had when they were coming out of the Canterbury earthquakes and the global financial crisis. But we bring that back down again to around 30 percent of GDP by the end of the forecast period. Again, a careful and a balanced approach to making sure that we look after New Zealanders, we invest in addressing the big challenges that are facing us, but we also have a mind to the future generations and what debts we leave them.”
Keep on keeping on please, I as ordinary political nerd have noticed more radio/tv challenges to current mad austerity. RNZ is asking the verrry rich what they think will listen with hope.
I think of more significance than how the rich might feel about a wealth tax (turkeys, Christmas, Scrooge), is David Parker's statement that 'Treasury estimated 3 percent of our capital would leave and 97 percent would stay'.
However, the best wealth tax will always be a tax on land, because it's pretty hard to pack land up and take it with you if you decide to be a tax fugitive.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/527411/billionaire-mainfreight-co-founder-bruce-plested-backs-wealth-tax-with-a-catch
Another view of taxing the rich:
https://jacobin.com/2024/03/billionaire-global-wealth-tax-proposal-brazil
Thanks Rae.
Most journalists in NZ get this email. I make sure they all have it for free.
cheers
Bernard
Bishop to infra guys “ how did they do it?” Surely the follow up is so how do they fund it? Press him on the suite of options that NSW employs to gather revenue. Isn’t this what they are stuck on? Oh that’s right they don’t want to hear the answers to those questions…
Fair questions I’ll try to ask.
Ka pai BH.
Your piece on 30% limit on borrowing matches my own view. Especially because government can borrow at lower rates than banks thus making PPP proposals more expensive for taxpayers. Especially over time.
It would be good to see a comparison of the final ultimate costs of Transmission Gully using the already established ppp and using government funding plus reasonable tolls. My experience was that the Ministry of Works and Development were very capable of building road structures equalling in both cost and quality those of the private sector.
Hipkins' division of NZers into "the working age population" and "the population over the age of 65" is correct in terms of eligibility for NZ Super but arbitrary in light of the fact an increasing number of over-65s are choosing to continue to work - sometimes out of financial necessity but also because of a desire to stay engaged etc. Our 79-year-old Foreign Minister is an example.
My thought about people staying in high paying jobs is that they are preventing the next generation moving up to take the reigns for their time. The effect ripples down the generations. Unsurprisingly it is Boomers who able to do this.
True - but sometimes boomers take a part-time/low-paying job post-retirement because they don't like being completely retired.
Indeed. The Deputy PM will be paying more in tax than the cost of his NZ Super. (But not the cost of his Parliamentary super)
The increasing proportion of the population who will be over 65 and drawing NZ Superannuation requires two steps to help foot the bill:
1. The reintroduction of some version of the surcharge or surtax on all other income of Super beneficiaries that Winston Peters succeeded in persuading National to abolish in 1998 (Susan St John has contributed thoughts on this: https://www.auckland.ac.nz/assets/business/about/our-research/research-institutes-and-centres/RPRC/PensionBriefing/Pension-briefing-2021-2-NZS-as-basic-income.pdf); and
2. Greatly increase the investment in the NZ Superannuation Fund by taxing sources of unearned income: capital gains tax (including realised gain less inflation on sale of the family home), inheritance tax, and gift tax. The NZSF is doing well, but needs far more put into it than the current $2 billion a year, and should not itself be paying tax as it now absurdly does:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-09-09/world-beating-nz-sovereign-wealth-fund-posts-15-annual-return
https://archive.is/O9oY3
Chris Trotter is of the opinion that any credibility Chris Hipkins had expired a long time ago.
https://www.interest.co.nz/public-policy/129623/no-realistic-prospect-policy-disrupter-taking-over-labour-party-writes-chris
This is the Chris Trotter that endorsed NZFirst and buddies up to Sean Plunket?
Yes, that's the one. However, it may pay to focus on his argument rather than on him.
https://thestandard.org.nz/is-a-transformational-left-wing-leadership-of-the-nz-labour-party-possible/
https://nzagainstthecurrent.blogspot.com/2024/09/a-new-party-of-left.html
Yup, the right are going to try & re-frame this debate in any which way, personal or otherwise. I hope Uncle Chippy stay stead fast & pry open that Overton window. The right will try to shut it firmly.
It's cool that this is even being discussed publicly.
I've said it before so I'll say it again.
PPP IS JUST RENT TO BUY.
It always costs more, makes more money for private companies and screws local people in local communities.
Never give up!
So Hipkins wonders about the 30-30 numbers, nek minit Andrea Vance (little miss journalistic integrity) does a piece on ‘tax doom loop’. The Atlas operation swings into action…
I read the piece on vehicle size in relation to deaths with interest this morning. I'd have thought it was a no brainer. I was glad to see it because it brings another perspective to the issue of road crashes causing injury & death. Speed limits are a huge conversation atm & i can't help but feel that lowering them is somewhat of a silver bullet response. I think the issue is way more complex & the more perspectives we can bring, the more likely we will minimise death & injury on our roads. I offer this perspective from my own experience; I grew up in West Auckland, surrounded by car culture. My father drove professionally & fast. You could even say aggressively. We imbibed his driving style early in our childhoods. For years this was just normal for us. As age & wisdom arrived I began to see how, it wasn't just unsafe to drive like that, it stressful & hard on my body. I then had to wrestle with my psyche to unfold narratives I learned early about 'sissy driving' & to change unconscious habits. I know I won't be alone in having had the experience of learning an unhelpful driving style. The psychological messages we receive both individually & collectively are highly impactful & we seem to be slow to reframe the idea of driving sensibly & with consideration. I constantly see people driving with unfunctioning indicators. Perhaps it's time for some communication upskilling across the whole subject of using our roads. And by everyone who uses them, regardless of their transportation mode. We may find there are multiple responses that could be much more constructive & even, heaven for fend, remove some of the polarisation from the speed limit conversation.
After years of living in cycle dominant cities I find the open roads here quite terrifying as it seems that the major goal is to pass other cars even when it's obviously dangerous to do so. I think we need more traffic calming measures, better road design and more driving instructors (not parents or siblings) more & cheaper PT (to get people out of their cars) and better rules and regulations. Such as trucks stay in slow lane on motorways (that's a no brainer). There should be more defensive driving training and learner licences could involved a half day's training in how dangerous driving really is. Our road culture is not good and I also think we
require a law of vulnerability in terms of pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and those with mobility devices. We have so much to do but education about sharing the road would be a start. And as our track record shows, it's time to look at that now. Also time for the Minister of Transport is be held to account for his "infestation" remarks and lack of knowledge in terms of road safety.
I drove mindlessly as a youth - which I think is the default style after the initial cautiousness while learning has passed. We then sold our car before doing an OE, which was an eye opener. 30 years later I still do not own a car and so drive less than 1,000km annually. And always in a very aware / conscious manner.
Unfortunately our kiwi culture still equates cars with freedom. I just see it as siphon in your wallet.
Would actually pay to ban ICE car ads first…
Well look at that, two systems related responses & one individual values related one. The possibilities of addressing this issue in a nuanced way is boundless.
Agree in principle but it would be another blow to our already-beleaguered media.
I'm not so sure about that. They barely advertise in newspapers anymore, and it's only the petrol/diesel ones you'd ban. Encourage advertising of BEV.
Every time I see ICE I think of methamphetamine, much the same in Simeon Brown’s case.
I constantly see people driving with unfunctioning indicators - yes. Or functioning indicators that only seem to get switched on once the manoeuvre is already underway.
I was recently the passenger in an electric car. I was sat in the backseat and was on high alert for the entire journey as the driver was "playing" with the centre control panel the entire time. 😳
I commented that the screen was large and asked if ( implied that ) it might be causing a distraction.
The driver didn't take the hint. I found alternative transport home.
The screen was the size of an Ipad and the driver may as well have been on their phone - such was the level of distraction.
I did wonder how many people would pass their drivers test if they were doing this....?
I've had this experience too & was equally uncomfortable.
I wonder if the calculation as to rego cost should include the potential damage to other road users when it comes to the ACC component of it.
I agree absolutely. I actually think the whole rego system should be overhauled to take account of all road users’ safety and also things like emissions (including NO² to avoid the perverse “clean” diesel issues in Europe), weight, etc.
Unfortunately, the ANCAP system is extremely flawed because it allows gizmos to compensate for unsafe vehicle design (a Ford Ranger gets a 5 star rating!? 74% in vulnerable road user category) but it could be a starting point.
This is really insightful and something I think about often too. Your level of awareness in changing your approach to driving is really admirable and it made me want to write a comment back to you. Like you, I learned to drive in West Auckland and I had to drive everywhere to get around. Fast forward to my twenties, I moved to a smaller, more compact city and bought a bike. Despite never having cycled on a road, it soon became my (typically joyful despite zero infrastructure) way to get everywhere, however I was blown away at the aggression some drivers showed towards cyclists and the driving behaviours around someone whose only protection is a usually just a plastic helmet. Did they really want to find out what would happen if they knock me down? It made me think that driving must activate a constant low level fight/flight response while we do it, based on the potential for it to erupt into more animal kingdom-type behaviours when drivers feel threatened or encounter obstacles: screaming and shouting, tail gating, swerving, cutting others off, speeding… leaving their vehicles and physically attacking other drivers or even just vociferously opposing new infrastructure for pedestrians and cyclists if it means a transfer of the (public) space they need for their cars to other modes… You're absolutely right, driving a car is deeply embedded in our psyche, so much so that we don't seem to question it in the way that you admirably did. I think until we do, we will be stuck with the status quo of car-dominant cities and a road toll that keeps breaking Kiwi hearts.
The old brain reactions we see def will keep us in the status quo. I really do think the psychological aspect of our relationships to each other on the road are under-recognised & a rich vein worth investigating.
Yes drivers can be very aggressive towards cyclists - and (far less frequently but it does happen) the other way round.
Thank you, as always Bernard. Kaka readers, if they haven't yet, may want to see this article in the Int Guardian, describing a time bomb healthwise in NZ, and it pertains to several health items in the Kaka today. The context is of extreme acceptance in NZ relative to other advanced countries of vaping by both major parties still, while eg over 20% 18-24 yr olds regularly vape is important. https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/sep/08/vaping-damages-young-peoples-lungs-as-much-as-smoking-study-suggests
NB also cardiovascular and carcinogenic effects.
Size of government needs to grow - kiwis want to make sure their kids and grand kids stay in Aotearoa - sounds like Chippy has been listening kind to the Kaka!
My worry about Bishop's positioning of the need for 'bi-partisan' action on infrastructure is Labour (and the 'electable left' in general) continue to demonstrate they are perennially incapable of the same kind of "ratchetting" that the right shamelessly use. National will leverage Bishop's sympathetic call for infrastructure to plan decades of stupid, ROI-deficient roads, mines, and other PPP boondoggles, and then Labour will be too timid to just cancel them when they are next in power, trapping us in even more wasted decades.
If by bi-partisan it is "you agree with what I prioritise" then Labour should not sign up for it. Bi-partisan needs to happen after an honest discussion about what projects are to be the priority.
I have one to start with - re-introduce the i-Rex ferries.
These awful days I do not laugh out loud all that much...but a drunk kaka has made my morning. I was nearly dive-bombed by a drunk kereru having trouble gaining height after it fell out of a tree!!! But that photo is marvellous!!! Thank you and I so appreciate the information in your work.
Ha! Thanks Marian. I was hoping it would get a giggle.
Is it hope on my part, or am I dreaming, but the early signs are appearing of different Local Councils telling the Minister of Speeding that he's not correct about raising the speed limits everywhere. This will be the start. Eventually more and more Councils will assist the Government to understand what the "localism" they rabbited on about during the last election really means.
I read this with surprise in the article
Public consultation on the draft has closed and Brown says thousands of people had their say. “I think 65 per cent of people who submitted said they support the reversals,”.
Has the result of the submissions been publicised? I made a submission but have been waiting to see what the outcome was. Also, dodging the cost to local councils question is par for the course with this minister.
You’re right Garry. I feel a bit of a fightback brewing, especially after the PM’s trolling speech at the LGNZ conference.
A long way to go but Hipkins' interview on Tova was already more heartening than anything Labour came up with in the last campaign. Easier to do in opposition two years out from an election I suppose though...
Definitely this post needs to be seen by as many NZers as possible. Especially about the capacity for the govt to borrow for necessary infrastructure, for public transport, at lower rates than PP arrangements ( Transmission Gully an example). And the information about the lack of evidence for raising speed limits. Simeon Brown’s reasoning is bizarre.
I do remember Grant Robertson in the election debate with Nicola Willis say that any government spending under 35% to GDP was austerity. Maybe I understand this wrong but I thought he chellenged Nicola on 30% to GDP target. I thought he was an incredible Finance Minister.
Here’s Grant defending Labour’s push to get Govt/GDP back down under 30% again in Parliament in 2022.
“We are up around the 35 percent of GDP level—that is a similar level to what the National Government had when they were coming out of the Canterbury earthquakes and the global financial crisis. But we bring that back down again to around 30 percent of GDP by the end of the forecast period. Again, a careful and a balanced approach to making sure that we look after New Zealanders, we invest in addressing the big challenges that are facing us, but we also have a mind to the future generations and what debts we leave them.”
https://www.parliament.nz/mi/pb/hansard-debates/rhr/document/HansS_20220309_051510000/robertson-grant