Obviously I'm hoping for the best from this govt. as I do with every NZ govt. But making Clare Curran the minister of anything at all is not a good indication of the 'talent' that Jacinda says she has in bucketsfull.
Printable View
No problems with my sanity and no differenc iof opiion. Its simpley I'm right and you're not
While I agree TVNZ7 was a good channel the world has moved on from the 50's - 70's when public service broadcasting had its place. Since then broadcasting is not the issue - there is no shortage of news services / wires and sources of current information. The major issue is an individuals ability to discern the truth free from bias.
Given the increase in mindless media (I'm pointing at TVone, 2 3 and Bravo etc here) I think it is safe to assume the general population is failing at any sort of critical thinking.
Which is excellent for public service broadcasting who can feed that empty head with whatever the state wants to fill it with. And that's a dangerous place to be.
It's hard to miss these figures, a ballooning shortfall in housing supply under National's rein, particularly in Auckland.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...ll-in-auckland
Of course National MPs refused to admit this while they were in office. The data doesn't lie.
Do I detect a bit of cynicism W69? I suppose they could preside over a period of net emigration, that would help too. But there was no jiggery-pokey of the net debt figures surely, under the Clark government. They paid the debt down, substantially. At the same time the economy was growing robustly.
If anyone is to be accused of juggling figures, it could be the National government, who picked up the benefit of new Stats NZ rules which changed the terms on what 'unemployment' means. This took effect nicely before the 2017 elections.
https://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2016/07/s...nemployed.html
Also, now, employment means one hour or more worked per week, and in some cases it doesn't have to be paid either. Two part-timers (work less than 30 hours per week) are classed as the equivalent of one full-timer in Stats NZ figures.
Regardless of which party is in power the Government of the day needs to start thinking outside the square as other countries have done. Not everybody needing a house needs a 2 or 3 bedroom traditional style house. There are plenty of single people (both young and old) who would be very happy with a “tiny house.” We need to be looking at some of the initiatives from the UK and even the US, and establishing tiny house villages. They do not need to look like “little boxes on the hillside.” There are many many different styles and sizes of tiny house. These could be built for a mere fraction of the cost of traditional houses and would be ideal for people like me (57, divorced, living in my caravan full time as a way of escaping the rent trap I’ve been stuck in for 13 years). Perfect for the homeless, young singles or couples and in many cases even single older folk.
I am not saying this would solve the entire housing problem but it would sure be a quick and efficient way of providing effective and attractive/pleasant homes for a great many people. Imagine how many tiny homes could be built for the cost of a traditional Auckland house? Think how many could be built in one week.
We need to think smarter.