Mark Keown

NZers are freaking out about asset sales. I can understand why. While we have financial challenges, do we want to sell our assets to get out of trouble? Yet, at the same time, one of the counter-arguments is that the floating of a portion of the assets is at least to an extent a good thing for NZ, giving NZers something to invest in. This would move investments away from our incessant obsession with investment in property, or off shore. Iwi and others may find this helpful. I find this a good argument to a point. That said, do we need to sell off 49% of an asset at all? My question then is this, why sell so much of any state owned asset? Why not place a limit on the amount of an asset that we float, say 25% or 33%, and why not limit the amount one investor can own at even lower than 10%, say 5%? We could float far more assets then, retain control, put the money to use to pay down debt to safeguard us against the effects of global recession etc. Then, if the situation permits, we ca...

So the dust is settling on another election. The people have spoken, the right rules for another three years. A few things stand out to me. First, there is the obvious surprise at the success of NZ First, no doubt in no small part due to the Epsom Tea Party which gave him a platform. Winston appeals to the floating voter who wants neither party, cares for the elderly, and is attracted to his style—which is very winsome (Winsome Winston). As a Christian, I have some sympathy, especially for Winston’s concern for the elderly. One sign of the health of a nation is how we look after the elderly. Perhaps the move from 65 to 67 for retirement cost Labour a few votes here. After all, there are other options, like a graded system where you can take retirement earlier, but receive less, or take it later, and receive more. Raising the retirement age works for people like me who sit in an office all day, but it is a tough call for those do manual work. I wonder if this policy is a popular ...