DOCSLIB.ORG

The Budget Policy Statement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Budget Policy Statement The Budget Policy Statement December 2019 Summary From a parliamentary perspective, the Budget Policy Statement (the Statement) commences the Budget cycle. The requirement for a Statement was first legislated in the Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994, and is now included within the Public Finance Act 1989. The Government must pursue its policy objectives in accordance with eight principles of responsible fiscal management set out in the Public Finance Act 1989. The Statement must provide details of the broad strategic priorities guiding the Government in the preparation of the Budget for the upcoming financial year (which commences 1 July). The Statement is required to provide details around how the upcoming Budget aligns with the short-term intentions published in the latest Fiscal Strategy Report (or any amended short-term intentions). The Statement is referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee, which then reports back to the House of Representatives within 40 working days. The next general debate after the presentation of the Committee’s report to the House of Representatives is replaced by a two hour debate on the Statement and the Finance and Expenditure Committee’s report on the Statement. The Budget Policy Statement commences the Budget cycle From a parliamentary perspective, the annual financial cycle commences with the publication of the Budget Policy Statement (the Statement). The Public Finance Act 1989 requires the Statement to be published and presented to the House of Representatives by 31 March (i.e. three months prior to the commencement of a new financial year on 1 July).1 For the upcoming financial year, the Statement must “…state the broad strategic priorities by which the Government will be guided in preparing the Budget…” The Statement must include: the overarching policy goals that will guide the Government’s Budget decisions; the policy areas that the Government will focus on in the upcoming financial year; and how the Budget for the upcoming financial year accords with the short-term intentions referred to in the most recent Fiscal Strategy Report (or any amended short-term intentions).2 1 Public Finance Act 1989, s 26M. 2 The Fiscal Strategy Report is normally published as part of the Budget documentation on Budget Day. Therefore the Fiscal Strategy Report referred to, is that published as part of the previous Budget. Parliamentary Library Research and Information research paper 2019/06 1 The 2020 Statement included the following five priorities: 2020 Budget Policy Statement priorities Just Transition – Supporting New Zealanders in the transition to a climate-resilient, sustainable and low-emissions economy. Future of Work – Enabling all New Zealanders to benefit from new technologies and lift productivity through innovation. Māori and Pacific – Lifting Māori and Pacific incomes, skills and opportunities. Child Wellbeing - Reducing child poverty and improving child wellbeing. Physical and Mental Wellbeing – Supporting improved health outcomes for all New Zealanders. Source: Hon Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, Budget Policy Statement. Budget 2020 (11 December 2019). Usual practice is for the Statement to be published at the same time as the Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update (HYEFU).3 However, this is not always the case (see Appendix 1). Specifically in election years, if the Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update is published between 1 October and 31 December, a HYEFU is not required to be published.4 This occurred in 1999 and 2011. In December 2008, due to the impact of the Global Financial Crisis on the New Zealand economy, the Government requested that the Treasury publish updated Economic and Fiscal Forecasts, despite a Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Update being published on 6 October 2008. The Statement was published on the same day as these Forecasts. Appendix 2 provides details of the Budget Policy Statement cycle. The role of the Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994 The Statement was a creation of the Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994. This legislation was enacted to “improve the conduct of fiscal policy by specifying principles of responsible fiscal management and by strengthening the reporting requirements of the Crown”.5 These reporting requirements included the publication of a Budget Policy Statement. Content of the Statement had to include the Government’s long-term objectives for fiscal policy, its broad strategic priorities for the upcoming Budget, and its fiscal intentions for the upcoming financial year and following two years.6 The first Statement was published on 23 February 1995 by the Minister of Finance, Rt Hon Bill Birch. In the Statement’s Introduction, the Minister said that “These strategic documents are 3 The Half Year Economic and Fiscal Update publication was previously known as the December Economic and Fiscal Update. Its name was changed in 2005 due to an amended Public Finance Act 1989 enabling the Update to be published in either November or December. 4 Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994, s 13(3) and Public Finance Act 1989, s 26S(4). 5 Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994, Long title. 6 Ibid. Parliamentary Library Research and Information research paper 2019/06 2 designed to provide confidence and certainty about the Government’s direction and to create an opportunity for debate about the choices that face the community”.7 The Statement was referred to the Finance and Expenditure Committee, which then undertook public hearings and had the Minister of Finance appear in front of it.8 The Committee’s report was presented to the House of Representatives on 30 March 1995, and the first ever debate on a Budget Policy Statement took place on 5 April 1995.9 In 2004, the Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994 was repealed, with sections incorporated into the Public Finance Act 1989.10 According to the explanatory note of the amending bill, the intention was to consolidate the principal legislation regarding public finances, while retaining the principles of the Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994.11 Some changes were introduced at this point, including: a refocusing of the Statement towards the Government’s budget strategy for the upcoming Budget, and reducing the emphasis on the long-term fiscal policy objectives; and allowing the Statement to be published earlier than 1 December. Principles of responsible fiscal management The Public Finance Act 1989 specifies that the Government must pursue its policy objectives in accordance with principles of responsible fiscal management. The Government can only depart from these principles temporarily. When it does so, the Minister is required to state the reason for the departure, the approach the Government intends to take to return to the principles, and the period of time it is expected to take.12 The Public Finance (Fiscal Responsibility) Amendment Act 2013 increased the number of principles from five to eight (while also amending the fifth principle).13 The Treasury’s An Introduction to New Zealand’s Fiscal Policy Framework noted that these additional principles broadened the definition of good fiscal policy (which was based around sustainability) to also include economic stability and fiscal structure.14 The eight principles of responsible fiscal management are:15 7 Rt Hon Bill Birch, Minister of Finance Budget Policy Statement 1995 (23 February 1995) at 5. 8 (5 April 1995) 547 NZPD 6707. 9 (30 March 1995) 547 NZPD 6573. (5 April 1995) 547 NZPD 6706. 10 The Treasury A Guide to the Public Finance Act (August 2005) at 42. 11 Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill, Explanatory note. 12 Public Finance Act 1989, s 26G. 13 The fifth principle was previously defined as “Pursuing policies that are consistent with a reasonable degree of predictability about the level and stability of tax rates for future years”. 14 The Treasury An Introduction to New Zealand’s Fiscal Policy Framework (March 2015) at 8. 15 Public Finance Act 1989, s 26G. Parliamentary Library Research and Information research paper 2019/06 3 1. Reducing total debt to prudent levels so as to provide a buffer against factors that may impact adversely on the level of total debt in the future by ensuring that, until those levels have been achieved, total operating expenses in each financial year are less than total operating revenues in the same financial year. 2. Once prudent levels of total debt have been achieved, maintaining those levels by ensuring that, on average, over a reasonable period of time, total operating expenses do not exceed total operating revenues. 3. Achieving and maintaining levels of total net worth that provide a buffer against factors that may impact adversely on total net worth in the future. 4. Managing prudently the fiscal risks facing the Government. 5. When formulating revenue strategy, having regard to efficiency and fairness, including the predictability and stability of tax rates. 6. When formulating fiscal strategy, having regard to the interaction between fiscal policy and monetary policy. 7. When formulating fiscal strategy, having regard to its likely impact on present and future generations. 8. Ensuring that the Crown’s resources are managed effectively and efficiently. “Prudent” debt levels are not defined in the Act, allowing for each Government to decide what level of debt it considers to be prudent. Similarly, a “reasonable period of time” is also undefined in the legislation. The Treasury’s An Introduction to New Zealand’s Fiscal Policy Framework noted that “By setting their own targets, governments are more likely to commit to meeting them”.16 Budget Policy Statement requirements For the upcoming financial year, the Statement is required to provide the details of the broad strategic priorities guiding the Government in the preparation of the Budget. According to the Public Finance Act 1989, these have to include:17 The overarching policy goals that will guide the Government’s Budget decisions; The policy areas that the Government will focus on in the upcoming financial year; and How the Budget for that year accords with the short-term intentions referred to in the most recent Fiscal Strategy Report (normally published as part of the Budget documentation on Budget day), or any amended short-term intentions.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Symposium on Retirement Income Policy
    Symposium on Retirement Income Policy Looking back and looking forward Wednesday, 16 April 2008 TASK FORCES IN THE 1990s AND THE POLITICAL ACCORD Task Force on Private Provision for Retirement Politics, not economics or demographics, was the key driver of the retirement policy debate of the nineties. The appointment of the Task Force on Private Provision for Retirement on 10 October 1991 by Prime Minister Jim Bolger was, for me, the first step on a fascinating journey of research, education, consultation and consensus which extended through the decade. During the 1990s New Zealand re-constructed and developed its simple two part system for providing income in retirement based on public provision of a basic pension (New Zealand Superannuation) and voluntary private savings. Retirement savings were tax-neutral compared with other forms of financial savings. The 1990s began with radical changes to national super announced in the 1991 budget that would have converted the pension into a welfare benefit. The government was forced to backtrack and was left wondering what to do. Announcing the formation of the 1991 Task Force, the New Zealand Herald’s Simon Collins, under the heading Task force to study compulsory super, reported that the eight-member task force “will consider requiring New Zealanders to contribute to compulsory private pension schemes. The eight-member task force will also consider tax incentives for retirement saving, regulation of superannuation schemes and compulsory retirement ages. The group would report to a joint cabinet-caucus committee chaired by the Prime Minister, Mr Bolger.” In fact, the Hon WF (Bill) Birch was our principal government contact.
    [Show full text]
  • Election Will Be Crush Vs Smile It Was Fashionable at One Point in the Last Generation and a Half for Some Men to Refer to Their Inner Feminism
    JT col for July 18 2020 - Crush v smile Election will be crush vs smile It was fashionable at one point in the last generation and a half for some men to refer to their inner feminism. I was one. But past performance not withstanding, I must still be viewed as a male chauv…or worse, an old male chauv. There, I’ve said it. The risk in what follows seems less: I’m delighted the leadership of the country will be contested by two women, Jacinda Ardern versus Judith Collins. How appropriate, given we were the first to “allow” women to vote. Not- withstanding further accidents, we’re headed into an election in which a woman is guaranteed to be Prime Minister. I must have had an inkling about this, because last week I went along to see Collins for myself. A self-declared good mate of Johnathan Young’s, she turned up in Taranaki to speak at his election launch, visit around, promote her recently published memoirs, et cetera. I was one of 110 people keen enough to brave a freezing night to observe this politician with a long game; good sense told us she was probably positioning for a post-election leadership run after Todd Muller was sacrificed on the altar of Ardern. Even if Collins can't out-Ardern her opponent come September, she'll hold on. Her strategy is one based on people's short memories for her missteps since she got into parliament 18 years ago. The National Party also seems temporarily to have lost its appetite for the youngish and the novel.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutional Nonsense? the ‘Unenforceable’ Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994, the Financial Management Reform, and New Zealand’S Developing Constitution
    CONSTITUTIONAL NONSENSE? THE ‘UNENFORCEABLE’ FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY ACT 994, THE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REFORM, AND NEW ZEALAND’S DEVELOPING CONSTITUTION CHYE-CHING HUANG* ‘Once again, in promoting this legislation New Zealand leads the world. This is pioneering legislation. It is distinctly New Zealand – style.’ (22 June 1994) 541 NZPD 2010 (Ruth Richardson) ‘[It] is constitutional nonsense. The notion that this Parliament will somehow bind future Governments on fiscal policy…is constitutional stupidity.’ (26 May 1994) 540 NZPD 1143 (Michael Cullen) The Fiscal Responsibility Act 1994 (the ‘FRA’) was part of New Zealand’s Financial Manage- ment Reform, a reform said to have introduced new values – efficiency, economy, effectiveness and choice – into the law.1 The FRA is peculiar because the courts may not be able to enforce it. Despite this, the authors of the FRA expected it to impact profoundly on the thinking and behav- iour of the executive, Parliament, and the electorate.2 The debate about how the FRA has affected the executive, Parliament, and the electorate con- tinues.3 Yet no one has analyzed thoroughly how the FRA has affected – or might affect – judicial reasoning.4 This article attempts that analysis, and concludes that the FRA may have profound legal and even constitutional effects, despite being ‘unenforceable’. The finding that the FRA may have legal and constitutional effects could be useful for two reasons. First, the FRA’s constitutional effects suggest that judicial reform of the constitution may tend to privilege the neo-liberal values that the Financial Management Reform wrote into law. Parliamentary sovereignty could be said to encourage a free and contestable market place of ideas, but this supposed strength may be paradoxically used to legally entrench values.
    [Show full text]
  • Well Being for Whanau and Family
    Monitoring the Impact of Social Policy, 1980–2001: Report on Significant Policy Events Occasional Paper Series Resource Report 1 Monitoring the Impact of Social Policy, 1980–2001: Report on Significant Policy Events Occasional Paper Series Resource Report 1 DECEMBER 2005 Stephen McTaggart1 Department of Sociology The University of Auckland 1 [email protected] Citation: McTaggart, S. 2005. Monitoring the Impact of Social Policy, 1980–2001: Report on Significant Policy Events. Wellington: SPEaR. Published in December 2005 by SPEaR PO Box 1556, Wellington, New Zealand ISBN 0-477-10012-0 (Book) ISBN 0-477-10013-9 (Internet) This document is available on the SPEaR website: Disclaimer The views expressed in this working paper are the personal views of the author and should not be taken to represent the views or policy of the Foundation of Research Science and Technology, the Ministry of Social Development, SPEaR, or the Government, past or present. Although all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure the accuracy of the information, no responsibility is accepted for the reliance by any person on any information contained in this working paper, nor for any error in or omission from the working paper. Acknowledgements The Family Whānau and Wellbeing Project was funded by the Foundation of Research, Science and Technology, New Zealand. Practical support from the Department of Statistics and the University of Auckland is also gratefully acknowledged. Thanks also to the members of the Family Whānau and Wellbeing Project team for their academic and technical support. The author would like to thank those who assisted with the report’s preparation.
    [Show full text]
  • New Zealand Hansard Precedent Manual
    IND 1 NEW ZEALAND HANSARD PRECEDENT MANUAL Precedent Manual: Index 16 July 2004 IND 2 ABOUT THIS MANUAL The Precedent Manual shows how procedural events in the House appear in the Hansard report. It does not include events in Committee of the whole House on bills; they are covered by the Committee Manual. This manual is concerned with structure and layout rather than text - see the Style File for information on that. NB: The ways in which the House chooses to deal with procedural matters are many and varied. The Precedent Manual might not contain an exact illustration of what you are looking for; you might have to scan several examples and take parts from each of them. The wording within examples may not always apply. The contents of each section and, if applicable, its subsections, are included in CONTENTS at the front of the manual. At the front of each section the CONTENTS lists the examples in that section. Most sections also include box(es) containing background information; these boxes are situated at the front of the section and/or at the front of subsections. The examples appear in a column format. The left-hand column is an illustration of how the event should appear in Hansard; the right-hand column contains a description of it, and further explanation if necessary. At the end is an index. Precedent Manual: Index 16 July 2004 IND 3 INDEX Absence of Minister see Minister not present Amendment/s to motion Abstention/s ..........................................................VOT3-4 Address in reply ....................................................OP12 Acting Minister answers question.........................
    [Show full text]
  • Writing of Book ' Fridays with Jim' Rt Hon Jim Bolger ONZ 10.50Am
    1 REMARKS U3A MEETING re Writing of book ‘ Fridays With Jim’ Rt Hon Jim Bolger ONZ 10.50am Parkwood Social Centre Monday 12.10.2020 Good morning all. Thanks for inviting me back to chat about and discuss my recent book ‘Fridays With Jim’. (launched 11th Aug ) The book had an unusual beginning in that Massey University’s head of publications, Nicola Legat having heard me launch a book on early days of mountaineering in New Zealand, decided to approach me with the idea that journalist and writer David Cohen and I should collaborate in the production of a new book that would explore in some detail my and my family’s background, to ‘fill in’ in their words, gaps in the public’s knowledge of who the 35th Prime Minister of New Zealand was. That was an interesting thought given the years I had been in public life but slotted in with my thinking about writing something about the history of my family so that future generations would have something to draw on if they wanted to check up on their ancestors. The book however is about much more than my Irish ancestry or my Catholic faith which journalists always seem very interested in. 2 I was fortunate that Tuhoe Leader Tamati Kruger and cartoonist Tom Scott generously agreed to help launch the book ‘Fridays with Jim’. I now work under the leadership of Tamati as a member of the Te Urewera Board which I refer to in the book and will come back to later. And I recall taking Tom Scott and the late Sir Edmund Hillary to the South Pole when I was Prime Minister on a visit to Antarctica.
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of a New Zealand Populism
    In Search of a New Zealand Populism Heresthetics, Character and Populist Political Leadership By Ben Thomas McLachlan A thesis submitted to the Victoria University of Wellington in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Political Science Victoria University of Wellington 2013 Contents Abstract – Page 3 Abbreviations – Page 4 List of Figures and Tables – Page 5 Chapter One – Introduction – Page 6 Chapter Two - Literature Review and Theoretical Frameworks – Page 15 Chapter Three - Case Study: John A. Lee – Page 37 Chapter Four - Case Study: Winston Peters – Page 61 Chapter Five - Case Study: Richard Seddon, ‘King Dick’ – Page 93 Chapter Six - Renshon and Character – Page 118 Chapter Seven – Conclusion – Page 124 Bibliography – Page 132 2 Abstract Populism, an academically contested political theory, has been subject to few thorough studies in the New Zealand context. With a history of strong, successful leaders, and fervent political rebels, New Zealand provides a useful political context in which the theoretical platform for what constitutes populism can be explored. While the current pre-eminent model of New Zealand-centric populist leadership is Barry Gustafson’s six point framework, this thesis will posit that adopting a multi-methodological approach is able to explain the nuances of New Zealand populism more effectively. Traditional international approaches to populist theory, such as those of Panizza and Laclau, are introduced to provide context on the wider literature on populism. In a challenge to Gustafson’s model, which closely matches the definitions of Panizza and Laclau, the social choice theorems of Riker’s heresthetics are introduced to provide a counter- explanation for populist leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reserve Bank Act 1989 and the Role and Evolution of the Policy Targets Agreement Between 1990 – 2012
    Review of the Reserve Bank Act Release Document – The Reserve Bank Act 1989 and the role and evolution of the Policy Targets Agreement between 1990 – 2012 July 2018 https://treasury.govt.nz/publications/information-release/phase-1-reviewing-reserve-bank-act This document has been proactively released. This document is an internal Treasury paper which informed the Treasury’s analysis and advice on the Policy Targets Agreement. The Reserve Bank Act 1989 and the role and evolution of the Policy Targets Agreement between 1990 - 2012 Prepared by Renee Philip and Brendon Riches 15 August 2016 Executive Summary 1. The Policy Targets Agreement (PTA) is an agreement between the Governor of the Reserve Bank and the Minister of Finance that specifies the inflation objectives of the Reserve Bank. The Reserve Bank Act requires a new PTA on the appointment (or reappointment) of a Governor, and provides scope for the PTA to be reviewed and altered “from time to time”. All Agreements are public documents. There is no requirement for the policy targets to be set in terms of inflation, but all PTAs have set inflation objectives in terms of the Consumers Price Index (CPI). 2. The first PTA, signed in 1990, closely reflected the intention of the reforms that underpinned the Reserve Bank Act 1989 – to bring inflation down to low single digits and to increase the Reserve Bank’s independence and its accountability for the decisions it made in the pursuit of price stability. In the first PTA, it was expected that any departure of inflation from the target range would trigger a formal process of review of the Governor's performance – in this sense the PTA played a key role as an accountability document.
    [Show full text]
  • (No. 2)Craccum-1979-053-002.Pdf
    Cos Anacles Stones ' II 12 r g f T I M E S / t h e j^cimes ISS'5 #** Honolulu Star-Bulletin craccum '©he fancouuer Sun THE GUARDIAN The difference between Craccum and this bourgeois crap is that you own it and that were neat enough to print your lettersAnd remember, the Craccum social is on tuesday 27 18pm intheOld Grad Bar.Freewine Who is Merv W< /erybody’s lips. 5 uestions such as' embarked upon ; craccum ravelling even un lessanine floor, I ie New Zealand i CRACCUM VOL. 53 26th FEBRUARY 1979. lose dust laden v ansard, I uncove CRACCUM is registered with the Post Office for trans­ relations. mission through the mail as a magazine. It is published Merv Wellingto by the Craccum Administration Board for the Auckland ree years! This University Students’ Association, Private Bag, Auckland. despite specula All typesetting was done on the Association’s very own Iterative facult IBM machine. The whole ghastly mess was printed by th iverely taxed by the splendid people at Wanganui Newspapers Ltd., 20 ey sought refuge Drewes Avenue, Wanganui (no less!). gard Mr Wellingl Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the ieat oppressed br; Craccum staff and it would take a very expensive pearance in pari lawyer to construe them into being the official policy ie speech he gav iy the fact o f hi Brian Brennan of the Students’ Association which they are not. yiinisterial rank, e Leader Janet Roth catches up with the news by reading last So there. ieopie. Mr Welling year’s Craccum Lor the last 13 Manure wa have wish to telepho Attempts to ret The Gripes The Craccum much o f my tir Battling for the constituents, Mr V afE o tti B lurb scurity beneath must be ano Welcome to University.
    [Show full text]
  • The Myth of Passivity Pamphlet.P65
    In this pamphlet Toby Boraman discusses working class movements against neoliberlism in Aotearoa (New Zealand) in the 1990s. The movements discussed are the near general strike against changes to employment law and the movement against welfare cuts, both in 1991 and the Maori movement of the mid-1990s against the government attempt to settle all Maori land claims by buying off rich Maori. This pamphlet was first published by Irrecuperable Distribution in 2004. They can be contacted by writing to PO Box 812, Dunedin New Zealand or emailing [email protected] This Treason Press edition was first published in July 2005. TREASON PRESS GPO Box 2427 Canberra ACT 2601 [email protected] http://treason.metadns.cx Dunedin: University of Otago Press, 2002, pp. 151-168. 24. Dannin, Working Free, p. 141. 25. Kelsey, The New Zealand Experiment, p. 318. 26. See Evan Te Ahu Poata-Smith, “He Pokeke Uenuku i Tu Ai: The Evolution of Contemporary Maori Protest” In Paul Spoonley, David Pearson and Cluny Macpherson eds., Nga Patai: Racism and Ethnic Relations in Aotearoa/New Zealand, Palmerston North: The Dunmore Press, 1996, pp. 97-116. 27. Teanau Tuiono, “Tino Rangatiratanga and Capitalism,” Thrall 24 (Spring 2002), p. 7. 28. Quoted in Poata-Smith, “He Pokeke Uenuku i Tu Ai”, p. 109. 29. Te Kawariki, The Maori Nation: Where to From Here (1995) quoted in Evan Poata-Smith, “The Political Economy of Maori Protest Politics 1968-1995: A Marxist Analysis,” PhD thesis, University of Otago, 2001, p. 304. 30. Poata-Smith, “The Political Economy of Maori Protest,” p.
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting Tomorrow Newspaper
    REVISITING TOMORROW 1977 – 1991 NEW ZEALAND AT THE TURNING POINT NZ Economist, April 1977 Issue * Image above: New Zealand Planning Council members and staff – First meeting on April 5 1977. Photograph from Archives New Zealand. Back row from left: Ted Thompson, Peter Wilding, R.W. Steele, Mervyn Probine, Don Brash, Rangi Mete-Kingi, Robin Irvine, Brian Picot, Ken Piddington (Director), Noel Lough. Front row from left: Claire Drake, George Gair, Sir Frank Holmes (Chair), Kerrin Vautier, Anne Delamare. About the Commission for the Future and the New Zealand Planning Council McGuinness Institute, 30 October, 2019 In 1976 the Task Force on Economic and Social Plan- ernment advisory role, was ‘concerned with long-term ning published the report New Zealand at the Turning Point. possibilities, a thirty year time frame, and with setting It highlighted New Zealand’s urgent need for direction in an agenda for public discussion and debate on possible significantly changing times, and the need to reconsider futures for New Zealand’ (Hunn, 1981, p. 2). The New how to encourage ‘widespread involvement’ in New Zea- Zealand Planning Council was ‘a focal point for consul- land’s planning processes: tation about trends, strategic issues and policy options ‘An important aim of the Task Force recommendations in New Zealand’s medium term development’, and in- is to provide for widespread involvement in the planning tended to advise ‘Government on the co-ordination of process. Up until now, participation by certain groups in planning and on choices of priorities in development’ the direction of the nation’s affairs has been much less sig- (Hunn, 1981, p.
    [Show full text]
  • MASSEY-April-2010.Pdf (7185
    MasseyThe magazine for alumni and friends of Massey University | Issue 27 | May 2010 fire down below living with volcanoes Choosing the right track Steven Joyce: from turntable to cabinet table Plus: saying when + the joy of sects + tiger country | MASSEY | April 2010 | 1 When we New Zealanders are trying to establish our credentials as a socially progressive nation, one of the ‘firsts’ we tend to mention (along with the introduction of votes for women in 1893) is the introduction of a state-funded old age pension in 1898, making us the first British country to bring in such a measure. There were, however, some buts when it came to that pension: to be eligible you had to be poor and deserving and you had to be old, remarkably old, by which I mean over 65. In 1898 the average life expectancy was in the mid-fifties, and a government could confidently vote in an old age pension knowing that few of its population would live to collect it. Contrast that with today. If someone now dies at the age of 65 it is not unusual for them to be described as dying young. In 2007 the average life expectancy stood at 78 for men and 82 for women. We are living longer and, by and large, we are living healthier. Why this vast leap in life expectancy? Partly one can thank advances in clinical medicine – many of us owe our lives to antibiotics. But equally, if not more, we owe the ‘years in our life’ and ‘the life in our years’ to measures that fall within the domain of public health: vaccination programmes, occupational and consumer safety measures, cleaner air and water, better nutrition, the promotion of healthy lifestyles, the success of anti-smoking legislation..
    [Show full text]