Posts by Marc C
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Forgetting what we didn't know, in reply to Sofie Bribiesca,
I do not quite get whether you mean that in relation to Key or me, they have certainly not made my life any easier over recent years, I can attest to that.
-
Hard News: Forgetting what we didn't know, in reply to Nick Russell,
Come on, that is a simplistic thought, and negative. Labour’s and perhaps to some degree also the Green’s challenge and problem has been to present a unified, convincing and clear policy alternative, a platform and progressive direction, that they do not sway from.
But after much talk of reviewing policy, of developing new policy, after the last election, we had too little clear policy announcements, or policy formation even. And what was announced was rather half baked, like the tertiary education policy offering everyone three years “free” education, we got some “thoughts” about a UBI, which was quietly laid to rest again, we still don’t know whether “Kiwi Build” will be maintained, and the Greens seem to be very careful also.
Instead they have almost desperately been looking for faults with the government, with Key and so, of which there have been enough, but nothing was attached in a clear, concerted and resolute manner. A bit tit for tat here and there, a bit nagging there, a bit stinging there, but no clear attack line.
Besides of showing failures of a government the opposition does of course need to present itself as an alternative government in waiting. We are still waiting for that, not because of the attacks, the people are simply not convinced of leadership and direction, I fear, particularly with Labour. James Shaw is still a bit of an apprentice, so he needs to learn more of the ropes. Bolder policy, firm, reliable goals and smarter solutions, that is in my view what is missing.
And besides of all that, the “missing million” (it will never be all or most of them), at least a fair number of them, must be attracted, involved and reached out to, this does NOT seem to happen.
So do not simply come with criticism of the opposition doing its job, attacking the government, the problem lies elsewhere. Voters simply stick with Key and Nats, because they are not convinced enough of the alternative.
Thinking people love Key so much, they forgive everything he does, is as much a myth as thinking the mythological “centre” is the only part of society that will change the political landscape.
Sadly Labour seem to think they just need a new IT system, and that will do the trick, but they are misled, there are other issues.
-
Hard News: Forgetting what we didn't know, in reply to Nick Russell,
I do not have unreasonably high expectations that anything comes out that will harm Key so much he has to resign as PM. But I think the Panama Papers deserve to be taken seriously and represent an opportunity to do some more investigative work. If some stuff was done that just underlines what we know of Key already, and that may reveal a bit more of his “smiling assassin” side, people may gradually start to realise, he is not just Mr Sunny-boy Do Lucky, who they should let get away with anything.
Sorry, I do not subscribe to the “nothing to see, move on” approach. The GFC should have reminded us what merchant banks were and still are about. But, oh, when was that again?
-
"But the database already tells us some more subtle things. For instance, while it lists only 47 Mossack Fonseca-connected offshore entities in New Zealand, there are 547 in the Cook Islands, 9611 in Niue and 13,418 in Samoa."
Well, well, well, if that does not tell us something!
I am still intrigued by that John Doe manifesto, where he mentions Key in relation to the Cook Islands tax haven Mecca. I wonder whether Key was involved in some consultations and activities before he became PM, while he worked for Merril Lynch or so. Some research may be worthwhile to dig further into his past, and whether advice was given to some small Pacific Island governments then.
And re Garner and Gower, are they perhaps not just envious and angry that their employer and they were left out of the collaborative work that TVNZ, RNZ and Nicky Hager did together? They presented more on the Panama Papers than Mediaworks would have been able to get their hands on.
-
Polity: Is being a tax haven worth it?, in reply to Alfie,
"New Zealand's international reputation taking a hit is one thing. But the average Joe Blow in the street will probably go meh and forget all about it because it has no affect on his life."
This is what I fear is already happening. Watching the hopeless 'Breakfast' on TV One and that ridiculous eternal, or late puberty displaying Paul Henry on his show this morning, the MSM presenters and many "reporters" do already seem to put the Panama Papers into the ticked off basket. The challenges put to Labour's Andrew Little and the Green's James Shaw are now in the form of questions like: "But have you found anything illegal?" As the way the law is, and as the way the system is ALLOWED to operate (thus far), the activities revealed are in the form of the foreign owned trusts held in New Zealand not strictly illegal. They are legal, as far as that no criminal activity may have been committed by those benefiting from or administering the trusts.
If tax evasion has occurred, it is illegal activities that happened in other jurisdictions, and that is nothing Key and industry insiders seem too concerned about. The law enforcement and prosecution in other jurisdictions will have to study the revealed new information, and to do checks, and see, whether any laws were broken, whether money may have been laundered and so forth.
Only if that gets proved, and only if it can be tied together with trusts here, will there be further discussion of this topic. Most people will otherwise not bother too much, as it will indeed not affect them directly.
And listening to Andrew Little on Morning Report, where Guyon Espiner gave him some hard time, asking him, why he thought ALL should be called to be "grubby" who hold such trusts, Labour have an uphill battle again.
Sadly it seems that the industry and vested interest holding businesses have all the experts on their side, as they are paid by them, and the opposition can only hope to find the odd academic at a university, who may offer some qualified comments on all this.
Academics again go into details and particular language, to which the ordinary Kiwi may not relate. Andrew Little did struggle to deliver arguments, I felt.
As for the benefits of these trusts now in discussion, I think that Andrew is basically right, as it is clear from the setup of all this, it is used to hide wealth assets behind complex networks. But instead of abolishing it altogether, a more refined approach may be needed, simply by starting to tighten regulations and creating a transparent register with more details. As Key is the expert in appearing to do something by doing as little as possible, most will settle to his "show activism" in this area, like in other areas.
-
It was interesting to listen to the following interview Guyon Espiner had with one tax expert on Morning Report this morning:
"Robin Oliver is a former Deputy Commissioner of Policy at Inland Revenue and now a director, and tax advisor, at Oliver Shaw"Listen from 4:45 on and hear how Robin Oliver and others advised the government on 22 Jan. 2015 that they saw a need for greater regulatory controls of such trusts.
He commented that he was told by the government that they had greater priorities. Add that together with John Key's "former lawyer" Whitney, and what came out of industry lobbying against an IRD proposed review of foreign owned NZ trusts, and we get the impression the government was simply not interested in addressing anything to do with foreign trusts held in New Zealand.
This morning even Paul Henry did in his breakfast show seem to be a bit more curious and concerned than normal when talking with John Key, and it was even admitted by Key that his "former lawyer" is still working for him, now not as a registered, practicing lawyer, but as a "consultant", looking after the same affairs he had looked after before for our dear PM.
With what we learned to day, I think it is fair to say, this is all rather murky and suspicious what has been going on for years, and even Fran O'Sullivan admitted that the Cook Islands are still allowing things that were supposed to be cleaned up after the revelations that came with the "Winebox Affair" Winston Peters had exposed.
John Key is dodgy, he looks dodgier than ever, and this time his attempts to discredit Nicky Hager as nothing but a "leftist conspiracy theorist" may not succeed.
As we have well established old boys networks operating in New Zealand, I bet Key did not want to disadvantage and restrict old buddies who operate trusts, some perhaps overseas contacts he may still have from his many years working in merchant banking.
I wonder what "advice" he gave to clients when working for Merryl Lynch and so?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Key"In 1995, he joined Merrill Lynch as head of Asian foreign exchange in Singapore. That same year he was promoted to Merrill's global head of foreign exchange, based in London, where he may have earned around US$2.25 million a year including bonuses, which is about NZ$5 million at 2001 exchange rates.[4][14] Some co-workers called him "the smiling assassin" for maintaining his usual cheerfulness while sacking dozens (some say hundreds) of staff after heavy losses from the 1998 Russian financial crisis.[5][14] He was a member of the Foreign Exchange Committee of the New York Federal Reserve Bank from 1999 to 2001.[15]"
Given his CV I bet he knows much more than he admits to know, as his previous employment will have required him to know all the ins and outs about tax saving systems and opportunities, including "tax havens" and what countries may offer tax avoidance.
And we know, the government has other priorities, such as dishing out to beneficiaries, tenants of Housing NZ, and other clientele, who would never bother vote for them. Paula Bennett has come to the rescue again, announcing another 41 million for assisting people needing emergency housing. Who really cares about those trusts that John and his many mates have? -
Access: Disability as a wicked policy problem, in reply to Rosemary McDonald,
Yes, scary indeed, what Minister Coleman answered to Annette King. I watched Question Time today, and hence know what this was about.
All this bold promotion of putting more into Pharmac did make me think instantly, I wonder where they will cut spending to fund for extra medicines to be bought and sold.
This government is a master in creating spin and in applying propaganda, and the largely underfunded, under-resourced, and under-skilled media does not even notice what goes on, it seems. That is unless they choose to be ignorant, as they do not want to upset the government.
It is the same BS we get with this incessant talk about "wrap around services" for those with sickness and disability on benefits. When actually examining what they have done, it boils down just to increased funding of some more case managers to offer "intensive case management", which means, more funding and efforts to move people off benefits, into whatever jobs there are, no matter what the medium to longer term outcomes.
There is no convincing and available information on extra health spending for those with disabilities on benefits, and as we see and hear from Coleman today, they even seem to be cutting spending on people with disability.
Read the OIA info offered in the posts found via the links below, which MSM have NOT reported on:
-
The situation here in Auckland, where I live is becoming increasingly grim for renters. I have been on Trade Me and find few 2-brm units under $ 400, and a humble one near where I live now even advertised for $ 500 per week. This is for just a unit, not a house, and having searched for units, flats and so under $ 350 per week, the result is meagre, only one and a half pages of ads on offer.
The government and Nick Smith are living in lala land when they say there is no crisis at all, as increasing numbers of people can no longer afford to live in Auckland. I read stories in the Central Leader that teachers are moving out of the city, as they cannot afford paying for housing, and so we have a shortage of teachers, early childhood teachers and even centres, with an ever increasing population here.
It is time to vote these criminals out of office, as what they allowed to happen is criminal in my view.
As for the polls they so often present, I do not give them much value, as I have over the last year been asked by EMR for my views, and it seems they are desperate to get people answer their endless questions that take about half an hours time to respond to. Who bothers putting up with that polling, much not even about political matters, rather on business and consumer topics. If they simply keep asking the same people again and again, and disproportionately that may be older and securely housed people with own homes, it is no wonder we get the poll results we get presented.
It is time Labour and Greens make more efforts to attract and interest the missing million, there is no alternative to win more of them over to vote, as otherwise we may not get any change of government for some time.
-
Polity: A short history of half-baked…, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Who was "blaming" immigrants for the shortage of labour to build homes? It is bizarre how so many read stuff into words I used, which were not even meant to say what is assumed. I am astonished, indeed confused rather.
-
Thanks for this article, I have long been worried about certain “think tanks” and vested interest funded or resourced initiatives and organisations that present often somewhat one-sided “research” and findings. They seem to have the peers that suit their ends, to review stuff, and then give it the scientific credentials.
Silos there are all over the place, and depending on the government of the day, some are larger than others, and some are kept for longer than others.
The dominant thought silos I see under our present government are stuff I worry about, as they just love that “market solves everything” idea, which in my view is certainly ideological. The evidence seems to come from selected few, convenient sources, which I am sure, will in future years be considered worthy to be questioned for their supposed merits.
It takes time for mistakes and flaws to be seen and then admitted to, often “trials” and new approaches will simply suddenly vanish from the public attention, and quietly get abandoned, as if they never existed in the first place. That perhaps is the arts of politics and government, in its application and implementation.