Monthly Archive for October, 2008

Side-show

Published
by
Tane
on October 31, 2008
in election 2008, labour, national and workers' rights
. 32 Comments

I see the media are now comparing the “redundancy” packages on offer with all of the horse race vigour they applied to the tax cuts. That’s understandable as the media like quantifiable measures so they can make simple graphs and X is greater or less than Y soundbite statements. But what they have forgotten is that neither package is better than a decent redundancy clause and of the major parties only Labour is offering one of those.

I don’t expect it’ll be great but let’s have a look at what redundancy means:

A standard redundancy (at the low end) is 4+2* capped at 20 years.

That means someone who has worked for 5 years in the same job who is made redundant at a time they are taking home $500 a week in the hand will get fourteen weeks of pay or $7000 dollars.

If they have worked 20 years they get 44 weeks of pay or $22,000. Compared to the “assistance” the two parties are offering that’s a lot of cash to use to cover your mortgage and look after your family.

Sounds too good to be true? Well, 80% of union negotiated employment agreements have redundancy clauses and 4+2 is on the low end - many are 6+2 or 8+2.

When you consider Labour’s policy is to protect workers’ rights and introduce a minimum redundancy, while National won’t commit to such a policy and wants to make it harder for unions to negotiate, it’s pretty clear which party is really looking out for workers who lose their jobs.

The media frenzy over these assistance packages is a side-show in comparison.

[*This means a redundancy formula of four weeks' pay on signing up and two weeks for every year of service.]

Greenpeace converts John’s office

Published
by
Tane
on October 31, 2008
in activism, climate change, john key and national
. 34 Comments

Some great political theatre from Greenpeace yesterday. A bunch of climate activists got up at the crack of dawn, plastered ready-made lawn around the outside of John Key’s electorate office, then put up some wee pine trees and stumps alongside a billboard saying “Would John solve this climate crime?” Looks like a couple of them even got inside a cow suit.

The point of the protest was to draw attention to the conversion of forests to corporate dairy farms, and in particular National’s lack of commitment to stopping this climate crime:

National have consistently failed to meet the mark over climate change and rates poorly on the issue when compared to almost every other political party. We’re calling on John Key to front up to the issue of deforestation for intensive dairy farming.

We think New Zealanders deserve to know where John Key’s commitment to tackling climate change is and how he and his party would deal with agriculture’s growing emissions.

Good luck getting that out of him in the next eight days. But in any case, a good political point and some great political theatre. It seems that despite the Herald’s best wishes our democracy is alive and well under the Electoral Finance Act.

Hat tip: Greenpeace blog

Granny Herald yearns for good old days but democracy alive and well

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in activism, election 2008, media and national
. 15 Comments

The Herald is once again trying to convince us that everyone is so scared of the EFA that there is no poltiical participation going on. Once again, they cite some rich right-wing organisations that don’t want to have to identify themselves when advertising, and so haven’t advertised at all. It seems the Right’s view is that democratic participation is rich organisations putting ads in the paper and trying to market to us.

It’s not. Real democracy is ordinary people, on the ground, talking, communicating, getting active. Maybe they’re helping a party or doing something off their own bat like putting up posters, making youtube vids, or pulling off clever political theatre. Here are a couple of examples that The Standard has been emailed just today:



check out more ‘John Key snake’ pics from Dunedin here

The Standard Week: 24-31 October

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in standard week
. 10 Comments

Two more examples of senior Nats hiding their conflicts of interest, in violation of Parliament’s rules, were revealed on The Standard this week. This time, however, the Nats were smart enough to have the issue fronted by chief spin-doctor Kevin Taylor and Gerry Brownlee, who knew that a robust response was the way to satisfy the media, whose attention would be move on in the swirl of the campaign before anyone thought to check whether their denials made sense. By not fronting with Key, they avoided a repeat of those ‘Tranzrail eyes’. This was also the week everyone got excited about the H-fee story, which turned out to be an absolute fizzer. Not one of Labour’s best plays by far, and an important lesson in what not to do in a campaign. It’s time to move back to policy, the one thing National really doesn’t want. For this final week, the Left must make the choice clear - continuing stable, inclusive government, that grows wealth while making sure people get a fair share, we invest in the future, and protect the environment, or a slash and burn right-wing government that would privatise ACC, gut Kiwisaver, cut work rights, weaken environmental protections, and let wages drop. Here are our favourite posts of the week:

More redunancy protection
we’re starting to see from Labour a pretty solid plan to provide security for workers and their families as the economy starts to deteriorate…[more]

Prisons for profit
Like the rest of their programme, National’s corrections policy is the same old ideological formula: remove control from the public sphere so the private sector can profit…[more]

Standard Scoop: Key exposed again on secret shares and Tranzrail
When the Tranzrail shares came to light, Key was asked whether he had any other undisclosed shares entailing a conflict of interest. He said he didn’t. That was not true…[more]

Standard scoop: Another senior Nat failed to disclose conflicts
[Gerry] seems a little upset about the drop in Contact’s share price, doesn’t he? Well he might, because Gerry Brownlee was a Contact shareholder; he had a financial interest in Contact’s performance and share price… [more]

On moral mandates
Key and the Herald can cry all they want, the fact remains: the legitimate and moral government is the one constituting the largest alliance of parties, whether or not it includes the single largest party…[more]

Don’t forget to check out our Standard lines series.

If you want to receive this weekly post by email, just flick us an email at thestandardnz@gmail.com to go on the Standardista list. On becoming a Standardista, you will receive your Standardista cloth cap, ‘how-to’ guide for living a PC life, class consciousness, and Notional Party yo-yo that swings from the right to the centre and back again every three years.*

*you won’t actually get these things, except the class consciousness

Tories’ crack at socialism a poor substitute

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in election 2008, labour, national, wages, welfare and workers' rights
. 5 Comments

National’s redundancy package would effectively continue Working for Families payments for some people who would otherwise lose them after redunancy. Only people who have been in the same job for six months would get it, cutting out labourers, temps, and contract workers. For about the same cost, it would deliver more money to fewer people than Labour’s policy, and would give more money to the more well-off. Labour’s scheme is better for the working class, National’s for highly indebted mortgage holders.

It’s nice they’ve had a crack at protecting workers but the instinct to favour the better-off always wins through, eh?

[You also have to consider the wider packages. While Labour's strengthening work rights and offering a minimum redundancy entitlement, National won't dare touch redundancy out of fear of offending its business mates and is instead planning to give employers the power to fire at will during a recession.]

Arseneau: Election too close to call

Published
by
Dancer
on October 31, 2008
in articles, election 2008 and polls
. 64 Comments

In her blog column Teresa Arseneau discusses the polls overall, and what happens if the largest party doesn’t form the government:

Several of these polls suggest that while National is likely to “win” the election - receive both the most votes and seats - it may not govern….But in an MMP election it is important to think in terms of party-blocs. And the source of a vote gain is as important as the gain itself. In the 2005 election, National grew its vote mainly at the expense of its potential partners - Act, UnitedFuture and New Zealand First - thus consolidating the centre-right vote. This partly explains why National’s support is now so large and why its potential coalition partners’ so small.

It is misleading then to simply compare the support of National and Labour. A more accurate picture is gained by looking at the relative support for potential governing blocs….The election is finely balanced between the two blocs.

The next week is crucial: one in four voters is still likely undecided. And support for the two blocs is so finely balanced that changes of less than 1% to each party’s vote, changes much smaller than the margin of error, could significantly alter the outcome of the election.

This time next week we’ll be into the final moments - and then it’s up to the voter. Centre right or Centre left?

Franks caught vandalising own billboards

Published
by
Guest post
on October 31, 2008
in humour
. 23 Comments

In a strange twist in the Franks billboard monitoring saga, infra red camera footage has revealed that Franks himself was responsibile for defacing his own hoardings.

Franks had previously claimed that he was the victim of an organised campaign to deface his hoardings and had installed infra red cameras to monitor his billboards. Photographic evidence revealed bored teenagers were responsible yet Franks has continued to insist “Mr Big” is still at large.

However, further evidence revealed today shows “Mr Big” is none other than Franks himself.

The Sensible Sentencing Trust was unavailable for comment.

Whose record is better?

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in activism, election 2008, greens, labour, national and youtube
. 6 Comments

I found it weird that National’s attack ad is a series of newspaper headlines. Everyone knows newspaper headlines are sensationalist and everyone knows that things were much worse under National in the 1990s, as this new youtube vid illustrates:

Meanwhile, the upbeat jokers at 08wire have a positive reponse to the Nat attack ad:

The Standard line: Nanny State

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in The Standard line, activism, child discipline and election 2008
. 31 Comments

So, you’re talking with someone about politics and they say something really dumb and wrong and you know it’s wrong but you don’t have the arguments and facts at your fingertips to make a decisive point. That’s where our election series, The Standard line, comes in. The info you need in bite-size form. Today: Nanny State 

Points:
- ask for specific examples of this so-called ‘Nanny State’ and why they are so awful that they are the decision someone would base their vote on. Does that example of ‘nanny sate’ really affect their life?
- in response to the Child Displicine Bill being raised, you can point out that:

- under the previous law people were being let off for hitting children with riding crops and other weapons,
- National supported the law and won’t reverse it,
- no-one has yet been convicted of assault on a child for a simple smack.
- It was just a minor change in the law to make sure child abusers weren’t getting protected by the law.

- on the lightbulbs

- The Government sets energy efficiency standards for all types of things - fridges, microwaves, and lights. All that happened was the standard for lights was raised to a point that most incandescent bulbs can’t match.
- You can still buy a huge range of bulbs, not just CFLs, halogen and LED as well.
- CFLs are not dangerous, they use a tiny amount of mercury, too little to have any health affect even if it were to somehow get in your body, and they are much cheaper to run, you can save hundreds a year.
- Shouldn’t we want a more energy efficent, smarter economy rather than keep on using out-dated technology?

- why does National make such a big deal over these minor things? Because they doen’t want you talking about things that matter like National’s policy to privatise ACC, cut work rights, lower wages, and gut Kiwisaver.

Not exactly Jon Stewart

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 31, 2008
in interweb and national
. 37 Comments

A new facebook group has started up called “I am killing a kitten for every person who votes for the Green Party” (*)

This group is to encourage New Zealander’s to join the fight against hippies and social engineering by killing a kitten for every vote they receive this election, if we run out of kittens we will start using ducklings and hedgehogs.

It’s not outrageous, its clearly an attempt at humour, but it is sad what passes for humour among some. It speaks to a nasty worldview among these people. People like Emmy Gargiulo, National Secretary of Young Nats, Michael Mabbet, ex-Young Nat President, and youth activist/41 year old National Party pollster David Farrar.

So, if you’re thinking of voting National, remember the type of people who will be ticking the same box as you.

More redundancy protection

Published
by
Tane
on October 30, 2008
in benefits, labour and workers' rights
. 76 Comments

It’s good to see Labour turning its focus back onto policy (and particularly the economy) today with its announcement of a “job search allowance” for people made redundant in the coming economic downturn.

Basically, the allowance means if you lose your job you’ll be eligible for the dole without means-testing for up to 13 weeks. Next to its policy to bring in a minimum redundancy entitlement and a retraining allowance, we’re starting to see from Labour a pretty solid plan to provide security for workers and their families as the economy starts to deteriorate.

The only real I have with the policy is that it excludes people who have been in the work force for less than five years - I can’t see any good reason why young people, many of whom will have families, should miss out.

Still, overall this is good, sensible, vote-winning stuff.

It’ll be interesting to see what the Nats come up with tomorrow in response. The signs are their package will be heavily targeted toward middle-income swing voters but I’ll hold my judgement until I’ve seen it. One thing’s for sure though, they’ve got their work cut out for them if they want to trump this one.

The Standard line: Tax cuts

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 30, 2008
in The Standard line, election 2008, labour, national and tax
. 23 Comments

[update: download this (tax-and-kiwisaver-calculator) simple excel table that will calculate tax cut and Kiwisaver losses under Labour and National, and the difference, for you and your family. No other calculator has included Kiwisaver losses]

So, you’re talking with someone about politics and they say something really dumb and wrong and you know it’s wrong but you don’t have the arguments and facts at your fingertips to make a decisive point. That’s where our election series, The Standard line, comes in. The info you need in bite-size form. Today: tax cuts

Points:
- tax cuts are not the only thing you should judge a party on. Tax is used to provide public services - there is a trade-off between tax cuts and better public services
- don’t just consider your personal situation. Just because one party offers you a bigger tax cut is it worthwhile if others you care about lose out?
- If you, like 1 million people, earn less than $14,000 the tax cuts from both parties are the same
- If you, like around 500,000 people, earn $14,000 to $24,000 you get more from Labour’s tax cuts
- If you, like around 500,000 people, get Working for Families, Super, or a benefit and your income is less than $44,000 your tax cut is larger under Labour because you wouldn’t get National’s ‘independent earner’ rebate
- if you, like 850,000 people, are in Kiwisaver you will be better off with Labour because National would cut Kiwisaver to pay for its tax cuts.
- Most of the money in Labour’s cuts will go to low and middle incomes, most of the money in National’s cuts would go to the wealthy. Just 10% of people get 40% of the money in National’s cuts.
- A family with children, each parent earning $35,000 and in Kiwisaver would be $52 a week worse off under National compared to Labour’s cuts. John Key would be $87 a week better off.
- National’s next round of tax cuts would come in 2009, a year before Labour’s next round, but there is nothing in that second round for anyone earning less than $48,000 and most of the money would go to people earning more than $70,000.
- Labour’s tax cuts are already passed into law. Labour has said they will not be cancelling their next rounds of cuts

Ripping the stuffing out

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 30, 2008
in humour, john key, kiwisaver, national, wages, workers' rights and youtube
. 1 Comment

The CTU has released a second great youtube vid. Well worth a watch and emailing around.

The DL Debates - Rangitikei

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 30, 2008
in drinking liberally and election 2008
. 7 Comments

The good fellas and fellaresses of Drinking Liberally Palmerston North have organised three debates for the Rangatikei electorate. These will be the only candidate debates in the electorate, so really great to see DL making it happen.

The debates are:

2 November, 7pm
Feilding - Senior citizens hall, Bowen street

3 November, 7pm
Marton - Rangitikei College Library

5 November, 7pm
Taumarunui - Cossie Club 10 Maramiri Street

There are persistant rumours of DL Wellington organising a Wellington Central debate too but I’ve yet to hear confirmation on time and place.

No smoking gun

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 30, 2008
in john key, labour and media
. 151 Comments

It turns out the Herald’s story about John Key’s H-fee involvement is a bust. Aside from Key not being straight with the dates he worked at Elders there isn’t anything firm to tie him to the actual fraud.

That’s not the story I expected given the Herald had decided to lead with this story on their website yesterday afternoon and hinted at a “smoking gun”. The reason it wasn’t the story I expected is because about a month ago we had material anonymously emailed to us that gave the background to the H-fee and included a series of posts outlining the issue. We ran the first of these posts but after trawling through the story and checking as much as we could we decided there simply wasn’t enough substance to run with. It now looks like we weren’t the only ones who were receiving this information.

There are still questions to be answered about this story, such as why did John get his dates wrong with the inoculation he took to the Herald in 2007 and why was the Herald promising audio of the 2007 interview yesterday and treating the story like a scoop when it knew there was no hard evidence?

But I expect these questions will be lost in the mishandling of the issue. My advice to Labour? Make sure you’ve got your ducks lined up before you go to the media, and when National is releasing stuff like their appalling prison policy don’t waste your time on blind alley stories like this one.

Brian Fallow: words of warning on bailout

Published
by
Dancer
on October 30, 2008
in uncategorized
. 11 Comments

Feeling attracted to the idea of getting your mortgage covered should the sky fall in? Brian Fallow comments on the perils of Key’s policy plans:

“We are in the mess we are in because of a cavalier attitude towards debt and risk by households and their bankers, both here and in more important economies overseas. Yet the prevailing view seems to be that the solution is to be equally reckless with the taxpayer’s money. Having privatised the gains, it’s time to socialise the losses. That doesn’t just relocate the problem. It makes it worse by creating a disconnect between actions and consequences.

The latest example of this is the National Party’s proposed “rescue package” for people who lose their jobs and consequently struggle to meet their loan obligations. It sounds compassionate. It might even be seen as a pragmatic measure that would limit further downward pressure on house prices.

But that is a thin coating of sugar around a bitter pill, made of a substance called moral hazard.

It heightens the risk that we will entrench, rather than reduce, the very structural problems which underlie the credit crunch.”

Synchronised presidential debating

Published
by
all_your_base
on October 29, 2008
in interweb
. 2 Comments

The H-fee explained

Published
by
Steve Pierson
on October 29, 2008
in corruption, election 2008, h-fee and john key
. 159 Comments

A little more detail to flesh out Tane’s post. The core of the H-fee story is this:

In 1987, head of Equiticorp Allan Hawkins illegally helped Elders Merchant Finance in New Zealand with the takeover of another company. In return, Elders paid Hawkins $66m through a series of sham foreign exchange transactions. There were two so-called ‘H-Fee’ payments, which were fraudulent and illegal. When all this was uncovered, it was described as the biggest fraud in Australasian history. Hawkins and Kenneth Charles Jarrett, the head of Elders, went to jail.

John Key had joined Elders Merchant Finance in 1985. He was head of foreign exchange from 1985 until he left Elders. Key told the media and the Serious Fraud Office that he left in 1987, before the H-fee transactions took place in January and August 1988: “Just one small issue: Three months before any of those deals got decided, I had left Elders.”. Key has also said that, if he had been working at Elders when the H-fee transactions went through, he would have been making the transactions.

Actually, as now established by the Herald, Key left in June 1988, after the first H-fee. That means John Key was the head of Elders Forex when massive illegal transactions were being conducted by that business group. Key himself says that he would have been the one making the transactions. It remains to be seen if Key actually signed off the deals, but he clearly knows more than he led us to believe. Why else would he lie about the date that he left Elders on multiple occasions?

As so often with Key, we are left asking the same question: ‘if he has nothing to hide, why all the lies?’

This looks big

Published
by
Tane
on October 29, 2008
in john key
. 46 Comments

It looks like the Herald has as a scoop on John Key’s possible involvement in the H-fee scandal. According to the article:

John Key faces accusations of misleading the public about his knowledge of one of New Zealand’s most notorious white collar crimes.

The allegations centre around the so-called H-Fee - two payments totalling A$66.5 million to Equiticorp funnelled via sham foreign exchange transactions in 1988 - and an interview Mr Key gave the Herald last year.

There have been rumours around the traps about this for some time but nothing substantial. It’ll be interesting to see what the Herald has got tomorrow, and whether the story stacks up.

John Key’s business experience

Published
by
John A
on October 29, 2008
in humour
. 9 Comments

Explained in detail