Grant Robertson explains how his ‘wellbeing’ budget will work

Minister of Finance Grant Robertson was interviewed on Q+A  last night on how ‘wellbeing’ will be woven into next year’s budget.

Wellbing in the budget  is described as ‘a new way of delivering public policy and measuring economic success, and now in a world first GDP won’t be the only indicator of our prosperity. Happiness indicators like mental health and poverty will be given weight”.

Is this a new approach? Or is it the ‘social investment’ ambitions of Bill English renamed and repackaged? Possibly a bit of both.

Beehive: Wellbeing of New Zealanders at the heart of Budget priorities

The five Priorities for Budget 2019 are:

  • Creating opportunities for productive businesses, regions, iwi and others to transition to a sustainable and low-emissions economy
  • Supporting a thriving nation in the digital age through innovation, social and economic opportunities
  • Lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skills and opportunities
  • Reducing child poverty and improving child wellbeing, including addressing family violence
  • Supporting mental wellbeing for all New Zealanders, with a special focus on under 24-year-olds.

“These priorities are focussed on the outcomes that will make real improvements to New Zealanders’ wellbeing,” Grant Robertson said.

“All Ministers and agencies will be collectively responsible for delivering on the priorities. For the first time, they are being tasked with developing their own Budget bids through the lens of the priorities. They are being asked to work together, across portfolios, on initiatives that will deliver the outcomes identified by the priorities.

“New Zealanders will see a difference with next year’s Budget. It will show how we are building an economy that is more productive, more sustainable and more inclusive,” Grant Robertson said.

“Strong economic fundamentals and sustainable economic growth remain integral to New Zealand’s success but they are a means to an end, not an end in themselves. We are widening our Budget focus to look at the wellbeing of our people, the health of our environment and the strength of our communities,” Grant Robertson said.

Q+A:

Robertson:

The caveat to all of this is of course is there are a certain amount of things in a budget that you have to spend on, for example the demand driven expenditure, welfare benefits and funding for children…and that includes some really basic capital needs that we’ve got. And actually we’ve got a lot of left over legacy needs that weren’t invested in.

As any new government does. Labour have kept hammering the ‘lack of investment’ of the last National Government (who kept spending more each year).

Each minister has to put all of their bids for new spending through the lens of wellbeing. There are twelve specific areas (domains) that range all the way from the impact on health to the impact on someone’s life satisfaction…

Who does a budget consider the impact on everyone’s life satisfaction?

These budgets will be based on the evidence of what makes a difference.

Bill English said similar things.

Why is it the Government’s job to address loneliness in the community?

It is never just the Government’s job to do something like that, and I’m absolutely clear about the fact that wellbeing is not something that the Government controls, but by making it part of our purpose therefore we can contribute to supporting an individual or community or a family to reach you know a state of wellbeing that they’re happy with.

We know that if people are disconnected from their communities that can see them becoming unwell, it can see for some people it leads them into mental health issues…

Science or subjective?

There’s no doubt we are putting together here the tangible and the intangible.

What would you do to help someone who is lonely and isolated, what can a Government do to ensure that they’ve got friends?

Well it’s not about ensuring that they’ve got friends, it’s about ensuring they are connected to their communities.

I’m not sure how that will be done via a budget.

ACT Party:

Great question from : “Why is it the Govt’s job to address loneliness?” The Govt’s “wellbeing” approach is about nanny-state politicians and bureaucrats deciding what your best life is, even though every New Zealander is different.

The panel discuss the interview:

Liam Hehir:

It’s all very laudable and unobjectionable in principle.

I do take exception to the idea that it’s the first time the Government has ever been concerned with anything other than GDP, a claim he’s made on several occasions. Governments have always been concerned with the wellbeing of citizens.

I just see this as a mushy PR job.

John Tamihere:

It’s a global movement.

There’s no doubt that the narrative has changed quite dramatically under this government.

The wellbeing, collective impact it’s called, it was championed out of Stanford University 15, 16 years ago, it is running globally and been tested. New South Wales Treasury has been tasked with running a wellbeing budget next year, so there’s a global movement about this wellbeing’s narrative.

It’s a response to supply side economics as the be all and end all, and you’ve got to actually shift your public investments to where you can measure the bang for the buck on whether it’s actually working.

It sounded to me like a great new idea from Labour. Sounds quite similar to where English and National were heading, they just didn’t frame it as “collective impact”.

Jennifer Curtin:

It’s actually about investing in more than economic growth…

You need economic growth to have the money to invest – we have good economic growth at the moment, so a good time to invest.

…and using that as the sole measure of how the country is doing. So it’s about measures. It’s almost a follow on from what Bill English was doing with his social investment strategy.

It’s using the term wellbeing, picks up on what the OECD and what serious economists there are recommending.

I hope it is angled more at ‘collective impact’ than ‘impact on the collective’.

The guidance issued to Ministers and departments:  https://treasury.govt.nz/publications/budget-policy-statement/budget-policy-statement-2019

 

89 Comments

  1. alloytoo

     /  17th December 2018

    Bill had a plan and a toolkit, frankly this lot are too lazy to do that, what’s the bet it will be outsourced to the highest bidder?

    • Blazer

       /  17th December 2018

      do tell!
      All theory .

      • Gezza

         /  17th December 2018

        Check departmental annual reports to Parliament.

      • alloytoo

         /  17th December 2018

        No, theories and hypothesis require some mental effort, this is a Labour feel good wishy washy list.

    • Duker

       /  17th December 2018

      Toolkit ?
      Which did what other than a tick box exercise. Did they even save maoney or was it buried under more spending from greater demand anyway.
      Identifying kids at 5 yrs old who have higher chance of going on to ‘cost a lot of money’ has prevented how many kids from that life or saved how much ?
      Bill was just looking out for ‘his soul’ in the afterlife – BTW , what great jobs did he go on to in the private sector, or even Steve Joyce.

    • Duker

       /  17th December 2018

      More fun with ‘Bills plan ( social investment) where they find from his own words he didnt understand what he was talking baout
      http://morganfoundation.org.nz/no-one-understand-social-investment-not-even-bill-english/
      So why does the man who essentially invented social investment “kiwi-style” not understand what is and is not possible with social investment in New Zealand? And what even is it?

      “The idea that Social investment could target ‘certain high risk kids’ was a complete nonsense
      “Using the IDI, some ‘predictive risk modelling’ has been done to see if it is possible to identify what characteristics present in children’s lives, put them at risk of poor outcomes as adults.
      To be very clear this is not a process to identify individuals, it can never be used to do so and any indication by the Prime Minister[English] or others that it can shows a real misunderstanding of how this type of analysis works.

      Risk modelling data cannot locate or know individual children”

      Now English was a smart cookie , he must have known he was talking bullshit ( perhaps why he hasnt got any real jobs in the private sector, others knew it as well)

      In reality English was all about the costs.

      ““The delivery agency needs to be accountable for reducing the forward liability and the associated reduction in long-term welfare dependency”
      – Social Welfare Working Group, 2011

      One of nationals many reviews, working groups…etc after the 2008 election.

      • High Flying Duck

         /  17th December 2018

        What a load of tosh.
        Social Investment required significant increases to upfront spending. As such it was only concerned with the costs, in that early interventions would alleviate future costs.
        English knew exactly what he was talking about and had set in progress comprehensive changes to the public sector to get the program in place.
        Jess Berentson-Shaw is a fruit loop and it shows in that article.

        “At its core, social investment is a more rigorous and evidence-based feedback loop linking service delivery to a better understanding of people’s needs and indicators of the effectiveness of social services.
        This needs to take account of the long term – including those benefits that might take years to be delivered.
        There will also be more systematic measurement of the effectiveness of services people are currently receiving.
        This information can then be used to do more of what works – and stop things that don’t.
        Understanding the effectiveness of spending and doing what works are two principles with relevance to all public spending.”
        Hon. Bill English Sept 2015.

        • Duker

           /  17th December 2018

          They have a quote of English telling porkies about ‘intervention’. Berentson Shaw was actually a supporter of the social investment approach. The Dipton Dipstick doesn’t know what he’s saying when talking off the cuff…reading someone’s else’s prepared lines means nothing. He’s been a phoney through his whole time in parliament… Early on he said he’s not going to stay here for the Long haul… 24 years later…. He said a few years back never wanted the PMs job…. He. Made out he was a farmer rural dude when he really was a Wellington bureaucrat when he became an MP , loved the ballet ..who got a jump in funding…tried to con taxpayers into paying him to live in his Wellington house.
          At least all his peers in Keys government made no secret of who they were and their backgrounds… Bill a total fake whos only claim to fame was Nationals worst ever loss with 20% of the vote

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  17th December 2018

            He was acting on advice given about the house, as is well known.The advice was wrong. He immediately repaid all the money that he had been given because of the wrong advice. He was never such a fool as to try to do such an obvious con, or any other. Don’t tell stupid and easily disproved lies.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  17th December 2018

            You are a very poor liar, Duker. You seem to think quantity beats quality:
            https://i.stuff.co.nz/business/farming/76855785/null

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              Duker is correct …English is good with sheep…but not a genuine farmer…another knighted hood…hopeless.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Who are the farmers in Labour or the Greens or NZF?

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              who fuckin cares ..farmers have a disproportionate influence on NZ politics.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              You seem to fuckin care whether Bill English is one.
              I don’t think the coalition has any farmers. Mostly ponces in Labour. Their leader once crashed a tractor. But I don’t think she’s a farmer.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Hmm … after checking, ponce might not be quite the right word for what I meant … I’ll give another one some …thought!

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              Bill English is a knighted hood…a 2 time loser.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              He won his electorate seat 8 times & rolled back in on the list twice because National was rolling so high in the Party Vote. Can’t even remember who the electorate losers in Labour were. He was a sound Finance Minister, won plaudits for it, lost out on being PM to a wily old shyster of a fox who backed a cover girl who crashed a tractor once & fronts for other people in the Labour Party.

              How does that make him a loser?

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              ‘How does that make him a loser?

              um G you are an intelligent man..he has had 2 stints as leader of the Natz..and lost both times…I guess you think Dean Barker is a winner ..too.Bol.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              It was just bad luck the 2nd time. Well, a bad penny really. Kind of. He’s made a stack of dosh, got a knighthood, picked up some lucrative sinecures & bowed out gracefully rather than slinking off & slipping away like Goffy, Cunliffe and Captain Mumblefuck.

              You’ve probably just got it in for him, You know what you can get like about people.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Are you at work Blazer? Hey, what do you think of my suggestion they give the housing portfolio to Kris Faafoi? I think he’s got promise that guy. Twford’s a dipstick.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              yes I don’t like fakes..When I look at knighted hoods these days ,it makes me wonder ..just how fantastic perception has pre vailed over reality.Once upon a time a Sir meant something..these self serving lightweights have destroyed that.
              As an aside please tell me what Sir William English did to deserve such an honour.Being ‘popular’ doesn’t cut it.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              Drivel, B. English learnt to shear on his family sheep farm. Knows a heck of a lot more about farming than you know about banking. But you and Duker will wank on about stuff you know nothing about and slur people who don’t.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              He got awarded his knighthood for his services to the state over a 27-year political career.

              https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/104416895/queens-birthday-honours-former-prime-minister-bill-english-made-a-knight

              If you want one for the same thing you need to get moving and get elected for some party or other. Be good to see what your policy positions are.

              Cullen got one too, didn’t he? Not sure what for. Might be a Finance MInister thing. Grant might get one too. Might depend how well he does.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              if rubber Billy knew as much about farming as you do about science ,he would make a great C.E.O of UFS.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              So he’s right up there with Sir Earnest Rutherford,Sir Edmund Hillary,Sir William Pickering…don’t let me bring Sir Isaac into the argument…btw you served as a public servant for that long..how about..//??

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Gonna hit the sack now. Great not working night shifts. Toodles.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              btw you served as a public servant for that long..how about..//??</i?

              Just a bewildered & bemused flunky a lot of the time. They don't give out knighthoods for that. I do agree with you though that handing out knighthoods to rich pricks and friends of friends in high places demeans them when you consider the few true greats who deserved them for their humanity or their prodigious feats rather than their money.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Sorry about html fail there. Tired. Need some zzz’s. Nitey nite.

        • Blazer

           /  17th December 2018

          ‘social investment’ is a nouveau term for Social Welfare which is targeted anyway.

  2. adamsmith1922

     /  17th December 2018

    To be very cynical communism was all about well being as was Chavez in Venezuela. I am very dubious about Government deciding what my well-being is. It is a very subjective matter. This sounds like feel good fuzzies rather than rational measured assessment.

    • Duker

       /  17th December 2018

      Exactly what Robertson says
      “It is never just the Government’s job to do something like that, and I’m absolutely clear about the fact that wellbeing is not something that the Government controls, .

      The previous government couldnt even bother to crackdown on dodgy WOF checks, even though the inspectors were finding problems. That was their statuary responsibility and they couldnt do it – saving money was the primary aim rather than ‘community wellbeing’ with safer cars

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  17th December 2018

        One of many examples that refutes your claim.

        • Duker

           /  17th December 2018

          Not individual wellbeing. But if the government mandates a WOF every year, you have to pay for a check but then the government then doesnt penalise at all those its finds arent doing to the standards they set. What sort of lunancy is that.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  17th December 2018

            I wonder why you say that the government has ‘statuary’ obligations…I can’t see how any government is obliged to make statues. Did you mean statutory, perchance ?

            • Duker

               /  17th December 2018

              Spell check run amok kitty old dear. These new fangled tablet things

          • Gezza

             /  17th December 2018

            Bizarre assertion. The NZTA had the statutory responsibility to take action on its own volition against offenders. The Minister can’t decide on operational matters or order them to do nothing about breaches of the Act. Just another pack of overpaid executives with no balls.

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  17th December 2018

    My well-being is my job, not a politician’s or bureaucrat’s. The cemetries are full of people who believed otherwise.

    • Gezza

       /  17th December 2018

      What do you mean? The cemeteries are full of dead people who believed as you do too.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  17th December 2018

        Yes but they died older and happier, G.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  17th December 2018

          • Blazer

             /  17th December 2018

            dead from slaughter in the war….’Yes but they died older and happier’…strange brew.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              They believed their Government was looking after them, B. Do you?

            • Duker

               /  17th December 2018

              “They believed their Government was looking after them”

              Are you kidding…they got sent off to war. Thats the opposite of looking after them…its all in the hands of the generals anyway. Even more recently with say Afghanistan… poorly trained, badly equiped..etc but the army doesnt care , and the politicians wont ask how its done.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              Didn’t you read any history? A lot of them lied about their age just so they could get sent they were so keen. Or you could just watch Peter Jackson’s movie.

    • Duker

       /  17th December 2018

      “My well-being is my job, not a politician’s or bureaucrat’s”
      yawn Tiresome having to repeat this
      ” I’m absolutely clear about the fact that wellbeing is not something that the Government controls,..” ..Robertson

      Surely you have a reading age of above 12 and could see this plainly

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  17th December 2018

        If it’s not my well-being whose is it and why is it being sold as important enough to spend a lot of money on? Actually you are quite wrong and most of this Government and its supporters do believe the Government is responsible for and is entitled to control my well-being. A moment’s real thought will reveal ver many examples of this if you can be bothered.

        • Duker

           /  17th December 2018

          Interesting that you think this…… are you on medication for it.
          You are talking gibberish because you didnt read what he said but your mind was made up before hand

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  17th December 2018

            If any question why we died/Tell them ‘Because our fathers lied.’

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  17th December 2018

            God, you talk claptrap, Duker. I guess it saves thinking though.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              Duker has whacked you out of the park…you must be getting used to it..by now.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              Is he your brother, B? Seems to have the mentality for it.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              he certainly is a soul brother..shows you up ..every day. 😉

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              Yep, you both talk crap 95% of the time and Robert manages 100%.

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  17th December 2018

          Alan, conscription was brought in because once the troops found what they’d been sent to, the enthusiasm wore off, unsurprisingly.

          I agree about the claptrap, but would add gibberish, like the claim about statuary responsibility.

          • Kitty Catkin

             /  17th December 2018

            If it’s not about people’s wellbeing, then whose wellbeing IS it about, and why is it called that ?

  4. Gezza

     /  17th December 2018

    This is all very well; I like the concept of measuring social AND economic well-being.

    But what counts for social well-being is tangible, sensible,worthwhile metrics. Specifying the desired outcomes or “states” and being able to track progress against specific measurable indicators – actual statistics. And that’s what I’m waiting for. To see those. Until those are known this is warm fuzzy wishes.

    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  17th December 2018

      I think Labour canned all those, G. Didn’t want any nasty Rightie facts to spoil the fuzzies.

      • Gezza

         /  17th December 2018

        In my experience, policy-making government bureaucrats & senior managers are piss poor at devising actually meaningful outcomes and/or objectives and real, practical measurable KPIs.

        But it CAN be done. If I were advising the Opposition, I would be telling them to start working on the kinds of KPIs that meet those few criteria mentioned above. Instead of waiting for Ministers to tell us what these are; the Oppos should be loudly & consistently telling the public what they should be.

    • adamsmith1922

       /  17th December 2018

      Precisely, and this government is not very keen on robust measurement frameworks, as that means accountability. Note how Clark scrapped measurement in the Health Service.

      • Duker

         /  17th December 2018

        Those health service measurements were a joke as they were being manipulated. I had to go to an emergency department very late at night, very quiet. To fiddle the figures me and another person would be ‘treated in the outer waiting room’, when I needed an Xray wheeled into the xray area and then wheeled back out to waiting room. Planty of space in treatment area . That way the numbers for delays in emergency treatment could be massaged. Surgeons told how other elective numbers were fiddled, new patients were prioritised for orthopedics in Waikato hospital while existing patients were given run around.

        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  17th December 2018

          Doesn’t happen when the customer controls the payment. And Waikato DHB is notorious.

          • Duker

             /  17th December 2018

            Right about the Waikato DHB and its charlatan CEO …especially recruited by ex Hamiton national MP and appointed DHB chairman Bob Simcock.- who was a nonenity amoung non entitys in the caucus and yet ….. probably a mate of Ryall’s
            Seems to be recurring nightmare for DHBs , some get stuck with useless CEOs, and not only here, but Australia and UK. Could it be 25% are duds ?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              It’s been crap for years and probably well predates that CEO. It’s more than 20 yrs since I did a consulting job there after they had created an IT disaster.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              And my wife looked at a job there nearly ten years ago and after visiting the place said “Hell no.”

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  17th December 2018

          ‘another person and I’

      • Ray

         /  17th December 2018

        Forget about real measurements it all “about the vibe” for the “woke” folk😉

  5. Blazer

     /  17th December 2018

    well being equation is quite basic=Maslows Law.

    • Gezza

       /  17th December 2018

      Now show what specific indicators of the state of the country, and how you will measure progress or change, meaningfully & statistically, in what areas & under what subcategories.

      • Gezza

         /  17th December 2018

        It’s possible to do it, but it takes a lot of thought, it needs agreement across parties, and it needs to be stuck with consistently and not chopped and changed to suit politicians where it’s not producing improvements or it’s showing negative trends. And bureaucrats are bad at this sort of thing.

        • Duker

           /  17th December 2018

          A Wellbeing criteria could be increased support for elderly people to be able to stay in their own homes- housekeeping , meals etc.
          This sort of thing was cit back by the previous government because …. social investment criteria meant they weren’t going to live long so they missed out…maybe went on ‘wrap round services for young ratbags who continued to misbehave.

          • alloytoo

             /  17th December 2018

            “A Wellbeing criteria could be increased support for elderly people to be able to stay in their own homes- housekeeping , meals etc.”

            Yes, lets keep the elderly trapped in their own homes, lost in loneliness.

            “This sort of thing was cit back by the previous government because …. social investment criteria meant they weren’t going to live long so they missed out”

            Social investment means you invest now in giving the people longer more productive lives, sort of right there on the label.

            “…maybe went on ‘wrap round services for young ratbags who continued to misbehave.”

            That clearly (despite what Andrew Little would have you believe) doesn’t work, Social investment was about breaking those cycles even before they developed.

            • Blazer

               /  17th December 2018

              ‘ Social investment was about breaking those cycles even before they developed.’…just another meaningless platitude from National….did they have an anti aging…plan!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  17th December 2018

              An old friend who delivered meals on wheels complained to me about a client who was always sitting around playing bridge with friends and they were all younger than him.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  17th December 2018

              I can well believe it. I know people who deliver them and have heard about some of the clients.

              I wish that Duker would realise that criteria is the plural of criterion; his ignorance of such things undermines his arguments, such as they are. Not that they’d make any sense even if they were written in correct English and not semi-literate.

    • admiralvonspee

       /  18th December 2018

      Maslows Law? Hahahahahahahahaha. You’ve outdone yourself, old sock.

  6. Alan Wilkinson

     /  17th December 2018

    Here’s one of yours, Duker. Rides a scooter downhill drunk without a helmet at night and crashes. Then demands the Govt legislate to stop drunk idiots like her doing what she did:
    https://i.stuff.co.nz/auckland/109396676/she-fractured-her-neck-falling-off-a-lime-scooter-and-is-calling-for-regulations

    • Kitty Catkin

       /  17th December 2018

      Read the whole article. She wasn’t a drunk idiot, although she’d had a few drinks, and she takes full responsibility for the accident. What she is wanting is regulations to stop the number of accidents on the Limes. She talked about it with a nurse who told her about the many people who were being injured by these scooters, and wants to do something about it now that she has had personal experience of what can happen. You make the whole thing sound ridiculous and it’s not.

      • Gezza

         /  17th December 2018

        Sir Alan does that sort of thing. Has it in for the peasantry I suspect. I do my best to reason with the fellow, usually to no avail.
        Sir Gerald

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  17th December 2018

          The Limes are a menace. I wonder what it will take for them to be banned from inner-city streets.

          This woman is no peasant, and deserves credit for her honesty and wanting to do something about them.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  17th December 2018

        It was ridiculous. What she did was completely idiotic and the outcome was inevitable. She calls herself intoxicated.

        What does she actually mean when she claims to take responsibility for her “accident”? I don’t see her apologising to the scooter company or the community for it. I see her wanting to stop other people using the scooters sensibly because she didn’t.

        • Gezza

           /  17th December 2018

          God what a pain in the arse these Lime scooters must be for other folk on pavements and plazas. Rather than avoid pesky and petty regulations why not just ban the bloody things. If people don’t like it they can always go and live in some country where they haven’t yet.

          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  17th December 2018

            You should start using them to go to the supermarket, G. You’ll need a backpack though.

            • Gezza

               /  17th December 2018

              Scooters are what kids used to ride for exercise back in my youthful days. They had decent-sized wheels then that could handle cracks in pavements. Unlike the collapsible ones with wheels the size you’d find on a pair of roller skates that were all the rage a decade or so back – when everybody including 20-something officer workers started carrying and using them to get from the train to work or home & seemed to all be breaking their noses going arse over kite because of cracks in the footpaths.

              These things are motor scooters. Motor scooters should be on the road. They should have to ride them in the bus lanes.

              Whatever happened to hover boards? I thought everyone was going to be using them to get around by now?

        • Gezza

           /  17th December 2018

          Associate Transport Minister Julie Anne Genter said e-scooters offered real benefits and she wanted to wait until the Lime scooter trial was complete before seeing if further regulation was required.

          “I don’t want to rush to over-regulate e-scooters and waiting for the trial to run its course will ensure we have real-world data and experience to base our decisions on,” Genter said.

          “In the meantime, I would urge people to not use e-scooters recklessly.

          “E-scooter users should be aware they are not invincible and to proceed carefully.”
          . . . . . . . . .
          What are these “real benefits”? Sickness benefits – from when they hurt themselves or from when someone they bowl over wraps the bloody scooter around these lazy arses’ neck or jams it up their exhaust pipe as an indication of their displeasure ?

        • Kitty Catkin

           /  18th December 2018

          Well, it was an accident; she didn’t do it on purpose.

    • Gezza

       /  17th December 2018

      Hospital staff she had spoken with echoed her concerns, she said.

      “They told me they are treating people of all ages who have come off the Limes,and not just drunk people, from the young to the elderly, people with brain bleeds and other very serious injuries.”

      She said the “general consensus” among the hospital staff she had spoken with is that nothing will be done to improve safety of the scooters “until somebody dies”.

      Would be good if the reporter followed that claim up with the hospital to confirm this is their view.

  1. Grant Robertson explains how his ‘wellbeing’ budget will work — Your NZ – NZ Conservative Coalition