Why the Left Win in New Zealand and the Right Lose

New Zealand right now seems to be bereft of political figures who will boldly state what needs to be said, and defend freedom.

The National Party in its current state reminds me of Ted Heath’s Conservatives in Britain.  They are weak, wet, managers of Labour’s reforms, and the minute someone questions their convictions they either back down or pretend they are doing something else.  There is a definite sense that in order to be popular, right wing views need to compromise and “be reasonable” to accommodate what is seen as a left-leaning electorate.

Case in point David Farrar’s blog.  Occasionally he will say the right thing, but much of it is hand-wringing and compromise.  One particular view that jumped out at me was on the Crafar Farms issue:

I should state my view on the Pengxin bid. It is:

Ministers should follow the recommendations of the Overseas Investment Office…

That was the first bit, and I didn’t read any further.  In that sentence Farrar has already conceded the argument!  But the correct view on this issue is that we should allow foreign capital to flow into our country to create jobs and wealth without any hindrance.  There is no compromise view.  The Overseas Investment Office serves no good purpose whatsoever and should be abolished.  It costs New Zealand’s economy hugely.

What is so hard about standing up for this view?  And why is it so hard for National politicians and bloggers to make such a simple argument?

New Zealand desperately needs a Thatcher who can stand up to the Left and stand firm on principles like these.  Otherwise the slow drift to poverty will continue while the Nats continue to smile and wave.

4 thoughts on “Why the Left Win in New Zealand and the Right Lose

  1. Lindsay says:

    Even more bald. Property owners have the right to sell to whoever they want to.

  2. Guest says:

    It’s far worse than that: given the absolute imperative to remove NZ’s overseas debt then the only way that can be achieved is trade sales of NZ assets to overseas owners

    That’s the only thing that lets NZ pay back overseas debt – basically swapping NZ assets for the debt overseas. Selling in NZ moves the ownership around by doesn’t undo the debt.

    The only responsible course of action for the last six years at least has been for all state assets – the SOEs sure, but also schools, hospitals, roads, railway (as scrap metal) – to be sold as quickly as possible to overseas owners

    Had we done that – and also removed the welfare system – NZ would now actually have a productive economy, instead of borrowing billions to buy votes from bludgers as the country crashes towards bankruptcy

    • Nice try, but you sound like a parody of what a leftist would think someone like me would think. Also, you are somewhat off topic, but I will address the comment nonetheless.

      Even this National Government is planning to put the budget back in surplus by 2015. Now I don’t trust anything Bill English says either, but to say that balancing the budget absolutely requires selling stuff off is a bit of a stretch.

      Your comment is also bad economics, since the people buying the assets would not be the same people we owe money to. Debt is not some communal thing that we can magically transpose without regard to who owns it.

      I do support a divestment of a large number of government assets, but only as share distributions to taxpayers, who can then decide for themselves whether they want to own an interest in them. Reducing debt is best done by balancing the budget, which means superannuation reform, welfare reform, replacing Working For Families with income splitting, and greater private sector involvement in health and education.

  3. Guest says:

    Getting the budget back into surplus eliminates the yearly deficit – but surpluses must be maintained over decades to undo the nett debt.

    Debt is not some communal thing that we can magically transpose without regard to who owns it.

    The public debt is ‘communal’ – there is no such thing as society but effectively the debt of the NZ government owed by all taxpayers. Then because NZ runs its own dollar, it certainly makes sense to talk about the nett debt (public + private).

    Events in Europe and the US demonstrate that countries must eliminate nett debt (as well as deficits!) as soon as possible. NZ is not in any way immune.

    Reforming (as in eliminating) all welfare, including super, health & education will eliminate the deficit and enable internationally competitive tax rates – zero for corporates, income tax capped at say NZD30,000 for individuals.

    But to eliminate the massive nett debt – multiples of NZ’s entire GDP – can only be done by liquidating assets and selling them overseas.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: