Posts by Sacha
-
couldn't be more predictable
right wing government
-
his official portrait (small size for humble families) that hung above my Nanna's pin-cushion
I doubt we'll ever have another leader whose photo graces most homes
-
How's writing, now that you're here?
-
stuff breathed into my infant ear about Mickey Savage
Got to earn a burial spot like this
-
Sofie - Kai Tahu in the mainland, Ngai Tahu for us northerners.
Hope you're right by Sunday
-
Welli does very well out of hosting our government (per capita) - but that has nothing to do with Auckland's current local governance changes.
-
Don't think anyone's dropped this one here yet (maybe laughing too hard). Fran O'Sullivan sees NZ as "the oil sheikhs of the Pacific" if we play our cards right, swallows the industry kool-aid and slags Kiwis for opposing conservation mining.
Redeems herself a bit by suggesting a sovereign fund like Norway (and I had the pleasure of meeting some of their parliamentarians carefully researching how to use it to offset the impact of ageing on future income support).
Economic Development Minister Gerry Brownlee has mentioned the parlous state of the NZ economy which will face fiscal deficits for another six years.
Brownlee has suggested extra income from mining in particular will help the Government meet its revenue objectives.
But he would be better advised to focus on the potential to accumulate investment funds from future petro dollars and minerals royalties.
If the MED projections are correct, the Government could make $10 billion a year from petroleum alone to tuck into a fund which could produce investment income for this country.
By comparison it has taken the NZ Super Fund nearly seven years to accumulate $15.9 billion.
-
Welfare changes fail evidence test says Regulatory Impact Statement.
"There is no research currently available which accurately quantifies the size of the behavioural response from these changes in policies. This prevents estimates, with the degree of accuracy required, from being made of the number of people who will move from benefit to work over a year, as a result of the proposed changes. The inability to determine firm numbers of people shifting from benefit to work as a result of these changes is due to the difficulty of separating out the effect of the policy changes from the effect of changes in other influences such as economic and labour market settings (e.g. employment growth, minimum wage increases)."
Oh, and fails rights test too.
Work testing sole parents on the domestic purposes benefit (DPB) is an unjustifiable breach of human rights, Attorney-General Chris Finlayson advised Parliament today.
-
And again, ARTA's budget is what proportion of the total transport expenditure by Auckland's current local authorities?
Compared with the proposed Transport CCO's 54% of the new Council's total budget.
Hopefully the attention on this lately means that the government will back down and insert some real accountability into the arrangements so that the CCOs are actually bound to follow strategic direction as set out in Council strategies and plans. Like ARTA is now.
Otherwise this will continue to be a live issue all the way to the next national elections, whenever they may be held.
-
back-of-the-envelope finger-in-the-wind calculations bear no resemblance to reality
Damn good work at Te Standard.
$18 billion: the estimated value of the minerals in the areas of Schedule 4 land the government wants to open up. That’s three years of current mining production, hardly enough to make a significant impact on the economy when extracted over several decades.
$6.8 billion: revenue of the mining industry (including oil and gas) in 2008. It paid just $500 million in wages and salaries and only $70 million in royalties. Even if it doubled in size, mining would be an insignificant contributor to government revenue and the country’s wages. Mining companies made a $2 billion pre-tax profit in 2008, most of the big miners are foreign-owned and exported their profits.*
...
5: years before any mine would start producing. By that time Treasury expects the budget deficit will be all but gone, so the argument that we need mining to pay for public services is wrong. And it’s doubly wrong when you consider the small income the government would get from this mining.less than 2%: Mining’s contribution to GDP. Even if the mining industry were somehow doubled (and it couldn’t get near that on current plans) it would be an insignificant increase to GDP and government revenue. Remember, this is the Government’s one big economic idea.
Less than 1%: The royalty the government gets for letting foreign companies dig up and take away our minerals on our land.
Zero: the likelihood of mining on Great Barrier. It’s classic bait and switch. Aucklanders get all upset about Great Barrier. The government ‘listens’ and decides to let foreign companies dig up more of our wealth for themselves in places like Stewart Island and Kahurangi instead.
Priceless