Disgraced former Labour minister Stuart Nash quoted former US president Theodore Roosevelt on his way out the door.
This quote, we are told, sums up his philosophy towards politics and man, is it telling.
“It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself in a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”
Nash is effectively arguing that the media, or anyone who takes issue with his woeful judgment and repeated breaching of cabinet rules, are irrelevant. They don’t count.
It’s the powerful man with a long political career who is the great grandson of a former prime minister sitting in the Beehive emailing mates about confidential cabinet discussions that's the real man. The one who counts. The one who should be listened to.
The man who counts is the former police minister who rang up the police commissioner to “vent” his “frustrations” about a judge’s ruling and was “chewing the fat with a guy who was a mate about a decision that I thought was very bad.”
Again, breaching the rules of Cabinet.
Nash could have chosen to quote another Roosevelt, but it's obvious why he didn’t.
Franklin D Roosevelt was a ferocious campaigner against vested interests and corporate monopolies.
In his speech to Congress in 1939 Roosevelt said it was a truth that "the liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic state itself."
“That, in its essence, is Fascism—ownership of Government by an individual, by a group, or by any other controlling private power.”
If you’d only read Nash’s political farewell note on Monday you’d be hard pressed to take away from it that he was leaving his political career behind other than to euphemistically spend more time with friends and family.
Being a politician had brought amazing opportunities to make a difference, Nash said. (For whom he made a difference fill in the blanks at home).
It had been a rewarding 12 years in parliament, and by gosh, he’s going to miss advocating for issues “important to hard-working Kiwis.”
Nash and our political leaders are laughing at us from behind their carefully-cultivated Everyman personas.
Don’t let the low-key sunglasses that Chris Hipkins’ sports fool you. He has been in Parliament as an MP since 2008 and before that was an advisor to ministers and even former prime minister Helen Clark. He is Parliament's everyman.
If you were to tune into Friday's media standup with the prime minister you would have learned that, of course, there are always improvements to make in the Official Information Act, but (smirk, intense, yet sage head nod) we’ve improved SO much.
It’s a truly galling display.
A minister of the New Zealand government, remember, emailed two donors and mates who happen to be in the commercial property game about a confidential cabinet discussion about a policy that directly affected them.
And Nash’s office refused to disclose this information because he said he emailed them as an MP not a minister about a cabinet matter - after three contacts with the former prime minister’s office to discuss.
Mr Wraparound Sunglasses says we’re all just honest Kiwis trying to make enough to buy a pie in this cost of living crisis, we’re all just hard-working professionals here in Welly who cocked up over, and over, and over again, and whoopsie, then concealed a scandal, can you pass me the T-sauce, mate.
This is what we’re led to believe. Ignore the evidence in front of you. Nothing has has happened here. Sure, incremental improvements are always on the cards...
The prime minister is standing in front of us and gaslighting us.
There are always improvements to be made, sure, but when you have the deputy head of staff in the prime ministers' office working with a ministers' office on an OIA request with an email like that, you cannot expect us to swallow this slop.
There was not only one contact with the former PM's office about Nash’s confidentiality-breaking email to pals Troy Bowker and Greg Loveridge, but three.
And now the Labour Party's podium of truth is selling that these repeated contacts that led to the email ultimately being refused were all a mistake.
These are hard working people who had no ill intent. Each time it happened.
It was a cock up, not a conspiracy. Three times it was discussed with the former prime ministers' office.
And then the decision was made to decline the request even though it was clearly a nonsense excuse.
So now we know. But Hipkins wants us to pretend we don't. You can ask for the most specific of things, and ministers will use the most daring, audacious bold-faced sophistry to conceal damaging information from the media, and by extension the public.
Finally on Monday, Hipkins offered up the most pathetic and weak intervention possible to tackle the issue that wasn’t an issue at all a few weeks ago, and said lobbyists are going to lose their swipe cards.
What horror.
And not only that, but, brace yourself, the government is going to offer support to "third-party lobbyists" to establish a voluntary code of conduct and the beginning of "long-term work on policy options to regulate lobbying."
Its business as usual. The soft-core regulatory capture of even this incremental change will come from the industry itself, as it always does.
Maybe coming in 2024. But don’t hold your breath, remember in a few weeks ago in March lobbying wasn’t even worth talking about. Hipkins will be hoping we forget.
And it really doesn’t matter which of the political duopoly are having their turn playing government.
Once they get behind the levers of power the truth goes into the shredder.
I once had an acquaintance on the inside detail what a game, such a lark it was, to think of dastardly, sneaky ways to control information and not release it to the public. The shredder was always busy.
It is all a game to many of these political people.
It’s about point scoring and winning personal victories. Look at how the Nash email was then leaked via another operative against Labour.
For the vested interests, the Bowkers of the world, it just makes good business sense to cultivate relationships with red and blue. To give them money. To take them out for dinner.
We’re mates. See you at the rugby. Give us a call on that issue, no worries mate. There is no corruption in New Zealand. Haven't you heard?
To talk with power players is to not only get what you want through policy, but to use information to wield power in direct and indirect ways and shape public discourse such as we have seen here, with Nash swiftly going under the bus once it was clear he was a dead man walking.
Vested interests can get an MP to rip into a business rival in parliament.
New Zealand's richest man Graeme Hart can slice and dice donations to political parties so we never know, unless it ends up in court, using lobbyists to set up meetings who then appear on media talking about what the Labour government should be doing.
Yikung Zhang and co got money for everyone and ended up being charged by the Serious Fraud Office. But the real truth in that trial was that red and blue all like green.
Zhang even got an MZMN from the governal-general.
As George Carlin would say, it’s a big club and you (the public) ain’t in it.
You can’t ring and get an immediate audience with a minister, or get personalised emails from a minister tailored to your specific policy wants.
And yet, the prime minister tells us there is nothing to see here. Of course, we can always do better guys. Nothing is perfect. Not even the prime minister.
The lack of respect is palpable. Our politicians hold us, the public, in contempt.
And hey, it works. They do it over and over and over. Fair play I guess. It’s your game after all.
But for the rest of us living outside of the human centipede of whataboutery that seems to capture supporters of both the big two, I sense despair and frustration.
We know now. We can see how things really work. It's out in the open.
The question is now will either of the big two, Labour or National, have the moral fortitude to really make any changes and start working for us, the public?
Looking at how the prime minister has started this week, and the fact the Opposition won't support an anti corruption commission, I doubt it.
I asked the PM's office if it will support an anti-corruption commission on Friday.
I'll let you know if they ever reply.
39 Comments
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again,…..if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat.”
Not according to many "Interest" commenters, their hero is the popcorn eater, lying lazily on his couch, doing nothing of use, but feeling very entitled to criticise those who "do".
“It’s not the critic who counts.” Ok then, but this particular one counted. Who exactly sat on these emails, so well hidden for over two years, waited until Mr Nash was all lined up with three strikes, and only then decided to bring them out and ping him with them and who was the chosen recipient that hot footed it all to Mr Hipkins. May not be up with it myself, but if no one has been actually identified as the uncoverer of the cover up, then things here now, are just as murky and double dealing as the original issue itself.
Most of the criticism on here I've seen is aimed at speculators. Who don't really do anything productive for society. Other than pack out the capitalism train then forget to get off at their stop, then whinge in comments sections about DGMs, and how they worked so very very hard and got in when the going was good... but we don't admit to that
I thought this was an article about corruption in government officials, not online housing market mirco-arguments?
Yvil - park the two quotes side by side in the context of this discussion and consider the veracity and relevance. In this Nash seeks to deflect the fact that he at the very least appears corrupt, and to justify his actions because he was taking on the good fight. Never mind that he had to all intents, put aside the interests of his constituents and placed before them the interests of his political donors. To suggest that this was simply an 'error' raises the suggestion that he believes the public are sufficiently stupid and gullible to accept this over it being a willing and knowing act to effectively subvert democracy. The second quote rails against exactly this sort of action and the utter lack of integrity Nash has demonstrated. The big question is, who else in Government is doing this as well?
People should read the 'Game of Mates.' The parallels in NZ are similar.
‘This book will open your eyes to how Australia really works.’
ROSS GITTINS
Australia has become one of the most unequal societies in the Western world, when just a generation ago, it was one of the most equal. This is the story of how networks of Mates have come to dominate business and government, robbing ordinary Australians.
Every hour you work, thirty minutes of it goes to line the Mates’ pockets rather than your own. Mates in big corporations, industry groups, government departments, the halls of parliament and the media skew the system to suit each other. Corporations dodge taxes, so you pay more. You pay more for your house and higher interest rates on your mortgage, more for your medicines and transport, and more for your children’s education and insurance, because the Mates take a cut.
Rigged uncovers the pattern of political favours, grey gifts and information sharing that has been allowed to build up over two decades. Drawing on extensive economic research, it exposes the Game of Mates as nothing less than cronyism on a grand scale across Australia, and how Australia has fallen behind other countries in combatting it.
NZ is no better. All western world government is elected by corporate money through the lobbyist system. Government is no longer for the people but are there for their own corporate interests (who sponsored them). Even the freedom march on Wellington shows how different 'our' government is from the people who elected them. Labour, Nats, Maori's, Green's are all vested for their own interest's, not the people. Even our little Invercargill City Council reeks of cronyism, with our inner city rebuild, possible new museum, stadium Southland, all designed to indebt the ratepayers and keep them slaves through debt. Government is not the answer, government is the problem.
Sounds like you are quoting President Ronald Reagan. With that slogan he beat former VP Mondale in one of the biggest landslide elections the US has ever had--and then he went on to beat the USSR into submission, while the Deep State stood by and gawked at his accomplishments. Once in awhile Western Democracies elect true believers who accomplish great things.
Great article Rebecca. I thought Kris "whanau whanau" Faafoi might have warranted a mention here, though.
After setting the wheels in motion on the media merger and feeling like his work as Broadcasting Minister was done, he quit abruptly to - you guessed it - "spend more time with family". Which apparently means setting up your own private sector lobbying firm to sell access to your high-powered contacts in Wellington. It truly is revolving door politics down there.
I'm sure he's paying close attention to what's happening with Stuart Nash, but they're all as bad as each other. Nash just happened to get caught.
... and true to form , Ardern snubs the political press gallery , to allow only her friends John Campbell at TVNZ & Samantha Hayes at NewShrub to do exit interviews with her ... to chat about fashion ... and Neve ... life after politics ... nothing nasty like the Nash emails !
To the bitter end , Ardern is a control freak ...
Covid has allowed unprecedented powers to be executed by parliament, and bred a culture in parliament where those on the inside feel they can get away with anything and swindle us all. Bold call but true, I'm simply glad that they are finally getting exposed for their failings and the public get to see this attitude towards them out in the open.
Thank you very much for your effort in this article Rebecca, its a great example of why Interest is my favorite NZ forum for ideas and commentary.
Commentators here won't always agree on the causes & effects however generally they have the best of intentions for a better NZ.
Timely article Rebecca. But I see nothing new here, it's been around since Jesus was in short pants. In my early days mates looking after mates was all about soldiers who had served in the second NZEF in WW2 in Egypt & Italy,...a sure way to get that job, secure a new car bypassing the waiting lists, or no doubt getting a subdivision approval, etc.. I think it is politely known as "networking". And I think this process has been cultivated by a wide range of people. During Helen Clarke's reign it seemed the "sisterhood" with common links via academia was well developed.
Strangely, Kiwis seem offended by the more direct manner adopted by some cultures where the brown envelope lubricates the desired decisions.
Corruption, minor and serious will probably always be a feature of business and governance and the only real answer is a vigilant media. It is a worry that our current crop of news media is either already owned by government or have taken a subsidy in some form or other from government.
You may have just landed a sprat in Nash, Rebecca, but please keep fishing.
Don’t think it was much of an issue until Muldoon’s prime ministership and even then it evolved, rather than by actual deliberate politics, out of the cronyism that attached itself to that government in the form of the big industry & commercial leaders. Fletcher, Myers, Cushing, Davis, Trotter to name a few thus the vaunted business round table.
"Labour Party's podium of truth" seems to be believed by our left wing media, they don't like to question anything from this government,
They don't want to risk missing out on some of that nice big 90 million dollar slush fund the government set up for left willing media outlets, the "NZ Journalism Fund".
One of the most unscrupulous things any government in NZ has even done in my opinion.
Yes a great article. I feel many many kiwi's are exasperated with our current political parties, all of them. Too much religious bigotry on one side, too much anti-religious bigotry on another, a government that can not get their head out of their idealogical backside for nearly 6 years and do anything substantive to improve our collective lives.
This frustration is boiling over, we saw some of this last year in Wellington.
So we need to all do something positive.
Some will have read a few of my thoughts and ideas, but thoughts and ideas do not achieve anything, and we all end up moaning about it to each other. Which might make us feel better for a short while but does not achieve anything positive.
So I intend to seriously look at joining TOP, so that I can say that I tried to get some ideas into policy. Why TOP? Well a party small enough where my socially liberal yet fisically conservative ideas, may make a difference. I just have to do something to make NZ a better place for my grandchildren, and all New Zealanders.
It is up to each and everyone of us to make a contribution.
Cheers
Jethro,
I agree. I have copied the article to our current PM, now doing the old smoke and mirrors trick of seeming to take bold and decisive action, while actually doing sod all.
I heard him express sympathy for those who might be affected by a decent cooling off period. However, a change of government will do nothing to disturb the cosy relationship between politicians and lobbyists.
That's really the rub, isn't it. The government collects more tax than ever. It collects more from workers by not adjusting tax rates for inflation it mandate and then sits by as the regulator blows past their target by a factor of two. Meanwhile, core Crown services like hospitals, medicine access and education are rapidly unwinding at a rapid rate of knots.
And all we get in response is "well if you vote for the other guys, it would be even worse!".
To quote the famous modern philosopher Twain: That don't impress me much.
I got to thinking the other day about the history in New Zealand. I am not a historian, but being born in the early 1950’s, I felt that there was more inequality in our New Zealand society than in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s. So what has changed? I am not a data analyst but am a great believer in the KISS principle.
Well one thing is technology has certainly changed, but not the wellbeing of the lower or middle income earners. Companies paid a higher tax rate to allow people to survive on one income. But do we want to go back to that, society does not I believe. However, we can improve what we have and bring some of these ideas of good society back into play.
The neo-liberalism of the past 40 odd years has not helped this lower/middle income bracket, the trickle down of Reaganism and Thatcherism has not resulted in a better society. The rich and super rich have gained while the lower and middle have lost, the percentage of wealth in NZ and internationally has increased by the wealthy, to the detriment of the middle and lower class.
When the lower and middle have income to spend, they tend to spend it and retail goes gang busters, while the rich just do what they have done for decades. This retail spend boosts manufacturing, and the primary industries, upon which we all rely upon. So how can we boost this income in the middle/lower bracket, simply and easily.
Why not have a simpler and easier tax system, to hopefully stop tax avoidance and tax evasion.
I believe we have a simpler and easier tax system within our grasp.
The current tax system is complex and built upon tax breaks for a whole host of reasons, some good and some not so good. It has evolved over many many decades if not centuries.
PAYE was I believed, designed in NZ or originated here. But it was simple and easy for the lower and middle income earners to pay tax that was due.
Effectively PAYE was a tax on gross income earned (gross income or revenue), no confusion and no deductions.
Then politicians got their dirty little fingers on it and tried to change things for companies and individuals, so we now have a complex mishmash of taxes and deductions applicable across our total tax system.
So why not tax everyone on gross income (gross revenue, if you like), as many people have different definitions of gross profit?
All income earners, be they corporate, sole trader, salary, wage, trust, religious structure, or social enterprise or beneficiaries all have a tax entity or number.
New Zealand has a GDP of approximately $400 billion dollars, and the tax take is approximately 37 Billion dollars, so to keep the maths simple, lets say 40 billion give or take, or 10 percent approximately. Easy to understand and easy to calculate, and hard to disguise or avoid tax.
We have many different taxes, which take a lot of time and effort (resources or money) to calculate, and not all of them are equitable. Politicians are always looking at alternatives to balance the books whilst looking after their favourite supporters, just to make it more and more difficult for businesses to operate simply and easily. Company tax is 28% approximately, and difficult and time consuming to calculate, not even mentioning provisional tax, and ensuring you have sufficient funds available to pay on time. Accounts can then spend more time ensuring a company is run efficiently and profitably, rather than calculating tax.
So why not tax every tax entity on their gross income at 10 – 15%., very easy and very fair, could be reduced once established, this can be adjusted with the right analysis and may well be less depending upon the gross tax take overall).
No deductions, no cheating, no fiddling the books, no sending corporate earnings overseas, no freebies, no tax avoidance, no tax evasion. Simplicity. No need for politicians to fiddle the taxes for their favourites. A company survives if profitable, or goes under. All profit/cost centres or business centre can be a tax entity or company, smaller companies, easier to manage, less means of tax avoidance. Instil a financial discipline in a company just as in a household.
Accountants can now focus on how to make a company profitable sensibly (this is the interesting aspect of an accountants life, not the being the most creative tax avoidance specialist).
Now to help all the lower income even more, as well as the middle classes, the first $20,000 of income is tax free for ALL tax entities.
I believe that in the above structure, wage and salary voters will easily understand the concepts, and agree with them. A large number of current voters are flipping between Labour and National, toying with NZ First (and other parties) but are disappointed with the status quo, and no improvements in decades. So these voters are ripe for some party with the right, simply, equitable policies. The detail will be in the implementation. But first someone needs to sell the idea, to get the votes, so that the representatives elected can have a meaningful discussion with Treasury and other interested parties.
I generally think you'd have a hard time taxing businesses on gross before allowing them to deduct the costs incurred. You're also going to lose any incentive to pay staff more, pay bonuses, offer benefits etc as you'd have to recoup the over-and-above from the selling and overhead costs.
How about company tax rate set at 35% or similar. they get a reduction for being somewhere other than a major center, another for the higher the number of staff they employ, another for the higher the median wage across all employees in the company, another for a lower differential between management/CEO and the above median wage, and so on. Structure the tax schedule so that it is reasonably possible for a company to have no tax liabilities under this scheme. Other components may be added such as taxes around environmental impacts.
I agree with the $20 k tax free threshold.
As the sovereign owner of our dollar, the Government does not have to tax to spend. But it must be prudent in what it does spend on.
I agree that the first $20,000 of earned (that is, wages) income should be tax free. Possibly N.Z. Super should be included in the definition of wages, and superannuation payments reduced accordingly.
To make the first $20,000 of all income tax free is silly. But for those in part time work their $350 per week ($18,200 per annum) would still be subject to Kiwisaver deductions and ACC Earner premiums.
Others have commented upon means testing N.Z. superannuation. The Superannuation Surcharge was axed in about 1992, I think. It was politically unsustainable, but damned good politics.
interesting concept. one way you could do things is treat all tax like gst. so when your tax is calculated you deduct the wages paid to staff as they pay tax on that portion.
simeraly you deduct supplies where another company paid tax on the stocker price so you only pay tax on the difference. would need to examine the model in more detail
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.