The NZ Herald & Radio NZ Misled the Nation by asserting "65% of Kiwis Support Capital Gains Tax". The survey they used shows around 90% oppose it.

The Herald & Radio NZ owe the nation an apology. Their reporting has hit new lows. No wonder people don't trust the Main Stream Media. Yesterday they reported on their front pages, "Labour closing in on National in latest Ipsos issues poll, with 65% support for capital gains tax". At best its a misleading headline; at worst its a blatant untruth. Then they go on to say, in a bit more detail, that the Ipsos Poll "found almost two-thirds of NZ'ers support a capital gains tax in some form". But Ipsos never asked its 1,000 survey respondents the question, "Do you support a capital gains tax in some form?" And wording in surveys is everything. Every word matters, since it can bias respondents. In fact, Ipsos asked, "Would you support the introduction of a Capital Gains Tax in the following situations? (1) Sale of an investment property? (2) Sale of a business? (3) Sales of other assets like boats, cars & paintings? (4) Sale of a family home". The proportions supporting were 57%, 43%, 22% and 13%, respectively. There's only (narrow) majority support for one asset class - investment properties - and NZ already has capital taxes on them (ones that come under the bright-line test). Faced with this failure to show much public support for capital taxes, what Ipsos (sneakily) did & the Herald (sneakily) reported does not even come from the answer to a survey question. Instead it came from a calculation that was made up & contrived - they added up the number of people who ticked any one (or more) of the above 4 categories. That's how they arrived at their "65% support capital gains in one of these forms" number.

To see how misleading is the Herald's story (journos also confronted the PM with the "65% support number") then answer the following question: do you think that only 35% of Kiwis oppose Capital Gains Taxes (being 100% - 65%)? If you think the answer is "yes", its wrong. The answers to the question, "Would you not support the introduction of a Capital Gains Tax in the following situations? (1) Sale of an investment property; (2) Sale of a business; (3) Sales of other assets like boats, cars & paintings; (4) Sale of a family home", are 32%, 41%, 64% and 78%, respectively, of respondents. So clear majorities in 2 out of 4 categories show no support. Although Big Media did not report it, I estimate about 90% of Kiwis object to Capital Gains Taxes on at least one of these asset classes (often several). Whereas the Herald reported that Ipsos "found almost two-thirds of New Zealanders support a capital gains tax in some form", the headline could equally have been Ipsos "found almost 90% of New Zealanders oppose a capital gains tax in some form". Big Media's Plot to get capital taxes put in and Labour re-elected on that platform makes me suspect its in cahoots with Labour at some horribly unpleasant & deeply disturbing level, one that needs investigation.

Sources:

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/politics/labour-closing-in-on-national-in-latest-poll-with-65-support-for-capital-gains-tax/QSD7A426WFDEFHIHVCVBDQ5C44/

https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/checkpoint/audio/2018961806/survey-of-1000-people-shows-65-would-support-capital-gains-tax

https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2024-10/26th%20Ipsos%20New%20Zealand%20Issues%20Monitor%20October%202024.pdf

Maybe NZ's Minister of Justice is Right. When Parliament Can't Make Laws, the people have no choice but to take the Law into their Own Hands.

Not so long ago, the Labour Party's Deputy PM Sir Michael Cullen stated in no uncertain terms in Parliament that sovereignty was ceded in the Treaty of Waitangi. According to his Labour Party, "The power of the NZ Parliament to change the law is central to the exercise of sovereignty and therefore the contemporary exercise of Article One of the Treaty". That was in 2004. He did so in the context of the Foreshore & Seabed Act. Now current Labour Leader Chris Hipkins has formally contradicted him and stated the opposite in Parliament, saying “Māori didn’t cede sovereignty in signing the Treaty”. Meanwhile the National Party revoked the Seabed and Foreshore Act because, under Sir John Key, it sided with the Waitangi Tribunal that NZ's Parliament had no right to pass such an Act. However, a few weeks ago, National PM Luxon told Parliament, "The Crown is Sovereign", in apparent confirmation of Sir Michael Cullen's view that also held it is Sovereign and has the right to pass laws by majority vote. ACT voted against the Seabed and Foreshore Act, with Richard Prebble saying at the time, "I say to the Minister again that the ACT party would have left the matter to the courts .. they should go ahead with court cases. Let me make that clear".

However now National and ACT are vociferously complaining that the court cases are unfair - that activist judges have hijacked them by making too generous awards of coastal lands to Māori claimants. Justice Minister Goldsmith blames Parliament, saying, "During the past three decades, Parliament has not always been clear about what specific Treaty provisions meant or were trying to achieve .. That’s left the courts, and the agencies themselves, and businesses and local councils all to free-range as to what it does mean and doesn’t mean". In order to clarify things, ACT has proposed legislation, in the form of its Treaty Principles Bill. However, the PM and his National Party don't want to clear things up, so say they will not support ACT's bill, nor even amend it. What a shambles. A shambles courtesy of our elected Parliamentarians - both Labour and National - the lot of them.

Having said that, the Justice Minister is right. When Parliament can't do its job and pass clear, intelligible laws, then the courts & people are left with no choice but to make rules & laws on their own. So schools & universities have decided how to interpret the Treaty their way, including how pupils are taught in this regard. Government departments have ruled on how employees must act, as have Councils, and private firms. Real estate authorities have ruled on obligations of agents regards the Treaty. Meanwhile judges have gone & done their own thing. And maybe you & me, next time we swim near the foreshore, or stand on a sea bed, should make our own rules & judgements, in negotiation with others, as to what we can, or can't, do. Maybe it should be sorted out by private bargains. After all, Parliament has failed to lead. Perhaps it doesn't deserve to be called "sovereign", when it can't pass proper laws anymore. Maybe its best to leave things up to the people & their organizations to make their own laws. Parliament is looking inept, embedded in a City where water pipes burst around it, red cones block streets, broken ferries are berthed nearby & few people want to go into work anymore. Maybe power should go back to the people.

Sources:

https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/waitangi-tribunal-report-disappointing