The Labour party, the ETS and the dairy farm.

It seems John Key has set about trying to destroy Labour's plan to bring farmers into the ETS in 2013.

Key says " the only impact of that will be to make our biggest exporter uncompetitive on a world scale and ultimately make New Zealanders pay more for milk, butter, cheese, meat and all the staples of a New Zealand diet".

Andrew Ferrier, CEO of Fonterra, says that this is not true as the milk and dairy prices are set by the international market.

I have two points to make on this, the first is that last year the average amount of tax paid by a dairy farmer was $1508, the second point is that this year Dairy farmers are set for a record payout of $8-$8.10. So, dairy farmers do not pay their fair share of tax (it is also important to keep in mind the levels of debt they may have and business expenditures because farms are very expensive).

Now here is where we must make some clarifications, so far I have only talked about dairy farms, whereas sheep and beef farms (or any other farm which produces meat) are very different and if Labour gets the chance to introduce this plan they must keep this distinction in mind.

The money raised from this will go to fund a 12.5% tax break for research and development. In order for this to work and gain public support Labour needs to do two things, firstly as the money is coming from an ETS tax it should go to develop technology that will directly benefit New Zealand environmentally, secondly Labour must make sure to explicitly state that dairy farmers cause a lot of harm to our environment (particularly our waterways) and that the R&D tax cuts will go to help alleviate this.

One particular question pops into my mind when I think about National's objection to this. Why are they really opposing this? Farmers are a big part of National's constituency and if they did support this they would very likely lose a lot of votes. It may very well be true that National does support this but because of their financial backing from the rural sector and the possible loss of votes, they just can't say so.

Is this just another case of the corporate interests driving our politicians?

I call him Gamblor, and it's time to snatch NZ back from his neon claws!!!

So it is budget day eve, tomorrow we will see exactly what it is this Government has in store for our economic future.

By all accounts we are going to see English present us with a budget that has many plans which will n0t take effect until after the election. It looks like John Key has said to Bill, "Hey Bill, do you think New Zealand likes me? I want to know but I'm afraid to ask. I know, you could write New Zealand a note and ask if he/she likes me." If New Zealand votes Key back in, we like the budget, if he doesn't get voted in Labour may reverse the budget.

So, what are we going to see tomorrow? Cuts, cuts, cuts is the short answer. For the first time in a very long time we will see a zero budget (no increase in spending), yet at the same time Key has promised us increases to health, education, justice and infrastructure. In order to keep spending the same over all yet increase it in certain areas they have to make big cuts.

Where are the cuts going to come from? Kiwisaver, student loans, working for families and "government departments" are where Key has said there will be cuts but beyond that we have no specifics.

Within the "Government departments" the chief executives are being left up to their own devices as to how they meet their targets. The most likely outcome is the slashing of backroom staff. What we keep hearing from Key and co. is that our Government departments are too big and inefficient, we must put more emphasis on the front line staff. In some cases this may be true though I have seen little evidence of it. In reality, the place where memorable, emotive five word catch phrases don't work, it is the back room staff who do the necessary work so that the front line staff can do theirs.

This Government is currently borrowing over $300 million per week and they plan to get us back in the black by cutting services and leaving it up to the private sector. Hang on a minute, wasn't it the private sector and de-regulation that got us into this mess?

So with Key and English placing their bets, how will it end? Red or black?

So it has come to this...

So it has come to this, Rodney Hide has resigned as leader of the ACT Party (though he will stay on as a minister) and I am unhappy about it. First off, Rodney Hide is everything I despise in a politician and over the last two and a half years ACT have been the tail that wags the dog. They have passed hard line policy against the wishes of the National Party, but of course National need ACT for the big policy changes that they can't pass alone. Act managed to pass the three strikes law despite the fact that wherever it has been tried around the globe it does not work, they passed the 90-day right to sack law against the research saying it will not work and against the wishes of Labour Minister Kate Wilkinson.

At the time of writing this Rodney has resigned and Don Brash is tipped to be the new leader though it has not yet been formally announced.

So why am I unhappy with this, well ACT have been poling below 2% and with all the strife they have been in over the past two years there was really no chance of them getting anyone but Rodney elected, and I was looking forward to seeing him getting his ass handed to him in the election.

I think what worries me most about Brash taking over is twofold, one: what kind of a prick would come out and state that he wants to be the leader of a party he is not even a member of, performing a coup de grace on that parties current leader within a week.

Secondly, and perhaps what worries me most is that Brash is a hard line, free-market, worshiping at the alter of Milton Friedman type politician, he will make it his job to implement these economic principals of a free for all, low tax corporate orgy when what we need now something else, something more linked to the brilliant Mr John Maynard Keynes (funny how the economist I like the most has a name very similar to one of the politicians I like the least).

Now lets try and figure this whole situation out a bit, Brash announced his interest in running ACT on Saturday, but we have no idea how long he has been in talks with the party.

The party may have even been wooing Brash for a while as Rodney has become a liability.

The quick and decisive nature of the deal puts Brash on the front foot, it makes him look like a strong leader and Rodney like a little bitch who will just roll over when he is told.

How much influence did the National party have on this? Brash is Key's predecessor and they are very likely still good pals.

Rodney seems to have gone along with this very easily, which leads me to believe that this decision has been in the works for some time.

So what does this all mean come election time? Brash is going to look good in theory, a strong man willing to take control and save the sinking ship, but how will he fare with the voters? I think we will see very little change in the poling up to the election, some will like him for getting rid of Rodney and some will resent him for the same reason.

I think because Brash is an old National leader, that National will do whatever they can to get him in, primarily running a weak candidate, a patsy if you will (and probably a list MP anyway), to give Brash the electorate win.

National know there is a slim chance of them governing alone but it is unlikely so they need to set up their coalition partners, and if they have to form a coalition they would prefer to do it with just ACT, so expect to see some compliments coming ACT's way from John Key.

We're seven months out from the election and already it's getting interesting, I can't wait for things to really heat up.

Update: turns out this leadership change had been in the works for a while, here's what the Herald has to say.

He's not he leader we want, he's the leader we deserve

It took me a while to realise the true blue popularity that John Key has, it seems no matter what he does the public will worship the ground he walks on.

Talking to people for the last couple of years about what it is that they like about our dear Optimus Prime I keep hearing the same set of words thrown at me, "He's just such a nice guy."

That's fucking bullshit, he's a goddamn greedy merchant banker scumbag who wants nothing more than to sell us down the fucking river and get famous along the way.

Does he have the gift of the gab? Hell no, put him in front of a journalist who actually wants to talk policy and doesn't fall for his nice guy act and then you'll see Key on the back foot, if he hasn't got a script or someone talking into his ear he's fucked.

The problem with this is twofold; firstly our TV media are too gutless to ask him the hard questions and the owners of the media won't let them because National love corporate welfare and tax cuts for the rich and secondly Key's handlers have him on such a tight leash that he doesn't do anywhere near the amount of interviews he should and when he does do them it's only with the one's who will ask him softball questions. Now you might be saying to yourself, "But I see John Key on TV all the time," Yes you do, but don't be fooled a post cabinet press conference or staged photo-op do not mean a leader is being held to account for his actions.

I do not believe that John Key operates ideologically, he spent time on Wall Street, if you're not willing to put personal views aside the big deals will slip by. I think he knows that there are some things he has to do to stay in power and get the bill through that he (and by he I mean Bill English and most of National's front bench) wants, for example 90 day right to sack was pushed through against Kate Wilkinson's advice but was done to ensure that National would have ACT's vote when it needed it, the foreshore and seabed bill is the same.

What we have is a public that doesn't want to be challenged, to sacrifice or be told the truth, that is why Key won.

Key refuses to give bad news, he let's his ministers do that, this is a (somewhat) clever way to allow the government to give the bad news and then have nice old Uncle John there to say, "Don't worry every thing's alright. Hey hey look at me I'm on a catwalk. Aren't I funny."

While he is distracting you with his cavorting in front of the media his cabinet are pushing through hard line policy that will fuck us all (and by "us" I mean anyone earning less than $70,000 a year).

We now have a Labour leader who has been unable to rise to the challenge, he fucked up the Darren Hughes issue, how could he think the media wouldn't pick up on that story, it's got everything that makes a front page headline.

Phil Goff has now become your other grumpy uncle who can't really get his shit together.

You know what, we only have ourselves to blame, it's our obsession with making the news infotainment and celebrity, I don't give a fuck what John Key's wife is wearing to William and Kate's fucking wedding.

It's time to grow up New Zealand, the news and politics are not there purely for your entertainment, it's the fucking news not where you go to see stories about the cat with the worlds loudest purr.

Until we say to our politicians, "Sit down and tell us the fucking truth, no more of this doublespeak and no more photo ops."

In the immortal words of Howard Beale, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore."

It's up to us New Zealand, we have to ask the hard questions and be prepared to hear the brutal unpleasant truth, we're not heading in the right direction politically, socially or morally and it's time for this to end.