Labour hid 1.5 BILLION ACC shortfall - Ministerial inquiry

[Tank]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10559739

A ministerial inquiry into why a $1.5 billion four-year shortfall forecast in ACC's non-earners account was not revealed before the election has concluded the previous government hid it, Finance Minister Bill English said today.

The report found the shortfall in the non-earners account was known to ACC, the Department of Labour, Treasury, ACC Minister Maryan Street and Finance Minister Michael Cullen in time for it to be disclosed as a fiscal risk in the Pre-election Fiscal Update.

"The previous government knew about the funding hole and effectively hid it. There are systems in place to protect us from this, but in this case they did not work," Mr English said when issuing the report today.

Given "Its all about trust" - Here is the g'ment of the time deliberately hiding 1.5 BILLION in shortfalls purely for their own gain.

Given that they chose to deliberately hide it - do you think that charges should be laid?

[vifferman]

Your heading's wrong- should read "Billion"

[Blackshear]

Personally, yes.
That's a fair emount of monies.
Lock those suckers up!

[MisterD]

We need a wide-ranging enquiry into the endemic corruption in the last government and then we can bring charges.

[MadDuck]

Kind of explains why Cullen was so reluctant to give out tax cuts???

[JimO]

wouldnt that be nationals fault now they are in, would be according to skyhumper

[The Stranger]

Don't worry, skyrider will be along shortly to explain why it is all National's fault.

[Skunk]

Yep, lay charges. It won't happen; but it should. They are paid to be responsible... so they should be.

[Swoop]

Is there any possible way of making the Liarbour party an illegal organisation?:clap:

[Tank]

Is there any possible way of making the Liarbour party an illegal organisation?:clap:

Not Illegal - but I do believe that Darwin's law is culling most of them off.

[JacksColdSweat]

Kind of explains why Cullen was so reluctant to give out tax cuts???

and so eager to resign...

Ooh! :shutup:

[JacksColdSweat]

Yep, lay charges. It won't happen; but it should. They are paid to be responsible... so they should be.

Funnily enough EXACT same thing when they lost in 1990 and we wound up with the Fiscal Responsibility Act which is supposed to save us from this...

[MisterD]

Funnily enough EXACT same thing when they lost in 1990 and we wound up with the Fiscal Responsibility Act which is supposed to save us from this...

Which just goes to show, the most reliable way to acheive a stuffed economy is to elect a Labour government...ask the UK.

[Skyryder]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10559739

A ministerial inquiry into why a $1.5 billion four-year shortfall forecast in ACC's non-earners account was not revealed before the election has concluded the previous government hid it, Finance Minister Bill English said today.

So English claims it was deliberatly hidden.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10559630

You could then argue that they were so occupied with hiding ACC's shorfall but you could also argue that the ministry is incompetant. I seem to recall Cullen and the ministery finding some extra cash that they did not know they had. So I'd go for incompetance. But I doubt if English is going to renounce his confidence in Ministery officals as Collins did with Mathews, not when they give him politcal ammunition.

Oh and it's a four year projected shortfall. Not an actual one.

This bullshit from English :stupid:is nothing more than a PR campaign to soften up the public for the sale of ACC to private providers. :Offtopic: Fuck me it's so obvious that even some of my friends who are Nats are surprised at the publics gullibility of their party.


Skyryder

[BBzz]

A ministerial inquiry into why a $1.5 billion four-year shortfall []

That’s a lot of cash. It’s amazing how they can get it soooo wrong.
The other Problem we will have now is how will they get it back???
The ACC part of Registration for Bikes is so up there now.
CRAP :headbang:what are these turkeys downing with it all.

[Mully]

Don't worry, skyrider will be along shortly to explain why it is all National's fault.

I'll give it a bash

That's because John Key, Liar, Ninja & Frenchman, broke in to Helen's and Michael's offices and.... umm..... hid the shortfall under the couch cushions.

I can't believe that John Key has managed to suck you all in again. You people are all suckers, voting for someone who would hide a shortfall from our wonderful leaders.

In fact, John Key should be charged with ninjaoristy in a public place and banished from the country. He's clearly responsible for this. The same way he's responsible for the music his party's DVDs used, and global warming, and shark attacks in Sydney, and the bush fires (how can you have voted for an arsonist!!!), and Mount St Helens, and the holocoust and Steven Hawking was fine before he met John Key. John Key gave Steven Hawking crippleness. There I said it. And you suckers voted for him.

EDIT: Never mind, he's already here.
("It's only projected, not actual!!" HAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA)

[Tank]

So English claims it was deliberatly hidden.


Skyryder

No a Ministerial Inquiry found that they knew about it and hid it.

And we all know that its a projected short fall - thank fuck Labour were kicked in their commie asses - else it could have ended up considerably worse (after all - its their mismanagement that caused it in the first place).

[Skyryder]

In fact, John Key should be charged with ninjaoristy in a public place and banished from the country. He's clearly responsible for this. The same way he's responsible for the music his party's DVDs used, and global warming, and shark attacks in Sydney, and the bush fires (how can you have voted for an arsonist!!!), and Mount St Helens, and the holocoust and Steven Hawking was fine before he met John Key. John Key gave Steven Hawking crippleness. There I said it. And you suckers voted for him.



Close :done:


Skyryder

[MisterD]

You could then argue that they were so occupied with hiding ACC's shorfall but you could also argue that the ministry is incompetant. I seem to recall Cullen and the ministery finding some extra cash that they did not know they had. So I'd go for incompetance.

Whaleoil's source says otherwise (http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=content/quotnah-fuck-itquot).

[Tank]

Whaleoil's source says otherwise (http://www.whaleoil.co.nz/?q=content/quotnah-fuck-itquot).

cut paste from Whale Oil for people who dont like links:

"The exact words to a senior treasury offical by Michael Cullen when he was told he had to include the ACC blowout were;

"Nah, Fuck it!"

Sources close to Treasury have informed WOBH that this is verbatim and they have had enough of taking the fall for his corrupt management of public finances.

Michael John Cullen, 64, Lit MP of no fixed abode needs to be arrested, charged, given a fair trial, found guilty and jailed for economic vandalism.

He is a treacherous, scum sucking, socialist liar.

The people of Tuwharetoa need to be very careful associating themselves with a crim."

[Finn]

Close :done:


Skyryder

Come on Skyryder, join the movement to the right. It's a lot more rewarding over here and you will no longer feel like Cartman in a room full of Jews. All you have to do is get a job and start being accountable - it's not really that difficult. Heck, you can ride a motorbike.

[ManDownUnder]

It's only a projected shortfall!. Given the conomic conditions I'd say it probably projects out to be even worse now. Anything to do with fiscal prudence or growth has hardly improved since the election.

Skyrider... tell me - who's responsible for this - National or Labour? I mean - the buck stops... where?

[The Stranger]

So English claims it was deliberatly hidden.



Come on Helen, we know it's you.
Not very original using a pseudo name but using your picture for your avatar is it.

[MSTRS]

Come on Helen, we know it's you.
Not very original using a pseudo name but using your picture for your avatar is it.

Might actually be a genuine self-portrait....done using a mirror....isn't the ugly spot normally on the other side? Oooops...hang on...I meant 'beauty' spot....the ugly is all over. And the lack of a signature is another giveaway...s/he only signs other people's work as it were.
That 'timely' discovery of a large chunk of change....couldn't have been stolen from here, could it?

[ManDownUnder]

That 'timely' discovery of a large chunk of change....couldn't have been stolen from here, could it?

Actually not a bad point... I wonder if there were any plans afoot to scrap or privatise ACC? That way it'd never be noticed missing... or at least it would be more quickly forgotten about.

[Mully]

Actually not a bad point... I wonder if there were any plans afoot to scrap or privatise ACC? That way it'd never be noticed missing... or at least it would be more quickly forgotten about.

Of course not. How dare you suggest such a thing.

Only the puppy beating, jew hating, bastards that are the National Party would even dream of something like that.

[MSTRS]

Actually not a bad point... I wonder if there were any plans afoot to scrap or privatise ACC? That way it'd never be noticed missing... or at least it would be more quickly forgotten about.

Yep. I can see the reasoning behind it now...
H 'How can we get a fourth term?"
C 'We'll buy it of course"
H "With what?"
C "This'll never be missed"
H "Why not?"
C "Because when we're back in, we'll fudge everything again, and no-one will know"
H "But what if some clever Nat finds us out?"
C "No worries....we'll just get that prat SkyRyder to say it was Key's fault"
H "Brilliant. I knew it wasn't us that lied, cheated and stole from the public purse. Do it"

[ManDownUnder]

Of course not. How dare you suggest such a thing.

Only the puppy beating, jew hating, bastards that are the National Party would even dream of something like that.

You forgot blue penguin clubbing... it's a central part of the Nat's manifesto and the reason the Party colour is blue.

[Mully]

You forgot blue penguin clubbing... it's a central part of the Nat's manifesto and the reason the Party colour is blue.

Good point.

I thought the blue colour was rememberance for the orphans that John Key strangles every night for dinner??

[MSTRS]

You forgot blue penguin clubbing... it's a central part of the Nat's manifesto and the reason the Party colour is blue.

Elementary. It may not be common knowledge that those little blue penguins are fifth columnists for the Liarbour party (after all - they are soooo cute), but it becomes totally obvious after they are given the bash. They show their true colour. RED!

[ManDownUnder]

Good point.

I thought the blue colour was rememberance for the orphans that John Key strangles every night for dinner??

Common misconception - he only strangles black kids and you can't actually see them go blue. It's all part of the racial purity policy to be announced after the next election

[ManDownUnder]

Good point.

I thought the blue colour was rememberance for the orphans that John Key strangles every night for dinner??


Elementary. It may not be common knowledge that those little blue penguins are fifth columnists for the Liarbour party (after all - they are soooo cute), but it becomes totally obvious after they are given the bash. They show their true colour. RED!

LMAO - you two are as full of shit as that other guy... What's his name - skyrider?

[Badjelly]

It's a projected shortfall and the solution is simple: raise ACC levies and/or reduce payouts. This has already been done, to a small extent, but more is needed. National is making a big noise about it, because they know they have to do it, but would like to blame it on Labour.

[Tank]

It's a projected shortfall and the solution is simple: raise ACC levies and/or reduce payouts. This has already been done, to a small extent, but more is needed. National is making a big noise about it, because they know they have to do it, but would like to blame it on Labour.

Yes - we know its a projected shortfall.

Yes Labour deserves the blame for it - after all it was them that caused it.

The issue is that the KNEW about it and HID the information it even tho that was required to be disclosed under the Public Finance Act.

Thats filthy politics and they should be held to account for illegally misleading the public and the opposition (of the time)

[Tank]

NBR states today:

The Public Finance Act is pretty clear on what is an offence, and what the penalties are.

Under section 76 (1) of the act, an offence is committed by anyone who, without reasonable excuse: refuses or fails to produce any information in their possession or under their control relating to “financial management, financial performance, or banking activities of a department or in relation to the management or control of any Crown asset or liability” when required to do so under the act.

The following section, 76 (2) states someone also commits an offence if they make “any statement or declaration, or gives any infor­mation or certificate, required by or pursuant to this Act, knowing it to be false or misleading.”

The potential penalty for the first of these is a maximum fine of $2000.


The second is more serious and includes a possible prison term of up to 12 months or a fine of up to $5000.

The chances of this happening are not high. But they’re not impossible either.
-----

Too much to wish for that Cullen gets 12 months jail huh?

[Skyryder]

The other Problem we will have now is how will they get it back???.

It's a shortfall. It has not happened. So it can not be paid back.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

Yes - we know its a projected shortfall.

Yes Labour deserves the blame for it - after all it was them that caused it.

The issue is that the KNEW about it and HID the information it even tho that was required to be disclosed under the Public Finance Act.

Thats filthy politics and they should be held to account for illegally misleading the public and the opposition (of the time)

The issue is that did Labour know and did they deliberately hide this information? If English has any evidence of either one or both then he needs to come clean and produce this evidence. It’s all very well to make media statements that this is Labour's fault. I’d be looking to officials for mistakes. They did make a massive one earlier where extra dosh was discovered. Just don’t recall the details.
However as things stand it appears that English’s objective is political gain. But since there is none here as National are the government it may be nothing more than spite. Cullen has acknowledge that he is leaving Parliament so I’m looking for other motives. A softening up process for the public to reduce any opposition for the sale of ACC.

Skyryder

[yungatart]

-----

Too much to wish for that Cullen gets 12 months jail huh?

F**k that!
Then I'm still paying to keep that slimy little bastard...burn him, I say!

[Skyryder]

NBR states today:

The Public Finance Act is pretty clear on what is an offence, and what the penalties are.

Under section 76 (1) of the act, an offence is committed by anyone who, without reasonable excuse: refuses or fails to produce any information in their possession or under their control relating to “financial management, financial performance, or banking activities of a department or in relation to the management or control of any Crown asset or liability” when required to do so under the act.

The following section, 76 (2) states someone also commits an offence if they make “any statement or declaration, or gives any infor­mation or certificate, required by or pursuant to this Act, knowing it to be false or misleading.”

The potential penalty for the first of these is a maximum fine of $2000.


The second is more serious and includes a possible prison term of up to 12 months or a fine of up to $5000.

The chances of this happening are not high. But they’re not impossible either.
-----

Too much to wish for that Cullen gets 12 months jail huh?

Where is English's evidence for a prosecution?

Skyryder

[Patrick]

Where is English's evidence for a prosecution?

Skyryder

Still looking. Labour hid that, too......

[paturoa]

You could then argue that they were so occupied with hiding ACC's shorfall but you could also argue that the ministry is incompetant. I seem to recall Cullen and the ministery finding some extra cash that they did not know they had. So I'd go for incompetance.


... so you think that "the ministry" is incompetent for telling several liarbour senior ministers about the shortfall, but the senior ministers are NOT incompent for hiding said info?

This may surprise you, but I fully agree with you that the senior Liarbour ministers were not as incompetent as you make out the "the ministry" to be. So where does that leave us? A deliberate act of deception?


This bullshit from English is nothing more than a PR campaign to soften up the public for the sale of ACC to private providers.

... so you think that, your words

- that an incomptetent ministry
- that attempts to hide $1.5 bill (deliberatly? - huh?)

.... would do a better job than commercial companies subject to copmmercial disclosure laws and competition?


The issue is that did Labour know and did they deliberately hide this information

... you seem to be a little slower than the rest of us on this one but your finally getting the point, that is a big fat YES.


I’d be looking to officials for mistakes.

Do you mean scapegoats? Just as well your not in gubbermint.


They did make a massive one earlier where extra dosh was discovered. Just don’t recall the details.

So the officals are incompetent for making not one but at least two "massive ones". Hmm interesting view. But a gubbermint isn't - OK once, but twice?


However as things stand it appears that English’s objective is political gain. But since there is none here

.... can I have some of your drugs please.


...as National are the government it may be nothing more than spite.

... yeah telling us about a $1.5 bill shortfall is just spite - oh please.


Cullen has acknowledge that he is leaving Parliament so I’m looking for other motives. A softening up process for the public to reduce any opposition for the sale of ACC.

... how about you just look at the situation?

[Swoop]

Yep. I can see the reasoning behind it now...
H 'How can we get a fourth term?"
C 'We'll buy it of course"
H "With what?"
C "This'll never be missed"
H "Why not?"
C "Because when we're back in, we'll fudge everything again, and no-one will know"
H "But what if some clever Nat finds us out?"
C "No worries....we'll just get that prat SkyRyder to say it was Key's fault"
H "Brilliant. I knew it wasn't us that lied, cheated and stole from the public purse. Do it"
Oh c'mon. Go easy on SkyRanter.
He is having difficulties with the "Jobs Summit" concept...
The alien concept that the government is actually asking for input from the public, instead of Liarbour simply shoving policy after policy down our collective throat, has not registered with him. "Democracy" it might be called. "The Government working FOR the populace" might be another?

If he can't get that concept, then outright fraudlent representations to the public, prior to the election, is a lost cause...

[Skyryder]

The fact that some of you need to change my login name just demonstrates how weak your arguements are. If you realy want to have a go do so by all means but this bullshit I can sort out by typing with one finger.

English is playing politics. It is no more and no less than that. Its what politicians do.
It's just part of the Westminster system that we live under.

When Cullen retires the whole lot of them will be singing his praise both Key and English together.

Skyryder

[Tank]

Where is English's evidence for a prosecution?

Skyryder

Just shows how slow you are.

Its not English's evidence - Its the ministerial inquiry. And they satated:

The report finds that the shortfall should have been disclosed, so in effect the requirements of the Public Finance Act were not met by the then Government.

The report finds that back on 4 August 2008 the ACC Board determined it would need more Crown funding, and that this was communicated to the Minister of 14 August 2008. They specifically advised of their intention to seek $1.559 billion over the next five years including $306 million in the *current* year.

Treasury advised Michael Cullen of this on 1 September 2008.

Cullen - despite the 'rules' of what has to be disclosed didnt.

So there you go facts - not fiction. Happy now (of course not - coz you crazy)

So he either hid it - or he is incompetent.

Take your pick - Im going with both.

[Skyryder]

Just shows how slow you are.

Its not English's evidence - Its the ministerial inquiry. And they satated:

The report finds that the shortfall should have been disclosed, so in effect the requirements of the Public Finance Act were not met by the then Government.

The report finds that back on 4 August 2008 the ACC Board determined it would need more Crown funding, and that this was communicated to the Minister of 14 August 2008. They specifically advised of their intention to seek $1.559 billion over the next five years including $306 million in the *current* year.

Treasury advised Michael Cullen of this on 1 September 2008.

Cullen - despite the 'rules' of what has to be disclosed didnt.

So there you go facts - not fiction. Happy now (of course not - coz you crazy)

So he either hid it - or he is incompetent.

Take your pick - Im going with both.

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/03/03/1245a3617280

Read the bit about the apologie and how Treasury got it wrong

Skyryder

[peasea]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=10559739

A ministerial inquiry into why a $1.5 billion four-year shortfall forecast in ACC's non-earners account was not revealed before the election has concluded the previous government hid it, Finance Minister Bill English said today.

The report found the shortfall in the non-earners account was known to ACC, the Department of Labour, Treasury, ACC Minister Maryan Street and Finance Minister Michael Cullen in time for it to be disclosed as a fiscal risk in the Pre-election Fiscal Update.

"The previous government knew about the funding hole and effectively hid it. There are systems in place to protect us from this, but in this case they did not work," Mr English said when issuing the report today.

Given "Its all about trust" - Here is the g'ment of the time deliberately hiding 1.5 BILLION in shortfalls purely for their own gain.

Given that they chose to deliberately hide it - do you think that charges should be laid?

Is that all??
The more ya dig, the more dirt you'll find.

[MSTRS]

The fact that some of you need to change my login name just demonstrates how weak your arguements are. If you realy want to have a go do so by all means but this bullshit I can sort out by typing with one finger.



How do you manage that? When you obviously have a finger in both ears. And your eyes covered too.
Impressive trick!!!

[Tank]

http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/stories/2009/03/03/1245a3617280

Read the bit about the apologie and how Treasury got it wrong

Skyryder

I take it you have not read the report then.

Else you would know that this isnt correct. FFS in that 'report' you have the ACC chick saying that they have been exonerated when in fact they have been named.

They get their accountability lessons off Mr Winston Peters me thinks.

[Pixie]

How do you manage that? When you obviously have a finger in both ears. And your eyes covered too.
Impressive trick!!!

He uses his dick on the keyboard - that's why his writings are a lot of cock

[Badjelly]

All I know about this is what I read in this forum and what I heard on the TV news last night about the inquiry report. Based on this I infer that they (specifically Michael Cullen) did know a shortfall was expected, but decided not to mention it. (I'm a bit vague on how you're supposed to mention these things. In some sort of report to Parliament, I suppose.) I'm sure he did so to avoid embarrassment and leave National on its own to deal with the shortfall, which they will do, by raising levies, which will be unpopular. Cullen's excuse is that this information was provisional ("not confirmed" in his words).

I find him guilty as charged.

PS: and I voted for them.

[Skyryder]

Oh c'mon. Go easy on SkyRanter.
He is having difficulties with the "Jobs Summit" concept...
The alien concept that the government is actually asking for input from the public, instead of Liarbour simply shoving policy after policy down our collective throat, has not registered with him. "Democracy" it might be called. "The Government working FOR the populace" might be another?

If he can't get that concept, then outright fraudlent representations to the public, prior to the election, is a lost cause...

Jesus this is unfucking believable. You still think this job summit is about saving jobs. Governments work to a strategy of delivering policy in a manner that is palatable to the public. National in their election campaign inadvertently signaled their push to the right. The two most obvious ones is their commitment to the private prison system and the road tolls.

There were others but these two are the one that I noticed. Nationals hard line on crime is not an unwelcome move but the private prison system is a signal that the Nats are well aware of the social implications of a move to the far right. Crime is going to increase. Hence their commitment to private prisons.

Second to this is their 90 day ‘firing time’ which they pushed with urgency. This was not a public issue but the Nats needed this so as to prevent any serious scrutiny by both Labour and the Unions.

Then came the fallout from the US banks. This was not unknown in financial circles and had been predicted for some time. The meltdown occurred right on the American Presidential elections and as such became an election issue and this more than anything else highlighted the oncoming recession which occurred on a timescale faster than anticipated. The Madoff thing highlighted the issues further.

As I have said earlier the Job summit was not about jobs. The Nats signed a deal last January with Mascot Finance a ‘taxpayer funded ‘ guarantee for their deposits should Mascot fail. While this scheme was setup by Labour in the wake of failed finance companies, it is interesting to note that seven weeks after the signing by the Nats Mascot finance went into receiver ship. I could if I was a complete prick blame Bill English for this as he has done too Cullen with the ACC blowout but the fact of the matter treasury had no more knowledge of the Mascot impending debacle than Cullen had of the ACC blowout.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10559630

One of the issues that came out of job summit was the business equity scheme for cash strapped companies wanting access to capitol. This is in effect an extension of
http://www.treasury.govt.nz/publications/media-speeches/media/22oct08 The purpose of this was two fold. A continuation of sound financial practices (just how this was to be achieved with govt guareentees I don’t know) and protection of kiwi savings. The purpose of which is to reduce state dependency in retirement etc.

But I digress. At the Job Summit banking CEO’s made no effort to disguise the fact that they wanted the taxpayer to underwrite any loans.
How ever there is a difference. Where the Crown Retail Deposit Guraentee scheme is primarily individual based the banks want a similar scheme for business. Yep if things turn to shit you and I pay………..again. Will the Nats want any fee for this……….of course not. The fee for this will be paid later when Key decides to go on a full privatization sell up. We pay again for bargain basement sale of NZ infrastructure just like the ‘good old days’ of rodgernomics.

But I am getting ahead of myself again.

For years both the Nats and ACT have been crying foul about how much tax we pay and to some extent they may have a good case. But there has not been one word of protest about how much interest we pay to foreign owned banks. Not so much as pip squeak. Nothing. One example of this exorbitant interest rates is the account the Law Society has for running their free legal aid. Westpac charge 40% for management fees. 40% that ‘s getting into loan sharking percentages.

To you give some idea of how much the banks have made since their establishment in eighties. At present NZ is running at about $8 billion in the red. ‘Combined,’ the commercial banks have $200 billion that they can spend on loans. (Chch Press March, 2009) And that’s jus the loose change.

So in effect the banks want the NZ taxpayer to underwrite any equity that they loan to NZ business. Not only have they screwed us with high interest rates but now they want us to underwrite their loans and some wonder why I go apeshit on here.

And you seriously think the Govt is working for the populace. Like fuck they are.

Skyryder

[NighthawkNZ]

:yawn: ...

[Skyryder]

:yawn: ...

I’ll explain so you can understand. For years the commercial banks have been screwing kiwis with high interest rates. Now Key is going to use taxpayer money to underwrite their buisness loans.

Now go back to sleep.

[MSTRS]

I’ll explain so you can understand. For years the commercial banks have been screwing kiwis with high interest rates. Now Key is going to use taxpayer money to underwrite their buisness loans.

Now go back to sleep.

He has to. The money/banking system is such that keeping it afloat is too important. Businesses etc have loans to allow them to trade, manufacture, employ people. The money goes - so does the business that would use it - the dole queue gets large(r). Where is the money going to come from to pay all that extra unemployment? Simplistic? Yes. But essentially correct. Key (or whoever at the top in this situation) would take the guarantee money from a ready source (ACC isn't one of them now, is it?). Somewhere that the taxpayer has been fleeced for over all the years/governments gone by. No government can do otherwise because where the fuck do they get the money from in the first place? It's not like they generate any revenue of their own.
EDIT: I do agree that banks charge waaay too much tho. Happy?

[Fub@r]

National in their election campaign inadvertently signaled their push to the right. The two most obvious ones is their commitment to the private prison system and the road tolls.


The Orewa motorway extension was built under a Labour governement and there are road tolls on that.........or did Labour knowing they were losing the last election put the toll devices in as an election win present for National?

There is nothing wrong with a toll road if there is a free alternative. It gets the roads built and you have a CHOICE as to whether you use it or not. CHOICE is something that has been sadly missing in New Zealand for the last 9 years and may be a foreign concept to you.

[Skyryder]

He has to. The money/banking system is such that keeping it afloat is too important. Businesses etc have loans to allow them to trade, manufacture, employ people. The money goes - so does the business that would use it - the dole queue gets large(r). Where is the money going to come from to pay all that extra unemployment? Simplistic? Yes. But essentially correct. Key (or whoever at the top in this situation) would take the guarantee money from a ready source (ACC isn't one of them now, is it?). Somewhere that the taxpayer has been fleeced for over all the years/governments gone by. No government can do otherwise because where the fuck do they get the money from in the first place? It's not like they generate any revenue of their own.
EDIT: I do agree that banks charge waaay too much tho. Happy?

We once had our own bank but not now. It got flogged off. Key claims that he is one of the good ol' boys from working class stock and is concerned about his roots. He's pissing on them but they have not noticed yet. Just try having a slash on ya tomato plants. Won't die straight away but once the wilt starts it's too late.

Skyryder

[Mully]

He has to. The money/banking system is such that keeping it afloat is too important. Businesses etc have loans to allow them to trade, manufacture, employ people.
EDIT: I do agree that banks charge waaay too much tho. Happy?

Yep, hopefully we can screw some conditions onto any public funds which they use, though.

[MSTRS]

We once had our own bank but not now. It got flogged off. I seem to recall there being a certain bailout reqd some time ago, and big union trouble at the Wgtn building site of BNZ having something to do with that. Coupled with a Liarbour govt desperately seeking to remedy the excesses of a particularly obnoxious fellow who was totally out of control. Other than the names, what's different this time? Oh yes...there wasn't a deep recession in the early 80s.
But to give the short answer, obviously Kiwibank doesn't have a branch on your little island...


Yep, hopefully we can screw some conditions onto any public funds which they use, though.

Ooooh yeah....something like 40%, with every building they own and the first born of every employee from branch manager and up being collateral...

[Mully]

Ooooh yeah....something like 40%, with every building they own and the first born of every employee from branch manager and up being collateral...

Subject to inspection, of course. Some of 'em you may not want.

I was thinking more about how they screw everyone out of every cent when times are good, and go looking for public guarantees when it all turns to shit.

[enigma51]

Second to this is their 90 day ‘firing time’ which they pushed with urgency. This was not a public issue but the Nats needed this so as to prevent any serious scrutiny by both Labour and the Unions.

Skyryder

:shit: ...... no public issue wow.

[ManDownUnder]

Now Key is going to use taxpayer money to underwrite their buisness loans.

Now go back to sleep.

WHAT???? THAT BASTARD IS USING OUR MONEY TO UNDERWRITE LOANS THAT PROTECT OUR JOBS?????

Doesn't he know he's there for his own personal gain?

[ManDownUnder]

We once had our own bank but not now. It got flogged off. Key claims that he is one of the good ol' boys from working class stock and is concerned about his roots. He's pissing on them but they have not noticed yet. Just try having a slash on ya tomato plants. Won't die straight away but once the wilt starts it's too late.

Skyryder

They must be right wing - being red I guess. Try taking a wizz under anything citrous - it fucken loves it.

Bad example dude.

[MSTRS]

WHAT???? THAT BASTARD IS USING OUR MONEY TO UNDERWRITE LOANS THAT PROTECT OUR JOBS?????

Doesn't he know he's there for his own personal gain?

Disgusting, isn't it? Who would have thought that a politician would actually attempt something that might be for the good of all. And being because of outside causes, he can't even be suspected of doing this as part of a secret agenda.
:no:

[Skyryder]

Well Key must be listening to me and watching KB

So come on guys lets hear a call from you lot about this $70 mill cock up that the Nats signed with our money as a gurantee.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10559878


Skyryder

[Mully]

Well Key must be listening to me and watching KB

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_complex_(self-concept)

"He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy"


So come on guys lets hear a call from you lot about this $70 mill cock up that the Nats signed with our money as a gurantee.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10559878


Yep, that was a bit of a cock-up. This, however is interesting:
"In this case Mascot have gone into receivership so we need to learn from this example how to make sure that we minimise the risks to the taxpayer that institutions that come along looking for the guarantee in the future may not be viable."
(That's a quote from Bill English, John Key's partner in fur seal clubbing). Admitting that the government made a mistake and they should learn from it. Unheard of in politics for the last decade in NZ.

[marty]

It's just part of the Westminster system that we live under.

r

As opposed to the excellent system they have in Zimbabwe, or even the Federal Republic system shared by some countries.....

I know what my choice is

[Skyryder]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messiah_complex_(self-concept)

"He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy"



Yep, that was a bit of a cock-up. This, however is interesting:
"In this case Mascot have gone into receivership so we need to learn from this example how to make sure that we minimise the risks to the taxpayer that institutions that come along looking for the guarantee in the future may not be viable."
(That's a quote from Bill English, John Key's partner in fur seal clubbing). Admitting that the government made a mistake and they should learn from it. Unheard of in politics for the last decade in NZ.

Still 70 mill of our money down the gurgler. So is Key or English asking for heads. Nope. Anyone here asking for heads?? Seven weeks after signing the deal Mascot turn to custard Someone got it wrong. But all we hear from English sorry chaps we will just have to better next time. Not his money but ours.

Skyryder


Skyryder

[Swoop]

Jesus this is unfucking believable. You still think this job summit is about saving jobs.
Waffle,waffle.
And you seriously think the Govt is working for the populace. Like fuck they are.
Yup. The concept has passed over your head. Consultation with people who "might" have a few ideas on alleviating the problems of the economy.
You lefties are only happy when Stalin tells you what you really want.
Keep the red flag flying.

[SPman]

Could this have something to do with it.....Merril Lynch reporting in July of last year.........

...a Merrill Lynch broker's report tipped Australian insurers to make a $200 million killing if National went ahead with an "informal" plan to privatise ACC.
Insurance companies expect National to privatise ACC, but their would-be customers, the business community, are surprisingly unenthusiastic.
Insurance Council chief executive Chris Ryan said there was an appetite among insurers to re-enter the workplace accident compensation market.
The Merrill Lynch report suggests privatisation could unlock $2.1 billion in new premium income. Mr Key once worked for Merrill Lynch. Prime candidates for privatisation were the workers' compensation and motor accident accounts.

There is trouble at ' mill, so, we know how this goes." First, they talk down a publicly-owned asset. Then they make it suck. Then they offer privatisation as a way of "fixing" the problem they have created. The end result in this case will be reduced entitlements, higher costs to both individuals and society due to the need to make a profit, and the diversion of a public income stream into the private pockets of National's insurance-industry donors."

and from I S
The government today released the results (http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0903/S00024.htm) of its inquiry into whether the shortfall in ACC funding should have been disclosed in the Pre-Election Fiscal Update. The report (http://beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/ACCFinalReport.pdf) [PDF] concludes that it should have, as while it was not under active consideration by Ministers, the costs arose from statutory obligations and so were reasonably certain. But while Bill English's press release accuses former Finance Minister Michael Cullen and former ACC Minister Maryann Street of "hiding" the shortfall, the report itself does nothing of the sort. Instead, it concludes that the non-disclosure was primarily attributable to:

Treasury’s interpretation of the PFA requirements related to the inclusion of Fiscal Risks in the economic and fiscal forecasts contained in the PREFU that put onus on the fact that Cabinet was yet to make decisions on adjustments to appropriations necessary to fund the Non-earners’ Account rather than the policy decisions already made by Government and embodied in statute, regulation, and requirements communicated to the ACC regarding its management and funding of the Non-earners’ Account and the Treatment Injury Account that resulted in the funding shortfall.

[SPman]

Disgusting, isn't it? Who would have thought that a politician would actually attempt something that might be for the good of all. And being because of outside causes, he can't even be suspected of doing this as part of a secret agenda.
:no:

"Finance companies engage in risky lending, e.g. to property developers, or (at the riskier end of the scale) providing consumer credit to people buying cars. Borrowers pay a premium for that risk, and this is passed on to investors in the form of high returns on their investment. But now when things go sour, the taxpayer picks up the tab. Not just for their initial investment (which would be bad enough) - but also for their interest! It is one thing to help people through a recession; that's what the state is for. But this is the outright privatisation of profit and socialisation of losses. And I really don't see why we should be paying for that." I.S.

[MSTRS]

Fair enough. BUT what any 'bail out' or underwriting proposal seeks to do is to protect the investors. If that protects the company/bank/lending institution...can't be helped. But be sure that it won't be free money for them. Same thing for employers. The downstream effects of a failure are just too big to ignore.

[SPman]

Fair enough. BUT what any 'bail out' or underwriting proposal seeks to do is to protect the investors..Fair enough - but most investors went in with dreams of easy money and no risk - contrary to all good sense - and then scream when they're burnt!
Didn't anybody learn anything from the 80's......

[MSTRS]

Fair enough - but most investors went in with dreams of easy money and no risk - contrary to all good sense - and then scream when they're burnt!
Didn't anybody learn anything from the 80's......

Some are like that for sure. Fuck'em eh? But what about your parents...sold the family home for 500,000 - bought a smaller unit for 250,000 - put the rest into Mascot (say) to give them security over and above their state pension (or a bit of play money to tour the world when their investment matures)...or to leave their family something meaningful in their will/s.

[Patrick]

Cullen - So he either hid it - or he is incompetent.

Take your pick - Im going with both.

I think its because he is a Labour Supporter myself....

[SPman]

That is the trouble of course - a lot of investors get pulled in with assurances of secure assets and fool proof, iron clad guarantees, when there is, of course, no such thing! Too many people still don't understand, that most of these "investment" companies are nothing other than a flash way of gambling - when they're on a roll, it's all hunky dory, but, when the dice turn sour, they can (and do) lose everything, and the sad part is, it's usually the little people, who can ill afford to lose anything, that get stung the worst.....

[Ixion]

..
Keep the red flag flying.


I does me 'umble best
Just in case anyone has forgotten the words

The people's flag is deepest red,
It shrouded oft our martyred dead,
And ere their limbs grew stiff and cold,
Their hearts blood dyed its every fold.

Then raise the scarlet standard high. (chorus)
Within its shade we'll live and die,
Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer,
We'll keep the red flag flying here.

Look round, the Frenchman loves its blaze,
The sturdy German chants its praise,
In Moscow's vaults its hymns are sung
Chicago swells the surging throng.

It waved above our infant might,
When all ahead seemed dark as night;
It witnessed many a deed and vow,
We must not change its colour now.

It well recalls the triumphs past,
It gives the hope of peace at last;
The banner bright, the symbol plain,
Of human right and human gain.

It suits today the weak and base,
Whose minds are fixed on pelf and place
To cringe before the rich man's frown,
And haul the sacred emblem down.

With heads uncovered swear we all
To bear it onward till we fall;
Come dungeons dark or gallows grim,
This song shall be our parting hymn.

We have great hopes of our latest comrade (http://community.myfoxtallahassee.com/blogs/Kestrel/2008/8)

[Brett]

Dissapointing of course, can I say I am shocked or surprised? No.

[The Stranger]

For years the commercial banks have been screwing kiwis with high interest rates.

How many years?

[SARGE]

but but but....


WE'RE GETTING NEW ELEPHANTS!!!!!!!!!!



seriously.. im SO glad i dont vote here

who the hell's running this joint????????


http://rightwingchicky.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/boss_hogg.jpg?w=294&h=389

[Ixion]

But , given your tie-in with the POTUS, who , it now appears, is actually a fellow traveller (amazing where the comrades have these sleepers), I reckon that makes you one of us too.

I'll organise for you to contacted and taught the secret signs. Someone of your experience will be *very* useful.

[Tank]

seriously.. im SO glad i dont vote here

who the hell's running this joint????????



People in glass houses Sarge

http://www.derelictafternoon.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/george-bush-funny1.jpg

[reofix]

I see the guy who took a private prosecution against Mallard for smacking Henare in parliament just got audited by the IRD and slammed with a whole bunch of penalties and stuff including home detention ... lesson ==== DO NOT FUCK WITH LABOUR PEOPLE... WE WILL SEND IN THE SECRET POLICE!!!( Comrade Stalin taught us well )

[cs363]

Don't like the rego increase talks even if they are in denial at present.... :argue:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/1997590/Minister-warns-ACC-cuts-loom

[Skyryder]

How many years?


http://www.rbnz.govt.nz/nzbanks/0091622.html

Skyryder

[pete376403]

I see the guy who took a private prosecution against Mallard for smacking Henare in parliament just got audited by the IRD and slammed with a whole bunch of penalties and stuff including home detention ... lesson ==== DO NOT FUCK WITH LABOUR PEOPLE... WE WILL SEND IN THE SECRET POLICE!!!( Comrade Stalin taught us well )

Oh FFS - the IRD are a law until themselves. They don't need to be set on to anyone BY anyone - if they think there's anything in it for them, they'll be on to it.
That guy was under investigation by IRD before he took action against Mallard. He was an accountant how tried to diddle IRD. They don't like that.

And good on Mallard for having the balls to take a poke at that annoying prick Henare anyway (but thats a whole other story)

[Winston001]

Haven't read the whole thread. I'm no Labour supporter. I think the Labour Government should have announced this ginormous short-fall.

But.....I reluctantly accept the ACC officials were not certain of the numbers and said they shouldn't be released......thus giving Labour an out. The honourable thing would have been to tell us anyway but sadly honour went out the door with the Electoral Finance Act etc.

As for National, maybe they do want to sell ACC. I'd be totally against that and happy to tell Bill English etc letters to the editor etc. We don't have to agree with everything proposed.

[The Pastor]

fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude!

acclevies are to double! shit shit shit


i can barely afford the current price!

[Mully]

Could this have something to do with it.....Merril Lynch reporting in July of last year.........

There is trouble at ' mill, so, we know how this goes." First, they talk down a publicly-owned asset. Then they make it suck. Then they offer privatisation as a way of "fixing" the problem they have created. The end result in this case will be reduced entitlements, higher costs to both individuals and society due to the need to make a profit, and the diversion of a public income stream into the private pockets of National's insurance-industry donors."


Thanks for the read - very interesting.

My understanding was that, when it happened last time, businesses were stoked with it (certainly, my boss was). I was a bit young at the time, so can anyone enlighten me to the pros and cons of last time you had the option on private ACC cover, please?

[MSTRS]

Thanks for the read - very interesting.

My understanding was that, when it happened last time, businesses were stoked with it (certainly, my boss was). I was a bit young at the time, so can anyone enlighten me to the pros and cons of last time you had the option on private ACC cover, please?

It was cheaper (at least it was for me), the cover was better, I had the choice of opting for which deal I thought was better (and could change it whenever I wanted). Just like insuring your bike etc....
Liarbour realised very quickly that their cash cow failed to measure up, so they changed it back tout suite.

[Winston001]

My understanding was that, when it happened last time, businesses were stoked with it (certainly, my boss was). I was a bit young at the time, so can anyone enlighten me to the pros and cons of last time you had the option on private ACC cover, please?

Privatisation of ACC. Hmmm. For all it's faults, I think it works as a public organisation. My recollection from last time is the cost of the private insurer was similar but everything was more complicated.

However way way over and above that, my enduring memory is the insurer we chose - an Aussie company, went into liquidation in 2001. Thank goodness Labour had reinstated ACC by then. :buggerd:

[MisterD]

Well Key must be listening to me and watching KB

So come on guys lets hear a call from you lot about this $70 mill cock up that the Nats signed with our money as a gurantee.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10559878



Erm, I think you'll find that was a triumph of the previous administration that the current one is having to suck up. I clearly remember the smugness with which Doc Sullen announced it after (again!) refusing the advice of treasury officals that the opposition really ought to have been consulted...

[davereid]

As for National, maybe they do want to sell ACC.

ACC should be dumped completely.

ACC is usually quoted as the reason I can't do stuff.

WHAAAA WHINNNNNE, if you do that you may hurt yourself, and I may have to pay for it, so I'm sending a policeman around to knock you off your push bike cos you didnt have a helmet...

Please, let me make my own decisions, leave my money in my wallet, if I F.Up, guess what, you don't have to care.

If we DO need ACC, it should have an excess.. like you pay the first $500 per claim yourself.

And that becomes $1500 when you lose your no-claims.

Everybody seriously injured would still get the rescue helicopter, but the "hit the thumb with hammers" would be "gee, I bet that hurt, do you have private insurance or will you pay cash ?"