I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See: https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The report available here: https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
would have been available to the new government but they decided
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. _____________________
the next item is also interesting. https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time -
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There are >several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at >the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
The report available here:
https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
would have been available to the new government but they decided
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time -
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't understand it if you did.
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There are >>several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at >>the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that
if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there
needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic
messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government
had done even a little bit of preparation.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decidedhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time -
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), TonyThey have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have applied road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well done for congratulating them.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't understand >>it
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement >>>>> that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the >>>>> results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have >>>>> a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There are >>>>several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at >>>>the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that
if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic
messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government
had done even a little bit of preparation.
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus.
don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decidedhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which >>>>> will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting >>>>> emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good >>>>> reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act, >>>>> and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as >>>>> they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that >>>>> she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time - >>>>> it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes >>>>> of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers >>>>> of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't understand it
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement >>>> that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the >>>> results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There are >>>several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at >>>the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that
if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there
needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic
messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government
had done even a little bit of preparation.
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decidedhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting >>>> emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good >>>> reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act, >>>> and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as >>>> they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time -
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers >>>> of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), TonyNo I have not.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), TonyThey have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>applied
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement >>>>>>> that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the >>>>>>> results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have >>>>>>> a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There >>>>>>are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus.
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well >>done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* low emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have
set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained in doing so.I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which >>>>>>> will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting >>>>>>> emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good >>>>>>> reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act, >>>>>>> and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as >>>>>>> they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that >>>>>>> she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time - >>>>>>> it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes >>>>>>> of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers >>>>>>> of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>> little but harass departments.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article - yes they are making some low emission
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), TonyThey have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have applied >road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well done >for congratulating them.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't understand >>>it
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement >>>>>> that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government.
The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the >>>>>> results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of
emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have >>>>>> a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to
reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges.
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at >>>>>the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus.
don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I won't >read their garbage today either.Your closed mind is increasingly evident.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decidedhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which >>>>>> will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting >>>>>> emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government.
_____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good >>>>>> reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act, >>>>>> and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as >>>>>> they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have
shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were
indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that >>>>>> she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury
which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time - >>>>>> it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes >>>>>> of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers >>>>>> of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do
little but harass departments.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), TonyNo I have not.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement >>>>>>>> that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this
decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the >>>>>>>> results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have >>>>>>>> a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There >>>>>>>are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus.
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well >>>done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* low >emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have
set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about that. They have not done what I supported - but you knew that. Thankfully
Pity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like >norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained in >doing so.
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which >>>>>>>> will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting >>>>>>>> emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>> _____________________https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good >>>>>>>> reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act, >>>>>>>> and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as >>>>>>>> they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that >>>>>>>> she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update;
thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time - >>>>>>>> it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes >>>>>>>> of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers >>>>>>>> of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:37:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyYpu lying fool - you did support it and more than once.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:They have not done what I supported
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), TonyNo I have not.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this >>>>>>>>> decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have >>>>>>>>> a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>>>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There >>>>>>>>are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled >>>>>>>>at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus. >>>>>I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well >>>>done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* low >>emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have
set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about >>that.
- but you knew that. ThankfullyANother lie - some Maori (fortunately not all) are refusing to talk to government - the same government that sent a senior minister to the hui.
they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and
their unwillingness to consult and commission advice is already coming >through clearly.
I don't read them either unless someone posts a reference, only idiots like you read political blogs - they are worthless.Pity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like >>norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained in >>doing so.
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>>>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
Kiwiblog Sewer
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess which >>>>>>>>> will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meetinghttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>>> _____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that >>>>>>>>> she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update; >>>>>>>>> thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>>>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time - >>>>>>>>> it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes >>>>>>>>> of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I supported changes to the charging regime for all vehicles, and yes
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:37:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyYpu lying fool - you did support it and more than once.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:They have not done what I supported
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:No I have not.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box.
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this >>>>>>>>>> decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears >>>>>>>>>> that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. There
are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is settled
at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>>>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus. >>>>>>I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well >>>>>done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* low
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have >>>>set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about >>>that.
Now you are really confused - this thread is talking about road user- but you knew that. ThankfullyANother lie - some Maori (fortunately not all) are refusing to talk to >government - the same government that sent a senior minister to the hui.
they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and
their unwillingness to consult and commission advice is already coming >>through clearly.
I don't read them either unless someone posts a reference, only idiots like youPity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the >>Kiwiblog Sewer
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like >>>norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained in
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>>>>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
doing so.
read political blogs - they are worthless.
But enjoy your fetishes and your sarcastic lies.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess whichhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>>>> _____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update; >>>>>>>>>> thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the >>>>>>>>>> previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time -
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:51:51 -0000 (UTC), TonyExactly - why did you deny it?
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I supported changes to the charging regime for all vehicles, and yes
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:37:11 -0000 (UTC), TonyYpu lying fool - you did support it and more than once.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:They have not done what I supported
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:No I have not.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>>>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box. >>>>>>>>>>
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international >>>>>>>>>>>agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this >>>>>>>>>>> decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose, >>>>>>>>>>> does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where >>>>>>>>>>> registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and >>>>>>>>>>>the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse >>>>>>>>>>> health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to >>>>>>>>>>>have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. >>>>>>>>>>There
are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is >>>>>>>>>>settled
at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic >>>>>>>>>volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus. >>>>>>>I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well >>>>>>done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* >>>>low
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have >>>>>set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about >>>>that.
picking up some elements of the UK processes. They have made silly
changes as described in the url above which I posted.
You iontolerable little runt. You craised the subject and I responded to it. Get a life, you are a creep.Now you are really confused - this thread is talking about road user- but you knew that. ThankfullyANother lie - some Maori (fortunately not all) are refusing to talk to >>government - the same government that sent a senior minister to the hui.
they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and
their unwillingness to consult and commission advice is already coming >>>through clearly.
charges and petrol excise rates, not the Maori issues are to do with
the Treaty and changes being made to arrangements to improve Maori
Health without consultation with Maori - the Waitangi Tribunal has
agreed to an urgent hearing - but that has nothing to do with this
thread.
I don't read them either unless someone posts a reference, only idiots like >>youPity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the >>>Kiwiblog Sewer
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like >>>>norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained >>>>in
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>>>>>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
doing so.
read political blogs - they are worthless.
But enjoy your fetishes and your sarcastic lies.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess >>>>>>>>>>>whichhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in >>>>>>>>>>>meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>>>>> _____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory >>>>>>>>>>> Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see >>>>>>>>>>>good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be >>>>>>>>>>> thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information >>>>>>>>>>>Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared >>>>>>>>>>>as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found >>>>>>>>>>>that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update; >>>>>>>>>>> thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that >>>>>>>>>>> she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time >>>>>>>>>>>-
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the >>>>>>>>>>>likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large >>>>>>>>>>>numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Wrong thread, Tony - or as you would say, "Off Topic"
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:51:51 -0000 (UTC), TonyExactly - why did you deny it?
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I supported changes to the charging regime for all vehicles, and yes >>picking up some elements of the UK processes. They have made silly
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:37:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Ypu lying fool - you did support it and more than once.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:They have not done what I supported
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:No I have not.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>>>>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two >>>>>>>>>>>> further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box. >>>>>>>>>>>
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international >>>>>>>>>>>>agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this >>>>>>>>>>>> decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has >>>>>>>>>>>> indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to >>>>>>>>>>>> pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, and >>>>>>>>>>>>the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to >>>>>>>>>>>>have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress.
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. >>>>>>>>>>>There
are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is >>>>>>>>>>>settled
at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that >>>>>>>>>>if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there >>>>>>>>>>needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te traffic
volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government >>>>>>>>>>had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus. >>>>>>>>I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>>>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so well
done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* >>>>>low
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have >>>>>>set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about >>>>>that.
changes as described in the url above which I posted.
You iontolerable little runt. You craised the subject and I responded to it. >Get a life, you are a creep.
the Treaty and changes being made to arrangements to improve Maori- but you knew that. ThankfullyANother lie - some Maori (fortunately not all) are refusing to talk to >>>government - the same government that sent a senior minister to the hui. >>Now you are really confused - this thread is talking about road user >>charges and petrol excise rates, not the Maori issues are to do with
they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and >>>>their unwillingness to consult and commission advice is already coming >>>>through clearly.
Health without consultation with Maori - the Waitangi Tribunal has
agreed to an urgent hearing - but that has nothing to do with this
thread.
I don't read them either unless someone posts a reference, only idiots like >>>youPity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the >>>>Kiwiblog Sewer
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit like >>>>>norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be gained >>>>>in
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so I >>>>>>>won'tYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
read their garbage today either.
doing so.
read political blogs - they are worthless.
But enjoy your fetishes and your sarcastic lies.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess >>>>>>>>>>>>whichhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in >>>>>>>>>>>>meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>>>>>> _____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see >>>>>>>>>>>>good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information >>>>>>>>>>>>Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well prepared
as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found >>>>>>>>>>>>that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update; >>>>>>>>>>>> thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the >>>>>>>>>>>> answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service time
-
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the >>>>>>>>>>>>likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large >>>>>>>>>>>>numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
On Sun, 21 Jan 2024 19:50:22 -0000 (UTC), TonyNot in the least. you have shown yourself to be a creep in this thread. More than once.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Wrong thread, Tony - or as you would say, "Off Topic"
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 23:51:51 -0000 (UTC), TonyExactly - why did you deny it?
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:I supported changes to the charging regime for all vehicles, and yes >>>picking up some elements of the UK processes. They have made silly >>>changes as described in the url above which I posted.
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:37:11 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:Ypu lying fool - you did support it and more than once.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:They have not done what I supported
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 21:05:25 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:No I have not.
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:You have mis-read the article
On Sat, 20 Jan 2024 19:41:17 -0000 (UTC), Tony >>>>>>>>><lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:They have not made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they have >>>>>>>>applied
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 20 Jan 2024 08:14:40 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>You have no idea what preparation they have done and you wouldn't >>>>>>>>>>understand
On 2024-01-19, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> I posted an item from No Right Turn earlier today, and noticed two
further articles worthy of wider considerations.The pervious Goverment (Labour) certainly were in this box. >>>>>>>>>>>>
See:
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
Ignoring the contempt that National has for an international >>>>>>>>>>>>>agreement
that a previous National-led government signed us up to, this >>>>>>>>>>>>> decision, and the lack of clarity regarding just what they >>>>>>>>>>>>>propose,
does demonstrate that they were very ill-prepared for government. >>>>>>>>>>>>
The
article was written a few days ago, and I think the government has
indicated that they may modify the amount lighter vehicles need to
pay. I have previously written about my experience in the UK, >>>>>>>>>>>>>where
registration requires proof of at least third party insurance, >>>>>>>>>>>>>and
the
results of a vehicle fitness test that included a measurement of >>>>>>>>>>>>> emissions - at that time the UK government was concerned at >>>>>>>>>>>>>adverse
health effects from vehicle emissions). It would be very easy to >>>>>>>>>>>>>have
a mix of registration charges road user charges and fuel taxes to >>>>>>>>>>>>> reflect axle weight, emissions and distance traveled; but it >>>>>>>>>>>>>appears
that the government have not had.
The UK is in the process of putting EV into the road user charges. >>>>>>>>>>>>
Geoff buys cars on you tube has reiews of the progress. >>>>>>>>>>>>
In my view I think NZ needs to have a discussion on what is fair. >>>>>>>>>>>>There
are
several ways of doing it and it is important that the matter is >>>>>>>>>>>>settled
at
the start otherwise the EV owners will moan about it.
I am less concerned about EV owners moaning - a lot of groups do that
if they think it will get them lower charges - but I agree that there
needs to be more discussion - we do not need incorrect economic >>>>>>>>>>>messages. Thanks for the reference to the UK - they do have te >>>>>>>>>>>traffic
volumes to make fair charges desirable. Would that our new government
had done even a little bit of preparation.
it
if you did.
AT least they are doing something unlike the Ardern/Hipkins circus. >>>>>>>>>I know they have made low emission vehicles more expensive, but they >>>>>>>>>don't appear to know what they are doing after that. See >>>>>>>>>https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/from-clean-car-discount-to-clean-car-tax.html
road user charges to EVs. Something you have supported many times so >>>>>>>>well
done
for congratulating them.
- yes they are making some low emissionYou did not make yourself clear - do get some lessons in English. "*Some* >>>>>>low
vehicles more expensive than petrol vehicles - essentially they have >>>>>>>set RUC charges at a higher cost than petrol excise costs.
emission vehicles" is not "low emission vehicles" - see?
They are doing what you have supported so I assume you are pleased about >>>>>>that.
You iontolerable little runt. You craised the subject and I responded to it. >>Get a life, you are a creep.
the Treaty and changes being made to arrangements to improve Maori- but you knew that. ThankfullyANother lie - some Maori (fortunately not all) are refusing to talk to >>>>government - the same government that sent a senior minister to the hui. >>>Now you are really confused - this thread is talking about road user >>>charges and petrol excise rates, not the Maori issues are to do with
they have some time to fix it, but their lack of preparedness, and >>>>>their unwillingness to consult and commission advice is already coming >>>>>through clearly.
Health without consultation with Maori - the Waitangi Tribunal has
agreed to an urgent hearing - but that has nothing to do with this >>>thread.
I don't read them either unless someone posts a reference, only idiots like >>>>youPity you cannot be more enthusiastic about progress.You will be even more bereft of ideas if you give up The BFD and the >>>>>Kiwiblog Sewer
My mind is significantly more open than yours - but I don't read shit >>>>>>like
I don't usually look at your favourite blog site, they usually lie, so >>>>>>>>IYour closed mind is increasingly evident.
won't
read their garbage today either.
norightturn or any other polical hack sites. There is nothing to be >>>>>>gained
in
doing so.
read political blogs - they are worthless.
But enjoy your fetishes and your sarcastic lies.
I'll have a look at the
Geoffs buys car videos.
The report available here:
would have been available to the new government but they decided >>>>>>>>>>>>> decisions without advice were desirable, and we now have a mess >>>>>>>>>>>>>whichhttps://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/regulatory-impact-statement-terminating-the-CCD-FINAL-30-November-2023-REDACTED.pdf
will unfairly penalise many vehicle owners - and not assist in >>>>>>>>>>>>>meeting
emission commitments accepted by the new coalition government. >>>>>>>>>>>>> _____________________
the next item is also interesting.
https://norightturn.blogspot.com/2024/01/willis-made-no-complaints-about-prefu.html
First we can be thankful that NAct1st only did away with >>>>>>>>>>>>>Regulatory
Impact Statements for their ''urgent repeals", but we can now see >>>>>>>>>>>>>good
reason for why they were stupid to even do that. But we can also >>>>>>>>>>>>>be
thankful that they have not meddled with the Official Information >>>>>>>>>>>>>Act,
and thankful to the public service for having been as well >>>>>>>>>>>>>prepared
as
they could be for a new Government. Enquiries under that Act have >>>>>>>>>>>>> shown that the claims of ''cooking the books" from National were >>>>>>>>>>>>> indeed deliberate lies by an embarrassed Nicola Willis who found >>>>>>>>>>>>>that
she had not understood the budget or the Pre-election update; >>>>>>>>>>>>> thankfully she will now have had personal briefings from Treasury >>>>>>>>>>>>> which have hopefully put her straight, but it is disappointing >>>>>>>>>>>>>that
she has not apologised for her unwarranted slurs on Treasury and >>>>>>>>>>>>>the
previous government.
Good on No Right Turn for using the ACT, but in a way that got the
answers being sought without needlessly wasting public service >>>>>>>>>>>>>time
-
it contrasts with the waste of public money that arose from the >>>>>>>>>>>>>likes
of the NZ Taxpayer Union flooding the public sector with large >>>>>>>>>>>>>numbers
of OIA requests that in some cases appeared to be designed to do >>>>>>>>>>>>> little but harass departments.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 107:16:44 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,482 |