Jim Anderton: Not the retiring type

The New Zealand Herald has not reported anything on whether or not the ACT Party Leader, Rodney Hide, is going to retire at the next election.

I am surprised.

The ACT Party, which has always been in Opposition and never for even five minutes joined Cabinet where you can actually achieve substantial things for people, has been sitting comfortably in Parliament and issuing press statements for over a decade.

With National clearly leaking reports to the media about how the Maori Party is its first choice of a coalition agreement, you would think this might be a good time for ACT to retire, but apparently no.

ACT MPs seem to like being on the taxpayer pay roll even though they don't actually do anything significant. Their productivity output is near zero, and certainly the lowest of the eight parties in Parliament. And that is saying something when you consider that New Zealand First and United have Parliamentary representation.

Meanwhile, Progressives were delighted to read that Jim is far from ready to retire and is just getting into his stride. I think Jim is at the age that the U.S. President Ronald Reagan was when he commenced his eight year presidency - and Jim is in his prime by current Asia-Pacific standards with just eight years in cabinet under his belt and with a wealth of experience and achievements. And Jim doesn’t have to use cue cards for his televsion appearances or be given a map to be shown where France and Germany are.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10444779

Challenging times all the more reason for Left government

We have known for ages that the 2008 election would be fought in "challenging" economic times of high interest rates and a high exchange rate - reflecting the incredibly strong employment and economic growth experienced in New Zealand since 2000.

http://www.progressive.org.nz/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=2412

The fact that next year's campaign will be held in a difficult economic environment is a great opportunity for the centre-left because when the media gets serious about Election 2008 and starts examining what party leaders have to say - that will be the time to remind voters , and teach new voters , what "a National Government" actually means in challenging times.

The record of the current crop of National front-bench M.P.s is that they used any old excuse, when they were in government, to cut National Superannuation, to introduce new user-pay charges in health and in education and to sell-off tax-payer owned assets to new overseas owners.

Any old excuse at all is enough for a National-led government to hit middle income and low income families and to hit them hard whereas a centre-left government that has planned for the future ( for example, by running large surpluses in the good times) cushions those most vulnerable in society from being bashed just because we are going through a slow-down.

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=29271

Labour-Progressive government is flexible in hard times

It is interesting that when the Reserve Bank Governor recently announced a rise in the Official Cash Rate (which means higher floating mortgage rates and higher fixed term rates too) he highlighted that the biggest new development worrying him about the future inflation track was the extraordinarily high prices that our dairy farmers are getting for their exports.Around 80% of spending in our economy is totally out of the control of the government, but this Labour-Progressive government has been absolutely resolute in its management of its tax and spending policies ("fiscal" policy) over the past eight years to run very large surpluses (the largest in the world) precisely because we were always thinking ahead to times like we have today.

By running a surplus equal to 3 per cent or 4 per cent of GDP, that is by putting away millions of dollars a day into the New Zealand Superannuation Fund to secure all of us a better retirement in the future, the Labour-Progressive government has been withdrawing demand from the economy - that is, this government has always helped the Reserve Bank's job of controlling inflation pressures.

And the Labour-Progresive government is also flexible. That is why Budget 2007, for example, was a budget for these challenging times - the multi-billion dollar employment initiative known as the Business Tax Package could be afforded because we cancelled personal income tax threshold changes which would be inappropriate at this particular time in the economic cycle.

But what of the National Party, which opinion polls suggest could win, next year's election? Is National changing its policies in light of current economic conditions? Is National showing it is flexible to take account of current needs and present realities?

Not according to John Key and Bill English. Oh no! In spite of the high exchange rate which is cutting into many exporters' profits, the inflexible, ideological and reckless National Party still threatens all of us with "significant income tax cuts" in its first budget. That is not in the best interests of New Zealand at this time.

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=29149

Why do the extreme right wing target Dr Cullen?

Members of the Progressive Party are familiar with how our party's predecessor, the NewLabour Party, was formed in 1989 when a large group of then Labour Party rank and file members - led by then backbench Sydenham MP Jim Anderton, could not stay in a government that was cutting income taxes dangerously, running large fiscal deficits and selling strategic national assets like Telecom, Kiwibank (PostBank), Air New Zealand and the like.

http://www.progressive.org.nz/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=157

It is very hard for younger readers to believe this, but in the late 1980s a bunch of ACT Party people managed to some how take control of the Labour Government. Those were pre-MMP days and a two-party system and these things happened.

The deliberations around the Cabinet table of that 1984-1990 Labour Government were of course not made public, but we do have insights into some of the huge fights that took place there between those on the centre-left like against the far-right - insights, for example, from the late David Lange's autobiography.

Dr Cullen, for example, was a feared cabinet minister ( by the Right) because he challenged the absurd (ACT-like) theories of that period.

The "business lobbies" that refuse to honestly tell the public what the implications of National's big spending, big tax-cutting and big borrowing policies actually mean, seem more than happy to tell journalists off-the-record that Dr Cullen is "damaging" the government because he is - to quote just one newspaper article, "scrooge-like".

It is absolutely critical to the country that the centre-left not be tempted into the fantasies of the National Party which is promising what is unsustainable: indiscriminate tax cuts that we know from 30 years' experience has reduced household savings rates, and which could only possibly be funded via yet more offshore borrowing by the central government.

We still have $40 billion dollars worth of government debt inherited from previous National governments. With the population ageing, and the challenges ahead of us from climate change, this country cannot afford for one second to dream that we can have significant income tax cuts. If anything, the truth is that income taxes will need to rise as this century progresses.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4090371a6160.html
_
Why does US favour nuclear-weapon armed Pakistan over NZ

I was thinking today how odd it is that the United States government goes out of its way to give special privileges and get out the kid gloves when dealing with the hardly-democratic regime with weapons of mass nuclear destruction, Pakistan, but refuses to remove the incredible punitive barriers against our farm exports to the U.S. consumer markets when we don't have any nuclear weapons.

We've had our nuclear-free status in law for 20 years, comply with international law in regard to nuclear weapons, and aren’t run by a military dictatorship which allows its secret service to co-operate with the Taleban and a host of other reactionary organisations that have declared the United States to be their number one enemy. What do we have to do - adopt the policies of Pakistan?

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/488120/1177466

_ If Chubb wants out, time for State to take control

Chief Ombudsman John Belgrave has now issued his report in the wake of the battering to death of 17-year-old Liam Ashley by fellow prisoner George Baker in the back of a prison van in August 2006. The report found that the Department of Corrections failed in its fundamental responsibility to keep Liam safe.

Achievable national standards for prisoner transport vehicles needed to be set and Chubb - the firm contracted to carry out prisoner transport - need to comply with those standards. If Chubb wants out - then good riddance - it is time the State took control for what it is responsible for.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10445114

SOEs have behave as socially responsible businesses

Since the death of Auckland mother Folole Muliaga, the Labour-Progressive government has announced that electricity retailers are to be subject to new guidelines for dealing with consumers having difficulty paying their bills and who face possible disconnection. This is work in progress.

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0706/S00188.htm

ENDS

© Scoop Media