We have been saying it on the blog for some time. This government is crashing what was, only a short time ago, a very well managed economy. The signs have been there for a while, but one of the most worrying aspects of recent times is that interest rates are continuing to fall. This means that the Reserve Bank has limited options to stimulate the economy if things get really bad.

I am not an economist, but I have been surprised at how keen Adrian Orr has been to cut interest rates over the last year or so. It seems we might be heading towards zero interest rates… which presents a whole raft of problems for the economy that we have never seen before.

So, what do we do? It seems the answer is to give away free money.

No… I am not joking.

New Zealanders could be in line for a cash payout, alongside temporary tax cuts if the economy crashes, according to advice from Treasury.

Treasury warned Finance Minister Grant Robertson that he would have to shoulder a large responsibility for getting the economy back on track, given the Reserve Bank, which New Zealand usually leans on in a financial crisis, has limited capacity to cut interest rates.

This is how this government is going to ruin this country. They seem to think that money just grows on trees, and can be happily splashed around as they see fit. Welcome to the Greece of the South Pacific.

Treasury’s plan for Robertson would mean temporarily cutting taxes and increasing spending to pump extra money into the economy until things improved, but some economists are concerned it doesn’t go far enough.

In January, Treasury briefed Grant Robertson on the best way to maintain New Zealand’s living standards through an economic downturn.
Because New Zealand, like the rest of the world, has arguably not fully recovered from the last recession, Treasury warned that a conventional response to a GFC-style shock is “likely to be impossible”.
That means two things: the Reserve Bank might try “unconventional monetary policies, currently untested in New Zealand,” and Robertson could open up the cheque book, spending billions of dollars on building new infrastructure, including “increased capital spending, tax cuts, and/or cash transfers to households”.

So the government is in such a good cash position that it can afford to give tax cuts and throw cash at people? Really? So why did they cancel National’s tax cuts then, when obviously, there was no need? And if they can afford to pay for all the much-needed infrastructure projects, why were so many Roads of National Significance cancelled? Why have extra fuel taxes been imposed to pay for transport projects when the government doesn’t need the money?

There is something very strange and very wrong about these Treasury proposals. I cannot decide if it is all simply pie in the sky, or if Gabriel Mahklouf was a total idiot, determined to bankrupt the country with no holds barred.

After all, it was under his watch that Treasury went through its ‘moon feelings’ project… not to mention that hacking of the website that wasn’t and that probably tells you all you need to know.

Treasury doesn’t give specific details of what it recommends, but says that “effective fiscal stimulus should be timely, targeted, and temporary”.
It says the “best case” stimulus would focus on tax cuts and stimulus, alongside spending money on building infrastructure, which would also boost the economy.
It recommends giving money to households, particularly those in need, saying that tax changes or cash transfers (meaning a payment of some kind, possibly a benefit) meet its policy objectives of boosting the economy, but in a way that achieves equity.

Long before we get to this point, the tax take will have already fallen, and government coffers will not be as full as they once were, which gives the government only one alternative. They will have to borrow heavily.

Usually in New Zealand the heavy lifting during a financial crisis is done by the Reserve Bank. It will cut interest rates, essentially making it cheaper to borrow money.
But New Zealand, like most other developed countries is in a bind this time round. Unlike the last recession, where New Zealand’s Official Cash Rate was 8 percent before being cut, New Zealand’s OCR is just 1.5, giving the Bank very little room to cut should it be required.
This is because the last decade of recovery has been far weaker than other recoveries. At every point the economy threatened to tip back into recession, so interest rates were kept low.

Stuff.

I don’t believe splashing around cash is the answer, and spending on large infrastructure projects, while it may have worked in the 1930s, is a different prospect these days, with the extremely regulated environment in which we now live. It will take years to get these projects moving, and will not, therefore, stave off the inevitable economic consequences of a major downturn quickly enough.

If the government’s answer is to simply throw cash around, then heaven help us. We will be repaying the debt this government racks up well into the 22nd century.

I enjoyed reading Matthew Hooton’s article posted by Christie. Like Christie always does, Matthew nails it.

Personally, I would go so far as to say that this would have to be the most fraudulent government I can remember, and I can remember back to  Arnold Nordmeyer’s Black Budget of 1958. This band of losers, like left losers globally, pays no attention to accuracy or truth when it comes to making political statements or to answering interviewers’ questions.

Winston and Jacinda lead the way. Jacinda is either talking meaningless drivel or spouting her ideology. Winston has no hesitation in mouthing off whatever piece of verbiage suits the subject matter at hand. There are many examples of ministers doing the same. They spend most of their time talking the language of hypocrisy. That is fine as far as they are concerned, though, because it’s their parlance. The reasons for this behaviour are many, but incompetence and ideology are two that would be near the top of the list.

The Wellbeing Budget is nothing short of a fraud. There is nothing for your wellbeing about it unless you are one of the nephews on the couch. Beneficiary numbers are up and are we surprised? Carmel Sepuloni could only come up with lame reasons for the increase, such as a rise in the population, when interviewed on ZB. If Carmel were honest she would say it was her policies that have led to the numerical explosion. It’s all about no care and no responsibility.

As Matthew points out, Kiwibuild, the Billion Trees and the Provincial Growth Fund have also turned out to be frauds. Those policies were never going to work in the way intended but taxpayers will now pay a heavy price for their continued implementation.

Jacinda promised no new taxes in her first term. Perhaps she should have prefaced that by saying at least not on a weekly basis. According to Amy Adams, the government has imposed $2 billion worth of new taxes since taking office. This is not only fraudulent but blatantly deceitful.

Corruption, embezzlement, fraud, these are all characteristics that exist everywhere. It is regrettably the way human nature functions, whether we like it or not. What successful economies do is keep it to a minimum. No one has ever eliminated any of that stuff.

Alan Greenspan

The type of economy this government is running means there is little hope of keeping it to a minimum.

Matthew Hooton nails it once again.

For those still committed to reality-based politics, Ardern’s “year of delivery” is as credible as her earlier promise to be “transformational”.
KiwiBuild, the Billion Trees programme and the Provincial Growth Fund handing out only 3 per cent of the money Shane Jones has paraded are the most risible.
More seriously, Ardern appointed herself Minister for Child Poverty Reduction and declared it the reason she entered politics, yet by some measures it has worsened.

Beneficiary numbers and state-house waiting lists are up, with just 656 new state houses completed in 2018/19, compared with 1043, 466 and 732 over the previous three years.
The promise to deliver a Wellbeing Budget based on the Treasury’s Living Standards Framework turned out to be a hoax, with Grant Robertson putting his Budget together in exactly the same way as his predecessors. His decision to increase the Government’s debt limit by $16 billion suggests Steven Joyce was right, pre-election, to talk about a $12b fiscal hole.

That is a stunning list of non delivered items, don’t you think?

Immigration from countries other than Australia is as high as ever, still above 100,000 a year, a massive number for a country of just 5 million people with already failing infrastructure.
At least in Auckland, there is no bold programme to address that infrastructure deficit, with vast bureaucratic effort going into analysing vanity projects like the airport tram rather than radically expanding the existing rail system and optimising the roading network.

On climate change — which Ardern called her generation’s “nuclear-free moment” — spin continues to trump substance, with agriculture potentially going into the Emissions Trading Scheme but with 95 per cent subsidies. Who knew Ardern’s climate “emergency” could be solved by dairy farmers paying just 1c per kilogram of milk solids?
As yet, no decisions have been made on reforming water allocation rights and cleaning up lakes and rivers. Plans for a water tax have gone the same way as Michael Cullen’s capital gains tax.

Well, for once, I am glad about something this government has done… or technically not done, as it looked like they were was going to trash our economy completely by strangling the agricultural sector. Now it might take them 2 terms to wreck the economy instead of just one.

In contrast to Chris Finlayson’s cracking pace, Andrew Little has signed just three Treaty of Waitangi deeds of settlement and made no progress with Ngapuhi. No human remains will ever be recovered from Pike River, whatever Little tells the families.

This was always a lie of outrageous proportions, with the Pike River families being used as political footballs all the way through the ordeal. The West Coast gets what it deserves though… these guys always, always vote Labour.

On ethical issues such as complying with the Official Information Act, answering parliamentary questions and managing conflicts of interest, the Ardern ministry has complied with the maxim that each Government is worse than the one before.

No, Matthew, they are the most open and transparent government of all time… and also the most skillful with a black felt pen…

Ardern may cultivate a brand of almost naive sincerity but those around her are at least as cynical as those around John Key.
They know it will be enough for Ardern to take to social media to declare the year of delivery a triumph and to thank New Zealanders for making it happen. “The Government didn’t do this alone!” the Prime Minister will gush. “We all did this together!”
It will be amplified by those in the traditional media for whom challenging Ardern’s narrative remains verboten. Those who break the taboo will be criticised for not embracing the vibe. Such negativity, her cheerleaders will tell us, is not who we are now.

For those who criticise National and their inability to tear the government to shreds, the next paragraph gives us an inkling into how tough it can be.

In the post-truth era, the Opposition pointing out the sheer emptiness of the Prime Minister’s utterances will achieve no more than the Washington Post frantically fact-checking Trump’s. If Simon Bridges challenges the Prime Minister’s account, he will be ridiculed for looking angry.

A Newspaper.

That is happening already, with National being accused of heresy for questioning the value of declaring ‘climate emergencies’. These guys cannot win in the current environment.

Good on Matthew Hooton for calling out the government’s woeful performance to date, but he is a lone voice. Over on Stuff, on the same day, we have the inevitable puff piece from Tracy Watkins…

Baby Neve Te Aroha Gayford is crawling around the floor of her parents’ Sandringham bungalow when she discovers the big fluffy microphone in our video operator’s bag. She grabs it before her famous mum can stop her and starts making “woof woof” noises.

“There are obvious limitations to what I’m able to do as a first time mum. And that’s something that actually I just had to accept. There’s no point dwelling on that too much.”
The limitations Ardern refers to are “just not being around” for Neve as much as she would like.
“Some days I’ll only see Neve once (a day). Sometimes I won’t see her at all. Sometimes I won’t see her for a couple of days.

Stuff.

Personally, I am sick to death of a sycophantic media trying to keep the worst-performing prime minister in living memory in her job by constantly writing these pathetic articles to bolster her public appeal.

Doesn’t it strike you as worrying that, apart from Matthew Hooton, the rest of the media doesn’t even try to defend the prime minster’s dreadful job performance, but concentrates solely on the fact that she is a first-time mother instead?

What does that tell you about the quality of our government?

 The ‘transformational’ government of the coalition has taken some heavy, self-inflicted hits including the inability to institute a capital gains tax, dropping the Kermadec Island sanctuary, walking back Kiwibuild housing numbers, ousting Curran and Whaitiri and loss of business confidence to name a few.

The most consequential back-down, however, has gone almost unnoticed.  Maybe the MSM just didn’t want to give it any focus as they were obviously big supporters.  It involves a commitment to 100% renewable electricity in New Zealand by 2035,agreed shortly after the 2017 general election between the Labour and Green parties. The policy is in their agreement on confidence and supply.

Late in 2017, Cabinet agreed to set up an interim committee to plan the policy of delivering 100% renewables also establishing a permanent Climate Change Commission, another item in the Coalition agreement.

Shock, horror, the committee came back with a recommendation to drop the 100% renewables policy by 2035.  The Coalition had little option but to agree.  In one fell swoop, a huge hole had been blown in the Coalition’s plans.  James Shaw had a mouthful of dead rats, yet again.  The Greens took a sucker punch.  One of their dearest goals just went ‘poof’ in a haze of CO2.

The “for the public” explanation was that the policy would have increased power prices but done little to reduce emissions.

The reality is that it was a green, wet dream. It would have seriously hurt those on low incomes by sending power prices through the roof and wrecked the viability and competitiveness of our export industries who rely heavily on our relatively low-cost hydroelectric power generation to market their goods offshore. It would have created endless blackouts causing havoc for homes, businesses, urban motorists etc and filled the skyline with more obscene wind machines that kill birds and produce damaging low-frequency sounds. Ironically it would have also had us opening new coal mines to fill the gaps when it is dark, cold and the wind stops.

The country has dodged a bullet.  Beware though as there are others in the gun’s chamber like the Emissions Bill going through the house now.

The hit on the coalition demands more scrutiny.  Of course, we are unable to have a discussion in the MSM – a draconian and sinister misuse of editorial power – so few in the public will see it for what it is – a significant back-down and damage to the extreme green policies of the red, left-leaning Greens and Labour.

The scrutiny would show that much of the environmental policy of the coalition is wishful thinking.  It’s ideology. It’s trumped-up, airy-fairy nonsense that has no basis in sound reputable science or logic.  Nor does it have a place in policymaking.

It’s based on manipulated graphs that turned cooling temperatures into warming temperatures using hidden or distorted data.  It’s based on models produced by geeks that cannot agree between themselves and that in 20 years or so have plotted temperatures so far above actual it’s laughable.

It’s based on a ‘hockey stick’ graph that emerged from one scientist studying the growth rings in half a dozen spruce trees in Siberia and ignoring decades of research into ice cores from multiple international sites that show a medieval warm period hotter than it is now.  (Note: It is Greenland, not Whiteland)

It’s based on fictitious claims of hot days, record temperatures, hottest months, warmest years when in many countries temperatures in the 1930s were several degrees hotter. It’s based on a politician’s movie that contained 35 proven factual errors but won him a handsome bank balance and a share of a Nobel Peace Prize.

It’s based on striking terror into people’s lives, especially the young and vulnerable with wild stories of sea-level rise swamping islands and cities, horror tales of increasing storms, tornadoes, hurricanes, droughts, floods, rain events when all the factual data shows the weather improving over 100 years of records.

It’s also based on the work of pseudo-scientists, who do no original, on the ground research but feed off the most recent outlandish claim and try and better it. It is Ponzi-science.

When you have few facts to back your claims you show an emaciated, scraggy polar bear perched on a melting blob of ice and claim that proves the end of those sweet, cuddly species – a symbol of a doomed civilisation.  No matter that their numbers are increasing to a point where a controlled reduction is discussed because the bears are over-running some areas.

You cannot build a house on the sand and expect it to last.  You cannot build policy on corrupt ideology and falsified science and expect it to perform.

Fortunately the appointed committee told it the way it was – they really didn’t have an option.  The goal of all renewables by 2035 according to the PM is now ‘aspirational’.  Hopefully, it will become ‘expirational’.

Jacinda Ardern is certainly racking up the achievements on her trip to Australia. She has triumphed where few brave souls have ever succeeded: uniting Australia’s two major parties…

Against her.

In these days of hyper-partisanship especially, there are usually not many issues that bring Labor and the Liberals within cooee of each other. However, for once both sides agree: Ardern can shut the hell up.

The Coalition and Labor have united against Jacinda Ardern’s calls to stop the deportation of New Zealanders who have committed offences in Australia.

The New Zealand Prime Minister says the deportation of some convicted criminals born in her country — even if they have resided in Australia for decades — has had a “corrosive” effect on the Australia-New Zealand relationship.

But Anthony Albanese and Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton both defended the longstanding policy this morning.

“We haven’t argued for change in this area,” the Opposition Leader told the Nine Network.

Which is a polite way of saying, “Jacinda, you’re on your own”.

The New Zealand leader said while some deportations were justified, she did not want criminals who had spent most of their lives in Australia in her country.

Oddly enough, Australia doesn’t much want New Zealand’s career criminals and outlaw bikers, either.

The Home Affairs Minister told the Nine Network today there would be no change from the government.

“We need to stand up for Australians and the New Zealand Prime Minister is rightly doing that for her people,” he said.

“But where we have Australian citizens who are falling victim in certain circumstances where people are sexually offending against children for example, we have had a big push to try to deport those paedophiles and people who have committed those crimes.

“I believe strongly that the Australian people would support that stance as well.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/peter-dutton-anthony-albanese-unite-against-jacinda-ardern

Ardern has also gone notably quiet on her previous begging for some photogenic refugees to virtue-signal next to.

Willem Van Spronsen, who attacked an Immigration and Customs Enforcement centre over the weekend, identified himself as a member of the left-wing Antifa movement in his manifesto. He died in a shootout Saturday after storming an ICE centre in Tacoma, Washington, armed with flares and a rifle. Van Spronsen, 69, reportedly attempted to ignite a propane tank on the premises in order to burn down the facility.

What follows is the written manifesto of Willem Van Spronsen:

there’s wrong and there’s right.
it’s time to take action against the forces of evil.
evil says one life is worth less than another.
evil says the flow of commerce is our purpose here.
evil says concentration camps for folks deemed lesser are necessary.
the handmaid of evil says the concentration camps should be more humane.
beware the centrist.

I wonder if Jacinda Ardern is included among his comrades?

[…] to my comrades:

i regret that i will miss the rest of the revolution.
thank you for the honor of having me in your midst.

giving me space to be useful, to feel that i was fulfilling my ideals, has been the spiritual pinnacle of my life.

doing what i can to help defend my precious and wondrous people is an experience too rich to describe.

my trans comrades have transformed me, solidifying my conviction that we will be guided to a dreamed of future by those most marginalized among us today. i have dreamed it so clearly that i have no regret for not seeing how it turns out. thank you for bringing me so far along.

i am antifa, i stand with comrades around the world who act from the love of life in every permutation. comrades who understand that freedom means real freedom for all and a life worth living.

keep the faith!
all power to the people!
bella ciao

don’t let your silly government agencies spend money “investigating” this one. i was radicalized in civics class at 13 when we were taught about the electoral college. it was at that point that i decided that the status quo might be a house of cards. further reading confirmed in the positive. i highly recommend reading!

i am not affiliated with any organization, i have disaffiliated from any organizations who disagree with my choice of tactics.

the semi automatic weapon i used was a cheap, home built unregistered “ghost” ar15, had six magazines. i strongly encourage comrades and incoming comrades to arm themselves. we are now responsible for defending people from the predatory state. ignore the laws of arming yourself if you have the luxury, i did.

Since this manifesto is a clear call to arms I expect our Chief Censor will be rushing to ban this document and make keeping copies of it subject to a 14-year jail sentence.

It is many months since I read the other manifesto, but I do not recall any call to arms or any encouragement to manufacture “home built unregistered ghost” firearms in the manifesto that is too dangerous for us to read.

An Auckland couple were given 90 days notice 4 days before the July 1st deadline for higher levels of insulation, because the landlord had not completed the work on time.

Unfortunately, if the landlord had not completed the work on time, he had no choice. It is now illegal to have tenants in a rental property where the insulation does not meet the new legal standards, and the tenant can demand a payment of $4000 for failure to comply.

Please note that the payment goes to the tenant, not the government.

A couple who were evicted from their home of 10 years four days before new rules to make rental properties warmer and drier came into effect are considering legal action against their landlord.

On Thursday, the pair from Henderson in West Auckland received a letter saying they had to leave the house within 90 days so the homeowner could renovate it to meet insulation standards.

Landlords had until Monday to ensure their rental properties met the standards, which require that rental properties must have underfloor and ceiling insulation. Those who have failed to comply with the regulations can be forced to pay their tenants up to $4000.

The wife said the house had been in a state of disrepair for some time – they had put buckets out every time it rained because the roof leaked, but multiple property managers had overlooked the issues.

They were still living there, though. Why? Because the rent reflected the state of the property, and the few rentals available.

“I have to say, we feel pretty gutted about it all.”
To make matters worse, the woman’s husband, who is in his 70s, has heart problems and the couple doubted they could find suitable rental accommodation in their price range because they have dogs.

So, they have dogs, they are on a limited income, so they are not in a great position. Nevertheless, the offer to dob in the landlord was just too tempting.

They planned to ask for the $4000 from their landlord because the landlord had failed to bring the property up to standard by the July 1 deadline and would then look at legal action.

Phil Twyford is trying to push a law that says that landlords cannot just evict tenants without a good reason (although failing to bring a property up to the required legal standard in time must qualify as a good reason) but this has not happened yet. In other words, the landlord is within his rights to give the tenant notice… and it is likely that there is nothing that they can do about it. Yet.

Auckland Tenants’ Protection Association co-ordinator Angela Maynard said kicking tenants out to avoid complying with the law seemed like “a rather stupid idea” for landlords.
She believed tenants who had been evicted over the standards could file an application with the Tenancy Tribunal for retaliatory notice.
A retaliatory notice is where a landlord issues a tenant with an eviction notice in retaliation to a tenant standing up for their rights.

Stuff.

This will be an interesting case if it does ever get to court. A landlord is not allowed to have tenants living in a property that is not compliant. In this case, it seems that the landlord has opted to do a number of renovations at the same time… but didn’t want to risk being fined $4000 for non compliance.

He had obviously read his tenants well.

Yesterday, I was in my favourite Asian store, buying multiple boxes of Chinese teabags. Normally, of course, they would give me a plastic bag. They didn’t offer one, but I had momentarily forgotten about the total ban. I almost asked for one… and then stopped. The last thing I would want would be to get them into trouble for trying to look after their customers, in case there was a climate Nazi in the queue behind me. So I left the store, juggling boxes of teabags, reminding myself for the millionth time to bring bags when I go shopping.

What I don’t like here is the insidious attitude in these policies, both of which came in on the same day, that the authorities will do nothing, but instead will rely on people dobbing in errant landlords and errant shopkeepers.

Since when did we live in a society where people dobbed in others to the authorities, for relatively minor infringements – particularly the plastic bags?

This government is pitching ordinary people against each other. Just like China under Chairman Mao, or Russia under Stalin, we can now dob in people we don’t like, even if they have done nothing wrong. What is stopping one of the other Asian stores in Lower Hutt from dobbing in one of the others, just to ruin their business?

All of this sounds like the Stasi to me.

What do you think, Comrade?