Quote
“I'm a big believer – in politics and leadership – you've got to take >people
with you,” Willis said.
“You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important.”
Unquote
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >role.
QuoteYes great words, and yes we need to keep watching and listening. The pity of it is that there are a large number of iditos who cannot do that, theyh are so entrenched in their belief systems that they will hate this government whatever gets done. And these people really are idiots, they often have the mental capacity to understand that they should give a new government a chance but their political or racial or other beliefs run their lives and they don't actually know it. What a waste of space they are.
“We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the
next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >that is not how we want to be as a government.”
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people >with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you
give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important.
Unquote
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >role.
QuoteMost the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General
report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the
next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >that is not how we want to be as a government.
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people >>with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important.
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance
Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby
not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and
effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that
are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial
impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the
next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >>that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own
actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to
include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their
impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people >>>with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important.
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance
Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby
not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and
effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that
are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial
impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >>>that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own
actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to
include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their
impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance
Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby
not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >>>>that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own
actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>>>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their
impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through
increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with
nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy
our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip
service to Climate change goals . . .
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), TonyThis idiotic and probably deliberate habit of yours to respond to the wrong people is tiresome. You defend it by saying it is a group discussion - that is a fatuous and deliberately obtuse argument. It is just you being objectionable. Please grow up and treat people with respect for the first time in your miserable life.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take >>>>people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance
Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby
not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around -
It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be - >>>>that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own
actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>>>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their
impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through
increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with
nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy
our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip
service to Climate change goals . . .
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 10:33:31 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance >>>>Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby >>>>not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around - >>>>>It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be -
that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own >>>>actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>>>>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their >>>>impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >>information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through
increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with >>nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy
our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip
service to Climate change goals . . .
Rich, who was your post above in reply to? Tony was the previous
poster but is comment was further up in the thread.
In general the mini-budget was of minor interest but an indicator of
where the new Government's priorities lie. I agree with Gordon that
some of the sentiments expressed showed good intent but the key issue
is to deliver on that good intent. It will come as no surprise to
many that I oppose the reduction of tax revenue in any form until a >significant portion of the increased Government's accumulated over the
last 6 years is repaid to keep interest costs at historic levels
(despite the jump in interest rates for Government debt).
The new Government has just got started. Unlike most previous
National governments it is actually repealing legislation that it
opposed in opposition. There is still a fair way to go with that - >particularly in formulating how water infrastructure needs will be
dealt with.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), TonyThis idiotic and probably deliberate habit of yours to respond to the wrong >people is tiresome. You defend it by saying it is a group discussion - that is >a fatuous and deliberately obtuse argument. It is just you being objectionable.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take >>>>>people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance >>>>Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby >>>>not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of
course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to
see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but
it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around - >>>>>It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be -
that is not how we want to be as a government.
are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own >>>>actions more generously than historians will judge them
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to >>>>>read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their >>>>impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying
the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see .
. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >>information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through
increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with >>nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy
our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip
service to Climate change goals . . .
Please grow up and treat people with respect for the first time in your >miserable life.
And what you wrote is wrong.
A question for you - why exactly do you do all you can (in your own inimitable >but pointless way) to make this government fail? Do tell.
On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 23:50:42 -0000 (UTC), TonyThat is exactly the point - but you will never understand that, most people will however.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), TonyThis idiotic and probably deliberate habit of yours to respond to the wrong >>people is tiresome. You defend it by saying it is a group discussion - that >>is
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take >>>>>>people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance >>>>>Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby >>>>>not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of >>>>>course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to >>>>>see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but >>>>>it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they >>>>>are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own >>>>>actions more generously than historians will judge them
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around - >>>>>>It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be >>>>>>-
that is not how we want to be as a government.
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to
read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their >>>>>impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying >>>>>the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see . >>>>>. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >>>information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through >>>increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with >>>nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy >>>our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip >>>service to Climate change goals . . .
a fatuous and deliberately obtuse argument. It is just you being >>objectionable.
If you did not think my comments were directed to you, why bother
replying?
It is not as if you had anything to contribute.See above.
Please grow up and treat people with respect for the first time in your >>miserable life.
And what you wrote is wrong.
A question for you - why exactly do you do all you can (in your own >>inimitable
but pointless way) to make this government fail? Do tell.
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:39:38 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>Absolute nonsense - even you don't believe that.
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 10:33:31 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take >>>>>>people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance >>>>>Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby >>>>>not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of >>>>>course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to >>>>>see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but >>>>>it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they >>>>>are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own >>>>>actions more generously than historians will judge them
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around - >>>>>>It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be >>>>>>-
that is not how we want to be as a government.
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to
read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their >>>>>impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying >>>>>the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see . >>>>>. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >>>information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through >>>increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with >>>nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy >>>our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip >>>service to Climate change goals . . .
Rich, who was your post above in reply to? Tony was the previous
poster but is comment was further up in the thread.
It was a further post in the general discussion - it refers fairly
directly to : -
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take
people with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If
you give them the information, if you help them understand the issues,
then people will better understand the decisions you then make. I
think transparency with what's going on with our economy is really >important.
I suspect most people agreed with those sentiments, and in context
looked forward to the mini budget fulfilling at least some of those >sentiments. Sadly the danger of such statements is that they set
expectations too high, and we did not really get anything useful -
just confirmation that the May 2023 budget appears not to have been
studied by the then opposition, and that we are now being primed for
many promises not being achievable, particularly any promises other
than relating to the top tax rate and landlord concessions; and even
there those changes may be delayed.
The initial post was a good reminder of an ideal that we are entitled
to expect. My comments are therefore a continuation of a conversation
to a ''usenet group'' - directed to the group rather than any specific >individual.
No they are not - you have made that lie before and have still not provided evidence.In general the mini-budget was of minor interest but an indicator of
where the new Government's priorities lie. I agree with Gordon that
some of the sentiments expressed showed good intent but the key issue
is to deliver on that good intent. It will come as no surprise to
many that I oppose the reduction of tax revenue in any form until a >>significant portion of the increased Government's accumulated over the
last 6 years is repaid to keep interest costs at historic levels
(despite the jump in interest rates for Government debt).
The new Government has just got started. Unlike most previous
National governments it is actually repealing legislation that it
opposed in opposition. There is still a fair way to go with that - >>particularly in formulating how water infrastructure needs will be
dealt with.
They are in a few cases going further and repealing legislation that
they voted for previously - RMA changes for example are more about
changing enough that it is a National / ACT / NZ First led bill, yes
there are some controversial changes, but in many cases the current >indications are that changes from issues they have previously agreed
may be very minor.
I agree with you that they have a long way to go on water
infrastructure - but they are signaling a direction with reducing
water standards . . .
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:39:38 +1300, Crash <nogood@dontbother.invalid>
wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 10:33:31 +1300, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> >>wrote:
On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 19:27:46 -0000 (UTC), Tony
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 19 Dec 2023 08:01:21 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:But wasn't!
https://www.thepost.co.nz/a/politics/350133870/were-going-start-new-chapter-nicola-willis-her-mini-budget
Quote
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take people
with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If you >>>>>>give them the information, if you help them understand the issues, then >>>>>>people will better understand the decisions you then make. I think >>>>>>transparency with what's going on with our economy is really important. >>>>>>
Unquote
Certainly nice words, which could have been said by any Finance >>>>>Minister in the last 30 years.
Was that said before the election? Or
before they decided not to do regulatory impact statements? (thereby >>>>>not even letting Members of Parliament know the financial impact and >>>>>effect on other laws and regulations of the "100 day" commitments that >>>>>are being rushed through Parliament under urgency). They will of >>>>>course need to do some of that work to enable courts for example to >>>>>see the intent of legislation as well as the actual words . . ., but >>>>>it does have the effect of hiding the short and long terms financial >>>>>impact of changes for at least a short time.
It not it nice to have a politican who understands what is needed in the >>>>>>role.Most the 100 day commitments come across as exactly that - but they >>>>>are not the first and will not be the last to describe their own >>>>>actions more generously than historians will judge them
Quote
We can't govern by press release. And my read of that Auditor General >>>>>>report was that the government had got things the wrong way around - >>>>>>It was far more driven by what the headline would be in the paper the >>>>>>next day than what the outcome for New Zealanders in three years would be -
that is not how we want to be as a government.
Take notice people, headlines are not the whole story.
It is somewhat uplifting to read this even though it may soon turn into >>>>>>bitter disappointment. It seems also a good idea to set aside some time to
read the mini budget which is planned for tomorrow.
That will certainly be interesting - Treasury will have had time to >>>>>include most of the coalition proposals, and include much of their >>>>>impact in financial projections. I gather there is talk of delaying >>>>>the changes to the top tax rate; we shall just have to wait and see . >>>>>. .
I don't think we can yet say it is bitter disappointment; the lack of >>>information is about what many expected - essentially they are
deferring a lot of expenditure to the future and still can't justify
the tax cuts, which would themselves make life difficult through >>>increasing cost inflation . . . They also appear to be hoping (with >>>nothing to back that hope) that we do not have further storms, flood
or earthquakes.
The other big question is how long some countries will continue to buy >>>our primary produce when our government is clearly only paying lip >>>service to Climate change goals . . .
Rich, who was your post above in reply to? Tony was the previous
poster but is comment was further up in the thread.
It was a further post in the general discussion - it refers fairly
directly to : -
I'm a big believer in politics and leadership you've got to take
people with you, Willis said.
You've got to treat people with the trust that people are smart. If
you give them the information, if you help them understand the issues,
then people will better understand the decisions you then make. I
think transparency with what's going on with our economy is really >important.
I suspect most people agreed with those sentiments, and in context
looked forward to the mini budget fulfilling at least some of those >sentiments. Sadly the danger of such statements is that they set
expectations too high, and we did not really get anything useful -
just confirmation that the May 2023 budget appears not to have been
studied by the then opposition, and that we are now being primed for
many promises not being achievable, particularly any promises other
than relating to the top tax rate and landlord concessions; and even
there those changes may be delayed.
The initial post was a good reminder of an ideal that we are entitled
to expect. My comments are therefore a continuation of a conversation
to a ''usenet group'' - directed to the group rather than any specific >individual.
In general the mini-budget was of minor interest but an indicator of
where the new Government's priorities lie. I agree with Gordon that
some of the sentiments expressed showed good intent but the key issue
is to deliver on that good intent. It will come as no surprise to
many that I oppose the reduction of tax revenue in any form until a >>significant portion of the increased Government's accumulated over the
last 6 years is repaid to keep interest costs at historic levels
(despite the jump in interest rates for Government debt).
The new Government has just got started. Unlike most previous
National governments it is actually repealing legislation that it
opposed in opposition. There is still a fair way to go with that - >>particularly in formulating how water infrastructure needs will be
dealt with.
They are in a few cases going further and repealing legislation that
they voted for previously - RMA changes for example are more about
changing enough that it is a National / ACT / NZ First led bill, yes
there are some controversial changes, but in many cases the current >indications are that changes from issues they have previously agreed
may be very minor.
I agree with you that they have a long way to go on water
infrastructure - but they are signaling a direction with reducing
water standards . . .
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 101:13:16 |
| Calls: | 6,659 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,334,859 |