Andrew Dickens Afternoons

Well here we go again.  More proof that the Law of Unintended Consequences has hit again in the rural sector.
Government forestry incentives have seen a 45 per cent increase in forestry farm prices over the past year.
Figures released this week by the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand showed the median price of forestry farms had increased from $6487ha to $9394ha.
At the same time though, less forestry land has been up for sale.  70 farms in the 2018 year down to 50 in the year ending April 2019.
So there are two things here.  People are hanging on to their forestry land and other people are prepared to pay heaps to get their hand on some. And this is all because they can see money in it all due to government policies.
Firstly, Shane Jones’ Billion Trees programme means people can almost be paid to increase their forest holding, thank you very much.
Secondly, now that foreigners, except Australians and Singaporeans, can’t buy existing residential or lifestyle properties, their money is now gravitating to an investment that they’re allowed into like forestry assets. 
An investment that the Government provides incentives for. 75 per cent of forestry companies operating in New Zealand are already foreign owned.  Many of the sales are to foreign companies to plant trees to get carbon credits to offset their filth in their neck of the woods.
Which brings on the third factor which is the Ponzi scheme that is the Emissions Trading Scheme.  Putting a dollar price on this scientific theory automatically introduces profit motives.  Currently, the New Zealand Carbon Price is capped at $25 a tonne of CO2.  In Europe it’s $44 a tonne.   Last a review recommended lifting the cap and putting in an auction system. The price will go up and that’s a dollar sign attracting the investors.
It’s a perfect storm of government policy that makes it as near as can be a sure fire investment.
Last week farmers went to talk to Cabinet ministers about their concerns.  30,000 hectares in the North Island alone has been sold to forestry companies. It’s estimated that means 300,000 stock units will be replaced by trees. That means a loss of jobs, people and services in places like Gisborne, Tararua, Wairoa and Wairarapa.
And once you replace farmland with tress there’s no going back.  Cows and sheep don’t go back, Crops will never be planted.  The land is a forest for a generation or more.  This is a big price to pay to give Shane Jones and his nephews a job and foreign polluters a get out of jail free card.
Shane Jones has commented on the situation and he has sympathy for farmers for what he calls the “shiny arses coming out of Auckland to cover Wairoa in trees”, but he says that was not the policies intention.
That may be so Shane, but that doesn’t mean it ain’t happening and it’s partly your fault.
There are some that believe that this policy triple punch is part of the Greens plan to de-farm this country but I don’t think they’re that smart and calculating and a lot of the factors were in play with the National Government.
Ill thought out blanket policies full of virtue signalling with dollars connected kindly donated by you and me in our taxes has artificially distorted the market. Foreigners are cashing in and rural areas are dying a slow death.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Welcome back to work after the last long weekend for a while.
I’ve always thought there was a design failure in the year when Queens Birthday happens in June and then the long haul of winter commences and the next  long weekend is Labour weekend in October.  
For your information, that is 21 weeks away.  Or nearly half a year with the coldest and most brutal weather. It’s ridiculous.
So if you cast your mind back you may remember I wasn’t here on Friday.  It’s because Helen and I have reached that age where things fall off and need to be stuck back on again so we were away having what they like to call a procedure.  Which also meant that we took the long weekend easy with a slow staycation.  And it was glorious.
I listened to no radio and watched no TV news the whole weekend. After last week’s horror show featuring  allegations or rape, hacking and cover ups in the political world it was a relief.  I didn’t hear the yapping of the commentariat about the strengths and failings of the budget.  I didn’t hear the wailing of those who think this country is on a one way descent into economic failure.  I didn’t hear the kumbaya crowd hailing the first so called wellbeing budget.
We walked the dog on beaches and heard the lapping of the sea and the call of sea birds and the laughter of children.  I watched Liverpool win and the Junior All Whites come oh so close, the Blackcaps destroy Sri Lanka, the French Open, the end of the Giro d’Italia and two episodes in a row of What We Do In The Shadows. We ate a Fish curry, some lamb caps and a chicken chorizo pasta.
Basically, we decompressed and cheered up.  Last week depressed me greatly.  Not just the visit to a surgeon but also the deplorable behaviour of all our politicians.
Which brings me back to the budget, which to me was just another budget whose saving grace was the investment in mental health.  Something we have ignored for so long. The way I feel today after a good weekend is proof that mental wellbeing is important for economic progress.
In 2016 the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists did a thorough investigation into the cost of mental health in our countries.  In New Zealand the cost to the economy due to the burden of mental illness in New Zealand is NZ$17.0 billion a year, or 7.2% of GDP, if opioid dependence is included.  
If opioid use is excluded the cost is still NZ$12.0 billion or 5.0% of GDP. On top of that it is estimated that for every dollar invested in mental illness will return $2.30. That's a $4.4 billion return based on this budget announcement. Happy workers are harder workers.
I think that’s a good riposte to all those who thought the budget was too touch feely and lacking a financial focus.  Now how about having another long weekend in August?

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The Government’s investing $10.7 billion in Budget 2019 to improve New Zealanders’ wellbeing in a world-first budget, but are the numbers good enough? 
Andrew Dickens is joined by KPMG's Director Harriet Dempsey and Tax Advisor Bruce Bernacchi, alongside ZB political editor, to discuss this year's budget.
Finance Minister Grant Robertson says the Government’s delivered critical investments needed to help address long-term challenges, while sticking to its self-imposed Budget Responsibility Rules.
That means net core Crown debt as a percentage of GDP is forecast to be 19.9 percent in 2021/22.
And the surplus will grow to $6.1 billion by 2022/23.
Bernacchi told Andrew Dickens he's sceptical.
"I would be surprised if we ever get to the point that the Government has a $6 billion surplus and hasn't found a way to spend it. If you look at these numbers, there's a lot of extra spending planned there, there's nothing about raising any new revenues."
He says that they the Government is hoping for three per cent GDP growth year on year in order to drive economic activity and drive the taxes to pay for this budget. 
Dempsey says that the planned infrastructure commission will be beneficial to the economy and business, with new incentives that will encourage working together. 
"That body is there, and now has the funding to promote good infrastructure."

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Air New Zealand's chairman is dismissing claims the company's chief executive is considering a move to politics.
Newstalk ZB political editor Barry Soper says he understands that Christopher Luxon wants to get into politics.
It comes after National list MP Alfred Ngaro decided against splitting away from the party to form a Christian-focused group.
Soper told Andrew Dickens that one reason why Ngaro has decided against this was that the Botany seat, which he was eyeing as a possibility, is instead being reserved for Luxon.
"The head of Air New Zealand wants to get into politics. He's a relatively young man. He's approaching 50, and I believe he probably has leadership aspirations."
He says that Ngaro has seen that he is safer in National, now that Botany is out of the question.
The Botany seat is held by Independent MP Jami-Lee Ross.
It had been held by National since it was first contested in 2008 - up until Ross left the party last year.
However, Air New Zealand board chair Tony Carter told NewstalkZB Luxon has confirmed he remains committed to Air New Zealand.
New Zealand Herald aviation editor Grant Bradley told Andrew Dickens that there have been political rumours surrounding Luxon for years.
"He was meant to be standing at Northcote last year, but that didn't happen."
Bradley says that it is a matter of timing for Luxon.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

COMMENT:
What a mess. The report into bullying at Parliament and the Speaker's behaviour after it's release.
This morning, the Prime Minister infuriated many by refusing to comment on the schemozzle. In her defence, that was the only professional response in the affair so far. Here's why.
The report was only meant to determine whether there was a culture of bullying and harassment in Parliament. There is, and that's all it was for. All submissions were confidential and anonymous and were destroyed after the report was written. It was commissioned for the Speaker. Its purpose was to convince the Speaker whether a review of the processes in Parliament for dealing with bad behaviour was necessary. Which it obviously is.
The allegations of sexual impropriety were all without identity. It was not an investigation to root out therapists and bullies in Bowen Street. It was not a naming and shaming.
And there it ends.
But in the hours after receiving the report, which detailed anonymous behaviour famously described as tantamount to rape by the Speaker, Trevor Mallard went and suspended some guy who had been investigated before. Only Mallard can tell us why he did that and now he's not talking.
Now whether by design or by stupidity, Mallard's actions have tainted the man currently under investigation. Presumed guilty in public opinion before proven innocent or not, and that's just not on.
My only guess is that having hyped up and blabbed about a confidential report, the Speaker needed a scapegoat to prevent the whole of Parliament being under suspicion. If that is the case, having made a mistake he then went and doubled down and made an even bigger one.
So what should happen next?
Well firstly, Trevor Mallard has to come out and explain his actions. If not, Chris Hipkins and Paula Bennett, the respective leaders of the house, might want to get together and discuss a vote of confidence in the Speaker.
When the Prime Minister was asked whether the Speaker should go she couldn't answer that question. It's a decision for the whole house.
Meanwhile, the investigation into the man needs to continue. While he contends that he's been investigated before that does not negate the current investigation. It should continue confidentially.
This affair was in response to a report that contained confidential and anonymous allegations, and they should have stayed that way until concrete allegations can be made through the correct process.
While she drove Mike and the audience bonkers this morning, the Prime Minister was bang on.
What a pity the Speaker didn't get that before blundering in.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's fair to say that the Newstalk ZB newsroom made some fresh discoveries about our colleagues today.
A viral Twitter topic, sparked by comic writer Gail Simone, has seen tens of thousands of people around the world share their first character crushes.
Simone asked a simple question: "Which animated character did you first think was super kissable, even if it sounds weird now?"
She has been flooded with responses, and the topic is now the top trending subject on Twitter as people reveal the Disney, Nickelodeon and anime characters that first stole their hearts.
Producer Antz put the question to the newsroom, as well as Andrew Dickens, and some interesting results were unveiled. 

Stupid Question Of The Day:Name the first animated character you ever had a crush on. Which animated character did you first think was super kissable, even if it sounds weird now? Please use hashtag#1stCartoonCrush
— GAIL SIMONE Thinks the Punisher Should Smile More (@GailSimone) May 21, 2019




Someone call the police! This man is guilty of stealing My 9 year old heart around 11 years ago #1stCartoonCrush pic.twitter.com/P0feaHEOIu
— big momma (@bigmomma69_) May 22, 2019




you’re lying if simba didn’t make you feel some type of way #1stCartoonCrush pic.twitter.com/nDq5d3ufc2
— adi🌪 (@uhdeetea) May 22, 2019




#1stCartoonCrush Are you really that surprised? pic.twitter.com/nds9rWvUaI
— JoeyWaggoner (Commissions OPEN!) (@JW_Cartoonist) May 21, 2019

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

If you think your mum is laying it on thick about producing grandchildren, take heart: At least you're not a male bonobo.
Bonobo mothers have been seen performing a variety of behaviours that seem to lend their sons an advantage when it comes to fathering babies, according to a study published Monday in Current Biology Magazine.
What kind of behaviours? Well, when a male bonobo is mating with a female, his mother will sometimes run interference against any other males that come too close and try to interrupt the love-making.
Wingman? How about wingmum?
Bonobo mothers have also been observed actively breaking up copulations between females and other males who aren't their sons, calling to mind the title of a certain crudely named, big-screen comedy released last year.
Sometimes a bonobo mum will even team up with with her son to beat up sexual rivals and help him rise in their social group's hierarchy.
Scientists have long known that mother bonobos do all of these things, but until now, they've never been able to provide evidence that the meddling actually gave their sons an advantage that led to more grand-bonobos. The new research, however, documented that wild male bonobos in the Democratic Republic of Congo father three times as many offspring when their moms are still in the picture than bonobos whose mothers have died or left their group.
By comparison, the same researchers found no such significant advantages for wild male chimpanzees in Côte d'Ivoire, Tanzania, and Uganda. This is important because bonobos and chimpanzees are very closely related. But chimpanzee mothers don't typically display any of these matchmaking - or, rather, match-defending -- behaviours for their sons. This suggests the boost in baby bonobos is at least partly due to the mothers' son-assisting behaviour and not simply good genetics.
But there's also a social component. In chimpanzee groups, males always retain dominance. In bonobo groups, males and females share dominance, and females are usually protected from violence from males.
"I am pretty sure we see these effects in bonobos because females have these high social ranks," said Martin Surbeck, a biologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and lead author of the study. "Where we are less sure is the actual mechanism by which the presence of mums helps their sons."
And the mothers' presence alone is important.
In a 2010 study, Surbeck and his coauthors observed that bonobo males tend to remain on the outskirts of the group when they don't have their mothers nearby. That's bad news for those males' reproduction rates, because the centre of the group is where the most reproductively available females congregate. On the contrary, even low- and mid-ranking males were able to safely enter the centre of the group when their mums accompanied them.
"They act as social passport allowing males to 'enter' the female core of the bonobo society," Surbeck wrote in an email.
Mothers also seem to influence the rank of their sons, with more powerful mothers having more powerful sons. "And once mothers lose their high ranks, this can affect their sons ranks as well," Surbeck said.
Ammie Kalan, a primatologist at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology who was not involved in the new study, called it "fascinating" for the way it invokes comparisons to the so-called grandmother hypothesis for human evolution.
The grandmother hypothesis attempts to explain why female humans are among the very few animals that experience menopause. After all, if evolution is all about passing on your genes, what benefit would there be in hanging up your reproductive ability?
The answer, according to the hypothesis, is that after a certain age, grandmothers actually have a better chance of passing on their genes by helping their offspring rather than by creating more offspring themselves.
"That being said,...

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

How easy are we?
Last week, Alfred Ngaro was some half remembered former Cabinet Minister who had slunk into invisibility in opposition.  From time to time pictures came out of the opposition benches and Alfred Ngaro would catch the eye with his shock of silver hair, looking just  like Mike McRoberts long lost twin brother. 
But that was last week.  How things have changed while we’ve been played.
Barry Soper wrote an article bringing to light the rumours that had swirled for a while. That Alfred would split off from the National Party and form a conservative Christian party.
It made sense. Alfred has always trumpeted his Christianity, called himself a Zionist and claimed to have been a pastor.
But Barry’s article went further, suggesting that National could cut a deal for Alfred and his new party along the lines of the deal with ACT.  The electorate of Botany was mentioned. And this also made sense as National is desperate for coalition partners.
Now, the Botany deal has been gently denied by National but that doesn’t matter because mentioning Botany was a stroke of genius.  It fired up the incumbent independent Jami-Lee Ross who dutifully went into attack mode against the party that isolated him. 
Ross scanned Alfred’s social media for a weapon and he found it: Alfred lightly conflated abortion with the word holocaust.  A powerful, emotionally laden word that rises heckles in many.
So bang.  Alfred’s in the paper again for a second day.  He refuses to apologise but mitigates the word saying he should have said the tragedy of abortion and then double downs on his long held belief that abortion is a crime.  He has always opposed moving abortion out of the Crimes Act.
So bang again. Many feminists rail against that attitude and put their argument, seemingly oblivious to the fact that people whose mind is set on keeping abortion criminal will never change their view. Alfred doesn’t mind.  His name is in the public sphere again.
Meanwhile, Simon Bridges is on the radio with Mike Hosking talking about Alfred.
This is all politics 101.  The trick is to get other people talking about you and Alfred has done that all week long. Holey Moley.  I’m doing it now!
But it’s all so seemingly calculating.  It doesn’t feel as though this so called party has emerged organically from a significant sector of like-minded individuals. It feels like a political party you order from a catalogue.
While Alfred may get the 500 members needed and the organisation together in the 18 months he has before the next election, it will still seem to me like a ruse from the National Party. And if it works and three or so members of this new party take a seat in parliament, there will still be a feeling that all the other people who started parties themselves were gypped.  The Colin Craigs and the Gareth Morgans.  That their two or three per cent of supporters were democratically disenfranchised.
So personally, if you think a conservative party is needed and you’d like to support one, then the one I like is the New Conservatives who have done the hard yards by themselves and look pretty prepared really and are not some party you buy in a flat pack and assemble yourself or a party you buy from a takeaways.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Formula One legend Niki Lauda has died aged 70 after a period of ill health, according to reports.
The Austrian Press Agency reported the news this morning.
Lauda, who had kidney transplants in 1997 and 2005, had reportedly been in hostpital for dialysis treatment after kidney issues.
"Due to kidney problems, he had to be transferred from the rehabilitation centre to a private clinic for dialysis," Lauda's brother Florian confirmed to Austrian media.
According to Austrian newspaper Volksblatt, the motorsport great passed away accompanied by his family.
"The 70-year-old three-time Formula 1 world champion and flight entrepreneur had peacefully fallen asleep with his family on Monday, the family said on Tuesday night," said the report.
Lauda, who was badly burned during a Formula One race in 1976 and later became an airline entrepreneur, underwent a double lung transplant in August last year.
The former driver was a world champion three times, taking the title for Ferrari in 1975 and 1977, and in 1984 for McClaren.
He was non-executive chairmain of Mercedes and had a close relationship with five-time F1 champion Lewis Hamilton, and was involved in helping sign the British driver from McClaren in 2013.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Why are we giving immigrants superannuation, asked a nationally broadcast current affairs host who should know better this morning.
Well, Mr Populism, preying on people’s basic instincts, it’s because they’re New Zealand citizens or residents.  But obviously in his eyes there two types of New Zealanders: the ones he thinks deserve to be here and the ones he thinks don’t deserve to be here, even if they’re totally legal. This is the worst dog whistle broadcasting and it’s also the worst dog whistle politics.
Honestly, if you don’t like older immigrants who qualify getting the super, then don’t let them in in the first place. This is an immigration debate, not a superannuation debate.  If we’re going to have a superannuation debate, then let’s talk about the elephant in the room.
NZ Super is a universal social welfare benefit paid to older New Zealand Citizens and Residents. Universal. It has been since the day it started.  $800 a fortnight for a single and $1300 for a couple.
It has nothing to do with how much tax you’ve paid before you turn 65. If it was then the people who paid the most tax would get back more super than the ones who paid less tax, further exacerbating the divide between rich and poor.
The taxpayers of today pay a universal benefit to ensure the older generation does not starve or freeze. Which is why it gets difficult when the proportion of taxpayers reduce and the number of pensioners increase, which is exactly what is happening now with the baby boomers hitting retirement age.
To combat that problem, some countries started to raise the age of the pension to 67. It also takes into account that we live longer these days. 
But in New Zealand, we refuse to countenance this. It was John Key who drew the line in the sand and said he’d never raise the age. All while allowing hundreds of thousands of immigrants into the country, many close to pension age, ironically putting even more pressure on his stand.
It’s only been two years but it’s turned into political poison. Jacinda Ardern made a commitment to 65 before the election.  In 2017, PM Bill English said the age would start to slowly rise. In 20 years time. Or 2037. Or when the baby boom bulge is starting to peter out. That was a policy that was not really a policy.  A stand that was not a stand.
No party will come out and say let’s raise the age now even when the argument makes perfect sense. Because New Zealanders are too married to their own entitlements no matter how hard it becomes for the entire system. They say millennials are entitled but there’s nobody more entitled than someone who’s within coo-eee of the super.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.