On Right Wing Politics in New Zealand -

The most “right wing” of NZ’s right wing political parties is a small group represented in Parliament by 5 MPs. The party stems from what was originally called ”Association of Concerned Taxpayers”; now known just as ACT.

The party was started by a group led by two of the more right wing movers out of David Lange’s Labour (left Wing) government by then Finance Minister Roger Douglas and Minister of Rail (as I recall) Richard Prebble.

The party’s representation in Parliament is based entirely on the fact that the Leader (the Rhinohide) is an electoral MP (as distinct from List). That, and the fact that they polled nationally some 4% of the total vote at the last General Election has given them 5 places around the table and a good part of the current Government.

I must be honest. I am not in any way a supporter of ACT. Realistically they are no more than a bunch of opportunistic self-promoting wallies – but then isn’t that what “politician” means? To give a f’rinstance their current Policy on the shape and form of the government of NZ -

Constitutional Framework
Action: Strengthen. Adopt Tax Payers Bill of Rights. Pass Regulatory Responsibilty Act. Return to privy council. Hold referendum of MMP voting system.
Benefit: Makes democracy more democratic. States spending capped, taxes kept low. Hard to make bad laws like the EFA. Free access to best judicial minds from a population of 58 million. People get long-overdue say on how they like MMP.

Sounds great, huh! So, let’s take a look at the “Action” –

“Adopt Tax Payers Bill of Rights” – whatever that means. Go find out if you want. I think that they favour flat tax rates.

“Pass Regulatory Responsibility Act.” Interesting one this, given that they have just supported the introduction of a Bill to “fast-track” the work needed in Christchurch (post-earthquake), which said Bill includes extensive Regulatory powers to the Ministers involved. Essentially, this gives the Government the right to make fiat law, within the structures of the Statute that will come out the other end of the process. So, there y’go. Instance one of great words being spoken by weasels.

“Return to privy council”. No I don’t think that they mean a convocation in the gents at the top end of The Terrace. I think they mean “Privy Council” – an august and highest Court in Britain. So they want to sell justice as part of our silverware, like so much else of NZ that they want to part with.

“Hold referendum of MMP voting system”. Now, I have to admire their political chutzpah on this item. I am quite certain that a good part of their party support comes from those who (like my #1son) believes that MMP is death and destruction to democracy and wishes for a return to FPP. The smile on my face as I type that is broad because, if it were not for MMP, ACT would have at the very most one member in the House. He would not hold anything like a balance of power. He would be a dim shadow of the last two (and quite missed in some respects) “third party members” under FPP, Bruce Beetham, and Gary Knapp (who I knew well and who had the most inappropriate nickname) who both originated in the (equally marginal) Social Credit Party. They were preceded by one Vern Cracknell (also SC), who achieved a heck of a lot for his electorate; primarily because the government of the day wanted to get the electorate back into their own (National Party) hands. Beetham and Knapp were nowhere near as successful.

“…democracy more democratic”? If the Rhinohide had his way… well just look at his approach to the Ministry he holds; autocratic and dictatorial.

“State spending capped…” See previous paragraph.

“Hard to make bad law like [Electoral Finance Act]”? How can I say this gently Rhino. Look in the mirror. What do you see? There is no question in my mind that you and ACT would not differ from any other parliamentary party in power. If expediency calls, then the law will be made; with or without consultation; with or without advice. That is the nature of politics in this country. No matter how you might try to argue otherwise, that is a truth that applies to your Party as much as any other. “Why” will be explained below.

“Free access to the best judicial minds…” Hey folks, this is the party that promotes and praises “user pays” and capping government spending. But when it comes to Justice, they propose that NZ should free-load on the British Justice system? Tui billboards spring to mind – “Yeah, Right!”

“…get a say on how they like MMP”? OK Rhinohide. I for one luvit! Why? Because it puts idiots like you and Boscowen and Garrett in Parliament where you can show the world just what “Right Wing Politics” really means.

That comes by way of introduction.

The present government is propped by two minor parties, ACT being one and Maori Party the other. I feel sorry for the Maori Party; they have been well and truly dicked by the Nats, and for some strange reason seem totally unaware of the fact. Perhaps it has something to do with the anaesthesia of political power? That aside…

During this past six months, ACT has been showing signs of suffering the kind of damage recently visited on Christchurch. Liquifaction of support, crumbling brickwork, failing infrastructure; and none of it due in any way to the impact of the outside world. Well, I must agree that the Rhinohide will blame “the left-wing dominated media” for his woes (well, I mean to say, it worked for George, why not me). In truth, that is about all he has to work with.

It began with the dust-up between Rhino and Heather (Pass The Duster) Roy. The detail goes a lot further down, I suspect, than the latter having her Ministerial mail read by the former. It ended with one of Rhino’s mates – Boss Cawan – replacing Roy as Deputy Leader of the Party.

Now that might seem a little bit trivial, but what has become apparent is that the Parliamentary Caucus comprises two clear camps – Rhino, Boss and Garrett on the one hand and Douglas and Roy on the other; 3-2 in favour of Rhino.

Now in the past week, another of the number has come under fire.

It transpires that ACT’s spokesman on Justice, “three-strike” law, and strong supporter of the Sensible Sentencing Trust, David Articulated Garrett has a conviction for assault ($10 contributed to His Majesty King Tupou IV of Tonga and conviction) and has appeared before a NZ Court on charges (which I hasten to say did not result in penalty or conviction despite his admission that they were true) of obtaining a Passport under the name of a dead infant – as done by The Jackal and, more recently, MOSSAD.

So now the Rhino has a problem, a veritable dilemma.

On the one hand he has an MP with “shadow Ministerial” responsibilities including one of the more important pieces of recent Government legislation who has a minor criminal conviction plus some quite idiotic law-breaking history.

However, if Rhino were to “do the right thing” and shed that said MP, then the next in line (Articulated Garrett being a List MP) is very likely not a Rhino supporter. Then, suddenly, the vote in Caucus becomes 2-3.

Oh, Dear!!! The next few weeks promise to be interesting indeed.

probligo correspondence

Over the two past weeks or so there has been strenuous and strident debate about the RhinoHide announcement, backed by the Jonkey, of the amalgamation of the various local authorities (there are some 8 of them) that "drive" the magnificent metropolis of Auckland.

The probligo has had his say with this...

Sir,

The raruraru about the coming “super-city” structure for Auckland should not be limited to the single aspect of representation, or the aspirations of individuals for the positions of power within the new structure.

There is another fundamental which thus far has been ignored and which, if the proposed structure is foisted on the region, will become of far greater import than ever before.

The most defining problem of the present structure is not just political, it is not just bureaucratic. Both are joined by the requirement for appropriate accountability. The most recent example was the ARC, and its highly unsuccessful foray into the realms of reality entertainment. That was bad enough on a small scale, and there are many other equally rotten examples that could be dug out of the woodwork. Hide and Key are right in blaming the political forces and the structure of the region, but regrettably they do not concentrate on the true problem.

I can not see, in any shape nor form, how the proposals for the super-city will improve accountability to the ratepayers for results of the machinations of both the super-bureaucrats and the super-politicians. The ballot-box remains for the latter, agreed. The counter to that is the relationship between elector and candidate for such regional functions as District Health Board, ARC, and (in the past) electricity distribution authorities. Who really “knows” their local representatives to any of those bodies?

The thought of the introduction of the American system, where bureaucrats and politicians walk in and out of office hand in hand offers little comfort. Yes, that might be seen to increase accountability. It would however be a matter of closing stable doors and cleaning up after.

There is no question that the local government of Auckland is “primarily dysfunctional”. There is no doubt that “something must be done”. Is the super-city the solution that will promote greater accountability? I have strong doubts that it will.


The present “problem” is the product of years of political infighting prompted by the need to preserve and expand individual political interests.


It is in the legal structures created by passing governments; structures that may well have been created with the very best of intentions but which on reflection and experience have been inadequate to the task.


It is also in the “hospital passes” from government to local government of functions which have not worked at a national level; and for which there were increasingly vocal demands for greater “local control”. In many instances they included functions that were becoming increasingly unpalatable and politically dangerous.


It is in the increased delegation of responsibilities from elected representatives to the bureaucracy. That does not mean I would wish for the days when the Mayor or Chairman would arrive in the office each morning to open and read the mail. The delegation of responsibilities is the consequence of greater complexities in modern city life; greater need and desire for personal control; a desire to isolate the political from the unpalatable decisions that must be made.

Did the last major round of local government reorganisation improve the relationship between Councils and electors? Were the problems of dysfunctional bureaucracy resolved? No, if anything they got worse.


In my minds eye I see old Sam Minhinnik, sitting on his little stool and sketching his thoughts on passing clouds. There has been a change though. Where in the past Minhinnik used his “parish pump” image with a top hat, in future it will wear a six-pearled coronet.

Yours

Will it be published? I will let you know, tomorrow is unlikely...