Category: Economic Issues
Jacinda Ardern’s Tax Working Group released its final report last week. It recommends a highly punitive capital gains tax, which it claims would make New Zealand’s tax system ‘fairer’ by forcing the ‘rich’ to pay more tax.
There is no evidence the that “the rich are getting richer”, that the highest income earners are increasing their income share. Similarly, there is no evidence that “the poor are getting poorer”. The extremes are not diverging.
Politics has been described as the contest of ideas. It is also the art of manipulation. This was evident during the 13 hour debate on the Prime Minister’s Statement that began on Parliament’s first sitting day for the new year.
Just a few days before Waitangi Day the government announced it has earmarked several million more dollars for Maori projects. During Waitangi Day commemorations it may express its willingness to give iwi leaders a greater say in governance, too - but without providing critical details.
Last week Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern met with her British counterpart Teresa May at 10 Downing Street to discuss a trade deal with New Zealand once the UK leaves the European Union.
It remains to be seen whether New Zealanders will decide the price of the Government’s climate extremism is too high and say enough is enough. The French President has just backed down from raising fuel taxes as a key part of his decarbonisation plan, following extreme protests that had the potential to destabilise the country.
In April 2016, the Royal Society of New Zealand published a report ‘Transition to a low-carbon economy for New Zealand’. The report was deeply substandard in my opinion, and I am not alone. I wrote up my findings and the resulting paper was rejected. I am publishing the original paper and the redacted referees’ reports here to show how serious debate is being suppressed.
This paper is in three sections. The first is a paper I wrote examining claims made by the Royal Society of New Zealand in 2016 on transitioning New Zealand to a low carbon economy. The second is the correspondence with the editor of the Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand. The third deals with the editor of the Journal of New Zealand Studies. While the referees thought the approach to the research was to be lauded, they could not agree with the results, and used the old ruse of nit-picking instead of unravelling the substantive arguments...