So according to the Government, inequality and poverty are the fault of Councils???

13
17

Bill English Idiot

Like privileged elitist private school kids on a bender, this Government is drunk on its own sense of power after their astounding win at the ballot box, so high on their own supply, we have the Finance Minister now claiming that inequality and poverty is the fault of local councils for not allowing urban sprawl.

That’s right folks, the 250 000 to 285 000 children in poverty (we don’t know because Paula Bennet refuses to count them), the 800 000 NZers living in poverty and the high level of inequality has nothing to do with the Governments draconian welfare reforms, tax cuts for the rich and privatisation of public wealth into private hands, oh no – it’s all the bloody councils fault.

The audacity of English would be outrageous if NZ hadn’t just overwhelmingly rewarded National for dirty politics and mass surveillance lies.

It’s going to be a very, very, very, very long painful 3 years.

13 COMMENTS

  1. Inequality in New Zealand would have been improving had it not been for growing housing costs. “So our planning processes have probably done more to increase income inequality and poverty in New Zealand than most other policies.”

    Slums are cheap.

    According to the Law of Dipton (Double) building lots of slums will solve inequality.

  2. But surely you know what English is doing here? This is not about poverty it’s about building regulations. By linking councils’ tough building regulations with ‘needless’ poverty he’s softening up the public for National’s 2nd attempt at gutting the RMA and turning it into a property developers charter in all but name.

  3. Time for the headmaster to get his big stick out – some of the children are not playing the game correctly and good ol’ boy BE is the worst offender. It is almost as if he is intentionally undermining Herr leader with all his ridiculous comments and antics. And to think that this is National’s deputy PM. He needs to get the silver spoon out of his mouth, his head out of his arse and start putting his brain into gear, before he spurts out the verbals.

    • Being part of a wealthy southern farming dynasty means he doesn’t have any idea of poverty. He would never have had to go to school without enough lunch or without shoes or a warm jacket. Or ever wanted for the good things in life.

  4. This doesn’t seem totally unreasonable. Councils face a lot of costs from development (both up & out) and don’t see many benefits. So their incentive is to ‘beggar thy neighbor’ by reducing their own supply, the net effect of all councils doing this is a nationally reduced housing stock = high accommodation costs = poverty.

    • Does Ben know how many councils have reduced their State housing stocks? As far as I know Dunedin, despite being $600 million in debt has tried, up to this moment, to maintain its stock of council houses. On the other hand National has been selling of its housing in Dundedin as fast as it can. So who is at fault?

  5. So it’s not lack of real jobs, shitty wages and conditions, and state benefits paid at subsistance level? Not landlords exploiting the lack of state housing by charging several thousand dollars in fees before people even get into their rental property? Not the spiraling prices of basics like food and electricity? No – it’s the councils.
    Well, just proves what the people who aren’t sitting in the tall tower, swerling their brandy and saying “The poor are revolting – yes, they are rather” know. You know, the people who are actually working with the poor?

  6. About 12 years ago the Blue Greens invited me, a known Labour supprter in the community I lived in, to 2 functions to discuss changes to the Resource Management Act. The Nats were in opposition. I thought this a huge joke and did not respond to the invitations, but I tell this story to show that even while in opposition under the Clark Labour led govenment these scumbags were planning major changes to this legislation.

  7. Bill English is sort of, part-way right.

    Most of the people who stand for Council are rarely-barely known to the ratepayers.

    There seems to be a lot of mates’ rates deals for local contractors and real estate agents/developers, thus driving up costs.

    A singular unwillingness to listen to simple citizens objecting to the loss of amenities, or precious rural land so stupid subdivisions can be created without either public transport or local shopping services – or even enough schooling capacity, kicking the can back on the citizens and ratepayers.

    And the endless ticket-clipping for permits, licences, consents which clearly don’t provide protection for the citizens (leaky homes, dog control, fouled waterways, to name but a few).

    Invisible councillors and arcane operations.

    Bill English should have kept his mouth shut. We’ve been reminded of the deadwood and fossilized systems in the ivory tower in town.

    PS – It is unlikely that MPs will move to disturb this particular institution. They’re still levying GST on rates.

    • With respect I disagree Andrea. Council costs are subject to an intense level of fiscal scrutiny through the Local Government Act 2002 Long Term Plan process. Much more scrutiny than central government spending (witness the lack of scrutiny surrounding the NZ$1.6b SFC bailout). The ‘greedy Council’ tag is on the one hand a myth/narrative (assisted by Fairfax media) calculated to take the heat off the National Government’s policy failures and their own fiscal corruptness, and on the other hand, part of a typical neo-liberal partisan political agenda to find yet another way of extracting money out of the middle classes (this time by targeting ratepayers in order to subsidise infrastructure development costs of private-sector-provided housing, cost-subsidies which won’t* be passed on to new home buyers, but which will instead go into lining the pockets of privateers and development speculators).

      * Developers are not sentimental in this regard – the cost of new allotments in private-sector-developed subdivision is set by ‘supply and demand’ rationality (of the sort espoused by the classical liberal economic theorists such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo).

  8. After the election result, I posted on FB that NZ is now “quite simply, f***ed” and the subject of the Ak housing problem came up in the thread. I had two notable responses to this. First, from a much respected friend, regarding the main post, that perhaps I was being “a bit extreme.” Second was from a loved, but often aggravating friend, who calls hmself a libertarian, and keeps a copy of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” neatly divided into 3 pieces (cut down the spine and retaped) so the section he is reading can be kept in the pocket of his jeans. He has read it maybe 15-20 times, and loves it. He said that the housing problem “is only an Auckland problem” and that “we won’t be having this conversation in 3 years.” Sadly, some people think that what affects a third of NZ’s population is unimportant if it’s not in their backyard. Also, sadly, they will not be concerning themselves with it at the next election, despite the fact that it is a MAJOR issue, and under National’s policy, will remain so. He is also proud of the fact that he does not vote, because he feels that none of the parties support his ideals. Considering this, it’s easy to see why we are where we are. There really are people who either don’t see what’s going on behind the veil, or see quite clearly but just don’t bother to care if it doesn’t affect them personally.

  9. … Because everybody knows that subsidizing speculative private sector investment in new greenfield housing in order to stimulate private sector development of housing at a time when no developer in their right mind would want to cut their own profit margin by flooding the market with cheap subdivsion, is the best use of ratepayers money.

    Disgruntled ratepayers of NZ unite! Take an interest in what’s happening in your neighbourhood (especially if your Council has been included in the Schedule to this Act of Parliament http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2013/0072/latest/DLM5369001.html)

Comments are closed.