An ACT MP is questioning the spending of taxpayer money on a football match.   

The Government's supporting a clash between English Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur and Auckland FC at Eden Park as part of its $70 million Major Events package. 

ACT MP Todd Stephenson is asking why the match is being subsidised by taxpayers, when neither club is a charity and both are backed by billionaires.  

He told Andrew Dickens he’s had a lot of feedback from people in the tourism and hospitality sectors, as well as local councils, asking for a better process around the fund, as they believe there could be better uses of taxpayer money.  

As Stephenson understands it, the current system has MBIE seeking out what they think will be a hot gig and then reaching out to the organisation, instead of asking people to come forward.  

LISTEN ABOVE 

An ACT MP is questioning the spending of taxpayer money on a football match. &nbsp;&nbsp;
The Government's supporting a clash between English Premier League club Tottenham Hotspur and Auckland FC at Eden Park as part of its $70 million Major Events package.&nbsp;
ACT MP Todd Stephenson is asking why the match is being subsidised by taxpayers, when neither club is a charity and both are backed by billionaires. &nbsp;
He told Andrew Dickens he’s had a lot of feedback from people in the tourism and hospitality sectors, as well as local councils, asking for a better process around the fund, as they believe there could be better uses of taxpayer money. &nbsp;
As Stephenson understands it, the current system has MBIE seeking out what they think will be a hot gig and then reaching out to the organisation, instead of asking people to come forward. &nbsp;
LISTEN ABOVE&nbsp;

Join Kerre Woodham one of New Zealand’s best loved personalities as she dishes up a bold, sharp and energetic show Monday to Friday 9am-12md on Newstalk ZB. News, opinion, analysis, lifestyle and entertainment – we’ve got your morning listening covered.

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Todd Stephenson: ACT MP questions the use of the Major Events Fund on a clash between Tottenham Hotspur and Auckland FC

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/dc9d7d59-7785-4280-8830-b41f000715b2/transcript

Here we are in the middle of autumn, or is it the start of another winter of discontent? Because April the 1st is the time of scheduled price increases. All sorts of things are going up. The minimum wage goes up today, putting more pressure on small businesses. Thank you very much, at a time of pressure anyway, you're going to have to spend more on your wage bill. Meanwhile, the ACC earners' levy is going up to $1.75 for every $100 you earn from today. That is up from $1.57, up 11%. So you'll be paying 11% more of your wage into ACC than you were before. That is up to a limit of $156,000 or something like that. It's going to hit us all.  

But the one you're probably going to feel the most and the one that's getting the headlines today is your electricity bill. Electricity bills are rising nationwide. Line charges are increasing again from today. Average households will see a bill increasing by about $5 more every month. There's no single price increase. What households will actually see on their power bill will vary a lot depending on where you live, what plan you're on, and what retailer you're with. Some householders will see a small increase, some will see a large increase. Some are going to be hit by an extra $20 a month. Times that by 12 and see if you can afford that right now. 

Just a quick reminder, there are about 28 different lines companies in New Zealand. They all have their own lines charges, so this is why the prices change depending on where you are. Why you will pay in some cases $5 extra a month, that's the average, you might pay less than that, but you might pay up to $20 a month more for your line charges. There will be also a 5 to 10% increase in power bills this year anyway because of, you know, power. And that's on top of the 12% we saw last year. So all this you have to say is terrible timing. We're in an energy crisis when it comes to fossil fuels, that's already raging. So this just does not feel fair, does it? 

However, the Commerce Commission yesterday said the power price increase is justified. They need the money to improve the lines so that you can get the power into your house. So it's one of these scheduled increases that isn't dependent on the overall economy or how New Zealand Inc is doing, it's just things cost more. Terrible, terrible timing. The Commerce Commission yesterday said the power price increase is justified, but the Chair of the Commission said a little bit more. He said he hoped that something like electricity suppliers being split into generators and retailers would happen to create more competition. This is the quote from him: He said it's really important for us with our competition hat on to make sure that something a little bit like this happens, the splitting of the gentailers, so that the generators are not favouring their own retail arm when they're selling electricity, so that they can end out selling electricity at the lowest rate, the most competitive rate. 

Splitting the gentailers was announced as Winston's election policy this year. Now it's getting support from the Commerce Commission. So my question for you could be, should all political parties now accept that this is probably a good idea and crack on with it, and would you like to see that happen? 

Here we are in the middle of autumn, or is it the start of another winter of discontent? Because April the 1st is the time of scheduled price increases. All sorts of things are going up. The minimum wage goes up today, putting more pressure on small businesses. Thank you very much, at a time of pressure anyway, you're going to have to spend more on your wage bill. Meanwhile, the ACC earners' levy is going up to $1.75 for every $100 you earn from today. That is up from $1.57, up 11%. So you'll be paying 11% more of your wage into ACC than you were before. That is up to a limit of $156,000 or something like that. It's going to hit us all. &nbsp;
But the one you're probably going to feel the most and the one that's getting the headlines today is your electricity bill. Electricity bills are rising nationwide. Line charges are increasing again from today. Average households will see a bill increasing by about $5 more every month. There's no single price increase. What households will actually see on their power bill will vary a lot depending on where you live, what plan you're on, and what retailer you're with. Some householders will see a small increase, some will see a large increase. Some are going to be hit by an extra $20 a month. Times that by 12 and see if you can afford that right now.&nbsp;
Just a quick reminder, there are about 28 different lines companies in New Zealand. They all have their own lines charges, so this is why the prices change depending on where you are. Why you will pay in some cases $5 extra a month, that's the average, you might pay less than that, but you might pay up to $20 a month more for your line charges. There will be also a 5 to 10% increase in power bills this year anyway because of, you know, power. And that's on top of the 12% we saw last year. So all this you have to say is terrible timing. We're in an energy crisis when it comes to fossil fuels, that's already raging. So this just does not feel fair, does it?&nbsp;
However, the Commerce Commission yesterday said the power price increase is justified. They need the money to improve the lines so that you can get the power into your house. So it's one of these scheduled increases that isn't dependent on the overall economy or how New Zealand Inc is doing, it's just things cost more. Terrible, terrible timing. The Commerce Commission yesterday said the power price increase is justified, but the Chair of the Commission said a little bit more. He said he hoped that something like electricity suppliers being split into generators and retailers would happen to create more competition. This is the quote from him: He said it's really important for us with our competition hat on to make sure that something a little bit like this happens, the splitting of the gentailers, so that the generators are not favouring their own retail arm when they're selling electricity, so that they can end out selling electricity at the lowest rate, the most competitive rate.&nbsp;
Splitting the gentailers was announced as Winston's election policy this year. Now it's getting support from the Commerce Commission. So my question for you could be, should all political parties now accept that this is probably a good idea and crack on with it, and would you like to see that happen?&nbsp;

Andrew Dickens: Is it time to split electricity gentailers?

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/80717c56-3369-4a1d-81c0-b41e0185ff94/transcript

"It's the economy, stupid," is a catchphrase that means the primary concern of American voters is the state of the American economy and how that economy affects their personal finances. It was a phrase coined by a strategist in Bill Clinton's successful presidential campaign, and it's pretty much what Christopher Luxon campaigned on in 2023.  

The Labour Government were, and I paraphrase, incompetent economic vandals who had done incalculable damage to the New Zealand economy and only by electing a National Party into government could New Zealand's fortunes be restored. That was pretty much the narrative going into ‘23. Add to that a little bit of light law and order and education and you had the election campaign. Three years on we're heading into another election, and the economic headlines are grim. Example: ASB economists have joined Westpac in forecasting that the economy will contract in the second quarter of the year. Households are only just starting to feel some relief according to ASB's chief economist Nick Tuffley. Higher fuel prices are now squeezing budgets again. That pressure will be felt right across the economy.  

Here's another headline: Finance Minister Nicola Willis has revealed inflation is set to go much higher this year and sit outside the Reserve Bank's target band of 1 to 3%. Here's another: Prospects for a recovery in the labour market this year appear to have dimmed with any decline in the unemployment rate looking more like a story for next year. Infometrics said any signs the economy was starting to recover would most likely be put on hold. Here's another: Wattie's factory closures, boss blames soaring manufacturing costs. Contrast that with Christopher Luxon back in 2023 and his bullish promises that help was on the way, first when he was speaking to me in July. 

“It's going to be a big turnaround job because I think actually we've got a great country but a lot of it is going to be pretty decayed by the time we get there in terms of health, education, housing, the economy, law and order. But that's why I've got my team working on that right now because when we get there, we're not forming steering review, you know we had what was it, 230 working groups to do reviews of stuff. We're going to be ready to go on day one and we're going to have to move at 100ks an hour.  

“So we will have to be really, really clear about the things that we need to transform and actually step up and change a lot and it is going to be education, it is going to be healthcare, it is going to have to be the economy, making sure we're making every dollar count and get a payback for it.” 

And this was Christopher Luxon in November: 

“I don't want people to give up hope. You know, we can actually get to a better and a different place from where we sit today, but we do have to go to work now and we have to go sort out the challenges and we have to realise the opportunities we've got in front of us, and we have to be straight up about it and get it done and get the country turned around.” 

Hmm. Have they? No. They won't be able to campaign on that. Is some of it due to external forces like the fuel crisis? Absolutely. But there were no caveats in the promise that things would turn around and things would get better. Could Labour have done any better? Hell no. I mean they'd already shown they can't cope in a crisis other than throwing money around and locking people up. They simply have no answers. Thank God they're not the government right now otherwise we'd all be working from home and homeschooling the kids because of the fuel crisis or strong winds. But when you look at the polls and you wonder to yourself how on earth could anyone possibly see Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori as a viable government, what you're seeing are voters who were promised much and have yet to see the delivery. 

"It's the economy, stupid," is a catchphrase that means the primary concern of American voters is the state of the American economy and how that economy affects their personal finances. It was a phrase coined by a strategist in Bill Clinton's successful presidential campaign, and it's pretty much what Christopher Luxon campaigned on in 2023. &nbsp;
The Labour Government were, and I paraphrase, incompetent economic vandals who had done incalculable damage to the New Zealand economy and only by electing a National Party into government could New Zealand's fortunes be restored. That was pretty much the narrative going into ‘23. Add to that a little bit of light law and order and education and you had the election campaign. Three years on we're heading into another election, and the economic headlines are grim. Example: ASB economists have joined Westpac in forecasting that the economy will contract in the second quarter of the year. Households are only just starting to feel some relief according to ASB's chief economist Nick Tuffley. Higher fuel prices are now squeezing budgets again. That pressure will be felt right across the economy. &nbsp;
Here's another headline: Finance Minister Nicola Willis has revealed inflation is set to go much higher this year and sit outside the Reserve Bank's target band of 1 to 3%. Here's another: Prospects for a recovery in the labour market this year appear to have dimmed with any decline in the unemployment rate looking more like a story for next year. Infometrics said any signs the economy was starting to recover would most likely be put on hold. Here's another: Wattie's factory closures, boss blames soaring manufacturing costs. Contrast that with Christopher Luxon back in 2023 and his bullish promises that help was on the way, first when he was speaking to me in July.&nbsp;
“It's going to be a big turnaround job because I think actually we've got a great country but a lot of it is going to be pretty decayed by the time we get there in terms of health, education, housing, the economy, law and order. But that's why I've got my team working on that right now because when we get there, we're not forming steering review, you know we had what was it, 230 working groups to do reviews of stuff. We're going to be ready to go on day one and we're going to have to move at 100ks an hour. &nbsp;
“So we will have to be really, really clear about the things that we need to transform and actually step up and change a lot and it is going to be education, it is going to be healthcare, it is going to have to be the economy, making sure we're making every dollar count and get a payback for it.”&nbsp;
And this was Christopher Luxon in November:&nbsp;
“I don't want people to give up hope. You know, we can actually get to a better and a different place from where we sit today, but we do have to go to work now and we have to go sort out the challenges and we have to realise the opportunities we've got in front of us, and we have to be straight up about it and get it done and get the country turned around.”&nbsp;
Hmm. Have they? No. They won't be able to campaign on that. Is some of it due to external forces like the fuel crisis? Absolutely. But there were no caveats in the promise that things would turn around and things would get better. Could Labour have done any better? Hell no. I mean they'd already shown they can't cope in a crisis other than throwing money around and locking people up. They simply have no answers. Thank God they're not the government right now otherwise we'd all be working from home and homeschooling the kids because of the fuel crisis or strong winds. But when you look at the polls and you wonder to yourself how on earth could anyone possibly see Labour, the Greens, and Te Pāti Māori as a viable government, what you're seeing are voters who were promised much and have yet to see the delivery.&nbsp;

Kerre Woodham: It's the economy, stupid

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/27ff9ddc-a9cc-4ad6-b164-b41d01708f1a/transcript

New Zealand First is ramping up its campaigning with an election fast approaching. They announced that if they have any say in the matter, if they form any part of a government, half of all mining royalties will go to the region from whence it came rather than head straight into the treasury coffers in Wellington.

New Zealand First says it will build up wealth and infrastructure in the regions allowing for future development rather than having the money spent across wider national projects, so flood mitigation in Westport rather than four lane highways north of Auckland.

I really like that idea. The funds would be directed to things like water services, flood protection, energy generation, tourism and transport to enable housing development in areas of high minerals industry growth and critical infrastructure projects, according to the party statement. As I say, I like the idea. What's not to like?

The West Coast Regional Council has the smallest operating budget and fewest staff of any regional authority, yet it's facing huge costs for specialised protection works such as those in the Karamea and Punakaiki ratings district. With a population of just under 35,000 and only 20 to 25,000 of those being ratepayers, there's not a lot of money coming in to do essential work and yet they're generating a huge amount of income. Why should they not share in the proceeds?

We don't get a huge amount from mining royalties compared to what it generates, 250 million last year, but it's all relative. Imagine tens of million into the West Coast, it would make the world of difference to the people and the land. It is really only fair when you think about it that the region that supplies the raw materials and the workers gets a bit more of the proceeds as Jamie Cleine, former mayor of Buller and now a New Zealand First candidate, told Ryan Bridge this morning.

One of the issues the West Coast has, small population base, huge geographic area and and like most of New Zealand, massive infrastructure needs and ability to pay, affordability, all of those things are affecting our region. So it's high time that the minerals royalty scheme gets a bit of a shake up and to hear that there's appetite, New Zealand First are certainly campaigning on 50% of those royalties coming back to the regions where the minerals are coming from is music to my ears. Alongside that of course is, you know, we've got an industry that wants to ramp up and a lot of that requires civil infrastructure to be to be put in ahead of time to facilitate building and accommodating all of the, you know, the wave of workforce that are coming. And so an ability to do that and make sense to focus that on the areas where the growth's going to occur in the mineral sector.

So, yeah, makes sense, doesn't it? However, and there's always a however, generally with most good ideas there's a however. You're only going to get, this is what Ryan referenced on Early Edition this morning as well, we're only going to get royalties if we're mining, if we're digging the stuff out of the ground and selling it overseas.

Last year mining contributed 2.83 billion to New Zealand's GDP. So, you know, it's worth exploring, it's worth investigating. We think that. But we'll only get investment in mining if we get a bipartisan agreement from our main parties. It is absolutely pointless for any mining company to invest huge amounts of money in this country only to be told to get out and stay out by an incoming government. They're not going to invest. They're not going to take that risk until they know that they can be here for enough time to make a profit. It's got to work for them, it's got to work for us.

So this is all very well and good, New Zealand First saying, Yes, let's put half of the royalties back into the regions from whence they came." Couldn't agree more. It will do wonders for all of New Zealand. Quite agree. It's only fair and right. Absolutely. But we have to have the confidence, we have to have the guarantee before mining companies will invest here, otherwise 50% of nothing is nothing. Love to get your thoughts on this. I mean, it is hard to disagree with the concept, isn't it, that 50% of the royalties go back to the regions, to Hauraki, to the West Coast. But why would you invest here when there is uncertainty?

The thing investors love more than anything is certainty in an uncertain world. And if they think that a Labour Greens Te Pāti Māori coalition is going to send them packing, they're not going to commit millions and millions and millions of dollars. So what chance do you think we have of getting a bipartisan agreement? This country needs money. We need to sell what we've got so that we can invest in the schools and the hospitals and the public health system and and the like.

Yes, we can make cuts and we should be making cuts in some areas, means testing the super and the like, but they're unpopular to voters. We also need to grow the economy and what we've got are minerals and resources. But there's a strong and vocal lobby group that doesn't want to sell those off. They want to leave the ground pristine as and as it is, which is fine, but then you have to accept that we can't have all the luxuries that come with living in a first world.

LISTEN ABOVE

New Zealand First is ramping up its campaigning with an election fast approaching. They announced that if they have any say in the matter, if they form any part of a government, half of all mining royalties will go to the region from whence it came rather than head straight into the treasury coffers in Wellington.
New Zealand First says it will build up wealth and infrastructure in the regions allowing for future development rather than having the money spent across wider national projects, so flood mitigation in Westport rather than four lane highways north of Auckland.
I really like that idea. The funds would be directed to things like water services, flood protection, energy generation, tourism and transport to enable housing development in areas of high minerals industry growth and critical infrastructure projects, according to the party statement. As I say, I like the idea. What's not to like?
The West Coast Regional Council has the smallest operating budget and fewest staff of any regional authority, yet it's facing huge costs for specialised protection works such as those in the Karamea and Punakaiki ratings district. With a population of just under 35,000 and only 20 to 25,000 of those being ratepayers, there's not a lot of money coming in to do essential work and yet they're generating a huge amount of income. Why should they not share in the proceeds?
We don't get a huge amount from mining royalties compared to what it generates, 250 million last year, but it's all relative. Imagine tens of million into the West Coast, it would make the world of difference to the people and the land. It is really only fair when you think about it that the region that supplies the raw materials and the workers gets a bit more of the proceeds as Jamie Cleine, former mayor of Buller and now a New Zealand First candidate, told Ryan Bridge this morning.
One of the issues the West Coast has, small population base, huge geographic area and and like most of New Zealand, massive infrastructure needs and ability to pay, affordability, all of those things are affecting our region. So it's high time that the minerals royalty scheme gets a bit of a shake up and to hear that there's appetite, New Zealand First are certainly campaigning on 50% of those royalties coming back to the regions where the minerals are coming from is music to my ears. Alongside that of course is, you know, we've got an industry that wants to ramp up and a lot of that requires civil infrastructure to be to be put in ahead of time to facilitate building and accommodating all of the, you know, the wave of workforce that are coming. And so an ability to do that and make sense to focus that on the areas where the growth's going to occur in the mineral sector.
So, yeah, makes sense, doesn't it? However, and there's always a however, generally with most good ideas there's a however. You're only going to get, this is what Ryan referenced on Early Edition this morning as well, we're only going to get royalties if we're mining, if we're digging the stuff out of the ground and selling it overseas.
Last year mining contributed 2.83 billion to New Zealand's GDP. So, you know, it's worth exploring, it's worth investigating. We think that. But we'll only get investment in mining if we get a bipartisan agreement from our main parties. It is absolutely pointless for any mining company to invest huge amounts of money in this country only to be told to get out and stay out by an incoming government. They're not going to invest. They're not going to take that risk until they know that they can be here for enough time to make a profit. It's got to work for them, it's got to work for us.
So this is all very well and good, New Zealand First saying, Yes, let's put half of the royalties back into the regions from whence they came." Couldn't agree more. It will do wonders for all of New Zealand. Quite agree. It's only fair and right. Absolutely. But we have to have the confidence, we have to have the guarantee before mining companies will invest here, otherwise 50% of nothing is nothing. Love to get your thoughts on this. I mean, it is hard to disagree with the concept, isn't it, that 50% of the royalties go back to the regions, to Hauraki, to the West Coast. But why would you invest here when there is uncertainty?
The thing investors love more than anything is certainty in an uncertain world. And if they think that a Labour Greens Te Pāti Māori coalition is going to send them packing, they're not going to commit millions and millions and millions of dollars. So what chance do you think we have of getting a bipartisan agreement? This country needs money. We need to sell what we've got so that we can invest in the schools and the hospitals and the public health system and and the like.
Yes, we can make cuts and we should be making cuts in some areas, means testing the super and the like, but they're unpopular to voters. We also need to grow the economy and what we've got are minerals and resources. But there's a strong and vocal lobby group that doesn't want to sell those off. They want to leave the ground pristine as and as it is, which is fine, but then you have to accept that we can't have all the luxuries that come with living in a first world.
LISTEN ABOVE

Kerre Woodham: NZ First are off to a strong start with their campaign

https://api.omny.fm/orgs/7784f840-c291-422a-924b-ad9000bbad71/clips/909cff13-2b4b-41b7-8c42-b41c017ac985/transcript

Todd Stephenson: ACT MP questions the use of the Major Events Fund on a clash between Tottenham Hotspur and Auckland FC

In 1 playlist(s)

Kerre Woodham Mornings Podcast

Social links

Follow podcast

Recent clips