ACT Party
5 Dec 2011
4:35pm
comments

ACT - National Agreement Nets Significant Policy Gains for ACT

ACT Party / Press Release / Economy / ACC / Commerce / Education / Primary And Secondary Education / Governance And Constitution / Regulatory Reform / Rural / Taxation

ACT New Zealand Party President Chris Simmons and ACT MP Hon John Banks today announced the details of ACT’s Confidence and Supply Agreement, highlighting a number of very significant policy ‘wins’ for ACT.

Mr Simmons said the new agreement builds on the two parties’ strong, constructive partnership of the past three years and advances ACT’s core economic and social policy goals. 

“In particular ACT wanted to see controls put in place to prevent excessive Government spending and poor quality regulation, improved choice in education, especially in disadvantaged communities, and reform of other key policy areas that are currently holding New Zealand’s economy back,” Mr Simmons said. 

Hon John Banks said that the policy programme outlined in the agreement was an excellent platform for ACT in Parliament and a strong base from which to continue building the relationship between the two parties.

“It shows that National is willing to make changes in these key economic and social policy areas to ensure our joint aspirations for a more prosperous New Zealand are met,” Mr Banks said.

Key features of the agreement are:

• Continuation of ACT’s focus during the last term on publicly monitoring progress on improving the country’s economy wide performance using international benchmarks, and building on the work of the 2025 Taskforce, with a requirement for Treasury to report annually on the progress being made to improve the quality of institutions and policies, raise productivity, and reduce the income gap with Australia. 

• Continuation of ACT’s work during the last term to reduce the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals through taking the Regulatory Standards Bill through to the new Parliament, with an agreement to pass a mutually agreed Bill based on Treasury’s preferred option (option 5) within 12 months.

• Continuation of ACT’s work during the last term on the Spending Cap (People’s Veto) Bill with an agreement to incorporate a legislated spending cap through a mutually agreed amendment to the Public Finance Act. 
 
• Reform of the Resource Management Act, including simplifying legislation to ensure there is only one plan (a “unitary” plan) for each district.

• The provision to set up a trial charter school system - under sections 155 (Kura Kaupapa Maori) and 156 (designated character schools) of the Education Act – for disadvantaged communities, specifically in areas such as South Auckland and parts of Christchurch where educational underachievement is most entrenched.  A private sector-chaired implementation group will be established to develop the proposal for implementation in this parliamentary term.

• The establishment of a taskforce to produce a comprehensive report on governance issues relating to state policy towards state, integrated and independent schools. 

• The implementation in this parliamentary term of the Welfare Working Group recommendations 27: Parenting obligations, 28: Support for at-risk families, 30: Income management and budgeting support, and 34: Employment services.

• To introduce competition to ACC’s Work Account.

• To support National’s Post-Election Action Plan.

• The appointment of Hon John Banks to the positions of Minister for Small Business, Minister for Regulatory Reform, Associate Minister of Education and Associate Minister of Commerce. 

Mr Banks said New Zealand is facing very challenging times. 

“This agreement is a significant achievement for ACT, addressing not just economic issues but key social issues as well, in particular those that are currently contributing to our very high rates of unemployed, undereducated and socially marginalised young people. 

“I intend over the next three years to advocate for further advances in these areas as well as in the areas of government spending and regulation, labour market reform, and other policies to reduce the burden on businesses and boost productivity and economic growth.

“I would like to thank former ACT MP and Parliamentary Leader John Boscawen for the lead work he has done over the past week to finalise the terms of the agreement.  His advice and ACT Party experience has been invaluable and stands us in good stead to reinvigorate and strengthen the Party over the next three years.

“ACT looks forward to working with National, and Prime Minister John Key, to put in place policies to strengthen our country and put us on a path to prosperity,” Mr Banks concludes.

ACT Party
6 Oct 2011
11:08pm
comments

Wellington Central Campaign Launch Speech

ACT Party / Speech / Education / Primary And Secondary Education

It's a great privilege to be the ACT candidate for Wellington Central. I want to thank you Heather for representing the ACT Party so ably in Wellington Central, and for maintaining such a successful local branch of the ACT Party.

There are a couple of other people I would like to thank. First, Sir Roger Douglas, Heather Roy, Hugh McCaffrey, and my dad for donating items to be auctioned this evening.
 
Second, to Shelley, Hugh, Clodagh, Sarah-Rose, and Chris for helping organise and run this evening.
 
Third, I'd also like to acknowledge David Seymour, who has flown down from Auckland for this campaign launch. David Seymour is number six on the ACT Party list, and like me is a young New Zealander who believes that ACT is the only party proposing the kind of policies that are necessary to make New Zealand not only more economically prosperous, but also a freer and fairer place to live.
 
Education
 
Tonight, I want to talk to you a little bit about growing up in Wellington, and some of the opportunities that I had that in just a few short years no longer exist for many Wellingtonians.
 
I have lived in Wellington my whole life. I grew up in Paparangi, attending my local primary and intermediate schools.
 
But when it came to secondary school, my parents decided that they wanted me to go to Wellington College.
 
We considered other options. One option was St Pat's Town, but much to my father's chagrin I'm not catholic, so that raises obvious issues. The other option was Scots College. But with three sons, the idea of paying private tuition for 15 years - in addition to taxes meant to cover the cost of schooling - was not particularly enticing.
 
I applied to be accepted Wellington College, and was fortunate enough to get in. Both of my brothers were equally fortunate.
 
That wouldn't happen today. If you have to apply to get into Wellington College, the chance of you getting in is slim. Last year, 208 parents applied to get their child into Wellington College. Wellington College took five of them. That's all they were allowed to take. The Ministry of Education would not let them take any more.
 
And they wouldn't let them take any more for a peculiar reason. They wouldn't let them take any more because it would mean other schools would not be able to fill their classrooms.
 
Think about how absurd that is. You can't send your child to the school you want because then other schools would not be full. Imagine if we passed a law preventing you from travelling to a restaurant in another suburb because the local restaurant was not full.
 
It is deeply troubling that rather than encouraging schools to innovate, we prevent successful schools from expanding. We prop up schools that are failing, and punish those that succeed. We are, in effect, forcing people to attend schools which do not serve their needs. Parents, not the Government, should decide where their children are educated.
 
Two New Zealands
 
And that brings me to my next point. A lot of people are rightly concerned about the level of inequality in New Zealand. What most people don't seem to realise is that, far from reducing inequality, most Government policies increase the gap between the rich and the poor. As a direct result of Government, we have two New Zealands.
 
In one New Zealand, you receive excellent state education at a school like Auckland Grammar or Wellington College.
 
In the other New Zealand, you can't afford a house close to Auckland Grammar, and so receive poor state education in a school like James Cook High School, where police are stationed to protect you from violence.
 
In one New Zealand, you stay in school until you're 18 to gain your secondary qualifications.
 
In the other New Zealand, you leave school to get a job, but find the minimum wage has priced you, along with 12,000 other young people, out of a job.
 
In one New Zealand, you go to University and receive significant state subsidies for your tuition and your student lifestyle.
 
In the other New Zealand, you work hard to pay taxes to ensure those more fortunate than yourself don't have to pay for their own degree.
 
In one New Zealand, you quickly realise that with your qualifications, you can easily leave New Zealand and earn significantly more overseas, joining the 300,000 New Zealanders who have left in the last ten years alone.
 
In the other New Zealand, you work hard your entire life, paying high taxes to fund other people's educations, other people's superannuation, and any other benefit that special interests can convince the Government to give them to secure their votes.
 
We are constantly told that there is a trade off between an equal society and a wealthy society. Unfortunately, New Zealand seems to be heading down a path where we are relatively poorer, and increasingly unequal.
 
Bootleggers and Baptists
 
The last thing I want to talk about is how we've got to the position where the Government serves the interests not of the poor, or even the interests of New Zealanders generally, but instead serves the interest of those who are politically connected.
 
The more power that politicians have, the greater the chance that they become beholden to special interests.
 
When talking about special interests, it's quite fitting that we're in a bar called Hooch. Hooch, of course, was a term for illegal liquor manufactured during the period of prohibition in the United States of America. This bar is modelled on an American speakeasy, where millions of Americans would go to peaceably violate the law. In those days, you would buy alcohol from gangs, typically the mafia.
 
Prohibition in America was politically possible only because of an unusual coalition forged between two groups of people: bootleggers and Baptists. The bootleggers served to gain an enormous amount of resources from prohibition. The Baptists spent their time building up the religious fervour necessary to ban the sale of alcohol.
 
The idea of bootleggers and Baptists working together seems odd, but in reality most policy ideas are pushed by those who will gain - the bootleggers - and those who get morally outraged at other people's choices - the Baptists. The bootleggers use the moral panic created by the Baptists to convince the Government to "do something," so long as that something boosts their bottom line.
 
Consider the proposal to have a split purchase age for alcohol. Baptists like Geoffrey Palmer and Doug Sellman create the moral panic, and the Hospitality Association - comprised of members who own bars - push for a split purchase age to ensure younger drinkers are forced to go to a bar. Supermarkets push to stop dairies selling alcohol. Those businesses are not friends of the free market - they want to use Government to increase their profits, at the expense of our freedom.
 
Or consider the law which requires taxi drivers to have security cameras in their cars. Newspapers create moral panic by highlighting the few number of taxi drivers who have been attacked by passengers, and the Taxi Federation - which will increase its revenue if it increases barriers to entry - push for mandatory cameras in cars.
 
Or consider the buy Kiwi made campaign. Economic illiterates in the Green Party create panic by suggesting that we would be wealthier if we stopped trading with the world, and local industry - which will profit by actively encouraging consumers to be xenophobic - start lobbying for a national advertising campaign.
 
Conclusion
 
It is a fact that as ever-larger Government begins to permeate all aspects of our lives, special interests will try to use that influence to their own benefit. If it's teachers' unions that don't want good teachers to be paid more, failed finance companies that want bailouts, public servants that oppose taking less from the people who actually earned it, or religious zealots who want to stop homosexuals from adopting children, they are all special interest groups which want their privileges at the expense of the freedom of consumers and taxpayers.
 
If you believe that the Government should serve the interests of all New Zealanders, rather than special interests; if you believe that you, not some bureaucrat or politician, make better choices about your own finances and personal life; and if you dream of not only a more prosperous New Zealand, but also one that is more free and fair; then I ask you to support me in my campaign, and Party Vote ACT on November 26.
 
Thank you. 
Rodney Hide
6 Dec 2010
2:27pm
comments

Ministering to those with Special Needs

Rodney Hide / Blog / Education / Primary And Secondary Education

Recently I spent a couple of hours at the Raukatauri Music Therapy Centre. Music therapy is used to help many with intellectual and physical disabilities reach their potential, and it was exciting to see it in action.

Below is a piece from the Raukatauri Centre newsletter on my visit.

Roger Douglas
18 Jun 2010
2:01pm
comments

NZEI Misleading Public About Bulk Funding

Roger Douglas / Press Release / Primary And Secondary Education

The New Zealand Educational Institute's (NZEI) claim that bulk-funding failed in New Zealand schools does not stack up with the evidence, ACT New Zealand Education Spokesman Sir Roger Douglas said today.

"Bulk-funding is very simple – schools are given a lump sum and then the Board of Trustees get to allocate it according to its needs. We already have bulk funding with operational grants to schools – my Bill would extend the same principle to staffing issues," Sir Roger said.

"In surveys undertaken for the Ministry of Education in the late 1990s, it was revealed that 94 percent of respondent schools felt that they had been mostly advantaged by bulk-funding, and 80 percent confirmed that their school would prefer to continue with bulk funding.

"Moreover, the idea that this would help high-decile schools is nonsense. The previous model of bulk funding was optional, and 36 percent of bulk funded schools came from those in low-decile areas - deciles 1 to 3. Why would so many low-decile schools opt in to the scheme if it harmed them?

"Over 80 percent of bulk-funded schools used the money to hire extra teaching staff. This shows that schools used the increased flexibility in order to increase teacher quantity and quality. Why should schools be prohibited from doing this?

"Far from being a bad chapter in education, school autonomy has increased around the world in the past 20 years – it is New Zealand's education system that has been moving in the wrong direction.

"Teachers' unions and interest groups should want good quality teachers to be well-remunerated. I am staggered by their belief that every area of school budgets – except teacher salaries – should be bulk-funded," Sir Roger said.

ENDS

Roger Douglas
18 Jun 2010
1:25pm
comments

Mallard Wrong on Teacher Incentives

Roger Douglas / Press Release / Primary And Secondary Education

Labour MP Trevor Mallard's claim that teachers do have incentives to improve their performance because they can be promoted to a management role illustrates how ridiculous our education sector is, ACT New Zealand's Education Spokesman Sir Roger Douglas said today.

"It is absurd that the only way to pay good teachers more is to put them in a managerial role – seeing them spend more time out of the classroom in order to receive a higher wage," Sir Roger said.

"The reality is that the one of the only ways to attract the best teachers to a school is to offer them more money. Currently, the only way to offer them more money is to have them spend more time administering, rather than teaching. It's a national tragedy that our best teachers end up doing very little of it.

"Labour seem concerned that so-called 'rich' schools will poach the best teachers. However, low-decile schools are the ones that receive the most Government money, and yet they are prevented from spending the money on the one thing that will have the most impact – better teachers.

"My Bill will allow Boards of Trustees to control and manage all the Government money that they receive – and if they want to pay teachers more to attract better staff, they will be free to do so. We all want the best education for our children, and this atmosphere of incentive will drive teacher performance, improving the education that our children receive.

"If the Labour Party really cares about the children from low-income households – and not the Teachers' Unions – then they will support this Bill," Sir Roger said.

ENDS