Thick-skinned Seymour must get message on semi-automatics
hen Adrian Orr stood up and gavethenewsthattheofficial cash rate was going to be on hold for the foreseeable future, the results was drowned out by news of Newshub’s probable closure at the end of June.
Orr was asked about Newshub and – while offering his thoughts for people who might lose their jobs – he said one would expect advertising to shrink in industries that rely on advertising, partly because of interest rates trying to squeeze inflation out of the system.
The cost-of-living crisis and associated higher interest rates will be affecting many corners of the economy. TV news stations such as Newshub, which rely entirely on advertising, are some of the first in the gun. Other media, namely legacy newspaper companies (including Stuff, publisher of this masthead) have also been hit by advertising’s decline, but have subscriptions as a part of the revenue mix.
Orr made a couple of very interesting comments. First he reiterated that the bank is determined to drive out what he called “the evil” of inflation. He also made some strong remarks about the China inflation dividend having run its course.
What he said in effect was that China has gone from being a low-wage economy to a middle-income country and is no longer producing very cheap goods for countries such as New Zealand to consume.
This is a large structural shift that, of course, has been known in econocrat circles for some time, but it was useful for the governor to explain it. There is not just the monetary response to the hangover from Covid-19 that is happening, but also a structural change from the pre-Covid world economy.
One thing was clear from the monetary policy statement. Despite the bank thinking that it has more or less picked the track of the economy and won’t have to raise interest rates again, there are a couple of important caveats.
The first is that the bank has what the governor called an “asymmetric” appetite for risk. That means that although it sees the picture as pretty balanced, there is little room for upside risk. In other words, if too many pockets of inflation pop up, the bank will move to act quickly and higher interest rates will be the result.
However, Orr and the monetary policy
Richard Lewis, the American comedian who passed away this week and was known for both his neurotic stand-up specials and playing a heightened version of himself on the show Curb Your Enthusiasm, once quipped: “When you do something in the moment, it may just be for that stage, that audience, that headspace you’re in.”
Perhaps that was the case when a youngish David Seymour appeared on Canada’s Alberta Primetime with what can only be described as a “Canadian-curious” accent. From the cheerful mocking taking place online by New Zealand’s political left, you might suspect this intriguing moment in North American televised history occurred in the past few weeks. In fact it was 14 years ago.
But who really cares that David Seymour faked a Canadian accent for an interview in 2010? Is it funny? Objectively, yes. With hindsight it comes across very silly. Does he look a bit stupid? Sure, but that has more to do with his opinions on public transport than the annunciation of his points. Does it matter though? Enough to go viral online and require an explanatory interview? No. Emphatically, no.
He was a 27-year-old Kiwi, in a for the Government. Luxon is entitled to claim the allowance as he is not living in Premier House – the prime minister’s Wellington residence – because work is being undertaken to fix it up.
But given that he is a wealthy man and owns the house where he is staying mortgage-free (as well as a number of others), he has already come under criticism for not doing his bit for fiscal restraint.
This sort of criticism should be taken with a dose of context. Just because Luxon is a wealthy man does not mean that the allowance is a bad idea. There is always much larger foreign nation, doing a live television interview. Things can go sideways. Everyone with a public a risk that wealthy politicians can make arulethatworksforthem,butthatcan mean short-changing a future PM who is not as wealthy. And in the usual course of events, Luxon would live at Premier House, which he apparently expects to move into after work is done on it.
This should be a case for spending money on Premier House. New Zealand is not a two-bit poor country and whoever the prime minister is should have a decent residence where various dignitaries and New Zealanders can be hosted. The house has been nickel-and-dimed by a conga line of prime ministers, in common with profile, no matter how beloved, has at least one stupid-looking take in their internet history. Sometimes it’s a bad quote, or a weird accent, or claiming a housing accommodation payment of up to $52,000 on a property you fully own when you spent most of your election campaign promising to cut down needless government spending.
Let they who are without gaffe throw the first stone.
Seymour has detractors from both sides of the political spectrum, but he has shown that his time with the critical-racetheory-opposing Canada Strong and Free Network (formerly the Manning Centre) and the climate change-denying Frontier Centre for Public Policy taught him to walk through the fires of criticism with a teflon skin.
He’s taken all the jokes thrown at him, absorbed them, and smirked all the way to the polls. This October will mark 10 years since he took over leadership of the ACT Party, a job that has consumed almost his entire 30s. If he was to resign at the end of this term, and spend his 40s being much more financially rewarded in the international private sector, he would still have a strong case for being the party’s most successful leader.
In some ways, Seymour’s staying power highlights a key problem for his the NZDF planes that sometimes ferry prime ministers round as part of their jobs.
Nevertheless for Luxon it was very much an appearance of “what is good for thee is not good for me,” and by Friday evening he said he would pay the money back, calling it a distraction.
The bigger fiscal question remains just how the Government is going to square the circle on everything it has promised in the May Budget. March has just ticked around and the Budget process is well under way.
Prior to the election it promised to continue health and education increases opponents. Once they’ve thrown jokes, or hurled insults, or cried shame, what exactly is left?. “Facts! Science! History!” you may cry or dismiss, depending on your YouTube history.
Where, though, are the counter-policies? Or perhaps more pertinent, where is the loud trumpeting of counter-policies?
Because right now, there are some very interesting pieces of legislation being passed and discussed in what could be said are very interesting ways, if only people can be actively interested in such things.
One announcement sticks out, and no it’s not the one you’re thinking of, or that other one. This isn’t about language, or healthcare, or representation, even smoking (which is somehow separate to healthcare). It’s actually guns, and in particular the prospect of the laws around semi-automatic weapons being rewritten.
To be very clear, this is not a condemnation of the discussion taking place. There is nothing wrong with checking in on legislation for updating, even if the timing raises eyebrows and is led by former gun lobbyist turned ACT no.3 and Associate Justice Minister Nicole McKee.
This is simply a firm, and perhaps more direct than usual, reminder to New Zealand that semi-automatic weapons in line with inflation, deliver tax cuts, as well as various other spending promises. It will try to do this while also whipping the books back into shape.
And that is also in the context of coalition partners who want resources for their areas.
This will not be an easy task practically, and potentially even more difficult politically. All roads lead to the May 30 Budget, when there almost certainly won’t be interest rate cuts in sight. It’ll be a tough ask.
Luke Malpass is The Post’s political editor. have no place in this country except with police, armed forces, and the sub-sector of Aotearoa’s military that is Farmers Hunting Rabbits. The Elmer Fudd division, if you will. They certainly have no place in recreation and sports shooting.
If rugby can live with concussion protocols, and smokers herded into tiny rooms at airports, then sports shooters don’t need semi-automatics.
There is nothing inherently wrong with being a gun owner, of which there are probably a lot more in New Zealand than anyone at home or abroad realises. It is very much a part of our national history. No-one is saying don’t hunt. (OK, some people do, but not for this reason)
No-one is saying don’t go down to the shooting range. Most people don’t know where the ranges are.
There are very few laws that have penetrated the Kiwi psyche to the level of the 1980s nuclear ban but, after March 15, 2019, the laws on semi-automatic weapons are tragically one.
Changing them just five years on from the Christchurch terror attack seems a little soon. Fifty-one years might be more appropriate.
James Nokise is a regular opinion contributor, a comedian, writer, and podcaster.