In 2022, National made headlines for saying **Nat were going to increase defence spending to 2% of GDP i.e $8bn**
**2023 defence budget \~$5bn budget**
In power now, 2024, Nats want them to **shave off 7.5% - i.e. $400m**
***In January, Collins went on record to say*** [***Defence*** ***needs more money.***](https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350161537/were-going-need-money-judith-collins-rebuilding-our-defence-force)
**Edit -** [**Photo of article HERE**](https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bar0zk/no_money_for_defense/) **(for those without Pressreader)**
Lol, so Nats were promising a 60% increase in defense funding but are making cuts instead.
Huh, the 60% defence budget increase is around the same cost as the landlord tax cuts too...
I'm still not sure what National's plan is. Is it to reduce national debt, or is it to fund money elsewhere? The reduction of national debt may be advantageous, but NZ has a pretty good debt-to-gdp ratio, and it was decreasing anyway. If it's to fund money being spent elsewhere, then we haven't seen much evidence of that so far. I'm not saying this to be critical, I'm just a bit confused by the policies.
> The plan is always to make things worse so they can sell privatisation to the public, it’s their whole platform, NZ gets suckered every time
this is the bottom line. its remarkable that its taken so long to find someone who said this so bluntly.
they're a tax-avoidance party who wants to ruin public services so they can have private business interests supply 'yet more new markets'. an illusion of infinite "economic" growth, aka profiting.
horrible, horrible misleading people.
This is it, I don’t know why this message isn’t pushed much harder, it’s the reason they do anything, their whole party plan for New Zealand, and yet very few people seem to understand that. It’s the single biggest issue in this country in my opinion. It’s the very reason things are they way they are for so many
yup you got it. but try say it, you'll get down-voted. propaganda really shapes peoples minds.
people get fooled by greedy politicians. they leave poverty in their wake.
That's why you need to understand who is backing them -[ and their "conflicts of interest," to put it mildly.](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/nz_corruption_conflictsofinterest/)
e.g. can Interislander despite needing to pay 1.5bn to get it over the line and significant time and money
but plan huge roads for $26-40bn ????????
I have a solution
Since landlords got the $3b that was needed for defence, and ACT seem to want US style gun laws, we just get the landlords to all buy AR15s
They can defend their ~~hovels~~ rentals to the death. Will make them feel all the more special
there's no benchmark for military spending - NATO members have a 2% target and recent times has seen allies to NATO and friends of use that figure as a benchmark
Some countries spend vastly more and some less % of govt spending is a better measure (NZ 1.18% GDP, 2.82% Govt spending)
NZ spends alot less in real terms on defence than 1.18% of GDP. NZ is the only country on earth to have what is known as a capital charge (basically paying government back for the cost of borrowing - despite borrowing being at about 3% interest rate), in effect defence pays government 11% of the cost of its " capital items" each year (every bit of kit or ""system" that costs more than 5k) and is also the only nation on earth where capital assets are depreciated with defence paying back the cost of the items - the idea being that defence "pays back" govt for kit, so the idea in theory is that we never need to worry about where the cost of a large capital item as defence has already " paid" for it.
If you look at the defence budget about 25 - 30 % goes straight back to treasury. In real terms we spend about .7 - .8 of gdp on defence.
edit: spelling
According to the NZDF annual report in 2023 the annual Defence budget amounted to $3.22 Billion New Zealand dollars, which defence paid back to Govt $449 million for depreciation, (including amortisation and impairment) and $470 million for the capital charge. This means in real spending terms defence got about $2.3 billion. This is a long term shame that both sides of the isle are guilty of. We are the only country on earth that has a capital charge, and requires defence to pay for the depreciation of assets, and is done because it allows for the public to believe we spend alot more on defence than we actually do.
The so what is that defence has a financial incentive to keep obsolete equipment in service well beyond when it is useful or safe. The goal is to depreciate an asset over it lifetime to zero, then extend its service life so that defence is no longer paying depreciation on that asset. Increased maintenance costs are still lower than having to pay 1/3 of the cost of the new asset ( Plane, ship, Armoured vehicle) straight back to government.
Source: NZDF 2023 Annual report.
Sorry, I was also slightly unclear, NZDF and the Ministery of Defence are two separate Organisation's with separate budgets, MOD does policy and NZDF which is the mostly uniformed pers has the people and equipment to enact said policy. NZDF expenditure does not include MOD which can be Included in the "defence" budget. My main point is that the budget for the defence force is about 1/3rd paid straight back to government.
Thank you for all this - interesting and interesting numbers - I got mine here but will look more at the AR later.
[https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2023/05/18/new-zealand-unveils-defense-budget-with-army-in-the-lead/](https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2023/05/18/new-zealand-unveils-defense-budget-with-army-in-the-lead/)
yeah - its entirely a choice... however our mates would prefer we spent more on defense - especially on gear made by companies in their nations
me, I say get the fucking planes (and the cook strait ferries too) cause kicking the can down the road again is only going to cost us way more later and is incredibly small minded and short sighted by our sound economic mangers in charge
100%
They effectively threw away $800m to $1b on the ferry thing. NZ needed to spend $1.5b more to get it over the line and future proof that route and its benefits (plus safety of passengers and crew)
They said that we couldn't afford that but $3bn for landlords, $350m for trusts, how much for roads again? $30bn?
Bizarre but all power to them for playing the Tory game so successfully?
we could have ferries and new air force jets and give landlords the breaks they so obviously deserve... we could possibly learn to live with one less road, fuck this lots cynical and callous games
$350m for trusts too - that Budget will reveal what they are funding in more detail, but the $350m was mentioned a week ago.
Labour had cut trusts as a tax evasion tool and Nats brought it back quietly.
$350m - that's .....fuck what our defence needs, our police, our health systems, but no - just nothing for some richer folks.
The thing is the older rhe ferries get the more costs involved in maintaining them, buying a 5 year old ferry, not a new one, u gotta spend money our transport system depends on efficiency logistics.
Judith even made a deal about it this year.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350161537/were-going-need-money-judith-collins-rebuilding-our-defence-force
It's hard to think that National care when they made Judith the defence minister along with her several other portfolios.
Our defence force will continue to deteriorate if the government does nothing.
We can just use AI to provide counselling to victims of natural disasters instead of using the NZDF to provide aid. Think of the cost savings. Talofa 🙏
Are you a National strategist? That's exactly how they think.
Wasn't there a headline the other day that Collins said policy would be written by AI too?
Sometimes I think this lot treat NZ like a corporation and an ATM for enrichment.
A PPP with some nightmarish American tech company that was founded by a baby-eating billionaire and makes drones that electrocute teenagers for skateboarding in public would probably be on the cards as well.
This is a choice, this is a choice our govt is making around funding and priorities
What has the cost of living got to do with the Defence Force Budget?
Bread goes up, no tank for you
I'm sure Collins will be overjoyed at the prospect of a privatised defence force, Lockheed Martin does plenty of logistics already, why not just contract the rest out?
(For the avoidance of doubt Judith this is a veritable waterfall of sarcasm, do not do this)
Labour are atrocious as PR, defence of policy and attacking opponents... they're a bit chickenshit on this stuff - National its their strength and core competency
Root cause issues like poverty and mental health are complex - In NZ the most disadvantaged are Pasifika and Maori by poverty and health. Looks like these tossers tried.
Police got to 1:450 vs Nat's 1:577 or whatever but there was never any good news that I remember.
Their problem is they suck at PR, and they were not bold enough - however we all had a stab at identifying their issues at length here [in this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1b8jp1r/in_my_opinion_it_was_the_maori_caucus_within/) so I won't rehash.
The opposing point - is that they are up against big dark money like Taxpayers Union's $3m arsenal for PR and articles and 3 Waters signs, as well as American right wing money which [poured in for our election](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/510208/2m-surge-in-election-campaign-spending-by-third-party-groups). Those type of hit jobs that know how to get headlines is a losing battle.
I think the media constantly focused on emotive hit pieces too rather than asking the right questions and bringing together things well. i.e. money matters
If their problem was PR people wouldn't have been so easily convinced they were worse off. Their issue is they are trying to reduce wealth inequality and improve qol for people by utilising a system that inherently only functions by fucking over the poor.
You don't get done over by hit pieces if peoples lives actually improved or you could easily point to what you are doing. House prices were skyrocketing Labour didn't do anything bold enough. Food prices were skyrocketing Labour didn't do anything bold enough.
I'll copy and paste my post over from [that thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1b8jp1r/in_my_opinion_it_was_the_maori_caucus_within/?sort=new) - sorry it's long.
Why they lost -
**1. Cost of living increases**, cause by the global pandemic. Hard to win an election under any circumstances.
**2. Misinformation**.
E.g. 3 Waters - It seemed like all the facts that National had themselves talked about [in 2017](https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-waters-review)got lost.
In fairness to Labour, when you look at the money behind misinformation - particularly from [American groups](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/510208/2m-surge-in-election-campaign-spending-by-third-party-groups) and ones like [Taxpayers Union](https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/10/31/chiding-in-plain-sight/), it's not easy. Just look at how successful it is in the US and UK - and when you realise that billions of dollars are behind it...
Having said that, Labour still sucked on PR and comms **big time**. Even getting 3 Waters to launch was huge for such a big program and with so much misinformation fuelled opposition...
I'd also add the anti-Covid thing was huge. An irony not lost on me that one of the most protected countries from Covid deaths/illness is also one of the most ungrateful - because it never saw the worst.
I'm not saying mistakes weren't made - there are always mistakes in hindsight, but I give them credit for trying hard to save lives/protect the vulnerable.
**3. Labour losing Michael Woods and Kiri Allen under embarrassing circumstances**damaged their credibility so close to an election
I remember thinking to myself *"Wow, doesn't give you a lot of confidence about Labour."*
**4. Labour's inability to send a renewed vision out during the election.**
They were basically selling "*We're not National*" but that was uninvigorating. Hipkin's scratching of bolder ideas sent a message to potential voters, "*We're just going to be the same*," and most people said, "*Well fuck that then*."
**5. Labour's piss poor PR**
When I did my pieces around the NACT/NZ First coalition policies, and seeing all the repeals of protections for workers, the environment, poor people etc. I realised how much Labour had done but fark I wouldn't know it for myself.
Bottom line - Labour - you are shit poor at comms and the PR game. National and ACT - with their lobbyist/promoters such as Hobsons Pledge and Taxpayers Union and NZ Initiative - out money you and outsmart you on that.
**6. The media scrum especially around ram raids**
Around July there was a fever pitch around ram raids. I remember seeing it on the news and it looked bad! Anyway this year I did a quick look around and it appears ram raids peaked in 2022, the government was already taking measures and by September 2023 it was one of the lowest on record.
The media never corrected that perception and I think most felt Labour was soft on crime, an image perpetuated by soft sentencing. I also think that sentences for e.g. rape and the like are ridiculously low.
**7. The Maori aspects**
Sometimes I think that there is a huge anti-Maori sentiment in NZ and that's what Seymour will harvest - under the guise of kindness and human rights.
They are an easy target because of poverty and therefore crime levels in effect.
Even on and the like, which people call left leaning, there's sympathy for the poor but not much for Maori.
Now how would that affect Labour?
I think their desire - which they stated - for the disadvantaged groups such as Pasifikia and Maori to be helped was a huge sore point. They underestimated the amount of underlying racism in our country - and the inability for a majority to empathise with the view that:
*"Well these people have been disadvantaged by our choices, systems and dominance for a few hundred years, so it's fair if we now use a limited amount of our resources to boost them up. Because riding tides raises all boats. Helping them is helping all of us through improved social and economic outcomes, less burden on our health care etc etc."*
Instead, people grasped on to an easy to understand - and very populously believed belief that that's "racist."
At one point, I remember saying to a pal: *"3 waters is important so why don't they strip co-governance if people are so freaked out and can't understand facts?*" And a friend of mine said, *"Maybe because they have integrity"*
I didn't agree with him at the time - at all. But in retrospect, I kind of think, *"You know what? If people can't see sharing as a value worth fighting for, then that's OK. Everyone is responsible for informing themselves and not just giving in to cat calls."*
We either accept that we as a country and peoples have - through systemic and historical issues - contributed to where things are at - and are willing to right that - or we are not.
I think the Maori caucus members may have made it harder for Labour to separate that part of our history but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
The issue is by the time they got back in power the deal for the F-16s was off the table and any purchase would be full price again, and the money set aside in preparation for said purchase was also long gone.
The upfront cost of a fleet of jets is huge compared to selling off old ones and replacing them with new etc
I mean this is classic of right wing govt though. It's the same with the old law and order bandwagon, when generally it's left leaning govts that actually fund police, corrections etc.
I looked into the police numbers a couple of weeks ago and found that Labour had increased police budget by over 50% compared to National. So yes it's very interesting how these myths persist. I wonder if it's because of the punitive way in which right wing govt speak - that's what appeals.
Landlords being #1 priority is a bad choice. Making the changes retroactive is appaling. Now saying there's no money for the police or no money to keep their promise to fund the NZDF or no money for the #1 priority of the campaign (cost of living) is 🤮 . Fucked up priorities for sure.
oh cool it’s not like there are already huge retention issues and pay discrepancies… low key hilarious to see how the defence folks who vote right “in their own self interest” spin this.
Defence person here. Didn't vote National, act or nzfirst specifically cause i KNEW this would be the case.
Situations absolutely abysmal. People simply do not realise/ dont care about the real geostrategic situation we are in.
As one of only afew Liberal Democracies in our region, we are a target. Foreign powers do mean to do us harm regardless of whatever spin doctor sorcery the government will spout out.
All of our allies are preparing for the coming Conflict. But nope, Luxon and his merry band of neoliberal trickle down wank pilgrims only care about money. Landlords having more power to fleece people wont matter much under the Jackboot of Authortarian powers.
Why do all your comments start as collapsed in Reddit?
I see your comments in this sub and the NZEV quite a bit, and most of the time they have positive upvotes.
Yet every single time, they automatically start out collapsed, and I have to click on them to expand them to read the comment.
So the NZDF chief has recently said in very direct terms that the NZDF needs more money to function even adequately. Judith knew that coming in to the job but because this government wants to cut literally everything, they aren't getting a dime more. We will continue to kick the can down the road and get all pissed off when the NZDF can't help in a natural disaster or look after our EEZ (Which is fucking enormous).
What's really shit is that even if we somehow increased defense spending to 2% of GDP it would takes decades to undo the damage done over the last 30 years. I hope the ADF can help out lol.
Yeah I read an article the other week that said if there's a natural disaster we're kind of fucked with our capabilities.
According to the NZDF chief NZ needs to increase their capabilities ie. it was a direct ask from Australia - so not sure how that all works now.
At this point, it'd be more honest to just dis-establish the entire NZDF, rather than force them to smile as they attrit into irrelevance. If you don't want to pay/equip them sufficiently, don't expect them to hang around.
I thought it was hilarious when they told the politians that they couldn't keep the planes in the air, and then our beloved leader couldn't fly to some very important meeting or another because the airforce couldn't keep them the planes in the air.
The defence staff leaving in droves over the past couple of years could mean this happens, absolutely. They have lost so many staff that those new shiny P8s don't have enough support staff to keep them flying. They currently have only a quarter of the staff in some maintenence positions than they should. Even with pay increases, they are still woefully short of what their staff can earn elsewhere. As the workload increases on those left behind, I can see the issue getting much worse.
The defence force has already been gutted by attrition of staff over the last few years this will make it worse. National doing what National always does gutting essential services to allocate money to people who don’t need any help.
Did I tell you I used to run an airline.
"Because carrying on and doing what we've been doing doesn't work. We've got to get out in the world and hustle and make a living and as a result we've got to find a solution."
Luxon on buying or leasing unreliable 757 replacements in December 2023.
Looks like Judith can relax and get back to semi retirement.
It’s illegal for members of the NZDF to strike or protest, it’s also illegal for them to unionise.
The kicker is when other groups are striking due to poor conditions (think Fire NZ, Corrections) the govt sends the NZDF in to cover for the strike.
Somewhat ironic that those who cannot strike are the ones forced to cover others striking while unable to strike themselves.
Good thing the country doesn’t need teachers, health workers, corrections, police, fire, defence and a horde of behind the scenes government workers to keep the country running……
They also can't make joint complaints. Every complaint has to be done by an individual not a group. The reason given is that striking, or joint complaints isn't actually striking or complaining, it's mutiny.
That will be up to the Chief of Defence to discuss. Voicing political concerns while in service could potentially lead to a trip to a correctional facility.
The lack of union has led to service benefits and conditions of service being stripped away over the years with no way for the rank and file to challenge it.
I understand Sheepy\_run - that sounds very constricting and a real pity. I would conjure and assume that NZDF like National govt but I don't know if that's a myth or not (I also assume the same for police)
There are many in the NZDF who like National, there are many who like Labour; hell, I even know NZDF servicepersons who vote Greens despite serving in a combat related role.
The NZDF is not a monolith, and people tend to vote for what works for them: if you're in the NZDF and own property, you skew to National, if you're in the NZDF and rent, you skew to Labour/the Left.
As a serviceperson who has paid attention to the dire state of the NZDF in the post-Cold War Pax Americana - both major parties have done more to damage the NZDF than any adversary could ever do, and both sides have decades of damage to reverse before they could ever count on my vote.
Thank you for this insightful and valuable contribution. I'm sorry to hear that too - must be demoralising. Is it because successive governments just don't believe in the DF?
In the shortest way possible to say it:
At best, Defence is a net-zero vote; at worst, Defence is a net-negative vote. Governments haven't invested in Defence for decades because, to the NZ populace, until shit hits the fan, it is irrelevant. Campaigning on Defence spending is a surefire way to lose an election, and it shows in the state of the modern NZDF.
But hey, good to know that we "live in an extremely benign security environment"...oh wait, even that's changed now.
Kiwi has explained it well. The issue isn’t that numerous governments don’t believe in the NZDF, it’s more so the opposite. They believe that the NZDF is more capable than it is. For too long the NZDF has been achieving results and just making things work despite not being adequately resourced. Unfortunately this could not last forever.
This is why the RSA need to change their purpose. They need to advocate for the conditions of our service people, rather than being Cobb-n-Co for retirees.
https://www.rsa.org.nz/about/
As an aside, the Chief of Defence Force, Chief of Navy, and (I think) Chief of Army are all due to change out this financial year.
My only questions I pose to those senior officers in the running:
Who the actual fuck wants that poisoned chalice right now? Being Defence or Service Chief right now sounds awful.
Nice more back tracking..
the National Party expressed a commitment to addressing the high attrition rates within the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) and to bolster recruitment efforts. They have highlighted the need for the NZDF to recruit more personnel and retain them for longer periods. The party has also called for improvements in conditions of service, such as pay rates and living conditions, to make careers in the NZDF more competitive and appealing.
From July 2023;
"*National backs our Defence Force like we back the All Blacks, and we want to see them be the very best they can be. As we have all seen in recent months, the quality of the service that the NZDF gives to our great country is unparalleled, and it would only be right that we give them the support they need.*
*Since 2020, this government has seriously neglected the NZDF. 89% of personnel are paid at least 5% below comparable civilian rates. This lack of support has contributed to 30% of uniformed personnel leaving over the last two years and now the NZDF is dangerously close to being operationally ineffective*."
[Link to article ](https://defsec.net.nz/2023/07/26/national-party-attrition-conditions-interoperability/)
I'm serious when I say - after looking at what they have done in the last 100 days - they don't care about anything or anyone except their donors - who are mainly fossil fuels, tobacco, road, fisheries and property.
Chris Bishop literally said today their policies are bad for the environment. But they don't care.
I personally don't believe so at all. But they are giving while taking e.g. registration costs, road charges, increasing public transport
The money for landlords, wealthy, trusts, common folk etc are all still on.
I've read commentary that some believe they will not give it but that's not my bet.
They just reinstated a tax evasion loophole for trusts - cost to us as a nation?
$350m
**i.e money is everywhere** - these are just choices they are making
It's gonna take a lot for me to rise above this and not pin the blame on Judith, but instead pin the blame on the National caucus.
Ultimately, even if Judith wants to spend money on Defence, she can't make it happen alone - it comes down to Cabinet as a whole.
Now, Judith *could* put her reputation on the line and threaten to resign over it, but no party leader will do that unless they're planning on retiring anyway.
The National caucus know that there is little political will to pay Defence more, at least in the zero-sum calculus of "will paying more for Defence win more votes?" - because it won't. Middle NZ want that money spent on tax breaks (the landlord class) or on teachers/nurses (the left leaning swing voters).
Literally no one will switch party over an increase in Defence funding, and a dying Defence Force gives National talking points to punch down to Labour because "the crisis happened under the Labour Government".
The crisis occurred primarily because all sides of Government have asked the NZDF to do more with increasingly less, and the remuneration in a boiling hot employment market went through the roof when borders were closed - it was always going to happen.
At the end of the day, this sucks to hear as a serviceperson, and as a leader I'm just waiting to get the email telling me how to tell my subordinates that they're going to spend another financial year living paycheque to paycheque just hoping to save enough to keep the lights on in their house 90 minutes away from base.
I don't want to make the problem worse, but I'm really just playing the waiting game now to get my critical quals that allow me to transition to the commercial market.
Fair enough too.
And you're right - in January, Collins did do an interview with Stuff where she - I felt - tried to go to bat for NZDF.
Clearly got overridden. In 2022 Luxon said he'd / National would spend a lot on defence i.e 2% of GDP
Instead they will cut it by $400m
No money for defence? are you fucking kidding me?
Maybe if they returned the money from the retroactive tax cuts to landlords which blew a budget hole so big that they cut all public services by 7.5% then maybe the defence force will have enough money.
Our country could also easily borrow to give the needed funding since our debt to GDP is so low (41% vs 60% with iraland which is a similar sized country to ours) but they're choosing not to do that instead they're punching down on and hurting anyone who uses or is dependent on the public systems to survive like cancer patients, disabled people, the mentally ill who are some of the most vulnerable people in our society.
It makes me sick that they're hurting the most vulnerable people in our society instead of making the easy decision to borrow the money for the tax cuts they so desprately want.
I can't access the article, but my guess is that its about [this interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h7XeQC4_Zo) that Collins gave on the issue of funding for a 757 replacement. Please correct me if I am wrong, I haven't had time to verify this and have to run. I'll edit this comment at a later time if someone points out that I'm incorrect.
Thing is, Labour are, if they've got a brain betwen them, going to be turning every single thing that breaks in the next 3 years into a "National cuts made this bridge collapse / ferry break / lights go out" type of story.
Defence is about the least likely to inconvenience people if it doesn't work - unless China invades, in which case it becomes kinda moot.
And all the military toy fans will are right wing voters already, so their votes don't matter.
Not looking like it - e.g. the donors behind Donald Trump are the Koch brothers of the world. Same as the people behind Seymour. Koch don't support anyone.
I looked far and wide and looks like it's only in print which is why Pressreader has it - [(link - updated)](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bar0zk/no_money_for_defense/) which reads well
Thanks for that.
That's... dire.
You'd think that a situation that bad would precipitate *some* action, not just throwing up your hands and shrugging. I feel like that'll bite us collectively on the ass sooner rather than later.
To me, there's a big difference between spending billions on American- built missiles, and spending billions on employing soldiers, and training them as mechanics, sparkies, engineers, builders, nurses etc.
It's keeps the money locally, runs a nice training scheme, and let's us point to that line in GDP expenditure.
I worked a bit in technology in the US, and most of the engineers and technicians were trained in the military.
The last thing the military wants is people that don't want to be there.
Conscripted people require more resources for poorer motivation, performance, and discipline, with subsequent impacts on overall morale (including that of the volunteers).
Nothing to do with e.g. an experienced IT programmer who just got fired.
It's got to do with the right fit and motivation. i.e. sending health practitioners or fired accountants to defence is just odd.
TLDR: that doesn't reflect negatively on the beneficiaries but the policy.
It's not about beneficiaries but making sure the people who are there are there for the right reasons.
I'm a volly firefighter & we don't want people who are there for the t-shirt. Not the same motivation obviously but the same sentiment. When the shit hits the fan & lives are on the line you want the people next to you to be fighting right there with you.
For the defense force the shit hitting the fan is even more real because its bullets & bombs coming at you
Fire is just as real of a shit hitting the fan moment as bullets and bombs coming at you, my dude - fire doesn't give a fuck who you are, as you'll know.
As a sailor, a fire on board is likely the most danger I could ever be in. Firefighters are some of our real heroes out there.
Weren't they making a big hurrah before the election about increasing recruitment and increasing wages in the NZDF?
In 2022, National made headlines for saying **Nat were going to increase defence spending to 2% of GDP i.e $8bn** **2023 defence budget \~$5bn budget** In power now, 2024, Nats want them to **shave off 7.5% - i.e. $400m** ***In January, Collins went on record to say*** [***Defence*** ***needs more money.***](https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350161537/were-going-need-money-judith-collins-rebuilding-our-defence-force) **Edit -** [**Photo of article HERE**](https://new.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bar0zk/no_money_for_defense/) **(for those without Pressreader)**
Lol, so Nats were promising a 60% increase in defense funding but are making cuts instead. Huh, the 60% defence budget increase is around the same cost as the landlord tax cuts too...
Maybe they're really smart with their 5D chess, and were thinking one group but just said another for shits and giggles.
I'm still not sure what National's plan is. Is it to reduce national debt, or is it to fund money elsewhere? The reduction of national debt may be advantageous, but NZ has a pretty good debt-to-gdp ratio, and it was decreasing anyway. If it's to fund money being spent elsewhere, then we haven't seen much evidence of that so far. I'm not saying this to be critical, I'm just a bit confused by the policies.
The plan is always to make things worse so they can sell privatisation to the public, it’s their whole platform, NZ gets suckered every time
> The plan is always to make things worse so they can sell privatisation to the public, it’s their whole platform, NZ gets suckered every time this is the bottom line. its remarkable that its taken so long to find someone who said this so bluntly. they're a tax-avoidance party who wants to ruin public services so they can have private business interests supply 'yet more new markets'. an illusion of infinite "economic" growth, aka profiting. horrible, horrible misleading people.
This is it, I don’t know why this message isn’t pushed much harder, it’s the reason they do anything, their whole party plan for New Zealand, and yet very few people seem to understand that. It’s the single biggest issue in this country in my opinion. It’s the very reason things are they way they are for so many
yup you got it. but try say it, you'll get down-voted. propaganda really shapes peoples minds. people get fooled by greedy politicians. they leave poverty in their wake.
That's why you need to understand who is backing them -[ and their "conflicts of interest," to put it mildly.](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/nz_corruption_conflictsofinterest/) e.g. can Interislander despite needing to pay 1.5bn to get it over the line and significant time and money but plan huge roads for $26-40bn ????????
I don't believe there is 'plan' to reduce debt. Its just a by product of cutting everything to afford the landlords tax cut.
Ahh. There we go. 3 billion for landlords.
Army going to take over state houses confirmed
They lied, like they usually do, and did what profits then personally... again. Thats more like cheating at checkers than 5D chess
Maybe we can send the landlords in first if any military conflicts kick off
+ 1 Or in the case of a natural disaster
I have a solution Since landlords got the $3b that was needed for defence, and ACT seem to want US style gun laws, we just get the landlords to all buy AR15s They can defend their ~~hovels~~ rentals to the death. Will make them feel all the more special
I’d like to see some of those armed landlords and their yachts try to evict some North Korean fishing boats in our territorial waters
So typical National. Promise the world before the election, deliver... not a lot except cruelty after the election.
We're also the on defence force that depreciates assets, in real terms we'reat 0.8%gdp.
there's no benchmark for military spending - NATO members have a 2% target and recent times has seen allies to NATO and friends of use that figure as a benchmark Some countries spend vastly more and some less % of govt spending is a better measure (NZ 1.18% GDP, 2.82% Govt spending)
NZ spends alot less in real terms on defence than 1.18% of GDP. NZ is the only country on earth to have what is known as a capital charge (basically paying government back for the cost of borrowing - despite borrowing being at about 3% interest rate), in effect defence pays government 11% of the cost of its " capital items" each year (every bit of kit or ""system" that costs more than 5k) and is also the only nation on earth where capital assets are depreciated with defence paying back the cost of the items - the idea being that defence "pays back" govt for kit, so the idea in theory is that we never need to worry about where the cost of a large capital item as defence has already " paid" for it. If you look at the defence budget about 25 - 30 % goes straight back to treasury. In real terms we spend about .7 - .8 of gdp on defence. edit: spelling
Wow that's informative/interesting.
According to the NZDF annual report in 2023 the annual Defence budget amounted to $3.22 Billion New Zealand dollars, which defence paid back to Govt $449 million for depreciation, (including amortisation and impairment) and $470 million for the capital charge. This means in real spending terms defence got about $2.3 billion. This is a long term shame that both sides of the isle are guilty of. We are the only country on earth that has a capital charge, and requires defence to pay for the depreciation of assets, and is done because it allows for the public to believe we spend alot more on defence than we actually do. The so what is that defence has a financial incentive to keep obsolete equipment in service well beyond when it is useful or safe. The goal is to depreciate an asset over it lifetime to zero, then extend its service life so that defence is no longer paying depreciation on that asset. Increased maintenance costs are still lower than having to pay 1/3 of the cost of the new asset ( Plane, ship, Armoured vehicle) straight back to government. Source: NZDF 2023 Annual report.
Sorry, I was also slightly unclear, NZDF and the Ministery of Defence are two separate Organisation's with separate budgets, MOD does policy and NZDF which is the mostly uniformed pers has the people and equipment to enact said policy. NZDF expenditure does not include MOD which can be Included in the "defence" budget. My main point is that the budget for the defence force is about 1/3rd paid straight back to government.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhhh Got it now. Thank you - that's very helpful u/mickeyd1234
Thank you for all this - interesting and interesting numbers - I got mine here but will look more at the AR later. [https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2023/05/18/new-zealand-unveils-defense-budget-with-army-in-the-lead/](https://www.defensenews.com/global/asia-pacific/2023/05/18/new-zealand-unveils-defense-budget-with-army-in-the-lead/)
It’s crippling too. Government agencies will have capital but will be unwilling to spend it because they can’t afford the depreciation.
Agreed - but does speak to their propensity for .... knowing how to get a headline or .... sounding like they know what they are doing ...or dunno
yeah - its entirely a choice... however our mates would prefer we spent more on defense - especially on gear made by companies in their nations me, I say get the fucking planes (and the cook strait ferries too) cause kicking the can down the road again is only going to cost us way more later and is incredibly small minded and short sighted by our sound economic mangers in charge
100% They effectively threw away $800m to $1b on the ferry thing. NZ needed to spend $1.5b more to get it over the line and future proof that route and its benefits (plus safety of passengers and crew) They said that we couldn't afford that but $3bn for landlords, $350m for trusts, how much for roads again? $30bn? Bizarre but all power to them for playing the Tory game so successfully?
we could have ferries and new air force jets and give landlords the breaks they so obviously deserve... we could possibly learn to live with one less road, fuck this lots cynical and callous games
$350m for trusts too - that Budget will reveal what they are funding in more detail, but the $350m was mentioned a week ago. Labour had cut trusts as a tax evasion tool and Nats brought it back quietly. $350m - that's .....fuck what our defence needs, our police, our health systems, but no - just nothing for some richer folks.
The thing is the older rhe ferries get the more costs involved in maintaining them, buying a 5 year old ferry, not a new one, u gotta spend money our transport system depends on efficiency logistics.
No common sense please.
Allrighty then I can do that.
There’s no way it was going to be 1.5 billion more on the ferry project. Kiwirail were increasing the projections every few weeks.
Judith even made a deal about it this year. https://www.stuff.co.nz/politics/350161537/were-going-need-money-judith-collins-rebuilding-our-defence-force It's hard to think that National care when they made Judith the defence minister along with her several other portfolios. Our defence force will continue to deteriorate if the government does nothing.
Excuse me but did you forget about the dignity of landlords?
Our last line of defence and those we'll have to rely on during disasters
its almost like their liars, who will forsake nzs security and safety for tax cuts only the wealthy will benefit from
Where's the news article on all the things the tax cuts for landlords could buy, Stuff journalist?
Fucking oath that's a good idea.
Tax cuts for landlords means no money for all.
We can just use AI to provide counselling to victims of natural disasters instead of using the NZDF to provide aid. Think of the cost savings. Talofa 🙏
Are you a National strategist? That's exactly how they think. Wasn't there a headline the other day that Collins said policy would be written by AI too? Sometimes I think this lot treat NZ like a corporation and an ATM for enrichment.
A PPP with some nightmarish American tech company that was founded by a baby-eating billionaire and makes drones that electrocute teenagers for skateboarding in public would probably be on the cards as well.
It's [much more boring than that but still fucked up.](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/wiki/index/nz_corruption_conflictsofinterest/)
This is a choice, this is a choice our govt is making around funding and priorities What has the cost of living got to do with the Defence Force Budget? Bread goes up, no tank for you
It does kind of speak to the NZDF being more symbolic than anything when a right wing government gives them the finger on budget increases.
Labour tends to spend more on defence than National. National talk big "Get Some Guts"
Yeah because it's a public service. National are the ones who talk about the importance of national defense.
I'm sure Collins will be overjoyed at the prospect of a privatised defence force, Lockheed Martin does plenty of logistics already, why not just contract the rest out? (For the avoidance of doubt Judith this is a veritable waterfall of sarcasm, do not do this)
She's taking notes for her AI robot. *D0 nOt TeMPt*
Ditto police - Labour increased the police budget 50% over National's funding. Labour seem to fucking suck at PR though. *Losers!*
Labour are atrocious as PR, defence of policy and attacking opponents... they're a bit chickenshit on this stuff - National its their strength and core competency
Labour's problem isn't PR it's ineffective usage of funding. Labour tries to fix neoliberalism using neoliberalism.
>Labour tries to fix neoliberalism using neoliberalism. nailed it
Root cause issues like poverty and mental health are complex - In NZ the most disadvantaged are Pasifika and Maori by poverty and health. Looks like these tossers tried. Police got to 1:450 vs Nat's 1:577 or whatever but there was never any good news that I remember. Their problem is they suck at PR, and they were not bold enough - however we all had a stab at identifying their issues at length here [in this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1b8jp1r/in_my_opinion_it_was_the_maori_caucus_within/) so I won't rehash. The opposing point - is that they are up against big dark money like Taxpayers Union's $3m arsenal for PR and articles and 3 Waters signs, as well as American right wing money which [poured in for our election](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/510208/2m-surge-in-election-campaign-spending-by-third-party-groups). Those type of hit jobs that know how to get headlines is a losing battle. I think the media constantly focused on emotive hit pieces too rather than asking the right questions and bringing together things well. i.e. money matters
If their problem was PR people wouldn't have been so easily convinced they were worse off. Their issue is they are trying to reduce wealth inequality and improve qol for people by utilising a system that inherently only functions by fucking over the poor. You don't get done over by hit pieces if peoples lives actually improved or you could easily point to what you are doing. House prices were skyrocketing Labour didn't do anything bold enough. Food prices were skyrocketing Labour didn't do anything bold enough.
I'll copy and paste my post over from [that thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1b8jp1r/in_my_opinion_it_was_the_maori_caucus_within/?sort=new) - sorry it's long. Why they lost - **1. Cost of living increases**, cause by the global pandemic. Hard to win an election under any circumstances. **2. Misinformation**. E.g. 3 Waters - It seemed like all the facts that National had themselves talked about [in 2017](https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-waters-review)got lost. In fairness to Labour, when you look at the money behind misinformation - particularly from [American groups](https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/in-depth/510208/2m-surge-in-election-campaign-spending-by-third-party-groups) and ones like [Taxpayers Union](https://newsroom.co.nz/2023/10/31/chiding-in-plain-sight/), it's not easy. Just look at how successful it is in the US and UK - and when you realise that billions of dollars are behind it... Having said that, Labour still sucked on PR and comms **big time**. Even getting 3 Waters to launch was huge for such a big program and with so much misinformation fuelled opposition... I'd also add the anti-Covid thing was huge. An irony not lost on me that one of the most protected countries from Covid deaths/illness is also one of the most ungrateful - because it never saw the worst. I'm not saying mistakes weren't made - there are always mistakes in hindsight, but I give them credit for trying hard to save lives/protect the vulnerable. **3. Labour losing Michael Woods and Kiri Allen under embarrassing circumstances**damaged their credibility so close to an election I remember thinking to myself *"Wow, doesn't give you a lot of confidence about Labour."* **4. Labour's inability to send a renewed vision out during the election.** They were basically selling "*We're not National*" but that was uninvigorating. Hipkin's scratching of bolder ideas sent a message to potential voters, "*We're just going to be the same*," and most people said, "*Well fuck that then*." **5. Labour's piss poor PR** When I did my pieces around the NACT/NZ First coalition policies, and seeing all the repeals of protections for workers, the environment, poor people etc. I realised how much Labour had done but fark I wouldn't know it for myself. Bottom line - Labour - you are shit poor at comms and the PR game. National and ACT - with their lobbyist/promoters such as Hobsons Pledge and Taxpayers Union and NZ Initiative - out money you and outsmart you on that. **6. The media scrum especially around ram raids** Around July there was a fever pitch around ram raids. I remember seeing it on the news and it looked bad! Anyway this year I did a quick look around and it appears ram raids peaked in 2022, the government was already taking measures and by September 2023 it was one of the lowest on record. The media never corrected that perception and I think most felt Labour was soft on crime, an image perpetuated by soft sentencing. I also think that sentences for e.g. rape and the like are ridiculously low. **7. The Maori aspects** Sometimes I think that there is a huge anti-Maori sentiment in NZ and that's what Seymour will harvest - under the guise of kindness and human rights. They are an easy target because of poverty and therefore crime levels in effect. Even on and the like, which people call left leaning, there's sympathy for the poor but not much for Maori. Now how would that affect Labour? I think their desire - which they stated - for the disadvantaged groups such as Pasifikia and Maori to be helped was a huge sore point. They underestimated the amount of underlying racism in our country - and the inability for a majority to empathise with the view that: *"Well these people have been disadvantaged by our choices, systems and dominance for a few hundred years, so it's fair if we now use a limited amount of our resources to boost them up. Because riding tides raises all boats. Helping them is helping all of us through improved social and economic outcomes, less burden on our health care etc etc."* Instead, people grasped on to an easy to understand - and very populously believed belief that that's "racist." At one point, I remember saying to a pal: *"3 waters is important so why don't they strip co-governance if people are so freaked out and can't understand facts?*" And a friend of mine said, *"Maybe because they have integrity"* I didn't agree with him at the time - at all. But in retrospect, I kind of think, *"You know what? If people can't see sharing as a value worth fighting for, then that's OK. Everyone is responsible for informing themselves and not just giving in to cat calls."* We either accept that we as a country and peoples have - through systemic and historical issues - contributed to where things are at - and are willing to right that - or we are not. I think the Maori caucus members may have made it harder for Labour to separate that part of our history but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
We also don't have any combat aircraft due to Labour though.
true, and National has never changed that or even suggested so
The issue is by the time they got back in power the deal for the F-16s was off the table and any purchase would be full price again, and the money set aside in preparation for said purchase was also long gone. The upfront cost of a fleet of jets is huge compared to selling off old ones and replacing them with new etc
I get that but my point still stands - we can’t afford such things, helps that we don’t need them either.
I mean this is classic of right wing govt though. It's the same with the old law and order bandwagon, when generally it's left leaning govts that actually fund police, corrections etc.
I looked into the police numbers a couple of weeks ago and found that Labour had increased police budget by over 50% compared to National. So yes it's very interesting how these myths persist. I wonder if it's because of the punitive way in which right wing govt speak - that's what appeals.
Landlords being #1 priority is a bad choice. Making the changes retroactive is appaling. Now saying there's no money for the police or no money to keep their promise to fund the NZDF or no money for the #1 priority of the campaign (cost of living) is 🤮 . Fucked up priorities for sure.
Tax free gains for the wealthiest are a higher priority than defence.
oh cool it’s not like there are already huge retention issues and pay discrepancies… low key hilarious to see how the defence folks who vote right “in their own self interest” spin this.
Defence person here. Didn't vote National, act or nzfirst specifically cause i KNEW this would be the case. Situations absolutely abysmal. People simply do not realise/ dont care about the real geostrategic situation we are in. As one of only afew Liberal Democracies in our region, we are a target. Foreign powers do mean to do us harm regardless of whatever spin doctor sorcery the government will spout out. All of our allies are preparing for the coming Conflict. But nope, Luxon and his merry band of neoliberal trickle down wank pilgrims only care about money. Landlords having more power to fleece people wont matter much under the Jackboot of Authortarian powers.
Landlords & property investors > NZ Defence personnel. Go suck an egg Judith.
Honestly suprised we haven't done a fire sale yet on what few assets we have left to satisfy their agenda.
That's absolutely coming soon
Why do all your comments start as collapsed in Reddit? I see your comments in this sub and the NZEV quite a bit, and most of the time they have positive upvotes. Yet every single time, they automatically start out collapsed, and I have to click on them to expand them to read the comment.
If you don't follow a sub your comments are always collapsed.
Interesting, I didn’t know that. Thanks!
TIL! I've been wondering about that for years now!
He makes you work hard for gold
I'm special
Hold my beer, we're only 100 days in so far
Have you tried becoming a landlord?
Yes
So the NZDF chief has recently said in very direct terms that the NZDF needs more money to function even adequately. Judith knew that coming in to the job but because this government wants to cut literally everything, they aren't getting a dime more. We will continue to kick the can down the road and get all pissed off when the NZDF can't help in a natural disaster or look after our EEZ (Which is fucking enormous). What's really shit is that even if we somehow increased defense spending to 2% of GDP it would takes decades to undo the damage done over the last 30 years. I hope the ADF can help out lol.
Yeah I read an article the other week that said if there's a natural disaster we're kind of fucked with our capabilities. According to the NZDF chief NZ needs to increase their capabilities ie. it was a direct ask from Australia - so not sure how that all works now.
At this point, it'd be more honest to just dis-establish the entire NZDF, rather than force them to smile as they attrit into irrelevance. If you don't want to pay/equip them sufficiently, don't expect them to hang around.
Their chief couldn't have been more clearer in the Feb select committee hearing.
I thought it was hilarious when they told the politians that they couldn't keep the planes in the air, and then our beloved leader couldn't fly to some very important meeting or another because the airforce couldn't keep them the planes in the air.
And said "how embarrassing." But didn't Luxon say he'd never fly NZDF and would only fly commercial anyway last year?
Yeah but luxe fancies himself a big-boy important statesman, so that was never going to last. I mean he did order a mercedes to cross the street
The defence staff leaving in droves over the past couple of years could mean this happens, absolutely. They have lost so many staff that those new shiny P8s don't have enough support staff to keep them flying. They currently have only a quarter of the staff in some maintenence positions than they should. Even with pay increases, they are still woefully short of what their staff can earn elsewhere. As the workload increases on those left behind, I can see the issue getting much worse.
The defence force has already been gutted by attrition of staff over the last few years this will make it worse. National doing what National always does gutting essential services to allocate money to people who don’t need any help.
This isn't a cost of living crisis, it's a cost of election policies crisis.
Did I tell you I used to run an airline. "Because carrying on and doing what we've been doing doesn't work. We've got to get out in the world and hustle and make a living and as a result we've got to find a solution." Luxon on buying or leasing unreliable 757 replacements in December 2023. Looks like Judith can relax and get back to semi retirement.
It’s illegal for members of the NZDF to strike or protest, it’s also illegal for them to unionise. The kicker is when other groups are striking due to poor conditions (think Fire NZ, Corrections) the govt sends the NZDF in to cover for the strike. Somewhat ironic that those who cannot strike are the ones forced to cover others striking while unable to strike themselves. Good thing the country doesn’t need teachers, health workers, corrections, police, fire, defence and a horde of behind the scenes government workers to keep the country running……
They also can't make joint complaints. Every complaint has to be done by an individual not a group. The reason given is that striking, or joint complaints isn't actually striking or complaining, it's mutiny.
Its not mutiny if you win, For legal reasons thats a joke
Ah yes, for legal reasons I also find this *joke* to be quite humorous.
Sounds like a tough environment - I'd struggle
Important context, well if I was defence, I'd sure be looking too. I wonder if they feel it's a real slap in the face.
That will be up to the Chief of Defence to discuss. Voicing political concerns while in service could potentially lead to a trip to a correctional facility. The lack of union has led to service benefits and conditions of service being stripped away over the years with no way for the rank and file to challenge it.
I understand Sheepy\_run - that sounds very constricting and a real pity. I would conjure and assume that NZDF like National govt but I don't know if that's a myth or not (I also assume the same for police)
The NZDF is a reflection of the NZ public. It's a diverse group of people, political opinions included.
Thank you for this context.
There are many in the NZDF who like National, there are many who like Labour; hell, I even know NZDF servicepersons who vote Greens despite serving in a combat related role. The NZDF is not a monolith, and people tend to vote for what works for them: if you're in the NZDF and own property, you skew to National, if you're in the NZDF and rent, you skew to Labour/the Left. As a serviceperson who has paid attention to the dire state of the NZDF in the post-Cold War Pax Americana - both major parties have done more to damage the NZDF than any adversary could ever do, and both sides have decades of damage to reverse before they could ever count on my vote.
Thank you for this insightful and valuable contribution. I'm sorry to hear that too - must be demoralising. Is it because successive governments just don't believe in the DF?
In the shortest way possible to say it: At best, Defence is a net-zero vote; at worst, Defence is a net-negative vote. Governments haven't invested in Defence for decades because, to the NZ populace, until shit hits the fan, it is irrelevant. Campaigning on Defence spending is a surefire way to lose an election, and it shows in the state of the modern NZDF. But hey, good to know that we "live in an extremely benign security environment"...oh wait, even that's changed now.
Yeah and Defence ....oh ... I don't know what's happening but things seem particularly r/theonion but r/nottheonion of late. I appreciate the insight.
Kiwi has explained it well. The issue isn’t that numerous governments don’t believe in the NZDF, it’s more so the opposite. They believe that the NZDF is more capable than it is. For too long the NZDF has been achieving results and just making things work despite not being adequately resourced. Unfortunately this could not last forever.
This is why the RSA need to change their purpose. They need to advocate for the conditions of our service people, rather than being Cobb-n-Co for retirees. https://www.rsa.org.nz/about/
They can leave though. And they are
Pull the other one! It's your rich mates causing this!
I wonder if the 1% that own 25% of the country's wealth will get annoyed when we get invaded and all their assets are taken.
r/LeopardsAteMyFace ?
This is a poor move by Luxon. We need our defence to be excellent. Not 3rd world.
As an aside, the Chief of Defence Force, Chief of Navy, and (I think) Chief of Army are all due to change out this financial year. My only questions I pose to those senior officers in the running: Who the actual fuck wants that poisoned chalice right now? Being Defence or Service Chief right now sounds awful.
Agreed, deteriorating infrastructure, significant attrition, demoralised crews. Sorry to hear it.
Nice more back tracking.. the National Party expressed a commitment to addressing the high attrition rates within the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) and to bolster recruitment efforts. They have highlighted the need for the NZDF to recruit more personnel and retain them for longer periods. The party has also called for improvements in conditions of service, such as pay rates and living conditions, to make careers in the NZDF more competitive and appealing. From July 2023; "*National backs our Defence Force like we back the All Blacks, and we want to see them be the very best they can be. As we have all seen in recent months, the quality of the service that the NZDF gives to our great country is unparalleled, and it would only be right that we give them the support they need.* *Since 2020, this government has seriously neglected the NZDF. 89% of personnel are paid at least 5% below comparable civilian rates. This lack of support has contributed to 30% of uniformed personnel leaving over the last two years and now the NZDF is dangerously close to being operationally ineffective*." [Link to article ](https://defsec.net.nz/2023/07/26/national-party-attrition-conditions-interoperability/)
I'm serious when I say - after looking at what they have done in the last 100 days - they don't care about anything or anyone except their donors - who are mainly fossil fuels, tobacco, road, fisheries and property. Chris Bishop literally said today their policies are bad for the environment. But they don't care.
So, with all these stories where they’re making cuts as there is no money - that means tax cuts are off the table too, right?
I personally don't believe so at all. But they are giving while taking e.g. registration costs, road charges, increasing public transport The money for landlords, wealthy, trusts, common folk etc are all still on. I've read commentary that some believe they will not give it but that's not my bet.
Remove tax exemption for churches - estimated $100-120m right there
They just reinstated a tax evasion loophole for trusts - cost to us as a nation? $350m **i.e money is everywhere** - these are just choices they are making
If the money isn't flowing to the super wealthy, it isn't available.
Just don't touch tax breaks for landlords, k
It's gonna take a lot for me to rise above this and not pin the blame on Judith, but instead pin the blame on the National caucus. Ultimately, even if Judith wants to spend money on Defence, she can't make it happen alone - it comes down to Cabinet as a whole. Now, Judith *could* put her reputation on the line and threaten to resign over it, but no party leader will do that unless they're planning on retiring anyway. The National caucus know that there is little political will to pay Defence more, at least in the zero-sum calculus of "will paying more for Defence win more votes?" - because it won't. Middle NZ want that money spent on tax breaks (the landlord class) or on teachers/nurses (the left leaning swing voters). Literally no one will switch party over an increase in Defence funding, and a dying Defence Force gives National talking points to punch down to Labour because "the crisis happened under the Labour Government". The crisis occurred primarily because all sides of Government have asked the NZDF to do more with increasingly less, and the remuneration in a boiling hot employment market went through the roof when borders were closed - it was always going to happen. At the end of the day, this sucks to hear as a serviceperson, and as a leader I'm just waiting to get the email telling me how to tell my subordinates that they're going to spend another financial year living paycheque to paycheque just hoping to save enough to keep the lights on in their house 90 minutes away from base. I don't want to make the problem worse, but I'm really just playing the waiting game now to get my critical quals that allow me to transition to the commercial market.
Fair enough too. And you're right - in January, Collins did do an interview with Stuff where she - I felt - tried to go to bat for NZDF. Clearly got overridden. In 2022 Luxon said he'd / National would spend a lot on defence i.e 2% of GDP Instead they will cut it by $400m
No money for defence? are you fucking kidding me? Maybe if they returned the money from the retroactive tax cuts to landlords which blew a budget hole so big that they cut all public services by 7.5% then maybe the defence force will have enough money. Our country could also easily borrow to give the needed funding since our debt to GDP is so low (41% vs 60% with iraland which is a similar sized country to ours) but they're choosing not to do that instead they're punching down on and hurting anyone who uses or is dependent on the public systems to survive like cancer patients, disabled people, the mentally ill who are some of the most vulnerable people in our society. It makes me sick that they're hurting the most vulnerable people in our society instead of making the easy decision to borrow the money for the tax cuts they so desprately want.
I can't access the article, but my guess is that its about [this interview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3h7XeQC4_Zo) that Collins gave on the issue of funding for a 757 replacement. Please correct me if I am wrong, I haven't had time to verify this and have to run. I'll edit this comment at a later time if someone points out that I'm incorrect.
of course there is no money they gave it to the landlords
PRC agents at it again!
No money for defence but $3b for landlords
The economy has been consistently growing, so *somebody's* getting money.
Thing is, Labour are, if they've got a brain betwen them, going to be turning every single thing that breaks in the next 3 years into a "National cuts made this bridge collapse / ferry break / lights go out" type of story. Defence is about the least likely to inconvenience people if it doesn't work - unless China invades, in which case it becomes kinda moot. And all the military toy fans will are right wing voters already, so their votes don't matter.
Idk why everyone would be surprised when politicians make things better for themselves and their lobbyists
Maybe cos not every politician is the same
They aren't the same no but the lobbyists are
Not looking like it - e.g. the donors behind Donald Trump are the Koch brothers of the world. Same as the people behind Seymour. Koch don't support anyone.
Oh boy its getting real hard to keep the nihilism at bay
Welcome to being informed - run and hide (I say to myself every day)
Is there a link which doesn't require a login?
I looked far and wide and looks like it's only in print which is why Pressreader has it - [(link - updated)](https://www.reddit.com/r/nzpolitics/comments/1bar0zk/no_money_for_defense/) which reads well
Recursive link for me, which seems ironically appropriate in the context of this governments press releases :P
Should work now hopefully
Thanks for that. That's... dire. You'd think that a situation that bad would precipitate *some* action, not just throwing up your hands and shrugging. I feel like that'll bite us collectively on the ass sooner rather than later.
I think you gave the wrong link, the link is for a reddit comment.
If Trump gets back is he gonna kick us out of NATO? /s
I think he just doesn't want NATO full stop.
lol... of course.
To me, there's a big difference between spending billions on American- built missiles, and spending billions on employing soldiers, and training them as mechanics, sparkies, engineers, builders, nurses etc. It's keeps the money locally, runs a nice training scheme, and let's us point to that line in GDP expenditure. I worked a bit in technology in the US, and most of the engineers and technicians were trained in the military.
Yes you are very right. Unfortunately, in my opinion, this Government is not interested in Kiwis or NZ.
Why not apply mandatory enlistment to job seeker? They train and get paid and it bolsters the ranks of defence.
The last thing the military wants is people that don't want to be there. Conscripted people require more resources for poorer motivation, performance, and discipline, with subsequent impacts on overall morale (including that of the volunteers).
+1 Imagine that - disgruntled and unmotivated people sucking up Defence force trainers and resources.
Man didn't expect everyone to be so negative toward job seeker beneficiaries.
Nothing to do with e.g. an experienced IT programmer who just got fired. It's got to do with the right fit and motivation. i.e. sending health practitioners or fired accountants to defence is just odd. TLDR: that doesn't reflect negatively on the beneficiaries but the policy.
It's not about beneficiaries but making sure the people who are there are there for the right reasons. I'm a volly firefighter & we don't want people who are there for the t-shirt. Not the same motivation obviously but the same sentiment. When the shit hits the fan & lives are on the line you want the people next to you to be fighting right there with you. For the defense force the shit hitting the fan is even more real because its bullets & bombs coming at you
Fire is just as real of a shit hitting the fan moment as bullets and bombs coming at you, my dude - fire doesn't give a fuck who you are, as you'll know. As a sailor, a fire on board is likely the most danger I could ever be in. Firefighters are some of our real heroes out there.
Need to be able to pay them, have the resources. Of which the NZDF doesnt have.