Graph Shows Decrease/Increase of Rates in Region

The graph above shows the decrease/increase in rates for ratepayers in the Waikato Regional Council area. From the graph it is easy to see that 40% of ratepayers in the region are actually paying no more or less than last year. Another 50% have an increase of between $0 – $10 overall. The column which shows quite a big increase in rates are ratepayers on new properties or conversions which are paying rates for the first time, hence the big numbers. The Rates Control Team is very happy with these results and will be working to ensure that this trend continues in the future. You can click the graph to see a larger picture.

Biodiversity

Biodiversity: What to do?

Everyone prioritises the way we use our resources to enable and enhance our lives. We manipulate our environment to our own ends; behaviour around our precious Biodiversity is a good reflection of this.  We are hard wired into exploiting and modifying our circumstances to our best advantage.

However, protecting our biodiversity runs into a few philosophical problems.  As most of our land is held in private ownership, this comes with certain rights.  It’s exactly at this point where the conundrum starts to play out.  On the one hand we have these rights that safeguard private property, yet we need to preserve biodiversity on the land that we privately own.

If we are to look at which landownership system can best manage the aims of biodiversity it would be land which is under state ownership. But this disregards the economic impact of rolling this state controlled system (Socialist State) out across the whole country.

So, how do we address the issue of biodiversity on private land? Not consistently!  On the one hand the government has been whittling away at our private property rights.  Local government attitude is much more pragmatic but are tightly constrained by the ever present economic environment.  Both are mandated to protect biodiversity.

What policies are most likely to succeed? The Government’s socialist attitude will not succeed because when you take personal responsibility away you also take away the reason to care.  The more responsibility you give with certain expectations attached and encouragement the more likely it will be successful.

The Government does not “trust” private ownership enough to deliver positive outcomes.  This is reflected in the policy settings that have taken responsibility away.  Set policies that strengthen private property rights, this then makes the land owner more responsible and more culpable which will deliver better results.

Let’s resolve this philosophical difference because without a consistent vision we will not make progress toward strengthening our weakening biodiversity.

Tony Armstrong
27/8/10

A STRESSED ENVIRONMENT AND THE WAVERING NZ DOLLAR

Will This Raise Any Eybrows?

From an environmental point of view profit margins on the average sheep and beef farm should be raising an eyebrow or two in government.

The messengers relate and extol the quantum of food exported and hail this statistic for all to see as a sign that all is well.

All is not well! EW councillors have been shown the increasing intensification with heavier stock, which is being grazed on class 6, 7 & 8 land west of the Waipa River. This steeper land was once the domain of sheep, a somewhat lighter animal.

I’m going to sheet this land use change back to one continuing uncontrollable event, our wildly fluctuating dollar. Our profit margins are deplorable, so what is the farmer expected to do but increase their risk by taking on animals that will give them a greater return. MAF figures show an average meat & Wool farmer’s cash surplus is a miserly $6900, not quite the return anyone should expect on a $2m property.

Once this farmer has had his day, which is nigh, I doubt that too many folk will be willing to take on the mantle of a mortgage and the risk of carrying stock through one rotation and end up with less equity than you started with.

Don’t just look at the big picture, the profit margins from any ones point of view is unsustainable and is putting the many links in our economy at risk, not to mention putting our environment under increasing stress.

Our anchor, the producer, finds his whole environment is under stress and, unless this is addressed, then our dreams of living in a first world economy will just float away.

Anthony Armstrong
18/8/10

SELLING THE FARM?

Farm For Sale?

One elephant sized reason as to why properties are going to be difficult to sell is discussed in an article by Carylon Cummins, in the Sydney Morning Herald, Monday 22 February 2010.  She starts by saying,

“Take a deep breath and watch the fine print. Property owners have basically been allowed to manage the process of appointing a valuer” when selling their property.  She goes on to say, “This may be a thing of the past.”

Not only have many banks been running wild, lending to all and sundry with little or no collateral with the result that countries like NZ have simply borrowed too much.  This, of course, includes private individuals with personal debts.

I would have expected the International banking sector to put some aligning mechanisms, or at least some guidelines, in place, to minimise the risk caused by this to the world financial sector.

Cummins article points out three simple rules around a “loan value ratio and associated risk”, that I would suggest that no government or banking group will be able to avoid simply because the IMF will not continue to lend to them unless they comply.

1. Banks will be expected to keep within a stated risk profile by keeping a certain cash requirement, (nothing new here). But the risk profile cash requirements will increase perhaps to 2% for urban and to 15% for industry.
2. To have the ability to borrow only 65% against the property.
3. The requirement to fund the rest personally.

Farming, our economic driver is mortgaged to the hilt. Many farmers have relied on capital gains to pull them through and we all know of several who are farming and living off a benefit. I would not expect banks to move wholesale into implementing the above scenarios but if the Australian banks are feeling their way through the process then it will happen here.

Our problem is, who will have the skills, the cash and motivation to buy a business with input costs greater than the profit?

All this information leads one to believe that farm values have a deal to drop yet, perhaps to a point where a 6% return is attainable.

Anthony Armstrong
Feb-Aug /10

Vote The Full Rates Control Team This Election

The Full Rates Control Team in the Waikato

To view a larger image and read the detail, please click the picture.
Tip: When you’re viewing the larger image press and hold down the Ctrl key and press the ‘+’  key to make it even bigger.  To reduce the size press and hold down the Ctrl key and press the ‘-’  key.  This will work in IE  & Firefox.

Here we are, the full team, ready for action! We are working to keep rates down, at least to the CPI – support us by voting Rates Control Team candidates. Return incumbents and elect the new members. We will work hard to make a difference on your behalf.

Thank you.
RCT Waikato

A TEAM APPROACH

It's all a matter of TEAMWORK

The Rates Control Team is bringing a team approach to the local body election in 2010.

Politicians find it difficult to build a close relationship with their community. This is exemplified by the 37% voters turn out. Perhaps the community does not feel involved!

Our team approach was to gain support/endorsement from community representative groups. Hamilton Grey Power, Hamilton Citizens and Ratepayers Association and Hamilton Federated Farmers Executive have again endorsed our team. We believe this also gives those people not personally involved in such group’s confidence that we identify with community core values and consequently confidence in the direction.

A team can offer appropriate support for those potential candidates who have the qualities necessary to represent their community. A team can support and give confidence to those unsure and can accurately describe the workload and obligations. Within this concept includes the vision of succession planning.

The imperative is a sensible selection process which looks to build a balanced skilled supportive team of candidates that will deliver good governance for the community.  Nothing is guaranteed, but it offers a viable alternative to the stand alone candidate and the possible problems associated with electing 12 candidates and hoping they will work cooperatively together for the community.

A political team will be accountable. The media will pick up on any indiscretions. The team will ride or fall on the behaviour of any one member. In contrast the stand alone councillor may avoid the personal responsibility and not be taken to task, thus avoiding that accountability.

Above all, a team has the ability to choose a candidate with a skill base that will compliment the team in the areas of responsibility required for good decision making.

Anthony Armstrong
11/11/09

Not a typical Political Party

Who Knows What 7 Good Men & Women Can Achieve?

The Rates Control Team was formed three years ago in Hamilton. Initially we stood 7 candidates in our regional council. This triennium our Rates Control Team will be standing 12 candidates in the Hamilton City Council and stand in the majority of seats for the Waikato Regional Council. Whilst there is never any certainty in politics, we believe that this approach to local body politics has many positives. The concept is gaining momentum and we encourage other electorates to consider a team approach.

Each Rates Control Teams is autonomous, but we are bound by our common pledge to ensure rates increases do not exceed CPI. Every candidate maintains their independence and integrity throughout their time, and can feel comfortable to vote freely, but at the end of the day, the Team and the individual’s aim is to achieve their common goal of ensuring rates increases do not exceed CPI.

We have developed a Manifesto to ensure good processes are followed.

It contains:

• A pledge form that pledges each candidate to collectively achieve the Goal of ensuring rates increases do not exceed CPI, (Note: targeted rates are excluded.)
• A Vision that balances extremes and avoids burdensome rates, protects community Interests and maximises value for money.
• A brief section on Community Commitments, Candidates Selection Strategies.
• A constitution

The manifesto formalises our teams direction
Tony Armstrong
19/7/10

The History of the Rates Control Team

Breakfast Brain Storming

On a November 2006 morning in Taupiri over a light lunch several farmers sat down to discuss, “Where to from here?  Our concerns and hackles had been raised by the double digit and ever escalating farm rates from the surrounding councils.

It didn’t take too long to decide what to do but, “Who was going to bell the cat?”  Who was prepared to put themselves forward?   At first we thought that we would stand a team in a district council.  But this plan soon dissipated when we realised how difficult it was to find candidates.  We felt we might have a better opportunity at finding candidates using the Federated Farmers network.

I remembered how overwhelmingly successful the WEL Energy rebate platform was.  It struck the right cord when they offered to rebate the profits back to the community.

We debated our name long and hard and took on a pledge to ensure rates increases do not exceed CPI and seek endorsements from popular middle stream representative groups.

It’s amazing the wide range of skills that a team contains, they came to the fore when the campaign began in earnest.

It ultimately all came together with 6 of the 7 candidates elected to the regional council…and then we learned what we had let ourselves in for!

Tony Armstrong
11/07/2010

ETS, FOOD SECURITY, ENERGY & WATER QUALITY

A Glass of Water

I think we can agree that the Emission Trading Scheme, Food security, Energy and water quality are the challenges as our planets population incrementally increases.

All governments have an insurmountable prioritisation problem ahead.  Our government is hell-bent on placing the ETS ahead of all those other challenges in my list, but I think this will very soon fall off the radar.

Why so? By farmer’s rule of thumb calculator and figures from Meat & Wool all showing they will only stay solvent for a few years after 2015 as the ETS tax increases.  This, with farmers growing realisation that the first year’s tax compounds over 9 years to meet that 100% compliance.

Some farmers will rely on their innovation and motivation to get them through.  Others enjoy farming for the lifestyle and will do nothing. Fortunately, many farmers have little debt or no debt so only need to cover operational costs.  They can generate positive cash flows while, at the same time, generating economic losses and relying on someone in the family to, effectively, subsidise the farm.

All farms will find it difficult to survive and many will give up and sell their capital stock, hopefully retaining the land.  Even if land is free, the remaining stock will be too expensive to buy, because of the scarcity factor.  Unemployment will markedly increase as a good percentage of NZers rely on farming for their livelihood.

In some sense this will be a good thing, as I believe our nation has forgotten how our wealth is created.  But at the end of the day food security will become the more realistic pressing issue, because ultimately, that’s what is essential; closely followed by a glass of water and a warm house.  Not a tax on a gas.

Anthony Armstrong
RD 9 Hamilton
17/4/10

Save our Libraries

Public Library

Not too many years ago, Government fully funded our Libraries. This has been wound back to be virtually fully funded by the rate payer. A complete turn around in funding should raise the issue of logic and create some robust analysis. To say “it’s in the public good” is not good enough in these times of constrained incomes. The question needs to be asked again. Where is the fair balance between who pays and “public good” now? Can the few continue to afford to pay for the many? Non-ratepayers have the ability to use our libraries just as regularly as our beleaguered payer. Such a financial shift in funding from one sector to another is untenable especially when the initial premise and the reasons for having a library have not changed.

Reading is a necessity of life. Our library system offers complete support for each person’s educational needs, entertainment and information. But isn’t this the rationale for the roll out of broadband. The government is funding this. It seems to me that the rural sector not only pays heartily for the library system but has a good chance of missing out on broadband too. Where is the funding alignment?

The library now offers an integrated array of activities, you only need to look around as you enter the door, but this integration does not include other community activities yet, to any degree. The synergies between school libraries and the public system are obvious and could not only save many millions of dollars in buildings but many advantages in staff expertise and resources.

Let’s also explore other possible collaborative advantages while in the mood. Can the people in this continuum loop please get together? The days of increasing taxation to fund every worthwhile “community good” are now over.

• Our libraries are here to stay and for everyone to use, so let’s work to save them and obtain the funding from the community as a whole not just the rate payer whose funding to sustain these “public goods” are not unlimited.

Tony Armstrong 4/7/10