Treasury is the dinner party guest who has an opinion on everything, whether they're asked for it or not. Incoming governments receive briefing papers from government departments, and though Treasury's advice was mostly predictable, some has been met with an awkward silence from the Government. Recommending adoption of the Labour Party's superannuation policy to raise the retirement age, as Audrey Young reports (Govt must address Super issue - Treasury), won't endear them to John Key, especially as he has explicitly rejected any rise while he is prime minister. Treasury also promotes changes to taxation on capital investment, which are broadly in line with Labour's capital gains tax policy.
The advice that has received the most vocal response is its advocacy of increasing class sizes - see Andrea Vance's Experts, MPs blast Treasury's advice on schools. NZEI, PPTA and Labour all question Treasury's educational expertise, and it's pretty clear that the advice is driven by a desire to save money. For polemical views of the advice, you can read Eric Crampton's very enthusiastic endorsement of the recommendations - see: Treasury! and The Standard's Treasury advocates own disbandment. The Standard says that a government looking to cut public sector costs should start at Treasury itself, which has had a 15% funding boost over the past two years, unlike nearly all other government departments, and also points out their recent economic forecasts have been fairly wide of the mark.
Heading into Waitangi weekend, issues of ethnicity and Maori politics dominate political news and analysis. Rawiri Taonui argues that if New Zealanders are going to become 'tenants in our own country' due to farms sales, then 'Maori would make good landlords' - see: Letting Maori share is best for NZ. He makes the case that the Government should and could have rejected the Shanghai Pengxin bid to purchase the Crafar farms. He cites numerous statements from National ministers about new regulations that would allow them to 'overrule the Overseas Investment Office recommendation for any number of reasons' - particularly that of 'concerns about "the undue aggregation of farmland by foreign investors".' Specifically, Taonui points to 'regulation 28 (i) can prevent "a single overseas person" controlling significant interests'. Furthermore, Taonui says that the Crafar farms should have been sold to the iwi-Michael Fay consortium on the basis that 'Article 205 allows the Government to override the agreement when necessity dictates "favourable treatment to Maori" in fulfilment of "obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi".
Similarly, Tahu Potiki's Press column today, Iwi keen but cautious on buying a slice of SOEs argues in favour of 'Maori or iwi owning a slice of New Zealand infrastructure assets'. He gives three reasons that iwi should become part owners of the SOEs: 1) it would be 'a natural extension of the Treaty-driven restorative process', giving 'a more equal partnership with the Crown', 2) those assets 'are perceived as very sound, intergenerational companies that make reliable returns', and 3) 'it further anchors iwi into an important stakeholder position within the community at large'.
Xenophobia in New Zealand is intelligently analysed in a lengthy guest post on Liberation by John Moore - see: Leftwing Xenophobia in New Zealand. Moore argues that the nationalist rhetoric used by Labour and Green politicians about the Crafar farm sale has nothing to do with progressive politics and everything to do with crude foreigner bashing, which the political left has a sordid history of championing in this country. Chris Trotter's column today explains why he supports the Crafar farm sale to Shanghai Pengxin - see: Our hands were tied over the Crafar farms sale. Trotter levels a charge of 'rank hypocrisy and populist opportunism' at Labour and David Shearer for their campaign against foreign investment.
