Talking about tax just got a lot more interesting.

Reading the Tax Working Group (TWG) interim report was eerily like reading The Opportunities Party policy pages. While the devil is in the detail with all matters of tax, on a high level the Tax Working Group has put many TOP policies squarely on the table for public debate:

It appears that the Tax Working Group is quietly dropping the idea of a Capital Gains Tax, although the Labour-led Government is still talking up the possibility. This isn’t surprising. Despite the fact that the Government’s Terms of Reference didn’t leave the TWG with a lot of room to move, experts will struggle to find much evidence to support a Capital Gains Tax (CGT).

Has there ever been a bigger no brainer than legalising, taxing and regulating cannabis?

Even former Prime Minister Helen Clark agrees citing overseas examples: “Follow the evidence, see what is working.”

Well done to Andrew Little for raising the thorny criminal justice conversation. Those who care about wasting taxpayer money should be calling for him to be bolder.

Here’s why: we already have the 2nd highest prison population in the world. Yet if we do nothing we will still need a $1b new prison every 2-3 years. Every new prisoner costs $100,000+ per year.

Since the announced closure of TOP there has been a flood of comment, gossip, hypotheses and even advice on how to resurrect that party. Almost all of that 3^rd party conjecture is blissfully unaware of what the purpose of that political party actually was. I don’t expect clarification to have any impact on the acuity of the political gossip columnists and purveyors of fake news, but setting the record straight (once again) might at least enlighten some as to the agenda

It seems Winston Peters has not taken long to get comfortable in his new role as Acting Prime Minister. His recent comments aiming to get housing affordability down to 5 times the living wage certainly speaks of a man not just looking to occupy his seat in a caretaker capacity, but rather shape it with his own identity. Obviously housing affordability must improve, but to claim such a target is achievable “before not too long” is simply absurd. The median house price across the country is currently $562,000, or 13 times the living wage, and much higher in our main centres. To achieve his proposed level of affordability the living wage would need to more than double to over $40 p/h. Considering minimum wage hikes up to $20 p/h are predicted to cost around 30,000 jobs by 2020, it’s not unreasonable to question our ability to cope with such an increase. Sure, he’s not saying these changes will happen immediately, but something will have to drastically change in order to drive such wage increases. Nothing in the Government’s current policy suite comes remotely close to achieving this.

Hats off to the Canadian Government for following an evidence-based approach to Cannabis reform. Yesterday they passed a landmark law that will legalise the recreational use of cannabis nationwide and will provide a regulated market for its sale and supply. Cannabis use is a health issue and the Canadian Government will treat it as such, rather than relying on their criminal justice system which simply exacerbates the issue, as we have seen in New Zealand. 

I would imagine the reaction of most New Zealanders would be pretty similar if you said it’s a good idea to allow overseas companies to bottle and sell our fresh water, and that they shouldn’t have to pay for it.

Dairy farming in New Zealand is synonymous with environmental degradation. A lot of the time, the criticism farmers receive is warranted considering the sheer scale of the industry and the impact it has on our environment. However, they are not the only ones who should shoulder the blame. In terms of water quality, the worst damage is often concentrated in urban areas, far away from the pastures that support our biggest export industry. It’s a problem that exists across the board, and it is the tax payer who ends up fronting the bill for the environmental damage resulting from production. It’s now forestry’s turn to put the spot light over this massive gap that exists in our environmental regulation.

When the Kiwibuild program was first announced we wrote that there was a chance it may simply crowd out private sector building.  We were not alone in harbouring this doubt as various industry commentators have shared similar views. It appears this, along with other concerns such as the lack of capacity, cost blow outs and affordability problems, have led quietly to a change of scope. The official documentation now states Kiwibuild will “facilitate the delivery” of the planned 100,000 homes, rather than “build”. It may seem minor, and arguing about semantics is never very productive, but it does further expose Labour’s flagship policy to criticism. Analysis from economic modeling firm Infometrics showed that the policy could see as few as 9,200 additional properties added to the dwelling stock over the next four years, representing less than one-third of the program that is penciled in for that period.