14

Show me the money – part two

by Whaleoil on November 22, 2011

Steven Joyce has released additional figures to show the huge borrowing that Phil Goff is going to have to agree to in order to govern. Not just his own massive election promises but also that of the Greens:

“The Greens have a huge number of spending policies and none of them are costed. Some are eye-wateringly expensive. We’ve calculated that just nine of the Greens’ centrepiece policies would add about $25 billion to debt over the next four years, in addition to what Labour is already planning.

“Even if Labour agrees to just 25 per cent of these policies promoted by the Greens as part of a coalition deal, we would be looking at extra debt of more than $6 billion over four years, on top of the $15.6 billion that Labour is already promising to borrow. New Zealand simply can’t afford a big-spending Government like that at this time. That would take the total to around $22 billion of extra borrowing.

“Taken together, the Greens and Labour policies would cost tens of thousands of jobs and massively ramp up debt.”

Mr Joyce says the pricey Greens proposals include (costs over four years):
• Extending paid parental leave to 13 months = $4 billion
• Extending the ‘In-Work’ tax credit to beneficiaries = $1.7 billion
• Extending unemployment benefit to all students over summer = $1.6 billion
• Universal Student Allowance at the level of unemployment benefit = $4.2 billion
• Free ‘wellness checks and dental check’ = $3.6 billion
• Wiping one year’s student debt for each year worked in New Zealand = $3 billion
• Green jobs initiatives = $3.2 billion.

And these are just a few of the Greens policies.

Tagged: • • • • •

Related posts

  • Chuck Bird

    And how much will it add up to when you and Winston’s and Hone’s promises.

  • Mort

    Just as an aside, when Labour won the election in 1984, what were they promising? Was is austerity or spend mongering, and what made them stop and deliver the most ACT like policies of any Govt (or would Bolger/ Richardson’s 1990 be the most?)

  • kevin

    I saw WP speaking in Rotorua today. It was all scare tactics focussing on past financial events with a few ‘audience plants’ echoing pre-determined buzz word responses.  Policy?  No, although I only managed to stomach 15 minutes. About 100 (mostly his demographic) people in attendance.

  • Anonymous Economist

    What about National’s promises? 

    There promises to keep paying bludger’s benefits, to keep paying for schools and GPs and hospitals and housing corp and super and ACC and EQC and bailouts and TVNZ and Maori TV and RadioNZ and new roads and AirNZ and the Army and Navy and Air “force” and Police and
    Prisons and 

    there isn’t any money

    every fucking cent is borrowed from China. A Billion a week, at least, in total.

    NZ’s economy is clearly worse than Spain’s — it’s only a matter of time before the bankers loose confidence in whichever government NZ has.  

    We all know the only solution is to stop government spending – but not even Brash has the guts to front up and tell the truth

    • greenmuppet

      I agree. 

      The reality is a politician or party that has the courage to cut spending (and not just the rate of increase of it)  will be thrown out of the government and replaced by Labour/Greens. So you are left with the choice of Nationals who tend to trickle down the reforms at best or Labour/Greens who can bring the country to her knees in a matter of a term.

      Sometimes I think Greece and Spain have the advantage of being ahead of us. Spain and Greece have hit the bottom and will now begin recovering while New Zealand is yet to reach the bottom.

      If MMP was dumped it would offer some hope.

    • greenmuppet

      Have to add that Defense, Courts, Corrections and Law Enforcement is one category any economy cannot do without. Having said that it doesn’t change the overall picture.

      • Honcho

        Defence is something the country can not do without, getting back to recent history, Christchurch would have been a much worse place to be without the serious defence involvement there in febuary of this year, approx 10% of our current (very small by global standards based on GDP) total defence force on the ground, working, in christchurch. Remember the past when looking to the future, and there just isnt the fat to trim from an already lean, fit and hard working defence force.If you are targetting savings, look for the low hanging fruit, which by and large is our MSD budget, look at a recent budget if you want proof.

        You dont ring bark a fruit tree for firewood.

        • greenmuppet

          Agree, I meant to say this is one area to be looked after.

        • Anonymous Economist

          NZ simply cannot afford to “rebuild Christchurch” and so any funds spent on defense forces to that end are simply throwing good money after bad..

          NZ’s defense forces are usless, the only good they do is under contract to the UN. Well they can do that after privatisation to Sandline or Executive Outcomes.

          Courts/Corrections/Law Enforcement – again vast ways to throw good money after bad!  Police & Fire services can be provided via insurance companies: there are already many effective private police forces in NZ — security guards — Hell any high-worth Kiwi relies on private alarms, security companies and insurance rather than the NZ police who exist mainly to raise revenue via roading fines.  There’s no reason why truly necessary public services cannot be provided by suitably armed private contractors.  

  • Peter Wilson

    This is very interesting. A vote for Labour, then is a vote for a Labour/Green coalition. It’s reasonable then, to lump their spending promises together, and ask Goff, for example, which Green Party spending promises he would refuse to implement?

  • http://www.justwondering.co.nz/ Mistywindow

    It’s all bloody nonsense.

    The treasury forecasts are pie-in-the-sky bollocks. Whichever major party gets to grab the reins is going to say, “Sorry, we did warn you that there was a 20% chance that the purse would turn pear-shaped. We can’t deliver.”

    None of the buggers are going to deliver on their criminally irresponsible promises and it doesn’t matter a rat’s arse whom you vote for, we’re heading for a train wreck.

    Back to the future.

    It’s pathetic.

    • Anonymous Economist

       None of the buggers are going to deliver on their criminally irresponsible promises

      We can only hope so!  

      With the Nats on over 50% – perhaps John Key will finally have the guts make a speech on monday morning saying “there really is no money left, and as a consequence, I’m passing an emergency Order in Council: all spending on benefits, super, welfare, health & education stops permanently today“ 

  • Anonymous

    The three priorities of the Green Party (jobs, rivers and kids) pay for themselves because they include significant revenue increases as well as spending increases – in fact they bring in more revenue than they spend.

    There is $7.9 billion of extra revenue and $4.1 in extra spending. For details see http://www.greens.org.nz/sites/default/files/fiscal_implications_november_6_2011_0.pdf

    • Anonymous

      I’d like to believe that. But I suspect that the Greens, whom I may vote for, are somewhat naive in their extrapolations. Unlike the rest of them however, at least they’r reasonably honest.