NZ: Compensation for wrongful conviction

Share |

New Zealand, like every Western democracy, is paying a very high price for its system of justice. Consider this very expensive case of compensation for David Bain, the man determined to have been wrongfully convicted for the murder of family members. The government established a committee to investigate and determine a fair compensatory package for the 'innocent man'. Behind the scenes, the Minister for Justice, Judith Collins, is said to have done her own assessment and ruled out the report by an independent judicial officer.
This case strikes me as the silliness of our system. Not that David does not deserve justice, but because we all do. Justice, both in terms of an effective and efficient system, but also one which does not result in a burden upon us all for very little value. Tax payer funds wasted.
The problem here is that an 'independent commission' was never the way the system should have determined fair value for a wrongful conviction; and the capacity of a minister to rule-out such an independent value, should not have been a counter-option. The problem is that the system is a framework for extortion, replete with 'mandates' or the government's prerogative. Judith's efforts are not wrong. Our system should be 'adversarial' in the sense of entertaining options or opinions. The problem is that its extortionate in the sense that Judith has effectively imposed her will, and the system gives her that power. I don't blame her; but I blame politicians collectively for positing as custodians of a system they do not know how to fix. They thus become the problem. You and I are powerless to 'fix' them to fix the system. This is not a system open to political or any other pertinent discourse. We cannot look for answers within this system. This is an extortion system which imposes arguments. There is no reconciliation; there is no acountability; given that a disinterested, disempowered, alienated electorate is trumped by politically polarised, reactive group of legislators scared of 'boo'.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

Discounted NZ flights to attract tourists

Share |

NZ is fighting a losing battle on most fronts for the simple reason that - its isolated. It is a difficult place to fly to. I dare say a lot of people wanting to come here get on various websites for the airlines and simply give up after realising how difficult it is to fly there, and the cost of direct flights. Invariably people will end up simply going to a closer location, or Australia, since they invariably have to transfer in Australia for NZ anyway. This is a shame because NZ has a lot to offer tourists. In fact, its capacity to offer a greater cultural experience is being undermined by the lack of economic activity that tourism could surely improve. Which makes one ponder the question - is there more the government and industry could be doing?

I ask whether NZ should be aiding travel to the country. Why can't it be as easy as flying to Australia? What does this require? Surely it requires:
1. More flights - more destinations, more timetable flexibility, so that people can actually get here at reasonable times.
2. Cheaper flights - using some type of coupon scheme. The tourist organisations need to find a way to make it targeted.
3. More airlines - the reverse seems to be the case. The cheapest flights to NZ were with Air Brunei (to Auckland) and Air Asia (to Christchurch). Both companies were forced to abandon these routes.

If we recognise the economic boon that tourists are for NZ; might it actually make sense for the NZ government to actually 'subsidise' tourists to stay in NZ, recognising that they are going to be contributing far more. What type of scheme is the question? There are several impediments:
1. Lack of jobs for tourists to stay longer - Clearly cheaper tickets would allow more tourists to come, allow more student tourists to work in the country, and contribute in a way the old retiree immigrant is not doing, i.e. by spending money. Already I see NZ is the first nation to allow Filipinos to work in the country...if they have $6000 to get here. Fair hurdle. But they are not going to get jobs as easily as Chinese, Japanese or Korean speakers since Filipinos English-speaking skills are not useful.
2. Lower cost education - The existing model is to ask foreigners to pay more to study in NZ (or Australia) than the local population. This can only curtail the spending that these students do when they get here. Why you might ask, in an age of discrimination-free politics, are foreign students paying more. I fully expect more Asians to go to the Philippines to learn English in future to avoid this rip-off.
3. High cost flights - It is a hard sell to offer discounted flights. It might particularly make sense for packaged tours where the value of 'domestic spending' per travel is 3x more than the nominal flight cost to offer a significant concession to these people. Old people travelling abroad are accustomed to spending large amounts for their unique experiences.

The challenge of course for the tourist industry is how to share any such burden. Perhaps the incentive might be for travellers to Australia to be offered a $300 hotel coupon to come to NZ. Perhaps not. But this is the type of scheme that might deliver greater economic spending at a time when NZ is educating kids, only to see them leave the country. Admittedly Asian kids are replacing them; but I forecast that in coming years, the flow will go the other way, as people realise that Asia is the place to be. For instance, consider the statistics:
1. Philippines - Population growth of 2% per annum; rise in incomes 8-12% per annum, rate of urbanisation 8% per annum.
2. New Zealand - Population growth - zero, rise in incomes - only among skilled workers, who invariably take more overseas holidays rather than spend it in NZ. Rate of urbanisation is also relatively high because of the lack of opportunity in rural communities...which largely reflects the fact that land is tied up in the hands of 'old money' who live on speculative gains rather than creating value. i.e. They sell their land to retired foreigners and city executives as 'premium lifestyle blocks' to finance their overseas jaunts. A false economy because they never really 'earned' the money.

Of course no one really cares about this if your economy is growing strongly. Which brings us back to the issue of why the Philippines and other emerging markets are increasingly 'relevant' and NZ strategically set adrift, as elites in power fail to see the forest through the trees.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com

NZ is a difficult and expensive travel destination

Share |

I am a frequent traveller from Asia to NZ, and the following NZ Herald article only universalises the problem for NZ - that it is an expensive place to travel. Whether you are flying there or leaving, its expensive for several reasons:
1. You have to rely on one of the expensive - non-discounting airlines to get there
2. Your alternative is to fly to Sydney, Gold Coast, Melbourne, or other ports before flying on to NZ. The Australian route at least gives you more points of entry - that is Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch or Queenstown.
3. The problem is that the choice of airports is offset by the poor travel times; so its hard to get a good connection. I often find it almost impossible to make good connections to get to or leave NZ. I invariably am left coming into the country at midnight, when there are no buses, having to stay an extra night for accommodation, and of course having to commute all the way to Auckland on slow public transport because domestic transport is so expensive.

This obstacle of course would readily be resolved if:
1. NZ migration laws were on-par with Australia
2. NZ biosecurity was beefed up
3. NZ did not have such a social welfare nightmare

Solve these problems and the dropping of barriers would see cheaper flights and greater inter-regional connections. i.e. You could well expect flights from Newcastle (NSW) to Rotorua (North Is NZ), or Melbourne to Napier (top of South Is NZ). This would of course be lovely for all concerned. Frankly, I think these developments are about 10 years off. This is how long it will take NZ to discover oil, and end its parlous state of economic irrelevance as 'Hobbitston' fame.

Aside from the need to change connections in Eastern Australia to get a good fare to Australia, the same is true flying from Asia. One is invariably forced to fly one of the Asian low-cost airlines to Sydney or the Gold Coast, before transferring to a Jetstar flight to Auckland or Christchurch. You have to pay more with Virgin Blue or Air NZ to fly to Wellington or Queenstown. I was forced to fly from Manila to Kuala Lumpur by Cebu Pacific, and then get a flight from KL to Sydney via Singapore, before transferring to a flight to Auckland with Jetstar. The poor service of Tiger Airlines (we could not reach its call centre after numerous attempts, its offices were non existent in Manila airport) and their website did not allow changes. Our problem was their misleading website - it suggests +15kg - leaving the passenger wondering if they are getting 15kg or 15kg + some nominal amount of luggage. Very annoying. Tiger is of course famous for poor service, which is why this airline is being absorbed by its sister company (under the Singapore Airlines brand) Scoot. Scoot is being well-marketed and is a very sensible operation. I have flown with them twice, and they are even better than Jetstar in service. This is their promotional stage, so that might change in 2013.

So it is clear in the Asian sector that the two main offerings are:
1. Scoot operating out of Singapore - see www.flyscoot.com
2. Jetstar operating out of Auckland, Singapore, Melbourne, Sydney, Perth - see www.jetstar.com

Clearly Jetstar has the stronger choice of destinations. Its service has been sloppy in some areas; however I suspect Scoot will give it reason to change its flight packaging. The discount airlines have really been very inflexible on their travel terms. i.e. For a cost of service charge of $3 for a flight change, they are extorting $50, or even causing travellers to forfeit discount tickets or buy new tickets on the day at premium prices. These tactics are shameful, and mirror the action of the banks in the past. It gets even worse, when in our case, the airline has unilaterally decided that there is no capacity to change a code share flight; or that you cannot change your luggage allowance...which is idiotic and frustrating when the revision arose because of their poor website disclosure. Tiger Airlines does not actually tell you on their website what your carry on baggage allowance is.

Asian property markets outperforming Japan Foreclosed Guide Philippines Property Guide
Profit from mining with Global Mining Investing eBook

Author Andrew Sheldon| Applied Critical Thinking | www.SheldonThinks.com