News Releases
Lowering the drink-drive limit is popular - why not do it?
28/07/10 15:43
“This government is so desperate to be liked it’ll make policy turns on anything unpopular, from Kiwibank and mining to foreign ownership of our land. So why won’t they follow the lead of 70% of New Zealanders who want to see the drink-drive limit lowered?” says MP for Wigram Jim Anderton.
In Parliament yesterday Jim Anderton criticised Transport Minister Steven Joyce for refusing to lower the drink-drive limit to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, in line with most other OECD countries like Australia.
At the moment the limit is 80mg. That is about 80% of a bottle of wine for an average man and about 60% of a bottle for an average woman, over a two hour period.
The URM poll shows that 70% of New Zealanders support lowering the drink-drive limit. Another poll on TVNZ’s Close Up program last night found that 68% favoured lowering the limit.
“The truth is the alcohol lobby has got to John Key’s government and it has’t got the guts to do what’s right.”
Jim Anderton asked Steven Joyce how he could reconcile his comments last year that the existing drink-driving limit was ‘ridiculous’ with his decision this week to spend two more years researching the ‘ridiculous’ limit.
The Motor Trade Association said yesterday that it's surprised that the government needs a further two years of research. Our level is already high by international standards, and alcohol is recognised as a significant contributor to New Zealand's high road toll.
The Ministry of Transport has estimated that reducing the limit could save up to 33 lives, prevent as many as 680 injuries, and save up to $238 million every year.
“We don’t need more research. We know that people are able to drive in this country while clinically intoxicated. That’s not good enough. What we need now is urgent action.
“John Key’s government has shoved the issue in the too hard basket for reasons it is difficult to fathom,” says Jim Anderton
In Parliament yesterday Jim Anderton criticised Transport Minister Steven Joyce for refusing to lower the drink-drive limit to 50mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood, in line with most other OECD countries like Australia.
At the moment the limit is 80mg. That is about 80% of a bottle of wine for an average man and about 60% of a bottle for an average woman, over a two hour period.
The URM poll shows that 70% of New Zealanders support lowering the drink-drive limit. Another poll on TVNZ’s Close Up program last night found that 68% favoured lowering the limit.
“The truth is the alcohol lobby has got to John Key’s government and it has’t got the guts to do what’s right.”
Jim Anderton asked Steven Joyce how he could reconcile his comments last year that the existing drink-driving limit was ‘ridiculous’ with his decision this week to spend two more years researching the ‘ridiculous’ limit.
The Motor Trade Association said yesterday that it's surprised that the government needs a further two years of research. Our level is already high by international standards, and alcohol is recognised as a significant contributor to New Zealand's high road toll.
The Ministry of Transport has estimated that reducing the limit could save up to 33 lives, prevent as many as 680 injuries, and save up to $238 million every year.
“We don’t need more research. We know that people are able to drive in this country while clinically intoxicated. That’s not good enough. What we need now is urgent action.
“John Key’s government has shoved the issue in the too hard basket for reasons it is difficult to fathom,” says Jim Anderton
0 Comments
Anderton hands over agriculture portfolio
21/07/10 12:57
MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader, Jim Anderton, today announced he is handing over the role of opposition agriculture spokesperson.
“I want to give someone else the opportunity to get up to speed before next year’s election, given that I won’t be standing again,” Jim Anderton said.
“In my time remaining as an MP, I have decided to prioritise workable models for affordable dental treatment and the reform of alcohol legislation.”
The Progressive Party campaigned for affordable dental treatment in the 2008 election. Jim Anderton has also been an active spokesperson for the +5 Solution to alcohol reform which involves increasing the purchase age to 20 years and curbing the sale and marketing of alcohol.
Jim Anderton was Minister of Agriculture and Forestry from 2005 to 2008 under the Labour-Progressive government. He is seen as responsible for putting the farming sector back at the centre of the government’s economic strategy after it had been demoted to a ‘sunset industry’ by former governments.
He created the Fast Forward Fund for the primary industry sector which saw a $700 million research and development fund established which was planned to grow to $2000 million over ten years. The private sector was to match government funding $ for $ and investment interest earned would build the total fund to around $2000 million.
John Key’s National government got rid of the Fast Forward Fund as well as tax credits for businesses investing in R&D. That was a loss of over $2.5 billion for the productive, export earning sectors of the New Zealand economy.
“John Key hardly mentions agriculture. But if he thinks he can grow the New Zealand economy while ignoring the farming sector and by building cycle ways he’s dreaming
“I will continue to advocate for agricultural issues,” Jim Anderton said.
“I want to give someone else the opportunity to get up to speed before next year’s election, given that I won’t be standing again,” Jim Anderton said.
“In my time remaining as an MP, I have decided to prioritise workable models for affordable dental treatment and the reform of alcohol legislation.”
The Progressive Party campaigned for affordable dental treatment in the 2008 election. Jim Anderton has also been an active spokesperson for the +5 Solution to alcohol reform which involves increasing the purchase age to 20 years and curbing the sale and marketing of alcohol.
Jim Anderton was Minister of Agriculture and Forestry from 2005 to 2008 under the Labour-Progressive government. He is seen as responsible for putting the farming sector back at the centre of the government’s economic strategy after it had been demoted to a ‘sunset industry’ by former governments.
He created the Fast Forward Fund for the primary industry sector which saw a $700 million research and development fund established which was planned to grow to $2000 million over ten years. The private sector was to match government funding $ for $ and investment interest earned would build the total fund to around $2000 million.
John Key’s National government got rid of the Fast Forward Fund as well as tax credits for businesses investing in R&D. That was a loss of over $2.5 billion for the productive, export earning sectors of the New Zealand economy.
“John Key hardly mentions agriculture. But if he thinks he can grow the New Zealand economy while ignoring the farming sector and by building cycle ways he’s dreaming
“I will continue to advocate for agricultural issues,” Jim Anderton said.
Progressive Party Update
27/06/10 15:08
The Progressive Party has been re-registered as a political party with the Electoral Commission after proving that it has a minimum of five hundred paying members.
Party activists and members continue to work closely with the Labour Party, both on the ground and in parliament.
“We remain focused on key policy issues like affordable dental health care for all New Zealanders, and on challenging the government not to sell Kiwibank,” says Jim Anderton.
The Party will continue to support its members who are seeking election both at the up-coming local body elections and the general election next year.
Party activists and members continue to work closely with the Labour Party, both on the ground and in parliament.
“We remain focused on key policy issues like affordable dental health care for all New Zealanders, and on challenging the government not to sell Kiwibank,” says Jim Anderton.
The Party will continue to support its members who are seeking election both at the up-coming local body elections and the general election next year.
Nats back to weasel words on Kiwibank
09/06/10 18:11
“Is Steven Joyce planning a leadership coup? Only days after John Key backed down and clarified that Kiwibank will never be sold while he’s Prime Minister, Steven Joyce announced this morning that if he’s going to sell it, he’ll tell you in time for the next election,” says Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“Who’s he going to tell? John Key or the country?”
John Key was forced to rule out a sale of Kiwibank on Friday after more than a week of confusion following finance minister Bill English’s post-budget comments that Kiwibank could be up for sale in time for the next election.
Steven Joyce went head to head with Labour’s Darren Hughes on Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hoskings breakfast show this morning.
When asked about Kiwibank he said that from his point of view “we’ve said we won’t change anything, and if we did we’d go to the country.”
“That might be his point of view, but it contradicts John Key’s latest point of view. Although if you take Mr Key’s ‘point of view’ from five days ago, then you’d have agreement between Mr Joyce’s point of view today and Mr Key’s point then. Of course Bill English has his own point of view. He wants to sell. Then there’s National MP Nathan Guy’s point of view - he signed a pledge that he would never support or initiate the sale of Kiwibank.”
“That’s a lot of points of view. Who should we be listening to now?” says Jim Anderton.
“One thing is crystal clear. The National party are not united on this issue. The ‘rat-pack’ want to sell, doesn’t matter what John Key says,” says Jim Anderton.
Steven Joyce also said when pushed further about Kiwibank “the reality is that nothing’s changed; we haven’t even asked for any work to be done, but if we do it’ll be in time for the next election.”
“Who can honestly believe John Key’s promise never to sell Kiwibank now?” says Jim Anderton.
“Who’s he going to tell? John Key or the country?”
John Key was forced to rule out a sale of Kiwibank on Friday after more than a week of confusion following finance minister Bill English’s post-budget comments that Kiwibank could be up for sale in time for the next election.
Steven Joyce went head to head with Labour’s Darren Hughes on Newstalk ZB’s Mike Hoskings breakfast show this morning.
When asked about Kiwibank he said that from his point of view “we’ve said we won’t change anything, and if we did we’d go to the country.”
“That might be his point of view, but it contradicts John Key’s latest point of view. Although if you take Mr Key’s ‘point of view’ from five days ago, then you’d have agreement between Mr Joyce’s point of view today and Mr Key’s point then. Of course Bill English has his own point of view. He wants to sell. Then there’s National MP Nathan Guy’s point of view - he signed a pledge that he would never support or initiate the sale of Kiwibank.”
“That’s a lot of points of view. Who should we be listening to now?” says Jim Anderton.
“One thing is crystal clear. The National party are not united on this issue. The ‘rat-pack’ want to sell, doesn’t matter what John Key says,” says Jim Anderton.
Steven Joyce also said when pushed further about Kiwibank “the reality is that nothing’s changed; we haven’t even asked for any work to be done, but if we do it’ll be in time for the next election.”
“Who can honestly believe John Key’s promise never to sell Kiwibank now?” says Jim Anderton.
Now NZ Post on the block
08/06/10 16:28
Desperation to sell something or anything is the only way to explain the prime ministers’ declaration that Kiwibank won’t be sold but NZ Post might be, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“The Prime Minister is now once again saying Kiwibank won’t be sold while he is leader.
He has made that declaration before and then forgotten about it, so there is every reason to suspect he will go back on his word again. Plainly, his political commitments mean little to the prime minister.
“In making his statement about Kiwibank today, Mr Key announced on radio that it is ‘technically’ or ‘theoretically’ possible that NZ Post will be sold.
“That’s like being technically or theoretically pregnant. Either National is going to sell NZ Post or it isn’t.
“Mr Key is using sneaky language. He should simply say National won’t sell NZ Post. It does a good job in pubic ownership.
“Rural communities in particular will lose their services or they will cost more if John Key sells NZ Post.”
Jim Anderton is also asking whether the Reserve Bank and Treasury will correct the PM’s statement that Kiwibank has an implicit government guarantee.
“When I made a statement that politics would mean a government is unlikely to allow Kiwibank to fail, the Reserve Bank issued a statement clarifying that there is no government guarantee.
“The watchdog is applying a different standard to the prime minister by refusing to make the same clarification today,” Jim Anderton said.
“The Prime Minister is now once again saying Kiwibank won’t be sold while he is leader.
He has made that declaration before and then forgotten about it, so there is every reason to suspect he will go back on his word again. Plainly, his political commitments mean little to the prime minister.
“In making his statement about Kiwibank today, Mr Key announced on radio that it is ‘technically’ or ‘theoretically’ possible that NZ Post will be sold.
“That’s like being technically or theoretically pregnant. Either National is going to sell NZ Post or it isn’t.
“Mr Key is using sneaky language. He should simply say National won’t sell NZ Post. It does a good job in pubic ownership.
“Rural communities in particular will lose their services or they will cost more if John Key sells NZ Post.”
Jim Anderton is also asking whether the Reserve Bank and Treasury will correct the PM’s statement that Kiwibank has an implicit government guarantee.
“When I made a statement that politics would mean a government is unlikely to allow Kiwibank to fail, the Reserve Bank issued a statement clarifying that there is no government guarantee.
“The watchdog is applying a different standard to the prime minister by refusing to make the same clarification today,” Jim Anderton said.
Key Should Stop Playing Personal Politics And Come Clean On Kiwibank
04/06/10 03:40
If National wasn't going to sell Kiwibank they would have said so by
now, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
"The Government has been fudging assets sales for two weeks. If they
weren't going to sell Kiwibank, they would have said so by now and made
the story go away.
"Instead of coming clean on Kiwibank, the prime minister is now
resorting to personal abuse. For example, "Who cares what Jim Anderton
says?"
"First John Key indicated his promise before the election not to sell
Kiwibank 'ever' was worthless. Then he started playing silly semantic
games. Now he has reduced himself to the kind of petty personal
point-scoring games he claimed he would stand aside from in politics.
"John Key is behaving just like the kind of politician he said he would
never become.
"If he wants to sell Kiwibank, he should be straight with New
Zealanders. He should make his case for the sale on its merits, not on
petty personal politicking," Jim Anderton said.
now, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
"The Government has been fudging assets sales for two weeks. If they
weren't going to sell Kiwibank, they would have said so by now and made
the story go away.
"Instead of coming clean on Kiwibank, the prime minister is now
resorting to personal abuse. For example, "Who cares what Jim Anderton
says?"
"First John Key indicated his promise before the election not to sell
Kiwibank 'ever' was worthless. Then he started playing silly semantic
games. Now he has reduced himself to the kind of petty personal
point-scoring games he claimed he would stand aside from in politics.
"John Key is behaving just like the kind of politician he said he would
never become.
"If he wants to sell Kiwibank, he should be straight with New
Zealanders. He should make his case for the sale on its merits, not on
petty personal politicking," Jim Anderton said.
Japan PM resigns over broken promise - why not Key?
03/06/10 15:34
“The Japanese Prime Minister has just resigned over a broken pre-election campaign promise. But clearly breaking promises is a qualification for government in John Key’s world,” says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
“Perhaps John Key is confusing the work ethics that drive the shady world of international speculation, with the moral demands of being in government.
“If you’re Prime Minister you say what you mean and keep your promises. That’s part of the job. If you’re not up to that, you resign. If it’s good enough for the Japanese Prime Minister, why not Mr Key?”
Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama resigned yesterday after eight months in office after a broken campaign promise made before he was elected, to move a United States Marine base off the southern island of Okinawa.
“John Key has broken his promise not to sell Kiwibank ‘at any time in the future’ - ever. He’s now done a U-turn and says the promise not to sell - ever - is only good for the first term of his government.
“That means Kiwibank is only safe for another 12-18 months. Then the ‘for sale’ sign goes up.”
“John Key made a pledge to resign if he broke his promise not to touch superannuation.”
“When is a John Key promise not a promise? When it’s a promise not to put up GST or sell Kiwibank. This is the kind of political cynicism which has changed governments and electoral systems in New Zealand and will do so again.
“John Key should give New Zealanders a list of all the promises he’s made. Tell people now which ones he intends to keep, and which promises he intends to break,” says Jim Anderton.
“Perhaps John Key is confusing the work ethics that drive the shady world of international speculation, with the moral demands of being in government.
“If you’re Prime Minister you say what you mean and keep your promises. That’s part of the job. If you’re not up to that, you resign. If it’s good enough for the Japanese Prime Minister, why not Mr Key?”
Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama resigned yesterday after eight months in office after a broken campaign promise made before he was elected, to move a United States Marine base off the southern island of Okinawa.
“John Key has broken his promise not to sell Kiwibank ‘at any time in the future’ - ever. He’s now done a U-turn and says the promise not to sell - ever - is only good for the first term of his government.
“That means Kiwibank is only safe for another 12-18 months. Then the ‘for sale’ sign goes up.”
“John Key made a pledge to resign if he broke his promise not to touch superannuation.”
“When is a John Key promise not a promise? When it’s a promise not to put up GST or sell Kiwibank. This is the kind of political cynicism which has changed governments and electoral systems in New Zealand and will do so again.
“John Key should give New Zealanders a list of all the promises he’s made. Tell people now which ones he intends to keep, and which promises he intends to break,” says Jim Anderton.
Nats cynical games over Kiwibank sale
03/06/10 15:33
“John Key is guilty of the worst kind of cynical politics. He changes his mind depending on where the votes are before the election, then reverts back to his original position once in government,” says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
He did this with his broken promises not to sell Kiwibank. In 2008, MPs like Nathan Guy won marginal seats like Otaki by signing a pledge that the National Party would not sell Kiwibank,”
“On August 7 2008 before the election, John Key refused to sign a pledge not to sell Kiwibank. Then when he could see how unpopular that was, he changed his mind and promised multiple times not to sell Kiwibank - ever - if he was elected.
“The National party needed all the votes it could get in the marginal seats, like Otaki.
“That is presumably why Cabinet Minister and National Party MP Nathan Guy did sign the pledge on behalf of the National Party not to initiate a sale of Kiwibank, and he did it in front of hundreds of local people.
“I wonder how those people feel now?”
After he signed the pledge, Nathan Guy won the Otaki seat with a majority of 1354.
“Assuming half those people had decided not to vote for National once they knew that asset sales were going to be back on the agenda (less than 700 votes), those votes probably would have gone to the Labour candidate Darren Hughes. Mr Guy would then not have won that seat.
“John Key’s policy on asset sales changed during the election, and it helped get his government elected. Now the truth is coming out. John Key will sell Kiwibank if he wins another term in government.
“‘Ever - is a short word and a short time in John Key’s world.”
“This is the kind of cynical politics that brings governments down,” says Jim Anderton.
He did this with his broken promises not to sell Kiwibank. In 2008, MPs like Nathan Guy won marginal seats like Otaki by signing a pledge that the National Party would not sell Kiwibank,”
“On August 7 2008 before the election, John Key refused to sign a pledge not to sell Kiwibank. Then when he could see how unpopular that was, he changed his mind and promised multiple times not to sell Kiwibank - ever - if he was elected.
“The National party needed all the votes it could get in the marginal seats, like Otaki.
“That is presumably why Cabinet Minister and National Party MP Nathan Guy did sign the pledge on behalf of the National Party not to initiate a sale of Kiwibank, and he did it in front of hundreds of local people.
“I wonder how those people feel now?”
After he signed the pledge, Nathan Guy won the Otaki seat with a majority of 1354.
“Assuming half those people had decided not to vote for National once they knew that asset sales were going to be back on the agenda (less than 700 votes), those votes probably would have gone to the Labour candidate Darren Hughes. Mr Guy would then not have won that seat.
“John Key’s policy on asset sales changed during the election, and it helped get his government elected. Now the truth is coming out. John Key will sell Kiwibank if he wins another term in government.
“‘Ever - is a short word and a short time in John Key’s world.”
“This is the kind of cynical politics that brings governments down,” says Jim Anderton.
John Key promised not to sell Kiwibank 'ever'
02/06/10 16:17
John Key made a clear undertaking before the last general election, that there would never be a sale of Kiwibank, even if National won a further term in government, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
“Since the Budget, the government has said its promise not to sell Kiwibank was only good for its first term. But on several occasions before the election, John Key personally insisted that the promise was permanent.
The Dominion Post after TV3 leaders debate 4 November 2008
John Key answers readers’ questions in The Dominion Post 22 October 2008:
“You made a statement on television that your government if elected will not sell Kiwibank in its first term of office. Does that mean that you do intend selling Kiwibank eventually?” (Carol Aldridge, Porirua)
‘I am ruling out selling Kiwibank at any point in the future.’ John Key
The Dominion Post 4 November 2008, following TV3 leaders' debate – 5 days before the election:
“Mr Key said he would not sell Kiwibank - and when asked if that meant ‘ever’ responded: ‘No, I’ve ruled it out’.”
The Press 4 November 2008
“John Key ruled out National selling Kiwibank at any stage ‘never....we’ve ruled it out.’”
Jim Anderton says: “John Key’s current position on Kiwibank is a broken promise. If he had used the weasel words he is now using in answer to these questions during the election campaign, the issue would have turned into a major campaign fiasco for National. He said one thing to get elected and now he is saying something else. That is flat out untrustworthy.
“Shares in Kiwibank should not be floated because it’s doing a great job. It’s making money, and because we own it, those profits go straight back into the New Zealand economy. John Key needs to come clean and tell us - did he mislead the electorate or is this another policy U-turn?” says Jim Anderton.
“Since the Budget, the government has said its promise not to sell Kiwibank was only good for its first term. But on several occasions before the election, John Key personally insisted that the promise was permanent.
The Dominion Post after TV3 leaders debate 4 November 2008
John Key answers readers’ questions in The Dominion Post 22 October 2008:
“You made a statement on television that your government if elected will not sell Kiwibank in its first term of office. Does that mean that you do intend selling Kiwibank eventually?” (Carol Aldridge, Porirua)
‘I am ruling out selling Kiwibank at any point in the future.’ John Key
The Dominion Post 4 November 2008, following TV3 leaders' debate – 5 days before the election:
“Mr Key said he would not sell Kiwibank - and when asked if that meant ‘ever’ responded: ‘No, I’ve ruled it out’.”
The Press 4 November 2008
“John Key ruled out National selling Kiwibank at any stage ‘never....we’ve ruled it out.’”
Jim Anderton says: “John Key’s current position on Kiwibank is a broken promise. If he had used the weasel words he is now using in answer to these questions during the election campaign, the issue would have turned into a major campaign fiasco for National. He said one thing to get elected and now he is saying something else. That is flat out untrustworthy.
“Shares in Kiwibank should not be floated because it’s doing a great job. It’s making money, and because we own it, those profits go straight back into the New Zealand economy. John Key needs to come clean and tell us - did he mislead the electorate or is this another policy U-turn?” says Jim Anderton.
Kiwibank will get downgraded if sold, says credit rating agency
27/05/10 18:13
Mums and Dads borrowing to buy their own home will pay more mortgage interest if the government doesn't stop talking about selling Kiwibank.
That's what Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says will happen after confirmation from credit ratings agency Standard & Poors that it would downgrade Kiwibank if it is sold.
Standard & Poors said "the current ratings on Kiwibank are equalized with the bank's wholly government-owned parent New Zealand Post Ltd. ...The ratings on the bank get a significant uplift from the bank's stand-alone credit profile due to an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee from the parent. Consequently, any change in the bank's ownership--which would likely be accompanied by a dilution in the parent guarantee--would be a possible trigger for rating review."
Jim Anderton says this means that if Bill English and John Key don't rule out selling Kiwibank, it will be downgraded.
"A downgrade makes Kiwibank's cost of borrowing more expensive, which means Mums and Dads pay more to borrow to buy a home.
"The Government's asset sales program is the worst feature of this year's Budget, and it’s about to cost costing Kiwi families money.
“What is there about the almost universally negative publicity following Bill English’s speculative comments about the sale of Kiwibank that this government does not understand?” says Jim Anderton.
That's what Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says will happen after confirmation from credit ratings agency Standard & Poors that it would downgrade Kiwibank if it is sold.
Standard & Poors said "the current ratings on Kiwibank are equalized with the bank's wholly government-owned parent New Zealand Post Ltd. ...The ratings on the bank get a significant uplift from the bank's stand-alone credit profile due to an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee from the parent. Consequently, any change in the bank's ownership--which would likely be accompanied by a dilution in the parent guarantee--would be a possible trigger for rating review."
Jim Anderton says this means that if Bill English and John Key don't rule out selling Kiwibank, it will be downgraded.
"A downgrade makes Kiwibank's cost of borrowing more expensive, which means Mums and Dads pay more to borrow to buy a home.
"The Government's asset sales program is the worst feature of this year's Budget, and it’s about to cost costing Kiwi families money.
“What is there about the almost universally negative publicity following Bill English’s speculative comments about the sale of Kiwibank that this government does not understand?” says Jim Anderton.
Money still not flowing out of R&D fund
27/05/10 18:00
“What money? It’s taken this government eighteen months to say it is allocating $3.9 million to research projects. But it hasn’t given anyone a cent yet,” says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram.
The Primary Growth Partnership replaced the Labour-Progressive government’s Fast Forward Fund which would have allocated $2 billion worth of funding for research and development in the primary sector.
$700 million of that was already in the bank, but was taken back into government coffers, and replaced with $30 million, allocated to the new Primary Growth Partnership (PGP)
This week the PGP, which has so far failed to fund any research projects during the first 18 months of this National led government, announced that it had approved funding for three projects, worth about $3.9 million per year for five years.
“Don’t hold your breath. Apparently there is still a pile of paper work and bureaucracy to go through before even a time line for releasing the funding is agreed.
“This is the problem when you tie up innovative business investment decisions in red tape. The Fast Forward Fund was part ‘owned’ by the private sector. They made the decisions about who and how funding would be distributed in partnership with the government. An 18 month delay would have been totally unacceptable when it has resulted in such small scale decisions.
“Now, even when decisions are made to proceed, businesses are being told to sit back and be patient while ‘milestones’ are being delivered and strategy papers written to help decide when to release funds. Here’s a few ‘milestones’ the National government might want to mark:
- $700 million for R&D replaced with $30 million per year,
- $5 million of that is deducted to fund the National Center for Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research (not to help develop primary sector production),
- A further $2 has gone to fund the administrative costs of the PGP, and
- About $3.9 million is finally allocated to R&D projects, but wait - there’s a still a delay while more paper work is done.
“That leaves about $20 million unallocated. Going on the past 18 months, it will take them about ten years to allocate the rest of this miserly funding,” says Jim Anderton.
The Primary Growth Partnership replaced the Labour-Progressive government’s Fast Forward Fund which would have allocated $2 billion worth of funding for research and development in the primary sector.
$700 million of that was already in the bank, but was taken back into government coffers, and replaced with $30 million, allocated to the new Primary Growth Partnership (PGP)
This week the PGP, which has so far failed to fund any research projects during the first 18 months of this National led government, announced that it had approved funding for three projects, worth about $3.9 million per year for five years.
“Don’t hold your breath. Apparently there is still a pile of paper work and bureaucracy to go through before even a time line for releasing the funding is agreed.
“This is the problem when you tie up innovative business investment decisions in red tape. The Fast Forward Fund was part ‘owned’ by the private sector. They made the decisions about who and how funding would be distributed in partnership with the government. An 18 month delay would have been totally unacceptable when it has resulted in such small scale decisions.
“Now, even when decisions are made to proceed, businesses are being told to sit back and be patient while ‘milestones’ are being delivered and strategy papers written to help decide when to release funds. Here’s a few ‘milestones’ the National government might want to mark:
- $700 million for R&D replaced with $30 million per year,
- $5 million of that is deducted to fund the National Center for Agricultural Greenhouse Gas Research (not to help develop primary sector production),
- A further $2 has gone to fund the administrative costs of the PGP, and
- About $3.9 million is finally allocated to R&D projects, but wait - there’s a still a delay while more paper work is done.
“That leaves about $20 million unallocated. Going on the past 18 months, it will take them about ten years to allocate the rest of this miserly funding,” says Jim Anderton.
Telecom share decline is a lesson for privatising government
25/05/10 15:50
This week's considerable reduction in Telecom's worth is only the latest chapter in a privatisation that should be a lesson to the current government's plans to resume asset sales, Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
"Today's decline in value is the direct result of a monopoly that got privatised being unable to adapt when its monopoly position finally began to unwind.
"Telecom spent about fifteen years dramatically overcharging New Zealanders and blocking innovative competition because it was privatised as a monopoly.
"Billions of dollars were taken out of New Zealand by foreign owners, at a time when a National Government was saying it was owned by Kiwi Mums and Dads.
"Since its monopoly position has been eroded, Telecom has faded because its monopolistic behaviour was hard-baked into the company and it couldn't adapt.
"Most financial commentators supported the sale of Telecom, but it has been a disaster for New Zealand.
"Today the same commentators are still supporting privatisation of successful Kiwi businesses, like Kiwibank.
"I recall consultant Rob Cameron telling the NZ Post Board that Kiwibank would only have ten thousand 'low value' customers after five years. It has between seven and eight hundred thousand and that shows how much credibility he has in calling for privatisation now. Professor Tripe from Massey University claimed Kiwibank would be a dog, and now says it needs $600 million of private capital because it is growing so fast.
"Instead of listening to people who repeatedly get their predictions wrong, the government should look at the record of privatisation: Telecom, Air New Zealand, Kiwi Rail. Disaster, disaster, and even more disaster."
"Today's decline in value is the direct result of a monopoly that got privatised being unable to adapt when its monopoly position finally began to unwind.
"Telecom spent about fifteen years dramatically overcharging New Zealanders and blocking innovative competition because it was privatised as a monopoly.
"Billions of dollars were taken out of New Zealand by foreign owners, at a time when a National Government was saying it was owned by Kiwi Mums and Dads.
"Since its monopoly position has been eroded, Telecom has faded because its monopolistic behaviour was hard-baked into the company and it couldn't adapt.
"Most financial commentators supported the sale of Telecom, but it has been a disaster for New Zealand.
"Today the same commentators are still supporting privatisation of successful Kiwi businesses, like Kiwibank.
"I recall consultant Rob Cameron telling the NZ Post Board that Kiwibank would only have ten thousand 'low value' customers after five years. It has between seven and eight hundred thousand and that shows how much credibility he has in calling for privatisation now. Professor Tripe from Massey University claimed Kiwibank would be a dog, and now says it needs $600 million of private capital because it is growing so fast.
"Instead of listening to people who repeatedly get their predictions wrong, the government should look at the record of privatisation: Telecom, Air New Zealand, Kiwi Rail. Disaster, disaster, and even more disaster."
National's threat to sell Kiwibank
21/05/10 16:18
National’s threat to sell Kiwibank is economic vandalism, says the MP who started the bank.
Jim Anderton says people worried about Australian banks buying Kiwi bank will immediately be concerned.
“That can only hurt Kiwibank, and therefore hurt the Kiwi Mums and Dads who already own it. It is reckless for a finance minister to deliberately undermine the value of a public asset.
“Kiwibank is a huge success, mainly because it’s ours. Selling the bank would push it straight into overseas hands. The buyers would be the Australian banks.
“Hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders signed up to Kiwibank because it’s ours. Since Kiwibank opened, the other banks have stopped closing branches and increasing fees. They’re feeling the heat. And that’s good for Kiwis.
“National repeatedly promised not to sell Kiwibank,” Jim Anderton said.
“Just this week I received a letter from a retired superannuitant on the Hibiscus Coast who has approached every commercial bank, all Australian owned, for a loan to buy a modest retirement residence for himself. They all refused, and the only bank that would lend him the money, and has now given him peace of mind for his retirement, was Kiwibank.”
Jim Anderton says people worried about Australian banks buying Kiwi bank will immediately be concerned.
“That can only hurt Kiwibank, and therefore hurt the Kiwi Mums and Dads who already own it. It is reckless for a finance minister to deliberately undermine the value of a public asset.
“Kiwibank is a huge success, mainly because it’s ours. Selling the bank would push it straight into overseas hands. The buyers would be the Australian banks.
“Hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders signed up to Kiwibank because it’s ours. Since Kiwibank opened, the other banks have stopped closing branches and increasing fees. They’re feeling the heat. And that’s good for Kiwis.
“National repeatedly promised not to sell Kiwibank,” Jim Anderton said.
“Just this week I received a letter from a retired superannuitant on the Hibiscus Coast who has approached every commercial bank, all Australian owned, for a loan to buy a modest retirement residence for himself. They all refused, and the only bank that would lend him the money, and has now given him peace of mind for his retirement, was Kiwibank.”
Canterbury people told to shut up and pay up
21/05/10 12:15
“Unelected commissioners running the regional council are telling Canterbury people to ‘shut up’ about democracy when it comes to submissions - they don’t want to hear about it,” says Jim Anderton, MP for Wigram.
Jim Anderton has obtained documents from the Riccarton Residents’ Association which show that the Commissioners are writing to submitters saying they will not hear submissions on “accountability through elected representatives”.
The Commissioners were appointed to replace the democratically elected Councillors and run the Environment Canterbury Regional Council. New elections will not take place for up to three and a half years.
“Silencing the voice of Canterbury people is a bad start for a bunch of unelected Commissioners, like David Caygill a former Christchurch City Councillor, Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister, who should know better,” says Jim Anderton.
“To tell residents of Canterbury who wish to make submissions on achieving the earliest possible return to elected democracy to ECan that ‘your views will be noted but not heard,’ is the height of arrogance.
“Canterbury people were shut out of the decision to sack the ECan Council and cancel elections for several years when the Environment Canterbury Act was rushed through Parliament under extra-ordinary urgency.
“Now the ECan Commissioners are taking away the one chance for Canterbury people to have their say on this issue,” Jim Anderton says.
A large number of people and organisations have already submitted questions on accountability and the need for representatives to be elected as soon as possible. The principle of accountability remains even if the Council has been sacked.
“The Government has said that there will be no elections for up to three and a half years. So why can’t local people and organisations not submit their views on why they think elections should be held in 12 months, or 18 months?”
Jim Anderton has obtained documents from the Riccarton Residents’ Association which show that the Commissioners are writing to submitters saying they will not hear submissions on “accountability through elected representatives”.
The Commissioners were appointed to replace the democratically elected Councillors and run the Environment Canterbury Regional Council. New elections will not take place for up to three and a half years.
“Silencing the voice of Canterbury people is a bad start for a bunch of unelected Commissioners, like David Caygill a former Christchurch City Councillor, Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister, who should know better,” says Jim Anderton.
“To tell residents of Canterbury who wish to make submissions on achieving the earliest possible return to elected democracy to ECan that ‘your views will be noted but not heard,’ is the height of arrogance.
“Canterbury people were shut out of the decision to sack the ECan Council and cancel elections for several years when the Environment Canterbury Act was rushed through Parliament under extra-ordinary urgency.
“Now the ECan Commissioners are taking away the one chance for Canterbury people to have their say on this issue,” Jim Anderton says.
A large number of people and organisations have already submitted questions on accountability and the need for representatives to be elected as soon as possible. The principle of accountability remains even if the Council has been sacked.
“The Government has said that there will be no elections for up to three and a half years. So why can’t local people and organisations not submit their views on why they think elections should be held in 12 months, or 18 months?”
Let them eat cake!
20/05/10 16:44
The gap between rich and poor is set to widen after today’s budget, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram.
“This National led government has shown its true colours today. The CEO of Telecom who reportedly earned $7 million last year, will now get an extra $6608 per week. Those on $600,000 will take home about an extra $500.
Meanwhile working Kiwis on $50,000 will spend about an extra $23 on increased GST at the supermarket, so their tax cut will be a miserly $5.50. More likely it will be wiped out by inflation.
Those on low incomes will pay more as a result of an increase in GST from 12.5% to 15%.
“What is this government saying to families on lower incomes in today’s budget? ‘Let them eat cake!’ It says ‘don’t worry about an increase in GST and rising food prices, because the rich consume more than the poor, so they’ll pay more in GST. Is that meant to make low income families feel better? ‘You might not be able to afford to buy much food - but just think of the GST you’re saving when you don’t eat?’
“There is nothing in this budget to help grow the economy or create jobs. John Key has got rid of $2 billion worth of Research and Development set up by the last Labour-Progressive government and replaced it with his own personal science advisor and just over a quarter of what scientists would have got under our government.
“New Zealand’s rates of increasing income inequality were amongst the worst in the world according to OECD figures. We only started to close that gap under a Labour-Progressive government. Now the gap will widen again.”
A recent UNICEF survey of the well-being of children puts New Zealand almost last - 24th out of 25 countries. It measured immunisation levels, infant death and early death from
injury and illness.
“Here’s what a respected Professor of Epidemiology in New Zealand said recently ‘In New Zealand, social injustice is killing and maiming our children on a grand scale.’ Nothing in this budget is going to change that.
“If you voted for this government because you thought John Key’s ‘rag to riches’ story might rub off on the country, now you know he is no Robin Hood - more a Sheriff of Nottingham”, Jim Anderton said today.
“This National led government has shown its true colours today. The CEO of Telecom who reportedly earned $7 million last year, will now get an extra $6608 per week. Those on $600,000 will take home about an extra $500.
Meanwhile working Kiwis on $50,000 will spend about an extra $23 on increased GST at the supermarket, so their tax cut will be a miserly $5.50. More likely it will be wiped out by inflation.
Those on low incomes will pay more as a result of an increase in GST from 12.5% to 15%.
“What is this government saying to families on lower incomes in today’s budget? ‘Let them eat cake!’ It says ‘don’t worry about an increase in GST and rising food prices, because the rich consume more than the poor, so they’ll pay more in GST. Is that meant to make low income families feel better? ‘You might not be able to afford to buy much food - but just think of the GST you’re saving when you don’t eat?’
“There is nothing in this budget to help grow the economy or create jobs. John Key has got rid of $2 billion worth of Research and Development set up by the last Labour-Progressive government and replaced it with his own personal science advisor and just over a quarter of what scientists would have got under our government.
“New Zealand’s rates of increasing income inequality were amongst the worst in the world according to OECD figures. We only started to close that gap under a Labour-Progressive government. Now the gap will widen again.”
A recent UNICEF survey of the well-being of children puts New Zealand almost last - 24th out of 25 countries. It measured immunisation levels, infant death and early death from
injury and illness.
“Here’s what a respected Professor of Epidemiology in New Zealand said recently ‘In New Zealand, social injustice is killing and maiming our children on a grand scale.’ Nothing in this budget is going to change that.
“If you voted for this government because you thought John Key’s ‘rag to riches’ story might rub off on the country, now you know he is no Robin Hood - more a Sheriff of Nottingham”, Jim Anderton said today.
How does cutting top tax rate cut make super more affordable?
04/05/10 16:32
Planned cuts in the top rate of tax weaken the ability of the government to continue to provide universal superannuation in the way all parties agreed to in the New Zealand Superannuation Accord, Progressive Party MP Jim Anderton says.
He has released the Progressive Party’s submission to the 2010 New Zealand Superannuation Retirement Income Review today.
Jim Anderton was one of the signatories of the 1993 Superannuation Accord that aimed to provide long-term stability to superannuation.
The main principle agreed to by all parties was that ‘the net amount provided from public funds for a retired person should reduce as that person’s total income increases’.
That principle could be met by a surcharge on superannuation or by a progressive income tax scale.
“If the National Government makes income tax less progressive in this budget by reducing the top personal income tax rate, then how is it going to meet the Accord principle that ‘the net amount provided from public funds for a retired person should reduce as that person’s total income increases’?
“Either National will ultimately reduce entitlement to superannuation, or it no longer believes that the amount provided from public funds should decrease as a person’s income increases. If it is the latter, then National will be solely to blame if it tries to say the cost of superannuation is unsustainable. Alternatively, if it is ultimately planning to cut publicly provided retirement incomes, then people deserve to be told.”
Jim Anderton’s submission shows that continuing New Zealand Superannuation at age 65, indexed to wages, is sustainable for the long term provided the government sticks to Accord principles.
“The future cost of super is affordable, but the government needs to keep the means to afford it”, Jim Anderton said.
He has released the Progressive Party’s submission to the 2010 New Zealand Superannuation Retirement Income Review today.
Jim Anderton was one of the signatories of the 1993 Superannuation Accord that aimed to provide long-term stability to superannuation.
The main principle agreed to by all parties was that ‘the net amount provided from public funds for a retired person should reduce as that person’s total income increases’.
That principle could be met by a surcharge on superannuation or by a progressive income tax scale.
“If the National Government makes income tax less progressive in this budget by reducing the top personal income tax rate, then how is it going to meet the Accord principle that ‘the net amount provided from public funds for a retired person should reduce as that person’s total income increases’?
“Either National will ultimately reduce entitlement to superannuation, or it no longer believes that the amount provided from public funds should decrease as a person’s income increases. If it is the latter, then National will be solely to blame if it tries to say the cost of superannuation is unsustainable. Alternatively, if it is ultimately planning to cut publicly provided retirement incomes, then people deserve to be told.”
Jim Anderton’s submission shows that continuing New Zealand Superannuation at age 65, indexed to wages, is sustainable for the long term provided the government sticks to Accord principles.
“The future cost of super is affordable, but the government needs to keep the means to afford it”, Jim Anderton said.
Deal with alcohol ads to deal with binge drinking culture
27/04/10 17:59
The National government must listen to New Zealanders and raise the age at which young people can legally buy alcohol from 18 to 20. But more needs to be done to restrict alcohol advertising, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
He was responding to the release of the Law Commission’s report on liquor law changes. The report recommends a package of policies designed to reduce criminal offending and
the harm caused by alcohol. These include, increasing the purchasing age, increasing the price of alcohol, and cutting back the hours licensed premises are open.
The report recognises that alcohol misuse is a major contributor to violent offending.
“The police know this; 60 percent of people arrested by the police were under the influence of alcohol when they committed their crime. There are now 70,000 physical and sexual assaults a year in New Zealand that can be attributed to alcohol abuse. That’s 1350 a week.
“We have a problem with alcohol abuse in this country. People with responsible drinking habits are not the target. The culture of tolerating heavy drinking is. We need law changes to alter that. Anyone who thinks we can change abusive behaviour without that is dreaming.”
“But we also need a strong position on regulating the marketing and advertising of alcohol. Reducing alcohol advertising and sponsorship of sports games for example, would go a long way towards changing people’s attitudes to alcohol.
“It’s obscene that you can go to an under 6s ripper rugby game on a Saturday, and see five year olds running around with beer ads all over the flags and the goal posts.
“Here’s what the alcohol industry won’t tell you; they make their profits out of heavy drinkers. So targeting kids as young as five to associate alcohol with sports is part of developing heavy drinkers for the future.
“Former Progessive MP Matt Robson’s private members bill called for alcohol advertising on TV to be moved from 8.30pm to 10pm. I’d like to see alcohol sponsorship of sports games banned. We did it for smoking. You don’t have Benson & Hedges sponsoring tennis games anymore. We should do the same for alcohol sponsorships,” says Jim Anderton.
He was responding to the release of the Law Commission’s report on liquor law changes. The report recommends a package of policies designed to reduce criminal offending and
the harm caused by alcohol. These include, increasing the purchasing age, increasing the price of alcohol, and cutting back the hours licensed premises are open.
The report recognises that alcohol misuse is a major contributor to violent offending.
“The police know this; 60 percent of people arrested by the police were under the influence of alcohol when they committed their crime. There are now 70,000 physical and sexual assaults a year in New Zealand that can be attributed to alcohol abuse. That’s 1350 a week.
“We have a problem with alcohol abuse in this country. People with responsible drinking habits are not the target. The culture of tolerating heavy drinking is. We need law changes to alter that. Anyone who thinks we can change abusive behaviour without that is dreaming.”
“But we also need a strong position on regulating the marketing and advertising of alcohol. Reducing alcohol advertising and sponsorship of sports games for example, would go a long way towards changing people’s attitudes to alcohol.
“It’s obscene that you can go to an under 6s ripper rugby game on a Saturday, and see five year olds running around with beer ads all over the flags and the goal posts.
“Here’s what the alcohol industry won’t tell you; they make their profits out of heavy drinkers. So targeting kids as young as five to associate alcohol with sports is part of developing heavy drinkers for the future.
“Former Progessive MP Matt Robson’s private members bill called for alcohol advertising on TV to be moved from 8.30pm to 10pm. I’d like to see alcohol sponsorship of sports games banned. We did it for smoking. You don’t have Benson & Hedges sponsoring tennis games anymore. We should do the same for alcohol sponsorships,” says Jim Anderton.
Affordable dental care within reach for all Kiwis
23/04/10 20:21
Affordable dental care within reach for all Kiwis
For less than $1 billion, dental care could be brought into the public health system so that every New Zealand, no matter what their age, had access to affordable care, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
“That includes what we already spend on free dental care for under 18 year olds (about $120 million); plus the millions we spend on treating severe cases when people turn up in hospital emergency rooms,” Jim Anderton said today.
Jim Anderton outlined his proposals for subsidised dental care to the annual conference of the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society. This year marks 90 years since the School Dental Service was established, the first of its kind in the world.
“Fifty percent of New Zealanders do not visit the dentist regularly, and many of them turn up at emergency wards. You can see the queues at hospitals across New Zealand - just like a third world country,” says Jim Anderton.
“The last Labour Progressive government extended free dental care to all under 18s so that adolescents who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist, and therefore not covered, can now get free care.
“Former Labour Minister of Health, Annette King introduced one hundred mobile dental clinics to service schools, and the first ever dedicated Community Oral Health Services to target adolescents. Members of the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society are in the process of rolling out these changes.
“I believe we could roll out a subsidised dental system in stages, in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits while in government. We’ve already targeted the under 18s. Other vulnerable groups include retired New Zealanders and pregnant mothers.
“Unfortunately under this National government there isn’t the political will to do anything about dental care. Tony Ryall has removed oral health completely, as a health target.”
“Funding required for a subsidised system could be raised either through income tax, or by a small ACC type earner’s levy, in return for a lifetime of free or affordable dental treatment. Research into options continues, in consultation with the dental industry,” Jim Anderton said.
For less than $1 billion, dental care could be brought into the public health system so that every New Zealand, no matter what their age, had access to affordable care, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
“That includes what we already spend on free dental care for under 18 year olds (about $120 million); plus the millions we spend on treating severe cases when people turn up in hospital emergency rooms,” Jim Anderton said today.
Jim Anderton outlined his proposals for subsidised dental care to the annual conference of the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society. This year marks 90 years since the School Dental Service was established, the first of its kind in the world.
“Fifty percent of New Zealanders do not visit the dentist regularly, and many of them turn up at emergency wards. You can see the queues at hospitals across New Zealand - just like a third world country,” says Jim Anderton.
“The last Labour Progressive government extended free dental care to all under 18s so that adolescents who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist, and therefore not covered, can now get free care.
“Former Labour Minister of Health, Annette King introduced one hundred mobile dental clinics to service schools, and the first ever dedicated Community Oral Health Services to target adolescents. Members of the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society are in the process of rolling out these changes.
“I believe we could roll out a subsidised dental system in stages, in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits while in government. We’ve already targeted the under 18s. Other vulnerable groups include retired New Zealanders and pregnant mothers.
“Unfortunately under this National government there isn’t the political will to do anything about dental care. Tony Ryall has removed oral health completely, as a health target.”
“Funding required for a subsidised system could be raised either through income tax, or by a small ACC type earner’s levy, in return for a lifetime of free or affordable dental treatment. Research into options continues, in consultation with the dental industry,” Jim Anderton said.
Government favours alcohol industry
22/04/10 17:26
Minister responsible for the government’s alcohol policy, Peter Dunne today dismissed Professor Doug Sellman, an addiction specialist, and 450 senior doctors and nurses as a group of people who don’t like a drink of wine at a wedding.
“These people are campaigning to stop the harm and violence that erupts as a result of alcohol abuse, particularly the harm done to young New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
“They are not campaigning to stop people enjoying a glass of wine at a wedding, and to suggest that shows how ill-equipped Peter Dunne is to be a minister anywhere near alcohol regulation.
“Although Peter Dunne claims to know what people like Professor Sellman thinks, Mr Dunne could not name the 5+ Solutions that Mr Sellman and Alcohol Action are proposing.
“For the record Mr Dunne, the 5+ Solutions are as follows: Raise the alcohol price, Raise the purchase age, Reduce availability, Reduce marketing and advertising and Increase drink driving counter measures. Plus increase treatment opportunities.
“Mr Dunne could also not name the 10 things that the alcohol industry won’t tell you about alcohol. They are, as follows:
“Mr Dunne misled the House today in claiming to have met with 47 alcohol groups not associated with the alcohol industry. He also provided TV3 with a list of these meetings. Eugene Bingham, producer of TV3’s 60 Minutes has analysed each meeting on his blog.
“Most of these meetings were nothing to do with alcohol regulation.
“23 were with Ministry of Health officials or ALAC – both of whom report to him – three were with the Law Commission, two were with the police. Four meetings were with other official groups of various types: the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, the WHO, a ministerial council on drug strategies in Brisbane, and the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs. Three were speeches he gave at conferences.
“That leaves five meetings. TV3 phoned the Downtown Community Ministry who Mr Dunne met with on December 2. They said the meeting was not specifically about alcohol.
“He met with the NGO Provider Forum on October 19. The agenda for that meeting, on the Ministry of Health’s website, shows that Mr Dunne spoke on the topic of ‘NGO Challenges and Opportunities for Changing Times’.
“He met with the Life Education Trust on May 5, but not specifically about alcohol.
“That leaves two meetings: one with the Salvation Army, which told TV3 they had indeed talked to the minister about alcohol issues, specifically taxation of liquor; and one with respected Scottish expert Dr Peter Rice, brought to New Zealand by ALAC for its conference last year.
“He did have some meetings with groups other than the alcohol industry. But not 47, and these meetings cannot be described a lobbying,” says Jim Anderton.
“These people are campaigning to stop the harm and violence that erupts as a result of alcohol abuse, particularly the harm done to young New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
“They are not campaigning to stop people enjoying a glass of wine at a wedding, and to suggest that shows how ill-equipped Peter Dunne is to be a minister anywhere near alcohol regulation.
“Although Peter Dunne claims to know what people like Professor Sellman thinks, Mr Dunne could not name the 5+ Solutions that Mr Sellman and Alcohol Action are proposing.
“For the record Mr Dunne, the 5+ Solutions are as follows: Raise the alcohol price, Raise the purchase age, Reduce availability, Reduce marketing and advertising and Increase drink driving counter measures. Plus increase treatment opportunities.
“Mr Dunne could also not name the 10 things that the alcohol industry won’t tell you about alcohol. They are, as follows:
- Alcohol is a highly intoxicating drug which is fairly easy to overdose on
- Alcohol can cause brain damage
- Alcohol causes aggression
- Alcohol is fattening in social drinkers
- Alcohol can cause cancer
- Alcohol cardio-protection has been talked up
- The alcohol industry actively markets alcohol to young people
- Low risk drinking means drinking low amounts of alcohol
- A lot of the alcohol industry’s profit comes from heavy drinking
- There is a solution to the national alcohol crisis: ‘The 5+ Solution’.
“Mr Dunne misled the House today in claiming to have met with 47 alcohol groups not associated with the alcohol industry. He also provided TV3 with a list of these meetings. Eugene Bingham, producer of TV3’s 60 Minutes has analysed each meeting on his blog.
“Most of these meetings were nothing to do with alcohol regulation.
“23 were with Ministry of Health officials or ALAC – both of whom report to him – three were with the Law Commission, two were with the police. Four meetings were with other official groups of various types: the UN Office of Drugs and Crime, the WHO, a ministerial council on drug strategies in Brisbane, and the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs. Three were speeches he gave at conferences.
“That leaves five meetings. TV3 phoned the Downtown Community Ministry who Mr Dunne met with on December 2. They said the meeting was not specifically about alcohol.
“He met with the NGO Provider Forum on October 19. The agenda for that meeting, on the Ministry of Health’s website, shows that Mr Dunne spoke on the topic of ‘NGO Challenges and Opportunities for Changing Times’.
“He met with the Life Education Trust on May 5, but not specifically about alcohol.
“That leaves two meetings: one with the Salvation Army, which told TV3 they had indeed talked to the minister about alcohol issues, specifically taxation of liquor; and one with respected Scottish expert Dr Peter Rice, brought to New Zealand by ALAC for its conference last year.
“He did have some meetings with groups other than the alcohol industry. But not 47, and these meetings cannot be described a lobbying,” says Jim Anderton.
Support for changes to alcohol law
22/04/10 17:24
If the reports are accurate, Jim Anderton calls on the government to act on the leaked Law Commission’s recommendations on alcohol controls, which appear to include a call to increase the drinking age to twenty and restrict the availability of alcohol.
“However I’m not hopeful that with a Minister like Peter Dunne responsible for alcohol the government will have the guts to do anything this brave,” says Jim Anderton.
“This is a man who refused to meet with Doug Sellman who represents 450 senior doctors and nurses across New Zealand calling for changes to the law. But he was prepared to meet on numerous occasions with representatives of the alcohol industry.
“He said he didn’t meet with Mr Sellman or his colleagues because he ‘knows what they think.’
“So he had to meet with the alcohol industry on numerous occasions to understand what they thought?”
“A few weeks ago new figures showed that violent offending was up by nine per cent last year - an increase of twenty thousand more victims of crime under John Key's National Government.
“The police know, and so do the doctors and nurses patching people up, that alcohol abuse is a major cause of that increase in violent crime. Three out of five people who are arrested are under the influence of alcohol at the time they commit the offence for which they are arrested. The problem is getting worse every year, not better, and that is largely because alcohol is becoming more available.”
Leaked recommendations from the Law Commission, published by KiwiBlog (an on-line blog) appear to call for a 50 percent increase in the excise tax on alcohol; an increase from eighteen to twenty in the purchasing age for alcohol; banning the sale of liquor at off licences after 10pm; forcing bars and nightclubs to refuse to allow people to enter after 2am; and a nationwide closing time of 4am.
“The spotlight is on the government now to see if they will have the courage to act,” says Jim Anderton.
“However I’m not hopeful that with a Minister like Peter Dunne responsible for alcohol the government will have the guts to do anything this brave,” says Jim Anderton.
“This is a man who refused to meet with Doug Sellman who represents 450 senior doctors and nurses across New Zealand calling for changes to the law. But he was prepared to meet on numerous occasions with representatives of the alcohol industry.
“He said he didn’t meet with Mr Sellman or his colleagues because he ‘knows what they think.’
“So he had to meet with the alcohol industry on numerous occasions to understand what they thought?”
“A few weeks ago new figures showed that violent offending was up by nine per cent last year - an increase of twenty thousand more victims of crime under John Key's National Government.
“The police know, and so do the doctors and nurses patching people up, that alcohol abuse is a major cause of that increase in violent crime. Three out of five people who are arrested are under the influence of alcohol at the time they commit the offence for which they are arrested. The problem is getting worse every year, not better, and that is largely because alcohol is becoming more available.”
Leaked recommendations from the Law Commission, published by KiwiBlog (an on-line blog) appear to call for a 50 percent increase in the excise tax on alcohol; an increase from eighteen to twenty in the purchasing age for alcohol; banning the sale of liquor at off licences after 10pm; forcing bars and nightclubs to refuse to allow people to enter after 2am; and a nationwide closing time of 4am.
“The spotlight is on the government now to see if they will have the courage to act,” says Jim Anderton.
Beer in a can recipe for trouble
02/04/10 16:27
The police don’t want it; rugby fans don’t need it; and I don’t like it. Selling beer in cans at the Rugby World Cup could damage our international reputation. It is not worth the risk,” Jim Anderton said.
Rugby World Cup minister, Murray McCully has announced that spectators at world cup games will be able to drink beer from cans.
“All it would take is for a few intoxicated fans to use cans as missiles and chuck them at players in front of a world-wide television audience of over 500 million people. Our international reputation would be tarnished for years.
“This is our moment in the world spotlight. We won’t get another chance like this for decades. Murray McCully thinks it is not worth the cost of putting a system in our stadiums so that we can serve beer in plastic cups.
“It might cost $1 million to install that system at Eden Park but that is money well spent if it can protect our reputation overseas. The loss to New Zealand if a negative incident happens could be many more times that.
“The only people who benefit from cans at games is Heineken. They get their branding on every can. They wouldn’t if beer was served in plastic cups.
“The National government is prioritising the business needs of a beer company over New Zealand’s image as a good place to visit and do business. If a negative incident happens and gets transmitted across the world via YouTube and twitter in a matter of minutes, it will be on Murray McCully’s head,” says Jim Anderton.
Rugby World Cup minister, Murray McCully has announced that spectators at world cup games will be able to drink beer from cans.
“All it would take is for a few intoxicated fans to use cans as missiles and chuck them at players in front of a world-wide television audience of over 500 million people. Our international reputation would be tarnished for years.
“This is our moment in the world spotlight. We won’t get another chance like this for decades. Murray McCully thinks it is not worth the cost of putting a system in our stadiums so that we can serve beer in plastic cups.
“It might cost $1 million to install that system at Eden Park but that is money well spent if it can protect our reputation overseas. The loss to New Zealand if a negative incident happens could be many more times that.
“The only people who benefit from cans at games is Heineken. They get their branding on every can. They wouldn’t if beer was served in plastic cups.
“The National government is prioritising the business needs of a beer company over New Zealand’s image as a good place to visit and do business. If a negative incident happens and gets transmitted across the world via YouTube and twitter in a matter of minutes, it will be on Murray McCully’s head,” says Jim Anderton.
Rugby song sounds like beer ad from the 1990s
02/04/10 16:26
“I would like to nominate Gary McCormick for New Zealand’s poet laureate because of his determination to campaign against the Rugby World Cup’s choice of theme song – an English song that sounds like an old beer ad from the 1990s,” says Jim Anderton.
“Prime Minister, John Key said today that he did not think it was ‘a missed opportunity to have a home grown song ring around the world’. So are we to understand that he approves of the use of an old English song, decades old?
“Of course it is a missed opportunity. Every other country would have picked a song which represented their own identity. It’s a chance to showcase our best musicians and our unique culture.
“We can’t blame Australia for promoting our musicians like Crowded House as their own, when we don’t even promote our own talent.”
The Rugby World Cup has chosen ‘Right Here, Right Now’ as the official theme song. It is a 1990 song originally recorded by UK band, Jesus Jones. The latest version has been covered by the Kiwi band, The Feelers.
“This is classic culture-cringe. We look like a country of covers bands. The truth is we have some wonderful home-grown artists and songs that have made it to the top of the charts internationally. Why not draw on this talent?
“Surely we could do better? It is not too late. I’d like to see another song. Why not a competition? That’s what we did when we hosted the commonwealth Games in 1974.
“In the meantime, I’ll be joining Gary McCormick and calling for a Kiwi song,” says Jim Anderton.
“Prime Minister, John Key said today that he did not think it was ‘a missed opportunity to have a home grown song ring around the world’. So are we to understand that he approves of the use of an old English song, decades old?
“Of course it is a missed opportunity. Every other country would have picked a song which represented their own identity. It’s a chance to showcase our best musicians and our unique culture.
“We can’t blame Australia for promoting our musicians like Crowded House as their own, when we don’t even promote our own talent.”
The Rugby World Cup has chosen ‘Right Here, Right Now’ as the official theme song. It is a 1990 song originally recorded by UK band, Jesus Jones. The latest version has been covered by the Kiwi band, The Feelers.
“This is classic culture-cringe. We look like a country of covers bands. The truth is we have some wonderful home-grown artists and songs that have made it to the top of the charts internationally. Why not draw on this talent?
“Surely we could do better? It is not too late. I’d like to see another song. Why not a competition? That’s what we did when we hosted the commonwealth Games in 1974.
“In the meantime, I’ll be joining Gary McCormick and calling for a Kiwi song,” says Jim Anderton.
ACC’s unlawful stealth policy change
30/03/10 16:30
People who are injured are having their claims ruled out because of a stealth policy change at ACC that the government won’t acknowledge, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
In parliament today he challenged the ACC minister over a doubling in the number of cases being taken on formal review after being declined because of a pre-existing condition.
“The law is clear that ACC cannot cover situations caused wholly or substantially by pre-existing conditions or aging. Fair enough. But the law does not permit ACC to decline cover just because of a pre-existing condition.
“Since the change of government, ACC has been declining cover on that ground in what appears to be unprecedented numbers. The government refuses to fess up to a policy change, but record numbers of people are contacting me. And how else to explain a doubling in numbers of claims sent for formal review - suddenly on national taking office.”
From 2004/05 the proportion of claims sent for formal review fluctuated between 0.13 and 0.18 per cent of all claims (about 2,200, to 3,000 a year). Suddenly, when national took office the numbers increased to 0.33 per cent. That would amount to around two thousand affected people.
Many thousands more people are having their claims denied, and can’t afford the cost of formal review and court cases.
Jim Anderton says the government has no satisfactory explanation for the sudden increase.
“There must have been a policy change. According to some of the best surgeons and specialists many of the ‘pre-existing conditions’ have nothing to do with the cause of injury and ACC has no grounds in law to reject people who need cover. This policy change is therefore unlawful,” Jim Anderton said.
The information below was provided by a series of written questions from the Minister for ACC and clearly shows that ACC did not have any information on which they could base policy changes as substantial as they have been.
In parliament today he challenged the ACC minister over a doubling in the number of cases being taken on formal review after being declined because of a pre-existing condition.
“The law is clear that ACC cannot cover situations caused wholly or substantially by pre-existing conditions or aging. Fair enough. But the law does not permit ACC to decline cover just because of a pre-existing condition.
“Since the change of government, ACC has been declining cover on that ground in what appears to be unprecedented numbers. The government refuses to fess up to a policy change, but record numbers of people are contacting me. And how else to explain a doubling in numbers of claims sent for formal review - suddenly on national taking office.”
From 2004/05 the proportion of claims sent for formal review fluctuated between 0.13 and 0.18 per cent of all claims (about 2,200, to 3,000 a year). Suddenly, when national took office the numbers increased to 0.33 per cent. That would amount to around two thousand affected people.
Many thousands more people are having their claims denied, and can’t afford the cost of formal review and court cases.
Jim Anderton says the government has no satisfactory explanation for the sudden increase.
“There must have been a policy change. According to some of the best surgeons and specialists many of the ‘pre-existing conditions’ have nothing to do with the cause of injury and ACC has no grounds in law to reject people who need cover. This policy change is therefore unlawful,” Jim Anderton said.
The information below was provided by a series of written questions from the Minister for ACC and clearly shows that ACC did not have any information on which they could base policy changes as substantial as they have been.
- ACC does not capture data on ‘pre-existing degeneration’, as a decline of cover classification,
- ACC does not capture data on the proportion of claims for treatment of shoulder injuries that have been declined due to a finding of ‘pre-existing degeneration’,
- ACC does not capture data regarding the number of reviews which dispute an ACC decision to decline treatments and/or cover on the grounds of ‘pre-existing degenerative’ condition,
- ACC does not capture data regarding the number of appeals which dispute an ACC decision to decline treatment and/or cover on the grounds of ‘pre-existing degenerative’ condition,
- ACC does not keep data on the average legal costs of defending court decisions relating to the presence of a ‘pre-existing degenerative’ condition,
Government cancels democracy in Canterbury
30/03/10 16:06
In an unprecedented attack on local democracy, the National government has seized control of local government in Canterbury and completely disregarded the wishes of ratepayers, says Jim Anderton, MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
Environment Minister Nick Smith and Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hyde today announced they would sack the Canterbury Regional Council. They also announced there will be no elections for at least three years.
“This is an outrage. 14 elected councillors have just been fired by the Ministers of Local Government and Environment, Rodney Hyde and Nick Smith.
The decision comes after a report by former National Party MP Wyatt Creech. The report recommended sacking the elected councillors and replacing them with appointed commissioners.
“Ratepayers and local farmers have not been consulted. The Councillors in the firing line have only been told this morning that their jobs are gone. This is the kind of response we read about happening in Fiji - not New Zealand.
“If this is how the government proposes to solve the water crisis in Canterbury, then I have grave concerns,” says Jim Anderton.
“ECan has made mistakes in its handling of water issues but it is ironic that ECan was on the brink of coming up with a coherent plan for dealing with the water crisis in Canterbury. Now any solution is on hold while the bureaucrats appointed by Rodney Hyde and Nick Smith move in to take over.
“If the government was serious about water, it would do more than spend a pathetic $700,000 per year through the Community Irrigation Fund on this problem. It would stop playing politics and get serious about water storage. We have plenty of water in and around Canterbury; our problem is how to store it. ECan was about to do something about that,” Jim Anderton said.
Environment Minister Nick Smith and Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hyde today announced they would sack the Canterbury Regional Council. They also announced there will be no elections for at least three years.
“This is an outrage. 14 elected councillors have just been fired by the Ministers of Local Government and Environment, Rodney Hyde and Nick Smith.
The decision comes after a report by former National Party MP Wyatt Creech. The report recommended sacking the elected councillors and replacing them with appointed commissioners.
“Ratepayers and local farmers have not been consulted. The Councillors in the firing line have only been told this morning that their jobs are gone. This is the kind of response we read about happening in Fiji - not New Zealand.
“If this is how the government proposes to solve the water crisis in Canterbury, then I have grave concerns,” says Jim Anderton.
“ECan has made mistakes in its handling of water issues but it is ironic that ECan was on the brink of coming up with a coherent plan for dealing with the water crisis in Canterbury. Now any solution is on hold while the bureaucrats appointed by Rodney Hyde and Nick Smith move in to take over.
“If the government was serious about water, it would do more than spend a pathetic $700,000 per year through the Community Irrigation Fund on this problem. It would stop playing politics and get serious about water storage. We have plenty of water in and around Canterbury; our problem is how to store it. ECan was about to do something about that,” Jim Anderton said.
Progressives contribute to heart surgery unit in Zambia
30/03/10 15:58
The Progressive Party has raised $1000 to help increase the number of heart operations in Zambia, particularly for young underprivileged Zambians with life-threatening conditions” says leader Jim Anderton.
The Mutima project is run by medical volunteers based in Christchurch and New Zealand.
It supports a cardiac surgical team from New Zealand to perform one hundred life-saving heart operations on young Zambian patients at the University Teaching Hospital in Lusaka.
“The long term goal is to create a dedicated cardiac surgery unit in Zambia so that they have the capacity and the know-how to perform these kinds of operations themselves,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton and other Progressive party members joined hundreds of Canterbury people, including many cardiac patients, on a six kilometre walk around Hagley Park on Sunday to raise money for the Mutima project.
“I am very proud that surgeons from our region have pioneered this project. I’m struck by the strength of the personal commitment of these local surgeons to serve and help others living thousands of miles away.
“We are a stronger and more caring community because we live amongst people like this.”
Zambia is a poor landlocked country in Southern Africa with a population of about 12 million. 60% live in poverty, earning less than $1 a day. One in five adults is infected by HIV.
The Mutima Trust was formed in 2009. In September a team of specialists will travel to Zambia for three weeks where they will carry out the first of one hundred heart valve replacements on young Zambians.
“These kind of projects leave behind a better functioning hospital system so that in the future Zambian surgeons can perform critical surgery themselves and projects like Mutima won’t be necessary. That is the best kind of aid and development, and I congratulate everyone involved, ” says Jim Anderton
The Mutima project is run by medical volunteers based in Christchurch and New Zealand.
It supports a cardiac surgical team from New Zealand to perform one hundred life-saving heart operations on young Zambian patients at the University Teaching Hospital in Lusaka.
“The long term goal is to create a dedicated cardiac surgery unit in Zambia so that they have the capacity and the know-how to perform these kinds of operations themselves,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton and other Progressive party members joined hundreds of Canterbury people, including many cardiac patients, on a six kilometre walk around Hagley Park on Sunday to raise money for the Mutima project.
“I am very proud that surgeons from our region have pioneered this project. I’m struck by the strength of the personal commitment of these local surgeons to serve and help others living thousands of miles away.
“We are a stronger and more caring community because we live amongst people like this.”
Zambia is a poor landlocked country in Southern Africa with a population of about 12 million. 60% live in poverty, earning less than $1 a day. One in five adults is infected by HIV.
The Mutima Trust was formed in 2009. In September a team of specialists will travel to Zambia for three weeks where they will carry out the first of one hundred heart valve replacements on young Zambians.
“These kind of projects leave behind a better functioning hospital system so that in the future Zambian surgeons can perform critical surgery themselves and projects like Mutima won’t be necessary. That is the best kind of aid and development, and I congratulate everyone involved, ” says Jim Anderton
Collective responsibility does not require Turia to vote for more Maori unemployment
30/03/10 14:59
Claims that ministerial collective responsibility stops Tariana Turia from voting against the government’s welfare reforms are a convenient fiction, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“Ms Turia is ignoring the last decade of political practice within MMP agreements that allow for minority parties as coalition partners in government to agree to disagree. When I was a minister I voted against the government several times, including against a free trade deal. If it was possible to do that, then it is possible for Ms Turia to vote against welfare changes.
“If, as Ms Turia states, she has not been briefed on the welfare reforms and the Maori Party leadership has not committed to vote for them in the House, Ms Turia is under no obligation at all to vote for them. To say she has to as a minister is just not politically accurate. She is tying herself in knots by speaking out against them, but then claiming she has to vote for them anyway.
“The welfare changes won’t create any jobs, or the skills that long-term job seekers need. If Ms Turia and the Maori Party disagree with the changes, then it is possible for ministers to agree to disagree. That allows parties to support the policies they voted for, instead of abandoning their own people, as Ms Turia appears to be doing by supporting higher Maori unemployment,” Jim Anderton said.
“Ms Turia is ignoring the last decade of political practice within MMP agreements that allow for minority parties as coalition partners in government to agree to disagree. When I was a minister I voted against the government several times, including against a free trade deal. If it was possible to do that, then it is possible for Ms Turia to vote against welfare changes.
“If, as Ms Turia states, she has not been briefed on the welfare reforms and the Maori Party leadership has not committed to vote for them in the House, Ms Turia is under no obligation at all to vote for them. To say she has to as a minister is just not politically accurate. She is tying herself in knots by speaking out against them, but then claiming she has to vote for them anyway.
“The welfare changes won’t create any jobs, or the skills that long-term job seekers need. If Ms Turia and the Maori Party disagree with the changes, then it is possible for ministers to agree to disagree. That allows parties to support the policies they voted for, instead of abandoning their own people, as Ms Turia appears to be doing by supporting higher Maori unemployment,” Jim Anderton said.
Save 198 Youth Health Centre
18/03/10 10:14
Save 198 Youth Health Centre
Jim Anderton’s address to rally
The services provided by the 198 Youth Health Centre over the last 10 years have played a critical part in the mental and physical well-being of tens of thousands of our most vulnerable young citizens, local Wigram MP, Jim Anderton said today.
“At a time when the National led government is calling for more services in the areas of mental health, comprehensive health services to primary care/general practitioner level, not to mention nursing, family planning, counselling vaccinations, alcohol and drug, sexual and reproductive health, peer support and smoking cessation services, this is the very worst time to cease adequate funding for 198 which provides exactly these services.
“With increasing unemployment, increasing social and housing needs, together with cuts in ACC, health and education, such a move would simply be a disaster,” Jim Anderton said.
“It is even more inexplicable when the Canterbury DHB is suggesting the need for a “One Stop Shop” for these services which, of course, 198 already provides.
“At a time when the Christchurch City Council is also reducing its funding for voluntary community organisations it is vitally important that concerned citizens in this city vigorously protest against this serious backward step in the provision of these and other crucial community services.
“For the 198 Youth Health Centre services to continue requires only a very modest amount of additional government funding, approximately around $100,000 per year for what is already a low cost, high quality health service.
“Good wishes for your protest. Be assured that I and my Labour Parliamentary colleagues will be joining you in this fight. I’m certain it is one we can win, no matter how long it takes,” Jim Anderton said.
Jim Anderton’s address to rally
The services provided by the 198 Youth Health Centre over the last 10 years have played a critical part in the mental and physical well-being of tens of thousands of our most vulnerable young citizens, local Wigram MP, Jim Anderton said today.
“At a time when the National led government is calling for more services in the areas of mental health, comprehensive health services to primary care/general practitioner level, not to mention nursing, family planning, counselling vaccinations, alcohol and drug, sexual and reproductive health, peer support and smoking cessation services, this is the very worst time to cease adequate funding for 198 which provides exactly these services.
“With increasing unemployment, increasing social and housing needs, together with cuts in ACC, health and education, such a move would simply be a disaster,” Jim Anderton said.
“It is even more inexplicable when the Canterbury DHB is suggesting the need for a “One Stop Shop” for these services which, of course, 198 already provides.
“At a time when the Christchurch City Council is also reducing its funding for voluntary community organisations it is vitally important that concerned citizens in this city vigorously protest against this serious backward step in the provision of these and other crucial community services.
“For the 198 Youth Health Centre services to continue requires only a very modest amount of additional government funding, approximately around $100,000 per year for what is already a low cost, high quality health service.
“Good wishes for your protest. Be assured that I and my Labour Parliamentary colleagues will be joining you in this fight. I’m certain it is one we can win, no matter how long it takes,” Jim Anderton said.
Mental health disaster unfolding in Canterbury DHB
18/03/10 10:08
Something has gone terribly wrong with the Canterbury DHB’s management of New Zealand’s only high quality Eating Disorder Unit, Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He says the resignation of the clinical director, Geoff Buckett, is only the latest disaster.
Dr Buckett is going to Sydney to work for one of the best eating disorder clinics in the world. He has been highly critical of the ‘exclusion from decision making tables’ of the mental health service, and especially of plans to remove adolescents from specialty care.
Jim Anderton has learned that eleven other psychiatrists have also recently resigned, including the chief of psychiatry Dr Phil Brinded.
“Why is the Board and management of the Canterbury DHB overseeing this disaster, with apparent disregard for the serious consequences for the most vulnerable patients and families anyone can imagine?
“Either they know about it and have done nothing, or they don’t know, which is almost worse.
“With the 198 Youth Centre Service going down one day and the Eating Disorder Unit the next, one wonders what else is about to happen to an already fragile mental health system.”
He says the resignation of the clinical director, Geoff Buckett, is only the latest disaster.
Dr Buckett is going to Sydney to work for one of the best eating disorder clinics in the world. He has been highly critical of the ‘exclusion from decision making tables’ of the mental health service, and especially of plans to remove adolescents from specialty care.
Jim Anderton has learned that eleven other psychiatrists have also recently resigned, including the chief of psychiatry Dr Phil Brinded.
“Why is the Board and management of the Canterbury DHB overseeing this disaster, with apparent disregard for the serious consequences for the most vulnerable patients and families anyone can imagine?
“Either they know about it and have done nothing, or they don’t know, which is almost worse.
“With the 198 Youth Centre Service going down one day and the Eating Disorder Unit the next, one wonders what else is about to happen to an already fragile mental health system.”
Anti-science government axes jobs
16/03/10 13:29
Future growth in the most productive parts of New Zealand’s economy will be reduced because of the Government’s decision to axe forty jobs at AgResearch, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
“Our future prosperity and jobs depend on science and innovation, and the sector where innovation and science makes the most difference in New Zealand is the primary sector.
“But today the government is hacking off over forty jobs, mainly in meat and wool research.
“I thought when the government axed the $700 million Fast Forward primary sector and innovation fund that it was coasting in neutral. But this is actually going backwards.
“Fast Forward was meant to work in partnership with the private sector and with agencies like AgResearch to speed up New Zealand’s economic development. After it was axed, nothing has happened for eighteen months - that’s why demand for AgResearch’s long term research and development is falling.
“Farmers won’t carry all the costs on their own back. They need a commitment from government as well.
“Having canned the innovation fund, the loss of jobs announced today is the direct result of the government’s anti-science policies,” Jim Anderton said.
“Our future prosperity and jobs depend on science and innovation, and the sector where innovation and science makes the most difference in New Zealand is the primary sector.
“But today the government is hacking off over forty jobs, mainly in meat and wool research.
“I thought when the government axed the $700 million Fast Forward primary sector and innovation fund that it was coasting in neutral. But this is actually going backwards.
“Fast Forward was meant to work in partnership with the private sector and with agencies like AgResearch to speed up New Zealand’s economic development. After it was axed, nothing has happened for eighteen months - that’s why demand for AgResearch’s long term research and development is falling.
“Farmers won’t carry all the costs on their own back. They need a commitment from government as well.
“Having canned the innovation fund, the loss of jobs announced today is the direct result of the government’s anti-science policies,” Jim Anderton said.
FAI Money should never have been given a Crown guarantee
11/03/10 14:00
A decision by FAI to stop raising money from the public without the government guarantee shows the company should never have been given a Crown guarantee in the first place, Progressive Party leader and Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
FAI Money has reportedly written to investors saying the company would no longer be raising money from the public to fund its lending. FAI is owned by Hanover and, through a network of companies, by Mark Hotchin and Eric Watson.
“The Crown guarantee was the only thing that kept FAI Money in the public marketplace,” Jim Anderton said.
“But FAI should not have been in the public marketplace after what happened to Hanover, and the behaviour of Mr Hotchin and Mr Watson.”
Jim Anderton says the Crown guarantee was introduced to make sure there wouldn’t be a run on financial institutions in the difficult global economic conditions of late 2008 and 2009.
“The guarantee was never intended to provide backing for businesses that were not going to cut the mustard in more normal times. Treasury’s guidelines for considering a Crown guarantee were ‘the maintenance of public confidence in New Zealand’s financial system; and maintaining the confidence of general public depositors in New Zealand financial institutions.’
“The guarantee for FAI never met that guideline. The Treasury says factors that should be taken into account in giving a guarantee include the size of the entity and related party exposure, the business practice of the entity, the ‘good character’ and business acumen of the entity and “The track record of the entity.”
“Bill English should never have allowed Hotchin and Watson’s business to get a Crown guarantee and the confirmation today that they will not be seeking funds from the pubic proves it.
“The Crown guarantee was a good policy; but that doesn’t mean everyone should have got it”
Jim Anderton has been raising queries about the Crown guarantee for FAI since early 2009.
In 2008, before the global meltdown and the Crown guarantee, Hanover froze over half a billion of investors’ money.
FAI Money has reportedly written to investors saying the company would no longer be raising money from the public to fund its lending. FAI is owned by Hanover and, through a network of companies, by Mark Hotchin and Eric Watson.
“The Crown guarantee was the only thing that kept FAI Money in the public marketplace,” Jim Anderton said.
“But FAI should not have been in the public marketplace after what happened to Hanover, and the behaviour of Mr Hotchin and Mr Watson.”
Jim Anderton says the Crown guarantee was introduced to make sure there wouldn’t be a run on financial institutions in the difficult global economic conditions of late 2008 and 2009.
“The guarantee was never intended to provide backing for businesses that were not going to cut the mustard in more normal times. Treasury’s guidelines for considering a Crown guarantee were ‘the maintenance of public confidence in New Zealand’s financial system; and maintaining the confidence of general public depositors in New Zealand financial institutions.’
“The guarantee for FAI never met that guideline. The Treasury says factors that should be taken into account in giving a guarantee include the size of the entity and related party exposure, the business practice of the entity, the ‘good character’ and business acumen of the entity and “The track record of the entity.”
“Bill English should never have allowed Hotchin and Watson’s business to get a Crown guarantee and the confirmation today that they will not be seeking funds from the pubic proves it.
“The Crown guarantee was a good policy; but that doesn’t mean everyone should have got it”
Jim Anderton has been raising queries about the Crown guarantee for FAI since early 2009.
In 2008, before the global meltdown and the Crown guarantee, Hanover froze over half a billion of investors’ money.
Kiwis didn’t want Telecom privatised, says ex CEO
05/03/10 15:47
Former CEO, Theresa Gattung has admitted that New Zealanders would have preferred Telecom to remain in public hands.
“After years of resisting attempts to open up the telecommunications market and fighting every move we made in government to increase competition so the public had a choice, Ms Gattung now confesses that there was nothing in a privatised Telecom for the public anyway,” says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
Ms Gattung said on Radio New Zealand’s Nine-to-Noon show this morning that the basic problem for Telecom was ‘a fundamental disconnect’ that Kiwis would have preferred Telecom to be a State Owned Enterprise (SOE) and ‘never have actually been a private company.’
She said that the SOE model of ‘commercial imperative but public good, sits much more comfortably with the Kiwi psyche.’
“It’s a shame she couldn’t have acknowledged that when she was the CEO of Telecom,” says Jim Anderton.
“The public of New Zealand are still getting the raw end of the deal when it comes to Telecom. Today it’s the failure of the XT network. In 1990 it was Roger Douglas and Richard Prebble selling Telecom for a song to US companies who on-sold it a few years later and walked away with $10 billion tax free.
Telecom was sold in 1990 for $4.25 billion to an American consortium of Ameritech and Bell Atlantic. The two American companies subsequently sold Telecom for $14 billion, making an untaxed capital gain of $10 billion.
“Theresa Gattung calls Telecom ‘a train wreck’. Well the wreck started in 1990. Ms. Gattung didn’t help to fix the wreck. She resisted the Labour Progressive government’s attempts to open the market and regulate Telecom’s monopoly. Despite her resistance we still managed to open the market considerably,” says Jim Anderton.
“Theresa Gattung is trying to re-write history and ignore the fact that Telecom should never have been sold off like the family silver, then a privatised Telecom monopoly allowed to dominate the telecommunications market in New Zealand for over a decade,” says Jim Anderton.
“After years of resisting attempts to open up the telecommunications market and fighting every move we made in government to increase competition so the public had a choice, Ms Gattung now confesses that there was nothing in a privatised Telecom for the public anyway,” says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader.
Ms Gattung said on Radio New Zealand’s Nine-to-Noon show this morning that the basic problem for Telecom was ‘a fundamental disconnect’ that Kiwis would have preferred Telecom to be a State Owned Enterprise (SOE) and ‘never have actually been a private company.’
She said that the SOE model of ‘commercial imperative but public good, sits much more comfortably with the Kiwi psyche.’
“It’s a shame she couldn’t have acknowledged that when she was the CEO of Telecom,” says Jim Anderton.
“The public of New Zealand are still getting the raw end of the deal when it comes to Telecom. Today it’s the failure of the XT network. In 1990 it was Roger Douglas and Richard Prebble selling Telecom for a song to US companies who on-sold it a few years later and walked away with $10 billion tax free.
Telecom was sold in 1990 for $4.25 billion to an American consortium of Ameritech and Bell Atlantic. The two American companies subsequently sold Telecom for $14 billion, making an untaxed capital gain of $10 billion.
“Theresa Gattung calls Telecom ‘a train wreck’. Well the wreck started in 1990. Ms. Gattung didn’t help to fix the wreck. She resisted the Labour Progressive government’s attempts to open the market and regulate Telecom’s monopoly. Despite her resistance we still managed to open the market considerably,” says Jim Anderton.
“Theresa Gattung is trying to re-write history and ignore the fact that Telecom should never have been sold off like the family silver, then a privatised Telecom monopoly allowed to dominate the telecommunications market in New Zealand for over a decade,” says Jim Anderton.
Save men’s help-line
04/03/10 15:19
Suicide rates are on the decline, but more men than women are still dying. This is not the time to get rid of New Zealand’s only phone counselling service set up to help men, says Jim Anderton MP for Wigram and former minister responsible for the government’s suicide prevention strategy.
Health Ministry figures show that 370 of the 483 people who killed themselves in 2007 were men.
“When I was the Associate Health Minister in the last Labour-Progressive government, we put considerable funding into public campaigns about depression and suicide prevention. We knew we had to target men deliberately because it was harder to reach them.
“Campaigns fronted by ex-rugby player John Kirwan have been very successful in de-stigmatising mental illness and raising awareness of depression. The fact that a male role model was chosen to front this campaign was deliberate.”
Lifeline runs the national helpline set up for men, but because of a funding crisis caused by the recession, the ‘Mensline’ will close tomorrow. All calls will be diverter to general Lifeline counsellors who are 75 per cent female.
Mensline has been funded by a number of private and public sponsors.
“I call on the Minister of Health to step in and work out how we can keep this line going. I suspect that the money required to restore the service is considerably less than it costs to fund other help lines like Quitline for smokers or the Gambling Helpline,” says Jim Anderton.
“The New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) puts a price on a life lost when it decides which black spots to fix. The more lives lost at the black spot, the more likely the road will get fixed. The cost of one life lost is reckoned to be about $2.5 million.
“Surely the government can find what is likely to be a fraction of that, to keep this helpline going and potentially save many lives,” says Jim Anderton.
Health Ministry figures show that 370 of the 483 people who killed themselves in 2007 were men.
“When I was the Associate Health Minister in the last Labour-Progressive government, we put considerable funding into public campaigns about depression and suicide prevention. We knew we had to target men deliberately because it was harder to reach them.
“Campaigns fronted by ex-rugby player John Kirwan have been very successful in de-stigmatising mental illness and raising awareness of depression. The fact that a male role model was chosen to front this campaign was deliberate.”
Lifeline runs the national helpline set up for men, but because of a funding crisis caused by the recession, the ‘Mensline’ will close tomorrow. All calls will be diverter to general Lifeline counsellors who are 75 per cent female.
Mensline has been funded by a number of private and public sponsors.
“I call on the Minister of Health to step in and work out how we can keep this line going. I suspect that the money required to restore the service is considerably less than it costs to fund other help lines like Quitline for smokers or the Gambling Helpline,” says Jim Anderton.
“The New Zealand Transport Authority (NZTA) puts a price on a life lost when it decides which black spots to fix. The more lives lost at the black spot, the more likely the road will get fixed. The cost of one life lost is reckoned to be about $2.5 million.
“Surely the government can find what is likely to be a fraction of that, to keep this helpline going and potentially save many lives,” says Jim Anderton.
ACC relies on out-dated methods to test injuries
25/02/10 15:09
Accident victims who are being turned away by ACC because of fictitious ‘pre-existing conditions’ are in some cases being assessed by non-practicing elderly surgeons who rely on text books dating back to 1934, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader, Jim Anderton.
An orthopaedic surgeon has contacted Jim Anderton to express concern that 85% of their patients needing surgery after accidents are being rejected on below-average assessments by a company contracted and paid by ACC to test claims.
“This seems a clear conflict of interest.
“A specialist surgeon currently practicing, and using the latest equipment and clinical research decides that a plumber who has fallen at work needs shoulder surgery as a result of the accident. Then retired surgeons, who are no longer specialists, probably never used an MIR scan in their working lives, and quoting from a text book which dates back to 1934, reject the claim on behalf of ACC, because of ‘pre-existing’ conditions.”
“The onus of proof had been reversed by ACC and is now on the patient to prove that their injury occurred at the time of their accident, and not ACC’s job to prove that there was a pre-existing condition. And yet there has been no public debate about this.
“It’s happened behind the scenes, and the public have been kept in the dark.”
The surgeon who contacted Mr Anderton’s office recently saw a seventeen year old who plays water polo competitively. The teenager had dislocated her shoulder and needed surgery. But ACC rejected her claim on the basis that the girl was ‘pre-disposed to dislocate her shoulder because she was very flexible.’
“That’s rubbish; it’s like saying someone is ‘pre-disposed to break their arm.’
“The typical patient being rejected is fit and well, and has been involved in occupations like the construction industry up until the time of their injury.”
“There’s no money saved here; specialists predict that up to 50% of these people who don’t get treatment straight away will have marked deterioration as they get older and will require much more expensive surgery later in life,” says Jim Anderton
An orthopaedic surgeon has contacted Jim Anderton to express concern that 85% of their patients needing surgery after accidents are being rejected on below-average assessments by a company contracted and paid by ACC to test claims.
“This seems a clear conflict of interest.
“A specialist surgeon currently practicing, and using the latest equipment and clinical research decides that a plumber who has fallen at work needs shoulder surgery as a result of the accident. Then retired surgeons, who are no longer specialists, probably never used an MIR scan in their working lives, and quoting from a text book which dates back to 1934, reject the claim on behalf of ACC, because of ‘pre-existing’ conditions.”
“The onus of proof had been reversed by ACC and is now on the patient to prove that their injury occurred at the time of their accident, and not ACC’s job to prove that there was a pre-existing condition. And yet there has been no public debate about this.
“It’s happened behind the scenes, and the public have been kept in the dark.”
The surgeon who contacted Mr Anderton’s office recently saw a seventeen year old who plays water polo competitively. The teenager had dislocated her shoulder and needed surgery. But ACC rejected her claim on the basis that the girl was ‘pre-disposed to dislocate her shoulder because she was very flexible.’
“That’s rubbish; it’s like saying someone is ‘pre-disposed to break their arm.’
“The typical patient being rejected is fit and well, and has been involved in occupations like the construction industry up until the time of their injury.”
“There’s no money saved here; specialists predict that up to 50% of these people who don’t get treatment straight away will have marked deterioration as they get older and will require much more expensive surgery later in life,” says Jim Anderton
Fisheries decision shows Fish Act is ‘hopeless’
23/02/10 17:06
A decision that stopped a fishery being closed in 2008 risked judicial extinction of a species of dolphin, Progressive leader and Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
A High Court judge has today decided a case brought by the fishing industry against Jim Anderton’s decision, as fisheries minister, to close some fisheries to protect rare and endangered species of dolphin.
The fishing industry won an injunction in 2008 against the closure in some parts of the coastline. The judge has taken until now to decide the case.
The injunction meant the fishery remained open in spite of the fact that an acknowledged risk to the species existed from continued fishing.
“Since the injunction was granted I understand at least one more dolphins has been caught. Big fishing companies, through their court action, risked judicial extinction of an entire species of dolphin,” Jim Anderton said.
The High Court today upheld the original decision in the Manukau harbour, West Coast of the South island, Te Waewae Bay and Bluff.
“It’s too easy for self-interested applicants to get an injunction that threatens a species’ survival.
“I couldn’t change the Act to ensure sustainability because of the influence of big fishing money on political parties.
“Two years have gone by while the dolphins were at risk, only for it to turn out that the judge found the original decisions were justified
“A ministerial decision to close the fishery can only be made after substantial scientific evidence is compiled and enormous amounts of evidence and advice weighed. It’s hopeless for a Judge to be able to come in and substitute his decision for the original one. Decisions to close the fishery should only be set aside when the minister’s decision is manifestly unreasonable.
“In 2008 I tried to change the law to ensure the sustainability of our fisheries. Those efforts were thwarted by NZ First, National and the Maori Party. It later emerged that NZ First had taken $9990 secret ‘donations’ from big fishing. I believe the Maori Party and the National party need to disclose whether they have accepted donations from those interests as well.
“The fishing industry’s behaviour is grotesque and selfish. Enormous damage would be done to New Zealand’s exports if a species went extinct on our watch, but those who took the injunction were clearly putting their own interests first,” Jim Anderton said.
A High Court judge has today decided a case brought by the fishing industry against Jim Anderton’s decision, as fisheries minister, to close some fisheries to protect rare and endangered species of dolphin.
The fishing industry won an injunction in 2008 against the closure in some parts of the coastline. The judge has taken until now to decide the case.
The injunction meant the fishery remained open in spite of the fact that an acknowledged risk to the species existed from continued fishing.
“Since the injunction was granted I understand at least one more dolphins has been caught. Big fishing companies, through their court action, risked judicial extinction of an entire species of dolphin,” Jim Anderton said.
The High Court today upheld the original decision in the Manukau harbour, West Coast of the South island, Te Waewae Bay and Bluff.
“It’s too easy for self-interested applicants to get an injunction that threatens a species’ survival.
“I couldn’t change the Act to ensure sustainability because of the influence of big fishing money on political parties.
“Two years have gone by while the dolphins were at risk, only for it to turn out that the judge found the original decisions were justified
“A ministerial decision to close the fishery can only be made after substantial scientific evidence is compiled and enormous amounts of evidence and advice weighed. It’s hopeless for a Judge to be able to come in and substitute his decision for the original one. Decisions to close the fishery should only be set aside when the minister’s decision is manifestly unreasonable.
“In 2008 I tried to change the law to ensure the sustainability of our fisheries. Those efforts were thwarted by NZ First, National and the Maori Party. It later emerged that NZ First had taken $9990 secret ‘donations’ from big fishing. I believe the Maori Party and the National party need to disclose whether they have accepted donations from those interests as well.
“The fishing industry’s behaviour is grotesque and selfish. Enormous damage would be done to New Zealand’s exports if a species went extinct on our watch, but those who took the injunction were clearly putting their own interests first,” Jim Anderton said.
Kiwibank stays in Kiwi market - and makes a profit
19/02/10 16:08
Kiwibank has made a profit during the worst recession in decades by staying in the New Zealand market and refusing to gamble on overseas currencies like the big Australian banks, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
“This is a remarkable achievement, worth celebrating.”
Kiwibank announced today that it had made a profit of $23.5 million after tax for the six months ended December 31, 2009.
“It’s succeeded because it gets most of its deposits from, and does most of its lending in the New Zealand market,” says Jim Anderton.
“One of its strongest areas is its support for small and medium sized businesses in New Zealand.”
Kiwibank was the only bank to front up at last year’s Parliamentary Banking Inquiry. The inquiry established that the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks did not pass on all of the cut in the OCR (Official cash Rate) to home owners, credit card holders and businesses in New Zealand.
The inquiry also criticised the Australian owned banks for contributing to our volatile exchange rate. Exporters are particularly hurt by sudden and frequent changes in the exchange rate.
“In contrast to Kiwibank, the Australian banks borrowed a lot of money from overseas to fund their lending in New Zealand. This has a significant effect on our exchange rate by holding it up regardless of the real economic circumstances of New Zealand.
“The export sector, including farmers make up roughly 30% of our GDP - about $40 billion per year. But suffer the most from currency instability.
“I would like to see the government provide more capital funding for Kiwibank in order to promote more competition amongst banks and increase the share of local funding for lending.
“The Australian owned banks don’t have a vested interest in strengthening the New Zealand economy. Kiwibank does. It stayed in the New Zealand market, and today its success is our success too,” says Jim Anderton.
“This is a remarkable achievement, worth celebrating.”
Kiwibank announced today that it had made a profit of $23.5 million after tax for the six months ended December 31, 2009.
“It’s succeeded because it gets most of its deposits from, and does most of its lending in the New Zealand market,” says Jim Anderton.
“One of its strongest areas is its support for small and medium sized businesses in New Zealand.”
Kiwibank was the only bank to front up at last year’s Parliamentary Banking Inquiry. The inquiry established that the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks did not pass on all of the cut in the OCR (Official cash Rate) to home owners, credit card holders and businesses in New Zealand.
The inquiry also criticised the Australian owned banks for contributing to our volatile exchange rate. Exporters are particularly hurt by sudden and frequent changes in the exchange rate.
“In contrast to Kiwibank, the Australian banks borrowed a lot of money from overseas to fund their lending in New Zealand. This has a significant effect on our exchange rate by holding it up regardless of the real economic circumstances of New Zealand.
“The export sector, including farmers make up roughly 30% of our GDP - about $40 billion per year. But suffer the most from currency instability.
“I would like to see the government provide more capital funding for Kiwibank in order to promote more competition amongst banks and increase the share of local funding for lending.
“The Australian owned banks don’t have a vested interest in strengthening the New Zealand economy. Kiwibank does. It stayed in the New Zealand market, and today its success is our success too,” says Jim Anderton.
ACC turning people away
18/02/10 15:09
Victims of vicious attacks, a 17 year old girl who had an accident at the gym, and many other accident victims, are being turned away by ACC for having non-existent ‘pre-existing conditions’, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader, Jim Anderton.
The Minister indicated in Parliament today that he would be willing to look at this issue if a clear pattern emerges.
“There is a clear pattern. He needs to do something now. My electorate office, and the offices of other MPs in Christchurch are inundated with stories of people who have been turned away by ACC after accidents or attacks,” says Jim Anderton.
“Wayne Direen, one of my constituents, was injured in an unprovoked attack in Christchurch, and sustained multiple injuries.
“Initially ACC paid for his treatment, but when his shoulder failed to come right, his GP referred him to an orthopaedic surgeon who recommended surgery. ACC declined to cover the surgery on the basis that the shoulder injury was a ‘pre-existing condition’ – which is clearly ludicrous.
“He had been a keen martial arts student and a rugby league player before the attack, and clearly did not have a long term shoulder problem - until the night he was attacked,” says Jim Anderton.
“Other cases include a businessman with his own cleaning business who fell at work and hurt his knee. He had no trouble with his knee prior to the accident, but again ACC declined to cover surgery on the grounds that he had a pre-existing medical condition.
“A self-employed electrician broke his elbow at work. ACC covered treatment for the bruising but not the broken bone because the break had caused on-going nerve problems which required surgery. He was forced to sell his wife’s car to pay for the operation.
“There are many more cases like this. Some of these people have contacted Nick Smith Minister for ACC, only to be sent away and told to take their case to the District Court. None of my constituents can afford to take this option, nor should they have to. Nick Smith needs to take responsibility and do something to stop this happening,” says Jim Anderton.
The Minister indicated in Parliament today that he would be willing to look at this issue if a clear pattern emerges.
“There is a clear pattern. He needs to do something now. My electorate office, and the offices of other MPs in Christchurch are inundated with stories of people who have been turned away by ACC after accidents or attacks,” says Jim Anderton.
“Wayne Direen, one of my constituents, was injured in an unprovoked attack in Christchurch, and sustained multiple injuries.
“Initially ACC paid for his treatment, but when his shoulder failed to come right, his GP referred him to an orthopaedic surgeon who recommended surgery. ACC declined to cover the surgery on the basis that the shoulder injury was a ‘pre-existing condition’ – which is clearly ludicrous.
“He had been a keen martial arts student and a rugby league player before the attack, and clearly did not have a long term shoulder problem - until the night he was attacked,” says Jim Anderton.
“Other cases include a businessman with his own cleaning business who fell at work and hurt his knee. He had no trouble with his knee prior to the accident, but again ACC declined to cover surgery on the grounds that he had a pre-existing medical condition.
“A self-employed electrician broke his elbow at work. ACC covered treatment for the bruising but not the broken bone because the break had caused on-going nerve problems which required surgery. He was forced to sell his wife’s car to pay for the operation.
“There are many more cases like this. Some of these people have contacted Nick Smith Minister for ACC, only to be sent away and told to take their case to the District Court. None of my constituents can afford to take this option, nor should they have to. Nick Smith needs to take responsibility and do something to stop this happening,” says Jim Anderton.
Government needs to resource animal welfare
18/02/10 14:07
Read Jim Anderton’s speech in Parliament on the Animal Welfare Bill. Click here.
“Increasing the penalty for cruelty to animals is the right thing to do, but unless you resource investigations and give staff the right tools to measure animal welfare, it’s just window dressing,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill had its first reading in Parliament today.
It will increase the maximum penalty for cruelty to animals from three years to five and introduce the new offence of ‘reckless cruelty’ to capture those offenders not covered under existing legislation.
“There are only five full-time staff at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry whose job it is to investigate animal cruelty, plus seven contractors. They have to cover the whole country. They are already stretched, and rely heavily on one hundred SPCA volunteers to monitor breaches wherever they occur.
“Unless the National-led government is prepared to increase the number of staff and increase the resources to investigate incidents of cruelty, this Bill will unfortunately end up as little more than window dressing.
“There’s no point in increasing the penalty if you don’t have people on the streets and in the fields to investigate the crime.”
“This government has already cut front-line staff in areas like biosecurity. When the Hadda Beetle was found in Auckland recently - it wasn’t found by a biosecurity staffer. It was found by a man walking his dog in an Auckland park.
“Perhaps that same man can monitor breaches of the Animal Welfare Act while he’s at it.”
“The other problem is how do we measure animal cruelty? It’s not easy to measure how an animal feels unless you have industry tested standards.
“When I was Minister we were keen that the Fast Forward Fund of over $700 million would help to fund research into standards and techniques for measuring animal welfare.
“This would have helped us deepen our research into animal welfare. We have to be leaders in the best techniques, not just the substantive results of our measuring. But the National-led government axed the Fast Forward Fund and replaced it with the Primary Growth Partnership which has yet to fund a single research project.”
“Increasing the penalty for cruelty to animals is the right thing to do, but unless you resource investigations and give staff the right tools to measure animal welfare, it’s just window dressing,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
The Animal Welfare Amendment Bill had its first reading in Parliament today.
It will increase the maximum penalty for cruelty to animals from three years to five and introduce the new offence of ‘reckless cruelty’ to capture those offenders not covered under existing legislation.
“There are only five full-time staff at the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry whose job it is to investigate animal cruelty, plus seven contractors. They have to cover the whole country. They are already stretched, and rely heavily on one hundred SPCA volunteers to monitor breaches wherever they occur.
“Unless the National-led government is prepared to increase the number of staff and increase the resources to investigate incidents of cruelty, this Bill will unfortunately end up as little more than window dressing.
“There’s no point in increasing the penalty if you don’t have people on the streets and in the fields to investigate the crime.”
“This government has already cut front-line staff in areas like biosecurity. When the Hadda Beetle was found in Auckland recently - it wasn’t found by a biosecurity staffer. It was found by a man walking his dog in an Auckland park.
“Perhaps that same man can monitor breaches of the Animal Welfare Act while he’s at it.”
“The other problem is how do we measure animal cruelty? It’s not easy to measure how an animal feels unless you have industry tested standards.
“When I was Minister we were keen that the Fast Forward Fund of over $700 million would help to fund research into standards and techniques for measuring animal welfare.
“This would have helped us deepen our research into animal welfare. We have to be leaders in the best techniques, not just the substantive results of our measuring. But the National-led government axed the Fast Forward Fund and replaced it with the Primary Growth Partnership which has yet to fund a single research project.”
Plan for economy does not stack up
09/02/10 16:00
The plan for our economy announced by the Government this morning is a huge disappointment, Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
“National thinks all we need to do to catch up to Australia is increase the price of a loaf of bread, increase the price of a litre of milk, increase the price of a litre of petrol, and put up the price of electricity,” Jim Anderton said.
“This from a prime minister who said before the election, “if National is elected and does a ‘half decent job’ at growing the economy, then increasing GST and the top tax rate will not be necessary.”
“New Zealand needs higher incomes not higher costs.
“The National Government has no plan for jobs, and no plan to increase wages.
“National slashed the R&D tax credit and abolished the two billion dollar Fast Forward fund. When it now says we need more science - those are just words. Its actions tell a different story.
Last year John Key told the Wall Street Journal, “We can use this recession to transform the economy to make us stronger so that when the world starts growing again we can be running faster than other countries we compete with.”
"His plan today will not transform the economy and make us stronger? How does putting up GST make us run faster than countries we compete with?
"Changing the tax system is not economic change. Compare that pathetic response to the Labour-Progressive government’s R&D tax credit of around $350 million, the largest ever company tax cut, a huge programme of personal tax cuts particularly for low to middle income earners and the largest ever investment in science in New Zealand.
“It just doesn’t stack up,” Jim Anderton said in Parliament.
“National thinks all we need to do to catch up to Australia is increase the price of a loaf of bread, increase the price of a litre of milk, increase the price of a litre of petrol, and put up the price of electricity,” Jim Anderton said.
“This from a prime minister who said before the election, “if National is elected and does a ‘half decent job’ at growing the economy, then increasing GST and the top tax rate will not be necessary.”
“New Zealand needs higher incomes not higher costs.
“The National Government has no plan for jobs, and no plan to increase wages.
“National slashed the R&D tax credit and abolished the two billion dollar Fast Forward fund. When it now says we need more science - those are just words. Its actions tell a different story.
Last year John Key told the Wall Street Journal, “We can use this recession to transform the economy to make us stronger so that when the world starts growing again we can be running faster than other countries we compete with.”
"His plan today will not transform the economy and make us stronger? How does putting up GST make us run faster than countries we compete with?
"Changing the tax system is not economic change. Compare that pathetic response to the Labour-Progressive government’s R&D tax credit of around $350 million, the largest ever company tax cut, a huge programme of personal tax cuts particularly for low to middle income earners and the largest ever investment in science in New Zealand.
“It just doesn’t stack up,” Jim Anderton said in Parliament.
Prisons not for sale in New Zealand
09/02/10 13:00
“The core business of prisons is to keep the community safe and reduce future crime; it is not to make money,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
He was talking to prison officers who held a rally at parliament today to protest against the government’s proposal to re-introduce private prisons in New Zealand.
Former Progressive Party MP and Minister of Corrections Matt Robson put a stop to the private sector’s involvement in the management of prisons in 2000. The National-led government is planning to reverse that policy.
“Prison management should never be a viable private business because we don’t want crime to become a growth industry for anyone,” says Jim Anderton.
“The priority must always be to have prisons that keep the community safe. For those offenders who return to society, they must be returned as safer members of our community.
“Australia is learning that its experiment in private prisons might not have been such a good idea.”
Australia has the highest proportion of inmates in private prisons (around 17%) of any other nation. There is no significant evidence to suggest that the performance of privately run prisons is better than publicly run prisons.
An empirical study of one private prison in Queensland concluded that the private sector has failed to deliver on promises of both internal and external reform.
In Victoria, the Metropolitan Women’s prison has been taken back from private operators because of serious deficiencies in the operation.
“This government is determined to go back to the future, and start the Australian experiment all over again in New Zealand.
“Imprisonment is essentially a state responsibility which should not be delegated to the private sector for cost cutting or profit,” said Jim Anderton.
He was talking to prison officers who held a rally at parliament today to protest against the government’s proposal to re-introduce private prisons in New Zealand.
Former Progressive Party MP and Minister of Corrections Matt Robson put a stop to the private sector’s involvement in the management of prisons in 2000. The National-led government is planning to reverse that policy.
“Prison management should never be a viable private business because we don’t want crime to become a growth industry for anyone,” says Jim Anderton.
“The priority must always be to have prisons that keep the community safe. For those offenders who return to society, they must be returned as safer members of our community.
“Australia is learning that its experiment in private prisons might not have been such a good idea.”
Australia has the highest proportion of inmates in private prisons (around 17%) of any other nation. There is no significant evidence to suggest that the performance of privately run prisons is better than publicly run prisons.
An empirical study of one private prison in Queensland concluded that the private sector has failed to deliver on promises of both internal and external reform.
In Victoria, the Metropolitan Women’s prison has been taken back from private operators because of serious deficiencies in the operation.
“This government is determined to go back to the future, and start the Australian experiment all over again in New Zealand.
“Imprisonment is essentially a state responsibility which should not be delegated to the private sector for cost cutting or profit,” said Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton at the prison officers’ rally at parliament with Labour MPs Clayton Cosgrove (Waimakariri - left of photo) and Grant Robertson (Wellington Central - right of photo).
Good step forward but more urgency needed
04/02/10 20:11
The National Animal Identification and Tracing (NAIT) scheme is an important step forward for New Zealand’s primary industry export sector but the lack of urgency to get this scheme up and running is worrying, said the opposition spokesperson on agriculture, Jim Anderton today.
“NAIT will ultimately see all livestock in New Zealand tagged as part of a database which traces animals from paddock to plate, a project which I strongly supported as the former Minister of Agriculture. We introduced the initiative in 2008 and would have had it implemented by now – as it needs to be. We had funding in place to develop a world-recognised animal identification and traceability system,” Jim Anderton said.
“NAIT is essential for maintaining international credibility for our food exports. The Labour-Progressive Opposition will be supporting the legislation for traceability and I would certainly like this scheme to have the importance given to it that it requires. The issue has been debated vigorously within the livestock industry for some years.
“David Carter, Minister of Agriculture, has announced that the date for implementation of the scheme will be in 2011 for cattle farmers and a year later for deer farmers. That means it will not be fully up and running in this term of government.
“Those that have opposed NAIT and used delaying tactics have been flying in the face of international reality. Having a scheme such as NAIT is how New Zealand demonstrates that we are one of the world’s leaders in producing high-quality, high-value, safe food.
“The world’s markets are increasingly demanding proof that food systems are of high-quality. Traceability is an important part of that. Consumers want to know where their food comes from, not just from what country, but sometimes even what farm and what particular part of a farm animals come from. NAIT will enable us to do that, on a systematic basis across the whole country. A comprehensive approach is called for.
“I congratulate the meat industry and especially Ian Corney, the NAIT chairman, who has worked with determination to overcome the obstacles to get the scheme accepted by the National government. It is time we saw action on this,” Jim Anderton said.
“NAIT will ultimately see all livestock in New Zealand tagged as part of a database which traces animals from paddock to plate, a project which I strongly supported as the former Minister of Agriculture. We introduced the initiative in 2008 and would have had it implemented by now – as it needs to be. We had funding in place to develop a world-recognised animal identification and traceability system,” Jim Anderton said.
“NAIT is essential for maintaining international credibility for our food exports. The Labour-Progressive Opposition will be supporting the legislation for traceability and I would certainly like this scheme to have the importance given to it that it requires. The issue has been debated vigorously within the livestock industry for some years.
“David Carter, Minister of Agriculture, has announced that the date for implementation of the scheme will be in 2011 for cattle farmers and a year later for deer farmers. That means it will not be fully up and running in this term of government.
“Those that have opposed NAIT and used delaying tactics have been flying in the face of international reality. Having a scheme such as NAIT is how New Zealand demonstrates that we are one of the world’s leaders in producing high-quality, high-value, safe food.
“The world’s markets are increasingly demanding proof that food systems are of high-quality. Traceability is an important part of that. Consumers want to know where their food comes from, not just from what country, but sometimes even what farm and what particular part of a farm animals come from. NAIT will enable us to do that, on a systematic basis across the whole country. A comprehensive approach is called for.
“I congratulate the meat industry and especially Ian Corney, the NAIT chairman, who has worked with determination to overcome the obstacles to get the scheme accepted by the National government. It is time we saw action on this,” Jim Anderton said.
Cracks start to show after National’s bio-security cuts
04/02/10 20:08
“Last year the government cut at least 54 frontline jobs in biosecurity. This year a small beetle enters New Zealand, and threatens the potato and tomato industries. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to see the link here,” says MP for Wigram and leader of the Progressive Party, Jim Anderton.
At the time, Jim Anderton warned that cuts to staff responsible for preventing diseases and pests from entering New Zealand was false economy and left our borders vulnerable.
Pest like the Hadda Beetle found in Auckland recently can cause serious damage to local farming and horticulture industries.
“The government’s justification for getting rid of these staff last year was that trade and passenger numbers were in decline. It’s true, there has been a decline in the last quarter, but the long term trend over ten years, is definitely up.”
The value of imports per quarter in 1999 for example was just over $6 billion. Now, even with the recent decline, it is about $11 billion. Total monthly arrivals were approximately 240,000 in 1999 and with the recent decline, still remain at about 360,000 per month.
“Trying to save money by playing Russian Roulette on the New Zealand border is worse than false economy; it’s putting our economy at serious risk.”
The Hadda Beetle was found in Auckland’s Dove-Myer Robinson Park and the Auckland Domain.
MAF have reassured farmers and horticulturists, including Kiwifruit, avocado and aubergines growers, that the pests are no longer a threat and have been dealt with.
“The government might have got away with it this time. I hope so for the sake of those farmers. But with 54 less staff at the borders looking out for pests, it’s only a matter of time before we have another incursion.
“Prevention is better than cure. Keep the money and the jobs in biosecurity to stop pests getting in. Then you don’t have to spend more money on trying to eliminate them once they’re here.”
At the time, Jim Anderton warned that cuts to staff responsible for preventing diseases and pests from entering New Zealand was false economy and left our borders vulnerable.
Pest like the Hadda Beetle found in Auckland recently can cause serious damage to local farming and horticulture industries.
“The government’s justification for getting rid of these staff last year was that trade and passenger numbers were in decline. It’s true, there has been a decline in the last quarter, but the long term trend over ten years, is definitely up.”
The value of imports per quarter in 1999 for example was just over $6 billion. Now, even with the recent decline, it is about $11 billion. Total monthly arrivals were approximately 240,000 in 1999 and with the recent decline, still remain at about 360,000 per month.
“Trying to save money by playing Russian Roulette on the New Zealand border is worse than false economy; it’s putting our economy at serious risk.”
The Hadda Beetle was found in Auckland’s Dove-Myer Robinson Park and the Auckland Domain.
MAF have reassured farmers and horticulturists, including Kiwifruit, avocado and aubergines growers, that the pests are no longer a threat and have been dealt with.
“The government might have got away with it this time. I hope so for the sake of those farmers. But with 54 less staff at the borders looking out for pests, it’s only a matter of time before we have another incursion.
“Prevention is better than cure. Keep the money and the jobs in biosecurity to stop pests getting in. Then you don’t have to spend more money on trying to eliminate them once they’re here.”
National shows its true colours – health cuts
22/01/10 11:52
A quick chat on the phone, and no more home help for you. This is how 2010 is starting for many elderly New Zealanders across the country, and the National Government couldn’t give a damn, said Wigram MP and Progressive Leader, Jim Anderton.
“Last year I was inundated with calls from elderly people in my electorate who were having their home help cut. Then I predicted that this would be repeated across the country. Unfortunately it looks as though I was right.”
Jim Anderton’s electorate office in Sydenham was receiving 15-20 calls a day from elderly people facing cuts, or concerned people worried about their neighbours.
The Kapiti Observer recently reported the same treatment of elderly people in the Kapiti region. Over forty upset locals have complained to Grey Power over cuts to Capital and Coast District Health Board funded home-help.
Elderly people are assessed over the phone, and then find that their 1-2 hours home-help with cleaning or shopping has been cut.
“Although it’s the District Health Boards making these decisions, whether in Wellington or Christchurch, they are cutting services because resources are limited. That’s a problem for the government, and Tony Ryall as Minister of Health should be doing something about it.”
Until now, elderly people who need it get help with basic domestic and personal activities like vacuuming and showering.
“I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg. If you get a government that promises tax cuts, then you’re going to have less money to spend on essential services, and then there’s only one way to balance the books.
“When my office contacted the Christchurch District Health Board, it was told that ‘families will need to take more responsibility for their elderly parents...If old people can’t go out shopping, there’s always on-line shopping; and if they can’t manage the cleaning they can just clean one room a day with a carpet sweeper.’ Well, I’d like to see my 90 year old constituent who has just had her help cut, carpet sweep the house on her walking frame!
“We need to have a proper public policy debate to work out how we’re going to deal with the health and welfare of the increasing numbers of aging New Zealanders. This shambles is certainly not the way to do it,” Jim Anderton said.
“Last year I was inundated with calls from elderly people in my electorate who were having their home help cut. Then I predicted that this would be repeated across the country. Unfortunately it looks as though I was right.”
Jim Anderton’s electorate office in Sydenham was receiving 15-20 calls a day from elderly people facing cuts, or concerned people worried about their neighbours.
The Kapiti Observer recently reported the same treatment of elderly people in the Kapiti region. Over forty upset locals have complained to Grey Power over cuts to Capital and Coast District Health Board funded home-help.
Elderly people are assessed over the phone, and then find that their 1-2 hours home-help with cleaning or shopping has been cut.
“Although it’s the District Health Boards making these decisions, whether in Wellington or Christchurch, they are cutting services because resources are limited. That’s a problem for the government, and Tony Ryall as Minister of Health should be doing something about it.”
Until now, elderly people who need it get help with basic domestic and personal activities like vacuuming and showering.
“I suspect this is just the tip of the iceberg. If you get a government that promises tax cuts, then you’re going to have less money to spend on essential services, and then there’s only one way to balance the books.
“When my office contacted the Christchurch District Health Board, it was told that ‘families will need to take more responsibility for their elderly parents...If old people can’t go out shopping, there’s always on-line shopping; and if they can’t manage the cleaning they can just clean one room a day with a carpet sweeper.’ Well, I’d like to see my 90 year old constituent who has just had her help cut, carpet sweep the house on her walking frame!
“We need to have a proper public policy debate to work out how we’re going to deal with the health and welfare of the increasing numbers of aging New Zealanders. This shambles is certainly not the way to do it,” Jim Anderton said.
FTT better than increasing GST
21/01/10 11:43
A financial transactions tax is a better option for widening the tax base and reducing income tax than increasing GST, MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton says.
“GST is a regressive tax,” Jim Anderton says.
“GST falls hardest on people who spend most of their income every week - low and middle income earners. For people on fixed incomes, like superannuitants, it’s almost impossible to make up for the price rises they would pay at the shops.
“Instead of increasing GST, the government should look at paying for personal tax cuts by introducing a low financial transactions tax.
“A financial transaction tax could be set at a rate that for most transactions would be similar to the fee people pay for using an ATM, EFT-POS or electronic banking.
“A financial transaction tax is fairer than increasing GST because the majority of financial transactions are made by people with large sums of money to move around.
“Moving more of the tax burden to people who move very large sums of money around in search of speculative gains means people who actually work for a living have to pay less of the total tax share.
“James Tobin, the economist who invented the modern financial transaction tax, points out that it would reduce speculation and volatility in financial markets. After the global financial crisis exposed the irresponsibility of the finance sector, the time is right to take a fresh look at the idea.”
For more about financial transaction tax, see this Guardian newspaper article from December 2009.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/07/tobin-tax-climate-change-investment
And this November 2009 column by Nobel laureate in economics, Paul Krugman, “a financial transactions tax is an idea whose time has come.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=1
“GST is a regressive tax,” Jim Anderton says.
“GST falls hardest on people who spend most of their income every week - low and middle income earners. For people on fixed incomes, like superannuitants, it’s almost impossible to make up for the price rises they would pay at the shops.
“Instead of increasing GST, the government should look at paying for personal tax cuts by introducing a low financial transactions tax.
“A financial transaction tax could be set at a rate that for most transactions would be similar to the fee people pay for using an ATM, EFT-POS or electronic banking.
“A financial transaction tax is fairer than increasing GST because the majority of financial transactions are made by people with large sums of money to move around.
“Moving more of the tax burden to people who move very large sums of money around in search of speculative gains means people who actually work for a living have to pay less of the total tax share.
“James Tobin, the economist who invented the modern financial transaction tax, points out that it would reduce speculation and volatility in financial markets. After the global financial crisis exposed the irresponsibility of the finance sector, the time is right to take a fresh look at the idea.”
For more about financial transaction tax, see this Guardian newspaper article from December 2009.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/dec/07/tobin-tax-climate-change-investment
And this November 2009 column by Nobel laureate in economics, Paul Krugman, “a financial transactions tax is an idea whose time has come.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/27/opinion/27krugman.html?_r=1
Mayor gets unfair drubbing by Key’s cheer squad
15/12/09 14:42
Mayor Andrew Williams is being given an unfair drubbing by the John Key’s media cheer squad, Jim Anderton said today.
“The media are showing their bias and are not listening to what Mayor Williams is saying. They are mindlessly repeating the lines given to them by John Key on timing of text messages and that Mayor Williams has been ‘aggressive’ in his communications to North Shore MPs, including John Key, MP for Helensville. For example, they are ignoring William’s criticisms of the National-ACT legislation for Auckland’s new Super City,” Jim Anderton said.
“Where are the hard questions to the North Shore MPs, including John Key, on the issues that Andrew Williams wants answers to, and is entitled to receive, as Mayor of the North Shore. Unfortunately, that seems all too hard for the National friendly media.
“Andrew Williams has produced his phone records but it makes no difference. John Key is not being asked for his to prove his allegations about Williams. No wonder the PM is so relaxed knowing he can say what he likes to discredit his opposition – and get away with it.
“Andrew Williams is an outspoken mayor – but then all good mayors are outspoken. That’s their job!
“He is a thorn in the side of those who driving the implementation of Auckland as a ‘Super City’ with barely a pause for breath. It is too reminiscent of Roger Douglas’ strategy in the 1980s for my liking. Douglas’ plan was to get unacceptable and unpopular legislation through the House before people understood their real implications.
“It is sad to see the very good relations that the Labour-Progressive government had with local government during the past nine years degenerate so quickly – but it is happening in so many areas so fast, that I guess it is par for the course and I predict we will unfortunately be experiencing a lot more of it in 2010,” Jim Anderton said today.
“The media are showing their bias and are not listening to what Mayor Williams is saying. They are mindlessly repeating the lines given to them by John Key on timing of text messages and that Mayor Williams has been ‘aggressive’ in his communications to North Shore MPs, including John Key, MP for Helensville. For example, they are ignoring William’s criticisms of the National-ACT legislation for Auckland’s new Super City,” Jim Anderton said.
“Where are the hard questions to the North Shore MPs, including John Key, on the issues that Andrew Williams wants answers to, and is entitled to receive, as Mayor of the North Shore. Unfortunately, that seems all too hard for the National friendly media.
“Andrew Williams has produced his phone records but it makes no difference. John Key is not being asked for his to prove his allegations about Williams. No wonder the PM is so relaxed knowing he can say what he likes to discredit his opposition – and get away with it.
“Andrew Williams is an outspoken mayor – but then all good mayors are outspoken. That’s their job!
“He is a thorn in the side of those who driving the implementation of Auckland as a ‘Super City’ with barely a pause for breath. It is too reminiscent of Roger Douglas’ strategy in the 1980s for my liking. Douglas’ plan was to get unacceptable and unpopular legislation through the House before people understood their real implications.
“It is sad to see the very good relations that the Labour-Progressive government had with local government during the past nine years degenerate so quickly – but it is happening in so many areas so fast, that I guess it is par for the course and I predict we will unfortunately be experiencing a lot more of it in 2010,” Jim Anderton said today.
Parliament right to fix problem for marine farmers
10/12/09 12:54
“Parliament’s select committee was right to amend the Aquaculture Bill so that a co-operative of marine famers can continue to farm shell fish in the Coromandel, as they have been doing since 1983,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive party leader Jim Anderton.
He was referring to the recent decision by Parliament’s primary production select committee to introduce a specific amendment and fix a legal anomaly so that the Coromandel Marine Farmers Association can continue to farm.
The Association represents a co-operative of marine farmers who farm under a single permit. Changes to legislation governing aquaculture in 2004 had created a unique problem in the Coromandel area which has since been stuck in the courts. The Association was initially established in 1983, and subsequently granted a Marine Farming Permit in 1998. Since then the area has been used collectively by marine farmers in the area.
In 1999 Environment Waikato (the regional council) made changes to the marine farming provisions of its coastal plan, and at that time questions were raised as to whether the site had been lawfully authorised.
Since then, the issue has stayed in the courts, making it impossible for the marine farmers to apply for new permits under the 2004 aquaculture legislation.
“The select committee recognised that the validity of the initial permit given over ten years ago could remain an issue for the courts indefinitely, making it impossible for the farmers to apply for a new permit under a new regulatory system.
“I introduced the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill in 2004 to get rid of these sorts of inconsistencies in the system. That was the spirit behind the bill.
“We’re likely to see more marine farms in New Zealand. It’s a growth area for the New Zealand economy and we should be supporting it. My Bill recognised also that commercial aquaculture must always be done in balance with the needs of boaties and other users of our coastal areas. There is a benefit to growing the aquaculture sector; the marine farmers depend on clean high-quality water, which is often an incentive to clean up pollutants coming into the waterways.
“Russell Norman and the Greens have got it wrong when they accuse the select committee of favouring an individual by amending my Bill. There is a general principle here, which is to use the parliamentary system to fix a problem that isn’t being solved any other way, so that these farmers can continue to work,” says Jim Anderton
He was referring to the recent decision by Parliament’s primary production select committee to introduce a specific amendment and fix a legal anomaly so that the Coromandel Marine Farmers Association can continue to farm.
The Association represents a co-operative of marine farmers who farm under a single permit. Changes to legislation governing aquaculture in 2004 had created a unique problem in the Coromandel area which has since been stuck in the courts. The Association was initially established in 1983, and subsequently granted a Marine Farming Permit in 1998. Since then the area has been used collectively by marine farmers in the area.
In 1999 Environment Waikato (the regional council) made changes to the marine farming provisions of its coastal plan, and at that time questions were raised as to whether the site had been lawfully authorised.
Since then, the issue has stayed in the courts, making it impossible for the marine farmers to apply for new permits under the 2004 aquaculture legislation.
“The select committee recognised that the validity of the initial permit given over ten years ago could remain an issue for the courts indefinitely, making it impossible for the farmers to apply for a new permit under a new regulatory system.
“I introduced the Aquaculture Legislation Amendment Bill in 2004 to get rid of these sorts of inconsistencies in the system. That was the spirit behind the bill.
“We’re likely to see more marine farms in New Zealand. It’s a growth area for the New Zealand economy and we should be supporting it. My Bill recognised also that commercial aquaculture must always be done in balance with the needs of boaties and other users of our coastal areas. There is a benefit to growing the aquaculture sector; the marine farmers depend on clean high-quality water, which is often an incentive to clean up pollutants coming into the waterways.
“Russell Norman and the Greens have got it wrong when they accuse the select committee of favouring an individual by amending my Bill. There is a general principle here, which is to use the parliamentary system to fix a problem that isn’t being solved any other way, so that these farmers can continue to work,” says Jim Anderton
Our lean meat reputation at risk
09/12/09 17:49
Stall-based farming where cows can be kept in boxes for 24 hours a day, eight months of the year will undermine New Zealand’s reputation for free-range, lean and healthy meat, says Opposition Spokesperson for Agriculture and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
“When I was minister of Agriculture in the last Labour-led government, I went to Korea and Japan to advocate for our pastoral farming techniques.
“There was huge interest in our ability to produce lean meat that was healthier than the high fat content meat produced in Japan and Korea.
“Many in those countries know their own meat is unhealthy and there was genuine interest in our approach to natural animal husbandry”, Jim Anderton said.
“There was an acknowledgement that New Zealand creates a high quality healthy product, compared to their own meat.
“I saw grain-fed cows in stalls. They were some of the fattest cows I have ever seen. Some of them died of heart attacks, they’re so fat and of course they get no exercise.
“It doesn’t make any sense to casually throw away our clean, free-range, lean meat reputation for the sake of keeping cows in stalls on a few farms in the Mackenzie Basin.
“It only takes a few negative stories to reach the international consumers, and our reputation is at risk,” says Jim Anderton.
Three companies in New Zealand have recently sought resource consents for sixteen new dairy farm developments in the Mackenzie Basin, with nearly 18,000 cows to be housed in cubicle stables. Cows would be confined in the stalls for 24 hours a day for eight months of the year.
“When I was minister of Agriculture in the last Labour-led government, I went to Korea and Japan to advocate for our pastoral farming techniques.
“There was huge interest in our ability to produce lean meat that was healthier than the high fat content meat produced in Japan and Korea.
“Many in those countries know their own meat is unhealthy and there was genuine interest in our approach to natural animal husbandry”, Jim Anderton said.
“There was an acknowledgement that New Zealand creates a high quality healthy product, compared to their own meat.
“I saw grain-fed cows in stalls. They were some of the fattest cows I have ever seen. Some of them died of heart attacks, they’re so fat and of course they get no exercise.
“It doesn’t make any sense to casually throw away our clean, free-range, lean meat reputation for the sake of keeping cows in stalls on a few farms in the Mackenzie Basin.
“It only takes a few negative stories to reach the international consumers, and our reputation is at risk,” says Jim Anderton.
Three companies in New Zealand have recently sought resource consents for sixteen new dairy farm developments in the Mackenzie Basin, with nearly 18,000 cows to be housed in cubicle stables. Cows would be confined in the stalls for 24 hours a day for eight months of the year.
After a year, government does nothing for R&D
09/12/09 17:49
The Minister of Agriculture, David Carter said in parliament today that he was ‘adhering to his own strict timetable’ which appears to be to do nothing and spend nothing in the first year of National-led government on primary sector research and development, says Opposition Spokesperson for Agriculture, and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
“The National government canned the Fast Forward Fund as soon as it came to power and replaced it with its own Primary Growth Partnership.
“After a year in office they’re not even out of the planning phase,” Jim Anderton said in parliament today.
“Projects were being developed and progress was under way through the ‘Fast Forward’ fund, set up by us the Labour/Progressive government at the time the National party came to power.
“There was already $700 million in the MAF accounts, ready to fund applications.”
$700 million was transferred to the Fast Forward fund in November just before the election in 2008. Organisations like Fonterra, Meat & Wool, Dairy New Zealand and others had committed to match this amount over approximately five years to ten years.
“In this current financial year, not one cent has been paid out for any research and innovation project, and no payment is likely any time soon.
“Under John Key’s leadership, new primary sector research and development has virtually stopped, even though agriculture, horticulture, forestry and fishing are our most important and productive economic resources,” says Jim Anderton.
“The National government canned the Fast Forward Fund as soon as it came to power and replaced it with its own Primary Growth Partnership.
“After a year in office they’re not even out of the planning phase,” Jim Anderton said in parliament today.
“Projects were being developed and progress was under way through the ‘Fast Forward’ fund, set up by us the Labour/Progressive government at the time the National party came to power.
“There was already $700 million in the MAF accounts, ready to fund applications.”
$700 million was transferred to the Fast Forward fund in November just before the election in 2008. Organisations like Fonterra, Meat & Wool, Dairy New Zealand and others had committed to match this amount over approximately five years to ten years.
“In this current financial year, not one cent has been paid out for any research and innovation project, and no payment is likely any time soon.
“Under John Key’s leadership, new primary sector research and development has virtually stopped, even though agriculture, horticulture, forestry and fishing are our most important and productive economic resources,” says Jim Anderton.
Kiwibank leads big banks back to local services
03/12/09 15:11
Westpac’s decision to return to boutique style branches in small communities so they can get closer to where customers live, demonstrates the impact Kiwibank has had on banking in New Zealand.
Jim Anderton was instrumental in setting up Kiwibank under a coalition agreement with Labour in 2001, at a time when the big Australian owned banks were abandoning rural and provincial New Zealand as well as local urban communities.
Westpac chief executive George Frazis now says that it was a mistake for his bank to abandon local branches in the 1990s.
Kiwibank reversed this trend by setting up regional branches and bank outlets so that local customers had access to bank services where ever they lived.
Westpac now plans to return to a local branch system. This is a welcome, if belated move from a bank customers viewpoint.
Today, Kiwibank has by far the biggest network of any bank in New Zealand, with more than three hundred branches (at least one hundred more than any other bank) and 650,000 customers. It operates in nearly forty communities where it is the only bank service available.
“We knew at the time that it was not only the right thing to do, but that it made business sense to keep banking services close to where people live,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
“It’s taken Westpac more than ten years to realise this, but they deserve credit for reversing the failed policies of the 1990s, and returning to local banking.”
“It’s a shame that given this re-engagement with the public of New Zealand, Westpac didn’t show up at the Parliamentary Banking Inquiry recently. We would have welcomed their views. Kiwibank was the only bank that fronted.”
“It’s only a matter of time now before the other banks follow Kiwibank and return to local banking,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton was instrumental in setting up Kiwibank under a coalition agreement with Labour in 2001, at a time when the big Australian owned banks were abandoning rural and provincial New Zealand as well as local urban communities.
Westpac chief executive George Frazis now says that it was a mistake for his bank to abandon local branches in the 1990s.
Kiwibank reversed this trend by setting up regional branches and bank outlets so that local customers had access to bank services where ever they lived.
Westpac now plans to return to a local branch system. This is a welcome, if belated move from a bank customers viewpoint.
Today, Kiwibank has by far the biggest network of any bank in New Zealand, with more than three hundred branches (at least one hundred more than any other bank) and 650,000 customers. It operates in nearly forty communities where it is the only bank service available.
“We knew at the time that it was not only the right thing to do, but that it made business sense to keep banking services close to where people live,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
“It’s taken Westpac more than ten years to realise this, but they deserve credit for reversing the failed policies of the 1990s, and returning to local banking.”
“It’s a shame that given this re-engagement with the public of New Zealand, Westpac didn’t show up at the Parliamentary Banking Inquiry recently. We would have welcomed their views. Kiwibank was the only bank that fronted.”
“It’s only a matter of time now before the other banks follow Kiwibank and return to local banking,” says Jim Anderton.
Key weak on Copenhagen
30/11/09 16:34
John Key’s is being weak and indecisive over whether to go to Copenhagen for a global conference on climate change, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“The prime minister is displaying an absence of leadership. He is saying he will only go if the conference is going to be a success. He is therefore accepting his presence is incapable of making any difference to whether it is a success or not.
“This is a failure of leadership. He should accept his share of responsibility for helping to make a difference.
“Instead, the prime minister is making an art form out of not doing anything.
“If he does flip-flop and decide to go, it will only be to make a photo opportunity out of associating himself with a success he has had nothing to do with.
“But his big subsidies for big polluters make him irrelevant anyway.”
“The prime minister is displaying an absence of leadership. He is saying he will only go if the conference is going to be a success. He is therefore accepting his presence is incapable of making any difference to whether it is a success or not.
“This is a failure of leadership. He should accept his share of responsibility for helping to make a difference.
“Instead, the prime minister is making an art form out of not doing anything.
“If he does flip-flop and decide to go, it will only be to make a photo opportunity out of associating himself with a success he has had nothing to do with.
“But his big subsidies for big polluters make him irrelevant anyway.”
Brash calls for return to failed policies of the past
30/11/09 16:33
“It’s like the return of Dracula.”
That’s how Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton is describing Don Brash’s recommendations released today.
“Don Brash and David Caygill were cheerleaders for the asset sales, deep spending cuts and wage cuts that only worsened the income gap with Australia. When they started New Zealand had parity with Australia and when they finished we were thirty per cent behind.
“Now they want to go back to the failed policies of the past.
“It’s not surprising that when Don Brash heads an inquiry at Act’s behest, he comes up with Act’s policies. Act is playing a very helpful footstool role for the government, where it takes all the hits and helps soften up the public for the National Party.
“More asset sales, deep spending cuts, radical policy change, and higher costs for low and middle income households wouldn’t make New Zealand better off.”
That’s how Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton is describing Don Brash’s recommendations released today.
“Don Brash and David Caygill were cheerleaders for the asset sales, deep spending cuts and wage cuts that only worsened the income gap with Australia. When they started New Zealand had parity with Australia and when they finished we were thirty per cent behind.
“Now they want to go back to the failed policies of the past.
“It’s not surprising that when Don Brash heads an inquiry at Act’s behest, he comes up with Act’s policies. Act is playing a very helpful footstool role for the government, where it takes all the hits and helps soften up the public for the National Party.
“More asset sales, deep spending cuts, radical policy change, and higher costs for low and middle income households wouldn’t make New Zealand better off.”
Erebus pilots deserve justice after 30 years
27/11/09 15:38
After thirty years, Air New Zealand needs to apologise to the families of the pilots of flight TE 901 who were wrongly blamed for the Mt Erebus crash which claimed the lives of 257 passengers and crew.
This Saturday (28 November) will mark the thirtieth anniversary since the crash.
A Royal Commission of Enquiry in 1980, led by Justice Mahon found that “organisational failure” was to blame for the crash. Justice Mahon also said that in his opinion, Air New Zealand had deliberately set out to put the blame on ‘pilot error’.
At the time, Air New Zealand undermined what became known as the ‘Mahon Report’ and its findings have only recently been formally acknowledged.
Thirty years later, the families of the pilots have never received an apology from Air New Zealand, who not only failed to stand by their own pilots, but actively sought to pass the blame onto the pilots, despite evidence which clearly showed they were not to blame.
Here is what the Mahon Report says: “In my opinion..the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible. In my opinion, neither Captain Collins nor First Officer Cassin nor the flight engineers made any error which contributed to the disaster, and were not responsible for its occurrence.”
“It is my hope, and the hope of many New Zealanders, that this injustice will be set right on Saturday, and the families of the pilots of flight TE901 will hear an apology from Air New Zealand,” Jim Anderton said.
This Saturday (28 November) will mark the thirtieth anniversary since the crash.
A Royal Commission of Enquiry in 1980, led by Justice Mahon found that “organisational failure” was to blame for the crash. Justice Mahon also said that in his opinion, Air New Zealand had deliberately set out to put the blame on ‘pilot error’.
At the time, Air New Zealand undermined what became known as the ‘Mahon Report’ and its findings have only recently been formally acknowledged.
Thirty years later, the families of the pilots have never received an apology from Air New Zealand, who not only failed to stand by their own pilots, but actively sought to pass the blame onto the pilots, despite evidence which clearly showed they were not to blame.
Here is what the Mahon Report says: “In my opinion..the single dominant and effective cause of the disaster was the mistake made by those airline officials who programmed the aircraft to fly directly at Mt Erebus and omitted to tell the aircrew. That mistake is directly attributable, not so much to the persons who made it, but to the incompetent administrative airline procedures which made the mistake possible. In my opinion, neither Captain Collins nor First Officer Cassin nor the flight engineers made any error which contributed to the disaster, and were not responsible for its occurrence.”
“It is my hope, and the hope of many New Zealanders, that this injustice will be set right on Saturday, and the families of the pilots of flight TE901 will hear an apology from Air New Zealand,” Jim Anderton said.
National’s third world way to govern
27/11/09 15:18
It’s hypocritical for the National Party to attack those who criticise its dodgy deal on emissions trading, Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
“National needs to say if it still supports the concept of full and final Treaty settlements.
“It has gone from declaring an unrealistic timeframe for Treaty settlements, its leader declaring ‘The Treaty did not create a partnership’, and Gerry Brownlee calling a Maori member of parliament a ‘black fella’, to now accusing someone else of playing the race card if they oppose National’s deal.
“National has done a grace and favour deal that cannot be justified on its merit. That is a third world way to govern and has no place in New Zealand.
“Last year I raised in Cabinet my concern about re-opening Treaty settlements from the nineties to compensate for loss of value in forests that had been part of a Treaty settlement. My Labour colleagues agreed with me that if we had compensated in that way, we would never be able to achieve final settlement.
“National has now reversed its position. It did so to get a deal with the Maori Party on an emission trading scheme, and now its trying to label as racist anyone who criticises the deal. That is dishonest and comes from a party that has done more than any other party in recent years to whip up racial tensions.”
Examples of Gerry Brownlee’s record on race relations;
“Why is the Government continuing to negotiate with a group that will not accept the Crown’s ownership of the foreshore and seabed?” - In parliament, on Tuesday, May 31, 2005, about negotiations with Ngati Porou:
“National would change the foreshore law to prevent the Maori Land Court hearing customary rights cases and investigate axing the court altogether.” - NZ Herald, 18 April 2005.
“What I think is that there is a large amount of worry – considerable amount of worry among people about where all this is heading and where we fit into it, and much of that is about someone at some point proclaiming what it is to be a New Zealander.” - Agenda, 6 November 2004.
Called John Tamihere ‘black fella’ - 10 February 2004.
“National needs to say if it still supports the concept of full and final Treaty settlements.
“It has gone from declaring an unrealistic timeframe for Treaty settlements, its leader declaring ‘The Treaty did not create a partnership’, and Gerry Brownlee calling a Maori member of parliament a ‘black fella’, to now accusing someone else of playing the race card if they oppose National’s deal.
“National has done a grace and favour deal that cannot be justified on its merit. That is a third world way to govern and has no place in New Zealand.
“Last year I raised in Cabinet my concern about re-opening Treaty settlements from the nineties to compensate for loss of value in forests that had been part of a Treaty settlement. My Labour colleagues agreed with me that if we had compensated in that way, we would never be able to achieve final settlement.
“National has now reversed its position. It did so to get a deal with the Maori Party on an emission trading scheme, and now its trying to label as racist anyone who criticises the deal. That is dishonest and comes from a party that has done more than any other party in recent years to whip up racial tensions.”
Examples of Gerry Brownlee’s record on race relations;
“Why is the Government continuing to negotiate with a group that will not accept the Crown’s ownership of the foreshore and seabed?” - In parliament, on Tuesday, May 31, 2005, about negotiations with Ngati Porou:
“National would change the foreshore law to prevent the Maori Land Court hearing customary rights cases and investigate axing the court altogether.” - NZ Herald, 18 April 2005.
“What I think is that there is a large amount of worry – considerable amount of worry among people about where all this is heading and where we fit into it, and much of that is about someone at some point proclaiming what it is to be a New Zealander.” - Agenda, 6 November 2004.
Called John Tamihere ‘black fella’ - 10 February 2004.
1000 people die because of heavy drinking each year
26/11/09 15:21
When over 300 leading doctors and nurses and the heads of police in New Zealand and Australia agree that we face an urgent and serious issue with alcohol abuse, then we know we have a problem, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
He welcomed the release today of a joint statement from New Zealand doctors and nurses, calling for the Law Commission to recommend reducing the marketing and advertising of alcohol; lowering the purchase age; increasing the price of alcohol; reducing the availability of alcohol; and doing more to counter drink-driving.
New Zealand and Australian police commissioners met recently to talk about the culture of binge drinking in both countries, and to agree to a series of crackdowns against alcohol-fueled crime and antisocial behaviour this Christmas.
“This is our chance to do something about binge drinking. The legislation must be changed, and the Law Commission is looking at that right now,” says Jim Anderton.
75% of people who show up in emergency rooms on a Friday or a Saturday night will have injuries related in some way to alcohol. 60% of people arrested by the police are under the influence of alcohol.
“25% of New Zealand drinkers are heavy drinkers. That’s equal to the combined population of both Wellington and Christchurch.
“To put this national crisis into perspective, each year less than ten people die as a result of using the drug commonly known as ‘P’. Twenty people died from swine flu this year.1000 people die from alcohol related problems each year.”
“But it’ll take more than legislation to change our attitude to binge drinking. What we need is a culture change. We need to stop romanticising heavy drinking.
“That’s why I want to see alcohol sponsorship, particularly for sports events banned, and the marketing of alco-pops to our teenagers stopped. Evidence shows that every advertisement seen by a young person (15-24 years) increases the number of drinks they consume by 1%. They become customers for life and the liquor industry banks on it,” says Jim Anderton
He welcomed the release today of a joint statement from New Zealand doctors and nurses, calling for the Law Commission to recommend reducing the marketing and advertising of alcohol; lowering the purchase age; increasing the price of alcohol; reducing the availability of alcohol; and doing more to counter drink-driving.
New Zealand and Australian police commissioners met recently to talk about the culture of binge drinking in both countries, and to agree to a series of crackdowns against alcohol-fueled crime and antisocial behaviour this Christmas.
“This is our chance to do something about binge drinking. The legislation must be changed, and the Law Commission is looking at that right now,” says Jim Anderton.
75% of people who show up in emergency rooms on a Friday or a Saturday night will have injuries related in some way to alcohol. 60% of people arrested by the police are under the influence of alcohol.
“25% of New Zealand drinkers are heavy drinkers. That’s equal to the combined population of both Wellington and Christchurch.
“To put this national crisis into perspective, each year less than ten people die as a result of using the drug commonly known as ‘P’. Twenty people died from swine flu this year.1000 people die from alcohol related problems each year.”
“But it’ll take more than legislation to change our attitude to binge drinking. What we need is a culture change. We need to stop romanticising heavy drinking.
“That’s why I want to see alcohol sponsorship, particularly for sports events banned, and the marketing of alco-pops to our teenagers stopped. Evidence shows that every advertisement seen by a young person (15-24 years) increases the number of drinks they consume by 1%. They become customers for life and the liquor industry banks on it,” says Jim Anderton
The law stops us saving dolphins
19/11/09 13:50
The Fisheries Act must be amended so that ministers have a clear mandate to protect our oceans as a priority, when fish stocks are low or a species is threatened with extinction, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
The Act is unclear about when the minister can favour sustainability over commercial use, and act to protect a species like Orange Roughy for example, or endangered mammals like the Hector and Maui dolphins.
“It demands that a minister prove beyond doubt that a species is threatened. But in reality, the information we get is often incomplete and flawed. It’s very hard to follow the behaviour of a fish stock. It’s an imperfect science.
“That’s why internationally, there is consensus that where information is uncertain ministers should adopt a precautionary approach, and protect a species as a priority.”
In 2008 Jim Anderton, then Fisheries Minister, introduced new rules and closed certain areas to commercial fishing in an effort to save the world's rarest and smallest dolphin from extinction - the Maui dolphin. The fishing industry took the government to court because they claimed that the proof was not absolute. The court is still to make a final ruling on the case.
As minister, Jim Anderton introduced a Bill to amend the Act to make it clear that the most important part of the minister’s job, on behalf of all New Zealanders, is to protect the sustainability of our fishing resource.
“I couldn’t get the support across the House to get this amendment passed. National MP Phil Heatley said in parliament that he supported the Bill because it “provided a clearer direction to the minister..to take a cautious approach.
“But between then and when the Bill was taken to Select Committee, the fishing industry got to him, to the Maori Party and to NZ First. Their support was subsequently withdrawn.
“Now that Phil Heatley is the Minister of Fisheries, he is still refusing to do something about this toothless fisheries act. The industry would do well to consider that a fish in the sea is a fish in the bank, and we all benefit when we protect the resources in our oceans,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton's speech notes at a marine mammals symposium are here.
The Act is unclear about when the minister can favour sustainability over commercial use, and act to protect a species like Orange Roughy for example, or endangered mammals like the Hector and Maui dolphins.
“It demands that a minister prove beyond doubt that a species is threatened. But in reality, the information we get is often incomplete and flawed. It’s very hard to follow the behaviour of a fish stock. It’s an imperfect science.
“That’s why internationally, there is consensus that where information is uncertain ministers should adopt a precautionary approach, and protect a species as a priority.”
In 2008 Jim Anderton, then Fisheries Minister, introduced new rules and closed certain areas to commercial fishing in an effort to save the world's rarest and smallest dolphin from extinction - the Maui dolphin. The fishing industry took the government to court because they claimed that the proof was not absolute. The court is still to make a final ruling on the case.
As minister, Jim Anderton introduced a Bill to amend the Act to make it clear that the most important part of the minister’s job, on behalf of all New Zealanders, is to protect the sustainability of our fishing resource.
“I couldn’t get the support across the House to get this amendment passed. National MP Phil Heatley said in parliament that he supported the Bill because it “provided a clearer direction to the minister..to take a cautious approach.
“But between then and when the Bill was taken to Select Committee, the fishing industry got to him, to the Maori Party and to NZ First. Their support was subsequently withdrawn.
“Now that Phil Heatley is the Minister of Fisheries, he is still refusing to do something about this toothless fisheries act. The industry would do well to consider that a fish in the sea is a fish in the bank, and we all benefit when we protect the resources in our oceans,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton's speech notes at a marine mammals symposium are here.
‘Full and final’ Waitangi settlements?
18/11/09 16:55
If the government reopens the Treaty settlement with Ngai Tahu because of the ETS, there will never again be any such principle as ‘full and final’ settlements, Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
“The government is heading down a very damaging path by doing a special deal that revisits the 1990s settlement with Ngai Tahu.
“This issue was raised with the previous government, when Ngai Tahu questioned the effect of an ETS on its Treaty settlement. When Cabinet considered this issue I personally raised the issue of principle that was at stake. If we reopened a settlement because of a subsequent new policy, it would be never-ending. On that basis, Cabinet decided not to reopen the settlement.
“To reopen it now makes a mockery of Treaty settlements.
“Governments make lots of decisions that affect assets like land and forests. It changes tax law, influences exchange rate policy and changes laws around land use, as well as changing environmental legislation, such as emissions.
“If the government has to compensate over ETS, then it has to compensate over any change of policy that might negatively affect valuation.
“I notice no one wants to revisit the settlement when governments make decisions that subsequently increase the value of the asset.
“What the Government is doing is creating a new class of assets that are former Treaty settlement assets, and they would never stop being Treaty assets. They would always be liable for compensation.
“Crown Law received an independent legal opinion that refutes suggestions there was bad faith or any breach of obligation in the settlement. The government should not be exposing the taxpayer to this unlimited risk particularly as a result of an expedient political deal with the Maori Party,” says Jim Anderton.
“The government is heading down a very damaging path by doing a special deal that revisits the 1990s settlement with Ngai Tahu.
“This issue was raised with the previous government, when Ngai Tahu questioned the effect of an ETS on its Treaty settlement. When Cabinet considered this issue I personally raised the issue of principle that was at stake. If we reopened a settlement because of a subsequent new policy, it would be never-ending. On that basis, Cabinet decided not to reopen the settlement.
“To reopen it now makes a mockery of Treaty settlements.
“Governments make lots of decisions that affect assets like land and forests. It changes tax law, influences exchange rate policy and changes laws around land use, as well as changing environmental legislation, such as emissions.
“If the government has to compensate over ETS, then it has to compensate over any change of policy that might negatively affect valuation.
“I notice no one wants to revisit the settlement when governments make decisions that subsequently increase the value of the asset.
“What the Government is doing is creating a new class of assets that are former Treaty settlement assets, and they would never stop being Treaty assets. They would always be liable for compensation.
“Crown Law received an independent legal opinion that refutes suggestions there was bad faith or any breach of obligation in the settlement. The government should not be exposing the taxpayer to this unlimited risk particularly as a result of an expedient political deal with the Maori Party,” says Jim Anderton.
Urgent inquiry into monetary policy now
11/11/09 10:08
We must put party politics aside and come up with a new approach to monetary policy which supports people in New Zealand who produce tradeable goods, rather than those who speculate on property and take the profits off-shore, says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader, Jim Anderton.
The Report from the Parliamentary Banking Inquiry was released today.
The inquiry was held by the Progressive Party, The Labour Party and the Greens. The National-led government and its coalition partners refused to take part in the inquiry.
The report proves that the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks did not pass on all of the cut in the OCR (Official cash Rate). The Reserve Bank cut the OCR from its high in mid 2008 of 8.25 per cent, to only 2.5 per cent today. But the banks kept a one per cent margin in interest rates for themselves. One per cent extra interest added $787 million in costs for New Zealand businesses; $460 million extra to the cost of loans in the farming sector; and $1.6 billion to the cost of mortgage repayments.
“This tells us it doesn’t matter what the Reserve Bank does with interest rates; the big Australian-owned banks will do whatever they want. Changing the OCR rate to try and help businesses or home owners during hard times isn’t working.”
“Fifty organisations and individuals made submissions - from the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association to the Council of Trade Unions. Each of them asked the inquiry to put pressure on the New Zealand parliament and the Reserve Bank to review monetary policy now.
“The government can no longer sit on the side-lines and say ‘there’s nothing we can do’.
“We need to look at how we can remove incentives to invest in property, otherwise we’re headed for another boom and bust cycle in property prices, and another recession. Banks must be encouraged to lend to businesses; and we need to review our tax system which at the moment encourages unproductive property investment and discourages investment in the productive tradeable good export sector.
"We need to look at regulating the banking sector so that ordinary New Zealanders don’t pay (in interest rates or hidden bank fees) while the Australian-owned banks make excessive profits.
“There’s always more we can do. We just need the political will to do it,” says Jim Anderton.
Download the banking inquiry report here. [Pdf, 3.2 Mb]
Visit the banking inquiry website here.
The Report from the Parliamentary Banking Inquiry was released today.
The inquiry was held by the Progressive Party, The Labour Party and the Greens. The National-led government and its coalition partners refused to take part in the inquiry.
The report proves that the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks did not pass on all of the cut in the OCR (Official cash Rate). The Reserve Bank cut the OCR from its high in mid 2008 of 8.25 per cent, to only 2.5 per cent today. But the banks kept a one per cent margin in interest rates for themselves. One per cent extra interest added $787 million in costs for New Zealand businesses; $460 million extra to the cost of loans in the farming sector; and $1.6 billion to the cost of mortgage repayments.
“This tells us it doesn’t matter what the Reserve Bank does with interest rates; the big Australian-owned banks will do whatever they want. Changing the OCR rate to try and help businesses or home owners during hard times isn’t working.”
“Fifty organisations and individuals made submissions - from the New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association to the Council of Trade Unions. Each of them asked the inquiry to put pressure on the New Zealand parliament and the Reserve Bank to review monetary policy now.
“The government can no longer sit on the side-lines and say ‘there’s nothing we can do’.
“We need to look at how we can remove incentives to invest in property, otherwise we’re headed for another boom and bust cycle in property prices, and another recession. Banks must be encouraged to lend to businesses; and we need to review our tax system which at the moment encourages unproductive property investment and discourages investment in the productive tradeable good export sector.
"We need to look at regulating the banking sector so that ordinary New Zealanders don’t pay (in interest rates or hidden bank fees) while the Australian-owned banks make excessive profits.
“There’s always more we can do. We just need the political will to do it,” says Jim Anderton.
Download the banking inquiry report here. [Pdf, 3.2 Mb]
Visit the banking inquiry website here.
Use milk payout to farmers to strengthen industry
09/11/09 15:00
It's important that the increase in Fonterra's payout to farmers is used to strengthen the industry, and not squandered, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
He is welcoming Fonterra's 95 cent increase in the forecast payout to $6.05 per kilogram of milk solids.
"The increased pay out is very timely for a large number of farmers who have been struggling with higher input prices and enormous costs for financing. Interest rates for many farmers have not come down.”
"But the risk is that the higher payout will lead to higher farm valuations and in turn to yet more farm indebtedness. That's what happened too often when the milk payout reached $7 a kilo. When the price then dropped, it left a lot of farmers under mortgage stress.”
"Banks should be careful about getting into the same position of lending against valuations based on favourable milk payouts.”
"The payout shows New Zealand is well positioned as a food producer to continue to earn a living when global conditions are less than favourable.”
“When payouts increase as much as this one has, the extra earnings need to be used to strengthen the industry, such as stronger investment in research and development, and stronger balance sheets to reduce our exposure to rapacious overseas owned banks," Jim Anderton said.
He is welcoming Fonterra's 95 cent increase in the forecast payout to $6.05 per kilogram of milk solids.
"The increased pay out is very timely for a large number of farmers who have been struggling with higher input prices and enormous costs for financing. Interest rates for many farmers have not come down.”
"But the risk is that the higher payout will lead to higher farm valuations and in turn to yet more farm indebtedness. That's what happened too often when the milk payout reached $7 a kilo. When the price then dropped, it left a lot of farmers under mortgage stress.”
"Banks should be careful about getting into the same position of lending against valuations based on favourable milk payouts.”
"The payout shows New Zealand is well positioned as a food producer to continue to earn a living when global conditions are less than favourable.”
“When payouts increase as much as this one has, the extra earnings need to be used to strengthen the industry, such as stronger investment in research and development, and stronger balance sheets to reduce our exposure to rapacious overseas owned banks," Jim Anderton said.
A generation of kids will be lost - NZ must do more
29/10/09 17:30
16,000 children are dying from hunger every day because food aid is now at its lowest level in twenty years, but the National government remains determined not to use our aid for ‘poverty reduction,” says Progressive leader and MP Jim Anderton.
The head of the United Nation’s World Food Programme recently announced that tens of millions of the world’s poor will have their food rations cut or cancelled in the next few weeks because some OECD countries have slashed aid after the financial crisis.
Jim Anderton was talking at the launch of the Mutima Project in Christchurch tonight.
The Mutima project is a volunteer organisation and will send a team of cardiac surgeons to Zambia to perform life-saving heart surgery on young adults.
“I commend them for the strength of their personal commitment and their determination to serve. We are a stronger and more caring community because of people like these Christchurch surgeons. Because of them, a hundred young Zambians will have a second chance at life.”
About 60% of the Zambian population are living on less than a $1 per day.
“But where is the urgency from the National government to save a generation of children who will die from starvation if the world does nothing?”
The National government has recently announced that it will abolish the goal of ‘poverty reduction’ for our aid, and replace it with a goal of ‘economic development’.
“I am a strong champion of economic development - I used to be Minister of Economic Development. But you can’t do much business development if people don’t have enough to eat or clean water to drink.”
“I also want to see the National government do more about bad governance and corruption in some of the poorest countries.”
“I want to see New Zealand get behind a new international Natural Resource Charter which sets out ‘best practice’ in countries with natural resources like oil (or copper in Zambia), so proceeds of those resources go to the poorest people and don’t end up in the pockets of the corrupt,” says Jim Anderton.
The head of the United Nation’s World Food Programme recently announced that tens of millions of the world’s poor will have their food rations cut or cancelled in the next few weeks because some OECD countries have slashed aid after the financial crisis.
Jim Anderton was talking at the launch of the Mutima Project in Christchurch tonight.
The Mutima project is a volunteer organisation and will send a team of cardiac surgeons to Zambia to perform life-saving heart surgery on young adults.
“I commend them for the strength of their personal commitment and their determination to serve. We are a stronger and more caring community because of people like these Christchurch surgeons. Because of them, a hundred young Zambians will have a second chance at life.”
About 60% of the Zambian population are living on less than a $1 per day.
“But where is the urgency from the National government to save a generation of children who will die from starvation if the world does nothing?”
The National government has recently announced that it will abolish the goal of ‘poverty reduction’ for our aid, and replace it with a goal of ‘economic development’.
“I am a strong champion of economic development - I used to be Minister of Economic Development. But you can’t do much business development if people don’t have enough to eat or clean water to drink.”
“I also want to see the National government do more about bad governance and corruption in some of the poorest countries.”
“I want to see New Zealand get behind a new international Natural Resource Charter which sets out ‘best practice’ in countries with natural resources like oil (or copper in Zambia), so proceeds of those resources go to the poorest people and don’t end up in the pockets of the corrupt,” says Jim Anderton.
Who owns the ASB? Not us
29/10/09 16:22
The ASB has been an Australian owned bank for the last two decades, and it is misleading the public when it pretends to be a ‘Kiwi Bank’, says Progressive MP Jim Anderton.
The ABS is running promotional ads claiming ‘We’ve been a Kiwi Bank since 1847.”
“The truth is we don’t really know who owns the ASB. We know it is owned 100% by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), but who owns the Commonwealth Bank?
“It used to be owned by the Federal Government of Australia but it was privatised in stages beginning in 1991.”
Almost half of the current owners of the Commonwealth Bank are ‘nominee’ companies. That means their identities are hidden behind other well-known companies, like the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC).
“We don’t really know who owns ASB. All we know for sure is that New Zealand doesn’t.”
In 1989, the ASB Bank Community Trust sold 75% of the shares to The Commonwealth Bank of Australia. In 2000 the CBA bought the remaining 25% of ASB shares from the Trust.
Since 2000 the ABS has been 100% owned by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
“We do however have a New Zealand owned banking network owned by all New Zealanders - and it’s called ‘Kiwibank’.”
“The Aussies are welcome to start their own ‘Aussiebank’ but they shouldn’t try to pinch ours,” says Jim Anderton.
The ABS is running promotional ads claiming ‘We’ve been a Kiwi Bank since 1847.”
“The truth is we don’t really know who owns the ASB. We know it is owned 100% by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA), but who owns the Commonwealth Bank?
“It used to be owned by the Federal Government of Australia but it was privatised in stages beginning in 1991.”
Almost half of the current owners of the Commonwealth Bank are ‘nominee’ companies. That means their identities are hidden behind other well-known companies, like the Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC).
“We don’t really know who owns ASB. All we know for sure is that New Zealand doesn’t.”
In 1989, the ASB Bank Community Trust sold 75% of the shares to The Commonwealth Bank of Australia. In 2000 the CBA bought the remaining 25% of ASB shares from the Trust.
Since 2000 the ABS has been 100% owned by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.
“We do however have a New Zealand owned banking network owned by all New Zealanders - and it’s called ‘Kiwibank’.”
“The Aussies are welcome to start their own ‘Aussiebank’ but they shouldn’t try to pinch ours,” says Jim Anderton.
An ‘unfortunate’ arrangement
28/10/09 16:45
The Auditor General’s findings about Bill English’s accommodation arrangements go significantly further than findings that caused Marion Hobbs and Phillida Bunkle to stand down from ministerial office in 2001, Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
“This makes Mr English’s position as finance minister very difficult,” Jim Anderton says.
“I have been in the same position as Mr Key is now in, in having to make a decision on the future of the Minister. A precedent for the right thing to do has been set.”
Jim Anderton wrote to the Auditor-General saying Mr English’ arrangements needed scrutiny. The report finds Mr English’s arrangements were not within the rules. The Auditor General’s report states:
The result was that the Crown was renting a property for Mr English from a trust in which he had an interest, and the arrangement was explicitly based on a view that he did not have an interest. Clearly, this was unfortunate.
“The report discloses Mr English went to some lengths to arrange his affairs around the accommodation allowance entitlement. That is not a good look for a Minister of Finance.
“The Auditor-General’s advice does not even mention other issues that the Prime Minister still needs to consider: that Mr English was giving his Wellington address as his home for the purpose of being a director of a company (incidentally, the company that owns his Dipton investment), but claiming to live in Dipton for the purpose of receiving an accommodation allowance.
“A prudent minister might have noticed the contradiction between those two claims.
“I have always welcomed the idea of Mr English having his family with him in Wellington. That is not the issue. The question is whether he was right to claim entitlements for doing so.
“It would not have been in any way objectionable if Mr English had lived in Wellington with his family and claimed an out of town allowance for his occasional trips to Dipton,”
Jim Anderton said.
“This makes Mr English’s position as finance minister very difficult,” Jim Anderton says.
“I have been in the same position as Mr Key is now in, in having to make a decision on the future of the Minister. A precedent for the right thing to do has been set.”
Jim Anderton wrote to the Auditor-General saying Mr English’ arrangements needed scrutiny. The report finds Mr English’s arrangements were not within the rules. The Auditor General’s report states:
The result was that the Crown was renting a property for Mr English from a trust in which he had an interest, and the arrangement was explicitly based on a view that he did not have an interest. Clearly, this was unfortunate.
“The report discloses Mr English went to some lengths to arrange his affairs around the accommodation allowance entitlement. That is not a good look for a Minister of Finance.
“The Auditor-General’s advice does not even mention other issues that the Prime Minister still needs to consider: that Mr English was giving his Wellington address as his home for the purpose of being a director of a company (incidentally, the company that owns his Dipton investment), but claiming to live in Dipton for the purpose of receiving an accommodation allowance.
“A prudent minister might have noticed the contradiction between those two claims.
“I have always welcomed the idea of Mr English having his family with him in Wellington. That is not the issue. The question is whether he was right to claim entitlements for doing so.
“It would not have been in any way objectionable if Mr English had lived in Wellington with his family and claimed an out of town allowance for his occasional trips to Dipton,”
Jim Anderton said.
Nick Smith stigmatises families of suicide victims
15/10/09 13:50
Minister of ACC, Nick Smith says it was ‘a mistake and wrong’ for the last Labour-led government to support the families of suicide victims through ACC.
“Nick Smith should have the courage to say this directly to the families of suicide victims. It is yet another cowardly and insensitive comment from a Minister who is determined to further stigmatise these families,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
Nick Smith apologised in parliament today for his comments on TVNZ News last night where he said that the terminally ill might as well ‘throw themselves under a train’ to get the same treatment for their own families as is available for the bereaved families of suicide victims.
“If the children or loved ones of a suicide victim don’t get our support through ACC, then where do they get it from? Is the Minister saying that they don’t deserve our support? Or is he saying that they should go on a sickness benefit?”
“When he said yesterday that the government’s ‘objective is to secure the long-term future of ACC as an efficient and fair 24/7, no-fault insurance scheme for all New Zealanders’, he clearly did not mean the families of suicide victims. He is effectively victimising these most vulnerable of New Zealanders.”
As the Minister in charge of suicide prevention programs in the last Labour/Progressive government, Jim Anderton introduced a program of support for families after a suicide (Postvention). This provided urgent counselling where needed to families, and victim support for those affected.
Nick Smith claims that it is necessary to cut support to the families of suicide victims because ACC has a huge deficit. He said if someone with a family committed suicide, that family could have been given almost $1 million in compensation over time.
“Yet the cost for ACC to give support to a family of three children on an average wage is less than $210,000 over five years. With approximately 350 claims per year, that is about $7 millions per year to all families of suicide victims who make an ACC claim.”
“That is a small cost to pay out of what Nick Smith claims is a $2 billion shortfall annually, to help some of the most vulnerable families in our community.”
“Nick Smith should have the courage to say this directly to the families of suicide victims. It is yet another cowardly and insensitive comment from a Minister who is determined to further stigmatise these families,” says MP for Wigram and Progressive Party leader Jim Anderton.
Nick Smith apologised in parliament today for his comments on TVNZ News last night where he said that the terminally ill might as well ‘throw themselves under a train’ to get the same treatment for their own families as is available for the bereaved families of suicide victims.
“If the children or loved ones of a suicide victim don’t get our support through ACC, then where do they get it from? Is the Minister saying that they don’t deserve our support? Or is he saying that they should go on a sickness benefit?”
“When he said yesterday that the government’s ‘objective is to secure the long-term future of ACC as an efficient and fair 24/7, no-fault insurance scheme for all New Zealanders’, he clearly did not mean the families of suicide victims. He is effectively victimising these most vulnerable of New Zealanders.”
As the Minister in charge of suicide prevention programs in the last Labour/Progressive government, Jim Anderton introduced a program of support for families after a suicide (Postvention). This provided urgent counselling where needed to families, and victim support for those affected.
Nick Smith claims that it is necessary to cut support to the families of suicide victims because ACC has a huge deficit. He said if someone with a family committed suicide, that family could have been given almost $1 million in compensation over time.
“Yet the cost for ACC to give support to a family of three children on an average wage is less than $210,000 over five years. With approximately 350 claims per year, that is about $7 millions per year to all families of suicide victims who make an ACC claim.”
“That is a small cost to pay out of what Nick Smith claims is a $2 billion shortfall annually, to help some of the most vulnerable families in our community.”
Iconic sports should be free to air
14/10/09 13:02
The government now reportedly has $8 million on the table to help TVNZ, Maori Television Service (MTS) and TV3 bid for the right to screen the Rugby World Cup, says MP for Wigram and Progressive leader Jim Anderton.
“Does it now accept the principal that all iconic sporting events should be free-to-air?”
Te Puni Kokiri (the Ministry for Maori Development) has funded the MTS bid by $3 million. The Government has allegedly freed up $5 million for a TVNZ and TV3 bid.
“$8 million would buy a lot of coverage for free-to-air sporting events.”
“We could buy the rights to screen the up-coming game between our national soccer team, the All-Whites who will play Bahrain to see if they qualify for the soccer World Cup next year in South Africa; as well as the rights for TVNZ to screen next year’s Commonwealth Games in Delhi.”
For the last forty yearsTVNZ has screened the Commonwealth Games.
“When TVNZ announced last month that it was seeking to offload its rights to broadcast the Commonwealth Games, the National Government refused to get involved, saying the arrangement was a commercial contract between TVNZ and Sky.”
“At the time Jonathan Coleman said the public could no longer expect major sporting events to be provided free on television.”
“What’s changed?”
“Does it now accept the principal that all iconic sporting events should be free-to-air?”
Te Puni Kokiri (the Ministry for Maori Development) has funded the MTS bid by $3 million. The Government has allegedly freed up $5 million for a TVNZ and TV3 bid.
“$8 million would buy a lot of coverage for free-to-air sporting events.”
“We could buy the rights to screen the up-coming game between our national soccer team, the All-Whites who will play Bahrain to see if they qualify for the soccer World Cup next year in South Africa; as well as the rights for TVNZ to screen next year’s Commonwealth Games in Delhi.”
For the last forty yearsTVNZ has screened the Commonwealth Games.
“When TVNZ announced last month that it was seeking to offload its rights to broadcast the Commonwealth Games, the National Government refused to get involved, saying the arrangement was a commercial contract between TVNZ and Sky.”
“At the time Jonathan Coleman said the public could no longer expect major sporting events to be provided free on television.”
“What’s changed?”
Alcohol abuse more serious than methamphetamine
08/10/09 16:19
The abuse of alcohol is by far and away the most serious drug abuse we face in New Zealand, the former Associate Minister of Health in charge of the government’s drug policy, Jim Anderton said today.
“It is more serious than the abuse of methamphetamine, even though it is a deadly serious and unacceptable drug.
“The Prime Minister and his government’s first priority to prevent drug abuse in New Zealand is to take up the challenge posed by incidents of heavy drinking, which is now deeply imbedded in our culture, across all ages.
“The economic costs, the health costs, the costs to our justice and corrections systems and lost time off work as well as road deaths and serious injuries are calculated by reputable economists to cost New Zealand between two to three billion dollars a year,” Jim Anderton said.
“The National-led government has announced today that it is taking cold and flu medicines containing pseudoephedrine off our pharmacy counters. This means that those acting illegally have succeeded in removing our most effective cold and flu treatments while the majority of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine is illegally imported across our borders and not sold over pharmacy counters.
“Simon Power’s statement to the Hospitality Association, as the Minister of Justice and Commerce last Wednesday, that “I tend to view liquor law reform through a wide angle lens” does not fill me with confidence that the Law Commission’s recent “Alcohol in our Lives” Discussion Document will bring about the liquor law reform that New Zealand needs.
“The easy availability of alcohol, the lowering of the drinking age, and the influence of the alcohol industry on alcohol-control policy has turned our drinking culture into a pathological problem.
“The police know that this is an urgent issue. Between half and three-quarters of all police work is associated in some way with alcohol abuse.
“Sixty per cent of people arrested by the police are under the influence of alcohol at the time they commit the offence for which they are arrested. Alcohol abuse affects the community and people other than the drinker; forty per cent of all deaths and almost half of all other injuries from alcohol-related car crashes impact on those who have not been drinking at all.
”I call on the government to get serious about alcohol abuse.
“Reduce the availability of alcohol because research around the world has shown that there is a direct link between the availability of alcohol and the level of harm caused by alcohol. Increase the minimum age for buying alcohol to twenty years old; help communities reduce the proliferation of liquor retailers; and reduce the advertising of alcohol especially at sporting events,” Jim Anderton said today in Timaru
Jim Anderson is chairing a meeting tonight in Tïmaru: "Ten things the alcohol industry won't tell you about alcohol”. This meeting is one in a series of thirty eight being held around New Zealand, organised by Alcohol Action, with the presentation by Dr Doug Sellman, Director of the National Addiction Centre, and Professor of Psychiatry and Addiction Medicine at the University of Otago.
“It is more serious than the abuse of methamphetamine, even though it is a deadly serious and unacceptable drug.
“The Prime Minister and his government’s first priority to prevent drug abuse in New Zealand is to take up the challenge posed by incidents of heavy drinking, which is now deeply imbedded in our culture, across all ages.
“The economic costs, the health costs, the costs to our justice and corrections systems and lost time off work as well as road deaths and serious injuries are calculated by reputable economists to cost New Zealand between two to three billion dollars a year,” Jim Anderton said.
“The National-led government has announced today that it is taking cold and flu medicines containing pseudoephedrine off our pharmacy counters. This means that those acting illegally have succeeded in removing our most effective cold and flu treatments while the majority of ephedrine and pseudoephedrine is illegally imported across our borders and not sold over pharmacy counters.
“Simon Power’s statement to the Hospitality Association, as the Minister of Justice and Commerce last Wednesday, that “I tend to view liquor law reform through a wide angle lens” does not fill me with confidence that the Law Commission’s recent “Alcohol in our Lives” Discussion Document will bring about the liquor law reform that New Zealand needs.
“The easy availability of alcohol, the lowering of the drinking age, and the influence of the alcohol industry on alcohol-control policy has turned our drinking culture into a pathological problem.
“The police know that this is an urgent issue. Between half and three-quarters of all police work is associated in some way with alcohol abuse.
“Sixty per cent of people arrested by the police are under the influence of alcohol at the time they commit the offence for which they are arrested. Alcohol abuse affects the community and people other than the drinker; forty per cent of all deaths and almost half of all other injuries from alcohol-related car crashes impact on those who have not been drinking at all.
”I call on the government to get serious about alcohol abuse.
“Reduce the availability of alcohol because research around the world has shown that there is a direct link between the availability of alcohol and the level of harm caused by alcohol. Increase the minimum age for buying alcohol to twenty years old; help communities reduce the proliferation of liquor retailers; and reduce the advertising of alcohol especially at sporting events,” Jim Anderton said today in Timaru
Jim Anderson is chairing a meeting tonight in Tïmaru: "Ten things the alcohol industry won't tell you about alcohol”. This meeting is one in a series of thirty eight being held around New Zealand, organised by Alcohol Action, with the presentation by Dr Doug Sellman, Director of the National Addiction Centre, and Professor of Psychiatry and Addiction Medicine at the University of Otago.
Coastguards prepare for their busy season.
25/09/09 18:01
“On an average day the Coastguard around New Zealand make ten rescues. That’s more than 3500 incidents a year, and over 5000 people a year who might not be with us today if it wasn’t for these volunteers,” says Progressive leader and MP for Wigram, Jim Anderton.
“These are just ordinary people with families and jobs, doing extraordinary things every day. And they do it for nothing. That kind of service is humbling.”
Jim Anderton was giving the key note speech at the annual Conference of the New Zealand Coastguard Association in Christchurch. He and his wife Carol are the official Patrons for the Canterbury Coastguard.
“It's easy for people to take this service for granted. But what would we do if we didn't have people around who give so much to helping out others?
“There are still New Zealand boaties out there who think they are indestructible; they don’t wear life jackets or carry rescue beacons. I know that many Coastguard volunteers would like to see more funding to spend on education, and there is a strong demand in the community for Coastguard boating education.
“That’s why I was very pleased last year to advocate in Cabinet with colleagues like Annette King, that a levy from petrol and diesel should be used to fund the work of the Coastguard service.
“They need all the funding they can get, and it doesn’t make sense for boaties filling their boats with fuel to pay a road tax.”
The Land Transport Management Act now allows for some of the fuel excise paid by boaties to be used to fund specified safety activities, most notably search and rescue.
“There are more than 2,500 of you across New Zealand. You are dedicated active volunteers who give over 300,000 hours of your time for free every year, and you are all heroes,” Jim Anderton said.
“Your service is an inspiration. New Zealanders owe you a debt of gratitude, and I wish you a successful and safe summer,” says Jim Anderton.
“These are just ordinary people with families and jobs, doing extraordinary things every day. And they do it for nothing. That kind of service is humbling.”
Jim Anderton was giving the key note speech at the annual Conference of the New Zealand Coastguard Association in Christchurch. He and his wife Carol are the official Patrons for the Canterbury Coastguard.
“It's easy for people to take this service for granted. But what would we do if we didn't have people around who give so much to helping out others?
“There are still New Zealand boaties out there who think they are indestructible; they don’t wear life jackets or carry rescue beacons. I know that many Coastguard volunteers would like to see more funding to spend on education, and there is a strong demand in the community for Coastguard boating education.
“That’s why I was very pleased last year to advocate in Cabinet with colleagues like Annette King, that a levy from petrol and diesel should be used to fund the work of the Coastguard service.
“They need all the funding they can get, and it doesn’t make sense for boaties filling their boats with fuel to pay a road tax.”
The Land Transport Management Act now allows for some of the fuel excise paid by boaties to be used to fund specified safety activities, most notably search and rescue.
“There are more than 2,500 of you across New Zealand. You are dedicated active volunteers who give over 300,000 hours of your time for free every year, and you are all heroes,” Jim Anderton said.
“Your service is an inspiration. New Zealanders owe you a debt of gratitude, and I wish you a successful and safe summer,” says Jim Anderton.
Mourning the loss of a passionate New Zealander
24/09/09 14:20
“Howard Morrison was more than a world-class and unique entertainer; he was a fierce advocate for a fair go for all New Zealanders,” says Progressive leader Jim Anderton.
“It is not widely known that Sir Howard was passionately committed to the economic development of New Zealand – and in particular for Maori economic development and an equal place for Maori in New Zealand society.
“He never sought political glory, even though he was driven by strong convictions and beliefs all his life.
“His political and community work often went unnoticed. He put together formidable kapa haka groups of young people which reflected his absolute genius and understanding of the performing arts. He instilled in the young people he mentored a sense of self-worth and self disciple. He was a fierce opponent of drug and alcohol misuse.
“He worked with me on campaigns to turn young people away from drugs and alcohol and he stood beside us when we formed the Progressive Party. His kapa haka group, Te Wero, performed at the inaugural conference of the Progressives in 2003, and they were a wonderful testament to him.
Sir Howard approached me at a difficult time to lend his support and was not concerned that this could make him unpopular with certain people. I have always admired him greatly.
“He was passionate about making New Zealand a better place.
“Many New Zealanders have lost a good friend. We shared a belief in the talents of people in the regions of New Zealand, and a determination to support all New Zealanders, no matter where they come from, to realise their dreams and to aspire to be the best that they can.
“He kept a low-profile politically. But he was driven to do things for people, and because of his status as one of our most loved entertainers, his legacy will live on.
“He will be much missed by us all,” says Jim Anderton.
“It is not widely known that Sir Howard was passionately committed to the economic development of New Zealand – and in particular for Maori economic development and an equal place for Maori in New Zealand society.
“He never sought political glory, even though he was driven by strong convictions and beliefs all his life.
“His political and community work often went unnoticed. He put together formidable kapa haka groups of young people which reflected his absolute genius and understanding of the performing arts. He instilled in the young people he mentored a sense of self-worth and self disciple. He was a fierce opponent of drug and alcohol misuse.
“He worked with me on campaigns to turn young people away from drugs and alcohol and he stood beside us when we formed the Progressive Party. His kapa haka group, Te Wero, performed at the inaugural conference of the Progressives in 2003, and they were a wonderful testament to him.
Sir Howard approached me at a difficult time to lend his support and was not concerned that this could make him unpopular with certain people. I have always admired him greatly.
“He was passionate about making New Zealand a better place.
“Many New Zealanders have lost a good friend. We shared a belief in the talents of people in the regions of New Zealand, and a determination to support all New Zealanders, no matter where they come from, to realise their dreams and to aspire to be the best that they can.
“He kept a low-profile politically. But he was driven to do things for people, and because of his status as one of our most loved entertainers, his legacy will live on.
“He will be much missed by us all,” says Jim Anderton.
Fonterra capital restructuring
18/09/09 16:43
The Opposition will be listening very carefully to farmer comment about the proposals, agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
"New proposals for Fonterra's capital restructuring appear to provide more stability for Fonterra and avoid the trap of opening the back door to overseas ownership.
"It's difficult to balance the ambition of a global multinational with the benefits of a cooperative structure, and if farmers accept the latest proposal then it will be a good sign for the future of Fonterra and of our dairy company that the right balance has been reached.
"But the government should be careful not to bully farmers into the deal. Farmers know better than the government what is best for their own businesses. Government's role is to help where it can make a difference and step in when wider community interests are at stake. It shouldn't replace farmers' own judgments about the best capital structure for them, when farmers have legitimate interests to look out for."
"New proposals for Fonterra's capital restructuring appear to provide more stability for Fonterra and avoid the trap of opening the back door to overseas ownership.
"It's difficult to balance the ambition of a global multinational with the benefits of a cooperative structure, and if farmers accept the latest proposal then it will be a good sign for the future of Fonterra and of our dairy company that the right balance has been reached.
"But the government should be careful not to bully farmers into the deal. Farmers know better than the government what is best for their own businesses. Government's role is to help where it can make a difference and step in when wider community interests are at stake. It shouldn't replace farmers' own judgments about the best capital structure for them, when farmers have legitimate interests to look out for."
Waikato innovation park opened
16/09/09 15:52
Jim Anderton was in Hamilton today to mark the further development of a project begun by the last Labour-led government; the formal opening of the now Tetra Pak building at Waikato Innovation Park.
As Minister of Economic Development, Mr Anderton had championed the initial establishment of the Park.
“I believed strongly that establishing and developing the park would help New Zealand agri-technology businesses to grow and develop,” says Opposition spokesperson on agriculture and Progressive leader, Jim Anderton.
“This is how governments actively support innovation and New Zealand business.
“It’s very disappointing that under the new National government support for big and bold ideas like this is less likely to occur.
“Our tax credits for businesses who invest in Research and Development for example, have been removed. That means a tax increase of about $1 billion over three years for anyone wanting to support initiatives like the Tetra Pak building.”
The Tetra Pak building will house many innovative companies working in the agricultural sector, including the multinational food processing and packaging company Tetra Pak, New Zealand Industry Training Organisation, and many others. It will house approximately 180 staff, doubling the size of the workforce at the Waikato Innovation Park.
Securing big multinational tenants like Tetra Pak means that the Park is now housing businesses which come up with new ideas to improve value for money from on-farm to processing activities.
“Only six years ago this was just a paddock of grass. Now it’s set to become a major contributor to wealth-creation in New Zealand.
“We need more centers of innovation like this across New Zealand. You don’t grow the economy with cycle tracks and small ideas. You need big and bold ideas. I wish the Waikato Innovation Park the best of luck for the future,” says Jim Anderton.
As Minister of Economic Development, Mr Anderton had championed the initial establishment of the Park.
“I believed strongly that establishing and developing the park would help New Zealand agri-technology businesses to grow and develop,” says Opposition spokesperson on agriculture and Progressive leader, Jim Anderton.
“This is how governments actively support innovation and New Zealand business.
“It’s very disappointing that under the new National government support for big and bold ideas like this is less likely to occur.
“Our tax credits for businesses who invest in Research and Development for example, have been removed. That means a tax increase of about $1 billion over three years for anyone wanting to support initiatives like the Tetra Pak building.”
The Tetra Pak building will house many innovative companies working in the agricultural sector, including the multinational food processing and packaging company Tetra Pak, New Zealand Industry Training Organisation, and many others. It will house approximately 180 staff, doubling the size of the workforce at the Waikato Innovation Park.
Securing big multinational tenants like Tetra Pak means that the Park is now housing businesses which come up with new ideas to improve value for money from on-farm to processing activities.
“Only six years ago this was just a paddock of grass. Now it’s set to become a major contributor to wealth-creation in New Zealand.
“We need more centers of innovation like this across New Zealand. You don’t grow the economy with cycle tracks and small ideas. You need big and bold ideas. I wish the Waikato Innovation Park the best of luck for the future,” says Jim Anderton.
Opening of Sydenham police station
11/09/09 14:00
Jim delivers on his promise
Twenty years ago, local MP Jim Anderton was promised funding to build a new police station in Sydenham. He put out a press release to announce the good news.
The 1984 press release has been pinned on the police notice board ever since.
“I was promised that the Christchurch South Police would have a new station in two to three years,” MP for Wigram Jim Anderton said.
But the funding never eventuated, until the last Labour-led government.
“I’m told that the police are going to frame the old press release from 1984 and give it to me!
“When I first arrived in Christchurch and stood as an MP in 1984, I could see that the police had totally inadequate facilities and were spread out over three sites which was hard to administer.
“In the 1984 –1990 Labour government, I kept reminding the Cabinet of their promise. In the years of the Labour-Progressive government of 1999 – 2008, I promised my Labour Cabinet colleagues that the only way they would get rid of me was to build the Christchurch South Police Station.
“That’s why I was thrilled to be present when the former Minister of Police, Annette King, laid the foundation for the new building last year and am thrilled that the police are finally in their new headquarters,” Jim Anderton said today.
Twenty years ago, local MP Jim Anderton was promised funding to build a new police station in Sydenham. He put out a press release to announce the good news.
The 1984 press release has been pinned on the police notice board ever since.
“I was promised that the Christchurch South Police would have a new station in two to three years,” MP for Wigram Jim Anderton said.
But the funding never eventuated, until the last Labour-led government.
“I’m told that the police are going to frame the old press release from 1984 and give it to me!
“When I first arrived in Christchurch and stood as an MP in 1984, I could see that the police had totally inadequate facilities and were spread out over three sites which was hard to administer.
“In the 1984 –1990 Labour government, I kept reminding the Cabinet of their promise. In the years of the Labour-Progressive government of 1999 – 2008, I promised my Labour Cabinet colleagues that the only way they would get rid of me was to build the Christchurch South Police Station.
“That’s why I was thrilled to be present when the former Minister of Police, Annette King, laid the foundation for the new building last year and am thrilled that the police are finally in their new headquarters,” Jim Anderton said today.
Bill to stop MPs standing for Parliament
11/09/09 12:00
New Bill designed to stop MPs standing for election when they are already elected
Jim Anderton has drafted a Bill designed to stop current members of parliament from standing for election to parliament in a by-election.
The Bill will be placed in the Member’s Ballot. The next ballot for Member’s Bills is expected to be drawn next Thursday.
“It’s a nonsense that people can stand for election to parliament when they’ve already members of parliament,” says Member of Parliament for Wigram and Progressive leader, Jim Anderton
“What would rate-payers think if a member of a city council stood in a by-election to become a city councillor?”
In this year’s Mt Albert by-election, three out of the four main candidates were already members of parliament. Only the Labour Party candidate, David Shearer was not already an MP. Mr Shearer went on to win the by-election.
“There should be a rule that if you want to stand in a by-election, you first resign your seat in parliament.
“It’s not acceptable that M.Ps like Russell Norman for the Green Party, Melissa Lee for National, and John Boscawan for the Act Party used tax-payers’ money to run a campaign to get elected to parliament when they had already been elected. In reality they were using their parliamentary salaries and resources to try and win the by-election and bring another MP into parliament on their party list.
“If the Bill is introduced, existing M.P.s will have to make a meaningful choice - if they really want to run for a seat, they will need to resign from parliament and contest it on the same basis as anyone else. If a list member is so keen to represent the people of a particular electorate, his/her party can open an office there.
“In a general election, an electorate MP has no insurance. They have to win enough votes in their electorate or for their party to return to Parliament. It is inconsistent at the very least, to have different rules in a by-election,” says Jim Anderton.
Jim Anderton has drafted a Bill designed to stop current members of parliament from standing for election to parliament in a by-election.
The Bill will be placed in the Member’s Ballot. The next ballot for Member’s Bills is expected to be drawn next Thursday.
“It’s a nonsense that people can stand for election to parliament when they’ve already members of parliament,” says Member of Parliament for Wigram and Progressive leader, Jim Anderton
“What would rate-payers think if a member of a city council stood in a by-election to become a city councillor?”
In this year’s Mt Albert by-election, three out of the four main candidates were already members of parliament. Only the Labour Party candidate, David Shearer was not already an MP. Mr Shearer went on to win the by-election.
“There should be a rule that if you want to stand in a by-election, you first resign your seat in parliament.
“It’s not acceptable that M.Ps like Russell Norman for the Green Party, Melissa Lee for National, and John Boscawan for the Act Party used tax-payers’ money to run a campaign to get elected to parliament when they had already been elected. In reality they were using their parliamentary salaries and resources to try and win the by-election and bring another MP into parliament on their party list.
“If the Bill is introduced, existing M.P.s will have to make a meaningful choice - if they really want to run for a seat, they will need to resign from parliament and contest it on the same basis as anyone else. If a list member is so keen to represent the people of a particular electorate, his/her party can open an office there.
“In a general election, an electorate MP has no insurance. They have to win enough votes in their electorate or for their party to return to Parliament. It is inconsistent at the very least, to have different rules in a by-election,” says Jim Anderton.
Power company profits at the expense of consumers
04/09/09 13:00
The enormous profit declared by Mighty River Power shows that electricity companies have been overcharging consumers, Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
He is calling for some of the dividend from the power companies to go to consumers as a rebate instead of the government as a dividend.
“I have record numbers of people approaching my electorate office with problems paying their power bills at the same time that a state owned power company is declaring a record profit, and paying the government a dividend of $230 million dollars.
“One way or another, the profits of the power companies are earned from the consumer paying power bills. The public energy companies are effectively being used as a form of tax – for providing a strategic essential service like electricity.
“I have people like a solo mother with four kids coming to see me with a $450 power bill at the same time that a public energy company is paying the government a special dividend of $150 million.”
Jim Anderton has been highlighting cases in his electorate that include a solo mother with an eleven month old baby who got a power bill for $369 for a four-week period; A low income young working couple in a Housing NZ flat got a power bill for $400 for four weeks, and a superannuitant living alone in his own home got a power bill for $205.
"Many families are wondering how they will pay their bills. Power bills have been driven up by a combination of an early start to winter, with very cold months early this year, and power bills that haverisen faster than inflation. The result is that many low income familiesare frightened to turn their heaters on, even in the middle of winter.
"Instead of making record profits, publicly-owned power companies should be charging consumers less,” Jim Anderton said.
He is calling for some of the dividend from the power companies to go to consumers as a rebate instead of the government as a dividend.
“I have record numbers of people approaching my electorate office with problems paying their power bills at the same time that a state owned power company is declaring a record profit, and paying the government a dividend of $230 million dollars.
“One way or another, the profits of the power companies are earned from the consumer paying power bills. The public energy companies are effectively being used as a form of tax – for providing a strategic essential service like electricity.
“I have people like a solo mother with four kids coming to see me with a $450 power bill at the same time that a public energy company is paying the government a special dividend of $150 million.”
Jim Anderton has been highlighting cases in his electorate that include a solo mother with an eleven month old baby who got a power bill for $369 for a four-week period; A low income young working couple in a Housing NZ flat got a power bill for $400 for four weeks, and a superannuitant living alone in his own home got a power bill for $205.
"Many families are wondering how they will pay their bills. Power bills have been driven up by a combination of an early start to winter, with very cold months early this year, and power bills that haverisen faster than inflation. The result is that many low income familiesare frightened to turn their heaters on, even in the middle of winter.
"Instead of making record profits, publicly-owned power companies should be charging consumers less,” Jim Anderton said.
Banks should front up
03/09/09 16:00
“The big Australian banks would have helped themselves more if they had openly fronted up to questions at the multi-party inquiry on banking,” Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
This week ANZ National Bank released its financial results for the last nine months, and prepared a paper on the impact of the credit crunch on New Zealand Banks.
“I am interested in their views. The rest of the world is having an open debate about the banking sector right now. The owners of banks here front up in their home countries. They should front up here, too.
“New Zealanders who are struggling with high interest rates for their mortgages, their businesses and their farms would have been very interested in what banks had to say.
“Ralph Norris, chief executive of the ASB Bank in Australia, welcomed the inquiry as an opportunity to clear up some ‘myths’ the very same week the ASB said it didn’t want to contribute to better understanding of the issues.”
Today the Banking inquiry completed its public hearings. A final report will be released shortly.
Submissions were heard from business organisions, members of the public, and community groups from across New Zealand, including Kiwi Bank; New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association; FINSEC; Federated Farmers; CTU and many others.
“I would like to see a cross-party agreement on how we improve the performance of the whole financial sector in New Zealand, for the sake of those who pay too much in interest charges and bank fees, and for the sake of our businesses, and for the future of our economy and living standards in New Zealand ” Jim Anderton said.
PHOTOS here.
This week ANZ National Bank released its financial results for the last nine months, and prepared a paper on the impact of the credit crunch on New Zealand Banks.
“I am interested in their views. The rest of the world is having an open debate about the banking sector right now. The owners of banks here front up in their home countries. They should front up here, too.
“New Zealanders who are struggling with high interest rates for their mortgages, their businesses and their farms would have been very interested in what banks had to say.
“Ralph Norris, chief executive of the ASB Bank in Australia, welcomed the inquiry as an opportunity to clear up some ‘myths’ the very same week the ASB said it didn’t want to contribute to better understanding of the issues.”
Today the Banking inquiry completed its public hearings. A final report will be released shortly.
Submissions were heard from business organisions, members of the public, and community groups from across New Zealand, including Kiwi Bank; New Zealand Manufacturers and Exporters Association; FINSEC; Federated Farmers; CTU and many others.
“I would like to see a cross-party agreement on how we improve the performance of the whole financial sector in New Zealand, for the sake of those who pay too much in interest charges and bank fees, and for the sake of our businesses, and for the future of our economy and living standards in New Zealand ” Jim Anderton said.
PHOTOS here.
Act irresponsible in walking out too quickly
20/08/09 12:38
Making threats to get your way in government as Act leader Rodney Hide is doing is the wrong way to go about getting cooperation in government, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He has led two smaller coalition partners in government. He says Rodney Hide is threatening to flounce out of government if he doesn’t get his way.
“It’s counter-productive as a means to get the policy you want, and it is a bad way to govern. When two parties cannot handle their differences without one walking out, it says either there is bad faith at the heart of government, or one party is not up to the challenges of government.
“It is inevitable when there is more than one party in government that there will be some issues on which the parties feel passionate and have different views. If one party stomped out every time it couldn’t get what it wanted, then cooperation and coalition could never happen.
“Mr Hide thinks Act will win some support over the Maori seats issue, but it will lose more credibility than it gains. The public will see Mr Hide as irresponsible - and that is a larger problem for Mr Hide than the policy at stake.
“Larger parties will never be seen to be allowing the tail to wag the dog. All Act can do by walking out is make itself irrelevant. For small parties, there are a lot of bitter pills to swallow. If your ideas are popular, the larger party will adopt them as their own anyway, but at least you get your policy adopted.
“The way to get what you want is by constructive argument and dealing with the objections of your partner, not by making threats. If they couldn’t agree and believe the issue is so important, Act should have reached an agreement that another minister would take over the relevant bill, allowing Act to vote against it.
“Making every important issue a make or break one means that eventually the relationship will break or at least be less effective.
“I would be pleased to see someone else than Mr Hide as Minister for Local Government, however. He clearly doesn’t like local bodies or the constructive role they play in the development of their communities and that is hardly a good qualification for being their minister.”
He has led two smaller coalition partners in government. He says Rodney Hide is threatening to flounce out of government if he doesn’t get his way.
“It’s counter-productive as a means to get the policy you want, and it is a bad way to govern. When two parties cannot handle their differences without one walking out, it says either there is bad faith at the heart of government, or one party is not up to the challenges of government.
“It is inevitable when there is more than one party in government that there will be some issues on which the parties feel passionate and have different views. If one party stomped out every time it couldn’t get what it wanted, then cooperation and coalition could never happen.
“Mr Hide thinks Act will win some support over the Maori seats issue, but it will lose more credibility than it gains. The public will see Mr Hide as irresponsible - and that is a larger problem for Mr Hide than the policy at stake.
“Larger parties will never be seen to be allowing the tail to wag the dog. All Act can do by walking out is make itself irrelevant. For small parties, there are a lot of bitter pills to swallow. If your ideas are popular, the larger party will adopt them as their own anyway, but at least you get your policy adopted.
“The way to get what you want is by constructive argument and dealing with the objections of your partner, not by making threats. If they couldn’t agree and believe the issue is so important, Act should have reached an agreement that another minister would take over the relevant bill, allowing Act to vote against it.
“Making every important issue a make or break one means that eventually the relationship will break or at least be less effective.
“I would be pleased to see someone else than Mr Hide as Minister for Local Government, however. He clearly doesn’t like local bodies or the constructive role they play in the development of their communities and that is hardly a good qualification for being their minister.”
Time has come for Kiwibank critics to admit they were wrong
20/08/09 12:37
The time has come for Kiwibank’s critics to admit they were wrong, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says, after the people’s bank today announced an after-tax profit of $52.5 million for the past year.
Loans grew by 52 per cent. Retail deposits grew by 39 per cent.
“The decision to set up a New Zealand-owned bank was the right one.
“Kiwibank has been an overwhelming success.
“It’s great that we have our own bank performing so well at a time of international financial crisis. We don’t have to be dependent on overseas financial markets. Those markets right now look like the dog that critics claimed that Kiwibank would be.
“Kiwibank’s success results from its commitment to the New Zealand community that other banks don’t have: Its profits stay here and help New Zealand. It doesn’t get involved in large tax avoidance schemes. Kiwibank opened a larger branch network than the other banks, and as a result those banks have stopped closing their branches. And Kiwibank charges lower interest rates and fees than its overseas competitors.
“When Kiwibank was set up, National and Act – and their cheerleaders – said New Zealanders couldn’t run our own bank. They were wrong. Today would be a graceful day to admit it.”
Loans grew by 52 per cent. Retail deposits grew by 39 per cent.
“The decision to set up a New Zealand-owned bank was the right one.
“Kiwibank has been an overwhelming success.
“It’s great that we have our own bank performing so well at a time of international financial crisis. We don’t have to be dependent on overseas financial markets. Those markets right now look like the dog that critics claimed that Kiwibank would be.
“Kiwibank’s success results from its commitment to the New Zealand community that other banks don’t have: Its profits stay here and help New Zealand. It doesn’t get involved in large tax avoidance schemes. Kiwibank opened a larger branch network than the other banks, and as a result those banks have stopped closing their branches. And Kiwibank charges lower interest rates and fees than its overseas competitors.
“When Kiwibank was set up, National and Act – and their cheerleaders – said New Zealanders couldn’t run our own bank. They were wrong. Today would be a graceful day to admit it.”
Farmers to pay for Auckland roads
19/08/09 17:58
Farmers will be paying more for Auckland roads because of National’s decision to replace a regional fuel tax with a general increase in petrol tax, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
“The roads are still regional, but now the bill is national.
“There aren’t many farms in Auckland. But farmers will be getting the bill for Auckland roads.
“When we had a regional tax, a tunnel under Auckland would have been paid by Auckland motorists. Now they have axed the tunnel, and sent the bill to farmers and others outside Auckland. Everyone loses.
“Fuel costs are an important input cost for farmers. When petrol tax goes up, their input costs go up.
“It can be fair to charge someone more when they get more of the benefit. But farmers and others in rural communities get less benefit from new Auckland roads than Aucklanders do,” Jim Anderton said.
“The roads are still regional, but now the bill is national.
“There aren’t many farms in Auckland. But farmers will be getting the bill for Auckland roads.
“When we had a regional tax, a tunnel under Auckland would have been paid by Auckland motorists. Now they have axed the tunnel, and sent the bill to farmers and others outside Auckland. Everyone loses.
“Fuel costs are an important input cost for farmers. When petrol tax goes up, their input costs go up.
“It can be fair to charge someone more when they get more of the benefit. But farmers and others in rural communities get less benefit from new Auckland roads than Aucklanders do,” Jim Anderton said.
Families in energy poverty while Brownlee looks for magic pudding solution
12/08/09 14:41
New recommendations on energy costs provide no hope of quick relief for
households facing huge power bills this year, Progressive Wigram MP Jim
Anderton says.
"Gerry Brownlee is relying on a magic pudding solution that reduces
costs but no one's going to pay.
"Finding a new structure in energy could take years, while there is a
crisis of electricity poverty this winter," Jim Anderton says.
His Wigram electorate office has been inundated with record numbers of
people who can't afford their winter power bills.
For example, a solo mother with an eleven month old baby got a power
bill for $369 for a four-week period. A low income young working couple
in a Housing NZ flat got a power bill for $400 for four weeks, and a
superannuitant living alone in his own home got a power bill for $205.
"Many families are wondering how they will pay their bills. Power bills
have been driven up by a combination of an early start to winter, with
very cold months early this year, and power bills that have risen faster
than inflation.
"There are alternatives. The state of Victoria, for example, provides
low-income households with more than $1 billion a year in concessions
for essential services. It pays a rebate to some households that reduces
the cost of LPG heating gas. In the United Kingdom, the government
provides a winter fuel payment of NZ$750 for pensioners over 60, and it
pays NZ$1200 for the over-80s.
"Today's review shows energy companies are charging too much for power
and some of those profits should be used to help very poor New Zealand
households," Jim Anderton said.
households facing huge power bills this year, Progressive Wigram MP Jim
Anderton says.
"Gerry Brownlee is relying on a magic pudding solution that reduces
costs but no one's going to pay.
"Finding a new structure in energy could take years, while there is a
crisis of electricity poverty this winter," Jim Anderton says.
His Wigram electorate office has been inundated with record numbers of
people who can't afford their winter power bills.
For example, a solo mother with an eleven month old baby got a power
bill for $369 for a four-week period. A low income young working couple
in a Housing NZ flat got a power bill for $400 for four weeks, and a
superannuitant living alone in his own home got a power bill for $205.
"Many families are wondering how they will pay their bills. Power bills
have been driven up by a combination of an early start to winter, with
very cold months early this year, and power bills that have risen faster
than inflation.
"There are alternatives. The state of Victoria, for example, provides
low-income households with more than $1 billion a year in concessions
for essential services. It pays a rebate to some households that reduces
the cost of LPG heating gas. In the United Kingdom, the government
provides a winter fuel payment of NZ$750 for pensioners over 60, and it
pays NZ$1200 for the over-80s.
"Today's review shows energy companies are charging too much for power
and some of those profits should be used to help very poor New Zealand
households," Jim Anderton said.
Electricity poverty crisis
05/08/09 12:00
Electricity poverty crisis
There is a crisis of electricity poverty underway in New Zealand this winter, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
His electorate office has been inundated with record numbers of people who can’t afford their winter power bills.
Examples include:
“What is a solo mum with four kids meant to do with a power bill of $400 for four weeks? All four children have recurrent upper and lower respiratory tract infections. That is what happens when you have electricity poverty. Health problems that cost much more than the power bill.
“I understand that Housing New Zealand is not even allowing energy community action to enter homes to undertake a report on insulation and heating options.
“There is no other expense that is similar to electricity bills - a seasonal spike that is an unavoidable expense, unpredictable and sometimes quite extreme in the context of a family budget;
“There are alternatives. The state of Victoria, for example, provides low-income households with more than $1 billion a year in concessions for essential services. It pays a rebate to some households that reduces the cost of LPG heating gas.
“In the United Kingdom, the government provides a winter fuel payment of NZ$750 for pensioners over 60, and it pays NZ$1200 for the over-80s.
“I believe we need some urgent intervention to help New Zealand homes. Energy prices have been rising steadily for around fifteen years. That has now combined with a very cold couple of months.
“The result is electricity poverty and real hardship for thousands of New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
There is a crisis of electricity poverty underway in New Zealand this winter, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
His electorate office has been inundated with record numbers of people who can’t afford their winter power bills.
Examples include:
- A solo mother with an eleven month old baby got a power bill for $369 for a four-week period. She has a wood burner but can’t afford wood. She has a medical certificate from her GP about the respiratory condition of her baby. She lives in a Housing New Zealand home, but can’t get a heat pump or carpet to help keep the house warm. How is she supposed to pay that bill?
- A young couple in another Housing NZ home have one source of power – a wall heater. They got a power bill for $400 for four weeks. These are working people on a very low income, already struggling to pay their rent. There is paint peeling off the walls because of mould. They are on the waiting list for a heat pump, but won’t be getting it before the winter is over.
- A young solo mother with four children came to my office with a power account of $400 for four weeks. They are in a Housing New Zealand home with a log burner, and on the urgent waiting list for a heat pump.
- I had a superannuitant who came to see me, living in his own home, alone. He got a power bill for $205. If you are living on a fixed income and you get a power bill of $205 for four weeks, what are you supposed to do?
“What is a solo mum with four kids meant to do with a power bill of $400 for four weeks? All four children have recurrent upper and lower respiratory tract infections. That is what happens when you have electricity poverty. Health problems that cost much more than the power bill.
“I understand that Housing New Zealand is not even allowing energy community action to enter homes to undertake a report on insulation and heating options.
“There is no other expense that is similar to electricity bills - a seasonal spike that is an unavoidable expense, unpredictable and sometimes quite extreme in the context of a family budget;
“There are alternatives. The state of Victoria, for example, provides low-income households with more than $1 billion a year in concessions for essential services. It pays a rebate to some households that reduces the cost of LPG heating gas.
“In the United Kingdom, the government provides a winter fuel payment of NZ$750 for pensioners over 60, and it pays NZ$1200 for the over-80s.
“I believe we need some urgent intervention to help New Zealand homes. Energy prices have been rising steadily for around fifteen years. That has now combined with a very cold couple of months.
“The result is electricity poverty and real hardship for thousands of New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
Feds’ concern over interest rates a topic for bank inquiry Feds’ concern over interest rates a topic for bank inquiry
22/07/09 11:40
Contact between Federated Farmers and banks over high interest rates for farm lending is welcome, and farmers should bring their concerns to the multi-party inquiry, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
Federated farmers says its economists calculate that floating rates account for about $6.6 billion of the $45 billion of rural debt and “floating mortgage rates are higher than they could be.”
Three parliamentary parties, Labour, Greens and the progressives are holding an inquiry on the topic and Jim Anderton wants banks to front up and answer farmers’ concerns.
“Banks need to explain why their interest rates haven’t come down as fast as the Reserve Bank has been bringing down the official cash rate that banks pay the Reserve Bank for their deposits. Not even the Governor of the Reserve bank can understand why they are not reducing their rates.
“Farmers are the backbone of the economy, and the pressure high interest rates are causing farmers is pressure on New Zealand’s entire economic development.”
Federated farmers says its economists calculate that floating rates account for about $6.6 billion of the $45 billion of rural debt and “floating mortgage rates are higher than they could be.”
Three parliamentary parties, Labour, Greens and the progressives are holding an inquiry on the topic and Jim Anderton wants banks to front up and answer farmers’ concerns.
“Banks need to explain why their interest rates haven’t come down as fast as the Reserve Bank has been bringing down the official cash rate that banks pay the Reserve Bank for their deposits. Not even the Governor of the Reserve bank can understand why they are not reducing their rates.
“Farmers are the backbone of the economy, and the pressure high interest rates are causing farmers is pressure on New Zealand’s entire economic development.”
Treasury claims about privatisation boosting productivity
21/07/09 11:48
Treasury’s claim that privatisation boosts productivity is an old song that Treasury should be embarrassed about, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“Treasury made the exact same claim about the privatisation of rail. It could not have been more wrong. The privatisation of rail was a disaster on any reasonable measure.”
Jim Anderton tabled in parliament Treasury’s 1999 report “The Privatisation of New Zealand Rail.”
In the report, produced when Bill English was finance minister, Treasury claimed, “welfare increased from the privatisation of rail. This reflects the remarkable improvement in productivity that took place.”
“Treasury has long made a habit of calling for the same medicine regardless of the facts. When the facts showed Treasury’s advice about privatising rail was hopelessly wrong, they made up a case that said it was great anyway! You can’t beat this for poor quality advice. If Treasury was a doctor, the patient would be dead.
In an ironic twist on Treasury’s call for other government departments to contract out more work, the discredited rail report was produced under contract for Treasury.
Banks have questions to answer
21/07/09 11:46
Banks are charging interest rates in New Zealand that are higher than the same banks charge in Australia, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He is supporting a cross-party inquiry into bank profits, because he says the banks have questions to answer about why there is a difference in the rates they charge.
“Overseas-owned banks took $11.7 billion out of New Zealand last year in interest and profits. That’s more than the entire sum collected in GST revenue. The amount they have been paying themselves has increased rapidly over the last three or four years.
“Interest rates charged by the overseas banks are especially affecting farmers.
“Total farm debt at the moment is around $43 billion. At farm lending rates of 13-14 per cent, that means our farmers are having to pay $5.5-6 billion a year in interest alone to the Australian banks.
“Every one per cent of interest charged represents $450 million off the bottom line of New Zealand’s farms.
“The Australian banks charge interest on unsecured loans of 17.95%, compared to 16.9% charged by Kiwibank.
“Interest on a standard Westpac credit card is 19.45%. In Australia, the comparable interest rate charged on a standard Westpac card is 17.74%. Australia has a higher official cash rate than we do. Kiwibank is able to charge 12.9% on its standard credit cards.
“An inquiry will help to establish why Aussie banks charge us more than they charge Australians.”
How to reduce prison populations
17/07/09 11:51
There are too many people in prison and the Chief Justice is right to raise the issue, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
But he says the only viable way to reduce prison overcrowding is to reduce the level of crime by targeting drugs and alcohol.
“Longer prison sentences are not making much difference.
“The Chief Justice’s comments are the latest of a flurry this year looking at the justice system: Pita Sharples wants to build special Maori prisons for Maori offenders. The government wants to build prisons out of shipping containers. The next step will be putting containers on a container ship and shipping them offshore.
“All of these ideas are looking at the wrong end of the problem. Early intervention works best and costs less.
“If you intervene early, you don’t have as many victims, and you don’t need to worry about locking people up or letting them out.
“Three out of five offences are committed while the offender is under the influence of alcohol. If you want to cut crime, you can’t go past that figure.
“The government made big promises about significantly cutting serious offending. It won’t keep that promise, because it won’t do anything about the most common factor in criminal offending.
“Reducing the abuse of alcohol is a tough issue to fix. Until it is fixed, crime rates will remain high, more prisons will be built in local neighbourhoods, we will pay higher taxes to build them, they will continue to be overcrowded and they will continue to fail.”
But he says the only viable way to reduce prison overcrowding is to reduce the level of crime by targeting drugs and alcohol.
“Longer prison sentences are not making much difference.
“The Chief Justice’s comments are the latest of a flurry this year looking at the justice system: Pita Sharples wants to build special Maori prisons for Maori offenders. The government wants to build prisons out of shipping containers. The next step will be putting containers on a container ship and shipping them offshore.
“All of these ideas are looking at the wrong end of the problem. Early intervention works best and costs less.
“If you intervene early, you don’t have as many victims, and you don’t need to worry about locking people up or letting them out.
“Three out of five offences are committed while the offender is under the influence of alcohol. If you want to cut crime, you can’t go past that figure.
“The government made big promises about significantly cutting serious offending. It won’t keep that promise, because it won’t do anything about the most common factor in criminal offending.
“Reducing the abuse of alcohol is a tough issue to fix. Until it is fixed, crime rates will remain high, more prisons will be built in local neighbourhoods, we will pay higher taxes to build them, they will continue to be overcrowded and they will continue to fail.”
Fitch warning a wake up on bank profits.
17/07/09 11:50
Warnings of a credit downgrade because of our current account deficit are a wake up call about the sums we are paying foreign banks in interest and profit to fund the deficit, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
The Fitch rating agency warns that New Zealand has a fifty-fifty chance of a credit downgrade because the current account is very high. Unless it halves, we will be downgraded, and households, farmers and businesses will have to pay higher interest rates.
Jim Anderton says the external deficit is already costing New Zealand too much.
“We sent $11.7 billion in interest and profit to overseas-owned banks last year, more than the government collected in GST revenue. Farmers alone are paying interest of around six billion dollars in farm debt.
“Interest rates charged here by the Australian-owned banks are higher than the same banks charge in Australia. Their margins are higher.
“We are sending that money to the overseas-owned banks because they are financing the current account deficit. When house prices rose, New Zealanders borrowed against the capital, bought new plasma tvs, but didn’t increase our capacity to earn more.
“Now the bill is starting to come in.
“Current account deficits have a history of reversing themselves sharply, with very sudden falls in consumption. That amounts to a poor outlook when the government is already hoping the recession will end by itself.
“Unfortunately the government doesn’t have any economic plans to reduce the current account deficit and it doesn’t even recognise the level of profits going to overseas-owned banks are a problem.
“Rogernomics was meant to end the current account deficit problem for ever. It failed abysmally.”
All talk and no jobs
15/07/09 11:53
National is talking big about agriculture, but it’s running up a surrender flag with no new ideas, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
“Today John Key billed his speech as a major statement on the economy, but he had no new ideas while unemployment is increasing.
“Unemployment in a region like Gisborne increased from 3.8% in 2006 to 7.8% in March this year and it will be inevitably higher now. Yet while unemployment is rising quickly in regional New Zealand, National has no ministry or policy for regional development or industry development. They never did and they don’t have now.
“National imposed a massive tax increase on research and development and it cancelled a two-billion dollar partnership between the government and private sector to invest in primary sector innovation.
“While John Key talks about the economic performance of agriculture, he has no idea about why our farms, businesses and homeowners are paying much higher interest rates than Australians, when the same banks are doing the lending.
“John Key is all talk and no jobs,” Jim Anderton said.
Complaints over secret agreements
13/07/09 11:57
An attempt to hold negotiations over Auckland’s water services in secret might be a breach of the law, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He is going to the Ombudsman and Auditor-General with complaints over a ‘confidentiality agreement’ Watercare has tried to make Auckland councils sign. The agreement would stop councils from disclosing any details about the transfer of water businesses to Watercare.
Jim Anderton says the agreement appears to be an attempt to thwart the law around official information - in particular the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. It provides the only grounds councils can use to restrict disclosure of information. It also provides for redress through the Ombudsman.
“The ‘confidentiality agreement’ has the whiff of darkness about it.
“There should be nothing in the transfer of the water business of councils that can’t be dealt with through the official information statutes. The important protection for the public is that officials can’t use our money without being accountable to the public. If there are public interest grounds for withholding information, then those grounds are subject to simple review by the Ombudsman.
“Therefore the attempt to override the statute with a secrecy deal appears to be sinister.
“You can’t use public money for unlawful purposes. Thwarting an Act of parliament is unlawful. Any public money used to write this agreement or negotiate it will have to be paid back. Any lawyers involved should be thinking about refunding their fees.
“What we are seeing repeatedly from the national government and its henchmen in Auckland is a highly undemocratic tendency towards taxation without representation.
“First, the public’s right to vote on Auckland was blocked by Act of parliament, passed under urgency. Now the public’s right to know what is happening to our assets is being blocked.”
Why do Aussie banks charge us more than they charge Australians?
07/07/09 12:04
Interest rates charged by the big Australian banks are not only higher than the rates charged by New Zealand’s own bank - they’re higher than the rates the Aussies charge themselves, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“Floating interest rates on mortgages are far too high. But interest rates on credit cards, unsecured lending and farm lending are simply scandalous.
“For example, interest on a standard Westpac credit card is 19.45%. In Australia, the comparable interest rate charged on a standard Westpac card is 17.74%. Australia has a higher official cash rate than we do. Kiwibank is able to charge 12.9% on its standard credit cards.
“The rate for borrowing cash on a credit card in New Zealand is 22.45%, while the same bank charges 19.99% in Australia.
“Why do Aussie banks charge us more than they charge Australians?
“Everywhere you look, the Australian banks are charging too much for lending in New Zealand.
“Total farm debt at the moment is around $43 billion. At farm lending rates of 13-14%, that means our farmers are having to pay $5.5-6 billion a year in interest alone to the Australian banks.
“The Australian banks charge interest on unsecured loans of 17.95%, compared to 16.9% charged by Kiwibank.
“New Zealanders sent $11.7 billion in profit and interest payments to Australian-owned banks last year. That’s more than the entire sum collected in GST revenue. There is no reason why interest rates can’t come down. The Australian banks are rapacious.
“This picture of excessive interest charges more than justifies a parliamentary select committee enquiry and one can only guess why the National government is opposed to one taking place,” Jim Anderton said.
Banks repatriating ‘enormous amounts’
01/07/09 12:10
Banks repatriating ‘enormous amounts’
New Zealand bank branches paid their overseas owners $11.7 billion in interest and profit last year.
Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton told a Federated Farmers conference today that the situation poses a risk for the agriculture sector, which is facing a ‘perfect storm’ of input price rises, threats to demand and now finance risks.
Total bank lending to agriculture in April this year was $43.7 billion, or 13.8 per cent of the total lent to New Zealand.
“Two thirds of that is lending to the dairy industry - at a time when one estimate says Fonterra could be forced to cut its payout from the current $4.55 if our dollar stays over sixty US cents. This would be very hard on some farming businesses that thought the last couple of years’ high prices would last longer. If interest rates came down just one per cent, farmers would save $450 million,” Jim Anderton said.
“The banking system has begun repatriating enormous amounts of New Zealand money.”
Remittances by banks in New Zealand to their overseas owners climbed from $3.8 billion in 2000, to 4.6 billion in 2004, and then began climbing steeply: $6 billion in 2005; $7.8 billion in 2006; $9.1 billion in 2007 and $11.7 billion last year.
“That’s more than the entire GST revenue of New Zealand. It is more than the entire education budget. And in a single year it is far more than the entire proceeds of the asset sales programme that caused so much pain through the eighties and nineties.”
“The huge remittances to banks are the result of the Australian banks funding our balance of payments deficit, now at sixteen billion dollars a year. They are taking an enormous clip of the ticket for doing it. We need to rely more on our own savings, instead of spending the savings of others.
“Interest rates are too high at a time when banks should be reducing them. In a recession, while banks around the world have been under pressure, the big banks here have been smirking. In the current environment, a lot of farms are facing a squeeze and they will struggle to meet the payments on their debt.”
New Zealand bank branches paid their overseas owners $11.7 billion in interest and profit last year.
Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton told a Federated Farmers conference today that the situation poses a risk for the agriculture sector, which is facing a ‘perfect storm’ of input price rises, threats to demand and now finance risks.
Total bank lending to agriculture in April this year was $43.7 billion, or 13.8 per cent of the total lent to New Zealand.
“Two thirds of that is lending to the dairy industry - at a time when one estimate says Fonterra could be forced to cut its payout from the current $4.55 if our dollar stays over sixty US cents. This would be very hard on some farming businesses that thought the last couple of years’ high prices would last longer. If interest rates came down just one per cent, farmers would save $450 million,” Jim Anderton said.
“The banking system has begun repatriating enormous amounts of New Zealand money.”
Remittances by banks in New Zealand to their overseas owners climbed from $3.8 billion in 2000, to 4.6 billion in 2004, and then began climbing steeply: $6 billion in 2005; $7.8 billion in 2006; $9.1 billion in 2007 and $11.7 billion last year.
“That’s more than the entire GST revenue of New Zealand. It is more than the entire education budget. And in a single year it is far more than the entire proceeds of the asset sales programme that caused so much pain through the eighties and nineties.”
“The huge remittances to banks are the result of the Australian banks funding our balance of payments deficit, now at sixteen billion dollars a year. They are taking an enormous clip of the ticket for doing it. We need to rely more on our own savings, instead of spending the savings of others.
“Interest rates are too high at a time when banks should be reducing them. In a recession, while banks around the world have been under pressure, the big banks here have been smirking. In the current environment, a lot of farms are facing a squeeze and they will struggle to meet the payments on their debt.”
Comparing Tamils with Te Whiti is not credible
04/06/09 12:00
Maori Party leader, Tariana Turia’s claim that Tamil Tiger leader, Velupillai Prabhakaran, the inventor of the suicide belt has left the same legacy and made the same historical contribution as Parihaka’s non-violent prophet Te Whiti o Rongomai and his fellow prophet, Tohu Käkahi, is just not credible from a Maori leader, Jim Anderton said today.
“When I heard Ms Turia on Waatea Radio comparing the two leaders - one from Sri Lanka fighting for a separate Tamil homeland – and the other well-known and revered New Zealander, Te Whiti - and the lesser known Tohu Kakahi, I did a double-take,” Jim Anderton said.
“Ms Turia said that Prabhakaran’s 33-year war for a separate Tamil homeland in Northern Sri Lanka had its roots in British colonial policies which disenfranchised the Tamil mana whenua from their land and when non-violent protest didn’t work, the Tigers turned to military action.
“Prabhakaran, their leader was a proponent of violence from the outset and remained so the whole of his political life. The ‘military action’ that Ms Turia talks about included pioneering the suicide belt as an instrument of assassination and terrorism, and as result of which many innocent civilians and bystanders suffered horrible deaths.
“Te Whiti and Tohu Kakahi’s greatness comes from their embrace of passive resistance, which preceded Mohandas Ghandi, and it is the kind of role model which Ms Turia and the Maori Party should be promoting particularly for young Maori, rather than the record and actions of perpetrators of mindless violence which always leads to more violence, not less,” Jim Anderton said.
See also here.
“When I heard Ms Turia on Waatea Radio comparing the two leaders - one from Sri Lanka fighting for a separate Tamil homeland – and the other well-known and revered New Zealander, Te Whiti - and the lesser known Tohu Kakahi, I did a double-take,” Jim Anderton said.
“Ms Turia said that Prabhakaran’s 33-year war for a separate Tamil homeland in Northern Sri Lanka had its roots in British colonial policies which disenfranchised the Tamil mana whenua from their land and when non-violent protest didn’t work, the Tigers turned to military action.
“Prabhakaran, their leader was a proponent of violence from the outset and remained so the whole of his political life. The ‘military action’ that Ms Turia talks about included pioneering the suicide belt as an instrument of assassination and terrorism, and as result of which many innocent civilians and bystanders suffered horrible deaths.
“Te Whiti and Tohu Kakahi’s greatness comes from their embrace of passive resistance, which preceded Mohandas Ghandi, and it is the kind of role model which Ms Turia and the Maori Party should be promoting particularly for young Maori, rather than the record and actions of perpetrators of mindless violence which always leads to more violence, not less,” Jim Anderton said.
See also here.
National is already causing super damage
03/06/09 12:13
Increasing calls this week for changes to superannuation entitlements shows that national has already caused damage by cutting contributions to the Superannuation Fund, Wigram MP and Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
“The cancellation of contributions to the Super Fund means we will be less able to meet the cost of superannuation in the future. This must mean either cuts to entitlement, increasing the age threshold, or substantial tax increases in the future.
“Already commentators are queuing up to say the age of eligibility will have to increase, or the link to the average wage will be dropped - meaning superannuitants will be poorer relative to other New Zealanders. Others are already calling for a return to some kind of surtax that actually penalises people for saving.
“When New Zealanders hear this, they begin to make changes in their lifestyle immediately, because you cannot change your retirement plans at the last minute. Families don’t know how much more they have to put aside to pay for their retirement. And the political consensus they rely on to make long term decisions begins to erode.
“National has a dreadful track record on superannuation because it doesn’t fundamentally believe in all New Zealanders having access to a secure retirement income at a level that enables retired New Zealanders to a reasonable standard of living.
“New Zealanders have already lost some of their security because of National’s decision to back track on meeting some of the future costs of superannuation.
“Increased chatter about future cuts to super is all the proof that’s needed that the damage is already being done,” Jim Anderton said.
“The cancellation of contributions to the Super Fund means we will be less able to meet the cost of superannuation in the future. This must mean either cuts to entitlement, increasing the age threshold, or substantial tax increases in the future.
“Already commentators are queuing up to say the age of eligibility will have to increase, or the link to the average wage will be dropped - meaning superannuitants will be poorer relative to other New Zealanders. Others are already calling for a return to some kind of surtax that actually penalises people for saving.
“When New Zealanders hear this, they begin to make changes in their lifestyle immediately, because you cannot change your retirement plans at the last minute. Families don’t know how much more they have to put aside to pay for their retirement. And the political consensus they rely on to make long term decisions begins to erode.
“National has a dreadful track record on superannuation because it doesn’t fundamentally believe in all New Zealanders having access to a secure retirement income at a level that enables retired New Zealanders to a reasonable standard of living.
“New Zealanders have already lost some of their security because of National’s decision to back track on meeting some of the future costs of superannuation.
“Increased chatter about future cuts to super is all the proof that’s needed that the damage is already being done,” Jim Anderton said.
Huge cuts in primary sector science
28/05/09 12:29
Nearly as much is being cut out of science and research in the primary sector as the government is investing in infrastructure, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
The total value of primary sector science investment falls from $2 billion in NZ Fast Forward under the last government to as little as $1.2 billion now.
Like for like government spending over ten years falls from around a billion dollars in the NZ Fast Forward Fund, to $610 million in the government’s replacement.
“With matching private sector funding, the total investment in primary sector research and development falls by $800 million, or about 0.4 per cent of GDP.
In addition, the government has not replaced a cent of the cancelled research and development tax credit. Overall, the government is cutting innovation spending by more than the value of the personal tax cuts.
“This is huge cut in science and research. It is a disaster for the future of New Zealand’s economy,” Jim Anderton says.
“Other developed countries are preparing themselves to come out of recession stronger. New Zealand is preparing by switching from science and research to poltergeists and UFOs.
“The government promised the primary sector it would spend more on science and research. It has broken that promise as surely as if it has broken its promise on personal taxes.”
The total value of primary sector science investment falls from $2 billion in NZ Fast Forward under the last government to as little as $1.2 billion now.
Like for like government spending over ten years falls from around a billion dollars in the NZ Fast Forward Fund, to $610 million in the government’s replacement.
“With matching private sector funding, the total investment in primary sector research and development falls by $800 million, or about 0.4 per cent of GDP.
In addition, the government has not replaced a cent of the cancelled research and development tax credit. Overall, the government is cutting innovation spending by more than the value of the personal tax cuts.
“This is huge cut in science and research. It is a disaster for the future of New Zealand’s economy,” Jim Anderton says.
“Other developed countries are preparing themselves to come out of recession stronger. New Zealand is preparing by switching from science and research to poltergeists and UFOs.
“The government promised the primary sector it would spend more on science and research. It has broken that promise as surely as if it has broken its promise on personal taxes.”
Winter rebate from electricity companies would be appreciated
22/05/09 12:35
Knowledge that many elderly New Zealanders huddle under blankets rather than turn on unaffordable heating should be a wake-up call to the power companies to return a winter rebate to their consumers this winter, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton said today.
“For many New Zealanders, this wintry weather brings on a bitter struggle with the cold and the dilemma of whether they can turn on a heater or not. Low income households, the elderly and students fear their electricity bills and well they might. I remember when the electricity bills came every two months – now the monthly bill is the same – or more – than the bi-monthly one was,” Jim Anderton said.
“The Commerce Commission’s principle investigation into the wholesale or retail electricity markets which showed that the electricity companies have not breached Part 2 of the Commerce Act but their extra $4.3 billion in earnings from 2001 to mid-2007 reveals they are charging with a take no prisoners mentality. The electricity companies’ profits are at the expense of New Zealand’s most economically vulnerable.
“Since 2002, I have pushed for a return to consumers of some of the big profit increases from the state-owned power companies to help them with winter power bills. Low income households could be given $200 toward winter heating costs and power companies would still contribute as much to the government as they did last year.
“$200 would mean some households had a month of relief from winter heating costs. For superannuitants, beneficiaries and people who have lost their jobs in the downturn, it would make a huge difference.
“The Commerce Commission’s ruling on the power companies should not be seen as sign off for a return to business as usual. I am sure that New Zealanders would be hugely relieved to see the companies acting in the interests’ of their consumers with a winter rebate during this winter,” Jim Anderton said.
“For many New Zealanders, this wintry weather brings on a bitter struggle with the cold and the dilemma of whether they can turn on a heater or not. Low income households, the elderly and students fear their electricity bills and well they might. I remember when the electricity bills came every two months – now the monthly bill is the same – or more – than the bi-monthly one was,” Jim Anderton said.
“The Commerce Commission’s principle investigation into the wholesale or retail electricity markets which showed that the electricity companies have not breached Part 2 of the Commerce Act but their extra $4.3 billion in earnings from 2001 to mid-2007 reveals they are charging with a take no prisoners mentality. The electricity companies’ profits are at the expense of New Zealand’s most economically vulnerable.
“Since 2002, I have pushed for a return to consumers of some of the big profit increases from the state-owned power companies to help them with winter power bills. Low income households could be given $200 toward winter heating costs and power companies would still contribute as much to the government as they did last year.
“$200 would mean some households had a month of relief from winter heating costs. For superannuitants, beneficiaries and people who have lost their jobs in the downturn, it would make a huge difference.
“The Commerce Commission’s ruling on the power companies should not be seen as sign off for a return to business as usual. I am sure that New Zealanders would be hugely relieved to see the companies acting in the interests’ of their consumers with a winter rebate during this winter,” Jim Anderton said.
Needle Exchange Programme proven it worth
19/05/09 12:44
On the 21st Anniversary of the Needle Exchange Programme (NEP) - and the 4th year of the free one-for-one exchange of needles, Jim Anderton said he would again support and expand a needle exchange programme that provides free needles for intravenous drug users.
“The Progressive Party successfully bid for the funding to institute a free-to-users, one-for-one exchange basis in 2004, spread over 4 years, because we wanted to minimise the harm caused by drugs”, Jim Anderton said at the 21st Anniversary tonight in Auckland.
“Back in 2002, I was appointed as the Associate Minister of Health and the minister responsible for drug policy. I received an independent review of the needle and syringe exchange programme. It reported that the programme saves lives. It said the programme saved - back then, seven years ago - $35 million in treatment costs since it had been established.
“The report said plainly that the needle exchange programme reduces the harm caused by drug use. It told me the programme back then had helped to prevent twenty deaths from AIDS and more than two thousand cases of Hepatitis C and HIV/AIDS.
“When you get a report like that in government, you sit up and take notice. It makes a pleasant change from all the doom and gloom about things that don’t work. Here was clear evidence of a programme that worked.
“And I remember a speech was given on the Bill by one MP at the time, saying he was worried about it. He thought a user should have to prove to a court their needles came from an approved source.
“And while he was giving his speech an Opposition MP interjected and said this: “Absolutely. This provision is political correctness by a liberal Government.” The National MP who made that statement in parliament is now the Minister of Health - Tony Ryall. He now has responsibility for the needle exchange programme,” Jim Anderton said.
“But there you have some insight into the battle you have to face if you want to do the right thing to minimise the harm caused by drug use. And on this day when we celebrate 21 years of a successful programme, you can be sure that we need to be vigilant in defence of good ideas.
“There were people who sneered at that as liberal political correctness. I can tell you from personal experience there aren’t many votes in being wise or liberal about this stuff. But it was then, and is now, the right thing to do anyway.
“The results have been very worthwhile. Obviously, I wish we didn’t need this programme. I wish we didn’t have drug use causing the harm it does, wrecking the lives of many people, and wrecking many communities.
“But it does happen. It will keep happening. And if we care about vulnerable victims then our responsibility is to reduce the harm to them as much as we can. The needle exchange programme does just that and I endorse it for that reason”, Jim Anderton said.
“The Progressive Party successfully bid for the funding to institute a free-to-users, one-for-one exchange basis in 2004, spread over 4 years, because we wanted to minimise the harm caused by drugs”, Jim Anderton said at the 21st Anniversary tonight in Auckland.
“Back in 2002, I was appointed as the Associate Minister of Health and the minister responsible for drug policy. I received an independent review of the needle and syringe exchange programme. It reported that the programme saves lives. It said the programme saved - back then, seven years ago - $35 million in treatment costs since it had been established.
“The report said plainly that the needle exchange programme reduces the harm caused by drug use. It told me the programme back then had helped to prevent twenty deaths from AIDS and more than two thousand cases of Hepatitis C and HIV/AIDS.
“When you get a report like that in government, you sit up and take notice. It makes a pleasant change from all the doom and gloom about things that don’t work. Here was clear evidence of a programme that worked.
“And I remember a speech was given on the Bill by one MP at the time, saying he was worried about it. He thought a user should have to prove to a court their needles came from an approved source.
“And while he was giving his speech an Opposition MP interjected and said this: “Absolutely. This provision is political correctness by a liberal Government.” The National MP who made that statement in parliament is now the Minister of Health - Tony Ryall. He now has responsibility for the needle exchange programme,” Jim Anderton said.
“But there you have some insight into the battle you have to face if you want to do the right thing to minimise the harm caused by drug use. And on this day when we celebrate 21 years of a successful programme, you can be sure that we need to be vigilant in defence of good ideas.
“There were people who sneered at that as liberal political correctness. I can tell you from personal experience there aren’t many votes in being wise or liberal about this stuff. But it was then, and is now, the right thing to do anyway.
“The results have been very worthwhile. Obviously, I wish we didn’t need this programme. I wish we didn’t have drug use causing the harm it does, wrecking the lives of many people, and wrecking many communities.
“But it does happen. It will keep happening. And if we care about vulnerable victims then our responsibility is to reduce the harm to them as much as we can. The needle exchange programme does just that and I endorse it for that reason”, Jim Anderton said.
Aucklanders should have an elected, not appointed leaders
19/05/09 12:36
Letting Auckland vote would be a better way to make appointees to the Auckland super city transitional agency than a secret process in a government where decision-making is melting down, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“Why is the government even appointing a board? The way we find people to run local government in New Zealand is we have democratic elections.
“A government that listened to New Zealanders would not have a problem making a choice of leadership. The people do the appointing for it.
“In a democratic election, you are much more likely to get leadership that looks like Auckland. National seems interested only in leadership that looks like the National or ACT Party.
“I am very concerned that the quality of decision-making in the government is falling apart as the pressure of actually governing comes on.
“The National government is making poor decisions or refusing to make them at all.
“It created a sense of urgency for itself over Auckland’s super city, and now it can’t even meet its own urgent timetable,” Jim Anderton said.
“Why is the government even appointing a board? The way we find people to run local government in New Zealand is we have democratic elections.
“A government that listened to New Zealanders would not have a problem making a choice of leadership. The people do the appointing for it.
“In a democratic election, you are much more likely to get leadership that looks like Auckland. National seems interested only in leadership that looks like the National or ACT Party.
“I am very concerned that the quality of decision-making in the government is falling apart as the pressure of actually governing comes on.
“The National government is making poor decisions or refusing to make them at all.
“It created a sense of urgency for itself over Auckland’s super city, and now it can’t even meet its own urgent timetable,” Jim Anderton said.
Anderton brands Auckland reorganisation as the “Removal of Democracy” bill
18/05/09 12:48
The Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill should be renamed the Removal of Democracy Bill, said Progressive leader Jim Anderton in parliament today. He was speaking on the proposal to create an Auckland ‘super city’.
“The Local Government Act would have given Aucklanders a say in one of the most significant changes in local government in their region they will see in their lifetime, but they are not going to have a chance to have that say”, Jim Anderton said.
“In essence it is a great leap backwards to the days when 21 out of twenty two councillors lived east of Queen Street. It was the reason why a ward system had to be introduced so that all Aucklanders could actually be represented on their own Council. The conservative rightwingers have always resented that change and this proposal returns Auckland to the past they have always hankered after.
“In real life terms it means, for example, the end of free swimming pools for the kids of South Auckland and any other future say for most Aucklanders in the way they want their local communities to deliver for them. Does anyone believe that those pools will continue to be free under the government’s proposal? I can already hear the self appointed Mayor of the super city, John Banks, making speeches about why the ratepayers of Auckland City shouldn’t be subsidising the swimming pools of south Auckland”, Jim Anderton said.
“I support a strong regional government for Auckland. There used to be one – the Auckland Regional Authority (ARA) and I know about it because I was elected to it in 1977. We bought all the major regional parks and replaced the entire ancient bus fleet with new Mercedes Benz.
“In 1989, the Labour government replaced the ARA with the Auckland Regional Council (ARC). In 1992, the then National government wanted to sell the Ports of Auckland and the water services, so they diverted ownership of these and other profitable assets into the newly established Auckland Regional Services Trust (ARST) with the plan to sell. What a shambles that would have been if it had been allowed to happen. It took all of the strength of the political group I led at the time to put a stop to that. Auckland has reaped the benefit ever since,” Jim Anderton said.
“Now they’re having another go. This is a privatisers’ dream to sell the community assets of Auckland, and is entirely in line with Rodney Hide and the ACT party’s ideologies. Does anyone believe that this is in the best interests of Aucklanders?
“You can understand in those circumstances why the National ACT government doesn’t want people to have a say as to whether or not they want this outrageous piece of community destruction to go ahead,” Jim Anderton said in the House today.
“The Local Government Act would have given Aucklanders a say in one of the most significant changes in local government in their region they will see in their lifetime, but they are not going to have a chance to have that say”, Jim Anderton said.
“In essence it is a great leap backwards to the days when 21 out of twenty two councillors lived east of Queen Street. It was the reason why a ward system had to be introduced so that all Aucklanders could actually be represented on their own Council. The conservative rightwingers have always resented that change and this proposal returns Auckland to the past they have always hankered after.
“In real life terms it means, for example, the end of free swimming pools for the kids of South Auckland and any other future say for most Aucklanders in the way they want their local communities to deliver for them. Does anyone believe that those pools will continue to be free under the government’s proposal? I can already hear the self appointed Mayor of the super city, John Banks, making speeches about why the ratepayers of Auckland City shouldn’t be subsidising the swimming pools of south Auckland”, Jim Anderton said.
“I support a strong regional government for Auckland. There used to be one – the Auckland Regional Authority (ARA) and I know about it because I was elected to it in 1977. We bought all the major regional parks and replaced the entire ancient bus fleet with new Mercedes Benz.
“In 1989, the Labour government replaced the ARA with the Auckland Regional Council (ARC). In 1992, the then National government wanted to sell the Ports of Auckland and the water services, so they diverted ownership of these and other profitable assets into the newly established Auckland Regional Services Trust (ARST) with the plan to sell. What a shambles that would have been if it had been allowed to happen. It took all of the strength of the political group I led at the time to put a stop to that. Auckland has reaped the benefit ever since,” Jim Anderton said.
“Now they’re having another go. This is a privatisers’ dream to sell the community assets of Auckland, and is entirely in line with Rodney Hide and the ACT party’s ideologies. Does anyone believe that this is in the best interests of Aucklanders?
“You can understand in those circumstances why the National ACT government doesn’t want people to have a say as to whether or not they want this outrageous piece of community destruction to go ahead,” Jim Anderton said in the House today.
MPs should not be able to fight by-elections
05/05/09 12:55
It’s a farce that sitting MPs are standing for election to parliament, Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He is drafting a members’ bill to stop MPs from standing for parliament in by-elections.
“In Mt Albert, there are three MPs standing for parliament. They are already MPs. If they want to represent the electorate, they already can. Any list MP can open an electorate office in Mt Albert and be a good representative.
“What those MPs are really doing in using their parliamentary salaries and resources to bring in someone on a party list who has nothing to do with Mt Albert. For example, if the National candidate were to win she would be an MP just as she is now. But she would bring in a new MP who virtually no one has heard of, and who might never have visited Mt Albert in his or her life.
“MPs who contest the seat but lose bring MMP into disrepute. Since there are three MPs contesting the seat, at least two of them have to lose and maybe all three will lose. If they are going to test their mandate, they should be prepared to live with the result.
“In a general election, no MP has insurance. They have to get enough votes in their electorate or for their party, or they are out. It’s a democratic farce to have different rules in a by-election.
“A simple bill that stopped a sitting MP standing in a by-election would force MPs to make a meaningful choice - if they really want to contest a seat, they should resign from parliament and contest it on the same basis as anyone else.
“MPs shouldn’t fight a parliamentary by-election while they’re drawing a full parliamentary salary,” Jim Anderton said.
He is drafting a members’ bill to stop MPs from standing for parliament in by-elections.
“In Mt Albert, there are three MPs standing for parliament. They are already MPs. If they want to represent the electorate, they already can. Any list MP can open an electorate office in Mt Albert and be a good representative.
“What those MPs are really doing in using their parliamentary salaries and resources to bring in someone on a party list who has nothing to do with Mt Albert. For example, if the National candidate were to win she would be an MP just as she is now. But she would bring in a new MP who virtually no one has heard of, and who might never have visited Mt Albert in his or her life.
“MPs who contest the seat but lose bring MMP into disrepute. Since there are three MPs contesting the seat, at least two of them have to lose and maybe all three will lose. If they are going to test their mandate, they should be prepared to live with the result.
“In a general election, no MP has insurance. They have to get enough votes in their electorate or for their party, or they are out. It’s a democratic farce to have different rules in a by-election.
“A simple bill that stopped a sitting MP standing in a by-election would force MPs to make a meaningful choice - if they really want to contest a seat, they should resign from parliament and contest it on the same basis as anyone else.
“MPs shouldn’t fight a parliamentary by-election while they’re drawing a full parliamentary salary,” Jim Anderton said.
Maori Party sides with disgusting humanitarian abuse
28/04/09 12:57
Maori Party sides with disgusting humanitarian abuse
Progressive leader Jim Anderton is disgusted that the Maori Party has sided with appalling humanitaran abuses by blocking a motion in Parliament that expressed concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka.
The United Nations estimates that since January 200,000 civilians have fled their homes, 4,500 have been killed and 12,000 wounded. The Red Cross has helped over ten thousand wounded civilians caught up in fighting between Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE).
Today Jim Anderton asked parliament to pass a motion expressing concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka, asking that civilians be spared and calling on respect for international humanitarian law. All parliamentary parties were given a copy of the notice of motion in advance. Only the Maori Party stopped it being adopted.
“The Maori Party’s behaviour is outrageous,” Jim Anderton said.
“The situation in Sri Lanka is dire. There is very little we can do from here, but one thing we can do is express support for the civilians caught up in fighting.
“No one is being asked to take sides. But parliamentarians were asked to express concern, they were asked to express support for allowing civilians to leave the combat zone, they were asked to condemn violence against civilians leaving the combat zone and they were asked to respect international humanitarian law.
“What on that list could any reasonable person be opposed to?”
The motion read:
That this House, notes its deep concern at the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka and calls upon both the Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE) to immediately stop hostilities to allow those civilians in the combat zone to move to safety, condemns all acts of violence and intimidation which are preventing civilians from leaving the conflict area, and calls on both sides to respect international humanitarian law and to protect and assist the civilian population in combat zone, as in the internally displaced persons (IDP) camps.
Progressive leader Jim Anderton is disgusted that the Maori Party has sided with appalling humanitaran abuses by blocking a motion in Parliament that expressed concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka.
The United Nations estimates that since January 200,000 civilians have fled their homes, 4,500 have been killed and 12,000 wounded. The Red Cross has helped over ten thousand wounded civilians caught up in fighting between Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE).
Today Jim Anderton asked parliament to pass a motion expressing concern about the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka, asking that civilians be spared and calling on respect for international humanitarian law. All parliamentary parties were given a copy of the notice of motion in advance. Only the Maori Party stopped it being adopted.
“The Maori Party’s behaviour is outrageous,” Jim Anderton said.
“The situation in Sri Lanka is dire. There is very little we can do from here, but one thing we can do is express support for the civilians caught up in fighting.
“No one is being asked to take sides. But parliamentarians were asked to express concern, they were asked to express support for allowing civilians to leave the combat zone, they were asked to condemn violence against civilians leaving the combat zone and they were asked to respect international humanitarian law.
“What on that list could any reasonable person be opposed to?”
The motion read:
That this House, notes its deep concern at the dire humanitarian situation in Northern Sri Lanka and calls upon both the Sri Lankan Government and the Liberation Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE) to immediately stop hostilities to allow those civilians in the combat zone to move to safety, condemns all acts of violence and intimidation which are preventing civilians from leaving the conflict area, and calls on both sides to respect international humanitarian law and to protect and assist the civilian population in combat zone, as in the internally displaced persons (IDP) camps.
Focus aid on poverty elimination
27/03/09 13:00
A focus on economic development rather than poverty elimination will mean we don’t focus on some critical problems affecting the world’s poorest countries, Progressive leader Jim Anderton told a summit on the future of New Zealand aid today.
Jim Anderton is a former economic development minister, and Progressive party deputy leader Matt Robson set up NZAid when he was overseas development minister.
“The poorest billion people in the world live in conditions we associate with fourteenth century deprivation. Bringing them out of poverty requires a focus on good government, on transparency and ending corruption,” Jim Anderton says.
“More money is stolen from Africa every year by corrupt governments than the world gives the entire continent in aid. It gets stolen and put in western banks. If we simply stopped Western banks from being used to hold the stolen proceeds of looting in Africa by corrupt political leaders, it would have the same effect as the overnight doubling of aid budgets. A focus on economic development doesn’t even look at this issue - a focus on poverty does.
“A focus on poverty requires a focus on post-conflict recovery. Not much is going to be done about poverty in a country ruined by civil war, where any money that comes in gets spent on strengthening the military. Focusing on these issues is crucial - but you cannot do a good job of that if you focus on economic development alone.”
Jim Anderton says it is profoundly wrong to make assistance to New Zealand companies the focus of our aid effort.
“We don’t give aid to benefit New Zealand companies. We do it because we are good global citizens. Trying to sell more of our exports to the poorest countries is not much of an economic strategy. We are not going to develop export markets for New Zealand by focusing on how much we can sell to the poorest people in the world.
“We should certainly be open to trade with the least developed countries of the world. But trade reform alone, while necessary, is not sufficient.”
Jim Anderton is a former economic development minister, and Progressive party deputy leader Matt Robson set up NZAid when he was overseas development minister.
“The poorest billion people in the world live in conditions we associate with fourteenth century deprivation. Bringing them out of poverty requires a focus on good government, on transparency and ending corruption,” Jim Anderton says.
“More money is stolen from Africa every year by corrupt governments than the world gives the entire continent in aid. It gets stolen and put in western banks. If we simply stopped Western banks from being used to hold the stolen proceeds of looting in Africa by corrupt political leaders, it would have the same effect as the overnight doubling of aid budgets. A focus on economic development doesn’t even look at this issue - a focus on poverty does.
“A focus on poverty requires a focus on post-conflict recovery. Not much is going to be done about poverty in a country ruined by civil war, where any money that comes in gets spent on strengthening the military. Focusing on these issues is crucial - but you cannot do a good job of that if you focus on economic development alone.”
Jim Anderton says it is profoundly wrong to make assistance to New Zealand companies the focus of our aid effort.
“We don’t give aid to benefit New Zealand companies. We do it because we are good global citizens. Trying to sell more of our exports to the poorest countries is not much of an economic strategy. We are not going to develop export markets for New Zealand by focusing on how much we can sell to the poorest people in the world.
“We should certainly be open to trade with the least developed countries of the world. But trade reform alone, while necessary, is not sufficient.”
Cutting holidays doesn’t stack up with 9-day fortnight
23/03/09 13:05
Cutting holidays doesn’t stack up with 9-day fortnight
It doesn’t make sense for National to remove four weeks minimum annual leave at the same time that it is trying to encourage a nine day fortnight, Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
Four weeks minimum annual leave was a Progressive Party initiative. It was introduced as a result of a member’s bill introduced by Progressive MP Matt Robson.
“Cutting four weeks’ leave is hypocritical for a government that took 27 days of holidays in its first 100 days in office. What’s good for National MPs ought to be good for working New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
“Calling the axing of holidays a ‘buy-back’ doesn’t change the fact that it cuts the minimum holiday entitlement.
“Thousands of workers who are paid just over the minimum wage will be presented with employment contracts that say they request cash instead of annual leave – and their employers will tell them ‘we will have to cut your pay if you don’t sign.’
“The same employer could then put their hand out for a government subsidy to reduce that worker’s hours by a day a fortnight.
“National is returning to its nasty, anti-worker roots.”
It doesn’t make sense for National to remove four weeks minimum annual leave at the same time that it is trying to encourage a nine day fortnight, Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
Four weeks minimum annual leave was a Progressive Party initiative. It was introduced as a result of a member’s bill introduced by Progressive MP Matt Robson.
“Cutting four weeks’ leave is hypocritical for a government that took 27 days of holidays in its first 100 days in office. What’s good for National MPs ought to be good for working New Zealanders,” Jim Anderton said.
“Calling the axing of holidays a ‘buy-back’ doesn’t change the fact that it cuts the minimum holiday entitlement.
“Thousands of workers who are paid just over the minimum wage will be presented with employment contracts that say they request cash instead of annual leave – and their employers will tell them ‘we will have to cut your pay if you don’t sign.’
“The same employer could then put their hand out for a government subsidy to reduce that worker’s hours by a day a fortnight.
“National is returning to its nasty, anti-worker roots.”
Auckland road tax shows National doesn’t get agriculture
17/03/09 13:05
Taxing rural communities more to pay for Auckland’s roads shows that National doesn’t understand the importance of agriculture for New Zealand’s economy, Opposition agriculture spokesperson Jim Anderton says.
“The whole country can benefit from roads that boost Auckland’s economy; But Auckland can benefit from the economic activity of the rest of the country too. How many farms are in Queen Street? When rural communities have to pay for roads they don’t use, it is a drag on them.
“The decision to make farmers pay more for Auckland roads is a decision by Auckland money market dealers who don’t understand our primary industry.
“It’s fairer to pay for extra projects locally, because local communities can best decide their top priorities and also decide whether the extra cost is worth it.
“The National Government has no new ideas so it’s going back to its old form in government – asking farmers and rural communities to pay more and more, while providing less and less services.”
“The whole country can benefit from roads that boost Auckland’s economy; But Auckland can benefit from the economic activity of the rest of the country too. How many farms are in Queen Street? When rural communities have to pay for roads they don’t use, it is a drag on them.
“The decision to make farmers pay more for Auckland roads is a decision by Auckland money market dealers who don’t understand our primary industry.
“It’s fairer to pay for extra projects locally, because local communities can best decide their top priorities and also decide whether the extra cost is worth it.
“The National Government has no new ideas so it’s going back to its old form in government – asking farmers and rural communities to pay more and more, while providing less and less services.”
Use power company profits to reduce winter power bills
12/03/09 13:10
Strong profit increases in the state-owned power companies should be returned to consumers to help with winter power bills, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He says low income households could be given $200 toward winter heating costs and power companies would still contribute as much to the government than they did last year.
“$200 would mean some households had a month of relief from winter heating costs. For superannuitants, beneficiaries and people who have lost their jobs in the downturn, it would make a huge difference.”
Mighty River Power recorded a profit of $234 million in the last six months of last year.
“That on its own is enough for every household in New Zealand to get a cheque of nearly $200.
“Genesis’ profit for the half year is up by 38 per cent, Transpower’s is up by over a quarter and Meridian is the most profitable of the lot.
“At the same time that the people’s own power companies are booming, the people who own them are heading for a winter when many will struggle to pay the bills. The government should help low income households out by returning some of the huge dividends,” Jim Anderton said.
According to Statistics New Zealand, there are about 1.4 million households. If half were eligible for a $200 winter power rebate, that would cost $140 million. $200 is the estimated winter power bill for a month for the lowest income half of households.
He says low income households could be given $200 toward winter heating costs and power companies would still contribute as much to the government than they did last year.
“$200 would mean some households had a month of relief from winter heating costs. For superannuitants, beneficiaries and people who have lost their jobs in the downturn, it would make a huge difference.”
Mighty River Power recorded a profit of $234 million in the last six months of last year.
“That on its own is enough for every household in New Zealand to get a cheque of nearly $200.
“Genesis’ profit for the half year is up by 38 per cent, Transpower’s is up by over a quarter and Meridian is the most profitable of the lot.
“At the same time that the people’s own power companies are booming, the people who own them are heading for a winter when many will struggle to pay the bills. The government should help low income households out by returning some of the huge dividends,” Jim Anderton said.
According to Statistics New Zealand, there are about 1.4 million households. If half were eligible for a $200 winter power rebate, that would cost $140 million. $200 is the estimated winter power bill for a month for the lowest income half of households.
National vote-buying with taxpayers’ money
12/03/09 13:09
Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton is appalled at National’s use of taxpayer money to change electorate office funding so that government MPs get an increase four times greater than Opposition MPs.
“They have noticed that government MPs have bigger electorates by land area than Opposition MPs, because the Opposition tends to hold inner city seats. So they have put a fix in and handed out more money to big electorates. This is a gerrymander.
Not only that but the rules they are putting in place are different for Maori seats. Maori seats qualify for extra funding if they are over 10,000 square kilometres. General seats qualify if they are over 20,000. I can think of no reason why a differentiation should be made.
“National is so brazen it has even left out the biggest electorate in the country – Rongotai.
“The busiest electorate offices in the country are inner city electorates. Imagine the outcry from National if Labour had given busier offices more.
“Most National MPs don’t need extra support staff; they just need to work harder.
“This is the same National Party that claimed to be the very soul of injured innocence when the Electoral Finance Act was changed - yet, whatever your opinion of the EFA, at least everyone was treated the same.
“The National Party has spent all this week reverting to form - backward-looking, mean and getting its priorities all wrong.
“Now National is taking money from higher priority uses to buy the votes of its own supporters. This is exactly the same National party that used to gave Alamein Kopu a nice Beehive office to secure its majority. Turns out that John Key is made of the same stuff.”
“They have noticed that government MPs have bigger electorates by land area than Opposition MPs, because the Opposition tends to hold inner city seats. So they have put a fix in and handed out more money to big electorates. This is a gerrymander.
Not only that but the rules they are putting in place are different for Maori seats. Maori seats qualify for extra funding if they are over 10,000 square kilometres. General seats qualify if they are over 20,000. I can think of no reason why a differentiation should be made.
“National is so brazen it has even left out the biggest electorate in the country – Rongotai.
“The busiest electorate offices in the country are inner city electorates. Imagine the outcry from National if Labour had given busier offices more.
“Most National MPs don’t need extra support staff; they just need to work harder.
“This is the same National Party that claimed to be the very soul of injured innocence when the Electoral Finance Act was changed - yet, whatever your opinion of the EFA, at least everyone was treated the same.
“The National Party has spent all this week reverting to form - backward-looking, mean and getting its priorities all wrong.
“Now National is taking money from higher priority uses to buy the votes of its own supporters. This is exactly the same National party that used to gave Alamein Kopu a nice Beehive office to secure its majority. Turns out that John Key is made of the same stuff.”
National Govt has a casual attitude to the harm caused by alcohol abuse
10/03/09 13:13
The government’s casual attitude to alcohol availability shows it has its priorities wrong, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton told parliament on the introduction of the Sale and Supply of Liquor bill.
“Alcohol is an enormous factor in crime. Between half and three quarters of all police work is associated in some way with alcohol abuse. Two out of three people the police deal with as offenders have been using alcohol prior to the offence being committed.
“But government members are the first to sneer about nanny state when someone tries to fix the problems. They claim to be anti-crime, but they also sneer and call anyone who tries to reduce crime the ‘fun police.’
“Alcohol causes between one and a half and two and a half billion dollars worth of economic and social harm every year. It is by far the most damaging drug in this country. It is the most damaging not because it is the most intrinsically dangerous drug - far from it. It is the most damaging because it is the most available drug. And in the recent years when alcohol was made much more available, predictably the harm caused by alcohol has risen as well.”
Last year, if the road toll among 15-29 year olds had fallen by the same amount as the general population, there would have been twenty fewer deaths of young New Zealanders.
In the years prior to 1999 the number of dead drivers who had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit had been tracking down. Since 1999, when the purchase age was lowered, the number of dead drivers has stopped tracking down.
In 2000 there were 4,079 fifteen to 29 year old car and van drivers involved in injury crashes. In 2007, there were 6,538 - an increase of sixty percent. The number of injuries among young people is far greater than the number among the general population.
“Sensible control is not prohibition, and pretending they are the same is irresponsible and distorted. I support reducing the availability of alcohol for young people and I support more restrictions on alcohol advertising and availability in the community,” Jim Anderton said.
“Alcohol is an enormous factor in crime. Between half and three quarters of all police work is associated in some way with alcohol abuse. Two out of three people the police deal with as offenders have been using alcohol prior to the offence being committed.
“But government members are the first to sneer about nanny state when someone tries to fix the problems. They claim to be anti-crime, but they also sneer and call anyone who tries to reduce crime the ‘fun police.’
“Alcohol causes between one and a half and two and a half billion dollars worth of economic and social harm every year. It is by far the most damaging drug in this country. It is the most damaging not because it is the most intrinsically dangerous drug - far from it. It is the most damaging because it is the most available drug. And in the recent years when alcohol was made much more available, predictably the harm caused by alcohol has risen as well.”
Last year, if the road toll among 15-29 year olds had fallen by the same amount as the general population, there would have been twenty fewer deaths of young New Zealanders.
In the years prior to 1999 the number of dead drivers who had a blood alcohol level above the legal limit had been tracking down. Since 1999, when the purchase age was lowered, the number of dead drivers has stopped tracking down.
In 2000 there were 4,079 fifteen to 29 year old car and van drivers involved in injury crashes. In 2007, there were 6,538 - an increase of sixty percent. The number of injuries among young people is far greater than the number among the general population.
“Sensible control is not prohibition, and pretending they are the same is irresponsible and distorted. I support reducing the availability of alcohol for young people and I support more restrictions on alcohol advertising and availability in the community,” Jim Anderton said.
It was all about privatising jails
09/03/09 13:19
The big mouth behaviour of the Corrections Minister has been exposed by the State Services Commissioner’s report on Barry Matthews, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“The report confirms mainly that Judith Collins is not equipped for a tough job.
“And it exposes the campaign to vilify a government department was really a cynical campaign to privatise prison management.
“Ms Collins swaggered around leaving no one under any doubt that she would force the Corrections department CEO to step down. For example, the Herald - citing Ms Collins’ ‘ruthless combination of raw power and tactical guile’ - declared:
She has made Matthews’ position utterly untenable. And she left the State Services Commission - as Matthews’ employer - no option but to remove him, assuming he does not resign beforehand.
Jim Anderton says the pressure on Mr Matthews to go was always an overreaction to the Auditor’s report.
“Among the specific, highlighted examples the Auditor cited were failures to fill out reports and inconsistency in classification of the illness of paroled offenders. These procedural issues needed to be fixed, but it was unjustified and disproportionate to say they amounted to a case for immediate dismissal. That was always going to be a wrong judgement - exactly what the State Services inquiry has found.
“Ms Collins should have known that there was no case to support the dismissal of the CEO of her department. Either she didn’t know and isn’t up to the job, or she did know and was cynical in the way she used the issue.”
“The report confirms mainly that Judith Collins is not equipped for a tough job.
“And it exposes the campaign to vilify a government department was really a cynical campaign to privatise prison management.
“Ms Collins swaggered around leaving no one under any doubt that she would force the Corrections department CEO to step down. For example, the Herald - citing Ms Collins’ ‘ruthless combination of raw power and tactical guile’ - declared:
She has made Matthews’ position utterly untenable. And she left the State Services Commission - as Matthews’ employer - no option but to remove him, assuming he does not resign beforehand.
Jim Anderton says the pressure on Mr Matthews to go was always an overreaction to the Auditor’s report.
“Among the specific, highlighted examples the Auditor cited were failures to fill out reports and inconsistency in classification of the illness of paroled offenders. These procedural issues needed to be fixed, but it was unjustified and disproportionate to say they amounted to a case for immediate dismissal. That was always going to be a wrong judgement - exactly what the State Services inquiry has found.
“Ms Collins should have known that there was no case to support the dismissal of the CEO of her department. Either she didn’t know and isn’t up to the job, or she did know and was cynical in the way she used the issue.”
Nats’ ACC cuts hit elderly, poor and farmers
05/03/09 13:21
National’s cuts to ACC and privatisation will mean vicious price hikes and service cuts for the elderly, beneficiaries and farmers, Wigram’s progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
He says new charges for some ACC services will mean low income people can’t afford treatment. Competing ACC providers will mean higher premiums for farmers. And many working people will be left without cover when private providers fail.
“If National charges for some ACC treatment, some low income people won’t be able to afford to pay. That means working people on lower wages, and especially beneficiaries and superannuitants, won’t be able to get treatment if they are hurt in an accident.
“National’s plans mean no rehabilitation for your elderly mum if she falls over in a shop unless someone can cough up for the costs of treatment.
“It is disgusting for the government to save ACC costs by blocking physio and rehabilitation services for elderly New Zealanders. How would a pensioner afford a $50 a week physio fee? Most of them paid their premiums for much of their working lives and national is contemplating increasing their costs at the same time it is cutting tax for the most affluent New Zealanders.
“National’s plans to bring in competition and privatise ACC will put up prices. A report from the previous National-Liberal Government in Australia, comparing accident compensation in Australia and New Zealand in 2004, showed levies in Australia’s competitive market were twice as expensive as those in New Zealand for the primary sector.
“A competitive scheme could result in a levy hike of as much as 250 per cent for rural people like farmers.
“Our ACC administration cost is about a third of Australian schemes.
“In Victoria – where two companies competed so seriously they ran each other out of business – they competed by underfunding the tail. In other words, in a competitive system, companies can go broke and leave liabilities for long term claims unpaid. What happens to people needing long term care for their accidents when the provider goes broke?”
He says new charges for some ACC services will mean low income people can’t afford treatment. Competing ACC providers will mean higher premiums for farmers. And many working people will be left without cover when private providers fail.
“If National charges for some ACC treatment, some low income people won’t be able to afford to pay. That means working people on lower wages, and especially beneficiaries and superannuitants, won’t be able to get treatment if they are hurt in an accident.
“National’s plans mean no rehabilitation for your elderly mum if she falls over in a shop unless someone can cough up for the costs of treatment.
“It is disgusting for the government to save ACC costs by blocking physio and rehabilitation services for elderly New Zealanders. How would a pensioner afford a $50 a week physio fee? Most of them paid their premiums for much of their working lives and national is contemplating increasing their costs at the same time it is cutting tax for the most affluent New Zealanders.
“National’s plans to bring in competition and privatise ACC will put up prices. A report from the previous National-Liberal Government in Australia, comparing accident compensation in Australia and New Zealand in 2004, showed levies in Australia’s competitive market were twice as expensive as those in New Zealand for the primary sector.
“A competitive scheme could result in a levy hike of as much as 250 per cent for rural people like farmers.
“Our ACC administration cost is about a third of Australian schemes.
“In Victoria – where two companies competed so seriously they ran each other out of business – they competed by underfunding the tail. In other words, in a competitive system, companies can go broke and leave liabilities for long term claims unpaid. What happens to people needing long term care for their accidents when the provider goes broke?”
McCully to return to pork barrel NZAid
04/03/09 13:22
Deputy leader of the Progressive Party Matt Robson and the Minister in 2002 who with Phil Goff set up NZAID slammed Foreign Minister McCully’ s proposal for aid to be part of "NZInc" and for NZAID to be "folded back into MFAT".
"He should just set up a Department of Bribes and be done with it said Matt Robson.
"Being part of MFAT was exactly the problem with NZ development aid before we separated it out into a specialist division."
"It was staffed by junior diplomats on their way up or older diplomats on their way out. There was no specialist department. The programmes were in a muddle. We gave aid to two super military powers- China and India. Why? To peddle influence in their capitals not to help the poorest people. It is to that obscene policy that McCully is obviously attracted.
"Phil Goff as Foreign Minister and I as the Minister responsible for Aid deliberately separated out development aid from Foreign Affairs as it was largely being used as a fund used for New Zealand’s foreign policy aims not to help the development, in a systematic way, of the world’s poorest policy.
"Under National aid money was used by Foreign Affairs to win the support and votes of tyrants like Suharto of Indonesia and the King of Tonga. It was used to give retirement jobs like the head of the Commonwealth to ex National MPs like Don McKinnon.
"NZ Aid was a progressive step for NZ ," concluded Matt Robson.
"He should just set up a Department of Bribes and be done with it said Matt Robson.
"Being part of MFAT was exactly the problem with NZ development aid before we separated it out into a specialist division."
"It was staffed by junior diplomats on their way up or older diplomats on their way out. There was no specialist department. The programmes were in a muddle. We gave aid to two super military powers- China and India. Why? To peddle influence in their capitals not to help the poorest people. It is to that obscene policy that McCully is obviously attracted.
"Phil Goff as Foreign Minister and I as the Minister responsible for Aid deliberately separated out development aid from Foreign Affairs as it was largely being used as a fund used for New Zealand’s foreign policy aims not to help the development, in a systematic way, of the world’s poorest policy.
"Under National aid money was used by Foreign Affairs to win the support and votes of tyrants like Suharto of Indonesia and the King of Tonga. It was used to give retirement jobs like the head of the Commonwealth to ex National MPs like Don McKinnon.
"NZ Aid was a progressive step for NZ ," concluded Matt Robson.
Kiwibank continues to prove itself a winner
26/02/09 13:25
Ownership of Kiwibank is paying off in a big way, both for the people of New Zealand and for the government as its shareholder, Wigram’s Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
“Combining its profit and its tax paid, Kiwibank is generating almost enough income for the government in one year to equal the $80 million it cost to set up.”
Kiwibank today declared an after-tax profit of $25.8 million for the last six months of last year. It also paid tax of $12 million.
“Kiwibank’s deposits are soaring because New Zealanders can see it offers a better deal than they would have if we didn’t have our own bank. Kiwibank has an AA- credit rating.
“And Kiwibank’s lending is soaring too, because it can offer lower interest rates.
“It’s great that we have our own bank performing so well at a time of international financial crisis. We don’t have to be dependent on overseas financial markets. Those markets right now look like the dog that critics claimed that Kiwibank would be.
“Kiwibank is, after only six years of operating, worth more than NZ Post. Its profitability is steadily rising. Kiwibank is continuing to prove itself a winner.”
“Combining its profit and its tax paid, Kiwibank is generating almost enough income for the government in one year to equal the $80 million it cost to set up.”
Kiwibank today declared an after-tax profit of $25.8 million for the last six months of last year. It also paid tax of $12 million.
“Kiwibank’s deposits are soaring because New Zealanders can see it offers a better deal than they would have if we didn’t have our own bank. Kiwibank has an AA- credit rating.
“And Kiwibank’s lending is soaring too, because it can offer lower interest rates.
“It’s great that we have our own bank performing so well at a time of international financial crisis. We don’t have to be dependent on overseas financial markets. Those markets right now look like the dog that critics claimed that Kiwibank would be.
“Kiwibank is, after only six years of operating, worth more than NZ Post. Its profitability is steadily rising. Kiwibank is continuing to prove itself a winner.”
Why is National guaranteeing FAI Finance?
25/02/09 13:28
A taxpayer guarantee for a finance company owned by Hanover has Wigram’s Progressive MP Jim Anderton puzzled. The government has given a Crown guarantee to FAI Finance - wholly owned by Hanover and, through a network of companies, by Mark Hotchin and Eric Watson.
“The absolutely top policy guidelines specified by Treasury for considering a Crown guarantee are ‘the maintenance of public confidence in New Zealand’s financial system; and maintaining the confidence of general public depositors in New Zealand financial institutions.’ It is not clear how a guarantee for Hanover companies fits that guideline,” Jim Anderton said.
The Treasury says factors that should be taken into account in giving a guarantee include the size of the entity and related party exposure, the business practice of the entity, the ‘good character’ and business acumen of the entity and “The track record of the entity.”
Last year Hanover froze over half a billion of investors money and investors approved a recovery plan in December.
In June last year, the latest date recorded in its prospectus issued this month, FAI had assets in loans worth a total of $28,582,000, at an average interest rate of 21.63%. This sum included $15,119,000 due in 2-5 years. Investors had $18,542,000 in FAI at an average interest rate of 9.9%. Among those entitled to their money back, $6,468,000 was on call, $7,514,000 due in 6-12 months, and $382,000 due in more than two years.
The Crown receives a fee for the guarantee, which could be worth as little as $28,000 a year.
Jim Anderton said a Crown guarantee to Hanover is a strange response to the financial crisis.
“The point of the guarantee is to prevent the entire deposit base of New Zealand fleeing. But there is still room for non-guaranteed businesses that should be able to charge an interest rate reflecting their risk. Hanover is the sort of company that the market can make its own decisions about.
“Mr Hotchin and Mr Watson appear to be affluent men and it is hard to see why they shouldn’t give the guarantee from their own resources instead of those of the Crown.”
Who owns FAI Finance?
Companies Office records, 24 February 2009
FAI Finance
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 15,766,588 - all held by Hanover Finance
Hanover Finance
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 71,651-596
Hanover Capital
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 5,000,000 all owned by Hanover Financial Services
Hanover Financial Services
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 13,303,620 all owned by Hanover Group.
Hanover Group
Directors: Mark Flay
Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Eric Watson
Shares: 207,327,000 all owned by Hanover Group Holdings
Hanover Group Holdings
Directors: Mark Flay
Mark Hotchin
Eric Watson
Shares: 87,871,057
Of these:
Hotchin Investments
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Dwayne McGorman
Shares: 39,500,000 all owned by Hotchin Trustee Ltd
Hotchin Trustee Ltd
Directors: John Radley
Tony Thomas
Shares: 1000, all owned by the directors (= trustees).
Forefront Investments
Directors: Leslie Archer
Mark Flay
Eric Watson
Shares: 596,933;
Of these:
Peak NZ
Directors: Bruce Armitage
Don Stanway
Eric Watson
Shares: 100, all owned by Foreshore Investments
Foreshore Investments
Directors: Leslie Archer
Mark Flay
Shares: 100, all owned by Cire Trust
Cire Trust
Directors: Mark Flay
Eric Watson
Shares: 100, all owned by Eric Watson.
FAI’s loans/deposits
FAI Prospectus 7, registered 9 February 2009.
At 20 June 2008, FAI had assets in loans worth a total of $28,582,000, at an average interest rate of 21.63%.
This sum included $15,119,000 due in 2-5 years.
At the same date it had deposit liabilities (i.e. Money that investors have invested in FAI securities) 0f $18,542,000, at an average interest rate of 9.9%.
This included 6,468,000 on call, $7,514,000 due in 6-12 months, and $382,000 due in more than two years.
“The absolutely top policy guidelines specified by Treasury for considering a Crown guarantee are ‘the maintenance of public confidence in New Zealand’s financial system; and maintaining the confidence of general public depositors in New Zealand financial institutions.’ It is not clear how a guarantee for Hanover companies fits that guideline,” Jim Anderton said.
The Treasury says factors that should be taken into account in giving a guarantee include the size of the entity and related party exposure, the business practice of the entity, the ‘good character’ and business acumen of the entity and “The track record of the entity.”
Last year Hanover froze over half a billion of investors money and investors approved a recovery plan in December.
In June last year, the latest date recorded in its prospectus issued this month, FAI had assets in loans worth a total of $28,582,000, at an average interest rate of 21.63%. This sum included $15,119,000 due in 2-5 years. Investors had $18,542,000 in FAI at an average interest rate of 9.9%. Among those entitled to their money back, $6,468,000 was on call, $7,514,000 due in 6-12 months, and $382,000 due in more than two years.
The Crown receives a fee for the guarantee, which could be worth as little as $28,000 a year.
Jim Anderton said a Crown guarantee to Hanover is a strange response to the financial crisis.
“The point of the guarantee is to prevent the entire deposit base of New Zealand fleeing. But there is still room for non-guaranteed businesses that should be able to charge an interest rate reflecting their risk. Hanover is the sort of company that the market can make its own decisions about.
“Mr Hotchin and Mr Watson appear to be affluent men and it is hard to see why they shouldn’t give the guarantee from their own resources instead of those of the Crown.”
Who owns FAI Finance?
Companies Office records, 24 February 2009
FAI Finance
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 15,766,588 - all held by Hanover Finance
Hanover Finance
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 71,651-596
- 37,835,596 held by Hanover Financial Services
- 33,815,000 held by Hanover Capital
Hanover Capital
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 5,000,000 all owned by Hanover Financial Services
Hanover Financial Services
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Shares: 13,303,620 all owned by Hanover Group.
Hanover Group
Directors: Mark Flay
Mark Hotchin
Greg Muir
Eric Watson
Shares: 207,327,000 all owned by Hanover Group Holdings
Hanover Group Holdings
Directors: Mark Flay
Mark Hotchin
Eric Watson
Shares: 87,871,057
Of these:
- 77,279,174 owned by Hotchin Investments.
- 10,591,883 owned by Forefront Investments.
Hotchin Investments
Directors: Mark Hotchin
Dwayne McGorman
Shares: 39,500,000 all owned by Hotchin Trustee Ltd
Hotchin Trustee Ltd
Directors: John Radley
Tony Thomas
Shares: 1000, all owned by the directors (= trustees).
Forefront Investments
Directors: Leslie Archer
Mark Flay
Eric Watson
Shares: 596,933;
Of these:
- 5000 owned by Eric Watson
- 591,933 owned by Peak NZ
Peak NZ
Directors: Bruce Armitage
Don Stanway
Eric Watson
Shares: 100, all owned by Foreshore Investments
Foreshore Investments
Directors: Leslie Archer
Mark Flay
Shares: 100, all owned by Cire Trust
Cire Trust
Directors: Mark Flay
Eric Watson
Shares: 100, all owned by Eric Watson.
FAI’s loans/deposits
FAI Prospectus 7, registered 9 February 2009.
At 20 June 2008, FAI had assets in loans worth a total of $28,582,000, at an average interest rate of 21.63%.
This sum included $15,119,000 due in 2-5 years.
At the same date it had deposit liabilities (i.e. Money that investors have invested in FAI securities) 0f $18,542,000, at an average interest rate of 9.9%.
This included 6,468,000 on call, $7,514,000 due in 6-12 months, and $382,000 due in more than two years.
Piggies raid bank
25/02/09 13:26
John Key’s failure to give an assurance about the Superannuation Fund means he cannot honour his pre-election promise not to change superannuation, Wigram’s Progressive MP Jim Anderton says.
“Raiding the piggy bank today means there is less in the piggy bank when it is needed.
“If the Super Fund is reduced in any way, then our future ability to pay for superannuation at existing levels is reduced. If it is cut then significantly higher taxes in future than we would otherwise have are inevitable, or alternatively reduced levels of superannuation in the future will be the certain result.
“There is no easy option. National makes pledges about super today, but that is meaningless because they are setting up super to be cut in the future. Future superannuation will not be paid for out of thin air. Whatever is taken out of the Fund today by way of ‘freezes’ or ‘reduced contributions’ is money not available to pay for super in the future.
“Cut the fund today, and the payout will be cut in future.
“National was repeatedly challenged to come clean on this before the election and it repeatedly gave an undertaking that superannuation would be unchanged.
"I specifically warned that National would use ‘changed circumstances’ as an excuse - but circumstances always change. Once again, just like it did last time in government, National is breaking its promise and finding a creative new way to break its promise not to cut super.”
“Raiding the piggy bank today means there is less in the piggy bank when it is needed.
“If the Super Fund is reduced in any way, then our future ability to pay for superannuation at existing levels is reduced. If it is cut then significantly higher taxes in future than we would otherwise have are inevitable, or alternatively reduced levels of superannuation in the future will be the certain result.
“There is no easy option. National makes pledges about super today, but that is meaningless because they are setting up super to be cut in the future. Future superannuation will not be paid for out of thin air. Whatever is taken out of the Fund today by way of ‘freezes’ or ‘reduced contributions’ is money not available to pay for super in the future.
“Cut the fund today, and the payout will be cut in future.
“National was repeatedly challenged to come clean on this before the election and it repeatedly gave an undertaking that superannuation would be unchanged.
"I specifically warned that National would use ‘changed circumstances’ as an excuse - but circumstances always change. Once again, just like it did last time in government, National is breaking its promise and finding a creative new way to break its promise not to cut super.”
Sentencing Bill won’t reduce crime.
18/02/09 13:38
The promise to significantly reduce violent crime won’t be kept, because the Sentencing and Parole Reform Bill introduced to parliament today won’t make the difference promised, Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
He told Parliament the Government would be accountable if there were more violent killings after Government Ministers announced ‘Under this Bill there will be no more William Bells.’
“Ministers responsible for this Bill know it will not deliver the results they have promised,” Jim Anderton said.
The Bill’s Explanatory Note says any impact on prison numbers from this Bill “will not be felt for at least 10 years.” When the government announced it was getting tough with criminals it didn’t say that ‘getting tough’ meant doing nothing for ten years and a total of 70 extra prison beds after twenty years.
“New Zealand has a serious problem with violent crime. A recent survey showed only 43% of New Zealanders feel completely satisfied about their security and safety in their own home. New Zealanders are sick of crime and want to see criminals punished. That’s why when my colleague Matt Robson was corrections minister he started building more prisons than any corrections minister in history. So I support putting violent offenders away and my party helped put the prisons in place to do it.
“But this Bill does nothing to reduce violence. It doesn’t lock anyone up until they have already committed a serious violent offence. It doesn’t prevent crime.
“If you want to reduce crime, the solutions are much more complex. It starts with reducing at risk behaviour, it continues to getting tough with young hoons on their way to a life of crime. And it includes addressing the major risk factors in prisons, like alcohol and illiteracy - because when over 90 per cent of criminals have an alcohol or drug problem, then you aren’t going to rehabilitate them and turn them away from a life of crime unless you fix those.
“We owe it to New Zealanders to get tough on crime. This bill does not. This Bill will lead to perverse results. This Bill will not deliver National’s promise to significantly reduce crime.”
Background: Alternatives to the Sentencing Bill
International evidence shows that changing the rate of imprisonment doesn't affect the crime rate. For example, Finland cut the number of crimes punishable by imprisonment. The prison population fell. The crime rate didn't change. Some states of the US went the other way and put offenders away for much longer terms. The prison population began growing enormously. The crime rate didn't change.
The point is that the likelihood of going to prison doesn't seem to affect whether or not offenders go out and commit crimes. So if we want to reduce crime, then there must be something else we can do to keep the public safe.
Young people who are at risk of becoming serious adult offenders are recognisable with increasing certainty as newborns, as school entrants, as young offenders and as early adult offenders.
Each of the main risk factors increases the probability of anti-social behaviour by four to ten times. The key risk factors are where the mother is:
- Young;
- Has little education;
- Is from a disadvantaged family where she received little care or attention;
- Is substance dependent;
- Is socially isolated; and
- Has a number of male partners.
This background doesn't condemn a child to adult offending. But it increases the risk. If all of these factors appear together, the risk increases many hundreds of times.
So the first step is to reduce the number of highest risk births.
We can do that by working with young women who fit the profile and who are in the social welfare and justice systems.
They need sexual health services - teaching them about contraception and avoiding exploitation. Teaching young women about the advantages of delaying child bearing until they are settled, mature and suitable support is available. The cost for each intervention is as little as about $500. The benefit to cost ratio has been assessed as fifty to one.
We need to back that up with more support for high-risk new mothers.
Family Start programmes are a good example of the sort of assistance that can be provided. Each intervention costs about $3000. The benefit to cost ratio is assessed at twenty-five to one.
And then we can move to children as they enter school.
Teachers have long been able to identify many of the school entrants that they believe will end up as adult offenders. For example an intervention for a five year old who is aggressive and defiant is estimated to cost about $5000-$10,000 per case with a success rate of 70%. The same behaviour at the age of 25 years costs $30-40,000 and has a success rate of only 20%.
Earliest possible intervention works best and costs less.
Children who are at risk of progressing to serious adult offending get easier to identify between the ages of ten and fifteen.
That is when they begin their offending career. The single most powerful indicator of a trajectory to serious adult offending is early repeat offending as a child.
The obvious risk factors include failure at school, substance abuse, deviant friends and a family that has problems - poor supervision, criminal parents and child abuse.
The remedies that work are fairly simple:
- Re-entry to school, with some incentive for doing well;
- Better parenting
- A complete ban on alcohol and drug use
- New social activities and friends.
Working with these kids to prevent them moving on to serious adult offending would mean intervention with about two thousand kids a year, at a cost of about $7-15,000 each.
If one in four of them moves on to a lifetime of offending without the intervention, and one in three interventions actually work, then the benefit-cost ratio is about 36-1.
We want to increase use of Day Reporting Centres.
They give the kids job skills and life skills; and help to place them in jobs;
More than half of the teenagers who enter the adult justice system are re-convicted within one year of ending their sentence. About 80 or 90% are re-convicted within five years.
Dangerous teenage offenders who commit violent and sexual offences would still go to prison. For the others an offence will still result in the appropriate penalty.
Attendance at Day Reporting Centres would be compulsory five days a week for six months, and might be accompanied by night curfews and electronic monitoring. The units cost about $10-20,000 per offender to run, with a benefit to cost return of 37-1.
Corrections Department research indicates the measures in this package could eventually reduce imprisonable offending by around 17% a year.
The earlier you intervene, the more effective the result, but the harder it is to work out where the intervention is needed. The preventive measures we support are not quick fixes, but they are effective. They will take enormous co-ordination across a number of government agencies - Corrections, health, CYFS, education and others.
He told Parliament the Government would be accountable if there were more violent killings after Government Ministers announced ‘Under this Bill there will be no more William Bells.’
“Ministers responsible for this Bill know it will not deliver the results they have promised,” Jim Anderton said.
The Bill’s Explanatory Note says any impact on prison numbers from this Bill “will not be felt for at least 10 years.” When the government announced it was getting tough with criminals it didn’t say that ‘getting tough’ meant doing nothing for ten years and a total of 70 extra prison beds after twenty years.
“New Zealand has a serious problem with violent crime. A recent survey showed only 43% of New Zealanders feel completely satisfied about their security and safety in their own home. New Zealanders are sick of crime and want to see criminals punished. That’s why when my colleague Matt Robson was corrections minister he started building more prisons than any corrections minister in history. So I support putting violent offenders away and my party helped put the prisons in place to do it.
“But this Bill does nothing to reduce violence. It doesn’t lock anyone up until they have already committed a serious violent offence. It doesn’t prevent crime.
“If you want to reduce crime, the solutions are much more complex. It starts with reducing at risk behaviour, it continues to getting tough with young hoons on their way to a life of crime. And it includes addressing the major risk factors in prisons, like alcohol and illiteracy - because when over 90 per cent of criminals have an alcohol or drug problem, then you aren’t going to rehabilitate them and turn them away from a life of crime unless you fix those.
“We owe it to New Zealanders to get tough on crime. This bill does not. This Bill will lead to perverse results. This Bill will not deliver National’s promise to significantly reduce crime.”
Background: Alternatives to the Sentencing Bill
International evidence shows that changing the rate of imprisonment doesn't affect the crime rate. For example, Finland cut the number of crimes punishable by imprisonment. The prison population fell. The crime rate didn't change. Some states of the US went the other way and put offenders away for much longer terms. The prison population began growing enormously. The crime rate didn't change.
The point is that the likelihood of going to prison doesn't seem to affect whether or not offenders go out and commit crimes. So if we want to reduce crime, then there must be something else we can do to keep the public safe.
Young people who are at risk of becoming serious adult offenders are recognisable with increasing certainty as newborns, as school entrants, as young offenders and as early adult offenders.
Each of the main risk factors increases the probability of anti-social behaviour by four to ten times. The key risk factors are where the mother is:
- Young;
- Has little education;
- Is from a disadvantaged family where she received little care or attention;
- Is substance dependent;
- Is socially isolated; and
- Has a number of male partners.
This background doesn't condemn a child to adult offending. But it increases the risk. If all of these factors appear together, the risk increases many hundreds of times.
So the first step is to reduce the number of highest risk births.
We can do that by working with young women who fit the profile and who are in the social welfare and justice systems.
They need sexual health services - teaching them about contraception and avoiding exploitation. Teaching young women about the advantages of delaying child bearing until they are settled, mature and suitable support is available. The cost for each intervention is as little as about $500. The benefit to cost ratio has been assessed as fifty to one.
We need to back that up with more support for high-risk new mothers.
Family Start programmes are a good example of the sort of assistance that can be provided. Each intervention costs about $3000. The benefit to cost ratio is assessed at twenty-five to one.
And then we can move to children as they enter school.
Teachers have long been able to identify many of the school entrants that they believe will end up as adult offenders. For example an intervention for a five year old who is aggressive and defiant is estimated to cost about $5000-$10,000 per case with a success rate of 70%. The same behaviour at the age of 25 years costs $30-40,000 and has a success rate of only 20%.
Earliest possible intervention works best and costs less.
Children who are at risk of progressing to serious adult offending get easier to identify between the ages of ten and fifteen.
That is when they begin their offending career. The single most powerful indicator of a trajectory to serious adult offending is early repeat offending as a child.
The obvious risk factors include failure at school, substance abuse, deviant friends and a family that has problems - poor supervision, criminal parents and child abuse.
The remedies that work are fairly simple:
- Re-entry to school, with some incentive for doing well;
- Better parenting
- A complete ban on alcohol and drug use
- New social activities and friends.
Working with these kids to prevent them moving on to serious adult offending would mean intervention with about two thousand kids a year, at a cost of about $7-15,000 each.
If one in four of them moves on to a lifetime of offending without the intervention, and one in three interventions actually work, then the benefit-cost ratio is about 36-1.
We want to increase use of Day Reporting Centres.
They give the kids job skills and life skills; and help to place them in jobs;
More than half of the teenagers who enter the adult justice system are re-convicted within one year of ending their sentence. About 80 or 90% are re-convicted within five years.
Dangerous teenage offenders who commit violent and sexual offences would still go to prison. For the others an offence will still result in the appropriate penalty.
Attendance at Day Reporting Centres would be compulsory five days a week for six months, and might be accompanied by night curfews and electronic monitoring. The units cost about $10-20,000 per offender to run, with a benefit to cost return of 37-1.
Corrections Department research indicates the measures in this package could eventually reduce imprisonable offending by around 17% a year.
The earlier you intervene, the more effective the result, but the harder it is to work out where the intervention is needed. The preventive measures we support are not quick fixes, but they are effective. They will take enormous co-ordination across a number of government agencies - Corrections, health, CYFS, education and others.
National asked to support vulnerable Christchurch tenants
16/02/09 13:40
There could be help for Christchurch tenants fighting Council-imposed rent increases if National picks up a proposal for government assistance that was prepared for the previous Labour-Progressive Government, Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
Tenants have successfully opposed the rent increase in court, but the Christchurch city’s incumbent right-wing majority has now signalled it could again try to substantially increase rents or even abandon social housing altogether - leaving two and a half thousand vulnerable tenants with nowhere to live unless central government steps in.
Jim Anderton says the government should step in to help because it would have to pick up some of the costs of a rent increase anyway, including through increased Accommodation Supplement payments.
He today released a business case he sent to the previous finance minister Michael Cullen on behalf of Labour and Progressive Christchurch MPs after a thorough review of the Council’s plan to raise rents to help pay for refurbishment of the Council’s social housing.
The business case was sent by Jim Anderton and Labour MPs Ruth Dyson, Lianne Dalziel, Clayton Cosgrove and Tim Barnett. It sought a net government investment of $29 million over ten years. It would have reduced the rent increase from 24 per cent to ten per cent and allowed for the replacement of over three hundred homes and a continuous refurbishment programme.
He also released Treasury advice on the report that says it should be considered as part of Budget 2009. The Treasury response says there is no evidence that the Christchurch City Council ever approached the government itself to ask for the necessary funds.
Jim Anderton says the Council’s behaviour has created a huge problem, and it’s now up to the National government to help tenants out.
“Council never approached the government before it announced the rent increase. Its threats to abandon social housing are very worrying for some of the city’s most vulnerable residents.
“The net cost to the government of stepping in to help is not unreasonable if it is looked at in the context of a twenty year programme of investment to help very vulnerable people. Over that period, the net cost to the government of $29 million averages around $1.5 million per year.
“The National government has indicated it wants to shoulder some of the costs to local body ratepayers of providing social services, and it has also indicated a willingness to see housing expanded as a response to the global financial crisis. One obvious solution is to assist the council directly to make this investment.
“I hope Gerry Brownlee, as the senior Christchurch government MP, will take over the role of advocating within his government for vulnerable Christchurch city tenants, and I have sent the file on the work done so far to him,” Jim Anderton said.
Tenants have successfully opposed the rent increase in court, but the Christchurch city’s incumbent right-wing majority has now signalled it could again try to substantially increase rents or even abandon social housing altogether - leaving two and a half thousand vulnerable tenants with nowhere to live unless central government steps in.
Jim Anderton says the government should step in to help because it would have to pick up some of the costs of a rent increase anyway, including through increased Accommodation Supplement payments.
He today released a business case he sent to the previous finance minister Michael Cullen on behalf of Labour and Progressive Christchurch MPs after a thorough review of the Council’s plan to raise rents to help pay for refurbishment of the Council’s social housing.
The business case was sent by Jim Anderton and Labour MPs Ruth Dyson, Lianne Dalziel, Clayton Cosgrove and Tim Barnett. It sought a net government investment of $29 million over ten years. It would have reduced the rent increase from 24 per cent to ten per cent and allowed for the replacement of over three hundred homes and a continuous refurbishment programme.
He also released Treasury advice on the report that says it should be considered as part of Budget 2009. The Treasury response says there is no evidence that the Christchurch City Council ever approached the government itself to ask for the necessary funds.
Jim Anderton says the Council’s behaviour has created a huge problem, and it’s now up to the National government to help tenants out.
“Council never approached the government before it announced the rent increase. Its threats to abandon social housing are very worrying for some of the city’s most vulnerable residents.
“The net cost to the government of stepping in to help is not unreasonable if it is looked at in the context of a twenty year programme of investment to help very vulnerable people. Over that period, the net cost to the government of $29 million averages around $1.5 million per year.
“The National government has indicated it wants to shoulder some of the costs to local body ratepayers of providing social services, and it has also indicated a willingness to see housing expanded as a response to the global financial crisis. One obvious solution is to assist the council directly to make this investment.
“I hope Gerry Brownlee, as the senior Christchurch government MP, will take over the role of advocating within his government for vulnerable Christchurch city tenants, and I have sent the file on the work done so far to him,” Jim Anderton said.
Minimum Wage Should Rise
03/02/09 14:07
Progressive MP Jim Anderton is supporting calls for an increase in the minimum wage when the national government discusses the issue next Monday.
He says protecting the vulnerable is the highest priority for managing the global economic recession.
“The government will need to be reassured that increasing the minimum wage won’t cost jobs. And experience of the last nine years shows just that. Unemployment fell to record lows while the minimum wage was steadily increased by over 70% in nine years.
“Increasing the buying power of the lowest income workers makes sense because they are more likely than anyone to spend their income, keeping the money in circulation and boosting the whole economy at a time when it is needed.
“The employer groups calling for a cut in the minimum wage need to look at the Great Depression. The accumulated effect of everyone cutting back was to drive the economy into a deeper hole.
“The government is likely to make some changes to business tax, and depending on the design that could well be helpful. But it would send the wrong message to cut the minimum wage in real terms at the same time,” Jim Anderton said.
He says protecting the vulnerable is the highest priority for managing the global economic recession.
“The government will need to be reassured that increasing the minimum wage won’t cost jobs. And experience of the last nine years shows just that. Unemployment fell to record lows while the minimum wage was steadily increased by over 70% in nine years.
“Increasing the buying power of the lowest income workers makes sense because they are more likely than anyone to spend their income, keeping the money in circulation and boosting the whole economy at a time when it is needed.
“The employer groups calling for a cut in the minimum wage need to look at the Great Depression. The accumulated effect of everyone cutting back was to drive the economy into a deeper hole.
“The government is likely to make some changes to business tax, and depending on the design that could well be helpful. But it would send the wrong message to cut the minimum wage in real terms at the same time,” Jim Anderton said.
Nothing for agriculture, bag of peanuts to replace National’s largest ever increase in business tax.
01/02/09 15:46
Business tax measures announced today are worth only a fraction of the increase in business tax the National Government introduced before Christmas, Progressive leader Jim Anderton says.
And the changes, worth just $10.50 a week to a small business, again ignore agriculture when New Zealand’s main source of overseas income faces testing times.
“The first thing National did in office was to introduce the largest increase in tax paid by business in New Zealand’s history. It introduced a new tax on innovation, at a cost to our most promising industries of over a billion dollars in just three years. The peanut-sized tax policies announced today are worth less than half that.
“Across 220,000 small businesses, $480 million over four years is worth only $10.50 a week. That’s a big bag of peanuts.
“It is a quarter of the two billion dollars that would have been invested in our primary industries through the New Zealand Fast Forward fund if National had not jeopardised our economic future by axing it.
“There is nothing for agriculture in this package. Agriculture earns two thirds of New Zealand’s income overseas, and if we are going to weather the global economic crisis we need to strengthen our agricultural sector. The National Government didn’t mention agriculture in the Speech From the Throne and didn’t get a mention from the Prime Minister today. This is a government made up of money market dealers, not people who understand productive businesses that power the real economy.
“If John Key hadn’t spent his first months in office on holiday, he would have had the strength to reverse his failed tax on innovation. The measures announced today are useful, but nowhere near enough to deliver the strength and innovation our economy needs.”
And the changes, worth just $10.50 a week to a small business, again ignore agriculture when New Zealand’s main source of overseas income faces testing times.
“The first thing National did in office was to introduce the largest increase in tax paid by business in New Zealand’s history. It introduced a new tax on innovation, at a cost to our most promising industries of over a billion dollars in just three years. The peanut-sized tax policies announced today are worth less than half that.
“Across 220,000 small businesses, $480 million over four years is worth only $10.50 a week. That’s a big bag of peanuts.
“It is a quarter of the two billion dollars that would have been invested in our primary industries through the New Zealand Fast Forward fund if National had not jeopardised our economic future by axing it.
“There is nothing for agriculture in this package. Agriculture earns two thirds of New Zealand’s income overseas, and if we are going to weather the global economic crisis we need to strengthen our agricultural sector. The National Government didn’t mention agriculture in the Speech From the Throne and didn’t get a mention from the Prime Minister today. This is a government made up of money market dealers, not people who understand productive businesses that power the real economy.
“If John Key hadn’t spent his first months in office on holiday, he would have had the strength to reverse his failed tax on innovation. The measures announced today are useful, but nowhere near enough to deliver the strength and innovation our economy needs.”
Progressives to co-operate with Labour in coalition
19/11/08 15:50
A close relationship with Labour in government will be every bit as close in Opposition, Progressive Party leader and Wigram MP leader Jim Anderton says. The Progressives will formally cooperate with Labour in Opposition.
Jim Anderton, who was agriculture minister, will be the Opposition coalition agriculture spokesperson on behalf of both parties.
"Before the election, we said we would only enter government in partnership with Labour. We couldn’t support National because we won’t work with parties that are likely to increase poverty, that try to sell publicly-owned strategic assets, that increase unemployment, or that fail to take care of our most vulnerable citizens.
"Progressives share with Labour a joint determination to ensure that National govern for no more than a single term, to stop it before it can do lasting damage to New Zealand and to refresh New Zealand’s interest in a progressive future.
"Our leadership group has met and we believe our long-term future is with our close partners in the Labour Party."
Jim Anderton said a priority for the Progresives beyond his coalition role would be to push better access to dental care.
Jim Anderton, who was agriculture minister, will be the Opposition coalition agriculture spokesperson on behalf of both parties.
"Before the election, we said we would only enter government in partnership with Labour. We couldn’t support National because we won’t work with parties that are likely to increase poverty, that try to sell publicly-owned strategic assets, that increase unemployment, or that fail to take care of our most vulnerable citizens.
"Progressives share with Labour a joint determination to ensure that National govern for no more than a single term, to stop it before it can do lasting damage to New Zealand and to refresh New Zealand’s interest in a progressive future.
"Our leadership group has met and we believe our long-term future is with our close partners in the Labour Party."
Jim Anderton said a priority for the Progresives beyond his coalition role would be to push better access to dental care.