Was it MMP’s fault?

MMP has been given some of the blame for the inability to kick Aaron Gilmore out of parliament.

Is that fair?

No.

Both list and electorate MPs can be sacked from their caucus and party but if they don’t resign they stay in parliament until the next election when voters give their verdict.

However, while a voters can ensure an MP doesn’t win an electorate they have no influence on where a candidate is on their party’s list. That means they can vote for someone else in the electorate but still find the person they rejected has got into parliament.

This is an aspect of the system on which many people submitted to the review of MMP, arguing that if an MP loses a seat, or contests it and fails to win it, s/he should not be able to enter parliament on the list.

I disagree with that.

Standing in an electorate ensures candidates face the voters and get to know the people whose support they are soliciting and learn about their concerns.

If they take it seriously, and given it’s the party vote which really counts they’d be stupid not to, they gain an understanding of the individuals, groups and communities on whom their policies will impact.

The goods ones don’t just stand in an electorate they stay in touch with it, working with and for the people in it. And failing once or twice doesn’t prevent later success.

Eric Roy* and Nicky Wagner, for example, failed to win electorates but got in on the list, worked hard, earned the support of the people and won Invercargill and Christchurch Central respectively.

Others like Chris Finlayson and Michael Woodhouse have stood in dark red seats they have little hope of winning, but even those who don’t share their political views would be hard pressed to criticise their performance as MPs and Ministers.

I have no doubt that standing in electorates has helped them in their work.

That not all list MPs who stand in seats perform well in parliament is not a reason to change the rules to prevent dual candidacy.

MMP is not my preferred electoral system but the advantages of dual candidacies outweigh the disadvantages.

One valid criticism of the system is that list MPs aren’t directly answerable to constituents. Dual candidacy at least means they have to front up to voters.

Good MPs will ensure they don’t squander the goodwill they earn by doing so by continuing to work in electorates whether or not they have any chance of winning them.

But to return to the original question of whether it’s MMP’s fault that Gilmore could have stayed in parliament had he not chosen to resign.

It’s not. But it is the system which enabled him to be there in the first place and that system has given less power to people in electorates and more to parties.

If parties get an electorate selection wrong, voters can ensure the candidate doesn’t get into parliament. They can’t do that with an individual list MP.

* Eric first entered parliament in 1993 by winning the seat of Ararua which disappeared when MMP was introduced. He stood unsuccessfully for Invercargill twice but stayed in parliament as a list MP. He missed out on the electorate and list in 2002 but won the seat in 2005.

What will they be doing?

Question of the day:

Apropos of which is the quote of the day:

Rural round-up

New vehicle rules will reduce cost for rural sector:

New rules for agricultural vehicles will reduce compliance costs while maintaining safety standards, says Associate Transport Minister Michael Woodhouse.

Mr Woodhouse has signed changes to Land Transport (Driver Licensing) Rule 1999 and seven other Land Transport Rules that will offer agricultural vehicle owners improved compliance and greater operational flexibility from 1 June 2013.

“This Government recognises that the primary sector remains the powerhouse of New Zealand’s economy and we want to remove unnecessary costs and red tape,” says Mr Woodhouse.

The Ministry of Transport estimates that changes will result in a net benefit of $51 million over 25 years. . .

Great white butterfly not pretty - RivettingKate Taylor:

Federated Farmers has put out a warning about a significant new pest threat – the great white butterfly.

What is it?

It is a significant pest of brassica vegetable crops. Its caterpillars feed voraciously on host plants reducing them to a skeleton. In New Zealand, it poses a major threat to commercial and animal forage brassica vegetable crops.  It could also have serious consequences for the survival of many of New Zealand’s 79 native cress species. . .

86% vote supports forest levy:

A referendum of forest growers has shown strong support for a levy on harvested forest products.

“We have been given the thumbs-up to introduce a funding system that will provide greater certainty, equity and commitment for activities that benefit all growers, such as research, promotion and forest health,” says Forest Growers Levy Trust chair Geoff Thompson.

“At this stage, we expect the levy to be introduced on 1 January 2014.” . . .

Building innovation into Marlborough’s food and beverage sector:

The untapped potential of Marlborough’s primary sector, if cleverly exploited, could take this region out in front of the field as an export earner according to a report prepared for the Marlborough Research Centre (MRC).

The research, examining the prospects for innovation with existing primary products, suggests that these industries could be transformed, said MRC chief executive Gerald Hope.

“There’s enormous scope for products which are health and performance oriented. It’s about turning smart ideas and clever science into new products and processes which will meet the expectations of the future,” said Mr Hope. . .

After A Hot, Dry Summer Green Beans Up There With Tomatoes And Wine:

Wattie’s Canterbury green bean crop has, like its sister crop of tomatoes in Hastings, relished the benefits of the country’s hot, dry summer, which has also been experienced by the wine industry.

Harvesting and processing of the beans is scheduled to finish this week, and Wattie’s South Island Agricultural Manager Mark Daniels reports excellent yields and blemish-free quality.

“Our bean crop has thrived under the hot dry conditions and we are finishing slightly ahead of schedule compared with recent years. . .

GIMBLETT GRAVELS – the best of both worlds?:

Is it possible to make world class wines from Syrah and Bordeaux varietals grown in the same area?

In France, you would have to drive almost 500km between Bordeaux and the Northern Rhone. Yet in Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand, GIMBLETT GRAVELS wines from these grape varieties – growing, literally, side by side in an area less than 800 hectares (2000 acres) – continue to receive acclaim from leading international wine critics.

Each year, the Gimblett Gravels Winegrowers Association (GGWA) releases to key wine influencers a limited number of their Annual Vintage Selection, comprising an independent selection of the members’ red wines that best represent the given vintage. The current 2010 vintage, selected by Andrew Caillard MW, comprises nine blended reds (from Bordeaux varieties) and three Syrah’s. . .

Kaye, Woodhouse in, Heatley, Wilkinson out, Smith back, Carter Speaker

Prime Minister John Key has announced a bigger Cabinet reshuffle than anticipated:

Mr Key confirmed the Government’s nominee for Speaker to replace the departing Lockwood Smith will be long-serving National MP and Cabinet Minister David Carter.

“I’m pleased to announce David Carter as the Government’s nominee for Speaker and I’d like to thank him for his service as a Minister,” Mr Key says.

“I have taken the opportunity presented by the change of Speaker to look at the Cabinet line-up as a whole, in the context of the Government’s priorities.

“As we begin a new year I am optimistic about the progress we can make, while being mindful of the challenges created, in particular, by the uncertain international economic environment.

“New Zealanders expect their elected Government to get on, and not only do what it has promised to do, but to do so with a sense of urgency and purpose, with real energy and new thinking along the way.

“It is in this context I have decided to make changes to the Ministry.”

Two other Ministers will also be leaving Cabinet on 29 January – Phil Heatley and Kate Wilkinson.

“Phil and Kate have both made a real contribution to the Government in their four years as Ministers and I’d like to thank them for that,” Mr Key says.

“I have made the judgement that it is time for fresh energy and ideas, and for other members of our talented 59-strong caucus to be given an opportunity.”

Returning to Cabinet is Nick Smith, who will take on the Housing and Conservation portfolios. Mr Key says Dr Smith will bring his trademark energy to housing market and social housing issues, which are of real public interest.

“I have also asked Social Development Minister Paula Bennett to work with Nick as Associate Housing Minister, reflecting the strong links between these two areas. Tariana Turia will remain as Associate Minister and a part of that housing team.”

Auckland Central MP Nikki Kaye will be appointed to Cabinet where she will become Minister for Food Safety, Youth Affairs and Civil Defence. She will also be Associate Education Minister, reflecting her work as Chair of the Education select committee.

Senior Whip Michael Woodhouse will be the third new Minister, serving outside Cabinet as Immigration and Veterans Affairs’ Minister as well as Associate Transport Minister.

“I’d like to congratulate Nikki and Michael on their promotions, which are both well deserved,” Mr Key says.

The remaining position inside Cabinet will be filled by Simon Bridges, who will be promoted from outside Cabinet and take on the Labour and Energy and Resources portfolios.

“Simon has had a very good first year as a Minister and is ready to step up and take on more responsibility,” Mr Key says.

Nathan Guy will pick up the Primary Industries portfolio to be vacated by David Carter, with Jo Goodhew assisting him as Associate Minister.

Mr Key says Chris Tremain will be appointed as Local Government Minister and is well placed to work with the sector on the Government’s well-advanced reforms.

Mr Key says he had also decided to make a change in relation to Novopay.

“I share the concerns of teachers and principals at continuing problems in the operation of Novopay, and fixing this as quickly as possible is a priority,” he says.

“A fresh set of eyes is needed and I have asked Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce to take on this responsibility.”

The change will be done through a transfer of responsibility to Mr Joyce under section 7 of the Constitution Act.

“Getting Novopay working as it should may take some time, given what appears to be the systemic issues involved. I can assure teachers that we want to get Novopay sorted as soon as possible.

“With this change and Nikki Kaye’s appointment, there is no need for Mr Foss to remain as Associate Education Minister. I have instead asked him to pick up the role of Minister of Consumer Affairs, which will link in with his existing responsibilities as Commerce Minister.”

Mr Key says there are also two notable promotions in terms of Ministerial rankings in the Cabinet changes – with Jonathan Coleman rising to 10, and Amy Adams to 15.

The resignations of Mr Carter, Mr Heatley and Ms Wilkinson will take effect on 29 January, and all the other changes will take effect on Thursday 31 January, when the Governor-General appoints the new Ministers, and the necessary paperwork will have been completed.

Mr Key says it is anticipated that a new Senior Whip will be elected at National’s first caucus meeting of the year on 29 January 2013.

“This refreshed Ministerial team is ready to continue the Government’s focus on its four key priorities for this term – responsibly managing the Government’s finances, building a more competitive and productive economy, delivering better public services within fiscal restraints, and supporting the rebuilding of Christchurch,” Mr Key says.

“I will have more to say about how we intend to meet these priorities in coming days.”

The promotion of David Carter to speaker and Nick Smith’s reinstatement aren’t a surprise.

The other changes are unexpected but refreshment is a good.

Nikki Kaye and Michael Woodhouse have earned respect as chair of the Education Select Committee and Senior Whip respectively.

Promotions always cause disappointment for those who miss out but these two are deserved.

Building in Fantasyland

Questions are being raised about the practicality of Labour’s plan to build 100,000 houses for around $300,000.

Acting Minister of Finance Steven Joyce explains some of the flaws in the proposal:

One of the big issues in Auckland is the availability and price of land. The median cost of an Auckland section is nearly $320,000, which is around 60 percent of the cost of the house, and that compares with around 40 percent in the rest of New Zealand. That is why the Government is putting a big emphasis on land section availability in our biggest city. I have heard there are some people who believe there are thousands of sections around Auckland available for around $50,000, apparently. That is news to most people. I actually suspect we would have to zone all the land to Taupō as residential before we would get to that sort of price.

John Hayes: Has he received any other proposals on housing affordability?

Hon STEVEN JOYCE: I have received a proposal that would take $1.5 billion of borrowed money, magically build $30 billion worth of houses with it, provide those houses to people at low interest rates but apparently at no cost to the Government, and then get the $1.5 billion straight back again. Under this particular “back of the envelope” plan, apparently, two-thirds of these houses will be built in Auckland on all those widely available sections that sell for $50,000. A very esteemed colleague of mine has referred to this plan as Fantasy land.

Section prices in Fantasy land must be considerably cheaper than those in Auckland.

However, the Prime Minister has found somewhere else it would be possible to build a less expensive house:

Michael Woodhouse: Has he heard of any reports that would encourage the building of at least one house for $300,000?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I have. I have seen the reports that there would be interest to build one house for $300,000 in Lumsden. The advice I have had is that it is possible to build a house for $300,000 in Lumsden. That house would contain David Cunliffe and it would be called the doghouse.

I suspect it would be possible to build a house for less than that in Lumsden, and of a much higher standard than the average doghouse.

Labour is getting its policies from . . . ?

Those of us who’ve wondered where Labour is getting its policies from have an answer:

David Shearer: Is the Prime Minister aware that Kurdistan recently postponed selling its state-owned mobile network, Russia recently cancelled three State privatisations, Hungary is preparing to renationalise a gas company, and Croatia has cancelled selling off its State bank?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: No, but now it is all starting to become clear where Labour is getting its economic policies from!

Those who wonder why the government wants to sell minority shares in a few energy companies also got an answer:

Michael Woodhouse: Why is it important that the share offer programme goes ahead?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: It is important, firstly, because the Government can use the proceeds of the share offer to invest in new public infrastructure without having to borrow so much to do so. This is exactly the same situation as in 2005 when the previous Government took $600 million from the sale of publicly owned asset Southern Hydro and used it to invest in roads. The share offer also gives New Zealand savers the opportunity to invest either directly or indirectly in big New Zealand companies, and being publicly listed will be good for the companies themselves. . . 

I do believe bringing these companies to the market through the mixed-ownership model is a good, sound economic approach, and actually I think it will deliver a better result for New Zealand without having to borrow more money. . .

Those who wonder who will benefit from the investment got an answer too:

David Shearer: Is it his aim in selling off assets to maximise return to the New Zealand taxpayer or, given that the value of shares is likely to slump as result of the sales, is it to give enormous bargains to those buyers rich enough to buy shares?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The member will be aware, because of the Securities Act, that I cannot offer a comment on whether the share sales are likely to be successful or not. What I can say is that if one goes and looks at TradeMe as an example, they will see it was brought to the market under what can really only be described as the mixed-ownership model, and that has proven to be very successful. I think if one also looks at the number of KiwiSaver accounts, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund, the other pension funds in New Zealand, and mums and dads looking for investments, they will find those to be attractive investments. . .

And those wondering about alternatives to the partial sales also got an answer:

Michael Woodhouse: What reports has he seen on any alternative approaches to paying for new public infrastructure?

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I am aware of a couple of approaches. One is simply to go out there and print money in the misguided belief it will make a country wealthy. Today I have with me actually a $500 million Zimbabwean note. Members might be interested to know that when this was issued in May 2008, you needed 100 of these to buy—

. . .

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: As I say, one option is to print money, and you would have needed 100 of these when it was printed, 100 $500 million notes, to buy an egg—poached, boiled, fried, scrambled, or any other way. The other option—

. . .

Rt Hon JOHN KEY: The second approach I have seen is to go out and borrow $5 billion to $7 billion, at a time when countries around the world are trying to reduce their debt. We know that that policy belongs to the big spending, big promising Labour Party.

We’ve sold non-core assets several times to allow us to reduce debt or reinvest in core assets. It’s normal and sensible business practice in countries with free markets.

The concept might be harder to grasp for those who get their policies and business practices from places still struggling from the aftermath of communism.

 

 

MP challenges city to say yes

Dunedin has joined some other councils in calling moratorium on fracking – hydraulic fracturing.

National MP Michael Woodhouse, has responded by challenging the city to say yes.

He’s calling on Dunedin’s city leaders to publicly state their support for oil and gas exploration as long as environmental risks can be managed.

Speaking in yesterday’s General Debate he compared the national GDP per capita of $46,000 with that of Taranaki where the GDP per capita is $88,000.

In that province agriculture, tourism and oil and gas exploration co-exist. The latter adds significantly to the economic and social benefits without environmental problems.

Problem drinking not confined to young

When the idea of a split age for the purchase of alcohol was first mooted I thought it was a good idea.

That would allow people to drink in licensed premises when they were 18 but not purchase alcohol to drink elsewhere until they were 20.

The aim is to address the problem of binge drinking and other problems associated with too much alcohol.

But when I thought about it more I realised that splitting the age is treating a symptom not the problem – and the problem isn’t confined to the young.

Teenager Verity Johnson writes:

If we actually want to reduce teenage binge drinking, we need to change what society demands. We need to show that drinking responsibly is the way to go. After all, drinking is going to happen.

Moderating it is the challenge.

National MP Michael Woodhouse has issued a challenge to young people who are advocating for him to vote to leave the purchase age at 18:

Here’s what will definitely get me voting 18/18:

• if young people actively promote the idea getting trashed is dumb, in the same way that smoking or drink-driving is dumb
• that student organisations pass remits promoting moderation, and rules expelling people from organisations (after say a three strikes process) for excessive drinking; messages saying alcohol consumption is normal – excessive consumption isn’t
• messages that the taxpayer is entitled to expect its money given to students is not thrown up against the wall of the Cook.

All of these are very good points but the first doesn’t apply only to young people and the message that excessive consumption isn’t normal needs to be spread far more widely than youth organisations. 

A lot of people who should be old enough to know better also get trashed and organisations of older people condone or even encourage excessive drinking.

It’s absolutely no use telling young people to do as we say if older people aren’t doing it too.

Excessive drinking and the problems it causes aren’t acceptable at any age.

Tinkering with the purchase age or price of alcohol won’t change the culture which is the only way to properly address problem drinking.

Equality or prosperity?

The quote in the previous post was from a Critic interview with National’s senior whip and Dunedin-based MP and Dunedin North MP David Clark.

Among the questions asked by interviewer, Callum Fredric was:

In a hypothetical society, which society would you prefer: One where everyone earns $50,000 per year; or one where half the people earn $70,000 and the other half earns $300,000?

In the discussion that followed Michael said:

. . .  It’s a really straightforward question, with a really straightforward answer. Either you agree with the proposition that as long as you’re better off, it’s okay for other people to be even more better off in society, all other things being equal. . .

The question was about income inequality. All other things being equal, would a society where everybody is better off but there is greater income inequality be a better society than one where everyone is equally impoverished? I’m going to quote my new colleague Dr Jian Yang who grew up in china. And in his maiden speech said by 1968 when he was 6 years old, china under Mao Zedong had reached its utopia. Everyone was equally impoverished, and on his tenth birthday his present was two eggs for breakfast. So we can go to the statistics that David loves quoting and say that according to your argument, we would be better off living in Afghanistan or the Czech republic than we would be in NZ and I simply reject that proposition. What’s important is the issue of social mobility. So fair pay for work.

The left are spending a lot of energy on inequality but it’s not whether everyone has enough is far more important than whether some people have more.

Prosperity for everyone even if it’s unequal is far better than everyone being equally poor.

 

 

 

Can’t legislate culture change

Quote of the day:

… if we can’t agree that getting really pissed, and throwing up and falling down is not cool, then no amount of law change in Wellington is going to change that. Michael Woodhouse

He’s right. You can’t legislate a change in culture.

Parliament could tighten drinking laws and increase the tax on alcohol but that won’t change the belief among some people that getting drunk is normal and acceptable.

 

Woodhouse & Upston Nats new whips

Dunedin list MP Michael Woodhouse is National’s new senior Whip and Taupo MP Louise Upston is the new Junior Whip.

This makes Michael the highest ranked National MP ever to come from Dunedin.

There have been three previous National Party MPs in the city - the late Sir James Barnes served two terms from the      snap 1951 election until 1957, the late Richard Walls served one term in 1975-78, and Katherine Rich was a list MP from  1999 until 2008 when she retired from politics.

   Both Michael and Louise entered parliament in 2008.

Lockwood Smith has been elected unopposed as Speaker.

He is a candidate for the best Speaker in recent years, having done a lot to raise the standard of behaviour in parliament.

Some of his National party colleagues might think he went too far in holding ministers to account in a far stricter fashion than Labour ministers were held in the previous governments.

Turning blue – or at least purple

One of National’s active supporters in Dunedin reckons the city isn’t so much red as purple.

The cover of the give-away paper DScene and story on the election result – National winning the party vote in Dunedin South and nearly doing it in Dunedin North - backs her up:

One of the benefits of MMP has been the presence of a National MP in the city.

Former MP Katherine Rich helped raise the party’s profile and present its softer side. She was succeeded in Dunedin North by Michael Woodhouse who has made an impressive start to his parliamentary career and worked hard for the people of city.

Conway Powell started turning the tide towards National in Dunedin South in 2005, built on that in 2008 and this year’s candidate Joanne Hayes carried on to win the party vote.

Boundary changes which included more rural areas and lifestyle blocks in the electorate, and demographic changes have helped cement the base. But it takes dedicated candidates and supporters to build on that and turn it into more votes.

There were special circumstances this time. It wasn’t just the National vote which went up, the Green vote did too and Labour’s went down.

But the result is an encouraging indication that the city could be changing from red to purple, though not blue – yet.

False complaint backfires

What is believed to have been a politically motivated complaint against the National Party’s human hoardings team backfired when it resulted in a story and photo in the ODT.

A complaint to Dunedin police yesterday morning about the potential hazard posed to drivers from these National Party hoarding carriers appeared to be politically motivated, Senior Sergeant Mel Aitken said.

The complainant had been on foot, not driving, she said . . . 

Dunedin North National candidate Michael Woodhouse also suspected the complaint was politically motivated, as the supporters had carried out the promotion responsibly.

He believed Dunedin Labour was concerned by the “visibility” and energy of National’s Dunedin election campaign.

Dunedin is supposed to be a red city.

A dedicated group of National Party members, supporting Michael and Dunedin South candidate Joanne Hayes, are doing their best to turn it blue as this photo of the “Hayes stack” shows:

The human hoardings are part of the strategy and thanks to the false complaint they’ve been seen not just by passers-by but everyone who reads the ODT.

Meanwhile in the real world

It is possible that Opposition leader Phil Goff did more than one thing yesterday but all we – at least the media and other political tragics – know is that he engaged in a public argument with the head of the SIS.

Meanwhile in the real world Prime Minister John Key had got up at about 5am to do some work before catching a flight to Timaru where he was met by Waitaki MP Jacqui Dean and whisked off to Geraldine for a meeting with pupils and the public at the high school.

When Goff was in the Waitaki electorate a few weeks ago, he had a crayfish lunch at Fleur’s. Jacqui and her team decided that enabling as many people as possible to meet John was more important than his dining pleasure. I provided a picnic for the entourage which they ate in their cars between Geraldine and Waimate High School where another meeting with pupils and public had been scheduled.

This visit was supposed to take only half an hour, but getting the PM away from the pupils who lined up to shake his hand, get photos and autographs almost doubled that. This had been taken into account in planning so more than enough time had been allowed to drive between stops at the legal speed limit without causing too much delay to the itinerary.

Senior pupils from Oamaru’s three secondary schools were waiting for him at Waitaki Girls’ where he delivered his third speech of the day and answered questions.

Outside he stopped to greet pupils, pose for photos and took a mintue to launch Jacqui’s campaign.

A good-sized crowd was waiting for John at his next stop in Waikouaiti where he made his fourth speech of the day.

He went straight from there to a cocktail party jointly hosted by National’s Dunedin North MP Michael Woodhouse and Dunedin South candidate Jo Hayes.

Five speeches, meeting hundreds of people and driving more than 300 kilometres in a car which had to double as a lunch room and mobile-office made it a very big day. But I bet the PM enjoyed his day in the real world far more than the Opposition Leader enjoyed his in the media.

What’s fair?

Labour justifies policies of high taxation and redistribution as being “fair”.

But a question from Michael Woodhouse to Bill English shows that the income tax burden already falls on very few people:

2.MICHAEL WOODHOUSE (National) to the Minister of Finance: What progress has the Government made in making the tax system fairer?

Hon BILL ENGLISH (Minister of Finance): In Budget 2010 we recognised there were parts of the community who, over the past decade, have simply not paid their fair share of tax. The Government raised the effective tax rate on property with a number of different measures, including denying depreciation on long-life assets, tightened the eligibility for Working for Families so that those with high economic incomes could not use paper losses to qualify, and allocated $120 million to the Inland Revenue Department to better enforce the rules. These measures have been successful, and we have achieved a more balanced and fair tax system that supports growth and provides good incentives in the economy.

Michael Woodhouse: How does the tax system interact with income support, which the Government provides?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Income support and the tax system need to be seen together. We tax those who earn income at progressive rates, although 75 percent of taxpayers pay no more than 17.5c in the dollar now. We also support those on low and median incomes with dependent children. A single-income family with two children pays no net tax until their income reaches $50,000 a year. This year Treasury projects we will collect $26 billion of income tax. Net of tax we will pay about $12 billion in income support and another $8 billion for superannuation.

Michael Woodhouse: Which groups now pay most of the tax collected by the Government?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: Our tax and transfer system is highly redistributive, and the number of people paying income tax is surprisingly small. The lowest-income 43 percent of households currently receive more in income support than they pay in income tax. The 1.3 million households with incomes under $110,000 a year collectively pay no net tax—that is, their total income support payments match their combined income tax. The top 10 percent of households contribute over 70 percent of income tax, net of transfers—over 70 percent of income tax, net of transfers. This system is highly redistributive and we believe it is fair.

Michael Woodhouse: What steps has the Government taken to prevent the erosion of the tax base?

Hon BILL ENGLISH: When we became the Government we found a pretty chaotic tax system, where a lot of wealthier people were simply not paying their fair share of tax, so we set out to tighten the taxation of property, beef up enforcement by the Inland Revenue Department, and reduce widespread income-sheltering through trusts. The Inland Revenue Department did an exercise where it tabulated New Zealand’s 100 richest people, and found that over half of them were not paying the top personal tax rate. That is how badly the tax system was operating.

Kiwiblog has a chart which shows how many – and how few – New Zealanders are net taxpayers.

Labour’s justification for a capital gains tax is fairness, but given how few people pay income tax now the policy is really motivated by envy, as Mike Hosking put it

The only people who truly believe in more taxes, and more taxes at the top end, are the envious who want to chop the tall poppies and somehow see it as unfair that they don’t have what others do and the true lefties who argue income redistribution is good for a fair and just society. But they’re the ones who paused to tell you that by putting down their book on Marxism, the world has moved on from the Labour style tax approach.

This is a country built on graft, inspiration, risk taking and just a lot of ordinary people who want to rely on themselves and their skills to do well in life. They don’t like Governments picking their pockets in a needlessly overt fashion.

Hat tip Keeping Stock

Another Clark for Labour

Selwyn College warden David Clark has been selected as Labour’s candidate for Dunedin North.

He has previously worked as a Treasury analyst and as an adviser to Labour list MP David Parker, also of Dunedin.

 Big News points out that four of the candidates who contested the seat at the last election will be in parliament after the recess:  Pete Hodgson (Labour), Michael Woodhouse (National), Metiria Turei (Greens) and Hilary Calvert (Act).

Clark has been seleted because Hodgson is retiring, Dunedin North is bright red so the new candidate’s chances of becoming the next MP are high.

 Given Act’s performance, Calvert’s seat in parliament is more precarious.

Marching in spirit

Nearly 20 years ago I was among more than 13,000 North Otago people who marched through Oamaru to protest against the removal of surgical services from the local hospital.

That was more than half the population of the district and about the total population of the town and we were wrong.

There were very good clinical reasons for closing the hospital’s operating theatre. Increased specialisation and technological advances meant the hospital and its surgeon simply weren’t able to offer the modern, and often less invasive, surgical services available in Dunedin.

That was a local battle lost for clinical reasons. Now the whole of Otago and Southland is fighting a bigger battle with clinical support.

More than 1000 people gathered for a meeting in Dunedin Town Hall last night to support the retention of neurological services in the city’s hospital.  Many more thousands of people are marching as I type for the cause and will form a chain of support around the hospital at lunch time.

I can’t be with there but I’m marching with them in spirit.

The south’s four National MPs, Jacqui Dean, Bill English, Eric Roy and Michael Woodhouse,  sent a message of support to last night’s meeting.

Jacqui pointed out in a media release that recent heavy workloads for the Otago Rescue Helicopter Trust highlighted the need for the people of Otago and Southland to have access to neurosurgery services in Dunedin.

Last month the rescue trust experienced what was the busiest day in its 11-year history, when its’ helicopter conducted six rescue trips, over 1934km, including four to Wanaka, one to Dunstan Hospital and one to Ranfurly.

While none of the emergencies related to head injury, Mrs Dean said the call-outs highlighted how essential it was for there to be access to health services which could meet the ever-increasing needs of the Otago and, particularly, the Central Otago communities.

“When we have an emergency helicopter service that can make six rescue missions in one day, it sends a pretty clear message to me that ours is a region that needs access to health services as close at hand as possible.

“We have people living in these areas which at times can be quite isolated. We need to have health services in place to meet their demands and to do it in a time frame in which lives are saved – not lost.

“The majority of the rescue trust’s missions relate to accidents – that is the nature of the Central Otago region, with its adventure tourism, skifields and challenging roads.

“This, in my opinion, reinforces the need for neurosurgery services to remain in a centrally located position at Dunedin.

“A shift in neurosurgery services to Christchurch is only likely to jeapardise lives and negatively disadvantage the people of this region.”

A widely scattered population can’t expect to get specialist services in local secondary hospitals but providing there’s no clinical evidence to the contrary, the nearly 300,00 people in the south ought to be able to get most of them in our nearest tertiary hospital, Dunedin.

Credo Quia Absurdum Est has a report:

 which shows the agreement to have a single site for neurology for the Southland Island was taken by the Canterbury DHB to mean it would be based in Christchurch.  As such the CDHB has spent considerable time and resources focusing on that and ignoring the single service, two sites approach.

The report is here and in another post CQAE points out :

“That the recommended neurological service for the South Island is one service based in Christchurch, with a comprehensive Outreach programme.”

Hang on a minute.  Dunedin does outreach services, but how does Christchurch perform in that regard at the moment?

“Christchurch’s record on outreach is poor.  Christchurch does not provide outpatient clinics outside Christchurch, while Dunedin’s record is impressive.”

Canterbury DHB would no doubt be happy to have all South Island tertiary services in Christchurch and on purely financial grounds there may be a case for that.

However, patients are almost always better off if they can get the treatment they need closer to home providing it is clincially safe and in this case it is.

Dunedin clinicians are confident the neurological services can be provided safely. This is a turf war with the Canterbury DHB which should back down and take a South Island-wide view.

Conference reflections part 1

Too little sleep and lots of excitement is not  conducive to insightful or incisive posts so I’ll stick to reflections on the weekend’s highlights of  the National Party’s Mainland conference which was held in Oamaru’s beautiful Opera House.

Delegates were welcomed by Waitaki MP Jacqui Dean who was too modest to point out that she had led the project to restore and refurbish the building when she was on the District Council.

Waitaki mayor Alec Familton opened the conference with a lesson in history and politics in which he linked Liberal MP and Minister of Land, Sir John McKenzie, former National Prime Minister Sir John Marshall and our current PM John Key.

He applauded the government for policies which leave more of our money in our own pockets, a sentiment which I, as a ratepayer, heartily approve of in a mayor.

Environment Minister Nick Smith had been going to speak about water but in response to requests from delegates he tackled the more complex and controversial issue of the ETS  (a post on that will follow).

Invercargill MP Eric Roy spoke with knowledge and passion about the goal of a pest-free Stewart Island. It’s a challenge but the environmental and economic rewards would be huge.

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett’s speech included an outline on strategies to help people become independent.

She told of a man who had been unemployed for many years. He had poor literacy one of the consequences of which included lots of fines for driving without a licence because he couldn’t read and write well enough to get one. He was taught to read and write, got his drivers licence and a jog operating a forklift.

When his case manager went to check on him after the first week he liked his boos, was enjoying his work, and delighted to be earning $600 a week. When the case manager went back the following week he wasn’t so happy. He still enjoyed the work but thought the boss had lied to him because he hadn’t got the $600 he’d been promised. The case manager checked his pay slip and pointed out the difference between the $600 he’d been promised and what he got in his hand was tax.

The man mentioned his 19 year old son was looking for work too. When the case manager went back a couple of weeks later she asked if the son, who hadn’t got the job, was on a benefit.

The father said of course not, he wasn’t working to pay taxes to have his son sitting round on the dole.

MPs Katrina Shanks, Michael Woodhouse and Jo Goodhew spoke on leaky homes, ACC and reforms to Aged Care policy respectively then joined Paula for a social policy forum.

The remit requiring freedom campers to have self-contained loos passed unanimously. Matthew Littlewood of the Timaru Herald reports on that here).

Finance Minister Bill English, fresh from the Budget which has gained unprecedented levels of approval, including not only economic and political analysts but fashionistas too, shared some reactions.

Among these were: It’s not great but it’s not Greece and it’s okay not UK.

He also said it was better to tax less the things you want and tax more the things you don’t. that’s why the budget increased tax on consumption and lowered it on income.

Bill said New Zealanders seemed to be more resilient and independent in this recession than in the 1990s. Most people are handling the tough times and we are a more resilient country because we’re standing on our own feet.

Less tax = more pension

One of the criticisms about suggestions of reducing income tax and increasing GST has been the impact on people on low, fixed incomes such as pensioners.

The government has been quite clear that if GST increases pensions and other benefits will increase to compensate.

But a response by National’s Dunedin list MP Michael Woodhouse to a letter to the editor of the ODT (not online) points out that pensioners get more when income tax goes down anyway.

Pensions are based on 66% of the average after-tax income. If income taxes come down, the average after-tax income rises and so do pensions.

Hospices get more money

Otago Community Hospice has received an extra $65,000 in government funding.

National’s Dunedin-based MP Michael Woodhouse said hospices got an extra $15 million in this year’s Budget, and the extra for Dunedin came from the $1.3 million of that which was put aside for addressing difficulties in accessing palliative care services.

Mercy Hospice in Auckland, Franklin Hospice, Hospice South Auckland, Hospice Eastern Bay of Plenty, Waipuna Hospice in the Bay of Plenty, Rotorua Community Hospice, Taupo Hospice, Gisborne Palliative Care Trust, Nurse Maude Hospice in Canterbury, and the South Canterbury Hospice also received a portion of the $1.3 million.

That’s another campaign promise kept.