I agree Max there are real scale problems in the provinces and with some of the smaller cities. But often the solutions are so hamstrung by the funding restraints that everyone spends all their time trying to ensure they’re not the ‘loser’ relative to the neighbours. Govt could have solved this with big compensation payments to start with.
Good articles on Kainga Ora and Three Waters Bernard. I also fail to understand why the government is tied into low debt ceilings. Borrowing money is cheap (although inflationary pressures worldwide are gradually increasing interest rates) and now is the time to improve our poor infrastructure at a national level. If we as a country increased indebtedness from 30% to 40% we would still be at the low end internationally, but just think how the quality of life would be improved. One possible answer to the three waters conundrum would be to time-limit the new authorities to control the infrastructure for say 30 or 40 years and then hand back a good water system to the councils. Would that work finance-wise?
I also can't understand why JA refuses to call the cost of living increase a crisis. She could blame the crisis on overseas factors, and escape blame for it without tying herself and her government in knots.
But can you see JA standing up in parliament and agreeing there is a cost of living crisis? Our political structure requires contrariness, and on change of government a form of back-flipping. Labour was highlighting a housing crisis until elected in 2017; then it changed to no crisis and 'we're doing all we can' as the "crisis" becomes in National's eyes a "catastrophe".
Perhaps JA should reply to Luxon something like "We agree there is a cost of living crisis and whilst some of it is coming from overseas and cannot be affected by the government; there is internal inflation. So I'm asking Mr Luxon to contact his buddies who finance the National Party and tell them to stop making unwarranted and excessive price rises".
Hi Steve. But politicians don't have to hedge their bets like that, all she had to do was say that there was a cost of living crisis and it was imposed by overseas (ie beyond my government's control) factors.
But there is a local component to the inflation that isn't influenced by imports. And with the current level of wage rises that isn't what is driving the local inflation.
So that leaves opportunists hiding their increases in the overall price increases and giving themselves a bigger margin.
If she just blames overseas inflation she opens herself to accusations she is doing nothing about local inflation. And she can't be seen to be doing nothing.
The time limited control idea is something like the build, own, operate, transfer (BOOT) model, and a bit of contracting out public services. While it looks attractive there is the devil in the details of what is being delivered and how it is measured - what is a good water system? The incentives around managing 50-100 year life assets for 30-40 years raise risks to the ultimate owners about what gets transferred back at the end of term. I don't think anyone has managed this with effective sharing of risk and everyone satisfied (or equally dissatisfied) at the end. There is also the problem of the individual councils having to gear up to individually manage something that was an integrated system of planning and delivery, that would be even more complicated than splitting up supermarkets.
Interesting idea John P. No reason why it couldn’t work. Owners struggle to hand things over though once they own it. Hence the Councils fighting back…
Thanks Bernard for another in depth analysis of a complex problem preventing NZ from getting ahead. I don't suppose you could make this one publicly available so I could share with my wider family in the regions who have fallen into the privitisation looming/big debts a problem/don't give it to the Maori rabbit hole? My 80 year old Mum in Tauranga really enjoyed your 'how we got into the housing mess' deep dive. Made a good change in listening from TalkBack (sigh!).
Thanks Sonya. I’ve made it publicly available now. Feel free to mention again in future. I’m actually considering doing something a bit radical on openness. Depends on how all subscribers feel about it. Watch this space.
Why is Kainga Ora engaging in producing fluff pieces and marketing?
They know who their customers are. A cute feel-good email to everyone on their waiting list extolling what they are doing in Auckland doesn't do anything for someone in New Plymouth.
All these PR people should be doing no more than producing a monthly report full of detailed facts. Facts such as regional breakdowns of people on the waiting list, current housing in that region, new houses built, old houses sold, and maybe a few others. Let the Minister's office fluff up these facts.
And if that job doesn't require the number of PR people currently employed then maybe some can be let go.
Agree Steve, way too many comms people in govt. Perhaps communicating at the expense of action? In the past govt officials were allowed to talk to the media on their topics of expertise, not anymore. Playing the meat in the sandwich between a tenacious reporter and a dull witted comms person was the start of the end of my public service career.
I agree completely. Sadly, the PR industrial complex is strong with many government departments, where the CEOs and aspiring execs see the PR cost as one way to protect and accelerate their own trajectories upwards.
They will be charging us for air soon, ETS?. Shelter, food, commmunity and care, water were all available to all via the commons. This was stolen by the wealthy and removed from people. They’ve just gone too far using our labour and reproductive and unpaid labour while ruining the environment. Many distractions to hide the reality and now money is used to do the same. To benefit from these resources distribution of the resources should be transparent, consultative, non coercive, equitably shared and these systems have to reform (like tax) to ensure each person has these basic needs met at no cost until they can afford to contribute to the pool. With less Governmrnt not more. A Guaranteed Minimum income per person and child, plus an automatic mortgage right, public transport (there is none) and rights to food, energy and water are rights. It is Governments job to ensure this and that’s about all other than safety. They make it about everything else to save the wealthy from being tax on all their advantage gained. Also I’d rather get water tanks than be forced to pay to live anymore it’s becoming literally too expensive too work and live. I know that’s not new kids have been sold off and institutionalised as too expensive for centuries but it’s getting obvious and too widespread now with all the increases. I suggest a Muldoonlike price freeze until the reforms needed are undertaken and adequate services provided.
Government and institutions in NZ have a long history of doing things very badly or not at all and being entirely unaccountable either institutionally or individually. They need to be both but the two party system stymies this and they all keep their jobs, perks and incomes (power) no matter where they sit.
Such clarity on what has seemed to be a befuddled issue. 🙏 We really need to have that 'uncomfortable' conversation about population growth. How to require that from both parties will be the tricky bit. Anyone got any suggestions? My writing/typing hand has overuse syndrome..
Hey Bernard, have you actually read the He Puapua document? Or was it TLDR? Please address the taniwha in the whare (elephant in the room) that many are seeing but not talking about because we fear being cancelled and labelled racist. Is our fear that the 3 waters project being pushed through at present, without debate, is a genuine democratic concern? Of course water infrastructure can be improved but why involve wealthy non tax paying Iwi in co-governing 4 areas of NZ which apparently divides the land up along tribal boundaries? What is going on, Bernard? Some independent journalism as promised is required please.
I agree Max there are real scale problems in the provinces and with some of the smaller cities. But often the solutions are so hamstrung by the funding restraints that everyone spends all their time trying to ensure they’re not the ‘loser’ relative to the neighbours. Govt could have solved this with big compensation payments to start with.
Thanks for that explainer on the No Fly Zone, that cleared a lot up for me.
Good articles on Kainga Ora and Three Waters Bernard. I also fail to understand why the government is tied into low debt ceilings. Borrowing money is cheap (although inflationary pressures worldwide are gradually increasing interest rates) and now is the time to improve our poor infrastructure at a national level. If we as a country increased indebtedness from 30% to 40% we would still be at the low end internationally, but just think how the quality of life would be improved. One possible answer to the three waters conundrum would be to time-limit the new authorities to control the infrastructure for say 30 or 40 years and then hand back a good water system to the councils. Would that work finance-wise?
I also can't understand why JA refuses to call the cost of living increase a crisis. She could blame the crisis on overseas factors, and escape blame for it without tying herself and her government in knots.
Hi John
But can you see JA standing up in parliament and agreeing there is a cost of living crisis? Our political structure requires contrariness, and on change of government a form of back-flipping. Labour was highlighting a housing crisis until elected in 2017; then it changed to no crisis and 'we're doing all we can' as the "crisis" becomes in National's eyes a "catastrophe".
Perhaps JA should reply to Luxon something like "We agree there is a cost of living crisis and whilst some of it is coming from overseas and cannot be affected by the government; there is internal inflation. So I'm asking Mr Luxon to contact his buddies who finance the National Party and tell them to stop making unwarranted and excessive price rises".
Hi Steve. But politicians don't have to hedge their bets like that, all she had to do was say that there was a cost of living crisis and it was imposed by overseas (ie beyond my government's control) factors.
Hi John
But there is a local component to the inflation that isn't influenced by imports. And with the current level of wage rises that isn't what is driving the local inflation.
So that leaves opportunists hiding their increases in the overall price increases and giving themselves a bigger margin.
If she just blames overseas inflation she opens herself to accusations she is doing nothing about local inflation. And she can't be seen to be doing nothing.
Except it’s not.
Excellent Steve. Now that would have been an entertaining question time.
The time limited control idea is something like the build, own, operate, transfer (BOOT) model, and a bit of contracting out public services. While it looks attractive there is the devil in the details of what is being delivered and how it is measured - what is a good water system? The incentives around managing 50-100 year life assets for 30-40 years raise risks to the ultimate owners about what gets transferred back at the end of term. I don't think anyone has managed this with effective sharing of risk and everyone satisfied (or equally dissatisfied) at the end. There is also the problem of the individual councils having to gear up to individually manage something that was an integrated system of planning and delivery, that would be even more complicated than splitting up supermarkets.
Great points Andrew. Time horizons for investment decisions are tricky. I’d suggest the longer the better…
Interesting idea John P. No reason why it couldn’t work. Owners struggle to hand things over though once they own it. Hence the Councils fighting back…
Thanks Bernard for another in depth analysis of a complex problem preventing NZ from getting ahead. I don't suppose you could make this one publicly available so I could share with my wider family in the regions who have fallen into the privitisation looming/big debts a problem/don't give it to the Maori rabbit hole? My 80 year old Mum in Tauranga really enjoyed your 'how we got into the housing mess' deep dive. Made a good change in listening from TalkBack (sigh!).
Great idea, up here in Northland we get that same bullshit & it needs challenging. I'm with you re talk back.. Sigh
Thanks Sonya. I’ve made it publicly available now. Feel free to mention again in future. I’m actually considering doing something a bit radical on openness. Depends on how all subscribers feel about it. Watch this space.
Why is Kainga Ora engaging in producing fluff pieces and marketing?
They know who their customers are. A cute feel-good email to everyone on their waiting list extolling what they are doing in Auckland doesn't do anything for someone in New Plymouth.
All these PR people should be doing no more than producing a monthly report full of detailed facts. Facts such as regional breakdowns of people on the waiting list, current housing in that region, new houses built, old houses sold, and maybe a few others. Let the Minister's office fluff up these facts.
And if that job doesn't require the number of PR people currently employed then maybe some can be let go.
Agree Steve, way too many comms people in govt. Perhaps communicating at the expense of action? In the past govt officials were allowed to talk to the media on their topics of expertise, not anymore. Playing the meat in the sandwich between a tenacious reporter and a dull witted comms person was the start of the end of my public service career.
Yep. This is very good from Anna Fifield on this issue. https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/127682814/when-did-our-public-service-get-so-arrogant
I agree completely. Sadly, the PR industrial complex is strong with many government departments, where the CEOs and aspiring execs see the PR cost as one way to protect and accelerate their own trajectories upwards.
They will be charging us for air soon, ETS?. Shelter, food, commmunity and care, water were all available to all via the commons. This was stolen by the wealthy and removed from people. They’ve just gone too far using our labour and reproductive and unpaid labour while ruining the environment. Many distractions to hide the reality and now money is used to do the same. To benefit from these resources distribution of the resources should be transparent, consultative, non coercive, equitably shared and these systems have to reform (like tax) to ensure each person has these basic needs met at no cost until they can afford to contribute to the pool. With less Governmrnt not more. A Guaranteed Minimum income per person and child, plus an automatic mortgage right, public transport (there is none) and rights to food, energy and water are rights. It is Governments job to ensure this and that’s about all other than safety. They make it about everything else to save the wealthy from being tax on all their advantage gained. Also I’d rather get water tanks than be forced to pay to live anymore it’s becoming literally too expensive too work and live. I know that’s not new kids have been sold off and institutionalised as too expensive for centuries but it’s getting obvious and too widespread now with all the increases. I suggest a Muldoonlike price freeze until the reforms needed are undertaken and adequate services provided.
Government and institutions in NZ have a long history of doing things very badly or not at all and being entirely unaccountable either institutionally or individually. They need to be both but the two party system stymies this and they all keep their jobs, perks and incomes (power) no matter where they sit.
Such clarity on what has seemed to be a befuddled issue. 🙏 We really need to have that 'uncomfortable' conversation about population growth. How to require that from both parties will be the tricky bit. Anyone got any suggestions? My writing/typing hand has overuse syndrome..
Yep. Know the feeling. Feel free to share this one. It’s open now.
Hey Bernard, have you actually read the He Puapua document? Or was it TLDR? Please address the taniwha in the whare (elephant in the room) that many are seeing but not talking about because we fear being cancelled and labelled racist. Is our fear that the 3 waters project being pushed through at present, without debate, is a genuine democratic concern? Of course water infrastructure can be improved but why involve wealthy non tax paying Iwi in co-governing 4 areas of NZ which apparently divides the land up along tribal boundaries? What is going on, Bernard? Some independent journalism as promised is required please.