• If you have difficulty connecting to certain section of the site i.e. Home/Forums, then please refresh your browser cache.

    Select your browser from the options on this link and it will walk you through the steps.

    If you still have difficulty, send a message.
  • During peak periods, this site will only be accessible to registered members of the site. Login or create an account to participate in the discussion.

Politics 🗳️ NZ Politics

Lot of maybes and question marks in there Mike. I guess the proof will be in the pudding? Because going from $2.3 million to $13.7 million, you’d want to see results
He makes a better case for it than any of the politicians I've heard though
 
NZWarriors.com
The same report says that a one-day delay for a small residential development, adds $4,000 to the cost of a project....
Experienced this myself and it’s painful!

On the RMA, what do overseas countries do Mike? Surely they have a better more efficient system while still protecting the environment?

On the regulation spend, it’s an investment. The more spent the more you get 100x the payback in savings for the economy.
 
Experienced this myself and it’s painful!

On the RMA, what do overseas countries do Mike? Surely they have a better more efficient system while still protecting the environment?

On the regulation spend, it’s an investment. The more spent the more you get 100x the payback in savings for the economy.
IMO, it's not that the RMA is bad, it's just parts of it aren't fit for purpose anymore. There are some parts that need to be relaxed such as consent processing but other parts, especially environmental, which need to be strengthened.

My fear is that the current government will get the first part right but remove to many safeguards for the second part.
 
Did you feel the same when the previous government was in?
Yes. We talk of left and right but they are just a product of our mindset.

Fundamentally I think the ‘right’ are more about personal responsibility, self direction and individualism. The ‘left’ are more communally and group minded. Many are in between.

When I was younger I was more inexperienced and reliant on others and I was more in touch with the left parties.

As I’ve got older and experienced I’m more drawn to control from within the individual as that is how I live now.
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
IMO, it's not that the RMA is bad, it's just parts of it aren't fit for purpose anymore. There are some parts that need to be relaxed such as consent processing but other parts, especially environmental, which need to be strengthened.

My fear is that the current government will get the first part right but remove to many safeguards for the second part.
We have build childcare centres where we know exactly what will be allowed and what all the conditions will be.

The process of getting a third party council to come to the same conclusion is diabolical, costly and excessively long and unpredictable time wise.

I believe the RMA adds no value on 95% of projects. Wouldn’t a prescriptive system achieve exactly the same outcome in most cases if you straight up front knew the environmental parameters you needed to abide by?
 
Here's something totally out of left field to consider.... at the moment, landlords are able to claim back income related expenses (rates, repairs and maintenance, insurance [don't mention interest]) but they can't claim back capital expenses such as new heat pumps, additions or providing double glazing.

At the moment, repairs and maintenance to solar systems are income related expenses but providing a new solar system isn't. Not getting into discussions about whether or not solar systems lead to higher electrical prices for others, I'd like to see the government allow the provision of a new solar system to be counted as an income related expense to provide an incentive to landlords to install them... in just the same way they did with insulation. Cap what can be claimed back to a certain amount for say the occupancy of the dwelling. Allow for a certain amount of storage capacity for each unit again based on occupancy.... if the landlord goes over that, he can't claim the excess back of his tax.

That would then provide energy cost savings to the renters while also increasing some of the renewable resources to the country.
 
All governments have things I'd like to know if it was really worth it... John Key's flag debacle, cycleway/walking way attached to the harbour bridge, the missing billions "spent" on mental health, trickledown theory economics, Tomorrow's Schools, the first round of Charter Schools, the second round of Charter Schools, reviews into kianga ora, the Treaty Policy Act..... the list just goes on and on and on..... sometimes, you just hope, like in the case of the regulation office, they actually do get it right and we do see a result.

Damn, I just looked at that list and realised how much "wasted" things are actually brought about by the party constantly going on and on about government spending.... ACT!!!
They will be hopeful that the extra committed will see results because there’s still plenty seeing the tax cuts given as offering little assistance to peoples struggles and could have been better spent elsewhere
 
Here's something totally out of left field to consider.... at the moment, landlords are able to claim back income related expenses (rates, repairs and maintenance, insurance [don't mention interest]) but they can't claim back capital expenses such as new heat pumps, additions or providing double glazing.

At the moment, repairs and maintenance to solar systems are income related expenses but providing a new solar system isn't. Not getting into discussions about whether or not solar systems lead to higher electrical prices for others, I'd like to see the government allow the provision of a new solar system to be counted as an income related expense to provide an incentive to landlords to install them... in just the same way they did with insulation. Cap what can be claimed back to a certain amount for say the occupancy of the dwelling. Allow for a certain amount of storage capacity for each unit again based on occupancy.... if the landlord goes over that, he can't claim the excess back of his tax.

That would then provide energy cost savings to the renters while also increasing some of the renewable resources to the country.
Or the govt just provides grants like for the insulation. A grant is essentially taking your own tax and giving it back to you in a roundabout way.

But I question if there is the will to have mass household solar systems? The generators don’t even pay market rates for regeneration back fed into the system which could also help.

From a govt perspective (also owning 51% of the major generators), wouldn’t large scale mass production of power generation for everyone be superior and cheaper (per unit) than small scale individual solar?
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Yes. We talk of left and right but they are just a product of our mindset.

Fundamentally I think the ‘right’ are more about personal responsibility, self direction and individualism. The ‘left’ are more communally and group minded. Many are in between.

When I was younger I was more inexperienced and reliant on others and I was more in touch with the left parties.

As I’ve got older and experienced I’m more drawn to control from within the individual as that is how I live now.
Also true of wealth in your estimation of left and right I think if that’s how we were to label them. The right in that individualism you speak of in growing personal wealth, the left more in spreading the pie
 
We have build childcare centres where we know exactly what will be allowed and what all the conditions will be.

The process of getting a third party council to come to the same conclusion is diabolical, costly and excessively long and unpredictable time wise.

I believe the RMA adds no value on 95% of projects. Wouldn’t a prescriptive system achieve exactly the same outcome in most cases if you straight up front knew the environmental parameters you needed to abide by?
Quite simply, the RMA considers the impact of a development or activity on either the environment and/or other people.

In the case of childcare centres, it wouldn't be the RMA that would be so much of the issue but how town planners access the application against their District Plan (DP). And some Councils have far better DP's than others.

Case in point, Franklin and Waitakere Councils in Auckland had really strong rural sections in their DP's but their urban planning was weak. Manukau and Rodney had moderate rural sections while North Shore and Auckland had no idea. But, instead of looking at what was best in the "rural" councils areas, the planners designing the new Auckland Unitary Plan were mostly urban planners from the old ACC and they stuffed up the rural sections.... including wanting RC's for farmers to do pretty much standard farming practices throughout the rest of the country.

Same with the heavy commercial areas in South Auckland and North Shore... the planners for those areas had a far better idea of the impact of heavy industrial processes because that's where the majority of the heavy industry in the greater Auckland area is based but they didn't have the input into the AUP that they should have.

The Engineering Standards in Manukau for providing public drainage was the best, IMO, out of all the Councils but the engineers who set the Auckland Council and WaterCare standards disregarded most of the standards developed by Manukau City Council and Manukau Water.... because they thought their old ways were the best and couldn't be improved on. Fortunately, now they've adopted most of the MCC and MW standards/practices.

There was too many town planners and engineers "protecting" their old methods and reasoning without looking if other Councils may actually been doing it better.
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Also true of wealth in your estimation of left and right I think if that’s how we were to label them. The right in that individualism you speak of in growing personal wealth, the left more in spreading the pie
Not quite.

There is no limit on wealth creation. When I earn more money it doesn’t take it from you.

You can grow the pie where a rising tide lifts all boats with everyone better off.

A static pie where your fighting over a limited share never ends well.

Would you rather half a pie with $1b dollars or a tenth of a pie worth $100b?
 
Not quite.

There is no limit on wealth creation. When I earn more money it doesn’t take it from you.

You can grow the pie where a rising tide lifts all boats with everyone better off.

A static pie where your fighting over a limited share never ends well.

Would you rather half a pie with $1b dollars or a tenth of a pie worth $100b?
There is a limit on wealth creation if the jobs aren’t there and people are being made unemployed
 
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
NZWarriors.com
Advertisement
If you would like to remove these advertisements, please do so by registering a free account
Back
Top