Ambitious for New Zealand, not...

The budget was presented here last week and if the aim was soley to avoid a ratings downgrade from S&P you have to say it passed the test, however if that is really the best that the National-led administration can come up with, bring on 2011 I say. I'm only going to touch on 3 areas, they signify just how bad the government here is IMO.

To recap, since the election we have had tax cuts passed under urgency in November and the second two tranches cancelled (deferred is the word used, but even if implemented in 2011/12 they will be different to the original scheme) also under urgency this past week. Now remember the tories campaigned hard on tax cuts and how they were fully costed yada yada, so for them to cancel the next lot is really quite unforgivable IMO. I understand that it is easier to remove something we have only been promised rather than delivered, but hearing Bill English prattle on about 'entitlements' when talking about WFF etc seriously made me question if he'd come across to Labour. I would have rather seen them be true to their supporters and spend some political capital, keeping the tax cuts and removing some of the middle / upper-middle class redistribution like WFF or putting interest at the rate of the CPI on Student Loans - although the latter would have pinged me in the pocket, I think interest = inflation is fair otherwise over time inflation eats away at the loan balance. On the tax cut front, sorry NACT you don't pass, even allowing for the current situation.

Superannuation is number two. Remember the 1970's where the Labour government introduced a compulsory super scheme that would have done what Australia's has but sooner, only for the tories under Muldoon to bring in universal and sometime when the baby boomers retire unaffordable National Superannuation? It's happened again. The Kiwisaver changes I could understand, if you are going to remove the tax break for employers reducing their compulsory contributions by the same amount is fair and 2% minimum makes it more accessible, but to essentially gut the NZ Super Fund is plain stupid. Yes, the fund, designed as a pre-funding mechanism for the boomers retire, made a loss over the last 12 months, but so did everything else and now that there are signs things are picking up it is back making acceptable profits. I don't buy the argument comparing government to households as a reason not to borrow to contribute, the long run return on borrowing to invest (and investment by NZ in NZ is a great way out of recession) will be greater than the cost of borrowing so should have been done. Given the deficits you can argue that government is borrowing to do anything.. By canning contributions for a decade NACT will leave the country with a pension problem in 20 years time, they could have at least had the balls to spend some political capital realising this and signal a raise in the age of entitlement to a pension as Australia has done. NACT, on superannuation you get an epic fail from me.

More epic is the transport fail, especially with respect to Auckland. In November we had funding mechanisms in place for a whole raft of improvements in public transport that would have come onstream soon and delivered massive benefits. What does NACT do? Ditch the regional fuel tax which Aucklanders were accepting of to pay for these improvements, delaying integrated ticketing and jeopardising the whole project as well as delaying the electrification project for rail, the single most important PT improvement Auckland needs. Instead we have billions being poured into roads, roads and more roads, a solution that the last 50 or so years has shown does not work. When Steven Joyce prattles on that 84/86% of Aucklanders get to work by car, he forgets that politicians have made sure that it is the only effective transport option, so not shit Sherlock, Aucklanders use their cars. Since 2003, when improvements have been flowing, this has been changing and once again, as with superannuation, it looks like Auckland will have had a clear path of where it wants to head with alternatives to the private car only for National and its' allies to torpedo that, making sure that the private car continues to reign supreme. Electrification is delayed by at least 6 months, possibly more, the tender was meant to happen in March, no action yet, integrated ticketing is uncertain as are some of the major upgrades that up until this lot came in were agreed, timetabled and most importantly funded. I'm mixed about the Waterview connection, the twin tunnels did not have room for expansion but I am still not convinced that this is the best option, especially around Great North Road, that will be chaos during construction. What happens when oil gets expensive again? Where is the move to more efficient transport options that are less oil dependent?

Those are my three areas, I was going to include the response to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance and Law and Order, but this is a long post as it is and you get the idea...