It will not be possible to catch Australia in the wealth stakes without slashing Government spending by $9 billion, productivity taskforce head Don Brash said today.
The 2025 taskforce report, headed by the former National Party leader and Reserve Bank governor, said the Government's goal of closing the 35 percent income gap with Australia by 2025 was an ambitious one that would require New Zealand growth to outstrip that of Australia by 1.8 percent a year.
Even before its release Prime Minister John Key said the radical changes were unlikely to be implemented quickly, if at all.
The only way to implement the vast majority of the recommendations would be to break election promises and Mr Key said he was not going to do that.
Dr Brash revealed 35 recommendations today but the centrepiece was to reduce government spending to 2005 levels of 29 percent of gross domestic product by 2012-13.
This could be done by:
* Reducing benefit numbers through "ambitious" welfare reform;
* Ending Kiwisaver subsidies;
* Scrapping the New Zealand Superannuation Fund and using the money to pay off debt;
* Raising the age of superannuation eligibility; and
* Cutting universal subsidies for health and education.
Of these savings, $7 billion would be used to reduce all income and business taxes to a top rate of 20 percent.
Dr Brash said unless tax and spending were slashed the Government's "ambitious" goal could not be achieved.
"There may be some other cunning plan, but I am not aware of it," Dr Brash said.
He said the proposed cuts were "not a massacre", but a winding back of spending that had not been effective since 2005.
The taskforce's other policy prescriptions included:
* Reducing the minimum wage and reintroducing a lower minimum youth wage;
* Changing employment laws to make it easier to sack workers;
* Extending probationary employment periods to a year for all workers;
* Privatising all state owned businesses which could feasibly be sold;
* Congestion charges; and
* Encouraging more mining.
Dr Brash said it was up to the Government how it reacted to the taskforce's recommendations, but he noted Mr Key had "enormous political capital" and without changes New Zealanders would remain poorer than Australians.
Mr Key said during the 1980s and 1990s New Zealand underwent radical economic reform while Australia took a more incremental approach. The trans-Tasman neighbour was now in much better shape.
"In that regard I am not convinced that absolutely radical big bang reform is the right way to go," Mr Key said.
"It would certainly have a dramatic effect on New Zealanders and in the short term it would feel very much like we were pulling the rug out from underneath them."
Mr Key said the Government would also keep its promises.
The taskforce was set up as part of a support agreement with the ACT Party which has a key policy plank of a flat tax.
Finance Minister Bill English said the report would create a lot of debate about New Zealand's economic performance.
"The Government intends to pick its way through the report to see what recommendations it could implement," he said.
"Some of the recommendations the Government would not support... the report is too radical for the Government to pick it up and push it through."
Where the Government did not accept recommendations it would look to other policy to achieve economic growth.
Labour leader Phil Goff questioned the motivation behind the taskforce.
"It makes you wonder why you would set up a committee led by Don Brash who has come up with an entirely predictable and discredited agenda," Mr Goff said.
"Why would you do that other than maybe to frighten the hell out of people, put up a straw man and then say `look we're only going to go part way toward that agenda' and everybody breaths a sigh of relief because the slashing that occurs isn't quite as extreme as the Brash proposal."
Comments
Looks like Roger Douglas
Looks like Roger Douglas isn't the hero he is made out to be, but cost us 30% of our incomes
Absurdity
Makes complete sense to lower wages to raise them.
Roger Douglas
Sir
It seems that your radical approach was not the answer. Our lack of wealth is testament to this. Only your continued arrogance supports this viewpoint. For one, you got your timing wrong, & your short tenure at Brierleys suggests you cant cut it in the private either.
Reform is good, but a more measured approach is far safer from both a social and investment prospective.
Go do something useful, like mow the lawns.
love the headline
Intentional, or slip, or Freudian slip?
Regardless, Goff has named the game properly. Let's respond in a way that shows Key this test balloon was made out of lead, and he shouldn't consider going in that direction, much less half way there.
Flat taxes are not acceptable in the kiwi society - how could one expect that idea to fly in the no-tall-poppies culture? Bring up the botttom is the best way to go to improve our average, we don't really want high flyers running way out ahead to bring up the average, that will just increase inequality in our society and create more rather than less tension
Catching Oz or the world?
What Brashes group propose is not radical, but inevitable. It is only a roling back of the largesse of the previous Labour Government. What Labour did in feeding a welfare addicted society with its excessive welfare policy spend is as imoral and reprehensible as having free supplies of crac cocaine on the street for drug addicts. Let us hope that the present government can come up with policies that are effective in rehabilitating our welfare addicted society.
tax reform
REDUCE govt spending,not increase it!...but im sure this govt is hellbent on growing as fast as possible [like america eg: -grow/bankrupt govt,so the central banks can eventually take over entirely]
didnt bill english say,at an overseas summit recently,that nz "wanted" to borrow 30 billion -and thats AFTER the USA fed said they would lend australia & nz 5 billion [from recollection]!!!
this is all about GROWING GOVT & govt control over us,and then finding an excuse to TAX,TAX & TAX some more!...and regulate ad nauseum,etc...the sheeples,of course,not the large corperations or BANKS [WHICH,OF COURSE,ONLY DESERVE PREFERRENTIAL TAX CONCESSIONS & UNFETTERED FREEDOMS TO DO AS THEY PLEASE/DEMAND]
oh,and of course,the money laundering bill was deemed too stringent by the banks![oh really! why?!!!]
AND THEN THERES THE GOVT REFUSAL TO INVESTIGATE/REMEDY WHY NZ'S ARE PAYING ON AVERAGE 2% MORE FOR FLOATING INTEREST RATES THAN THEY SHOULD BE
yes,yes...we can see who has "secured" political support:the banks! ...its most convenient having 'friends' in high places...
and finally,its remarkably timely that POLITICIANS NOW AIM TO HEAVILY PENALIZE PROPERTY WITH ONEROUS TAXES,as it inconveniently competes with peddled banking investment products
cc
here's the financial impact
here's the financial impact OF NOT adopting 2025
this is includes the economic impact of the Emissions con and the proposed GST hike
Av Household income = $ 619.03 (- $ 112 per week)
Av Household Costs = $ 953.33 per week (+ $ 50.03 per week)
Av Debt of Income = $ 159.9
Av Household Weekly Prosperity = - $ 381.00 (- $220) (note 56% of NZ credit card debt is charged at 13.4% % or higher).
Societal Deterioration across 29 societal levels (crime, community, education etc)
Loss of 4% to 7% SME businesses
Broadening tax base = too late and or an added crippler
0.8% - possibly 1.2% rise unemployment
1.2% rise welfare
0.4% rise in theft based crime
1.2% required crime management facilities – approx $ 0.2bn to $ 0.6bn per year (dependent on crime management conditions)
3% deterioration in motivational productivity
GDP –1.0 % (+/- 0.25%)
Government income = - 9.4% (loss of SME provisional tax payers due to either market abandonment and or total failure).
Government expenditure = increase n billion (welfare increase)
Borrowing = determined by persuasion however 1) likely to impose higher taxation or 2) increased international debt 3) or both
"Finance Minister Bill
"Finance Minister Bill English said the report would create a lot of debate about New Zealand's economic performance"
Message to Bill: New Zealand has NO economic performance. We are donkey deep in the brown stuff.
Debt + Taxation = NO ECONOMIC RECOVERY
The only question is: Where is the change you promised?
By hocking NZ up to the eyeballs, by taxing and crippling a debt riddled society - with ZERO positives on the other side - and by denying the 2025 sense - are you doing this purposefully?
"annoymous"
comment to gutless "annonymous"
what a load of rubbish
govt budget-you either live WITHIN your means,or live beyond & devise new taxes
our govt shows no interest in reducing expenditure meaningfully,but is more interested in GROWING GOVT/GOVT DEBT,whilst showing preferrential tax treatment to large corperations at the expense of the average kiwi
taxes such as the proposed land tax/gst...are merely designed to SHIFT the burden of taxation from large corperations onto the average kiwi...the land tax is even more scandellous in that a potentially non-generating asset [eg bare land only,possibly mortgaged] could be taxed as if it were income generating,which it might not be at all!...and,of course,gst cant be claimed back as an expense by wage earners/pensioners
so what we see proposed is in fact a pretext/excuse to re-engineer the tax system to favour corperations vs the masses
Post new comment