All posts tagged David Parker

Superprofits versus Supersocialism

Both ‘Superprofits’ and ‘Supersocialism’ are exaggerated terms, but the power debate – as much about ruling the country as about about electricity – has become a highly charged superdebate.

There is more at stake than whether we will get a few dollars off our power bills. It may be critical in deciding who runs the next government, and is in part an ideological battle between capitalism and socialism.

The stakes were raised yesterday when business groups issued a critical letter – PDF of letter – and NZ Herald reports in Power plan an ‘ambush’:

Ten business groups led by Business NZ yesterday issued an open letter to Labour and the Greens criticising the policy – which the two political parties argue may reduce power prices for industrial and commercial users – and have asked them to withdraw it.

The business groups said they were “particularly” concerned the policies would have a “chilling effect on investment across the entire economy”.

David Farrar and co. comment at Kiwiblog: Major Electricity Consumers ask Labour and Greens to drop their nationalisation policy.

Labour’s ‘Eddie’ at The Standard hasn’t addressed the letter directly but continues his campaign of trying to discredit critics in Why First NZ Capital wants you to keep paying too much for power and Why Brian Gaynor wants you to keep paying too much for power, with modest levels of discussion.

UPDATE: ‘Eddie’ has address this now in on Why Phil O’Reilly wants you to keep paying too much for power.

Labour MPs are distracted by Parekura Horomia’s tangi so have been quiet, although David Parker commented:

He said the letter “repeats the National Government’s scaremongering about investment”.

“The NZX stock exchange is up since the announcement. There is no investor flight or fear. It is irrational and damaging to markets and the New Zealand economy to claim there is.”

Parker was reported as saying he knew more about markets than Phil O’Reilly of BusinessNZ, and put out a media release attacking O’Reilly:

Phil O’Reilly open letter wrong on many counts – Parker

“The letter from Mr O’Reilly does not cure the current problems in the uncompetitive electricity market. Prices have increased since the independent report from Professor Wolack found $4.3 billion of overcharging. The system must be fixed.

“Currently super-profits are made on the back of our public resource – free water. This must be addressed if power bills are to be lowered. Mr O’Reilly again offers no effective solution.

“There are several other mistakes in the letter. There are no subsidies involved. It is remedying overcharging and will increase retail competition, and enable new entrants into generation.

Mr O’Reilly has made no effort to contact Labour to discuss this policy. If he had some of his errors would have been avoided,” says David Parker.

That’s ironic considering Parker’s policy was released without any effort to discuss it with business groups.

And according to Whale Oil Labour corrected Parker’s original release:

How embarrassing

Correction: at Labour’s request this replaces the earlier press release on this matter.

As for the Greens, Russel Norman is still overseas on leave, and Clint seems to have muzzled Gareth Hughes, but Clint himself fought back yesterday:

Clint Smith ‏@ClintVSmith 

Biz NZ’s extraordinary attack on Green/Labour plan to lower power prices shows they know it’s popular & it’ll work, ending rentier profits

@georgedarroch it’s pretty telling, eh? They’re advocating for rentier companies’ ‘right’ to parasite off real NZ businesses and families

Familiar parrot lines.  Clint later tries to talk down a poll result (see Roy Morgan poll bounce)…

Clint Smith ‏@ClintVSmith 

latest Roy Morgan. did 1/17 NZers switch left to right in last fortnight or just normal statistical variation w Nat trend down?

…but the swing against Greens and Labour should worry him. But the business letter didn’t seem to worry Metiria Turei in Greens respond to Business New Zealand open letter:

The Green Party will not be withdrawing its popular plan to reduce power prices for Kiwi families and businesses, Green Party Co-leader Metiria Turei said today.

“The NZ Power plan proposed by the Greens and Labour will lower power prices for Kiwi families and businesses. That will mean warmer homes, a healthier population, and more jobs. We are declining Business New Zealand’s request that we withdraw this popular plan,” said Mrs Turei.

“The Greens make no apologies for wanting to get power prices down to a fair level. Business New Zealand and National seem to think that electricity companies’ profits matter more than lower power bills for families and businesses.

Turei continued with familiar talking points, and concluded:

“The Greens are a democratic party and we won’t have our policy choices dictated to us by big business. We will make our policy choices based on what is best for New Zealand, its people, its economy, and its environment. NZ Power fits the bill,” said Mrs Turei.

The claim “based on what is best for New Zealand” is obviously just a Green view, they often seem to think their own convictions are uncontestable. But there are many opinions about what might be best for the country.

I also saw comments on Twitter suggesting that as National wouldn’t discuss with Greenpeace so why should Greens discuss with business groups.

I think when it comes to the election crunch voters will be thinking more about economic and business issues in New Zealand than they will worry about whaling in remote oceans.

The power debate will continue, largely between capitalists – National and business interests – versus what is seen as Labour backing more socialist Green policies.

A super heated battle between Superprofits and Supersocialism.

2 Comments
by Pete George on May 3, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on May 3, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/05/03/superprofits-versus-supersocialism/

Shane Jones “swallowing dead rats”

Shane Jones looked like he was uncomfortably swallowing dead rats when he was interviewed on Q + A yesterday.

Labour continue to pass the parcel (or hot potato) in their promotion of their “big Kahuna” power policy.

  • David Shearer did a joint launch with Russel Norman.
  • David Parker was interviewed on The Nation a week ago.
  • Grant Robertson had interviews and issued press releases through the week (Shearer was out of the country).
  • It was Shane Jones’ turn to front up on Sunday’s Q + A.

Jessica Mutch asked Jones if he thought Shearer’s joint press conference with Norman launching similar-ish power policies was a good idea.

JESSICA Do you or do you not think it was a good idea?

SHANE Yeah, no, no, the fact that the Greens and Labour sat together and talked about moderating power prices for the benefit of industry and the households is good optics.

JESSICA Steven Joyce put out a press release last night saying that the Greens are having a lot of influence and saying “more middle-of-road MPs like Shane Jones are now isolated and forced to recite the anti-growth agenda”. What’s your response to that?

SHANE No, well, anyone who’s got a sliver of knowledge about me knows that I’m a firm believer in growth. There will be occasions where we continue to have a different position with the Greens, but, look, Steven Joyce-

JESSICA But does Steven Joyce have a point?

SHANE He’s just being hysterical. It’s pretty sad that he’s having to recite my name at a National Party-

JESSICA So you’re not having to swallow dead rats here?

SHANE No, it’s not how politics works. You have your say. You may be a bit frustrated, etc. I mean, I’m a Maori politician. I live with frustration. And then once having arrived at a position, then you go out, you robustly sell it, and then you convince the public that this is good for the economy, this is good for households and the people who are against it are tainted because they’re paid by the government to oppose our policy.

JESSICA So what you’re basically saying is you have to suck it up and go out and sell Labour’s policy.

SHANE Without a doubt. You don’t-

JESSICA Even if you don’t believe in it?

SHANE No, no, no, no, no. What you do is you have your debate and you’ll never ever completely agree with everything behind the scenes, but you show loyalty, and unless the voters believe that you’re a united team, then why would they ever support you?

Labour have tried to look united with Greens to promote a credible  image of Government-in-waiting, but they don’t even look united amongst themselves.

Jones waffled around the topic but looked far from convincing. Neither Shearer nor Parker had looked comfortable when it was their turn.

The Labour “team” has looked like a procession of reluctant individuals – are they all swallowing dead rats in climbing on board the Green machine?

Video – Shane Jones on Labour’s power plan (10:06)

Full Transcript – Q+A: Transcript of Shane Jones interview

 

 

1 Comment
by Pete George on April 29, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 29, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/29/shane-jones-swallowing-dead-rats/

Labouring with political vapidity

Labour have a serious communication problem. Their obsession with repetitive media managed messages delivered by bland bodgies threatens their existence as a political power.

Their vapid messengers have become as appealing as a flat beer. Labour’s fizz has all but evaporated.

Gareth Hughes’ “Hey Clint” moment did more then reveal how much some MPs reply on their media managers, it reinforced the impression that much of what many MPs say is vapid party parroting. Hughes stumbled and fumbled when he forgot his carefully practised lines.

Grant Robertson is leading Labour’s defence of it’s NZ Power policy. He has posted this at Red Alert:

Power to the People

Posted by  on April 26th, 2013

If you wanted a reason to know why we need to do something about power prices, look no further than the lead story in today’s Dominion Post. 44% of people in the survey are living pay day to pay day. The cost of living is taking its toll as unemployment stays high and wages are not keeping pace. Raewyn Fox from the Family Budgeting Services Federation said they had seen a 60% increase in those needing financial support and advice in the last two years. And yes, she highlighted power prices as one of the causes of financial stress.

One of the reasons I am really proud of New Zealand Power as a policy is that it will put money back into the pockets of ordinary New Zealanders.  It is a hugely significant change to the way our electricity system is run. Its not something that we have gone into lightly, but New Zealanders have been ripped off for too long. Its time that people come first, not super-profits and million dollar CE salaries. This policy cuts to the heart of reducing inequality and it will help businesses who struggle with energy costs to develop and create more jobs.

This is what we mean by Labour being a hands-on government.  We can use the power of being in government to change our country for the better.  And yes, you can expect to see more bold policy from Labour. Just like KiwiBuild and NZ Power we are not going to sit on our hands while opportunity and prosperity concentrates in the hands of the few. National’s disastrous policies in education, labour relations and elsewhere need to be, and will be, turned around. And we are not going to be put off by the predictable howls of outrage from those with a vested interest.

The government Labour leads will be a progressive, social democratic government, far, far different from the hands-off crony capitalism of the National Party. Get on board if you want to be part of it!

Chris Trotter has linked Robertson to the Hughes humbug with a “Hey Julian” post.

Robertson’s post is full of carefully crafted claptrap, a collection of tediously repeated phrases. And he closes with a corny attempt at party recruitment.

Vapid party parroting is an ongoing problem for Labour. They haven’t learnt from their last term mistakes, where Phil Goff droned repeatedly on his way to an election disaster, and Labour failed to rebuild.

The public instinctively recognise a party drone from the first few syllables and more often than not they turn off. But not all politicians.

Like him or not John Key sounds like he is speaking his own words, warts and all.

Bill English sounds like he’s drawling his own mind. Stephen Joyce, Judith Collins, Gerry Brownlee, Tony Ryall, Paula Bennett – there can be plenty to criticise, but they all sound like they are distinct thinking people, not puppets strangled by a media manager’s strings.

Hekia Parata’s communication disasters last year stood out because of the contrast with her colleagues.

National’s Maurice Williamson and Chris Auchinvole were stars of the marriage debates. They were clearly speaking their own thoughts.

Labour MPs can do it – Louisa Wall expressed her own personality and convictions strongly.

I remember rookie David Clark giving an excellent marriage speech too – which stood out because Clark is more often a loyal party parrot. I campaigned alongside him in the last election and most of his speeches were repetitive party lines 0- very repetitive.

Goff uninspired throughout his term as Labour leader, and his party failed to rebuild – they lost support.

David Shearer is famous for his fumbling mumbling lines – he is improving, but that’s simply because he is learning more parrot lines, we still have no idea what he stands for or what he might think himself.

Last week on The Nation Labour’s finance spokesperson David Parker gave an inauthentic recital – see Story | Video | Transcript.

And the mid-man of Labour’s top three, Robertson, shows with this post he is another vapid party parrot.

What does Robertson (or Shearer or Labour) really think, believe in, get inspired by? I have no idea.

If they want a real chance of inspiring the many disillusioned voters they have to start to sound like real people with minds and passions of their own, something sadly lacking amongst Labour lackeys.

Media managed muppets are symptoms of a mindless MP malaise – politicians and parties without passion, without a soul. Without leadership, without inspiration.

Labouring with political vapidity.

If they don’t recognise this and address it, Labour will continue their cringey crawl into personality, policy and party vapidity.

vap·id (v p d, v p d). adj. 1. Lacking liveliness, animation, or interest; dull: vapid conversation. 2. Lacking taste, zest, or flavor; flat: vapid beer.

Labouring with political vapidity

1 Comment
by Pete George on April 27, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 27, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/27/labouring-with-political-vapidity/

Where’s Norman and Shearer?

A week ago David Shearer and Russel Norman announced a policy on power that was promoted as a game changer in both  the electricity industry and in next year’s election stakes.

Shearer referred to Labour’s NZ Power policy as “the big Kahuna”. He also said that timing his announcement with the MRP float was coincidental, and he has said several times “We are working…according to our own timetable.”

You would think the timing would reflect the supposed importance of the policy to Greens and Labour. How did Shearer and Norman promote their big new policy from there?

They had David Parker and Gareth Hughes front up for interviews about it on The Nation on Saturday. Parker and Hughes, and Grant Robertson, have since been interviewed on it.

In the meantime the party leaders have been conspicuous in their absence from promoting their great new policy.

David Shearer left for England on Monday. He is on a world tour which will also take him to New York and the UN.

It was announced on Russel Norman’s Facebook on Monday:

Russel is on leave from now until Monday 6 May. I (Izzy, Russel’s Executive Assistant) will be checking his messages and posting the occasional update, but Russel’s profile won’t be as active as usual for the next couple of weeks. Cheers, and happy recess!
-Izzy

Izzy has shared a few political posts on Facebook for Norman. Norman has posted once, apparently on holiday in Los Angeles.

Norman and Shearer chose a time to announce their power policies knowing that they would both soon be leaving the country.

In the meantime Gareth Hughes has botched an interview on Green media management and Green glee at sabotaging the MRP float.

And Grant Robertson is trying to repair the damage Labour has inflicted on itself by spooking and threatening the financial markets due to Labour’s lack of thought about the likely wider effects of their proposed socialisation of the power market.

And the Labour and Green party leaders have other things to do overseas.

The timing of the NZ Power policy has turned out to be terrible as far as ongoing party promotion and damage control is concerned.

This adds weight to the probability that the timing of the announcement last week was for one purpose, to try and upset the MRP float – something neither Labour nor Greens have credibly denied, they have avoided answering questions about this honestly, and Hughes inadvertently made it obvious what they wanted their announcement to do, inflict damage on National’s asset sale programme.

And Greens and Labour will be left floundering without their leaders.

2 Comments
by Pete George on April 26, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 26, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/26/wheres-norman-and-shearer/

Labour’s financial deficit

The economy will be a major factor in the next election (it could easily be the deciding factor). Labour’s financial credibility and their ability to promote themselves as competent managers of the New Zealand economy will be under close scrutiny.

Labour’s release of their NZ Power policy has highlighted some potential problems for Labour – they appear to have a significant financial deficit (and a communication deficit).

At the NZ Power policy launch David Shearer claimed it was “the big kahuna”. A two or three hundred dollar a year election bribe is not big, especially when you consider the potential down sides.

After the launch Shearer seemed to disappear, and has now gone on an overseas tour. This may not be a bad thing for Labour, his financial nous and his ability to express himself are well known deficits.

David Parker was interviewed about NZ Power on The Nation on Saturday. He is a policy wonk and a political wonk, and not a great communicator. It didn’t help that he looked uncomfortable trying to support aspects of the policy. Since then Parker also seems to have retreated from view.

Grant Robertson and Clayton Cosgrove have climbed in to the PR campaign. Neither present a strong voice on financial policy, and their politicking doesn’t

The financial credentials in the current and previous governments are strong.

Labour under Helen Clark had a strong contribution from her deputy and Minister of Finance, Michael Cullen, who was an integral part of a formidable team while calling the financial shots.

National has a Prime Minister with a financial background, and his deputy Bill English also has significant financial credentials.

In contrast Labour has:

  • Leader David Shearer with little known financial or business background.
  • Deputy Grant Robertson with little known financial or business background.
  • No 3 is Labour’s finance spokesperson David Parker – he seems to be far from a dominating force in Labour’s decision making team.
  • Labour’s biggest financial mind and arguably their best speaker, David Cunliffe, has been back benched.

Comparatively Labour has a very weak financial look, and it shows in their fragmented promotion of their “big kahuna”.

To be brutal, it’s not just in finance that Labour looks wish washy weak, it’s hard to see what they stand strongly for.

Labour seem to think NZ Power will be a game changer, but I don’t know if it is big enough or will be strongly enough supported by voters. Labour will still have to look like they know enough about financial matters to run the country.

Currently Labour have a significant financial credibility deficit.

1 Comment
by Pete George on April 23, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 23, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/23/labours-financial-deficit/

Labour and Greens on “coincidental” power policies and timings

Where there three remarkable coincidences of Labour and Greens:

  • working on very similar power pricing policy independently of each other,
  • they were both planning to announce their policy at about the same time, and
  • the timing had nothing to do with the Mighty River Power share float?

Or are Labour’s David Parker and Green’s Gareth Hughes not being truthful?

They were both interviewed on The Nation yesterday and were both asked about the coincidence of Labour and Greens working on similar power pricing policy.

Rachel Smalley interviewing David Parker…

Rachel: How long have you been working on this policy?

David: Me personally off and on over the years I’ve been working on this since 2006, 2007 to be honest.

Rachel: This specific policy?

David: Well the options that we have to improve our electricity system yes.  This specific system pushing it forward to this the last month.

Rachel: Pretty much a month.  Was it a Greens’ policy that Labour jumped on?

David:  No, it’s an absolute coincidence that we put out a press release last week saying we were announcing this week.  They then phoned us and said they had a plan for this week.  We got together and we found our plans were very similar.

Rachel: You weren’t comfortable appearing with the Greens though alongside us here on the programme?

David: We didn’t want it to be thought that this is Greens’ policy.  This is actually independent Labour policy.  The Greens I think have a similar view in respect of theirs, they’ve arrived at a similar conclusion independently of us.

Rachel Smalley interviewing Gareth Hughes:

Rachel: So let’s talk about this new power policy and what you’re going to be doing with the electricity market, whose policy was this.  Who thought of it first this joint plan if you like?

Gareth: Well we’ve been working on it independently.  We started talking to Labour after their press release on Sunday, realised we had very similar proposals, so we decided to work together on launching them together.  I think it shows the solutions we’re both proposing are commonsense, they’re smart, they’re going to be effective, we both independently reached them.

Well I’ve been thinking about how do we make a fairer more affordable electricity system for some while.  We have been working on this mostly this year.  

The conclusions we’ve both reached independently are broadly similar. 

Putting these two responses together we have:

  • Hughes has been “been working on this mostly this year”.
  • Parker claims “this specific system pushing it forward to this the last month”.
  • Labour “put out a press release last week saying we were announcing this week”.
  • Hughes: “We started talking to Labour after their press release on Sunday”.
  • Parker “Greens phoned us and said they had a plan for this week”.
  • Parker “We got together and we found our plans were very similar”.
  • Hughes “realised we had very similar proposals, so we decided to work together on launching them together”.
  • Parker “it’s an absolute coincidence “.

And there’s a third coincidence.

Rachel: Okay, your timing is at best coincidental.  At worst it’s pretty cynical it has to be said.  You’re toying with Mighty River Power here, it’s an asset that’s valued at around one and a half billion dollars.

Gareth: It is coincidental.

Smalley asked Parker:

Rachel: Is this a genuine economic policy Mr Parker or is this a stunt to derail asset sales?

Parker avoiding answering that, and Hughes claimed MRP float timing “is coincidental”, but that’s at odds with both of their leaders.

Norman was interviewed on Firstline on Friday:

The timing of the policy announcement has been questioned, coming four days into the three-week sale of Mighty River Power shares. Dr Norman says they chose to release the details now, rather than later, so Kiwis considering buying in know what the future might bring.

“We think it’s important that people know, so if you’re thinking about buying Mighty River Power shares it’s only fair enough you know.”

David Shearer said…

…it was not an attempt to derail the Government’s Mighty River share offer which began this week or the wider asset sales plan.

But…

He said it was likely to have an impact on share prices so he had written to the board of Mighty River Power, 49 per cent of which is about to be floated on the stock exchange by the Government, and to shareholding ministers asking them to issue a supplementary disclosure.

“This will allow Kiwis who have applied for shares since Monday to reconsider”

That’s contradictory.

Should we believe the similarity in policies, both parties independently planning an announcement at the same time, and the timing of the announcements in relation to the Mighty River Power share float, were all “an absolute coincidence”?

—

Source The Nation:

Labour confused on power policy

Labour Leader David Shearer and Finance Spokesman David Parker still appear to differ on whether power generator SOEs will pay a dividend under the party’s new electricity policy.Mr Shearer issued a media statement yesterday saying the party would forgo dividends.But today,…

Greens deny political games

Green Party energy spokesperson Gareth Hughes echoed David Parker’s statement by denying the two parties co-ordinated their announcement as a political…

2 Comments
by Pete George on April 21, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 21, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/21/labour-and-greens-on-coincidental-power-policies-and-timings/

The cost of NZ Power

If NZ Power is implemented it will cost the Government – and that means it will cost all of us. That will depend on next year’s election result.

But the Labour-Green policy announcement will have more immediate costs.

It is likely to significantly reduce how much the Government (us) gets in the Mighty River Power share float.

It is already costing investors in power companies which have lost about $500 million in value. That is not just overseas investors, it is both large and small New Zealand investors, including many of us with KiwiSaver retirement investments.

This is due to both the nature of the NZ Power policy and the deliberate timing of it. Fran O’Sullivan points out the obvious:

No one with any residue of grey matter left will believe Shearer’s protestations that the timing of this joint announcement has nothing to do with the pending Mighty River Power IPO.

This policy has all the signs of being rushed out with one aim in mind: To spook the private investors (including the many smaller shareholders who are being enticed back into a New Zealand sharemarket, which was on the verge of its own demise a few years back) who are lining up to buy shares in the forthcoming float.

The effect on the sharemarket was immediate – Power shares keep falling:

Investors take seriously Labour and Greens’ plan to shake up the electricity market

JB Were investment strategist Bernard Doyle said a move to a state buyer of power risks being a retrograde step for the New Zealand economy.

“Secondly, we believe it will prove damaging for New Zealand capital markets, and comes at an unfortunate time given the significant progress made here since 2010.”

And Plan puts frighteners on investors:

Investors spooked by the Labour-Green plan to cut power prices have wiped more than $500 million off the value of three listed energy companies since the policy was released.

Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce said that by 5pm yesterday $326m had been wiped off the value of Contact Energy, $200m from Trustpower and almost $34m from Infratil.

Is this unintended consequences? A bit of collateral damage to business?

Not if you listen to what Labour people are saying, 3 News reported in Opposition ‘trying to disrupt share sales’:

The new policy, which will be implemented if there is a change of government at the 2014 election, is expected to drive down the issue price of Mighty River Power shares.

Labour and the Greens accept the consequences of their policy and say investors will have to take the risk into account.

“People choose to buy shares, they don’t choose to buy electricity,” said Labour leader David Shearer.

@ImperatorFish (Scott Yorke):

The people benefiting from excessive profit-taking are now realising that the good times may be over? Not seeing a problem.

Anthony Robins at The Standard in Reaction to NZ power:

Opinions opposed consists of a fair bit of squealing business folk. Well they would, wouldn’t they. Because this policy isn’t for them. It’s for the roughly one quarter of Kiwi families that are living with fuel poverty due in part to the ever rising prices of the failed market model.

Labour’s finance spokesman, David Parker, on National’s reaction:

“Their scaremongering shows they’re worried that hard-working New Zealanders, who are sick of paying through the nose for electricity, will embrace our new policy.”

The policy is to transfer wealth, to take business profits and give them to “the people”.

Mr Shearer…

…was referring to the impact of lower profits the companies would make under its policy, and therefore lower taxes and dividends.

A full on attack on business and the stock market is a very risky move by Labour. In what seems to be a cynical use of NZ Power to get themselves back into power could have a cost – and that could be a major cost to the country.

The loss of value to the Government in the Mighty River Power share float, possibly hundreds of millions of dollars, will be an immediate impact.

But by introducing major uncertainty into the whole share market at a time that it was finally showing signs of recovery after a long struggle during the Global Financial Crisis could have a serious impact on business confidence and investment.

The cost of NZ Power will be significant in dollar terms for the country, and that means us.

The cost of Labour’s attempt to regain power could be much greater.

And Labourites seem happy to stick it to business and investors to achieve a position of power. They seem to think that any means is justified in achieving their goal.

Will the cost to the country be worth it?

by Pete George on April 20, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 20, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/20/the-cost-of-nz-power/

Labour Power – small bribe, huge risk

Labour’s apparently hurried launching of their NZ Power policy appears to be aimed at enticing voters next election. David Shearer has called it “the big kahuna”. How big?

It is dangling a $4-6 per week carrot in front of voters.

For those on tight budgets every dollar matters, but $4 a week is really small change and will not give anyone hope of rising above the pangs of poverty.

It’s a small bribe.

So what are the risks?

Of course Labour is hoping this bet will win them the big prize, the next election.

They have now closely allied themselves with the Greens to try and win in a joint venture. Being this closely associated with Greens has big risks.

Labour’s economic credibility is at risk. They have already banished their biggest economic voice to the the back benches (Cunliffe). Their leaders (Shearer and Robertson) have scant business credentials – and no sign of any understanding economic issues.

David Parker fronted up with Shearer and Russel Norman at the NZS Power launch so presumably buys into the policy, and may be the architect of it. As Labour’s Finance spokesperson he has a lot of credibility on the line.

Some financial comment suggests that while Government enforced reductions in power prices will work in the short term they could have serious longer term effects on the energy market and future propsects of new generation projects.

And there are huge risks for the New Zealand economy, as the sharemarket reaction to the NZ Power announcement showed yesterday.

And that was when many international investors would have been asleep. If they put the threat of Government imposed profit limits together with last night’s poll result showing that a Labour-Green government is a distinct possibility together it could impact drastically on investor confidence in the whole New Zealand share market.

In their quest for power Labour are betting a few dollars a week against the high risk of stuffing both the electricity market and the whole economy.

by Pete George on April 19, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on April 19, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/04/19/labour-power-small-bribe-huge-risk/

Labour’s conflicting priorities with Tiwai

National are in a difficult position on Tiwai balancing then interests of employment in Southland, the electricity market and asset share sales.

Labour are also in a difficult position as they need to find a position that satifies their anti asset sales campaigning, anti foreign multinational investment, and employment.

In Stuff Labour’s financial spokesperson David Parker is reported as saying:

“The optimal solution is to walk away (from the smelter) and let New Zealand have lower power prices,”

After Labour’s campaigns for Government intervention in saving jobs at KiwiRail and Telecom this is a remarkable statement – the Tiwai smelter supports a workforce of about 3,000, and unlike Telecom employees most of them would have real difficulty finding alternative employment in Southland or New Zealand.

Radio New Zealand has reported David Shearer as saying that  “the Government should have stepped in earlier” and been “more hands on”.

He wasn’t clear whether that meant more hands on to walk away from the smelter and the jobs, or more hands on to do a subsidised deal with Rio Tinto on power.

So this leaves Labour in a conflicted and vague position.

Is their anti asset sales campaign more important to them than the Tiwai smelter and thousands of jobs?

by Pete George on March 29, 2013  •  Permalink
Posted in General
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on March 29, 2013

http://yournz.org/2013/03/29/labours-conflicting-priorities-with-tiwai/

Grinch Robertson’s Christmas jeer

Grant Robertson has posted on Labour’s final parliamentary speeches of the year at Red Alert.

The final Parliamentary debate of the year is an opportunity to sum up the political year and enjoy a few laughs. Labour had four speakers yesterday, and I will post them up in order today.

Adjournment Debate – David Shearer

 First up was David Shearer who delivered a funny but also very pointed summing up of National’s Year to Forget. The consensus at the Press Gallery Party last night was that his was the best speech on the day.

I’d prefer to hear the Press Gallery’s judgement from them.

Adjournment Debate – David Parker

Second up for Labour in the Adjournment Debate was David Parker. He went through National’s shameful economic performance (to quote David Clark, ” the worst economic record in 50 years!) and outlined some of Labour’s alternative policies. David has had a really good year shifting the debate on monetary policy and pushing the need for a more active government role to stimulate our economy.

More negative attacking to the fore but at least some Labour PR following that.

Adjournment Debate- Jacinda Ardern

Third speaker for Labour in the adjournment debate was Jacinda Ardern. This was an excellent speech, challenging the government’s abysmal social record that sees inequality at its worst ever levels and hundreds of thousands of children in poverty. Jacinda laid down some specific policy challenges for National to get in behind Labour’s policies.

More emphasis on National negatives.

Adjournment Debate – Grant Robertson

The fourth and final speaker for Labour in the adjournment debate was, well, me. Its a pity I can’t sing, but I did my best to end the year with a bit of levity through National’s 12 Days of Christmas aka the National’s 12 Fiascos. I hope you enjoy!

And Grinch closes with his own mish-mash of mockery. Maybe the few Labour supporters who risk venturing onto Labour’s flagship blog will enjoy the Christmas jeer.

Maybe Grant will have a happy transforming Christmas and make a New Year resolution to take a more positive approach to politics.

 

 

by Pete George on December 14, 2012  •  Permalink
Posted in Politics
Tagged , , , , ,

Posted by Pete George on December 14, 2012

http://yournz.org/2012/12/14/grinch-robertsons-christmas-jeer/

« Older Posts
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 78 other followers