The Taxpayers’ Union is welcoming Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s commitment that today’s fuel support package must not drive government debt higher.

“At a time when the books are already under strain, this is a welcome sign of discipline,” Taxpayers’ Union spokesperson Tory Relf said. “It shows the Government now understands that every extra dollar of debt is tomorrow’s tax bill.”

"The PM's comments indicate tomorrow's announcement is fiscally neutral. That means that at least equal reductions in spending will be specified to go along with the support package."

“Helping Kiwis with targeted and temporary measures during this crisis is sensible, but only if it’s paid for. Government debt is already at $140,000 for every Kiwi household, as tracked by the National Debt Clock. Shifting the cost onto future taxpayers would just kick the can down the road."

"Any increase in debt is counterproductive. It will drive up inflation and the costs of borrowing."

"As Friday's warning from Fitch shows, New Zealand enters this crisis in a vulnerable state. Despite political rhetoric about 'saving money' the Government's running a larger structural deficit now, than when it assumed office."

"Borrowing more right now would be to adopt a Grant Robertson-style response. Even if on a smaller scale, that would be a grave mistake. We welcome Mr. Luxon's approach."

“Fiscal neutrality means real trade-offs and tough choices. But there is no longer the option to borrow and hope.”

News broke on Wednesday that Mana Party leader Hone Harawira had erected hoardings for the election which displayed the crest of the House of Representatives. This led to questions about how the hoardings had ben funded – had taxpayers’ money been used?

When we questioned if taxpayers’ money had ben used by the MP, Mr Harawira aggressively claimed that funding for the hoardings had not come from Parliamentary Service.

So why do they all contain the crest? It’s a symbol that generally denotes that taxpayers’ money has been used to purchase advertising or other goods and services. 

We have written to the Speaker in order to gain some clarification on this matter.

The rules applicable to fundings MPs receive are clear:

1. Taxpayers’ money should not be used for, or in a way that could be seen to promote a candidate or party during the election; and
2. The House of Representatives crest should not be used on materials that contain electioneering.

Which rule has been broken? And what repercussions, if any, are likely to follow?

We’re looking forward to the Speaker’s ruling and response.

24/07/2014 Letter to the Speaker