Category: New Zealand

Nov 22

Cyclists, oh dear.

Sorry, been out of action for a while. Tired old brain misbehaving. All better now, nothing like a firing range pistol to the head, oh sorry, that was the twins. More on that soon.

Cyclists have been in the news lately. That and over bonnets, under trucks, and a variety of other vehicles. Even into a curb after sliding down a steep hill.

Cycling is dangerous. But so is driving. Do we need yet another taxpayer funded inquest into what to do about it?

I say not. We already know what to do about it. But the government(s) don’t want to. It’ll cost money. More than an inquest that they promptly ignore.

CYCLE LANES ON ALL MAIN ROADS AND STATE HIGHWAYS.

Pretty simple really. Resolve & prevent 90% of the incidents.

1
comments

Posted in New Zealand, Politicians, Responsibility, Transport

May 14

The Road Toll and Drink Driving

The NZ Police are calling for a reduction in the legal alcohol limit.

It’s currently 80 milligrams of alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood.  They want it reduced to 50 milligrams.They insist this will reduce the road toll by 14 per year and save the country about $100 million per annum.

Okay, great.  I can still drink nearly a whole bottle of wine over a few hours and still be under the limit.

The issue I have however is it does not address recidivist drunk drivers.  All it does is target those who have one or two drinks too many.  Essentially, just as the NZ government did with other laws like the “Anti-Smacking” law, we target the wrong people.  People who are law abiding. The people that need to be targeted don’t give a flying fuck about the law.

The true nasties of the world continue onwards without care.  They don’t care if they lose their license, or if their kids are taken away in the case of section 59. The will continue to intimidate, or wear patches, or not pay their taxes and fines.  They simply do not care.

Some of the most serious drink driving incidents last year were caused by recidivist drunks.

One had over nine convictions, had a permanent license suspension and were still out amongst society.  They are a threat to society, no worse than a violent criminal with multiple assault and murder convictions. Why will the authorities not deal with them as such.

Is someone bashing someone else with a hammer any different than driving a 1 ton piece of metal into an innocent oncoming vehicle killing a newly wed woman who was not even 30 yet any different?

A hard line on drink driving needs to be taken. But no on those just over the limit. It’s the recidivist drunk drivers that need to be targeted first. Then we can deal with the education of the others who drink one or two too many over dinner at a restaurant or work party.

We currently need to focus on other matters to get the road toll down, speed and drinking are not killing us as much as other factors.

My opinions, based on anecdotal research are strong, practical and I believe valid. I wrote a piece a couple of  years back, which you can read. It is called simply “Road Toll“. It is even more relevant today I think.

Let me know what you think, because as with most social issues, I still think public voice and education are the solution.

0
comments

Posted in Law and Order, New Zealand

Oct 11

Tax On Rentals – What You Need To Think About

Owning rental property is an addiction here in New Zealand. Just about everyone I know has a rental property. Some even rent or flat share in more “desirable” locations than they could afford to buy in but have one or two rentals in other suburbs.

Yet with all these rental properties, the government sees very little tax revenue because of the level of negative gearing put in place. Whether you own the rental property through a trust, a company (usually an LAQC – Loss Attributing Qualifying Company) or even just as an individual, the gearing most people go for is the costs associated with that property barely cover the mortgage and rates, and then the depreciation on buildings and the like can be applied to other PAYE based income.

At face level, I see no reason to worry about this, it is within the letter of the law. However, as Wespac recently found out, the letter of the law is not sufficient protection. (Westpac loses massive tax case on all counts)

This should alarm mum and dad property investors. Some will say the IRD won’t worry about these people. They are not banks. They are not rich corporations. To this I say, the rental property industry is a $200 billion industry. It is only a matter of time that the effort put into the banks will then be applied very seriously to this industry.

If you are a small property investor, now is the time to look at how you have structured it, but more importantly why. The questions you need to be thinking about is what was your intent. The big banks that recently lost all made financial transactions that were following the letter of the law, but gave them huge advantages in reduced tax to pay. This ended up falling into the realm of tax avoidance.

Now, look at your specific situation, have you structured your situation to follow the letter of the law, but are following pretty close to the wind? If so, it will only take IRD one or two cases before they can then apply a blanket judgment on all similar cases.

Will you be caught? That’s what you really need to think about. I’m no tax lawyer or accountant, but I can see a world of hurt coming for rental property investors. I’m just glad I won’t be one of them!

0
comments

Posted in New Zealand, Taxation

Jun 26

Kiwis tax debt soars to $4b – may double in five years

Tax. It’s a word that often instills emotion. Particularly if you are speaking to a small business owner.

There are two distinct camps here in New Zealand. Well three if you include those that just don’t give a damn about anything.

The first is that New Zealand is technically a low taxed country. This camp argues that by OECD standards, New Zealand tax rates are relatively low, especially compared to “socialist” countries such as Spain.

The other camp basically says based on our overall economic situation, New Zealand is highly taxed and our tax system is overcomplex.

So, lets take this a little deeper. It has been acknowledged that tax debt is increasing rapidly. In fact, officials have now acknowledged that Inland Revenue can not keep up. They are at breaking point, and only cases that meet certain criteria are now being dealt with.

This highlights the second camps primary opinion of New Zealand’s tax system. It is too complex. It is simply costing too much for businesses and the Inland Revenue to remain compliant. Essentially “dead money”. The government has several options here. Considering the prediction is an $8 billion tax debt by 2014, the government really does need to do something.

Camp one, who feel New Zealand is relatively balanced as far as taxation are leaning towards more punitive penalties to force people to be more compliant. Anecdotal evidence shows New Zealand already has one of the most punitive taxation compliance systems in the OECD, disproportionate to the actual “non-compliance” crime. And it must be taken into account that in New Zealand, the buck stops with the taxpayer, even if they pay professionals to look after their tax position. Inland Revenue do not care that your tax lawyer or accountant made a mistake, you as the taxpayer, are culpable for any errors. Not exactly endearing to “voluntary compliance”.

Now, we have the other camp, which I freely admit I am biased towards.

The second camp, largely made up of front line business people rather than bureaucrats or academics, are adamant that a simpler, flatter and less punitive regime will not only increase the overall tax take, but reduce government spending in the area of both tax management and treasury duties.

Their argument basically says treat tax as a flat cost, equal for all entities regardless of income, and make “expenses” counted against income black and white rather than the gray mish-mash it currently is.

So which is right? Flatter, simpler taxation that would be easier for IRD to manage/monitor or a more punitive system that punishes those who break the rules?

As a nation, the next five years are pretty critical. Will the current government have the balls to actually make a decision about the New Zealand taxation system? Only time will tell.

0
comments

Posted in New Zealand, Taxation

May 25

Road deaths have dropped by 52%

“Since 1990 the number of vehicles on the road has increased by 51% while Police reported injuries have dropped by 8%, road deaths have dropped by 52% and the number of days spent in hospital as a result of road crashes has dropped by 48%.”

That looks pretty good to me.  But the officials still say it’s not enough.  People need to SLOW DOWN.

I’ll qualify what I am about to say a little, and say I have to agree that it’s not good enough.  But I will never agree that speed is the problem.

Let’s look at some specific aspects of the statistics.

3% of the deaths in 2008 were cyclists. If you include motorcyclists and pedestrians, it is 27%. That’s more than a quarter were “unprotected” victims.  So unfortunately other than road user attitude, there is not much you can do about this.

Now, moving along, a quarter of all fatalities were the result of the driver losing control with a further nearly 20% being attributed to not driving to conditions.

So close to half of all the fatalities were in incidents related to driver skill, vehicle quality or road quality.

If you have ever driven on a New Zealand road at night in the rain, I think you will probably agree visibility of road markings is non-existent.  In addition to this, our open roads have potholes, usually on corners and overall we could consider our roads to be both narrow and substandard.

Even our “modern motorways” are diabolical. An hour after rain, the amount of surface water is amazing.

Then we have my pet hate, Warrant of Fitness.

But before I touch on WoF again, let’s revisit the statistics. Why are there no documented statistics on Number of Fatal Incidents?  Not deaths, but actual incidents.  If we have dropped from 250 fatal incidents  killing 800 people to 50 fatal incidents kill 366 that is better than still having 100 fatal incidents killing 366 people.

Without this critical statistic, New Zealanders’ are being lied to. If a van crashes killing 8 people, that is very, very bad. But it is one incident. Far worse is four incidents killing 8 people. The authorities need to capture and publish clearly the number of fatal incidents, not just the death toll.

Why?

Because perhaps we can then take the focus off speed and put it back into three other areas that are far more important.

1.  quality of the fleet

Our vehicle fleet quality is shocking.  And in fact, one part of it in particular. Shock Absorbers.  Tyres and Shock Absorbers are what keep you on the road.  Yet Shock Absorbers have to be almost destroyed before they fail a warrant.  One bad Shock Absorber can send a car out of control in even slow speed manoeuvres, let alone high speed ones.  All Shock Absorbers should be replaced every 80,000km at most, and as part of the  warrant of fitness, all Shock Absorbers should be electronically tested.  Anything more than a 5% discrepancy between each  of the four wheels will require all four to be replaced.

2. driver skill

Raise the driving age to 18. Require a practical defensive driving course as part of the license process. Teach drivers how to react to unexpected situations, don’t just assume they will know like the current system. If they can’t handle a skid, they don’t go on the road in a one ton killing machine. All drivers should sit a practical test every five years and a defensive driving refresher every ten years.

3. road quality

The roading infrastructure needs to be upgraded, and quality improved.  It is simply unacceptable not to have adequate drainage on roading in New Zealand, and the maintenance cycle needs to be improved.  The paint used, and the use of Cat’s Eyes on ALL roads needs to be mandatory.

What’s the primary objection to these three things?

MONEY

Yet this is a bit of an oxymoron.

Improve (1), (2) and (3) above, and the reduction in monetary and emotional loses will more than cover the cost of implementation.

2
comments

Posted in New Zealand, Transport

Jun 10

VoIP – The Revolution Has Started

Today, my own private revolution has started.

Well, not really. I just ordered my WAG54GP2 Wireless ADSL2 VoIP Gateway.

It’s a little expensive, without much change from $200.

But, with the WorldXChange Xnet Fusion plan, we will be saving about $50 a month on telecommunications.

In addition, I will be bringing the office phone for DocScan onto the second “virtual line”. How much for this? $7.95 a month!!!

That’s going to be a saving of a further $180 a month!

Even with the penalties for closing down the TelstraClear phones before their contract ends, we will be saving close to $230 a month on current telecommunications so it makes it worth the termination fee.

The only issue I have with the service is that they consider any household that has “2 virtual lines” to be a business, so all calls will be charged at 5 cents a minute.

But as we live in Orewa, all calls are already charged as toll calls to Auckland! So we will save money there as well.

Good bye Telecom and TelstraClear. I wish I could say I will miss you, but you have both been overcharging me for years, and I have had enough!

0
comments

Posted in Internet, New Zealand, Telecommunications

Dec 22

Fast drivers face fast licence loss

So, the government is pushing through more restrictive driving regulations to apparently try and reduce the road toll to 300 by 2010.

Good luck.

They are increasing demerit points. Banning radar detectors, and changing to a percentage scale for traffic violations (i.e. 20km/h over in a 50km zone is far more serious than in a 100km zone).

The last part I agree with.

But in my opinion it is a complete rort.

Where are the true statistics that say speeding contributes to a higher road toll? Back in the 70s we had a far higher toll, cars were slower and there were less of them.

Here are the initiatives they should introduce:

Drunk Driving

  • 1st offence: Lose license for 12 months, $5,000-25,000 fine based on how much over the limit.
  • 2nd offence: Lose license for 60 months, car is impounded and sold. $5,000-25,000 fine.
  • 3rd offence: Permanent ban from driving. 6 – 60 months incarceration; home detention primary method.

All fines and proceeds of sale should be put into a trust fund to assist organizations like Odyssey House.

Infringements
Sorry, driving at 80km/h past a school is far more serious than a driver that has driven the same stretch of open road between work and home 1000s of times. Doesn’t make sense to say they are the same offence.

Speed cameras need to be abolished. They are pointless revenue gathering devices.

All revenue should be put into a trust fund. That fund subsidises improved driver training, including a mandatory defensive driving course and refresher courses every 10 years for all drivers.

Vehicle Crashes
True data on the incident should be collected. e.g. Age of the vehicle, experience of the driver, condition of the road. Particular focus should be conditions of the tyres, brakes and most importantly shock absorbers.

Why the last one? Because shock absorbers should be replaced every 60,000 to 80,000 km. This should be mandatory as part of WoF. Shock absorbers are probably the biggest cause of minor incidents turning into disastrous one from an anecdotal perspective.

Statistics
As I have said in various forums before, the statistics model used by the LTSA and other government units are flawed.

A raw number is simply wrong, as is the use of deaths.

We have more vehicles on the road than the 70s, they drive far more that they did in the 70s. Our road toll is sitting around the 400 compared to 700-1000 in the 70s. The actual percentage of fatal incidents is tiny compared to the 70s. And guess what, our cars go much faster, the speed limit is 20km higher!

The statistics should be focused on the number of fatal incidents (not deaths), and be measured as a weighted value based on the number of km per annum driven by the NZ vehicle fleet.

This rant has been quite long, as I believe the government is not serious about reducing the road toll.

Four things affect the road toll:

  1. correct capture of statistics
  2. addressing lack of skill of drivers
  3. recidivist drunk drivers
  4. lack of focused vehicle safety

This is one subject I truly believe the public need to better understand, instead of taking at face value the flawed approach by government.

0
comments

Posted in Law and Order, New Zealand, Responsibility, Transport

Apr 12

Cow Farts And Colostomy Bags

Global Warming. Just about every day there is a new piece of drivel in some paper or new bulletin about it.

Costs are going to go up, coastal property prices are going to go down, we face economic ruin, the world is going to change.

Come on people, cow farts affecting the climate? Get real!

What is the answer? All cows are to be fitted with colostomy bags, which is then transfered to a processing station and this is then recycled into the following products:

  • fibreboard cladding from the grass based waste
  • refined natural gas from the decomposition of said waste
  • green food coloring for childrens play doe
  • recycled bottled water

There. That was easy. That should ensure New Zealand at least has sufficient Kyoto credits to become a nuclear dumping ground. Yes?

Problem solved. Oh… nuclear waste is not so bad… Chernobyl is flourishing!

0
comments

Posted in Climate Change, Humor, New Zealand

Aug 16

Drugs, The Law, And Common Sense

So, David Henderson is now a criminal.

His crime; using cocaine or more accurately getting caught.

His punishment, likely the loss of control of his successful international business and the inability to travel overseas ever again.

Does a conviction for personal use of drugs justify the impact of that conviction has on society? When convicted, people can lose their job, or their busines, as is the likely case for David Henderson. Does that do society any good? No.

Prohibition of alchohol was a complete failure, and the prohibition of drugs is also a complete failure. When it impacts the lives of people like David Henderson it is undeniable that the so called crime is victimless except through the application of the law. He used cocaine as part of his entertainment, in the same way many people use alchohol, cigarettes or even driving fast in their cars.

Should he have a conviction? Did he hurt any one? Was he in control of a vehicle while under the influence? Did he use machinery? Did he rob or attack someone? No.

But he is now a criminal. For enjoying himself.

Use of drugs should be legalized across the board. Would the ‘P’ problem exist today if there was no prohibition in New Zealand? Unlikely.

There are problems with alchohol in society, and there is an argument that society would have an even bigger problem with legalized drugs. But the thing is, that problem is already there, and the big difference is, because one is legal and the other is not, people often do not get help until they have truely gone down a very dark path.

I personally know several alchoholics, and I know also several drug addicts. Guess what, the alchoholics get help, the drug addicts only do so when they hit rock bottom.

Outnumbering the drug addicts and alchoholics are the work-a-holics. They do far for damage to our society than the others, but that’s their choice.

That is what it comes done to. Choice.

I can go down the road and buy beer, and get drunk in the privacy of my own home and it is nobody’s business but mine. If I go down the road and buy cocaine for my own personal use, I am technically a criminal. But for what?

The current arguments to keep drugs illegal just do not stack up. There are already problems. But they are hidden under the guise of a responsible society that does not acknowledge the drugs are already there.

Legalization and regulation of drugs is the only answer that will ensure people like David Henderson are not made to be criminals for victimless crimes.

0
comments

Posted in Law and Order, New Zealand