Dental care
Levy on soft drinks would help to reduce diabetes epidemic
27/06/11 17:17 Filed in: News Releases
A levy on sugary drinks would help to reduce our diabetes epidemic, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
New research shows New Zealand has some of the highest rates of diabetes in the world - and the problem is fast getting worse.
Last week Jim Anderton called for a levy on sugary drinks to help pay for bringing dental care into our free public health system.
“A levy would not just help to pay for dental care, it would help to reduce our diabetes epidemic too," Jim Anderton said.
"Without a levy everyone has to pay more tax to the health system to help pay for diabetes treatment. A levy on sugary soft drinks would reduce the problem of diabetes - a little prevention is a better alternative than a lot of costly treatment after the damage has been done."
A study published in the Lancet medical journal found the number of people worldwide with diabetes has doubled since 1980, with about 30 per cent of the increase caused by an increase in obesity.
Among high-income countries, New Zealand has the fourth-highest rate of diabetes.
“We have a diabetes problem. We have an oral health problem. And we could have a levy on sugary drinks as a simple answer to help reduce both problems."
New research shows New Zealand has some of the highest rates of diabetes in the world - and the problem is fast getting worse.
Last week Jim Anderton called for a levy on sugary drinks to help pay for bringing dental care into our free public health system.
“A levy would not just help to pay for dental care, it would help to reduce our diabetes epidemic too," Jim Anderton said.
"Without a levy everyone has to pay more tax to the health system to help pay for diabetes treatment. A levy on sugary soft drinks would reduce the problem of diabetes - a little prevention is a better alternative than a lot of costly treatment after the damage has been done."
A study published in the Lancet medical journal found the number of people worldwide with diabetes has doubled since 1980, with about 30 per cent of the increase caused by an increase in obesity.
Among high-income countries, New Zealand has the fourth-highest rate of diabetes.
“We have a diabetes problem. We have an oral health problem. And we could have a levy on sugary drinks as a simple answer to help reduce both problems."
Jim's E-News, June 2011
27/06/11 11:10 Filed in: Newsletters
Dental policy, free care to all
Free dental care for all may sound like a dream, but it is something I strongly believe should be introduced as a benefit for the entire population. This week, I launched a dental policy which advocates free dental care to be made available to all people, starting with vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and those aged over 65 years, then moving to those aged between 18 and 50 and, finally, those between 50 and 65 years of age.
These steps should be supported by education, publicity and, if supported by a parliamentary select committee enquiry, the fluoridation of all drinking water.
There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural or provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt over a 3 to 5 year period of service.
Good oral health should also be reinstated as a priority goal for the public health system, together with the reinstatement of the requirement that school lunch shops and cafeterias provide only healthy food for our children.
The reasoning for my policy is quite simple. More than 44 per cent of our entire population do not currently receive any form of dental care and this is set to get worse. Only 50 per cent of young New Zealanders receive dental treatment because of a lack of available service or cost and dental decay is increasing significantly, often due to poor diet and the effect of such things as sugar-loaded soft drinks. Along with obesity and diabetes, dental decay is destined to reach epidemic proportions unless something is done as a matter of urgency.
Between 2011 and 2030, many of the baby-boom generation are due to retire and because most of them have kept their natural teeth, many will get serious decay from tooth crowns and exposed tooth roots. Clearly this means that many elderly New Zealanders will need expensive dental treatment, in many cases this will be well beyond their ability to pay.
There will, of course, be questions over the cost and affordability of this policy, and I have done considerable work researching this. The total cost of universal dental care could be as high as $1 billion, but this could be funded through a levy on earnings, similar to ACC, along with a reduction in the $17.8 billion tax cuts given to the most affluent New Zealanders by the National-led government, a levy on sugary soft drinks (such as we have on tobacco or alcohol), or a mix of all these possible sources of funds.
It is not that difficult and I hope that this policy will be promoted across the political spectrum and be an issue for debate during this years’ general election campaign.
Full details can be found here.
Christchurch CEO appointment process contaminated
If ever a process looked contaminated, it is that being followed for the recruitment and appointment of a new chief executive of the Christchurch City Council, and it is high time the process was abandoned and started afresh.
To cap what has already been a controversial course of events, the Council has restricted advertising for its chief executive position to seventeen days, and included in the advertisement that the current chief executive ,Tony Marryatt, is applying for a further five years in the job. It sends a clear message to other potential candidates that they need not bother applying.
There are a number of troubling aspects to the current process, none less so than Mayor Bob Parker silencing council members from expressing a view on Marryatt’s performance, by saying that it could expose the Council to legal action, but then publicly proclaiming his own support.
Marryatt, Parker said, was the best chief executive he had ever worked with, before being reported in The Press as threatening to resign if Marryatt was not re-appointed. He then apparently went on to ask each member of council individually, in front of the others, whether they personally supported Marryatt. Attempting to silence, then badger, elected members of Council is not part of a healthy, democratic employment process, for any position, let alone such an important one as this.
Add to this mix, the curious position where prominent business people, led by Chamber of Commerce and Solid Energy bosses, respectively Peter Townsend and Don Elder, published an open letter setting out the qualities they felt were needed in a chief executive to lead our city. According to Townsend and Elder, the sentiments expressed in the letter were a mild version of the discussion within their Chamber. Since then, others have added their voices, with a collection of "very influential businessmen" and public office-holders expressing "a considerable amount of dissatisfaction" with Marryatt's performance
Something is amiss here, and I cannot help but draw the conclusion that this recruitment and appointment process cannot continue. This appointment is not something that has to be rushed, and it is imperative that Christchurch has a chief executive who can unite the city and inspire confidence in tackling the very important tasks which lie ahead.
Maori suicide prevention
This week I was fortunate enough to speak to the Kia Piki te Ora national hui, although perhaps the word fortunate is not quite the right as the discussion was on suicide prevention. Alarmingly, around 500 New Zealanders each year commit suicide, that’s ten a week and, of that number, suicide among Maori is the highest of any demographic group.
I know that researchers have identified a high risk factor for Maori in attempted suicide among those who are not connected to their Maori heritage and Maoritanga. Other major factors include poor general health, the use of drugs, including alcohol, and, especially cannabis, and the number of suicides is high among those who have been the victims of abuse.
While suicide figures still remain too high, it is not to say that nothing has been done to deal with the issue. Suicide rates have dropped by around 25 per cent since a peak in the nineties and, while I was the Minister responsible for suicide prevention policies, the then Labour-Progressive government funded research into an all-ages suicide prevention as part of a suicide strategy.
While I was Minister, we ran the hugely successful John Kirwan advertisements that encouraged people who were depressed to seek help. We also launched a website, thelowdown.co.nz, where kids could go and find out about how to get help, and that was also effective.
When we talk about Maori suicide, we need to talk about adapting tools that work for individuals, and not thinking that one solution fits everyone. And we need to be committed enough and tough enough to implement our strategies, because not all of them will be popular.
Every single suicide is a tragedy, and I understand the distress and hurt of those who lose their loved ones. A caring country needs to respond when it sees a problem such as this. We need to make a difference if we want to create a society where New Zealanders feel valued and nurtured, where we care for each other and where we value lives.
My full speech to the Kia Piki Te Ora national hui can be found here.
Privatising ACC will lead to higher costs
Those who believe the rhetoric that privatising workplace accident insurance and open up ACC to competition will cut costs and provide a better, more efficient system need only look to Australia to see the opposite is the case.
An independent report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers in Sydney in 2008 showed that ACC costs in New Zealand, at around 0.8 per cent of wages, are substantially lower than the Australian average of 2 per cent of wages. ACC costs for farmers are much lower in New Zealand than in Australia.
It is inevitable that insurance premiums will rise for businesses and farmers when ACC workplace coverage is privatised, but worse than that, taxpayers could end up on the hook for another AMI-style bailout
There will be little to stop those same Australian insurance companies coming over here and underfunding their liabilities, which is what happened in 1998, when HIH went under with billions of dollars of liabilities that had to be picked up by Australian taxpayers.
In New Zealand, taxpayers are today on the hook for up to a billion dollars because AMI didn’t carry enough reinsurance and regulators were never warned of a problem. Why would workplace insurance be any different?
My press release can be found here.
Live animal exports banned from Australia
It isn’t often that Australians admit to being behind New Zealand, but earlier this month I was interviewed by ABC, the Australian national broadcasting corporation, about the banning of live animal exports. The Australian Government recently banned live cattle exports to Indonesia after revelations of cruelty to those Australian cattle in Indonesian abattoirs.
In this case it has taken the Australians some time to catch up with New Zealand’s lead and, in particular, the ABC was interested in the consequences to New Zealand’s economy of banning live animal exports for slaughter.
What happened in New Zealand is that most live animal exporting stopped in 2003, but it was finally brought to a complete end in 2007, after I intervened over the planned export of live cattle to Korea.
I was able to tell the ABC reporter that, although many farmers opposed the live export ban in 2003, by 2007 most of the agricultural industry in New Zealand supported the ban for a number of obvious reasons. These ranged from concerns about animal welfare to the potential reputational and economic backlash as consumers in other countries stopped buying New Zealand meat they believed was being transported and killed through inhumane processes.
But aside from the issues of animal welfare, I was concerned that sending live animals overseas represented the lowest form of commodity export. When asked by the interviewer whether there had been an economic backlash to the banning of live animals for slaughter, I looked to Indonesia as an example. New Zealand currently exports high quality, processed meat cuts to Indonesia, so it would make no sense at all for us to send them live animals. Shifting the processing from New Zealand to Indonesia would simply export our jobs and reduce the benefit to the New Zealand economy. There is nothing to be gained and plenty to lose by sending live animals overseas in this manner.
The full interview can be heard at: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/saturdayextra/stories/2011/3245820.htm
Family violence must be stopped
If I was to look at one alarming crime statistic, it would be that half of the homicides in New Zealand each year are the result of family violence. And it I was to look at another, 70,000 physical, including sexual, assaults take place every year. That is 1350 recorded assaults each week, or 172 each day, and, whatever way you look at it that is unacceptable.
Police believe they only hear about one in five family violence incidents. And they respond to one somewhere in New Zealand every seven minutes, meaning, literally hardly a minute goes by when there isn’t a family assault.
At a recent hui at Tapu te Ranga marae in Wellington, I told the audience that the only way we are going to make a substantial difference in reducing domestic violence is to front up to the extent of the problem.
The causes of domestic violence are multiple and complex, but there are some plain differences we can make. To start with, if people believe that violence has taken place (or is taking place), then they have a responsibility to act. It is no longer “just a domestic” as it was called when I grew up in New Zealand.
There is one common factor affecting sixty per cent of people who are arrested for violence and other criminal acts; alcohol. Alcohol, unarguably, is the most serious drug in terms of influencing violent and criminal behaviour in NZ and that’s the context in which ten kids a year are killed by a member of their own family.
Ninety per cent of people in prison have drug and alcohol abuse problems, and if we want to reduce the level of crime and particularly violence in New Zealand, the fastest way we can make a difference, and the biggest difference we can make, would be to make alcohol less available.
And that is just as true of family violence as it is for any other crime. The best law changes I can think of to assist tackling these problems would be to put up the price of alcohol, reduce the drink driving limits and raise the drinking age. That would be a good, practical and effective first step.
Free dental care for all may sound like a dream, but it is something I strongly believe should be introduced as a benefit for the entire population. This week, I launched a dental policy which advocates free dental care to be made available to all people, starting with vulnerable groups such as pregnant women and those aged over 65 years, then moving to those aged between 18 and 50 and, finally, those between 50 and 65 years of age.
These steps should be supported by education, publicity and, if supported by a parliamentary select committee enquiry, the fluoridation of all drinking water.
There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural or provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt over a 3 to 5 year period of service.
Good oral health should also be reinstated as a priority goal for the public health system, together with the reinstatement of the requirement that school lunch shops and cafeterias provide only healthy food for our children.
The reasoning for my policy is quite simple. More than 44 per cent of our entire population do not currently receive any form of dental care and this is set to get worse. Only 50 per cent of young New Zealanders receive dental treatment because of a lack of available service or cost and dental decay is increasing significantly, often due to poor diet and the effect of such things as sugar-loaded soft drinks. Along with obesity and diabetes, dental decay is destined to reach epidemic proportions unless something is done as a matter of urgency.
Between 2011 and 2030, many of the baby-boom generation are due to retire and because most of them have kept their natural teeth, many will get serious decay from tooth crowns and exposed tooth roots. Clearly this means that many elderly New Zealanders will need expensive dental treatment, in many cases this will be well beyond their ability to pay.
There will, of course, be questions over the cost and affordability of this policy, and I have done considerable work researching this. The total cost of universal dental care could be as high as $1 billion, but this could be funded through a levy on earnings, similar to ACC, along with a reduction in the $17.8 billion tax cuts given to the most affluent New Zealanders by the National-led government, a levy on sugary soft drinks (such as we have on tobacco or alcohol), or a mix of all these possible sources of funds.
It is not that difficult and I hope that this policy will be promoted across the political spectrum and be an issue for debate during this years’ general election campaign.
Full details can be found here.
Christchurch CEO appointment process contaminated
If ever a process looked contaminated, it is that being followed for the recruitment and appointment of a new chief executive of the Christchurch City Council, and it is high time the process was abandoned and started afresh.
To cap what has already been a controversial course of events, the Council has restricted advertising for its chief executive position to seventeen days, and included in the advertisement that the current chief executive ,Tony Marryatt, is applying for a further five years in the job. It sends a clear message to other potential candidates that they need not bother applying.
There are a number of troubling aspects to the current process, none less so than Mayor Bob Parker silencing council members from expressing a view on Marryatt’s performance, by saying that it could expose the Council to legal action, but then publicly proclaiming his own support.
Marryatt, Parker said, was the best chief executive he had ever worked with, before being reported in The Press as threatening to resign if Marryatt was not re-appointed. He then apparently went on to ask each member of council individually, in front of the others, whether they personally supported Marryatt. Attempting to silence, then badger, elected members of Council is not part of a healthy, democratic employment process, for any position, let alone such an important one as this.
Add to this mix, the curious position where prominent business people, led by Chamber of Commerce and Solid Energy bosses, respectively Peter Townsend and Don Elder, published an open letter setting out the qualities they felt were needed in a chief executive to lead our city. According to Townsend and Elder, the sentiments expressed in the letter were a mild version of the discussion within their Chamber. Since then, others have added their voices, with a collection of "very influential businessmen" and public office-holders expressing "a considerable amount of dissatisfaction" with Marryatt's performance
Something is amiss here, and I cannot help but draw the conclusion that this recruitment and appointment process cannot continue. This appointment is not something that has to be rushed, and it is imperative that Christchurch has a chief executive who can unite the city and inspire confidence in tackling the very important tasks which lie ahead.
Maori suicide prevention
This week I was fortunate enough to speak to the Kia Piki te Ora national hui, although perhaps the word fortunate is not quite the right as the discussion was on suicide prevention. Alarmingly, around 500 New Zealanders each year commit suicide, that’s ten a week and, of that number, suicide among Maori is the highest of any demographic group.
I know that researchers have identified a high risk factor for Maori in attempted suicide among those who are not connected to their Maori heritage and Maoritanga. Other major factors include poor general health, the use of drugs, including alcohol, and, especially cannabis, and the number of suicides is high among those who have been the victims of abuse.
While suicide figures still remain too high, it is not to say that nothing has been done to deal with the issue. Suicide rates have dropped by around 25 per cent since a peak in the nineties and, while I was the Minister responsible for suicide prevention policies, the then Labour-Progressive government funded research into an all-ages suicide prevention as part of a suicide strategy.
While I was Minister, we ran the hugely successful John Kirwan advertisements that encouraged people who were depressed to seek help. We also launched a website, thelowdown.co.nz, where kids could go and find out about how to get help, and that was also effective.
When we talk about Maori suicide, we need to talk about adapting tools that work for individuals, and not thinking that one solution fits everyone. And we need to be committed enough and tough enough to implement our strategies, because not all of them will be popular.
Every single suicide is a tragedy, and I understand the distress and hurt of those who lose their loved ones. A caring country needs to respond when it sees a problem such as this. We need to make a difference if we want to create a society where New Zealanders feel valued and nurtured, where we care for each other and where we value lives.
My full speech to the Kia Piki Te Ora national hui can be found here.
Privatising ACC will lead to higher costs
Those who believe the rhetoric that privatising workplace accident insurance and open up ACC to competition will cut costs and provide a better, more efficient system need only look to Australia to see the opposite is the case.
An independent report by PriceWaterhouseCoopers in Sydney in 2008 showed that ACC costs in New Zealand, at around 0.8 per cent of wages, are substantially lower than the Australian average of 2 per cent of wages. ACC costs for farmers are much lower in New Zealand than in Australia.
It is inevitable that insurance premiums will rise for businesses and farmers when ACC workplace coverage is privatised, but worse than that, taxpayers could end up on the hook for another AMI-style bailout
There will be little to stop those same Australian insurance companies coming over here and underfunding their liabilities, which is what happened in 1998, when HIH went under with billions of dollars of liabilities that had to be picked up by Australian taxpayers.
In New Zealand, taxpayers are today on the hook for up to a billion dollars because AMI didn’t carry enough reinsurance and regulators were never warned of a problem. Why would workplace insurance be any different?
My press release can be found here.
Live animal exports banned from Australia
It isn’t often that Australians admit to being behind New Zealand, but earlier this month I was interviewed by ABC, the Australian national broadcasting corporation, about the banning of live animal exports. The Australian Government recently banned live cattle exports to Indonesia after revelations of cruelty to those Australian cattle in Indonesian abattoirs.
In this case it has taken the Australians some time to catch up with New Zealand’s lead and, in particular, the ABC was interested in the consequences to New Zealand’s economy of banning live animal exports for slaughter.
What happened in New Zealand is that most live animal exporting stopped in 2003, but it was finally brought to a complete end in 2007, after I intervened over the planned export of live cattle to Korea.
I was able to tell the ABC reporter that, although many farmers opposed the live export ban in 2003, by 2007 most of the agricultural industry in New Zealand supported the ban for a number of obvious reasons. These ranged from concerns about animal welfare to the potential reputational and economic backlash as consumers in other countries stopped buying New Zealand meat they believed was being transported and killed through inhumane processes.
But aside from the issues of animal welfare, I was concerned that sending live animals overseas represented the lowest form of commodity export. When asked by the interviewer whether there had been an economic backlash to the banning of live animals for slaughter, I looked to Indonesia as an example. New Zealand currently exports high quality, processed meat cuts to Indonesia, so it would make no sense at all for us to send them live animals. Shifting the processing from New Zealand to Indonesia would simply export our jobs and reduce the benefit to the New Zealand economy. There is nothing to be gained and plenty to lose by sending live animals overseas in this manner.
The full interview can be heard at: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/saturdayextra/stories/2011/3245820.htm
Family violence must be stopped
If I was to look at one alarming crime statistic, it would be that half of the homicides in New Zealand each year are the result of family violence. And it I was to look at another, 70,000 physical, including sexual, assaults take place every year. That is 1350 recorded assaults each week, or 172 each day, and, whatever way you look at it that is unacceptable.
Police believe they only hear about one in five family violence incidents. And they respond to one somewhere in New Zealand every seven minutes, meaning, literally hardly a minute goes by when there isn’t a family assault.
At a recent hui at Tapu te Ranga marae in Wellington, I told the audience that the only way we are going to make a substantial difference in reducing domestic violence is to front up to the extent of the problem.
The causes of domestic violence are multiple and complex, but there are some plain differences we can make. To start with, if people believe that violence has taken place (or is taking place), then they have a responsibility to act. It is no longer “just a domestic” as it was called when I grew up in New Zealand.
There is one common factor affecting sixty per cent of people who are arrested for violence and other criminal acts; alcohol. Alcohol, unarguably, is the most serious drug in terms of influencing violent and criminal behaviour in NZ and that’s the context in which ten kids a year are killed by a member of their own family.
Ninety per cent of people in prison have drug and alcohol abuse problems, and if we want to reduce the level of crime and particularly violence in New Zealand, the fastest way we can make a difference, and the biggest difference we can make, would be to make alcohol less available.
And that is just as true of family violence as it is for any other crime. The best law changes I can think of to assist tackling these problems would be to put up the price of alcohol, reduce the drink driving limits and raise the drinking age. That would be a good, practical and effective first step.
A Progressive dental health policy for all New Zealanders
22/06/11 10:57 Filed in: News Releases
Today Progressive leader Jim Anderton launched a policy to promote free dental health care for all New Zealanders.
THE FACTS
This policy proposal advocates free dental care should be extended over time, and on an incremental basis, to all New Zealanders. First to the most vulnerable groups; pregnant women, those aged 65 years and over followed by those aged between 18 and 28, then those 28 years to 50, followed by those between 50 and 65 years old.
These steps should be supported by education, publicity and the fluoridation of all drinking water (following, and if supported, by a parliamentary select committee enquiry).
There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural/provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt over a 3-5 year period of service.
Good oral health should also be reinstated as a priority goal for the public health system, together with the reinstatement of the requirement that school lunch shops/cafeterias provide only healthy food.
SUMMARY
Considering the three trends: Obesity – Diabetes - and Dental Deterioration – it seems clear that there will be an increasing need for dental care, especially for people on low incomes, including a growing number of elderly citizens.
Put simply, bad teeth are likely to compromise the overall health of large numbers of New Zealanders and add significant cost to an already stretched public health system.
Prevention should therefore be the thrust of good dental health policy, and ensuring that all people have access to high quality, affordable dental care will have a powerful preventative effect.
Prevention should be aided by four new policies:
92% in New South Wales
78% in Victoria
90% in South Australia
92% in Western Australia
83% in Tasmania
70% in Northern Territory
100% Australian Capital Territory
THE COST OF A UNIVERSAL FREE DENTAL CARE SYSTEM
The current cost of free dental care to those under 18 is approximately $120 million per year. The estimated cost of introducing free dental care to those over 18 years of age (based on 2002-2003 data) would be an additional $542 million bringing the total cost of universal dental care to an estimated $670 million.
However, allowing for inflation, the cost of more expensive equipment and more people accessing dental services, we should allow for a cost of around $1 billion.
FINANCING THE PROPOSED POLICY
Accepting that the cost of extending free dental care to all could be around $1 billion a year at current prices, the required funding could come from a levy on income, similar to ACC levies, a reduction in the $17.8 billion tax cuts given to the most affluent New Zealanders by the National-led government over 4 years (average $4.4 billion per year), a levy on sugary soft drinks (such as we have on tobacco or alcohol) because of their contribution to the forthcoming diabetes epidemic, or a mix of all these possible sources of funds.
The extension of the Volunteer Bonding Scheme (VBS) to dentist and dental hygienists will also require funds. In the absence of details about shortages of such professional services in rural areas and provincial centres with serious shortages that cannot, at this time, be costed.
However, the current Voluntary Bonding Scheme costing around $7.5 million p.a for over 500 doctors, midwives and nurses, indicates that such a scheme for improved dental services, should be able to be accommodated within the $800-$1000 million estimated to obtain a free dental service.
This plan could be implemented over a period of between 5-10 years so that the funding, administration and resources required could be accommodated more efficiently.
The current Dental Agreement will continue to apply, but will also be amended to cover the incremental extension to other groups. There will need to be an agreed fee structure.
The introduction of State Funding should make private insurance cover redundant. This should be reflected in a reduction in premiums charged by insurers for general health insurance if this includes cover for dental care – a saving for existing policy holders.
Dentists will remain in charge of their own practices and professional procedures. They will not become Government employees.
Negotiations with the dental profession will be conducted to agree on an administrative system which would be required, over time, to introduce the free dental system.
Because of my retirement from politics this year, I am handing this policy programme to the NZ Labour Party as the vehicle through which I hope these issues, concerns and initiatives can be progressed.
THE FACTS
- 44% of all New Zealanders do not receive any form of dental care. Obesity and diabetes are increasing and both are linked to an increase in dental health problems.
- The number of New Zealanders over 65 years of age who still have some or all their natural teeth is rapidly increasing. Dental problems amongst this group are complex and costly. Because 70% of those over 65 years of age only have NZ Superannuation as their main or only source of income, regular dental care is simply unaffordable.
- While free dental care is theoretically available in New Zealand from birth to 18 years of age, in practice only 50% of young NZers receive treatment because of availability of services, cost or understanding how to access them.
- A very worrying statistic is the 2,668 children (and rising) under 5 years of age who require dental procedures at our public hospitals each year, including the removal of teeth under general anaesthetic.
- District Health Boards provide access to dental health services for children up to year 8 (age 13) of their schooling through the school dental service – a combination of school mobile clinics followed by dental services for adolescents from age 13 up to the 18th birthday with services at agreed fee levels. (A service introduced by Hon Annette King). The goal is to achieve and maintain an 85% access rate compared to around 50% at present.
- Māori and Pacific children are less likely to be cavity-free by 5 years of age.
- Māori and Pacific children experience more dental cavities by 5 years of age
- Water fluoridation has a significant and positive preventative effect on dental decay.
- In general, drinks containing high amounts of sugar (including fruit juices, milk shakes and fizzy drinks) are not only associated with an increased risk of cavities, but also with weight and obesity problems.
- To a large extent, dental problems result from what we eat and drink. There are three major problems:- dental cavities, gum disease and gum erosion. Our diet encourages the development of tooth decay. Sugar and refined carbohydrates which we consume are the key culprits in this regard.
- People who are overweight tend to have worse dental problems. The 2009 Social Report found that 1.13 million New Zealanders were overweight. Greater consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks is associated with weight gains and obesity and is a serious risk factor for dental decay.
- According to Diabetes NZ, about 270,000 New Zealanders suffer from Type 2 diabetes, whilst another 90,000 cases go undiagnosed. The incidence is increasing rapidly and around 500 young NZers aged between 10-18 years also have Type 2 diabetes.
- From 2011 to 2030 the baby-boom generation will retire and because most of them have kept their natural teeth, even though heavily restored, many will get serious decay from tooth crowns and exposed tooth roots. Clearly this means that many elderly NZers will need expensive dental treatment, in many cases well beyond what they had to spend on dental care in their younger years and well beyond their ability to pay.
This policy proposal advocates free dental care should be extended over time, and on an incremental basis, to all New Zealanders. First to the most vulnerable groups; pregnant women, those aged 65 years and over followed by those aged between 18 and 28, then those 28 years to 50, followed by those between 50 and 65 years old.
These steps should be supported by education, publicity and the fluoridation of all drinking water (following, and if supported, by a parliamentary select committee enquiry).
There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural/provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt over a 3-5 year period of service.
Good oral health should also be reinstated as a priority goal for the public health system, together with the reinstatement of the requirement that school lunch shops/cafeterias provide only healthy food.
SUMMARY
Considering the three trends: Obesity – Diabetes - and Dental Deterioration – it seems clear that there will be an increasing need for dental care, especially for people on low incomes, including a growing number of elderly citizens.
Put simply, bad teeth are likely to compromise the overall health of large numbers of New Zealanders and add significant cost to an already stretched public health system.
Prevention should therefore be the thrust of good dental health policy, and ensuring that all people have access to high quality, affordable dental care will have a powerful preventative effect.
Prevention should be aided by four new policies:
- Providing Free Dental Services so that dental decay can be arrested and other health problems which may arise from a lack of dental care can be avoided and general health costs reduced.
- Bonding of Dentists working in Provincial and Rural areas
- A Parliamentary Inquiry into the need (or otherwise) for Fluoridation as part of a National Dental Health Strategy
92% in New South Wales
78% in Victoria
90% in South Australia
92% in Western Australia
83% in Tasmania
70% in Northern Territory
100% Australian Capital Territory
- Publicity - In order to make free dental care as effective as possible, the government should fund advertising across all media to show the importance of regular dental
THE COST OF A UNIVERSAL FREE DENTAL CARE SYSTEM
The current cost of free dental care to those under 18 is approximately $120 million per year. The estimated cost of introducing free dental care to those over 18 years of age (based on 2002-2003 data) would be an additional $542 million bringing the total cost of universal dental care to an estimated $670 million.
However, allowing for inflation, the cost of more expensive equipment and more people accessing dental services, we should allow for a cost of around $1 billion.
FINANCING THE PROPOSED POLICY
Accepting that the cost of extending free dental care to all could be around $1 billion a year at current prices, the required funding could come from a levy on income, similar to ACC levies, a reduction in the $17.8 billion tax cuts given to the most affluent New Zealanders by the National-led government over 4 years (average $4.4 billion per year), a levy on sugary soft drinks (such as we have on tobacco or alcohol) because of their contribution to the forthcoming diabetes epidemic, or a mix of all these possible sources of funds.
The extension of the Volunteer Bonding Scheme (VBS) to dentist and dental hygienists will also require funds. In the absence of details about shortages of such professional services in rural areas and provincial centres with serious shortages that cannot, at this time, be costed.
However, the current Voluntary Bonding Scheme costing around $7.5 million p.a for over 500 doctors, midwives and nurses, indicates that such a scheme for improved dental services, should be able to be accommodated within the $800-$1000 million estimated to obtain a free dental service.
This plan could be implemented over a period of between 5-10 years so that the funding, administration and resources required could be accommodated more efficiently.
The current Dental Agreement will continue to apply, but will also be amended to cover the incremental extension to other groups. There will need to be an agreed fee structure.
The introduction of State Funding should make private insurance cover redundant. This should be reflected in a reduction in premiums charged by insurers for general health insurance if this includes cover for dental care – a saving for existing policy holders.
Dentists will remain in charge of their own practices and professional procedures. They will not become Government employees.
Negotiations with the dental profession will be conducted to agree on an administrative system which would be required, over time, to introduce the free dental system.
Because of my retirement from politics this year, I am handing this policy programme to the NZ Labour Party as the vehicle through which I hope these issues, concerns and initiatives can be progressed.
Jim's E-News, May 2011
20/05/11 16:01 Filed in: Newsletters
National government presides over dying economy
Rarely have I heard a speech of such breath-taking cynicism as Prime Minister John Key’s yesterday in support of the 2011 Budget. As his Government set us on a course to take New Zealand back to the very worst of National’s failed policies of the past, he had the gall to tell Parliament that the previous Labour-Progressive Government, of which I was a cabinet minister for 9 years, was responsible for the poor position this country is in.
Let’s look at the facts. In 2008, the Government had a fiscal surplus of $2.7 billion and its accounts were forecast to stay in surplus, unemployment was the lowest in the OECD and only 17% of children in New Zealand lived with someone reliant on a benefit. The Crown was contributing to the Superannuation Fund and had no net debt at all.
Yesterday the Government announced a deficit of $17 billion. In less than three years, unemployment is back at levels last seen in the nineties and 32 thousand more children live with someone reliant on a benefit. It is no accident.
Let’s look at where the current deficit comes from. The income tax cuts from 1 October last year cost $17.8 billion over four years. The top ten per cent of income earners alone got income tax cuts worth $44 million a week, which means that the government is borrowing two and a half billion dollars a year just for tax cuts for that top ten per cent of income earners.
Let’s now look at what this Budget has done? It has cut ‘Working for Families’, it has cut Kiwisaver and it has cut students loans and it has promised to sell off state-owned assets. But it has also allowed for the rich to keep their tax cuts of $44 million a week.
What we have is a government that is too weak to make the changes New Zealand needs, and there is a predictable outcome to this failure; ordinary people will suffer. When families don’t have adequate income, children end up living in poor housing conditions, they lack nourishment and they are not warm enough. Their health suffers and their opportunities suffer even more.
This National-led government should be ashamed of itself. It has not one single programme to fix the problem it has outlined and if it is voted back in office at this year’s General Election, it will come back and ask again for more because its policies have failed.
This Budget is a return to the failed policies of the nineties. It fails to create jobs, it fails to lift incomes and it fails to create a stronger future for New Zealand. In fact it is unarguably the worst I have seen in all of my years in Parliament.
My Budget Day speech can be found here.
Half of New Zealanders don’t have access to affordable dental care
Nearly half of all New Zealanders did not receive any dental care in the last year, partly, at least, because of the cost. The current economic conditions are making dental care even less affordable for New Zealanders.
Dental health is the ‘poor relation’ of our health system. It goes under the radar screen but the human and health costs are mounting.
I am launching an in-depth policy document to stimulate discussion about ways to fill the dental care hole in the health system, with the release at parliament next month of research about the extent of the problem and options for solving it.
The Government spokesperson said recently in the House that he was satisfied that New Zealanders have adequate access to affordable dental health care. He also said he was satisfied with the affordability of dental care, and only acknowledges ‘some’ can’t afford it. In fact 44% of all New Zealanders aren’t getting dental health care. That is more than ‘some.’
The Government also believes that hospital care is an adequate backstop. But people are queuing at dawn for that care, and they even then can only access emergency services such as pain relief and teeth extractions. The National-led government is minimising a serious problem and accepting Third World solutions.
If there is a single policy initiative that could make a difference to health outcomes for all New Zealanders, it would be access to affordable dental health care. Current economic conditions are putting affordable health care even further beyond the reach of average New Zealanders. We need action.
I’ve been studying the problem, and have developed some practical options for making dental care affordable, starting with sensible, practical steps we can take straight away. I’ll be releasing that document in late June.
With up to half of New Zealanders missing out on the dental health care they need, this is not a problem that can be ignored.
Inside the Red Zone
Almost three months after the 22 February Christchurch earthquake, I and the other Christchurch MPs toured the Red Zone earlier this week. The Red Zone is the inner city central business district which has remained strictly off limits to the general public. It was a stark and solemn reminder of the damage that was done on February 22 and of the tragic loss of life that occurred. The miracle was that not more lives were lost.
The destruction is almost inconceivable and to see from close quarters landmarks such as the Hotel Grand Chancellor leaning so perilously close to its neighbouring buildings was quite sobering. The other thing that struck me was boarded up buildings in deserted streets along with winter leaves piling up on the ground in the shadows of an autumn afternoon. It was reminiscent of the images we have seen of the aftermath of a nuclear winter.
The CTV site is now barren and the only reminder of what occurred there are wreaths of flowers placed on the ground, a poignant tribute to those who died. Elsewhere in the city, there are still piles of rubble waiting to be cleared and buildings with their insides exposed. In one, the whole side of a building had fallen off, leaving an upstairs bedroom open to an almost voyeuristic view of a small set of shelves holding folded clothes, completely undisturbed.
What was clear from our visit is that the process of making the central city safe is going to be a long one, and so too the enormity of the work ahead. With that in mind, I was delighted at the appointment of Roger Sutton to lead the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA). The talents Roger has demonstrated in leading the power company Orion have not been replicated in any corporate infrastructure company I am aware of anywhere else in New Zealand. He brings a mix of skills that should successfully manage that difficult terrain between political and public pressures, the requirement to exercise good judgement and the need to show strong and inclusive leadership. I am looking forward to working with Roger to rebuild our city.
Those wishing to have a look at the inner city can do so by visiting Terralink’s earthquake street camera.
New electorate office
As a result of earthquake damage, my staff and I have had to relocate my Wigram electorate office, and we are now sharing the premises of the Tulloch Group, 2 Baigent Way. This is on the corner of Lunns Road, just off the southern expressway.
My office contact details remain the same, phone 365 5459 or 365 6172, or email anderton.wigram@parliament.govt.nz.
It is very generous of the Tulloch Group to accommodate us, as following the earthquake my staff worked out of my home and we held constituent clinics at the Rowley Community Centre. It was far from ideal. But we are now all back together and fully engaged.
Because we are sharing premises, constituents wishing to see me or my staff are requested to phone and make an appointment.
Petrol margins remain too high
While the current high price for petrol is being blamed solely on the high cost of oil, many people will be surprised and dismayed to learn that the margin of 29 cents a litre that petrol companies currently apply to fuel sales is nearly double their average margin of last year. Those record margins are indefensible and show the greed of petrol companies at a time when restraint is needed.
The price of petrol is too high because the Government has taken its eye off the ball and petrol companies know they won’t face any pressure for taking advantage of New Zealand consumers. Although the price of petrol has dropped from a record high of 221.9 cents a litre in early May to around 212.9 cents now, it could drop lower still if petrol companies were prepared to take a lower profit margin.
In early May the petrol companies’ margin on fuel was 29 cents per litre compared with an average of around 19 cents in the previous ten days. The lowest margin in the last year had been just 4 cents per litre.
As we all know, petrol prices are always fast to increase and slow to fall. These excessive prices are not just bad for consumers, but bad for business because transport costs are always passed on the consumer.
Given that the New Zealand dollar is now generally at a much higher rate than it has been against other currencies for the last twenty years, it is long past time that petrol companies showed a bit of control and acted in the interests of the country as a whole.
Rarely have I heard a speech of such breath-taking cynicism as Prime Minister John Key’s yesterday in support of the 2011 Budget. As his Government set us on a course to take New Zealand back to the very worst of National’s failed policies of the past, he had the gall to tell Parliament that the previous Labour-Progressive Government, of which I was a cabinet minister for 9 years, was responsible for the poor position this country is in.
Let’s look at the facts. In 2008, the Government had a fiscal surplus of $2.7 billion and its accounts were forecast to stay in surplus, unemployment was the lowest in the OECD and only 17% of children in New Zealand lived with someone reliant on a benefit. The Crown was contributing to the Superannuation Fund and had no net debt at all.
Yesterday the Government announced a deficit of $17 billion. In less than three years, unemployment is back at levels last seen in the nineties and 32 thousand more children live with someone reliant on a benefit. It is no accident.
Let’s look at where the current deficit comes from. The income tax cuts from 1 October last year cost $17.8 billion over four years. The top ten per cent of income earners alone got income tax cuts worth $44 million a week, which means that the government is borrowing two and a half billion dollars a year just for tax cuts for that top ten per cent of income earners.
Let’s now look at what this Budget has done? It has cut ‘Working for Families’, it has cut Kiwisaver and it has cut students loans and it has promised to sell off state-owned assets. But it has also allowed for the rich to keep their tax cuts of $44 million a week.
What we have is a government that is too weak to make the changes New Zealand needs, and there is a predictable outcome to this failure; ordinary people will suffer. When families don’t have adequate income, children end up living in poor housing conditions, they lack nourishment and they are not warm enough. Their health suffers and their opportunities suffer even more.
This National-led government should be ashamed of itself. It has not one single programme to fix the problem it has outlined and if it is voted back in office at this year’s General Election, it will come back and ask again for more because its policies have failed.
This Budget is a return to the failed policies of the nineties. It fails to create jobs, it fails to lift incomes and it fails to create a stronger future for New Zealand. In fact it is unarguably the worst I have seen in all of my years in Parliament.
My Budget Day speech can be found here.
Half of New Zealanders don’t have access to affordable dental care
Nearly half of all New Zealanders did not receive any dental care in the last year, partly, at least, because of the cost. The current economic conditions are making dental care even less affordable for New Zealanders.
Dental health is the ‘poor relation’ of our health system. It goes under the radar screen but the human and health costs are mounting.
I am launching an in-depth policy document to stimulate discussion about ways to fill the dental care hole in the health system, with the release at parliament next month of research about the extent of the problem and options for solving it.
The Government spokesperson said recently in the House that he was satisfied that New Zealanders have adequate access to affordable dental health care. He also said he was satisfied with the affordability of dental care, and only acknowledges ‘some’ can’t afford it. In fact 44% of all New Zealanders aren’t getting dental health care. That is more than ‘some.’
The Government also believes that hospital care is an adequate backstop. But people are queuing at dawn for that care, and they even then can only access emergency services such as pain relief and teeth extractions. The National-led government is minimising a serious problem and accepting Third World solutions.
If there is a single policy initiative that could make a difference to health outcomes for all New Zealanders, it would be access to affordable dental health care. Current economic conditions are putting affordable health care even further beyond the reach of average New Zealanders. We need action.
I’ve been studying the problem, and have developed some practical options for making dental care affordable, starting with sensible, practical steps we can take straight away. I’ll be releasing that document in late June.
With up to half of New Zealanders missing out on the dental health care they need, this is not a problem that can be ignored.
Inside the Red Zone
Almost three months after the 22 February Christchurch earthquake, I and the other Christchurch MPs toured the Red Zone earlier this week. The Red Zone is the inner city central business district which has remained strictly off limits to the general public. It was a stark and solemn reminder of the damage that was done on February 22 and of the tragic loss of life that occurred. The miracle was that not more lives were lost.
The destruction is almost inconceivable and to see from close quarters landmarks such as the Hotel Grand Chancellor leaning so perilously close to its neighbouring buildings was quite sobering. The other thing that struck me was boarded up buildings in deserted streets along with winter leaves piling up on the ground in the shadows of an autumn afternoon. It was reminiscent of the images we have seen of the aftermath of a nuclear winter.
The CTV site is now barren and the only reminder of what occurred there are wreaths of flowers placed on the ground, a poignant tribute to those who died. Elsewhere in the city, there are still piles of rubble waiting to be cleared and buildings with their insides exposed. In one, the whole side of a building had fallen off, leaving an upstairs bedroom open to an almost voyeuristic view of a small set of shelves holding folded clothes, completely undisturbed.
What was clear from our visit is that the process of making the central city safe is going to be a long one, and so too the enormity of the work ahead. With that in mind, I was delighted at the appointment of Roger Sutton to lead the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority (CERA). The talents Roger has demonstrated in leading the power company Orion have not been replicated in any corporate infrastructure company I am aware of anywhere else in New Zealand. He brings a mix of skills that should successfully manage that difficult terrain between political and public pressures, the requirement to exercise good judgement and the need to show strong and inclusive leadership. I am looking forward to working with Roger to rebuild our city.
Those wishing to have a look at the inner city can do so by visiting Terralink’s earthquake street camera.
New electorate office
As a result of earthquake damage, my staff and I have had to relocate my Wigram electorate office, and we are now sharing the premises of the Tulloch Group, 2 Baigent Way. This is on the corner of Lunns Road, just off the southern expressway.
My office contact details remain the same, phone 365 5459 or 365 6172, or email anderton.wigram@parliament.govt.nz.
It is very generous of the Tulloch Group to accommodate us, as following the earthquake my staff worked out of my home and we held constituent clinics at the Rowley Community Centre. It was far from ideal. But we are now all back together and fully engaged.
Because we are sharing premises, constituents wishing to see me or my staff are requested to phone and make an appointment.
Petrol margins remain too high
While the current high price for petrol is being blamed solely on the high cost of oil, many people will be surprised and dismayed to learn that the margin of 29 cents a litre that petrol companies currently apply to fuel sales is nearly double their average margin of last year. Those record margins are indefensible and show the greed of petrol companies at a time when restraint is needed.
The price of petrol is too high because the Government has taken its eye off the ball and petrol companies know they won’t face any pressure for taking advantage of New Zealand consumers. Although the price of petrol has dropped from a record high of 221.9 cents a litre in early May to around 212.9 cents now, it could drop lower still if petrol companies were prepared to take a lower profit margin.
In early May the petrol companies’ margin on fuel was 29 cents per litre compared with an average of around 19 cents in the previous ten days. The lowest margin in the last year had been just 4 cents per litre.
As we all know, petrol prices are always fast to increase and slow to fall. These excessive prices are not just bad for consumers, but bad for business because transport costs are always passed on the consumer.
Given that the New Zealand dollar is now generally at a much higher rate than it has been against other currencies for the last twenty years, it is long past time that petrol companies showed a bit of control and acted in the interests of the country as a whole.
Half of NZers don’t have access to affordable dental care
11/05/11 16:41 Filed in: News Releases
Nearly half of all New Zealanders did not receive any dental care in the last year, partly, at least, because of the cost.
Progressive leader Jim Anderton says the current economic conditions are making dental care even less affordable for New Zealanders.
“Dental health is the ‘poor relation’ part of our health system. It goes under the radar screen but the human and health costs are mounting.”
Jim Anderton is planning to launch an in-depth policy document to stimulate discussion about ways to fill the dental care hole in the health system, with the release at parliament next month of research about the extent of the problem and options for solving it.
In Parliament today he asked the Government if it was satisfied that New Zealanders have adequate access to affordable dental health care.
“The Government says it is satisfied with the affordability of dental care, and only acknowledges ‘some’ can’t afford it. In fact 44% of all New Zealanders aren’t getting dental health care. That is more than ‘some.’
“The Government also believes that hospital care is an adequate backstop. But people are queuing at dawn for that care, and they can only access emergency services such as pain relief and teeth extractions. The government is minimising a serious problem and accepting third world solutions.
“If there is a single policy initiative that could make a difference to health outcomes for all New Zealanders, it would be access to affordable dental health care. Current economic conditions are putting affordable health care even further beyond the reach of average New Zealanders. We need action.
“I’ve been studying the problem, and have developed some practical options for making dental care affordable, starting with sensible, practical steps we can take straight away. I’ll be releasing that document next month.
“With up to half of New Zealanders missing out on the dental health care they need, this is not a problem that can be ignored.”
Progressive leader Jim Anderton says the current economic conditions are making dental care even less affordable for New Zealanders.
“Dental health is the ‘poor relation’ part of our health system. It goes under the radar screen but the human and health costs are mounting.”
Jim Anderton is planning to launch an in-depth policy document to stimulate discussion about ways to fill the dental care hole in the health system, with the release at parliament next month of research about the extent of the problem and options for solving it.
In Parliament today he asked the Government if it was satisfied that New Zealanders have adequate access to affordable dental health care.
“The Government says it is satisfied with the affordability of dental care, and only acknowledges ‘some’ can’t afford it. In fact 44% of all New Zealanders aren’t getting dental health care. That is more than ‘some.’
“The Government also believes that hospital care is an adequate backstop. But people are queuing at dawn for that care, and they can only access emergency services such as pain relief and teeth extractions. The government is minimising a serious problem and accepting third world solutions.
“If there is a single policy initiative that could make a difference to health outcomes for all New Zealanders, it would be access to affordable dental health care. Current economic conditions are putting affordable health care even further beyond the reach of average New Zealanders. We need action.
“I’ve been studying the problem, and have developed some practical options for making dental care affordable, starting with sensible, practical steps we can take straight away. I’ll be releasing that document next month.
“With up to half of New Zealanders missing out on the dental health care they need, this is not a problem that can be ignored.”
MP who campaigned on dental care says the evidence is in
17/12/10 15:19 Filed in: News Releases
MP who campaigned on dental care says the evidence is in
Affordable dental care is the biggest gap in New Zealand’s health system, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“The cost of seeing the dentist is beyond the means of thousands of New Zealanders - especially those on fixed incomes. A bill of $400 or more to get a sore tooth fixed? They can’t do it,” he says.
He was responding to the 2009 New Zealand Oral Health Survey, commissioned by the Ministry of Health, which has just been released. The survey looked at the dental health of 4,906 New Zealanders.
Jim Anderton campaigned for affordable dental health care in the 2008 election.
He says the new study vindicates his concern about the seriousness of the issue.
The study shows the number of New Zealanders who can’t afford to see a dentist increased by a third between 1988 and 2009.
“Nearly half of adult New Zealanders are not receiving any form of dental care. The main reason is the cost.
“In the twenty years since the last major study, dental care for those under 14 years old has improved, but it has significantly worsened for those over 18. Cost is the main factor that explains the difference. Dental care has got cheaper for kids.
“Free dental care is currently available in New Zealand from birth to 18 years.
“We need to start bringing the rest of dental health care into the public health system, starting by making dental care free for the most vulnerable groups, pregnant women and the over-65s.
“Prevention should be the thrust of a good oral health policy. Ensuring that all people have access to dental care will have a powerful preventative effect, and this should be supported by education, publicity and the fluoridation of all drinking water (if that is supported by a parliamentary inquiry). There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural/provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt.”
Affordable dental care is the biggest gap in New Zealand’s health system, Progressive Wigram MP Jim Anderton says.
“The cost of seeing the dentist is beyond the means of thousands of New Zealanders - especially those on fixed incomes. A bill of $400 or more to get a sore tooth fixed? They can’t do it,” he says.
He was responding to the 2009 New Zealand Oral Health Survey, commissioned by the Ministry of Health, which has just been released. The survey looked at the dental health of 4,906 New Zealanders.
Jim Anderton campaigned for affordable dental health care in the 2008 election.
He says the new study vindicates his concern about the seriousness of the issue.
The study shows the number of New Zealanders who can’t afford to see a dentist increased by a third between 1988 and 2009.
“Nearly half of adult New Zealanders are not receiving any form of dental care. The main reason is the cost.
“In the twenty years since the last major study, dental care for those under 14 years old has improved, but it has significantly worsened for those over 18. Cost is the main factor that explains the difference. Dental care has got cheaper for kids.
“Free dental care is currently available in New Zealand from birth to 18 years.
“We need to start bringing the rest of dental health care into the public health system, starting by making dental care free for the most vulnerable groups, pregnant women and the over-65s.
“Prevention should be the thrust of a good oral health policy. Ensuring that all people have access to dental care will have a powerful preventative effect, and this should be supported by education, publicity and the fluoridation of all drinking water (if that is supported by a parliamentary inquiry). There should also be a bonding scheme for dentists and dental hygienists who are prepared to work in rural/provincial areas where dental professionals are in short supply in return for writing off student debt.”
Dental care issues – Report 2010
10/08/10 03:00 Filed in: Speeches
Thank you for inviting me today.
I see you’ve had a few visits from politicians lately. Phil Goff was here last month.
And of course your local MP Winnie Laban has been traveling the country to raise publicity about cuts in aged care.
I’m here today to talk to you about a new approach to dental care. It’s good to see groups like yours creating spaces for political discussion. I commend you for it.
Politicians can come under fire at times. Which is a shame because most MPs I come across in parliament genuinely think they can make the world a better place.
I might criticise their ideas - not necessarily their motivation.
Recently it’s been financial advisors and businessmen in the oil industry who’ve been unpopular and for good reason when you look at the facts. Take BP’s ex CEO Tony Hayward, for example. He complained recently that he was unfairly 'demonized' in the U.S. over his handling of the Gulf oil spill.
In response, demons complained that they were unfairly compared to BP’s Tony Howard!
Talk about how to make yourself really unpopular:
Last week the BP president said, we’re not to worry. That BP will survive this disaster. That's like someone running over your dog and saying, 'Don't worry, my car is fine!’
Today, I want to talk to you about the cost of dental care.
As some of you will know, I will not be standing again as MP for Wigram. I hope to be the next Mayor of Christchurch.
I have decided to make the most of my remaining months in parliament and use the time to advocate for affordable dental care. I’ve got my team in parliament developing a workable, practical policy for affordable dental care. Even post recession, it is do-able.
All that is lacking is the political will to make it happen.
The fact that times are hard, and the cost of living is increasing is even more of a reason to subsidise dental care.
I bet you’re finding that it’s costing more to fill your car; more to heat your house. And wait till GST increases to 15% in the supermarket. You’ll be paying more for your grocery bill than ever before.
At the same time, Australian wages have increased by $17 a week, compared to a miserly $3 for Kiwi workers.
So not only is this National government failing to close the wage gap between us and Australia, but Kiwis pay a bigger percentage of their wages at the supermarket and the petrol pump.
After all that, who in this room can afford to pay for regular dental care? A whopping fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. Some even end up in a hospital emergency department where they get their teeth removed.
In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present! Don’t have to worry about teeth decay after that!
I had a letter recently from an elderly woman who couldn’t afford to get new dentures, and was forced to super-glue her teeth in so she could keep eating and maintain appearances.
You’d think we live in a third world country when you hear stories like that.
The baby boomer generation, on the other hand, will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
It’s a positive that they still have their own teeth, but they’re going to have to spend even more money just to keep those teeth going.
It’s a shock that there isn’t more outrage about how so many people can not afford to get dental care. A high level of untreated decay is a classic sign of poverty.
Perhaps if people died from dental decay, like they do from cancer or heart disease, there would be more political action.
There’s some good news though; the last Labour and Progressive government extended free dental care to all kids under 18 years. The former Labour Minister of Health - and former school dental nurse - Annette King extended free dental care to cover kids who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist.
Before that, these kids fell through the cracks and didn’t qualify for free dental care. She restored the School Dental Service which was in danger of disappearing all together after the previous National government had closed all the training schools.
The number of dental therapists had dropped from 1000 in 1990 to a mere 400 by 1999.
That was reversed. And that means that if we did have a government which wanted to roll out affordable care beyond 18 year olds, to older New Zealanders, we would have the capacity to do it.
This year marks the 90th anniversary since the School Dental Service was set up. We made history when we did this. It was the first of its kind in the world.
90 years on, though, there are still too many New Zealanders not getting regular dental care because they simply can’t afford it.
I’m developing practical policies to support a subsidised state system, and I’m doing it in consultation with dentists, dental therapists and hygienists. I’ve had many letters and calls, in support of this campaign. But there are considerable hurdles to overcome.
The most vulnerable people in our society are unfortunately still the under 18s. As Health Minister in 2008, Labour’s David Cunliffe issued a list a ten health targets. 'Improving oral health' was the second target.
When Tony Ryall became Health Minister he issued 'a slimmed down set of health targets’ - from ten to six. Oral health was not one of them.
That’s the first thing we have to change. Oral health must be put back on the list of priorities.
I’m realistic however, about what it will take to introduce an affordable public dental system for everyone. It will have to be done in stages; in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits, starting with the youngest followed by the oldest of our citizens. It was right to focus on dental care for the 0-18 year olds first. Now we have to identify all vulnerable groups and target them.
Once kids leave school, they are at risk. From the age of 18 many of these young adults will probably never go to the dentist. Some of them don’t see the dentist again for ten, twenty or even more years.
When they do finally turn up at the dentist, the problems can be so big it’s almost impossible and costly to treat them. Cost is a significant barrier. But we also have to incentivise people to go to the dentist, and get them used to looking after their own teeth.
That will involve an education program together with a public campaign which is long overdue.
Another vulnerable group is pregnant women. As mothers they will set habits for dental care at home with their children. That’s why affordable treatment for the adult population is so important.
I’ve never understood why pregnant women get free GP visits during their pregnancy, but not free visits to the dentist. Dental problems start for children before they are born.
Many parents do not know that their children’s teeth are forming before they are born. Although the 0-5 age group is entitled to free dental care, some new mothers are not aware of this.
The next big problem we have, as many of you here know - is New Zealanders in retirement. The truth is, most retired New Zealanders (75%) live on their superannuation income alone. People in retirement homes are particularly vulnerable. They often don’t get the treatment they need.
I’m pleased to hear that the Dentist’s Association is about to roll out training for rest home workers on how to better manage dental care in rest homes.
So what are the options for affordable dental care?
I believe that affordable dental care for everyone is achievable. Just like I believed that we could have our own New Zealand owned bank - Kiwibank - when everyone told me it couldn’t be done.
I would like to see dental care brought into New Zealand’s general health system. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population.
That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments. One billion dollars sounds like a lot until you realize that the National Government is about to give away $14.33 billion in tax cuts over four years from October 01 2010 to the most affluent New Zealanders.
We could raise this money by not giving such a large tax cut to the richest New Zealanders - $6500 to the CEO of Telecom a week and $500 to the Prime Minister every week - in return for a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
We’ll actually save money by promoting prevention and helping new parents introduce good habits for their children.
The other problem we have is a shortage of dentists in some provincial areas - like the Kapiti Coast. There’s a straight forward solution to that problem too.
At the moment young doctors can have their student loans paid off if they agree to work in hard to staff areas for the first few years after they graduate. We have the same scheme for vets. There is no reason why we couldn’t extend it to dentists too.
So we could be on the brink of achieving affordable dental care. It’s possible, it’s affordable and it’s a social tragedy that half our population doesn’t get the dental care they need.
What we don’t have at the moment is the political will to make it happen.
I hope that Grey Power will get behind a campaign to make dental care affordable, particularly for retired New Zealanders. It’s not fair, but it’s a fact of life, that as you get older, the care of your teeth and gums becomes a bigger problem.
I heard of a couple of old friends the other day. One was in his 90s and close to death. The friend of the dying man, who’d recently, spent all his life’s savings on his teeth, asked his friend:
“Will you do me a favour? Will you tell me if they have free dental care in heaven?”
The dying man replies: “You’re my best friend. I’ll do this for you.”
And then he dies. Next day the friend hears a ghostly voice and realises it’s his old friend.
“I’ve got good news and bad news,” says the ghost. “The good news is that there’s free dental care for everyone in heaven.”
So his friend still alive and well on the Kapiti Coast says: “Well, what’s the bad news?”
“The bad news is - you’re booked in on Wednesday.”
Thank you for listening to me today, and let’s hope future New Zealanders don’t have to wait to get to heaven before they get affordable dental care.
I see you’ve had a few visits from politicians lately. Phil Goff was here last month.
And of course your local MP Winnie Laban has been traveling the country to raise publicity about cuts in aged care.
I’m here today to talk to you about a new approach to dental care. It’s good to see groups like yours creating spaces for political discussion. I commend you for it.
Politicians can come under fire at times. Which is a shame because most MPs I come across in parliament genuinely think they can make the world a better place.
I might criticise their ideas - not necessarily their motivation.
Recently it’s been financial advisors and businessmen in the oil industry who’ve been unpopular and for good reason when you look at the facts. Take BP’s ex CEO Tony Hayward, for example. He complained recently that he was unfairly 'demonized' in the U.S. over his handling of the Gulf oil spill.
In response, demons complained that they were unfairly compared to BP’s Tony Howard!
Talk about how to make yourself really unpopular:
Last week the BP president said, we’re not to worry. That BP will survive this disaster. That's like someone running over your dog and saying, 'Don't worry, my car is fine!’
Today, I want to talk to you about the cost of dental care.
As some of you will know, I will not be standing again as MP for Wigram. I hope to be the next Mayor of Christchurch.
I have decided to make the most of my remaining months in parliament and use the time to advocate for affordable dental care. I’ve got my team in parliament developing a workable, practical policy for affordable dental care. Even post recession, it is do-able.
All that is lacking is the political will to make it happen.
The fact that times are hard, and the cost of living is increasing is even more of a reason to subsidise dental care.
I bet you’re finding that it’s costing more to fill your car; more to heat your house. And wait till GST increases to 15% in the supermarket. You’ll be paying more for your grocery bill than ever before.
At the same time, Australian wages have increased by $17 a week, compared to a miserly $3 for Kiwi workers.
So not only is this National government failing to close the wage gap between us and Australia, but Kiwis pay a bigger percentage of their wages at the supermarket and the petrol pump.
After all that, who in this room can afford to pay for regular dental care? A whopping fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. Some even end up in a hospital emergency department where they get their teeth removed.
In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present! Don’t have to worry about teeth decay after that!
I had a letter recently from an elderly woman who couldn’t afford to get new dentures, and was forced to super-glue her teeth in so she could keep eating and maintain appearances.
You’d think we live in a third world country when you hear stories like that.
The baby boomer generation, on the other hand, will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
It’s a positive that they still have their own teeth, but they’re going to have to spend even more money just to keep those teeth going.
It’s a shock that there isn’t more outrage about how so many people can not afford to get dental care. A high level of untreated decay is a classic sign of poverty.
Perhaps if people died from dental decay, like they do from cancer or heart disease, there would be more political action.
There’s some good news though; the last Labour and Progressive government extended free dental care to all kids under 18 years. The former Labour Minister of Health - and former school dental nurse - Annette King extended free dental care to cover kids who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist.
Before that, these kids fell through the cracks and didn’t qualify for free dental care. She restored the School Dental Service which was in danger of disappearing all together after the previous National government had closed all the training schools.
The number of dental therapists had dropped from 1000 in 1990 to a mere 400 by 1999.
That was reversed. And that means that if we did have a government which wanted to roll out affordable care beyond 18 year olds, to older New Zealanders, we would have the capacity to do it.
This year marks the 90th anniversary since the School Dental Service was set up. We made history when we did this. It was the first of its kind in the world.
90 years on, though, there are still too many New Zealanders not getting regular dental care because they simply can’t afford it.
I’m developing practical policies to support a subsidised state system, and I’m doing it in consultation with dentists, dental therapists and hygienists. I’ve had many letters and calls, in support of this campaign. But there are considerable hurdles to overcome.
The most vulnerable people in our society are unfortunately still the under 18s. As Health Minister in 2008, Labour’s David Cunliffe issued a list a ten health targets. 'Improving oral health' was the second target.
When Tony Ryall became Health Minister he issued 'a slimmed down set of health targets’ - from ten to six. Oral health was not one of them.
That’s the first thing we have to change. Oral health must be put back on the list of priorities.
I’m realistic however, about what it will take to introduce an affordable public dental system for everyone. It will have to be done in stages; in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits, starting with the youngest followed by the oldest of our citizens. It was right to focus on dental care for the 0-18 year olds first. Now we have to identify all vulnerable groups and target them.
Once kids leave school, they are at risk. From the age of 18 many of these young adults will probably never go to the dentist. Some of them don’t see the dentist again for ten, twenty or even more years.
When they do finally turn up at the dentist, the problems can be so big it’s almost impossible and costly to treat them. Cost is a significant barrier. But we also have to incentivise people to go to the dentist, and get them used to looking after their own teeth.
That will involve an education program together with a public campaign which is long overdue.
Another vulnerable group is pregnant women. As mothers they will set habits for dental care at home with their children. That’s why affordable treatment for the adult population is so important.
I’ve never understood why pregnant women get free GP visits during their pregnancy, but not free visits to the dentist. Dental problems start for children before they are born.
Many parents do not know that their children’s teeth are forming before they are born. Although the 0-5 age group is entitled to free dental care, some new mothers are not aware of this.
The next big problem we have, as many of you here know - is New Zealanders in retirement. The truth is, most retired New Zealanders (75%) live on their superannuation income alone. People in retirement homes are particularly vulnerable. They often don’t get the treatment they need.
I’m pleased to hear that the Dentist’s Association is about to roll out training for rest home workers on how to better manage dental care in rest homes.
So what are the options for affordable dental care?
I believe that affordable dental care for everyone is achievable. Just like I believed that we could have our own New Zealand owned bank - Kiwibank - when everyone told me it couldn’t be done.
I would like to see dental care brought into New Zealand’s general health system. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population.
That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments. One billion dollars sounds like a lot until you realize that the National Government is about to give away $14.33 billion in tax cuts over four years from October 01 2010 to the most affluent New Zealanders.
We could raise this money by not giving such a large tax cut to the richest New Zealanders - $6500 to the CEO of Telecom a week and $500 to the Prime Minister every week - in return for a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
We’ll actually save money by promoting prevention and helping new parents introduce good habits for their children.
The other problem we have is a shortage of dentists in some provincial areas - like the Kapiti Coast. There’s a straight forward solution to that problem too.
At the moment young doctors can have their student loans paid off if they agree to work in hard to staff areas for the first few years after they graduate. We have the same scheme for vets. There is no reason why we couldn’t extend it to dentists too.
So we could be on the brink of achieving affordable dental care. It’s possible, it’s affordable and it’s a social tragedy that half our population doesn’t get the dental care they need.
What we don’t have at the moment is the political will to make it happen.
I hope that Grey Power will get behind a campaign to make dental care affordable, particularly for retired New Zealanders. It’s not fair, but it’s a fact of life, that as you get older, the care of your teeth and gums becomes a bigger problem.
I heard of a couple of old friends the other day. One was in his 90s and close to death. The friend of the dying man, who’d recently, spent all his life’s savings on his teeth, asked his friend:
“Will you do me a favour? Will you tell me if they have free dental care in heaven?”
The dying man replies: “You’re my best friend. I’ll do this for you.”
And then he dies. Next day the friend hears a ghostly voice and realises it’s his old friend.
“I’ve got good news and bad news,” says the ghost. “The good news is that there’s free dental care for everyone in heaven.”
So his friend still alive and well on the Kapiti Coast says: “Well, what’s the bad news?”
“The bad news is - you’re booked in on Wednesday.”
Thank you for listening to me today, and let’s hope future New Zealanders don’t have to wait to get to heaven before they get affordable dental care.
Jim’s E-News July 2010
03/08/10 14:17 Filed in: Newsletters
Jim’s E-News July 2010.
Lowering the drink-drive limit is popular - why not do it? 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?
In Parliament this week, I 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.
I 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 have said 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.
How to keep your power bill down I chaired a public meeting last Sunday for Christchurch residents to hear from the experts on how to keep their energy bills down this winter.
Power companies based on hydro power, for example, do not emit lots of carbon, so they don’t have to pay a carbon fee. But they benefit from higher market prices for electricity.
These government-owned companies pay a dividend to the government. The profits come back to the government. There is no reason why the government can’t give some of that windfall profit back to you.
In the last election I campaigned for a $200 power rebate for people on low incomes. The chilling reality is that some people face winter power bills they simply can’t afford. When you are on a fixed income and then you get a $400 monthly power bill coming through the mail, how is that going to be paid for?
Just a quarter of the power companies’ gross profits would pay for a $200 winter power rebate for every low income household in New Zealand. That includes superannuitants.
Other countries have a winter rebate. In the UK for example the government provides a winter fuel payment of £250 for over 60s and £400 for over-80s. The State of Victoria in Australia has a similar scheme.
But I wouldn’t hold your breath with this National government. We managed to keep the ‘For Sale’ signs away from Kiwibank. But John Key has made it clear that the publically owned electricity companies could well be up for sale.
If that happens, one thing is for sure. Your power bills will go up even higher, and there will never be a chance for a winter rebate again.
A meeting like this can not only give useful advice on savings for your power bills but can give information on what to do if John Key and his government decide to sell the power companies. People need to be warned. Ask your local Member of Parliament to hold a meeting in your electorate on these issues.
Practical measures to save money on your power bills Community Energy Action’s Bede Martin and Orion Energy’s Roger Sutton set about providing practical solutions and advice at the Christchurch meeting on making efficient use of energy and reducing electricity bills this winter. The key things they recommended that can be done around the home to save $s are:
Community Energy Action’s Warm Babies Programme and Elderly Health Programme provide subsidies for those in the community most in need of a warm home to stay healthy. For more information Community Energy Action Trust on 03 374 7222 www.cea.co.nz or for advice call 0800 388 588 or www.energyadvice.org.nz
There is no way back to Kansas: Anderton speech in the House, 21 July We have just heard from the former spokesperson on the eradication of political correctness. And he wants to know why we were not making any noise while he spoke. It was because we were asleep. This is a government with no plan and no new ideas, but lots of smiles from Mr Key who is starting to look like a poor man’s Wizard of Oz. He is like a travelling magician who pulls out another trick every time that the one before does not work.
But we can only trick Dorothy and the Tin Man for so long, because the people of New Zealand are starting to see there is no plan. There is no way back to Kansas.
What has the Wizard of New Zealand pulled out of his bag so far? The 2025 Task Force? Don Brash has failed to deliver and is being kept on, to give another report next year. Yet he has run out of money already. That is some trick for the former Governor of the Reserve Bank, who was in charge of New Zealand’s monetary policy. He runs out of his budget in the first year of the task force.
Then we had the Job’s Summit. How is that going? There are no new jobs. Unemployment is on the rise. The government that my colleagues on my right and I were in halved unemployment to 4 percent by the time we went out of office. This government has increased unemployment by 50 percent already, and it is still rising.
Now the rate has almost returned to what it was under the previous National Government, and we cannot blame that on the recession, especially when the only idea to save jobs was a 9-day fortnight. That was meant to save thousands of jobs, by getting people to work less so that they were paid less, and businesses stayed afloat. That was the idea. At most it saved 100 jobs, for the whole of New Zealand.
Then John Key came up with another wizard idea. Employees could sell the fourth week of their holidays. That means the solution to New Zealand’s problems is to get people to work longer. Previously the solution was for people to work less, and now it is for them to work longer.
Then we had the cycle way. This was meant to create jobs. The cycle way was the great new innovation for New Zealand. Tourist industries were meant to pop up all along the cycle way. All we have seen so far is pictures of John Key on a bike, smiling as always. It will take more than a pushbike and a cycle way in New Zealand to fix up the New Zealand economy.
However, the government has the answer; it is mining. We dig up the country, just like Australia, and we’ll catch up to Australia. What happened to that idea? It is another flip-flop, because the smiling Prime Minister does not want to be unpopular. He discovered that this idea was not at all popular.
40,000 people marching in Queen Street convinced him of that. So that is not going to happen. If John Key and his government were serious about growing the economy, they would not pay just lip service to the farming sector. That sector is our largest economic earner. The truth is that agriculture makes up 43 percent of New Zealand’s exports.
There is nothing wrong with supporting tourism, but there is a heck of a lot wrong with not supporting farming, and ignoring it. If he thinks we can grow the New Zealand economy while ignoring the farming sector and building cycle ways, he is dreaming.
What kind of Mickey Mouse economics smashes the Fast Forward Fund for research in the primary sector, and cancels the Research and Development tax credit for business, in favour of a cycle way? We do away with the New Zealand Fast Forward Fund, we do away with research and development rebates for business, but we replace them with a cycle way. Now that will work. Yeah, right!
Handing over agriculture portfolio
I have announced I am handing over the role of opposition agriculture spokesperson as 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 for Parliament again.
In my remaining time 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. I have also been an active spokesperson for the +5 solution to alcohol reform which involves increasing the purchase age and curbing the sale and marketing of alcohol.
During my term as Minister of Agriculture and Forestry from 2005 to 2008, I set out to put the farming sector back where it should be, at the centre of the government’s economic strategy, after it had been demoted to a ‘sunset industry’ by former governments. I created the Fast Forward Fund which would have seen $2000 million go towards research and development in the primary sector. I will continue to advocate for agricultural issues in public life.
Affordable dental care update Since the last election, I've been looking at what it would take to introduce affordable dental care for all New Zealanders. It can be done. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population. That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments.
It would cost even less to give just the over 65s affordable care. I'm realistic that we would need to introduce subsidised care in stages, just like we did when we introduced affordable GP visits under a Labour-Progressive government. So why not start with the over 65s? We could raise this money either through income tax, or through a small ACC type earner’s levy. In return, people get a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
The problem of looking after teeth in your later years is only going to get worse as the baby boomers age. In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present! The baby boomer generation on the other hand, will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
They're going to need help.
The other problem we have is a shortage of dentists in some provincial areas of New Zealand. There's a straight forward solution to that problem too. Bonding. At the moment young doctors can have their student loans paid off, if they agree to work in hard to staff areas for the first few years after they graduate. That scheme should be extended to dentists. It's already been extended to vets. If you have an emergency dental problem in Gisborne over the weekend, you have to drive to Napier. But getting young 'pioneer dentists' to Gisborne to work would solve that problem. Those young dentists might decide they like the East Coast lifestyle, and stay for even longer.
At the moment dental care is too expensive and fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. That's a national crisis and something has to be done. The solutions are staring us in the face, and I'll continue to fight for affordable dental treatment for all New Zealanders.
On ACC Earlier this year Ruth Dyson and I highlighted the actions of Nick Smith and the ACC which resulted in the imposition of unreasonable rules on those seeking surgery to remedy injuries caused by accidents. We predicted there would be a flood of ACC claimants seeking access to elective surgery because ACC would not fund them.
The Budget papers, released 10 days ago have proven us right.
In the first six months of last year, ACC turned down 5019 applications for surgery and the extra money Tony Ryall highlighted as being available for additional elective surgery, has gone to treat these cases with, of course, no reduction in the numbers of the waiting lists.
SIGN UP TO RECEIVE JIM’S E-NEWS IN YOUR INBOX HERE.
Lowering the drink-drive limit is popular - why not do it? 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?
In Parliament this week, I 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.
I 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 have said 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.
How to keep your power bill down I chaired a public meeting last Sunday for Christchurch residents to hear from the experts on how to keep their energy bills down this winter.
Power companies based on hydro power, for example, do not emit lots of carbon, so they don’t have to pay a carbon fee. But they benefit from higher market prices for electricity.
These government-owned companies pay a dividend to the government. The profits come back to the government. There is no reason why the government can’t give some of that windfall profit back to you.
In the last election I campaigned for a $200 power rebate for people on low incomes. The chilling reality is that some people face winter power bills they simply can’t afford. When you are on a fixed income and then you get a $400 monthly power bill coming through the mail, how is that going to be paid for?
Just a quarter of the power companies’ gross profits would pay for a $200 winter power rebate for every low income household in New Zealand. That includes superannuitants.
Other countries have a winter rebate. In the UK for example the government provides a winter fuel payment of £250 for over 60s and £400 for over-80s. The State of Victoria in Australia has a similar scheme.
But I wouldn’t hold your breath with this National government. We managed to keep the ‘For Sale’ signs away from Kiwibank. But John Key has made it clear that the publically owned electricity companies could well be up for sale.
If that happens, one thing is for sure. Your power bills will go up even higher, and there will never be a chance for a winter rebate again.
A meeting like this can not only give useful advice on savings for your power bills but can give information on what to do if John Key and his government decide to sell the power companies. People need to be warned. Ask your local Member of Parliament to hold a meeting in your electorate on these issues.
Practical measures to save money on your power bills Community Energy Action’s Bede Martin and Orion Energy’s Roger Sutton set about providing practical solutions and advice at the Christchurch meeting on making efficient use of energy and reducing electricity bills this winter. The key things they recommended that can be done around the home to save $s are:
- Windows are the single biggest cause of lost heat. Insulation Kits will cut down drafts and make a big difference to the warmth of your home.
- Curtains, if drawn before the temperatures drop late afternoon, will keep the warmth in.
- Use ‘door sausages’ to reduce drafts.
- Fit plastic door and window seals to keep drafts out.
- Dry clothes outside to avoid the build up of moist air.
- Shop around the power companies for the competitive price plans or talk to your power company about your options.
- A night plan on your electricity bill can cut down power usage by 20%.
- By spending $50 on energy efficient bulbs, you can save an average of $100 a year.
- Heating water is one of the single biggest energy users. Insulating your water cylinder can save up to $100 a year on the fuel bill.
- Roof insulation can save up to $500 a year.
- Turning the beer fridge on only in the weekend can save $100 a year.
- Turning off a heated towel rail can save $100 a year.
- $150 a year is being wasted on appliances left on stand-by mode.
- Avoid using unflued gas heaters as they create moisture and are very expensive to run, plus they have health disadvantages.
- It is not necessary to have a heat pump running continuously. Put it on a timer and only use to heat up rooms when required.
- Shower rather than bath to save on hot water.
- Shop around for the best deals with insulation and heating options. Some companies quote a lower level of insulation or energy efficiency than is practical.
Community Energy Action’s Warm Babies Programme and Elderly Health Programme provide subsidies for those in the community most in need of a warm home to stay healthy. For more information Community Energy Action Trust on 03 374 7222 www.cea.co.nz or for advice call 0800 388 588 or www.energyadvice.org.nz
There is no way back to Kansas: Anderton speech in the House, 21 July We have just heard from the former spokesperson on the eradication of political correctness. And he wants to know why we were not making any noise while he spoke. It was because we were asleep. This is a government with no plan and no new ideas, but lots of smiles from Mr Key who is starting to look like a poor man’s Wizard of Oz. He is like a travelling magician who pulls out another trick every time that the one before does not work.
But we can only trick Dorothy and the Tin Man for so long, because the people of New Zealand are starting to see there is no plan. There is no way back to Kansas.
What has the Wizard of New Zealand pulled out of his bag so far? The 2025 Task Force? Don Brash has failed to deliver and is being kept on, to give another report next year. Yet he has run out of money already. That is some trick for the former Governor of the Reserve Bank, who was in charge of New Zealand’s monetary policy. He runs out of his budget in the first year of the task force.
Then we had the Job’s Summit. How is that going? There are no new jobs. Unemployment is on the rise. The government that my colleagues on my right and I were in halved unemployment to 4 percent by the time we went out of office. This government has increased unemployment by 50 percent already, and it is still rising.
Now the rate has almost returned to what it was under the previous National Government, and we cannot blame that on the recession, especially when the only idea to save jobs was a 9-day fortnight. That was meant to save thousands of jobs, by getting people to work less so that they were paid less, and businesses stayed afloat. That was the idea. At most it saved 100 jobs, for the whole of New Zealand.
Then John Key came up with another wizard idea. Employees could sell the fourth week of their holidays. That means the solution to New Zealand’s problems is to get people to work longer. Previously the solution was for people to work less, and now it is for them to work longer.
Then we had the cycle way. This was meant to create jobs. The cycle way was the great new innovation for New Zealand. Tourist industries were meant to pop up all along the cycle way. All we have seen so far is pictures of John Key on a bike, smiling as always. It will take more than a pushbike and a cycle way in New Zealand to fix up the New Zealand economy.
However, the government has the answer; it is mining. We dig up the country, just like Australia, and we’ll catch up to Australia. What happened to that idea? It is another flip-flop, because the smiling Prime Minister does not want to be unpopular. He discovered that this idea was not at all popular.
40,000 people marching in Queen Street convinced him of that. So that is not going to happen. If John Key and his government were serious about growing the economy, they would not pay just lip service to the farming sector. That sector is our largest economic earner. The truth is that agriculture makes up 43 percent of New Zealand’s exports.
There is nothing wrong with supporting tourism, but there is a heck of a lot wrong with not supporting farming, and ignoring it. If he thinks we can grow the New Zealand economy while ignoring the farming sector and building cycle ways, he is dreaming.
What kind of Mickey Mouse economics smashes the Fast Forward Fund for research in the primary sector, and cancels the Research and Development tax credit for business, in favour of a cycle way? We do away with the New Zealand Fast Forward Fund, we do away with research and development rebates for business, but we replace them with a cycle way. Now that will work. Yeah, right!
Handing over agriculture portfolio
I have announced I am handing over the role of opposition agriculture spokesperson as 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 for Parliament again.
In my remaining time 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. I have also been an active spokesperson for the +5 solution to alcohol reform which involves increasing the purchase age and curbing the sale and marketing of alcohol.
During my term as Minister of Agriculture and Forestry from 2005 to 2008, I set out to put the farming sector back where it should be, at the centre of the government’s economic strategy, after it had been demoted to a ‘sunset industry’ by former governments. I created the Fast Forward Fund which would have seen $2000 million go towards research and development in the primary sector. I will continue to advocate for agricultural issues in public life.
Affordable dental care update Since the last election, I've been looking at what it would take to introduce affordable dental care for all New Zealanders. It can be done. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population. That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments.
It would cost even less to give just the over 65s affordable care. I'm realistic that we would need to introduce subsidised care in stages, just like we did when we introduced affordable GP visits under a Labour-Progressive government. So why not start with the over 65s? We could raise this money either through income tax, or through a small ACC type earner’s levy. In return, people get a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
The problem of looking after teeth in your later years is only going to get worse as the baby boomers age. In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present! The baby boomer generation on the other hand, will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
They're going to need help.
The other problem we have is a shortage of dentists in some provincial areas of New Zealand. There's a straight forward solution to that problem too. Bonding. At the moment young doctors can have their student loans paid off, if they agree to work in hard to staff areas for the first few years after they graduate. That scheme should be extended to dentists. It's already been extended to vets. If you have an emergency dental problem in Gisborne over the weekend, you have to drive to Napier. But getting young 'pioneer dentists' to Gisborne to work would solve that problem. Those young dentists might decide they like the East Coast lifestyle, and stay for even longer.
At the moment dental care is too expensive and fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. That's a national crisis and something has to be done. The solutions are staring us in the face, and I'll continue to fight for affordable dental treatment for all New Zealanders.
On ACC Earlier this year Ruth Dyson and I highlighted the actions of Nick Smith and the ACC which resulted in the imposition of unreasonable rules on those seeking surgery to remedy injuries caused by accidents. We predicted there would be a flood of ACC claimants seeking access to elective surgery because ACC would not fund them.
The Budget papers, released 10 days ago have proven us right.
In the first six months of last year, ACC turned down 5019 applications for surgery and the extra money Tony Ryall highlighted as being available for additional elective surgery, has gone to treat these cases with, of course, no reduction in the numbers of the waiting lists.
SIGN UP TO RECEIVE JIM’S E-NEWS IN YOUR INBOX HERE.
Affordable dental care within reach for all Kiwis
23/04/10 20:21 Filed in: News Releases
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.
The State of the Nation's teeth
23/04/10 20:18 Filed in: Speeches
The State of the Nation's teeth 90 years on - How are we doing?
Jim Anderton’s speech at the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society Conference
Thank you for inviting me tonight. This is probably the only time I’ll get a chance to give a speech in a brewery.
Some of you may be aware I am part of a national campaign to increase the legal drinking age and get rid of alcohol advertising. The alcohol industry doesn’t like that idea much.
There’s even a radio ad at the moment which advertises the latest party pills, and it starts by saying ‘Don’t let Uncle Jim ruin the party’!
So we make a fine team. I’m taking away their drugs and alcohol, and you’re taking away their sweets, lollies and sugary drinks!
But I don’t want to sound too negative tonight. Especially as we all have a reputation as reasonably serious people. Dentists and dental therapists always seem to get a bad rap.
Up till the 1980s, Kiwi kids used to tell their parents, ‘We’re off to the murder house today.’
They meant they were off for a check up. A dental nurse and a bus would arrive outside the primary school to carry the kids off to the murder house.
The parents themselves were raised on films where the dentist was often evil and probably insane; or otherwise a bumbling fool played by one of the Three Stooges or Groucho Marx.
There is a serous side to tonight though. Each of you here knows that the lack of affordable dental health care is a very grave problem in New Zealand.
Fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. Some even end up in a hospital emergency department where they get their teeth removed. There are queues of people at hospitals across New Zealand from 5am in the morning, waiting for pain relief or extraction - just like a third world country.
It’s a shock that there isn’t more outrage about this. A high level of untreated decay is a classic sign of poverty. Perhaps if people knew you could die from dental decay there would be more political action. We’ll know more about who is or isn’t seeing the dentist later this year when the results of a nationwide survey of the nation’s teeth are released.
This is the first time in twenty years that we’ve done a survey like this. It’s long overdue.
There’s some good news though; the last Labour and Progressive government extended free dental care to all kids under 18 years.
Tonight I’d like to pay tribute to my colleague, the former Minister of Health - and former school dental nurse - Annette King. She extended the under 18’s scheme to cover kids who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist. Before that, these kids fell through the cracks and didn’t qualify for free dental care.
She restored the School Dental Service which was in danger of disappearing all together after the previous National government had closed all the training schools. The number of therapists had dropped from 1000 in 1990 to a mere 400 by 1999.
Annette also made dental therapists a stand alone profession for the first time. That meant you were recognised for your skills, and you could practice on adults. Which means that if we did have a government which wanted to roll out affordable care beyond 18 year olds, we would have the capacity to do it.
The new dedicated Community Oral Health Services are targeting teenagers in the community. So are the hundred mobile clinics being introduced across the country over the next three years to service schools.
I’m looking forward to visiting the first of the purpose built community centre’s in Gisborne in the coming weeks.
I know you have worked hard to roll out this new scheme. I’d like to thank all of you here (and those who are absent) for your huge efforts in making Annette King’s policy decision in parliament a reality.
Reconfiguring child and adolescent oral health services has not been easy. It’s involved Chief Dental Officers and their teams, and people like Dr Robin Whyman who is not here tonight, and Dr Tim Mackay who is.
It’s involved dental therapists, managers, clinicians and support staff across the country.
We made history when New Zealand was the first country in the world to establish the School Dental Service, 90 years ago.
You are making history again.
My advice from the Ministry of Health this week is that although it’s early days to evaluate the success of the new scheme, you will achieve your target of reaching 60% of all eligible adolescents across New Zealand in the first year or so. That’s great news and we’ll keep monitoring progress.
90 years ago
It’s an historic time; this year marks the 90th anniversary since the School Dental Service was set up. I have a direct link in my office to that day 90 years ago when the idea for the school service began.
One of my research staff, David Cuthbert, who has worked for many hours on our dental policy, is related to the man who played a pivotal role in setting up the School Dental Service.
His great uncle was a man called John Llewellyn Saunders - ‘Llew’ to his family. I’m sure it won’t surprise you to hear that I don’t like smoking. But in the case of Llew I have to admit that smoking saved his life - and helped create the School Dental Service.
Like many men of his generation he went off to war in 1914-15. He was full of dreams for a fully funded dental service in New Zealand, and determined to survive the war so he could come back and make it happen.
He ended up at Gallipoli and the Western Front, which didn’t bode well for his future or the future of our community dental health services. He got hit by a sniper and thought he had been seriously injured. But the bullet had hit the cigarette tin in his chest pocket. He came back to New Zealand more determined than ever to introduce a fully funded state dental service. His great nephew in my office tells me the family still has that dented cigarette tin.
Llew had been shocked by the appalling state of dental health revealed by the wartime inspection of army recruits. He had a sense of urgency, a determination to make a difference that wouldn’t be out of place today. But he’d be encouraged to see people like you working in schools and the community delivering a free and affordable service to young New Zealanders.
At the time that Llew and his colleagues were designing the first School Dental Service, there was of course a private system of dentistry which was going from strength to strength.
Llew was like the 'Indiana Jones' of dentistry; He had a brave, can-do attitude. He was doing god's work and getting shot at. Those of you here tonight have picked up the fight where Llew left off. He succeeded in getting the first School Dental Service up and running. He believed a service made up of trained women could provide a much needed dental service to New Zealand children. He helped to create a school of dentistry to improve the quality of care.
And after his war time experience, he was part of setting up the New Zealand Dental Corps which looked after the teeth of soldiers serving overseas. Now we have to pick up the baton.
90 years on, who’s not getting dental care?
In the last election I argued for the introduction of affordable dental care for all New Zealanders - adults included.
I have been encouraged by the support I’ve received, and I have no doubt that we can achieve Llew’s dream of a fully developed state system of some kind.
The New Zealand Dental Association has agreed to look at the research from my office. We have costed various models for a subsidised system.
The Progressive Party is developing practical policies, and we’re doing it in consultation with dentists, dental therapists and hygienists. I’ve had many letters and calls, in support of this campaign.
Grey Power branches across the country have been in touch; The New Zealand Dental Therapists’ Association, the Nurses Organisation and many other organisations and individuals have also shown their support. But there are considerable hurdles to overcome.
The most vulnerable people in our society are unfortunately still the under 18s.
As Health Minister in 2008, Labour’s David Cunliffe issued a list a ten health targets. 'Improving oral health' was the second target.
When Tony Ryall became Health Minister he issued 'a slimmed down set of health targets’ - from ten to six. Oral health was not one of them
I’m realistic about what it will take to introduce an affordable public dental system for everyone. It will have to be done in stages; in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits, starting with the youngest followed by the oldest.
It was right to focus on 0-18 year olds first. Now we have to identify all vulnerable groups and target them. Once these kids leave your care, they are at risk. From the age of 18 many of these young adults will probably never go to the dentist. Some of them don’t see the dentist again for ten to twenty years.
When they do finally turn up at the dentists, the problems can be so big it’s almost impossible and too costly to treat them. Cost is a significant barrier. That’s one of the first things we have to fix. But we also have to incentivise them to go to the dentist, and get them used to looking after their own teeth. That will involve an education program together with a public campaign which is long overdue.
Another vulnerable group is pregnant women. Not only are their teeth at risk during pregnancy, but as mothers they will set habits for dental care at home with their children.
That’s why affordable treatment for the adult population is so important.
I’ve never understood why pregnant women get free GP visits during their pregnancy, but not free visits to the dentist.
The problems start before kids get to see therapists like you. They start between the ages of 0-5. Many parents do not know that their children’s teeth are forming before they are born. Although the 0-5 age group is entitled to free dental care, some new mothers are not aware of this.
The dangers of sugary fruit juices, sweetened milk or fizzy drinks are not sufficiently spelt out to new parents. I’m encouraged to see that at least Plunket and other early child support services will be doing more in the future to include information on dental care and the dangers of sugary drinks.
This was an initiative set up by the New Zealand Dental Association, Plunket and Colgate.
The next big problem we have is New Zealanders in retirement.
It’s not fair, but it’s a fact of life, that as you get older, the care of your teeth and gums becomes a bigger problem. In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present!
The baby boomer generation will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
I heard of a couple of old friends the other day. One was in his 90s and close to death. The friend of the dying man, who’d recently, spent all his life’s savings on his teeth, asked his friend:
“Will you do me a favour? Will you tell me if they have free dental care in heaven?”
The dying man replies: “You’re my best friend. I’ll do this for you.”
And then he dies. Next day the friend hears a ghostly voice and realises it’s his old friend.
“I’ve got good news and bad news,” says the ghost. “The good news is that there’s free dental care for everyone in heaven.”
“The bad news is - you’re booked in on Wednesday.”
Most retired New Zealanders (75%) live on their superannuation income alone. People in retirement homes are particularly vulnerable. They often don’t get the treatment they need.
I’m pleased to hear that the Dentist’s Association is about to roll out training for rest home workers on how to better manage dental care in rest homes.
What are the options for affordable dental care?
I believe that affordable dental care for everyone is achievable. Just like I believed that we could have our own New Zealand owned bank - Kiwibank - when everyone told me it couldn’t be done.
Llew’s dream - 90 years ago - of affordable or free care for everyone is closer today than it first appears.
I would like to see dental care brought into New Zealand’s general health system. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population. That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments.
We could raise this money either through income tax, or through a small ACC type earner’s levy in return for a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
We’ll actually save money by promoting prevention and helping new parents introduce good habits for their children. We would save money by putting fluoride in the water in more places across New Zealand. I know this continues to be controversial, and you have been discussing this at your conference.
The anti-fluoride lobby should let the facts get in the way of their prejudice. On average the addition of fluoride in drinking water reduces tooth decay in children by at least 30% and strengthens the teeth of adults.
We could be on the brink of achieving affordable dental care. It’s possible, it’s affordable and it’s a social tragedy that half our population doesn’t get the dental care they need.
What we don’t have at the moment is the political will to make it happen.
But when you look back at the milestones in dental care over the last 90 years, it hasn’t been politicians who have led the call for affordable care. It’s been people like you.
Llew had to personally lobby Peter Fraser, Minister of Health in the first Labour government to expand the School Dental Service to cover teenagers.
Without people like Llew however, there wouldn’t be any school or community dental service at all. Without people like you, an ex-dental nurse by the name of Annette King wouldn’t have been able to win the argument in parliament to extend free dental care to all under 18 year olds.
She wouldn’t have been able to bring back the training of dental therapists, central to Llew’s dream of free dental care for children.
The next milestone is up to you. You have to go out there and create the political will to make affordable care a reality for all New Zealanders. We must pool our knowledge and our efforts to make a final push.
That’s the only way we will realise Llew’s dream, 90 years ago, of an affordable, high quality dental care system within the reach of every New Zealander.
Jim Anderton’s speech at the New Zealand School and Community Oral Health Services Society Conference
Thank you for inviting me tonight. This is probably the only time I’ll get a chance to give a speech in a brewery.
Some of you may be aware I am part of a national campaign to increase the legal drinking age and get rid of alcohol advertising. The alcohol industry doesn’t like that idea much.
There’s even a radio ad at the moment which advertises the latest party pills, and it starts by saying ‘Don’t let Uncle Jim ruin the party’!
So we make a fine team. I’m taking away their drugs and alcohol, and you’re taking away their sweets, lollies and sugary drinks!
But I don’t want to sound too negative tonight. Especially as we all have a reputation as reasonably serious people. Dentists and dental therapists always seem to get a bad rap.
Up till the 1980s, Kiwi kids used to tell their parents, ‘We’re off to the murder house today.’
They meant they were off for a check up. A dental nurse and a bus would arrive outside the primary school to carry the kids off to the murder house.
The parents themselves were raised on films where the dentist was often evil and probably insane; or otherwise a bumbling fool played by one of the Three Stooges or Groucho Marx.
There is a serous side to tonight though. Each of you here knows that the lack of affordable dental health care is a very grave problem in New Zealand.
Fifty per cent of New Zealanders do not receive regular dental care. Some even end up in a hospital emergency department where they get their teeth removed. There are queues of people at hospitals across New Zealand from 5am in the morning, waiting for pain relief or extraction - just like a third world country.
It’s a shock that there isn’t more outrage about this. A high level of untreated decay is a classic sign of poverty. Perhaps if people knew you could die from dental decay there would be more political action. We’ll know more about who is or isn’t seeing the dentist later this year when the results of a nationwide survey of the nation’s teeth are released.
This is the first time in twenty years that we’ve done a survey like this. It’s long overdue.
There’s some good news though; the last Labour and Progressive government extended free dental care to all kids under 18 years.
Tonight I’d like to pay tribute to my colleague, the former Minister of Health - and former school dental nurse - Annette King. She extended the under 18’s scheme to cover kids who were not at school or enrolled at a dentist. Before that, these kids fell through the cracks and didn’t qualify for free dental care.
She restored the School Dental Service which was in danger of disappearing all together after the previous National government had closed all the training schools. The number of therapists had dropped from 1000 in 1990 to a mere 400 by 1999.
Annette also made dental therapists a stand alone profession for the first time. That meant you were recognised for your skills, and you could practice on adults. Which means that if we did have a government which wanted to roll out affordable care beyond 18 year olds, we would have the capacity to do it.
The new dedicated Community Oral Health Services are targeting teenagers in the community. So are the hundred mobile clinics being introduced across the country over the next three years to service schools.
I’m looking forward to visiting the first of the purpose built community centre’s in Gisborne in the coming weeks.
I know you have worked hard to roll out this new scheme. I’d like to thank all of you here (and those who are absent) for your huge efforts in making Annette King’s policy decision in parliament a reality.
Reconfiguring child and adolescent oral health services has not been easy. It’s involved Chief Dental Officers and their teams, and people like Dr Robin Whyman who is not here tonight, and Dr Tim Mackay who is.
It’s involved dental therapists, managers, clinicians and support staff across the country.
We made history when New Zealand was the first country in the world to establish the School Dental Service, 90 years ago.
You are making history again.
My advice from the Ministry of Health this week is that although it’s early days to evaluate the success of the new scheme, you will achieve your target of reaching 60% of all eligible adolescents across New Zealand in the first year or so. That’s great news and we’ll keep monitoring progress.
90 years ago
It’s an historic time; this year marks the 90th anniversary since the School Dental Service was set up. I have a direct link in my office to that day 90 years ago when the idea for the school service began.
One of my research staff, David Cuthbert, who has worked for many hours on our dental policy, is related to the man who played a pivotal role in setting up the School Dental Service.
His great uncle was a man called John Llewellyn Saunders - ‘Llew’ to his family. I’m sure it won’t surprise you to hear that I don’t like smoking. But in the case of Llew I have to admit that smoking saved his life - and helped create the School Dental Service.
Like many men of his generation he went off to war in 1914-15. He was full of dreams for a fully funded dental service in New Zealand, and determined to survive the war so he could come back and make it happen.
He ended up at Gallipoli and the Western Front, which didn’t bode well for his future or the future of our community dental health services. He got hit by a sniper and thought he had been seriously injured. But the bullet had hit the cigarette tin in his chest pocket. He came back to New Zealand more determined than ever to introduce a fully funded state dental service. His great nephew in my office tells me the family still has that dented cigarette tin.
Llew had been shocked by the appalling state of dental health revealed by the wartime inspection of army recruits. He had a sense of urgency, a determination to make a difference that wouldn’t be out of place today. But he’d be encouraged to see people like you working in schools and the community delivering a free and affordable service to young New Zealanders.
At the time that Llew and his colleagues were designing the first School Dental Service, there was of course a private system of dentistry which was going from strength to strength.
Llew was like the 'Indiana Jones' of dentistry; He had a brave, can-do attitude. He was doing god's work and getting shot at. Those of you here tonight have picked up the fight where Llew left off. He succeeded in getting the first School Dental Service up and running. He believed a service made up of trained women could provide a much needed dental service to New Zealand children. He helped to create a school of dentistry to improve the quality of care.
And after his war time experience, he was part of setting up the New Zealand Dental Corps which looked after the teeth of soldiers serving overseas. Now we have to pick up the baton.
90 years on, who’s not getting dental care?
In the last election I argued for the introduction of affordable dental care for all New Zealanders - adults included.
I have been encouraged by the support I’ve received, and I have no doubt that we can achieve Llew’s dream of a fully developed state system of some kind.
The New Zealand Dental Association has agreed to look at the research from my office. We have costed various models for a subsidised system.
The Progressive Party is developing practical policies, and we’re doing it in consultation with dentists, dental therapists and hygienists. I’ve had many letters and calls, in support of this campaign.
Grey Power branches across the country have been in touch; The New Zealand Dental Therapists’ Association, the Nurses Organisation and many other organisations and individuals have also shown their support. But there are considerable hurdles to overcome.
The most vulnerable people in our society are unfortunately still the under 18s.
As Health Minister in 2008, Labour’s David Cunliffe issued a list a ten health targets. 'Improving oral health' was the second target.
When Tony Ryall became Health Minister he issued 'a slimmed down set of health targets’ - from ten to six. Oral health was not one of them
I’m realistic about what it will take to introduce an affordable public dental system for everyone. It will have to be done in stages; in the same way we introduced affordable GP visits, starting with the youngest followed by the oldest.
It was right to focus on 0-18 year olds first. Now we have to identify all vulnerable groups and target them. Once these kids leave your care, they are at risk. From the age of 18 many of these young adults will probably never go to the dentist. Some of them don’t see the dentist again for ten to twenty years.
When they do finally turn up at the dentists, the problems can be so big it’s almost impossible and too costly to treat them. Cost is a significant barrier. That’s one of the first things we have to fix. But we also have to incentivise them to go to the dentist, and get them used to looking after their own teeth. That will involve an education program together with a public campaign which is long overdue.
Another vulnerable group is pregnant women. Not only are their teeth at risk during pregnancy, but as mothers they will set habits for dental care at home with their children.
That’s why affordable treatment for the adult population is so important.
I’ve never understood why pregnant women get free GP visits during their pregnancy, but not free visits to the dentist.
The problems start before kids get to see therapists like you. They start between the ages of 0-5. Many parents do not know that their children’s teeth are forming before they are born. Although the 0-5 age group is entitled to free dental care, some new mothers are not aware of this.
The dangers of sugary fruit juices, sweetened milk or fizzy drinks are not sufficiently spelt out to new parents. I’m encouraged to see that at least Plunket and other early child support services will be doing more in the future to include information on dental care and the dangers of sugary drinks.
This was an initiative set up by the New Zealand Dental Association, Plunket and Colgate.
The next big problem we have is New Zealanders in retirement.
It’s not fair, but it’s a fact of life, that as you get older, the care of your teeth and gums becomes a bigger problem. In my parent’s day, teeth were extracted and false teeth provided, often as a 21st birthday present!
The baby boomer generation will go into old age with their own teeth, often heavily filled and a number of them missing.
I heard of a couple of old friends the other day. One was in his 90s and close to death. The friend of the dying man, who’d recently, spent all his life’s savings on his teeth, asked his friend:
“Will you do me a favour? Will you tell me if they have free dental care in heaven?”
The dying man replies: “You’re my best friend. I’ll do this for you.”
And then he dies. Next day the friend hears a ghostly voice and realises it’s his old friend.
“I’ve got good news and bad news,” says the ghost. “The good news is that there’s free dental care for everyone in heaven.”
“The bad news is - you’re booked in on Wednesday.”
Most retired New Zealanders (75%) live on their superannuation income alone. People in retirement homes are particularly vulnerable. They often don’t get the treatment they need.
I’m pleased to hear that the Dentist’s Association is about to roll out training for rest home workers on how to better manage dental care in rest homes.
What are the options for affordable dental care?
I believe that affordable dental care for everyone is achievable. Just like I believed that we could have our own New Zealand owned bank - Kiwibank - when everyone told me it couldn’t be done.
Llew’s dream - 90 years ago - of affordable or free care for everyone is closer today than it first appears.
I would like to see dental care brought into New Zealand’s general health system. Our research tell us that it would cost less than $1 billion to finance basic dental care for the whole population. That includes the money we already spend on free visits for under 18 year olds. And it includes the cost of those who end up in emergency departments.
We could raise this money either through income tax, or through a small ACC type earner’s levy in return for a life time of free or affordable dental treatment.
We’ll actually save money by promoting prevention and helping new parents introduce good habits for their children. We would save money by putting fluoride in the water in more places across New Zealand. I know this continues to be controversial, and you have been discussing this at your conference.
The anti-fluoride lobby should let the facts get in the way of their prejudice. On average the addition of fluoride in drinking water reduces tooth decay in children by at least 30% and strengthens the teeth of adults.
We could be on the brink of achieving affordable dental care. It’s possible, it’s affordable and it’s a social tragedy that half our population doesn’t get the dental care they need.
What we don’t have at the moment is the political will to make it happen.
But when you look back at the milestones in dental care over the last 90 years, it hasn’t been politicians who have led the call for affordable care. It’s been people like you.
Llew had to personally lobby Peter Fraser, Minister of Health in the first Labour government to expand the School Dental Service to cover teenagers.
Without people like Llew however, there wouldn’t be any school or community dental service at all. Without people like you, an ex-dental nurse by the name of Annette King wouldn’t have been able to win the argument in parliament to extend free dental care to all under 18 year olds.
She wouldn’t have been able to bring back the training of dental therapists, central to Llew’s dream of free dental care for children.
The next milestone is up to you. You have to go out there and create the political will to make affordable care a reality for all New Zealanders. We must pool our knowledge and our efforts to make a final push.
That’s the only way we will realise Llew’s dream, 90 years ago, of an affordable, high quality dental care system within the reach of every New Zealander.
Jim's E-News, Christmas 2009
17/12/09 17:00 Filed in: Newsletters
I’d like to wish a Happy Christmas and a good new year.
As we head off to spend holiday time with loved ones, and take a break from the pressures of daily life, this will be my last e-newsletter for 2009. It’s been a busy year, and an adjustment for us all to be in opposition. One bad day in government is worth a thousand good ones in opposition because in government you can make decisions which you know will help people and change lives.
Now we don’t have control of the purse strings. But we are making the most of our days in opposition to hold this government to account. It’s not only what the National-led government does that matters - it’s what it doesn’t do. And I don’t see any bright ideas or new initiatives which will create jobs, or support those with big new ideas to help us trade better with the world.
I see indecisive leadership from John Key, budget cuts, cuts to ACC, and looming problems with coalition partners like Act on the extreme right, and the Maori Party which seems hell-bent on being the party of Maori corporations and the affluent elite.
2010 will be a busy year. We will keep the pressure on this government to see more done for ordinary New Zealanders, Maori and Pakeha. We won’t let them get away with sitting back and hoping that ‘she’ll be right’ after a year of recession. New Zealand needs bigger ideas and more guts than a government which so far has come up with one idea; a national cycle pathway.
That’s not good enough after a year in government.
Enjoy the holiday season, and we’ll be back in 2010 ready to hit the ground running.
Here’s a summary of recent news items to give you an idea of what I’ve been doing in parliament and the electorate recently.
Feedback on dental care issues for New Zealanders
After the last e-news went out, I have received a range of communications, letters and emails on ways our dental system could be improved. It is generally agreed that cost is a major barrier for access to ongoing dental care for many people on fixed and low to middle incomes. Within this group, it is especially hard on the elderly, pregnant women, pre-school children and those with large families.
I am working on getting a reasonably accurate estimate of the total costs for New Zealand of the current dental system. This is quite complex but I have well informed contacts in the dental industry willing to help work on solutions.
Once dental care is free, then of course, there would be system changes. In the short-term check-ups would increase, followed by extra treatments. Over a period, the increase in check-ups and care of delayed treatments would result in improved dental health and lower treatments costs. Indeed, this is one of the reasons for making dental care free.
Correspondents are also agreed on the need for a parallel publicity campaign for people of all ages to have regular check-ups and cut down on the consumption of sugar (beverages, sweets, pastry) in favour of vegetables and fruit.
I will be in touch on the dental campaign early in 2010.
Copenhagen - New Zealand could be taking a lead, but it’s not
John Key looked indecisive when he couldn’t decide whether or not to go to Copenhagen. He only decided to go once a hundred other world leaders had bought their tickets. What kind of leadership is that?
It’s as if he accepts his presence is incapable of making any difference to whether or not the conference on climate change is a success or not. But it’s important to be there for the photo-op!
It’s that kind of non-committal attitude that is likely to see the Copenhagen talks end without agreement on clear targets for reducing emissions of carbon. John Key will have to take some responsibility for that.
As prime minister he’s making an art form out of not doing anything much (but always with a smile).
New Zealand could have been at the top table showing we were serious about climate change.
But this half-hearted participation at Copenhagen undermines our reputation for being leaders in this area and producing clean green food.
It didn’t help that John Key went to Copenhagen with a revised ETS (Emission Trading Scheme) which leaves the New Zealand taxpayer out of pocket. Big polluters aren’t paying, ordinary Kiwis are.
Someone has to pay for pollution; under National, Kiwi families will pay. The gap they have left for taxpayers to meet is $110 billion.
That’s $92,000 for each working Kiwi family.
North Shore Mayor gets unfair drubbing by Key’s cheer squad
Mayor Andrew Williams is being given an unfair drubbing by John Key and the media. He has been texting the Prime Minister about the Auckland Super City, and why not? John Key is a North Shore MP. So far, no-one has produced any evidence that these texts are abusive or that they were at an excessively late hour.
The media are showing their bias and are not listening to what Mayor Williams is saying. They are repeating the lines given to them by John Key on timing of text messages and that Mayor Williams messages have been ‘aggressive’. They are ignoring William’s criticisms of the National-ACT legislation for Auckland’s new Super City.
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 as Mayor of the North Shore? The media should be following up on that.
Andrew Williams has produced his phone records but it makes no difference. John Key is not being asked to prove his allegations about Williams. That doesn’t seem fair to me.
Andrew Williams is an outspoken mayor – but then all good mayors are outspoken. That’s their job!
He’s just trying to stop unacceptable and unpopular legislation as it’s rushed through the House before people have a chance to understand the 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 see more of it in 2010.
Intensive dairy farming in the MacKenzie basin - our reputation is at risk
Reputation is everything. Copenhagen hasn’t helped. Neither has the application from three companies in the MacKenzie Basin a few weeks ago to use stall-based farming. This is the kind of farming where cows can be kept in boxes for 24 hours a day, eight months of the year.
When I was Minister of Agriculture in the last Labour-Progressive 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. 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 were so fat, of course, because 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 international consumers, and our reputation is at risk.
Farming is a sunset industry? Yeah right....
You can understand why farmers are worried about the future. Stall-based farming is a silly idea. Farmers need good ideas. New pastures, crops, animal species and techniques won't invent themselves, which is why we need a government prepared to invest in research and development.
We currently spend around 1.2 percent of GDP on Research & Development. Our peers like Denmark, however, invest three percent.
When I was Minister of Agriculture in the Labour-Progressive government, I put millions of dollars into research and development in the primary sector.
Pioneering cleaner more cost-effective ways of farming makes sense for our farming sector and for the environment.
Unfortunately within the first few weeks of government John Key and the National party got rid of the Fast Forward Fund and $700 million set aside for research and development. Since then not one cent of the promised funding has been spent on research and innovation.
I’ll be keeping the pressure on this government in 2010 to put funds into research and development because if we don’t, New Zealand will miss out. The global population is growing, and food production will continue to be a huge industry. We can’t afford not to be a leader in this market.
Brash hardly mentions farming in his 2025 Report
In Don Brash’s entire 150-page 2025 Taskforce Report, farming got just 24 words.
Back in the eighties, the late David Lange said, "Farming is a sunset industry.” Looks like Don Brash agrees. Why is the National-led government letting Don Brash loose on the economy? Because of a coalition deal with Act.
The bad news is that Don Brash is going to keep getting paid for another few years to come up with yet more destructive and back to the future ideas.
Twenty years ago, politicians in both main parties thought that instead of growing export products, we were going to be the Switzerland of the South Pacific - an economy based on banking, earning a lavish income from financial services.
We can get a glimpse of what might have been by taking a look at Iceland now - a small, isolated country, with a strong primary industry that set out to become a global financial capital. Imports of beautiful luxury cars boomed.
And when those industries all fell over in the recession, which part of the Icelandic economy is still trundling along today? What’s left of its fishing industry.
All we need to do, Dr Brash says, is follow the same prescription of deregulation, speculation and monetary irresponsibility that wrecked Iceland.
There are ministers in this government who agree with that.
But instead of going back to the failed policies of the past, there are some less disruptive things we can try.
First, we need deeper pools of capital, so that each worker is more productive. Workers in capital intensive jobs earn much more. Every Australian job is backed by 1.2 times as much capital as the average job in developed countries. Every job in New Zealand has just 0.7 per cent as much capital.
Second, we need more science, research and innovation.
But after this government axed the Fast Forward Fund which we had set up with $700 million set aside for research and development, it has spent a year doing nothing except creating another body called the ‘Primary Growth Partnership’. The PGP hasn’t allocated a single cent to research and development yet, and it doesn’t appear that any will be invested in the near future.
The Minister of Agriculture, David Carter said in parliament recently that he was ‘adhering to his own strict timetable’ for research and development funding, which appears to be to do nothing and spend nothing on primary sector research and development
We need a culture change to tackle binge drinking
Some people get very defensive when you talk about the need to change our attitudes to binge drinking. Columnist Karl du Fresne accused me and Professor Doug Sellman of being alarmist and presumably making him feel bad about drinking.
But his attack on us was a misguided reaction to what is a well-informed attempt to do something about binge drinking in New Zealand.
His personal drinking habits aren’t under attack and no-one is counting how many glasses of wine he consumes each day. I believe that three glasses of wine every day over many years constitutes heavy drinking. So does the World Health Organisation. Karl doesn’t think so, and that’s his choice.
For the record the 700,000 heavy drinkers Professor Doug Sellman and I referred to represent 25% of the New Zealand population who drink and are over 16 years old, not a percentage of the total population.
It’s ironic that Mr du Fresne’s column came out almost the same week that 300 leaders of the medical profession in New Zealand issued a statement against our heavy drinking culture, and the New Zealand and Australian police launched a massive police operation against alcohol-fuelled crime.
The New Zealand police commissioner Howard Broad said "While legislation and enforcement are key, changing the drinking culture is crucial.” We need a culture change, especially as we head into the holiday season, and commentators like Karl du Fresne have to decide whether they want to help or hinder.
Kiwibank leads big banks back to local services
It’s ironic. Kiwibank was created in part as a response to the monopoly behaviour of the big banks who were abandoning small communities throughout New Zealand. Today, those banks have seen the error of their ways and are returning to a small town near you.
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.
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.
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.
It’s taken Westpac more than ten years to realise this, but at least 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.
As we head off to spend holiday time with loved ones, and take a break from the pressures of daily life, this will be my last e-newsletter for 2009. It’s been a busy year, and an adjustment for us all to be in opposition. One bad day in government is worth a thousand good ones in opposition because in government you can make decisions which you know will help people and change lives.
Now we don’t have control of the purse strings. But we are making the most of our days in opposition to hold this government to account. It’s not only what the National-led government does that matters - it’s what it doesn’t do. And I don’t see any bright ideas or new initiatives which will create jobs, or support those with big new ideas to help us trade better with the world.
I see indecisive leadership from John Key, budget cuts, cuts to ACC, and looming problems with coalition partners like Act on the extreme right, and the Maori Party which seems hell-bent on being the party of Maori corporations and the affluent elite.
2010 will be a busy year. We will keep the pressure on this government to see more done for ordinary New Zealanders, Maori and Pakeha. We won’t let them get away with sitting back and hoping that ‘she’ll be right’ after a year of recession. New Zealand needs bigger ideas and more guts than a government which so far has come up with one idea; a national cycle pathway.
That’s not good enough after a year in government.
Enjoy the holiday season, and we’ll be back in 2010 ready to hit the ground running.
Here’s a summary of recent news items to give you an idea of what I’ve been doing in parliament and the electorate recently.
Feedback on dental care issues for New Zealanders
After the last e-news went out, I have received a range of communications, letters and emails on ways our dental system could be improved. It is generally agreed that cost is a major barrier for access to ongoing dental care for many people on fixed and low to middle incomes. Within this group, it is especially hard on the elderly, pregnant women, pre-school children and those with large families.
I am working on getting a reasonably accurate estimate of the total costs for New Zealand of the current dental system. This is quite complex but I have well informed contacts in the dental industry willing to help work on solutions.
Once dental care is free, then of course, there would be system changes. In the short-term check-ups would increase, followed by extra treatments. Over a period, the increase in check-ups and care of delayed treatments would result in improved dental health and lower treatments costs. Indeed, this is one of the reasons for making dental care free.
Correspondents are also agreed on the need for a parallel publicity campaign for people of all ages to have regular check-ups and cut down on the consumption of sugar (beverages, sweets, pastry) in favour of vegetables and fruit.
I will be in touch on the dental campaign early in 2010.
Copenhagen - New Zealand could be taking a lead, but it’s not
John Key looked indecisive when he couldn’t decide whether or not to go to Copenhagen. He only decided to go once a hundred other world leaders had bought their tickets. What kind of leadership is that?
It’s as if he accepts his presence is incapable of making any difference to whether or not the conference on climate change is a success or not. But it’s important to be there for the photo-op!
It’s that kind of non-committal attitude that is likely to see the Copenhagen talks end without agreement on clear targets for reducing emissions of carbon. John Key will have to take some responsibility for that.
As prime minister he’s making an art form out of not doing anything much (but always with a smile).
New Zealand could have been at the top table showing we were serious about climate change.
But this half-hearted participation at Copenhagen undermines our reputation for being leaders in this area and producing clean green food.
It didn’t help that John Key went to Copenhagen with a revised ETS (Emission Trading Scheme) which leaves the New Zealand taxpayer out of pocket. Big polluters aren’t paying, ordinary Kiwis are.
Someone has to pay for pollution; under National, Kiwi families will pay. The gap they have left for taxpayers to meet is $110 billion.
That’s $92,000 for each working Kiwi family.
North Shore Mayor gets unfair drubbing by Key’s cheer squad
Mayor Andrew Williams is being given an unfair drubbing by John Key and the media. He has been texting the Prime Minister about the Auckland Super City, and why not? John Key is a North Shore MP. So far, no-one has produced any evidence that these texts are abusive or that they were at an excessively late hour.
The media are showing their bias and are not listening to what Mayor Williams is saying. They are repeating the lines given to them by John Key on timing of text messages and that Mayor Williams messages have been ‘aggressive’. They are ignoring William’s criticisms of the National-ACT legislation for Auckland’s new Super City.
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 as Mayor of the North Shore? The media should be following up on that.
Andrew Williams has produced his phone records but it makes no difference. John Key is not being asked to prove his allegations about Williams. That doesn’t seem fair to me.
Andrew Williams is an outspoken mayor – but then all good mayors are outspoken. That’s their job!
He’s just trying to stop unacceptable and unpopular legislation as it’s rushed through the House before people have a chance to understand the 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 see more of it in 2010.
Intensive dairy farming in the MacKenzie basin - our reputation is at risk
Reputation is everything. Copenhagen hasn’t helped. Neither has the application from three companies in the MacKenzie Basin a few weeks ago to use stall-based farming. This is the kind of farming where cows can be kept in boxes for 24 hours a day, eight months of the year.
When I was Minister of Agriculture in the last Labour-Progressive 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. 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 were so fat, of course, because 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 international consumers, and our reputation is at risk.
Farming is a sunset industry? Yeah right....
You can understand why farmers are worried about the future. Stall-based farming is a silly idea. Farmers need good ideas. New pastures, crops, animal species and techniques won't invent themselves, which is why we need a government prepared to invest in research and development.
We currently spend around 1.2 percent of GDP on Research & Development. Our peers like Denmark, however, invest three percent.
When I was Minister of Agriculture in the Labour-Progressive government, I put millions of dollars into research and development in the primary sector.
Pioneering cleaner more cost-effective ways of farming makes sense for our farming sector and for the environment.
Unfortunately within the first few weeks of government John Key and the National party got rid of the Fast Forward Fund and $700 million set aside for research and development. Since then not one cent of the promised funding has been spent on research and innovation.
I’ll be keeping the pressure on this government in 2010 to put funds into research and development because if we don’t, New Zealand will miss out. The global population is growing, and food production will continue to be a huge industry. We can’t afford not to be a leader in this market.
Brash hardly mentions farming in his 2025 Report
In Don Brash’s entire 150-page 2025 Taskforce Report, farming got just 24 words.
Back in the eighties, the late David Lange said, "Farming is a sunset industry.” Looks like Don Brash agrees. Why is the National-led government letting Don Brash loose on the economy? Because of a coalition deal with Act.
The bad news is that Don Brash is going to keep getting paid for another few years to come up with yet more destructive and back to the future ideas.
Twenty years ago, politicians in both main parties thought that instead of growing export products, we were going to be the Switzerland of the South Pacific - an economy based on banking, earning a lavish income from financial services.
We can get a glimpse of what might have been by taking a look at Iceland now - a small, isolated country, with a strong primary industry that set out to become a global financial capital. Imports of beautiful luxury cars boomed.
And when those industries all fell over in the recession, which part of the Icelandic economy is still trundling along today? What’s left of its fishing industry.
All we need to do, Dr Brash says, is follow the same prescription of deregulation, speculation and monetary irresponsibility that wrecked Iceland.
There are ministers in this government who agree with that.
But instead of going back to the failed policies of the past, there are some less disruptive things we can try.
First, we need deeper pools of capital, so that each worker is more productive. Workers in capital intensive jobs earn much more. Every Australian job is backed by 1.2 times as much capital as the average job in developed countries. Every job in New Zealand has just 0.7 per cent as much capital.
Second, we need more science, research and innovation.
But after this government axed the Fast Forward Fund which we had set up with $700 million set aside for research and development, it has spent a year doing nothing except creating another body called the ‘Primary Growth Partnership’. The PGP hasn’t allocated a single cent to research and development yet, and it doesn’t appear that any will be invested in the near future.
The Minister of Agriculture, David Carter said in parliament recently that he was ‘adhering to his own strict timetable’ for research and development funding, which appears to be to do nothing and spend nothing on primary sector research and development
We need a culture change to tackle binge drinking
Some people get very defensive when you talk about the need to change our attitudes to binge drinking. Columnist Karl du Fresne accused me and Professor Doug Sellman of being alarmist and presumably making him feel bad about drinking.
But his attack on us was a misguided reaction to what is a well-informed attempt to do something about binge drinking in New Zealand.
His personal drinking habits aren’t under attack and no-one is counting how many glasses of wine he consumes each day. I believe that three glasses of wine every day over many years constitutes heavy drinking. So does the World Health Organisation. Karl doesn’t think so, and that’s his choice.
For the record the 700,000 heavy drinkers Professor Doug Sellman and I referred to represent 25% of the New Zealand population who drink and are over 16 years old, not a percentage of the total population.
It’s ironic that Mr du Fresne’s column came out almost the same week that 300 leaders of the medical profession in New Zealand issued a statement against our heavy drinking culture, and the New Zealand and Australian police launched a massive police operation against alcohol-fuelled crime.
The New Zealand police commissioner Howard Broad said "While legislation and enforcement are key, changing the drinking culture is crucial.” We need a culture change, especially as we head into the holiday season, and commentators like Karl du Fresne have to decide whether they want to help or hinder.
Kiwibank leads big banks back to local services
It’s ironic. Kiwibank was created in part as a response to the monopoly behaviour of the big banks who were abandoning small communities throughout New Zealand. Today, those banks have seen the error of their ways and are returning to a small town near you.
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.
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.
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.
It’s taken Westpac more than ten years to realise this, but at least 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.
Jim's E-News, November 2009
16/11/09 15:00 Filed in: Newsletters
DENTAL CARE ISSUES FOR NEW ZEALANDERS
I am involving myself in a project to raise the profile of, and extend the services for, dental treatment in New Zealand.
The cost of dental treatment is a significant barrier to lifetime dental care and as a result, neglected teeth and gums are a hidden but critical problem for New Zealand’s healthcare system which needs to be urgently addressed.
It is my strongly held view that a high quality, accessible and affordable dental system should be part of the general medical health system in New Zealand. This would provide a public-private partnership which would enable all of our citizens from their earliest years right through to their last, to have their teeth cared for by qualified dental professionals at an affordable cost.
From one end of New Zealand to the other I have been made aware of the importance of this issue to a large number of our citizens, young and old, and it is well beyond time when action rather than words was seen and heard to be taking place.
I would be grateful to hear from you by email, fax or letter about your thoughts on this vital issue.
Contact me here.
ACC IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD - BIKERS RALLY, CHRISTCHURCH
Let’s be clear about one thing; New Zealand has the best accident compensation scheme in the world. It’s not broken, so why try and fix it; and no matter what Nick Smith tries to tell you - it’s not broke. It has reserves of money. It has over $11 billion of reserves, and last year it collected $1 billion more in levies, than it spent on claims.
Bikers are being unfairly targeted – Nick Smith wants them to pay three times as much in ACC levies as they are paying today.
Today motorcyclists are paying about $252. Tomorrow they will be paying $735.
This is outrageous. And it is completely unnecessary - because ACC can pay its bills without making them pay three times as much.
ACC was set up as a no-fault system to be run by a government-owned company so that everyone who has an accident gets looked after, and at a lower cost than overseas.
It was never intended to penalise certain groups that it saw as ‘high risk’ - otherwise where do you stop? If its bikers today, why not old people who are more likely to fall over than anyone else; why not 6 year boys who play rugby and are more likely to get hurt than kids playing chess?
The point of the scheme was to avoid this situation, and draw on the overall resources of the whole community. So we all pay a bit, and no one is disadvantaged. Every one avoids the very large lawyers’ bills and insurance company profits that have to be paid under a private insurance system.
We gave up the right to sue under this system, in return for the fair treatment of injured people.
The National-led government is playing dirty with the figures. It’s insisting that all imagined accidents in the future should be paid right now by people like the bike riders. But this wasn’t what ACC was set up to do. It was always intended to be a ‘pay as you go’ scheme.
That means the levies received in any one year, pay for the accidents in that year. And that system has been working fine - in fact ACC has even managed to put aside significant resources.
The real agenda here, is to set up ACC for a gradual return to a privately run insurance scheme. Scaremongering about costs is just the Trojan horse. And inside the Trojan horse is a bunch of lawyers and foreign insurance companies, licking their lips and looking forward to getting their hands on your levies!
I am entirely opposed to any private scheme. And I totally reject the National government’s attempt to make bikers pay three times as much.
URGENT INQUIRY INTO MONETARY POLICY NOW
We should 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.
The National-led government and its coalition partners refused to take part in the inquiry, with the PM cynically calling it a ‘stunt’ from the opposition parties.
I don’t believe in the “nothing we can do” stance of this government. We could be looking to remove the incentives for those buying investment properties. Banks need to 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 export goods 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.
With the National-led government complacently sitting on the sidelines, New Zealanders will be the losers for it.
To download the banking inquiry report, go here, or get in touch with my office.
BANKING INQUIRY BACKGROUNDER AND FINDINGS
The ‘big four’ Australian banks control nearly 90% of banking assets in New Zealand. The three New Zealand owned banks have 4% of banking assets.
Have the Banks made a profit?
The combined profits of the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks now exceed the combined profits of all other companies listed on the stock exchange NZX 50 series.
In 2008 Banks earned $3.26 billion; the earnings of the NZX 50 were $2.89 billion.
Did the Banks pass on the cut to the Official Cash Rate (OCR)?
The Reserve Bank cut the OCR from its high of 8.25 % in mid 2008, to only 2.5% today.
But the overseas owned banks reduced interest rates by less than the fall in the OCR. 1% margin in interest rates was not passed on to bank customers. 1% extra interest added $787 million to costs for New Zealand businesses; and 1% higher margin on loans added $460 million to the net interest costs to the farming sector.
The biggest cost was in the housing sector: 1% extra interest cost added over $1.6 billion to mortgage repayments.
New Zealand businesses are suffering
In 2009 bank lending for home loans rose about $3.2 billion (to $164.8 billion). Meanwhile business lending fell by about $3 billion (to $78 billion.)
The effects on the farming sector have been negative
Federated Farmers interest rates survey in June 2009 found that farm business overdraft interest rates had fallen an average of 2.68 % since December 2008. Meanwhile the OCR was cut by 4%.
Ordinary New Zealanders had problems paying their mortgages
In five years, Budgeting and Family Support Services has only seen one family lose their house in a mortgage sale. But in the first three months on 2009, fifteen families had already lost their home.
Have the Banks contributed to overseas debt and a housing bubble?
In the last ten years, personal lending has almost doubled, from $60 billion to $105 billion; most of the lending has been for housing.
Home loans now make up 55% of bank lending, up from 35% ten years ago. The banks borrowed more money to fund property price increases which contributed to a rise in overseas debt.
Between 2003 and 2009 net overseas liabilities rose from $100.6 billion to $176.3 billion; that’s a rise from 76.8% of GDP to 98%.
What have the banks got to do with our volatile exchange rate?
High overseas borrowing has impacted on the exchange rate which is subject to high volatility. The export sector makes up roughly 30% of GDP - about $40 billion per year but suffers the most from currency instability which means uncertain returns.
PROGRESSIVE SUBMISSION ON THE LAW COMMISSION PAPER: ‘ALCOHOL IN OUR LIVES’ I am under no illusion about the challenge involved if we are to seriously reduce the harm caused by alcohol. But doing nothing is not an option.
Alcohol is by far the most damaging drug in the country. It causes between $2-$3 billion dollars worth of economic and social harm each year. The personal cost to families and loved ones is incalculable. How can we measure the cost of a family tragedy?
One of the most damaging drugs we face right now is not even illegal; our kids can buy it in the local dairy; they play sports and have it promoted to them all the time; they see it on TV, on billboards and hear about it on the radio.
The abuse of alcohol amongst our young people is on the rise and it’s destroying lives.
I have been working with others like Dr Doug Sellman of the Otago School of Medicine to raise awareness of the damage that alcohol is causing. We have a unique opportunity right now to do something, through the Law Commission’s review of the legislation to do with the drinking age, the availability and the advertising of alcohol.
Did you know that every advertisement seen by a young person increases the number of drinks they consume by 1%. They become customers for life. And people like you end up picking up the pieces.
Currently, $200,000 per day is spent on marketing and advertising alcohol. About half the marketing is spent on sponsorship.
I welcome the Law Commission’s issues paper which gives New Zealanders a unique opportunity to reform the legal framework in which alcohol is sold, advertised and promoted.
It gives us a chance today to do more to protect New Zealanders from the harm caused by the abuse of alcohol.
The Progressive Party submission calls on the Law Commission to do more in its final recommendations to guide law makers on how to further curb alcohol advertising, particularly to the most vulnerable New Zealanders - the young. I would like to see more options put forward by the Law Commission on how we can greatly reduce the availability of alcohol to young people. I have also given my opinions and made comments on every option put forward in the Law Commission’s paper, ‘Alcohol in our Lives’.
For the full submission: go here.
For my speech to the National CAYAD hui, go here.
"Ten things the alcohol industry won't tell you about alcohol"
Alcohol Action are holding their last two last meetings this week with presenter Dr. Doug Sellman.
The meetings are at: CHRISTCHURCH: Art Gallery Theatre, Tuesday 17th November, 7.30-9pm PORIRUA: Helen Smith Community Room, Wednesday 18th November, 7.30-9pm
There is still time to get in a late submissions to the Law Commission.
Use milk payout to farmers to strengthen industry
It's important that the increase in Fonterra's payout to farmers is used to strengthen the industry, and not squandered.
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, for example by stronger investment in research and development, and strenthening balance sheets to reduce our exposure to rapacious overseas owned banks.
A generation of kids will be lost – New Zealand must do more
Launch of the Mutima Project in Christchurch
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.
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.
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 but you can’t do much business development if people don’t have enough to eat or clean water to drink.
I want to see the National government do more about bad governance and corruption in some of the poorest countries and 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.
For the speech, go here.
Who owns the ASB? Not us.
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’.
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.
For the release, go here.
An ‘unfortunate arrangement’
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. This makes Mr English’s position as finance minister very difficult. I have been in the same position as Mr Key, in having to make a decision on the future of the Minister. A precedent for the right thing to do has been set.
I 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.
For the release, go here.
I am involving myself in a project to raise the profile of, and extend the services for, dental treatment in New Zealand.
The cost of dental treatment is a significant barrier to lifetime dental care and as a result, neglected teeth and gums are a hidden but critical problem for New Zealand’s healthcare system which needs to be urgently addressed.
It is my strongly held view that a high quality, accessible and affordable dental system should be part of the general medical health system in New Zealand. This would provide a public-private partnership which would enable all of our citizens from their earliest years right through to their last, to have their teeth cared for by qualified dental professionals at an affordable cost.
From one end of New Zealand to the other I have been made aware of the importance of this issue to a large number of our citizens, young and old, and it is well beyond time when action rather than words was seen and heard to be taking place.
I would be grateful to hear from you by email, fax or letter about your thoughts on this vital issue.
Contact me here.
ACC IS THE BEST IN THE WORLD - BIKERS RALLY, CHRISTCHURCH
Let’s be clear about one thing; New Zealand has the best accident compensation scheme in the world. It’s not broken, so why try and fix it; and no matter what Nick Smith tries to tell you - it’s not broke. It has reserves of money. It has over $11 billion of reserves, and last year it collected $1 billion more in levies, than it spent on claims.
Bikers are being unfairly targeted – Nick Smith wants them to pay three times as much in ACC levies as they are paying today.
Today motorcyclists are paying about $252. Tomorrow they will be paying $735.
This is outrageous. And it is completely unnecessary - because ACC can pay its bills without making them pay three times as much.
ACC was set up as a no-fault system to be run by a government-owned company so that everyone who has an accident gets looked after, and at a lower cost than overseas.
It was never intended to penalise certain groups that it saw as ‘high risk’ - otherwise where do you stop? If its bikers today, why not old people who are more likely to fall over than anyone else; why not 6 year boys who play rugby and are more likely to get hurt than kids playing chess?
The point of the scheme was to avoid this situation, and draw on the overall resources of the whole community. So we all pay a bit, and no one is disadvantaged. Every one avoids the very large lawyers’ bills and insurance company profits that have to be paid under a private insurance system.
We gave up the right to sue under this system, in return for the fair treatment of injured people.
The National-led government is playing dirty with the figures. It’s insisting that all imagined accidents in the future should be paid right now by people like the bike riders. But this wasn’t what ACC was set up to do. It was always intended to be a ‘pay as you go’ scheme.
That means the levies received in any one year, pay for the accidents in that year. And that system has been working fine - in fact ACC has even managed to put aside significant resources.
The real agenda here, is to set up ACC for a gradual return to a privately run insurance scheme. Scaremongering about costs is just the Trojan horse. And inside the Trojan horse is a bunch of lawyers and foreign insurance companies, licking their lips and looking forward to getting their hands on your levies!
I am entirely opposed to any private scheme. And I totally reject the National government’s attempt to make bikers pay three times as much.
URGENT INQUIRY INTO MONETARY POLICY NOW
We should 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.
The National-led government and its coalition partners refused to take part in the inquiry, with the PM cynically calling it a ‘stunt’ from the opposition parties.
I don’t believe in the “nothing we can do” stance of this government. We could be looking to remove the incentives for those buying investment properties. Banks need to 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 export goods 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.
With the National-led government complacently sitting on the sidelines, New Zealanders will be the losers for it.
To download the banking inquiry report, go here, or get in touch with my office.
BANKING INQUIRY BACKGROUNDER AND FINDINGS
The ‘big four’ Australian banks control nearly 90% of banking assets in New Zealand. The three New Zealand owned banks have 4% of banking assets.
Have the Banks made a profit?
The combined profits of the ‘big four’ Australian owned banks now exceed the combined profits of all other companies listed on the stock exchange NZX 50 series.
In 2008 Banks earned $3.26 billion; the earnings of the NZX 50 were $2.89 billion.
Did the Banks pass on the cut to the Official Cash Rate (OCR)?
The Reserve Bank cut the OCR from its high of 8.25 % in mid 2008, to only 2.5% today.
But the overseas owned banks reduced interest rates by less than the fall in the OCR. 1% margin in interest rates was not passed on to bank customers. 1% extra interest added $787 million to costs for New Zealand businesses; and 1% higher margin on loans added $460 million to the net interest costs to the farming sector.
The biggest cost was in the housing sector: 1% extra interest cost added over $1.6 billion to mortgage repayments.
New Zealand businesses are suffering
In 2009 bank lending for home loans rose about $3.2 billion (to $164.8 billion). Meanwhile business lending fell by about $3 billion (to $78 billion.)
The effects on the farming sector have been negative
Federated Farmers interest rates survey in June 2009 found that farm business overdraft interest rates had fallen an average of 2.68 % since December 2008. Meanwhile the OCR was cut by 4%.
Ordinary New Zealanders had problems paying their mortgages
In five years, Budgeting and Family Support Services has only seen one family lose their house in a mortgage sale. But in the first three months on 2009, fifteen families had already lost their home.
Have the Banks contributed to overseas debt and a housing bubble?
In the last ten years, personal lending has almost doubled, from $60 billion to $105 billion; most of the lending has been for housing.
Home loans now make up 55% of bank lending, up from 35% ten years ago. The banks borrowed more money to fund property price increases which contributed to a rise in overseas debt.
Between 2003 and 2009 net overseas liabilities rose from $100.6 billion to $176.3 billion; that’s a rise from 76.8% of GDP to 98%.
What have the banks got to do with our volatile exchange rate?
High overseas borrowing has impacted on the exchange rate which is subject to high volatility. The export sector makes up roughly 30% of GDP - about $40 billion per year but suffers the most from currency instability which means uncertain returns.
PROGRESSIVE SUBMISSION ON THE LAW COMMISSION PAPER: ‘ALCOHOL IN OUR LIVES’ I am under no illusion about the challenge involved if we are to seriously reduce the harm caused by alcohol. But doing nothing is not an option.
Alcohol is by far the most damaging drug in the country. It causes between $2-$3 billion dollars worth of economic and social harm each year. The personal cost to families and loved ones is incalculable. How can we measure the cost of a family tragedy?
One of the most damaging drugs we face right now is not even illegal; our kids can buy it in the local dairy; they play sports and have it promoted to them all the time; they see it on TV, on billboards and hear about it on the radio.
The abuse of alcohol amongst our young people is on the rise and it’s destroying lives.
I have been working with others like Dr Doug Sellman of the Otago School of Medicine to raise awareness of the damage that alcohol is causing. We have a unique opportunity right now to do something, through the Law Commission’s review of the legislation to do with the drinking age, the availability and the advertising of alcohol.
Did you know that every advertisement seen by a young person increases the number of drinks they consume by 1%. They become customers for life. And people like you end up picking up the pieces.
Currently, $200,000 per day is spent on marketing and advertising alcohol. About half the marketing is spent on sponsorship.
I welcome the Law Commission’s issues paper which gives New Zealanders a unique opportunity to reform the legal framework in which alcohol is sold, advertised and promoted.
It gives us a chance today to do more to protect New Zealanders from the harm caused by the abuse of alcohol.
The Progressive Party submission calls on the Law Commission to do more in its final recommendations to guide law makers on how to further curb alcohol advertising, particularly to the most vulnerable New Zealanders - the young. I would like to see more options put forward by the Law Commission on how we can greatly reduce the availability of alcohol to young people. I have also given my opinions and made comments on every option put forward in the Law Commission’s paper, ‘Alcohol in our Lives’.
For the full submission: go here.
For my speech to the National CAYAD hui, go here.
"Ten things the alcohol industry won't tell you about alcohol"
Alcohol Action are holding their last two last meetings this week with presenter Dr. Doug Sellman.
The meetings are at: CHRISTCHURCH: Art Gallery Theatre, Tuesday 17th November, 7.30-9pm PORIRUA: Helen Smith Community Room, Wednesday 18th November, 7.30-9pm
There is still time to get in a late submissions to the Law Commission.
Use milk payout to farmers to strengthen industry
It's important that the increase in Fonterra's payout to farmers is used to strengthen the industry, and not squandered.
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, for example by stronger investment in research and development, and strenthening balance sheets to reduce our exposure to rapacious overseas owned banks.
A generation of kids will be lost – New Zealand must do more
Launch of the Mutima Project in Christchurch
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.
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.
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 but you can’t do much business development if people don’t have enough to eat or clean water to drink.
I want to see the National government do more about bad governance and corruption in some of the poorest countries and 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.
For the speech, go here.
Who owns the ASB? Not us.
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’.
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.
For the release, go here.
An ‘unfortunate arrangement’
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. This makes Mr English’s position as finance minister very difficult. I have been in the same position as Mr Key, in having to make a decision on the future of the Minister. A precedent for the right thing to do has been set.
I 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.
For the release, go here.