Freedom of Association for Students Too.

This week I was pleased to take back sponsorship of the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill - also known as the Voluntary Student Membership (VSM) Bill – from my colleague Sir Roger Douglas.  I originally drafted the bill in 2005 and it sat in the Members’ Ballot from then until 2008 without being drawn.  When I became a Minister Sir Roger took it over and the bill was drawn from the ballot in his name.  He has shepherded it through its First Reading in the House and it’s currently at Select Committee where submissions are being heard.

So why does ACT feel so strongly about voluntary student membership and is it really so important?

It’s important because the overarching principle is that of Freedom of Association.  The practical considerations of the current law should also be considered carefully.

Currently, tertiary students around the country (everywhere in fact other than those studying at Auckland Uni) are the only remaining group that are forced to join an organisation and pay the fees that they set.  ACT has always believed that individuals should be free to pursue their own interests, unless they violate the rights of others.  Compulsory membership of unions went in 1983 and students remain the only group compelled to join what is essentially a union whether they want to or not.

Students are having their freedom violated.  Kiwis prize their freedom, especially freedom of speech and freedom of association; the right to join any group you want or not to join a group with which you disagree.  So important is our right to freedom of association that it is protected in the Bill of Rights.  My ‘VSM’ Bill would finally see students have the same freedom that the rest of us currently enjoy.

As the situation presently stands, a student must pay the student association fees set by that body at the University or Polytechnic they attend.  The exception is Auckland University where membership is voluntary.  The law does provide an ‘out’ – those who object to belonging to a student association can arrange for their fees to be paid (by the association) to a charity, but I know from speaking to those who have taken this course it does not happen smoothly or without concerted debate!

Compulsory membership and payment of fees means the guaranteed income students associations receive, regardless of their actions, results in associations not actually representing students’ views and in many cases undertaking partisan political activities.  There are a great many examples of student resources being wasted and some associations have indulged in resource mismanagement for the personal gain of association officials.

Sadly for students, this situation is currently playing itself out at Whitireia Polytechnic, where over $1 million dollars in cash and assets have gone missing from the students’ association.
(http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/4030024/Whitireia-student-losses-climb-to-1m)

Unsurprisingly, Whitireia students are angry, and are demanding to know where this money has gone.  However being angry is cold comfort when under the present legislation students still have to pay the association’s fees if they want to study.  Perhaps the most frivolous use of students’ money was the well publicised case of a Victoria University Student Association Official spending thousands of dollars on a psychic hotline.

Not all are guilty of such behaviour however, but students should be able to choose.  Making students’ association membership voluntary will ensure that they are more accountable to their members.  There is nothing like having to provide quality services to attract members and to, reduce the risk of fraud occurring.  Associations would have a greater incentive to provide services that students actually want – demand and supply in action.

Opponents of VSM claim that if students are not forced to pay the union fees no-one will join and services and the student voice will go.  This attitude merely says to me that the associations have no belief in themselves.  If they provide services students want they will prosper.  Auckland University is a case in point.  Membership is voluntary there and students do join.
The reason any customer service outlet provides quality services is because they know that their customers have the opportunity to shop elsewhere.  As soon as you have the option of opposing shoddy service delivery by withdrawing your money from the association, they, out of necessity to survive, become far more accountable.

There have been over 4000 submissions made to the Select Committee on this Bill, so I have a lot of reading to do over the coming weeks.  I also have a few plans to ramp up the campaign over the next month.  My first job is convincing other parties in Parliament – including the National Party - that Freedom of Association is a principle worthy of support.

Lest We Forget
2 September, 1960

Fifty years ago this week New Zealand literally won Gold twice at the Rome Olympics.  Peter Snell won the 800m and within half an hour Murray Halberg won the 5000m to complete a track double.

21 year old Snell was a little known middle-distance runner, having raced outside New Zealand only once previously and he was ranked 26th in the world.  He progressed impressively through the qualifying rounds but still wasn’t rated for a medal.  The final was run at a blistering pace and in the last 100m Snell came into his own, surging past world record holder Roger Moens of Belgium, crossing the finish line with his eyes closing and not realising at first that he had won.

Minutes later Murray Halberg ran the 5000 m.  Halberg already had a reputation as a world-class mile runner.  With 3 laps to go he burst ahead of the field and hung on until the finish, winning in 13 minutes 43.4 seconds and collapsing after crossing the line.  His run was later described as ‘probably the most courageous run in Olympic history’.

It was a great day for these two men and their legendary coach Arthur Lydiard, but a much greater day for kiwi sport.

ACT New Zealand Maori Affairs Spokesman David Garrett today rejected Maori Party Co-leader Tariana Turia's claims that ACT is 'playing the race card' 'to 'create division and win votes' by drawing attention to the folly of National's plans for the Foreshore and Seabed.

"As Mrs Turia well knows, ACT opposed Labour's Foreshore and Seabed Act, which took away the rights of Maori to go to court to claim customary title, and instead vested ownership in the hands of the Crown," Mr Garrett said.

"ACT has always believed that the Foreshore and Seabed Act should be repealed and that the Court of Appeal decision in Ngati Apa - which allowed Maori to go to court and seek customary title - should stand.  Our position has not changed. 

"What ACT does not agree with is National's move to repeal Labour's Foreshore & Seabed Act and replace it with a new law that proposes that the Government, in the form of the Attorney General, can decide whether iwi should be allowed customary title or not.

"This is of grave concern as it is not a fair and transparent process, and can be manipulated by successive governments to further their own political advantage.

"Contrary to Mrs Turia's statement, ACT does believe in property rights and we do believe that Maori should be allowed their day in court.  If it is found by the courts that Maori have customary title over an area of land, ACT is in complete support of that.

"What ACT does not - and never will - agree with is the National Government creating legislation which will allow secret backroom deals to be done away from public scrutiny," Mr Garrett said.
 
ENDS

Good afternoon. Thank you all for inviting me here today for the New Zealand Institute of Animal Control Officers’ 49th annual conference.

I appreciate the important job enforcement officers do ensuring public safety, and I am aware of the risks and dangers of your job.

To read more, please click here

Minister of Consumer Affairs John Boscawen today announced that Financial Dispute Resolution, and the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, have been formally approved as financial service dispute resolution schemes under the Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Act.

"The Banking Ombudsman Scheme has operated for 18 years with professionalism and integrity.  It has played a significant role in providing redress for consumers - including investigating and resolving nearly 700 complaints about ING New Zealand’s frozen funds," Mr Boscawen said.  "

"Financial Dispute Resolution (FDR) is the operating name of the Government’s backstop, or reserve, scheme.  It will be operated by Dispute Resolution Services Limited (DRSL), an experienced provider of dispute resolution services. 

"These schemes - along with the Insurance & Savings Ombudsman Scheme and Financial Services Complaints Ltd (FSCL) - will provide independent dispute resolution services where complaints about financial products and services can be resolved.  They are free to consumers who have been unable to resolve complaints about the schemes’ members.

"Under the Financial Service Providers (Registration and Dispute Resolution) Act, financial service providers - banks, finance companies, insurance companies, financial advisers, credit unions, mortgage brokers and money lenders - must be registered by December 1, and must join a dispute resolution scheme before delivering services to retail clients.

"Consumers having access to dispute resolution, along with the registration of all financial service providers and the licensing of financial advisers, will promote confidence in the financial services sector," Mr Boscawen said.

ENDS

ACT New Zealand MP Heather Roy is today pleased to announce that she will be taking over responsibility for the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill which is currently in the name of her colleague Sir Roger Douglas.

Mrs Roy had the Education (Freedom of Association) Bill – also referred to as the ‘VSM Bill’ - in the Ballot from 2005 until 2008 but it was never drawn.  It was transferred to her colleague Sir Roger Douglas at the end of 2008.

"ACT was founded on the principle of freedom – both economic and personal - and a belief that individuals should have the right to determine for themselves whether they want to belong to a particular group.  This is why voluntary student membership is so important," Mrs Roy said. 

"Students are the only group who are forced into joining a union.  Many of these associations do not represent students’ views and in many cases undertake partisan political activities, waste student resources and some have indulged in resource mismanagement for personal gain – such as the alleged misuse of funds at Whitireia Polytechnic. 

"Making students' association membership voluntary will ensure that the associations become more accountable to students and have a greater incentive to provide services that students actually want.

"The idea that people should be forced to join an association has lost support over the years as people recognised that it violates individual freedom of association.  The Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill will allow students to finally enjoy that freedom too," Mrs Roy said.

ENDS

Rodney Hide addresses the NZ Herald Business Luncheon, discussing recent CCO director appointments and the new price of water for Aucklanders.

To read more please click here

The list of directors and chairs for the Auckland Council's new council controlled organisations was agreed to by Cabinet last week, Minister for Local Government Rodney Hide said.

Minister Hide said that those chosen were the elite in their respective fields, and testament to the quality of structure and organisation the new Auckland Council represents.

To read more, please click here

World Recession: How is New Zealand Faring?

In late 2008, the huge American bank Lehman Brothers went bankrupt, and many other major financial institutions suddenly looked shaky.  The US financial system froze as banks refused to lend to each other and the panic quickly spread.  In Britain the Royal Bank of Scotland, a major bank, became insolvent, and Gordon Brown was in the unlucky position of being the first Prime Minister since Benjamin Disraeli - in the nineteenth century - to face a run on the banks.  People queued for hours to make withdrawals in case their bank went under.

To anyone who has studied the origins of the Great Depression of 1930, the sequence of events then and now had a horrifying similarity and the spectre of a global economic meltdown loomed.

At the time New Zealand looked vulnerable on a number of fronts.  Then we had a large balance of payments deficit and had been consistently importing more than we exported.  The deficit was typically around nine percent, which was high by international standards.  Only Iceland was in a worse position.
New Zealand also had a low level of savings that made us dependent on overseas investment and that looked likely to evaporate at short notice.  Much of New Zealanders’ money was tied up in housing and that sector looked particularly weak.  Readers may recall commentary around interest rates being decided on what the Auckland housing market was doing.

As the world banking crisis evolved we were already having a home grown problem with a number of insolvent Finance Companies.  Many Mum and Dad investors lost their life savings.

Our overall position looked weak but the truth is that New Zealand has, so far, done much better than most.  Whilst Greece teetered on default and riots in the streets of Athens cost three lives, the reporting in New Zealand concentrated of Ministerial credit card spending.

So how did we manage so well?  The banking crisis never affected New Zealand directly.  Most of our major banks are Australian owned and no Australian banks became insolvent.  Presumably their lending policies were more prudent.  Furthermore, Australia is our largest trading partner so their prosperity is to our benefit.  Australia was the only large Western nation to not have experienced recession during the global financial crisis.

The New Zealand economy also had some strengths.  Government debt was relatively low at around 20 percent of one year’s production (GDP).  By comparison Britain’s debt figure was 50 percent, which would not normally be considered excessive, but with tax revenues falling it rose rapidly.

Furthermore, New Zealand had been labouring under relatively high interest rates in comparison with other OECD countries.  These were progressively cut with the impact of making it easier for borrowers to service their loans.  In countries where interest rates were already low there was less room to manoeuvre.  The Japanese, for example, have interest rate close to zero making it difficult to create a monetary stimulus.

During this time and when finance companies were beginning to topple the New Zealand government felt it prudent to guarantee deposits.  To date, payouts have not been excessive.  By contrast the US government, for example, has spent a fortune on propping up ailing banks and industries.

New Zealand has also benefitted from being an exporter of commodities.  Food products have attracted and maintained relatively good prices during the global recession and it is our manufacturing exports that have struggled.  Our trade imbalance is down to three percent.

Though New Zealand is now technically out of recession the overall picture is one of mild recession.  The fear is that the USA continues to struggle.  Its unemployment rate hovers stubbornly around 10 percent and its budget deficit is huge.  Europe, meanwhile, struggles with the prospect of several nations defaulting on debt.  As a small economy, if our trading partners suffer then so will we.

So far, so good, but we need to remain vigilant and the right monetary policy decisions are crucial.  That’s why the ACT party constantly calls for stimulation of our economy in the form of lower taxation coupled with less government spending.

Lest We Forget
28 August 1963: Martin Luther King’s “I have a Dream” Speech

Martin Luther King delivered his historic “I have a Dream” speech advocating racial harmony at the Lincoln Memorial during “The Great March on Washington”, also known as the “March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom”.  A shortened version of the speech can be found at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4AItMg70kg&feature=related  

The march was a large political rally in support of civil and economic rights for African-Americans.  Somewhere between 200,000 - 300,000 people marched.  Of those who marched, 75-80 percent were black with the rest being made of white people and other minorities.  The march was organised by a group comprising civil rights, religious and labour organisations.  Most now credit the march with assisting the passage of the Civil Rights Act (1964).

 

Good evening to you all. I would like to speak initially as the MP for Epsom, and ACT Party Leader, and then I will put on my Minister of Local Government hat, and talk about my policy program in that portfolio.

As you will know, we have had something of an upheaval in the ACT Party through the past week or two, leading to a change in the deputy leadership.

How the ACT Party manages such changes is not just important to ACT, it potentially has consequences for the stability of the government.

That’s why I want to take you through how I have handled these developments in respect of the commitment we have to ensuring stable centre-right government.

I am under no illusions about the nature of political support in Epsom.  Epsom voters have supported me as their electorate MP, but those same voters have also been strong supporters of the National Party in the Party vote.

After the last election, ACT entered into a confidence and supply arrangement with the National Party.

That agreement ensures that we have a stable centre-right government.  That is what both National and ACT voters want.

ACT is committed to that support on confidence and supply.

And my handshake with John Key on that deal is one that I absolutely will stick by.

ACT’s internal issues were resolved last week in a vote for the deputy leadership, and John Boscawen was supported by Caucus as the new deputy leader.   

He is an outstanding campaigner, a forceful speaker, is well regarded in the ACT Party, and is leading the fight against the Emissions Trading Scheme.

I have no doubt that John is the best candidate for the position of deputy, and I am looking forward to working closely with him and with the rest of our team of MPs and staff.

After the vote I took the opportunity to reshuffle the portfolios the ACT Party holds.  John Boscawen became Minister of Consumer Affairs.  This is an excellent portfolio for him because he has been a tireless campaigner against some of the rorts that have been exposed in the collapse of finance companies in recent years.  He also takes my Associate Commerce Portfolio.

I have taken the Associate Education portfolio, which I can assure you should be taken as a signal of ACT’s commitment to Education as a crucial issue for the economic and social future of our country.

We have relinquished the Associate Defence portfolio.  

National didn’t ask for it back.  Rather, I decided that we needed to focus our limited resources on areas that are of most importance to the ACT Party, and where we could make a difference.

I am saddened by what has happened to Heather Roy, in particular by the leaking of material, much of it malicious and designed to cause maximum harm to the Party.  The developments have now been well covered in the media, so I want to move on from them.

What I want to do is to explain to you how I managed the upheaval in the ACT Party in respect of our commitment to stable centre-right government.

You deserve an explanation.

As soon as a challenge for the deputy leadership was lodged on August 5, for the vote to be held 12 days later at the caucus on August 17, we informed the PM.

We let the National Party know that this was an internal matter, that there was no threat at all to the confidence and supply agreement.

With a change in deputy likely, I considered the implications for portfolio positions, and through that 12 day period indicated to the Prime Minister that following a change in the deputy leadership position it was likely I would be seeking a reshuffle of portfolios.

I informed the PM of the changes I wished to make, and he indicated he would have no problem with any of them.

He regarded these as matters for the ACT Party to decide.

On the morning of Tuesday August 17 the ACT Caucus voted John Boscawen to the deputy leadership.

The ACT Board approved this change in a meeting at midday.

Heather Roy resigned her portfolios, and I spoke with the Prime Minister to agree the amendments to our Confidence and Supply agreement in respect of portfolios, including our wish to drop the Associate Defence portfolio entirely.

These changes were announced at a press conference at 1.15pm that day.

The media have had some fun attacking me for not giving reasons for the deputy leadership and portfolio changes, other than that their was a challenge for the deputy position and John won the vote.

As has been revealed since, I did have some serious concerns about some aspects of the Associate Defence portfolio, and about a senior ministerial advisor to Heather Roy.  These concerns were shared by caucus.

But the brute fact of politics is that you need the support of the caucus, and in the end Heather did not have that support.  

All the various reasons – the track record of performance, the teamwork, and the specific issues that may arise – all these matters that contribute to such a decision get debated at caucus, but crucially also within the privacy of caucus.

Caucus weighed it up and made a decision.

I also believe it is appropriate that the two top ranked members of caucus hold the portfolios.

Thus the changes.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

But the other reason for not giving much background about the change of deputy leader is that I was giving Heather the chance to put this behind us, and move on as a team.

As Nick Smith showed when he lost the deputy leadership of the National Party in late 2003, it is possible to accept the verdict of caucus, move on and re-establish yourself.  

The next day Heather agreed to accept that olive branch, and we gave two joint interviews.  

But during that day we discovered that the document which, in part, had been the basis of her case for retaining the deputy leadership, had been leaked to the media and some bloggers.

Cameron Slater of the Whaleoil blog identified the source of these documents, showing that they came from Heather’s ministerial advisor, who by the weekend had admitted leaking them.

It is a sad and in many ways a pathetic saga.

Various commentators have dusted off their old commentaries, and decided for the 15th year running that ACT is finished.

Well, its not, and that is because the ACT Party is based on ideals and values.  And you don’t work away in the ACT Party unless utterly committed to them.

We aren’t here because of any individual, or because of a powerful party machine.  

What unites ACT is an inspiring political ideal and timeless values. 

The ideal that people should be free.  The ideal that our government exists to uphold our rights as free citizens, not to hold us hostage to political whim and fancy.

The belief that human dignity comes from self-reliance, and that a free person should be, wants to be, responsible for his or her decisions.

As a Party we champion values that encourage self-reliance, not dependency.

We favour choice, not compulsion.

Competition, not government monopoly.

One law for all. 

These are the ideals and values that hold ACT together. 

These aren’t just handy slogans.  We are absolutely committed to them.

I put my job on the line for the principle of one person, one vote, in Auckland local government.

We embrace the world of free markets, of competition, entrepreneurship and profit.  Unashamedly.

We embrace the world of private enterprise, of hard work, new ideas, exciting innovation.

We applaud those who want to see a more successful, wealthier, higher income country.

It is the values and principles and policies of a Party that people vote for.

As a Party, we have achieved much, and have much to achieve.

New Zealand is now enjoying stable centre-right government.  That’s something we haven’t had since the start of MMP. 

And you can put that down to ACT.

It’s a promise ACT made. It’s a promise ACT has kept, and will continue to keep.

The ACT Party promised stable government.  

But we made serious policy promises too.

To give New Zealand the safeguard of a Regulatory Responsibility Bill;  a Productivity Commission; a 2025 Taskforce to show the way to lift New Zealand incomes;  RMA reform;  a review of the climate change policy;  an Inter-Party Working Group on school choice;  local government reform.

And a Three-Strikes policy to get repeat violent offenders off our streets.

Promises made.  Promises kept.

We have our differences with the National Government, but we manage them.

We can agree to disagree and make our case forcefully – as we do on the ETS.

In other areas the ACT Party continues to prod the government to move faster, to tackle problems now rather than later.  

We have pushed to start opening up the ACC work account to competition.

We pushed to extend the 90 day trial period to all firms.

And we will keep pushing and prodding the government to deal with issues now, not leave them to the future.  

But while doing that, the Prime Minister has my absolute assurance that his government will not have to worry about confidence and supply.

Nor will he have to worry about ACT support for any of the many policy changes that you would expect from a centre-right Party, but which would not be supported by the Maori Party.

Because without ACT, National would be stalled, dependent on getting Maori Party support for any change it needed to make, and thus be able to make very little useful change.

That is why we need the ACT Party in parliament.  And that is why I have no doubt that we will continue to see ACT well represented, better represented, in parliament in the future.

Let me move on, and discuss some of the issues I am facing as Minister of Local Government.

As Local Government Minister I am leading the reorganisation of local government in Auckland. We will have the new arrangements in place in time for the 2010 local body elections and we are moving fast and effectively to achieve that goal. 

The new unified council for Auckland will be lean and focused on customer service.  My hope is that it will boost Auckland’s performance and that of the country.

On November 1, the Auckland Council, under a single council and mayor will produce strong regional governance, integrated decision-making, greater community engagement and improved value for money.  It will streamline operations and reduce bureaucracy, through consistently delivered policies, lowered fees and costs, simplified paper work and improved customer service across the region.  

The improvements won’t happen overnight but rationalising the tangle of plans and policies will deliver consistency.

The focus will be on lowering fees and costs and simplifying the paper work.

A single district plan will go a long way towards that.

Costs will be lower with better customer service. 

There are a bewildering number of fee categories across the region. Take dogs – there are sixty categories for registering, impounding, and adopting dogs. There will now be half that number with charges dropped to the lowest levels.

Then there are building inspections, currently charged at an hourly rate varying from $110 to $178. In future there will be a standard hourly charge of $110 across the region.

And the resource consent forms! Over 850 forms currently used by councils will be reduced to 120 simplified forms for consistency across the region. Wherever you are in the region, the consent application will be the same.

And there will be a single Building Control Authority. This will deliver a standardised control policy and acceptance criteria, a consistent policy for reviewing and deciding on applications.

I want the Auckland Council to focus on providing a service culture for the people of Auckland - I expect that from the moment the phone is answered.

We also need improved performance from central government now we are soon to have a new Auckland Council.  I am working with Ministerial colleagues on how we can better mesh the cogs between Wellington and Auckland  

The second big job I have underway is a review of the planning, decision-making and accountability aspects of the Local Government Act 2002. This will focus on the transparency, accountability and financial management of local government.  

The Local Government Amendment Bill proposes to that councils provide in-depth information about their budgets, rates and activities in an easier to understand format. This ensures that constituents can hold their councils to account for decisions made, and that funds are utilised appropriately.  

The bill also pushes councils to focus on core services.  By core services, I mean those things that most people understand and expect their councils to provide, such as infrastructure, waste collection and public transport.  

My third job is the largest and most significant. 

I want to produce next year a first-principles discussion document of the proper constitutional status of local government in New Zealand, how its proper function and structure should be evaluated, and how central and local government can better mesh both their decision-making and their work programmes to improve the service we provide in the communities we represent.

I have tentatively called this project “Smarter Government – Stronger Communities”.  

We need to clarify the role of local government and its relationship between central and local government. In my view, local government should not be seen as subservient to central government.  To me, local government is a distinct tier of government, focused on a particular set of core services.  Too often central government sees local government as a government department it can impose its will upon, with little or no consultation.

This discussion document will look at the problems and engage the public in a debate about the position of local government.  

This project is a huge task, likely to take two to three years.  We’ll further consider what the issues are by seeking public feedback on the discussion document, which I expect to release sometime next year.  

So let me conclude briefly, putting back on my ACT Leader hat.

Let me come back to the ACT vision for a more prosperous and socially cohesive nation.

Here is what we need to do in this country.

We face huge challenges, but we have enormous resources.

The greatest resource we have is the energy and enthusiasm, the talent and the drive of the extraordinary people that make New Zealand great.

What we have to do is unleash it.

Fundamentally, what makes an economy grow is people backing themselves and trying something new.  

It is entrepreneurship, innovation, experimentation, competition.

So the job of government, especially one as bloated and inefficient as ours, is to get out of the way.

Stop regulating every damn thing.

Stop taking so much tax from people.

Give people choice in the education and health services they need.

Get the government out of the way.

Then hang on for the ride as we rev up.

Ignore the depressing folk who say we can never catch Australia.

Of course we can.  And when we have done that, we had better start focusing on catching our Asian neighbours.

So what can ACT guarantee to voters at the next election?

ACT can guarantee stable centre-right government – the electorate wants that, and we will have the track record to prove it.

But most importantly ACT can guarantee better government.

Much better government – and the electorate both wants and needs that.

Thank you. 

The ACT caucus met today, and unanimously pledged its support for the Leader and Deputy Leader.

Heather Roy regrets the leaking of her caucus notes by her advisor and apologised for the problems they caused, but reiterated that this was done without her knowledge. 

Caucus has accepted that she wasn’t aware of or responsible for the leaking of that document.

Heather Roy has accepted Rodney Hide’s word that he did not pass on any cabinet papers.

ACT Leader Rodney Hide said he is looking forward to having the team working together to advance policies in the interest of all New Zealanders.