Minnows, pike and parliamentary sovereignty
So said 20th century philosopher Isaiah Berlin. He was warning us to be wary of occasions when the rich and powerful argue for greater freedom. They already have a great deal of freedom, usually a lot more than the rest of us.
Act New Zealand's proposed Regulatory Standards Bill appears to be one of these occasions.
The Bill states that any proposed legislation will have to be held up to certain principles. However, they are a very limited number of principles, mostly based on individual rights and property.
Why just the principles important to Act? Why not hold legislation accountable to how it will affect child poverty? How it will impact on rights to education and health? Whether it will lead to increases in crime or unemployment?
There are any number of principles they could align legislation to, and yet individual and property rights is where they are focused.
Why have principles that primarily benefit the rich and powerful? Why not have principles that benefit the majority, especially those in these unending crises we have had since the Global Financial Crash in 2008?
One of the main objections to the Regulations Standards Bill is that it puts limitations on Parliament's sovereignty and it is beyond ironic that one of Act's objections to the way that the Treaty of Waitangi was being applied was that it encroached on Parliament's sovereignty.
We have a system that has created a lot of wealth for certain individuals, and some of those who have accumulated that wealth want to ensure that they keep it and are also able to accumulate it at an even faster rate.
This month the NBR announced that the total valuation of New Zealand's rich list had risen from $95.55 billion last year to $102.1b this year. Their wealth has gone up by 6.8% and is not an outlier. In 2023 the valuation of the rich list was $72.79b, meaning that their combined wealth had gone up 50% in the two years that included a recession and a cost of living crisis.
The annual inflation rate is currently 2.5%. The New Zealand cash rate is 3.25%, Kiwi Bonds are around 3.5%, and one-year term deposits are less than 4%. So the very wealthy are accumulating wealth at a much faster pace than the rest of society.
Some of the money the very rich make is ploughed back into their businesses to make them more efficient and productive, and some is used to look for further business opportunities. Sometimes these are very risky opportunities, and sometimes that riskiness is a surprise such as earthquakes, cyclones and their close cousin, presidentially declared tariffs.
However, a lot of their wealth appears to go into buying assets.
United Kingdom economist Gary Stevenson claims that the super wealthy live in an economic black hole that sucks in wealth. If you have $100million and your wealth conservatively goes up 6% that is $6m a year. That is a lot of money to try to spend on holidays, food and clothes.
They can't spend that much and so what they do, according to Stephenson, is buy assets. They are always ahead of inflation so their money just grows and the value of the assets they have, and the assets they buy, goes up.
It is his explanation as to why it is so much tougher to buy a house than 20 years ago and why real estate, gold and the stock market continually trend upwards.
Structurally, if it is true that our current system is tailor-made to shift wealth from one part of society to a very small minority of society, it is no wonder they want to lock it all in place before the rest of us find out.
At the same time as our small population of very wealthy are growing wealthier, the number of homeless people is skyrocketing. Statistics New Zealand claimed at the 2023 census over 112,000 New Zealanders were "severely housing deprived", including 61% living in "uninhabitable housing".
This did not include any of the 396,000 people they had no information on.
Change needs to come, but not in legislation that locks in the gains of the top 5% and locks in the losses of the majority. We don't have to worry about the rich, they will be OK. Even if they lose their fortunes, they have the skills and networks to bounce back up again.
We need an economy that rewards risk and innovation but at the same time provides affordable housing and health, education and social services.
Parliament is perfectly able to do all this without passing the Regulatory Standards Bill.
Submissions on the Regulatory Standards Bill close on June 23.
• Dr Anaru Eketone is an associate professor in the University of Otago's social and community work programme.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Otago Daily Times
5 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
NZ First rural minister on ‘listening tour'
Minister of Rural Communities Mark Patterson speaks at an open forum in Gore, where he was joined by NZ First outreach adviser Kym McDonald. PHOTO: ELLA SCOTT-FLEMING Industry, energy, genetic engineering and artificial intelligence were the hot topics at an NZ First minister's open forum in Gore last week. Minister of Rural Communities Mark Patterson held a public meeting at the Gore Town & Country Club on Friday afternoon to connect with the issues of Southland. The minister said, though it sounded a bit "namby pamby", he was on a "listening tour" to gather feedback for his party to use to build policy for the next election. In his opening speech, he spoke of the similarities — and differences — of the coalition government, its endeavour to get rid of the "red and green tape" and the last government's mistakes. The three parties agreed "pretty much" on the bigger picture, but NZ First were more at the "interventionist" end, making things happen, he said. Interventions included the $1.2 billion Regional Infrastructure Fund developed by himself and Shane Jones. The economy, inflation and cost-of-living crisis were the fault of the previous Labour Party government, he said. "[It] is a sort of direct impact of some really, really bad-quality spending towards the tail end of the last government." Southland had been going "gangbusters" in terms of industry growth, Mr Patterson said. Datagrid NZ's proposed data centre in Makarewa would be a "massive opportunity" for Southland. But he received pushback from the crowd, one member of the community expressing concerns about the "enormous" amounts of power such centres needed. Data centres generated a lot of heat which took power to cool down, and had surges needing random bursts of power, which all cost, the man said. He did not want to see that cost subsidised by the general public. Mr Patterson said he was apprehensive at first about the centres too, but he had come around. There was potential for 500-600 jobs, as the project sized up, 10ha of greenhouses using the industrial heat and up to 3500 jobs in auxiliary surrounding businesses. "That's the modelling they've put to us." Concerns around the proposed deregulation of genetic engineering and modification were also brought up, as were Mr Jones' recent comments denouncing the proposal. Mr Patterson said Mr Jones had made comments on the proposed deregulation of genetic engineering at a meeting in Hutt Valley last week, but the crowd's applause had drowned out some of his qualifying remarks. The Gene Technology Bill, which passed its first reading in Parliament last December, remains a contentious issue. Mr Patterson said NZ First supporters remained sceptical and that the party had received significant public feedback on the matter. Dr William Rolleston, a strong supporter of the Bill who was attending the meeting in Gore, recalled Mr Jones' warning about not allowing "Frankenstein" into the environment. Addressing public concerns about consumer and health authority reactions to GMO use in farming, Dr Rolleston assured that no genetic modifications had faced health authority objections and emphasised that farmers grew GM crops only where there was market demand. "Farmers wouldn't grow GM crops if they didn't think there was a market for it," the doctor said. Mr Patterson declined to comment further, citing the Bill's current status before the parliamentary committee.
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Government 'revising' pay offer to teachers but says union must compromise too
Teachers strike outside Parliament on Wednesday. Photo: JOHN GERRITSEN / RNZ The government is revising its pay offer for secondary teachers, following a nationwide strike, but the union would need to compromise too, Public Service Commissioner Sir Brian Roche said. Thousands of members of the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA) walked off the job to protest their pay talks , forcing the closure of many secondary schools. Teachers on picket lines told RNZ the government's offer of a one percent pay rise every year for three years was "despicable, insulting and terrible". The Public Service Commission, which was overseeing the government's side of the pay talks, had been at pains to note that teachers in the first 10 years of their career get annual pay rises of about 13 percent a year as they progress up the pay scale. But teachers said most of them were at the top of the scale and the one percent increases would be all they received. Roche told RNZ in a statement: "This was always going to be a difficult bargaining round - the strike is evidence of that. Now that has happened, we have to find a way forward - we owe that to the students, parents and teachers." "Our initial offer clearly hasn't hit the mark, and we are doing work on a revised offer." He said the union's claim was not realistic. "The PPTA's current set of claims would cost taxpayers $1.7 billion over four years. That's equivalent to an extra $67,000 for every full-time secondary teacher. It's unaffordable, unreasonable and unrealistic. Sir Brian Roche is the Public Service Commissioner. Photo: RNZ / Samuel Rillstone "Bargaining is about compromise and to date, and somewhat regrettably, the PPTA has refused to offer any real compromise on these claims. The government is committed to working with the PPTA to get a resolution." Education Minister, Erica Stanford, said the union should have called today's strike off because it had agreed to further talks. But PPTA president Chris Abercrombie said: "The government knew it had an opportunity yesterday to make a reasonable offer to us which could have encouraged us to reconsider our action. Unfortunately, no such offer was forthcoming." Meanwhile, on picket lines, teachers said they were frustrated that they had to strike to try to force a better offer from the government. Wellington teacher Catharine de Montalk said she and her colleagues would be losing money if they accepted the offer. "I don't particularly want to be here. I feel like since my career started 20 years ago that I've been doing this every single pay round and it does get tired, it does get old but one percent is actually the lowest... it is an insult," she said. A teacher outside Parliament during the strike. Photo: RNZ / John Gerritsen Outside Parliament, maths teacher Jennifer Crisp said the government's offer was not reasonable. "We think that's entirely incorrect. It's not a reasonable offer in this economy. Not when MPs have been given more than double that," she said. In Christchurch, teacher Richard Allen said the government's offer was never going to fly. "The knew that that wasn't going to be acceptable right from the start and so it's a shame that it's come to this. To be fair we all want to teach so give us something more reasonable that we can work towards," he said. Several Wellington commuters said they supported the striking teachers. Christian Shaw said the picket at Wellington Railway Station prompted him to do some online research which showed politicians were getting much better annual pay rises than what teachers were being offered. "They're willing to line their own pockets, more than happy, year after year, but they don't want to give our teachers, our nurses... they just cut pay equity which is so important to so many people and they're just taking the absolute piss," he said. His mate Jack Dyer said teachers were not paid enough - and he'd know, having abandoned the profession because of the pay rates for new teachers. "I studied to become a teacher. I got my diploma of teaching for secondary schools and the starting rate there is just atrocious. Like after four years of study, a bachelor's and a diploma, you're coming out and making less than the median wage in Wellington, which is just bizarre," he said. Meanwhile, primary school teachers, support staff and principals belonging to the Educational Institute, Te Riu Roa, were holding stop-work meetings this week and next to discuss their pay talks. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
5 hours ago
- RNZ News
Saplings, stalking, and spying: Government bills this week
A harvesting site in the Waimata Valley near Gisborne. Photo: RNZ / Alexa Cook This week in Parliament is a Members' Week, with Wednesday evening dedicated to debating non-government legislation. Members' Days cut into government time for lawmaking, so they have now added Wednesday morning to the schedule (rather than the usual 2pm start time for a sitting day) to maintain momentum. This week's bills are a mixture of unfinished business from last week and other bills plucked from the Order Paper that area waiting their respective next stages. Of particular interest are; The Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme-Forestry Conversion) Amendment Bill is back in the House after truncated consideration by the Environment Committee. The bill seeks to address growing concerns about the conversion of farms into "exotic" forestry land, under the auspices of the Emissions Trading Scheme. The word exotic may evoke visions of coconut palms or banana trees, but it is the mass planting of pine trees that has largely been at the centre of the issue. Obviously not all farmland is the same, and New Zealand employs the Land Use Capability (LUC) scale to distinguish highly productive, arable land (LUC class 1) from very unproductive land (LUC class 8). This bill would determine a farm's eligibility for ETS registration based on its LUC rating and restrict the amount of exotic forestry conversion on farmland with an LUC rating between 1 and 6. "The current settings in the emissions trading scheme have tipped the scales too far," said the minister in charge of the bill, Todd Mclay, during the first reading. "We're seeing entire farms converted into exotic forests under the ETS from Invercargill to Ruatōria. These are not marginal lands; these are productive farms supporting families, communities, and local economies. Once they are planted into exotic carbon forests, they are, effectively, lost to food production for decades, if not permanently so." In that same debate, Labour offered what they have called very cautious support for the bill, citing the need to carefully work through issues in select committee. Meanwhile, the Green Party, who are against the bill, have said the real issue is that the whole concept of carbon offsetting is inherently flawed. "The fiction of offsetting has the same practical impact as an alcoholic paying somebody to drink water and thinking that they have solved their drinking problem", said Steve Abel. "That is the distortion that we have in this country to this day, and what's more, the person who's drinking all the water's making a lot of money and thinking that they're doing something about alcoholism, but they're not at all." There have been a number of bills this parliament relating to infrastructure, consenting, and public works, and getting those things done fast. This week's bill aims to speed up the acquisition of private land that is desired for projects listed in the Fast Track Approvals law, or under the Roads of National Significance programme. The Public Works debate was one of the three (Government Bill) committee stages this week. In the committee stage, debate is not time-limited, so it took a while, but was eventually wrapped up by midday Wednesday, before the House moved onto the second committee stage - the Hauraki Gulf / Tikapa Moana Marine Protection Bill , which was interrupted part of the way through its third and final part. The third planned committee stage was for a new stalking law (though the slow pace of debating makes progress on this bill this week unlikely). The last time this bill was in the House was for its second reading, when it received unanimous support from all parties after a robust select committee stage, during which several amendments were adopted. "The committee recommended a broader definition for the pattern of behaviour," National's Erica Stanford explained. "The offence will now require two specified acts within two years, rather than three specified acts within one year. This broadens the pattern of behaviour by capturing fewer acts across a longer time frame. I agree that this change will better address strategies such as anniversary-based stalking. It will also make it harder for stalkers to work around the law." Ginny Andersen is Labour's spokesperson on this. She applauded the adopted amendments but was worried that a remaining aspect might make prosecution difficult - intent. "Currently, it must be proven that the stalker acted knowingly, that their behaviour is likely to cause fear or distress to their target, so it means that the stalker has to know that their behaviour is likely to cause fear or distress. Proving that intent of someone who is lying or is genuinely deluded about how another person feels about them may well be extremely difficult to prove in a court of law and this is concerning." Minister of Justice Paul Goldsmith has a second key bill up this week - The Crimes (Countering Foreign Interference) Amendment Bill , which may resume its second reading (interrupted last week), probably on Thursday afternoon (but only if the pace of debating is brisk). It intends to fill gaps in criminal law concerning clandestine actions made on behalf of foreign actors intending to harm New Zealand, which the Government has said there has been an increased risk of. This law change would introduce treason, inciting mutiny or espionage - all on behalf of foreign actors - as new offences. Only the Green Party voted against the Bill at its first reading, although Te Pāti Māori were absent for the vote. Finally, among Thursday's bills is a brand new government bill, the recently announced bill to prohibit mounting protests outside someone's private residence. You can listen to the audio version of this story by clicking the link near the top of the page. RNZ's The House, with insights into Parliament, its legislation and issues, is made with funding from Parliament's Office of the Clerk.
