KEY POINTS:
Now that the election campaign is over, this Q&A is now closed. Thanks to all those who contributed.
November 6
John Georgeff asks: "What plans do your parties have in place to make N.Z. a fiscally attractive place to live again and perhaps lure Ex-pat Kiwis back?"
United Future responds: "A simpler, fairer tax structure; more support for parents raising kids and their families; greater emphasis on making the great outdoors cleaner and more accessible for all New Zealanders."
Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said New Zealand will be attractive when the country plays to its strengths of sustainability, democracy, and an independent voice.
"We can be world leaders in fostering sustainable business and agricultural practices, enhancing our wealth as a nation, and protecting our most precious resource - our beautiful country.
"To incentivise this, the Green Party will shift tax off incomes and enterprise, and on to waste, pollution, scarce resources, and speculation. We're intent on building a green economy that fosters environmentally-sound industries, creating thousands of new green-collar jobs and stimulating investment in local business," Dr Norman said.
He said the Greens will introduce a student debt write-off scheme and a bond scheme that would see a year of debt written-off for every year a graduate works in a paid and unpaid job.
Dr Norman said one of the biggest reasons Kiwis come home is the lifestyle.
"Our beaches, rivers and bush, our safe communities, and our egalitarian approach cannot be defined by purely fiscal measures. We need to protect and restore our natural and living environments so that our country remains a great place to live and come back to," he said.
Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said his party is concerned that up to 110, 000 Maori are living in Australia.
"Many of the 'Mozzies' (Maori living in Australia) said they left because of dwindling employment prospects; racism, and a desire to create a better future for their whanau.
"The Maori Party promotes the importance of whanau ora (well-being) as critical towards ensuring all families can determine their own solutions. We want to see opportunity communities where their own locally developed solutions can be supported," Dr Sharples said.
No other parties have so far responded.
Labour has made mention of ex-pat' Kiwis on their Labour08 website.
"We do not want to discourage young New Zealanders from doing their traditional OE, or overseas work experience, because these people generally return to New Zealand with valuable work and life experience.
"However it is important that we have avenues to contact skilled New Zealanders overseas so that we can continue to promote their eventual return home. While New Zealand citizens are obviously excluded from all requirements in the Immigration Act, there is a role that Immigration New Zealand can play through its international presence and contacts.
"Labour will ensure that the Immigration Service continues to market New Zealand overseas as a great place to live, work and raise a family, targeting people with the skills needed to grow our economy. This message will apply to potential migrants and expatriate New Zealanders and be conveyed through, for example, international career expos and its existing New Zealand Now website."
The National Party has also failed to respond nzherald.co.nz but last month finance spokesman Bill English attacked Labour over the number of New Zealanders heading to Australia and said his party would introduce tax cuts and a stronger economy to bring Kiwis back.
"The reality is that the current crisis makes it more important to deal with these underlying problems, or we are heading for slow growth and Labour's decade of deficits.
"Australians have enjoyed year-on-year tax cuts, while New Zealanders have had to wait nine long years," Mr English said.
* * *
November 05
Penny Twiss sent this in: "The credit crisis seems to have the IMF and main industrialised nations such as G7 communicating on a programme that will affect the world's financial systems.
"It would appear that if there were a programme of cooperation, the nations of the world may be asked to cooperate under one financial system, almost like a one world government.
"Would either of the two main party leaders sign up NZ to such a scheme if this meant giving up NZ's sovereignty and ability to create and manage its own financial system and instead of being dictated to by foreign parties?
"If such a scheme were presented to each leader would they be transparent to the NZ people about this and run a referendum or would they incorporate it into NZ law without taking it to the people?"
Although Penny addressed her question to Prime Minister Helen Clark and National leader John Key, we sent her question to all the parties.
The Green Party was the first to respond. Party co-leader Russel Norman said his party "would not allow New Zealand's financial sovereignty to be traded away for the promise of financial stability under the auspices of the G7. We have lost too much of our sovereignty already under the guise of free trade; the Greens have consistently opposed this erosion of independence."
He said the Greens support an internationally coordinated overhaul of financial regulations and will push the New Zealand Government to play a role.
"The financial meltdown and ensuing Government bail-outs have showed, once and for all, that the mantra of financial deregulation has failed. It's time to find new forms of international cooperation to protect society and the real economy from the destructive activities of the financial speculators and cowboys," Dr Norman said.
"The Greens will support moves and help reform our financial markets to internationally agreed-upon principles of transparency, integrity, responsibility, and co-operation. Likewise, we would bring such reforms home. Our central bank needs to be more proactive in supervising our financial industry here," he said.
Dr Norman said his party would impose tougher requirements for banks signing up to the deposit guarantee scheme. "Reckless bonus incentives in CEOs' pay packages that encourage them to take the kind of short term risks that have led to this financial melt-down will be curbed. We will also work to stem the flow of bank dividend payments out of the country for the duration of this crisis," he said.
The Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said his party sees the IMF and the World Bank as promoting foreign ownership of strategic infrastructure and this has driven poor countries further into poverty.
"Under Rogernomics, New Zealand's state-owned assets, our national bank, and energy, communications and transport networks were sold off. Government control of seabed and foreshore has opened vast areas to seabed mining. International trade agreements recognise foreign patents on NZ's natural and cultural heritage.
"Maori groups have led opposition to globalisation. The Government's Free Trade Agreement with China limits our sovereign right to protect our environment from foreign-owned industry. The Maori Party supports fair trade, not free trade. We are the only Party who will not sell our land, our heritage, our future. Aotearoa is safe with the Maori Party," Dr Sharples said.
No other parties have responded.
Labour did not respond to the question but last Thursday the Herald reported that US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called Finance Minister Michael Cullen to seek his views ahead of the Group of 20 meeting to be held in Washington in 10 days time.
Dr Cullen told the Herald that the conversation was initiated by the US and it emphasised again how much better the relationship between the two countries had become.
Dr Cullen said he thought the Secretary of State was concerned about where the G20 meeting left the US' friends not in the grouping.
"I think she just wants to reach out to friends like New Zealand," Dr Cullen told the Herald.
"So she just wants to have a bit of a call, and tell us what their ambitions are for the meeting, and I just want to say 'well, there's a few things that we'd like to just have put on the agenda'."
Dr Cullen said he wanted to thank the US Administration for what it had done to lead the Western world in propping up the financial sector.
He said he also wanted to emphasise that the short-term stop-gap measures being taken at the moment weren't really sustainable in the long term.
The short-term arrangements to combat the crisis were fraught with dangers and would become difficult to sustain, he suggested.
"There's also the need, I think, for greater international co-operation around prudential regulation - I think that's been one of the issues in a lot of this," Dr Cullen said. "So just how do we get that better co-operation, and maybe better alignment between prudential regulation around the world?"
The G20 leaders scheduled to meet in Washington include those from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Britain, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United States and the European Union.
* * *
ACT have since elaborated on their answer on tax from yesterday.
"We lower tax not raise it."
November 04
Glyn Thomas asks: "Will Labour promise not to increase income taxes or GST as part of their economic measures to combat the crisis?"
We asked parties to provide their policy on the likelihood of GST or tax increasing after the election.
ACT was the first to respond with: "and how could you possibly rely on them keeping that promise?"
We asked: what is ACT's policy on raising GST and taxes? They have not been back in contact.
Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said: "The Maori Party has campaigned to reduce taxes for those with income under $25,000 and to take GST off food on the grounds that GST hits low-income people disproportionately.
"A Research New Zealand poll conducted in June 2008 found that 80 percent of Kiwis think the government should consider lowering tax on food. We are a party that listens," Dr Sharples said.
Green Party co-leader Russel Norman said his party will not raise GST.
"We are however committed to lower income taxes by introducing a tax-free income threshold - your first $10,000 of income will be tax-free.
"The Green Party will pay for this tax cut by shifting the tax burden from work and enterprise, and onto social harms like waste, pollution, scarce resources, and speculation. This would mean lower taxes for everybody, especially the poor, and a higher price on activities that are harmful to us and our environment," Dr Norman said.
No other parties have so far responded
* * *
November 03
Adrienne asks: "What do you plan to do about the lack of funding for extra ambulance officers, especially in the rural areas that depend heavily on volunteers because of this inability to pay for full-time staff and also to address the dangerous practice of single-crewing because of this?"
Green Party health spokeswoman Sue Kedgley described the ambulance service as "under-funded" and "under-staffed".
She said the service "relies too heavily on volunteers. It lacks strategic direction, regulatory oversight and national clinical standards, and New Zealanders' lives are being needlessly endangered as a result".
Ms Kedgley said the Greens will increase funding for the provision of ambulance services, and integrate funding into one single provider.
"We will look into replacing the current largely voluntary system with a professional ambulance service that is an integral part of the public health system," she said.
Ms Kedgley said funding will be sufficient to guarantee double-crewing for all emergency call-outs and ambulance crew will not have to exceed the NZTA regulations for the length of time driving without taking a break.
She said NZTA regulations prohibit drivers from driving for more than five-and-a-half hours without a break but underfunding is forcing some ambulance officers to drive for more than eight hours without a break.
Ms Kedgley said the extra funding would allow 75 percent of ambulance call-outs to reach their destination within 8 minutes.
"Ambulance services in New Zealand used to be expected to meet this target but the target was removed because they were not meeting it.
"Other ambulance-related policies we have are: Ensure mandatory minimum national qualification standards for paramedics and ambulance officers, establish and provide a national training programme for all paramedics and ambulance officers, require paramedics to be regulated under the Health Professionals Competency Act," Ms Kedgley said.
Maori Party co-leader Tariana Turia said: "It is a huge concern that we have services that do not meet the minimum clinical crewing requirements, and that there are significant gaps in terms of the crewing qualification levels.
"If the state is serious about a safety net, then surely it must make a contribution towards that net by contributing to these services, which are often voluntary but vital.
"The next Government must address this issue as a priority in order that all ambulance services meet the standard for basic life support capability when it comes to crewing," Mrs Turia said.
No other parties have so far responded but last Thursday Minister of Health David Cunliffe and Minister for ACC Maryan Street announced a $47 million package for ambulances under Labour.
Mr Cunliffe said the sector had urgent needs and the funding would go some way to addressing those.
"I expect this funding to be used to reduce part charges by the ambulance sector and to address in part the issue of single crewing," Mr Cunliffe said.
The Government released a draft New Zealand Ambulance Service Strategy in September and comments from the public are welcome until December 12.
The National Party supported recommendations made by a health select committee on ambulances back in July.
Associate health spokesman Jo Goodhew said National believes volunteers will continue to make-up part of ambulance services in New Zealand.
"Volunteers are a strong and vital part of many communities, and as such, are an extremely valuable resource. Any move to have ambulances only crewed with a salaried workforce is bound to undermine our rural and provincial communities."
* * *
October 31
Justine Ashton asks: "What is your party's policy on special education? Do you support inclusion of Special Needs children i.e Mainstreaming, or do you support separate education for special needs children e.g. special schools and special classes?
"I am a parent of a special needs child and I support inclusion of special needs children where possible, and I support choice for parents. However, mainstreaming is only possible with adequate funding of teacher aides and specialist teachers.
"Another issue is how little time the average teacher (not the specialist teacher) spends learning about special needs children. What is your policy about teacher training regarding special needs?"
Labour education minister Chris Carter said his party's policy had not yet been released and he declined to answer the question.
Green party spokeswoman for education and disability, Metiria Turei, said: "Obtaining a quality education is essential for achieving a non-disabling society and schools remain an area of real concern. At the moment parents constantly have to advocate so school principals and trustees understand their obligations and work in positive, non-discriminatory ways.
"Some teacher education still does not include any component on supporting children with diverse needs. Many children living with impairments are made to feel unwelcome when enrolling at their local school, partly because of prejudice, but mainly because resources are not adequate to meet their needs. Some schools are sending children home at lunchtime or telling them to stay at home on days when there is no teacher aide. With individual funding capped this means that children with moderate needs often miss out; they rely on the goodwill of schools to meet their needs."
Mrs Turei said her party will:
Ensure education (pre-school to tertiary) is accessible to all, is well resourced, flexible and alternative approaches are available to meet the needs of all children and adults.
Introduce needs based funding for children with impairments and to double the percentage receiving individual funding.
Introduce needs based funding for children with impairments
Double ORRS funding and individualise SEG funding.
Support the 2006 IHC Code for Schools and ensure that schools come under the New Zealand Disability Strategy implementation and reporting process.
Ensure all children have the absolute right to education in their local school and have the resources to support this, and that schools are accountable for the way they use disability funding.
Ensure that disability awareness is part of all induction courses for the public service sectors, particularly those that deal directly with the public every day.
Implement mandatory on-going training programmes about disability issues, needs and rights for all employed in public services; and as part of all teacher education.
Maori party co-leader Pita Sharples said: "The Inclusive education Action Group has confirmed that disabled children and their families continue to experience discrimination and a second rate education at school.
"We support a review of the funding and contracting model for special needs in schools. Current provision is uneven and inequitable. We have supported IHC's complaint to the Human Rights Commission that Government policy has impacted on the ability of schools to meet the educational needs of students with disabilities."
"We will review the National Vision Hearing Screening Programme service specifications to ensure universal coverage is achieved. We want teacher aide funding to be increased, and professional development for teachers to ensure high quality inclusive education approaches."
United Future MP Judy Turner said her party supports both mainstreaming and special education classes for the reasons Justine Ashton outline.
"Our policy is to see ORRS Funding increased by 10 percent immediately with a fuller review of the funding needs to follow. We think that it is unsatisfactory that while 10 percent of NZ children have an identified disability requiring support in school .... Only 1 percent of funding for compulsory education goes to that end.
"We would make it compulsory for all teacher education providers to have
content on identifying and responding to the educational needs of
students with disabilities. We would want to see training for teachers
aids working with these students through an industry training
organisation."
National, New Zealand First, Act and the Progressives have not responded.
* * *
October 30
Mike asks: "If you win the Election, will you retain ownership of Kiwibank? The recent global banking crisis has highlighted the need for countries to own a significant stake in their banking sector. If you are elected would you take the opportunity to increase NZ ownership of the banking sector?"
Green party co-leader Russel Norman responds: "The fact that Kiwibank only borrows within New Zealand and is Government-owned has made it one of New Zealand's most reliable financial institutions. The Greens will unequivocally fight to retain public ownership of Kiwibank.
"Long before this financial crisis, the Greens have advocated for greater local ownership of our banks and financial institutions. To achieve this, the Greens will look at providing the starting capital for a community owned banking network that reinvests profits locally. We'll also take the initiative to introduce reforms in the sector to introduce fairness in lending and greater transparency throughout."
Mr Norman said the Greens' reforms include:
Legislation aimed at tightening up the provision of credit in both the bank and non bank financial sector, and establishing an independent financial consumer agency.
Addressing the size and performance incentives of the remuneration packages within the industry.
Establishing a code of lending practice to protect the most vulnerable from further indebtedness.
Establishing a Code of Social Responsibility for the finance industry and ensure our own Government invests our superannuation funds ethically.
Maori party co-leader Pita Sharples said his party has signed a pledge not to sell Kiwibank.
"Our 2008 Policy proposes the establishment of a community development bank, which makes small loans without collateral - no charges, low interest, but high levels of support and controls.
"The community bank would lend to those at the low end of the income and asset scale, to help them improve their position. The bank will create access to credit on reasonable terms enabling the poor to build on their existing skills to earn a better income."
ACT have responded saying: "Lets see, the POSB was a $300 million millstone and the BNZ cost a few billion. With a track record in banking like that you would wonder why people are so keen to have the taxpayers own a bank."
Act's answer is "Sell Kiwibank".
"Countries only bought banks equity in a desperate crisis. Why would the taxpayers want banks that are broke? There will be New Zealand ownership of banks operating in New Zealand when Kiwis stop pouring their money into houses and invest in bank shares."
No other parties have responded but...
Labour has used Kiwibank in their election advertising as an example of big items - along with KiwiSaver and KiwiRail - that the party has helped to set up or bought in their nine years in government.
National party finance spokesman Bill English was caught out saying that his party would "eventually" sell off Kiwibank when he was secretly recorded at a party conference in August.
National leader John Key distanced himself telling Radio New Zealand: "National's made it clear we won't be selling assets in our first term".
"If there's any change to that position ... we will go and seek that mandate by going out and asking the voters of New Zealand whether they support a particular policy or not," Mr Key said.
New Zealand First put forward a proposal to float shares in Kiwibank earlier this month. Party leader Winston Peters said the shares would be restricted to New Zealanders and the Government would channel its $55 billion a year worth of business through it.
Progressives leader Jim Anderton championed the creation of Kiwibank and at the time was leader of the Alliance Party.
Mr Anderton has asked other parties to sign a pledge that they will not sell Kiwibank.
* * *
October 29
Every election promise has a price tag and today's question from David looks at this issue, given the global financial situation.
"In these hard times we need to haul in spending which doesn't assist the growth and sustainability of the economy. When are you going to cap your campaign offerings and promises?"
ACT said it is the only party to have said that the rate of increase in Government spending must be curtailed during the election campaign.
"We firmly believe that Government spending must not increase above the rate of inflation plus consideration of the increase in population. ACT has capped its campaign offerings accordingly. All other parties have engaged in the usual lolly scramble."
Green party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said it was crucial to invest in keeping New Zealanders in work and business during this time of "global uncertainty".
"The Greens believe that careful spending on housing and transport needs to be brought forward in response to the global financial crisis and we will prioritise investment that will save us money in future.
"This includes investment in: More state housing to employ spare capacity in the construction industry and to keep jobs in the timber and other supplier industries."
Ms Fitzsimons said that would include: Insulating and upgrading homes to improve health and reduce power bills, building better public transport systems rather than new motorways, to reduce oil dependence and upgrade the rail system so it can carry more freight and passengers
"These investments will keep people in work, support businesses that are struggling, and leave us with essential assets that reduce costs in the future," Ms Fitzsimons said.
Maori party co-leader Pita Sharples said with 27 percent of Maori children already living in poverty, and 150,000 children in severe and significant hardship, the government cannot afford not to act.
"The government's debt is low relative to our gross national product. It is in a better position to borrow than small businesses and individuals and should do so to protect vulnerable citizens from the harshest impacts of economic recession, and invest in their futures. We must sustain investment in the local economy to keep it buoyant," Dr Sharples said.
National leader John Key responds: "I agree we need to exercise restraint in government spending - something Labour has failed to do for nine years.
"I agree we need spending that assists growth. We want to cut wasteful Government spending and redirect it to the frontline. Our spending promises are either coming from existing new Budget spending allocations or, in the case of badly-needed infrastructure, borrowing.
"National believes it is appropriate to have small and prudent increase in borrowing to fund long-term inter-generational assets. We need more investment in infrastructure to help grow the economy."
Labour has responded to the question below. Transport minister Annette King said: "The Government passed legislation in 2003 enabling PPPs. National opposed the legislation.
"Earlier this year the Government set up a joint private sector/public sector group to investigate the possibility of progressing the Waterview connection in Auckland as a PPP. The group produced a positive report, and the Government is currently awaiting final advice, due shortly, from officials before making a final decision."
* * *
October 28
Simon asked "In relation to private/public partnerships for new road/rail projects, do you support these?"
So far only the Greens and the Maori Party have responded.
Green party co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons said her party would: "only support the use of public/private partnerships under strict conditions. The public can not be left shouldering all the commercial risk of a venture while private businesses capture all the profit.
"A number of PPP arrangements overseas, including in Australia and the United Kingdom, have been disastrous for the taxpayer while proving bonanzas for the private sector, particularly in transport projects. In the case of roading, this has resulted in higher tolls for longer".
Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples said his party is opposed to privatisation. We support iwi-Crown/ iwi-local government partnerships.
"To lessen our dependency on fossil fuels we must make significant changes to the way we live our lives; including building a better integrated high quality public transport system and rail, walking and cycle tracks. Increased investment is needed to provide services that are frequent, reliable and economic.
"Government must take responsibility for the management structure of contracts to ensure all agencies are capable of efficient delivery. We must learn from the failure of a privatised rail system. New Zealand should maintain control of our strategic infrastructure," Dr Sharples said.
National leader John Key said his party supports public private partnerships to "grow the economy".
"The problem is not just about adequate safeguards; it's actually getting some projects started. The Government has had PPP legislation on the books since 2003 but has not approved even one PPP. New Zealanders already face the very real costs of congested roads because of these delays. We have to get the safeguards right but we also have to get building and get New Zealand growing.
"International experience has shown that the most important safeguard is getting the contract right in the first place. There must be clarity about purpose, responsibilities, funding and risks and this requires a transparent contracting process. The projects that have quietly succeeded, often ahead of time and within budget, have been the result of good contracts.
"There are also legal safeguards. Any charges on motorists are subject to Government approval and can only be levied with adequate community consultation. The current law requires that an alternative free route must always be available to a tolled road and we support that law."
Labour did not respond to the question but according to the party's election website, Labour "will support the rational use of public/private partnerships for large scale infrastructure developments where these can deliver more effective solutions for communities at lower cost to ratepayers and taxpayers.
"Labour changed the law to allow for public/private partnerships and will continue to explore opportunities in this regard on a case by case basis."
* * *
October 24
Yesterday we changed tack and sent out party specific questions to leaders sent in by readers.
Michael Basagre wrote nzherald.co.nz a letter for National Party leader John Key. It has been edited because of its length.
Dear John Key,
What can you do that will help those who have invested time and money to educate themselves only to be chained down by the burden of a student loan? Should there be a policy that tertiary education be reduced once qualified? Or cost and repayments be heavily reduced once other factors take place such as an increase in family numbers or job status? One policy could be once you have a home loan, the student loan is removed altogether. This would be an incentive for young people to save for a deposit of 10 percent or more and focus on repaying a real investment, a home and family!
National Party spokesman Kevin Taylor replied to nzherald.co.nz: "Hi, You are just dreaming if you think I can deal with these questions, in the midst of all the other demands, while I'm on the road".
So we had a look at National's policy for student loans.
National has proposed to keep interest free student loans and establish an early repayment bonus which includes a 10 percent repayment bonus on a loan balance for voluntary lump-sum payments of $500 or more.
The repayment scheme would be available to students up to 10 years following the start of repayments by the borrower.
National provides an example: If a borrower pays $800 off their student loan in a lump sum payment above the compulsory requirement, the Government would take $880 off their loan balance.
The party would also increase the number of funded medical students by 200 over the next five years and introduce a bonding scheme.
Under National, there would be a maximum annual write-off of about $10,000 for medical graduates, but the amount would depend on the average amount of the average student loan debt at graduation for each occupation.
The first three years of write-offs would come after the first three full years of work and the scheme will be flexible to allow for maternity leave and ongoing training.
The party expects the scheme could cost about $3 million in the first year, $6m in the second and $9m in the third.
Ray Eyre asked: "What if anything would the leaders do to assist those that are genuinely unable to work because of health problems and do they consider $216.00 a week after tax is enough to sustain any reasonable quality of life?"
We sent Mr Eyre's question to Labour Party leader Helen Clark's press people and they suggested we get in touch with the minister of the relevant portfolio.
We have since sent
