www.mccully.co.nz
11 May 2007

A Weekly Report from the Keyboard of Murray McCully MP for East Coast Bays

Televising Parliament

Long-suffering taxpayers will be pleased to hear that the opportunity was taken, during the most recent parliamentary recess, to install new television cameras and studio equipment in the chamber and some of the select committee rooms. The objective is to ensure more and improved televising of Parliament and major select committee hearings. The cost: some $4.43 million this year.

The bill, of course, will be met by taxpayers, who will own and operate the facility. The taxpayer-funded plan was hatched to take the place of an earlier proposal that would have seen a consortium of broadcasters (TVNZ, Can West and Sky) operate the new facilities and bill taxpayers for the annual cost.

The new facilities are, according to reports, estimated to have a $1.8 million running cost. All, of course, to be paid by taxpayers. A sum that appears a little on the high side when compared with the proposal pitched by the broadcasters’ consortium, which would have seen an annual operating bill rumoured to be in the vicinity of $350,000 a year handed to taxpayers.

Just who, we hear you ask, could have been responsible for this outstanding decision? Well, a not insignificant role, we hear, can be ascribed to one of the most senior Ministers in the land. One who has become noted in recent times for a tendency towards choleric rantings and intemperate accusations aimed at certain senior media personages. One, indeed, who is currently wrestling with the task of disposing of a rather large budget surplus a little later in the week. In which task he will, of course, be modestly assisted by this lavish investment in the televising of our Parliament.

Sir Geoffrey on the Defensive

Former Labour Party Prime Minister Geoffrey Palmer is on the defensive, following reports in last week’s edition of this humble publication that he had made an $11,000 donation to the Labour Party. The donation, listed in the Labour Party’s 2006 return to the Electoral Commission, is extraordinary from someone who is now President of the New Zealand Law Commission, and thus required to avoid party politics. Just get a load of this description of the Law Commission role from Sir Geoffrey himself when Minister of Justice:

“The Law Commission will be more independent of the Government than any other Law Commission in the Commonwealth.”

Sir Geoffrey is now defending his political donation on the basis that it was personal and unrelated to his role at the Commission. He knows that is absolute bunkum. The Law Commission role is a quasi-judicial one. And Sir Geoffrey knows full well that any judge active in party politics would be sacked. Any judges who were previously members of political parties, routinely resign those party memberships when appointed to the bench. A good number of them even cease voting in general elections just to emphasise their political independence. And there isn’t a judge in the country that would prejudice their role by making a substantial political donation.

The argument that a political donation is acceptable if made in a personal capacity is utterly ludicrous. By that logic, the High Court judges in Wellington could form the lower Molesworth branch of the Labour Party, members of the Waitangi Tribunal could openly join the Maori Party and judges of the Employment or Environment Courts could openly flaunt support for the Greens, provided, of course, they claimed to be acting in a personal capacity.

If anything, an even higher level of observance of these rules is required from Sir Geoffrey. Appointments of former politicians to judicial or quasi-judicial office are extremely rare in this country. As a former Labour politician it was incumbent on Sir Geoffrey to avoid any appearance of ongoing political partisanship. Now, when the President of the Law Commission raises his head to offer public comment, as he is known to do, he will be open to the charge that he is serving the interests of his Labour mates. He will thus embarrass his fellow Commission members and devalue any contribution they make to public policy debate. And that is precisely what the rules are there to avoid.

Gangs with Guns

Police Minister Annette King has been left looking incompetent and extremely foolish in the wake of gang activity in Wanganui that resulted in a two year-old child’s death. DominionPost reporters on the scene in subsequent days saw a car patrolling a Mongrel Mob fort with a rifle clearly visible in the back seat. They reported their sighting in the DomPost. And National MP Gerry Brownlee asked the Minister on Wednesday exactly what the Police proposed to do about such a state of affairs.

King simply hit back, denying the media reports, accusing Brownlee of making the story up, and asserting that any journalist who had seen a gun should have advised the Wanganui Police. But King, of course, was never a politician to engage her brain in advance of her mouth. Unfortunately for King the DomPost reporter had seen a gun in a Mongrel Mob car, was prepared to stand behind the story, and had told Wanganui Police, raising the issue, in fact, at a Police press conference. Which leaves her looking really, really silly.

What King fails to understand, is that the Minister of Police is the person accountable to the Parliament, on behalf of the public, for the actions of Police in upholding the rule of law. Her immediate reaction to the DomPost story should have been to check that the Police were taking all of the appropriate actions. She should have expected to be questioned in Parliament on a matter of such high public interest involving the safety of ordinary citizens.

The Police act with force and speed when they receive word that any ordinary individual is in possession of an unlawful firearm. The Armed Offenders Squad is routinely sent into action. The same rules, at least, should apply to gangs as to other members of the public.

Here, it was alleged in a major newspaper that a gun was clearly visible in a gang car, outside a gang fort, at a time of heightened tension following a gang related killing. Any Minister worth her salt, in these circumstances, should have been demanding reassurance that Police were acting with all of the seriousness and force that would have been used against any other New Zealanders reported to be brandishing unlawful firearms in a public place. But that, apparently, is too much to ask of our current Police Minister.

The Aussie Challenge

Tuesday’s Australian Federal Budget was no doubt designed to lay down the domestic political gauntlet to the Australian Labour Party. In fact, it constitutes an equally serious challenge to the New Zealand economy.

Five successive years of tax cuts and growing after-tax wages in Australia have now raised the trans-Tasman gap in after-tax incomes close to the 40% mark. Those with choices – those with capital and skills – can hardly fail to notice. Which is why the numbers moving from New Zealand to Australia have topped 700 per week over the past year.

New Zealand’s Budget will be presented on Thursday of next week. But already Dr Cullen is signalling that there will be no attempt to move down the Australian path of lower taxes. Australia maintains its place in the middle of the OECD ranking for per capita GDP. New Zealand, which has dropped to 22nd out of 30, is now destined to fall further. Until, of course, a government is elected that is prepared to put wealth creation, rather than wealth re-distribution, at the top of the national agenda.

ENDS

© Scoop Media