Press Releases - Social Credit

FOLLOW US ON
  "We'll put in place
an economic system
that works for people
and the planet"  
   Chris Leitch - Leader   
     About Us      Policies       Press Releases       Donate        Join Up    
Northern Lights
Go to content

Press Releases

Click on the release you want to read
August 8th - OCR cut action called for
OCR cut action called for
Media Release 8th August
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Now that the shock horror merchants and doom and gloom predictors have had their say on the Reserve Bank's cut in the OCR to 1%, it's time for action.
 
The Bank itself could start the process by offering to fund government infrastructure projects and investments that would boost the productivity of New Zealand businesses.
 
After all, if it was good enough for it to provide money to the country's overseas owned private banks during the global financial crisis to ensure they could continue to deliver massive profits to their shareholders, then surely it's good enough for it to generate funding for the government to invest in the productive base of our economy.
 
The government signalled an $8 billion dollar increase in borrowing in the 2019 budget update, so the Reserve Bank could fund that for a start.
 
Why borrow that $8 billion from overseas lenders, with the added interest burden on taxpayers, when your own bank could provide the funds?
 
The Bank could also replace the government’s current private sector borrowing with Reserve Bank funding, and save taxpayers $6 billion each year in wasted interest payments. That $6 billion could be left in the hands of taxpayers through a tax cut, particularly for those on the lowest incomes.
 
But more is needed to get our economy rolling. Quantitative easing – lending money to the banks – is not one of them.
 
There are three direct investment options the government could pursue, and the Bank could fund.
 
     
  1. Investment in      productivity-generating infrastructure such as roads and rail.
  2.  
  3. Investment in companies needing      capital to introduce new technology or develop and market new innovations.
  4.  
  5. A direct payment to New Zealand citizens as a dividend from New Zealand Inc, based on the      value of the economy and the country's publicly owned assets.
 
Infrastructure investment takes significant time to roll out. Planning, consents, letting of contracts, etc all extend the time frame before real spending takes place, although there are some projects well down that track that simply require a sensible and immediate funding capability. The Reserve Bank could provide that rather than the taxpayer-expensive options the government is currently exploring.
 
The Provincial Growth Fund has made a start in investment directly into the productive economy but it's only tinkering around the edges. Its offer of $10 million for Westland Milk to develop new processing capacity (since withdrawn) was an indicator of what could be done. But it's nowhere near enough.
 
The government should set up a Development Bank, perhaps as an arm of the Reserve Bank, so that businesses needing additional capital for innovation and new technology could source it from within New Zealand instead of looking to overseas investors. That capital could be provided at 0% interest so that those new projects did not have a front-end additional cost on their development.
 
This would retain our most productive businesses in New Zealand ownership instead of them falling into overseas hands, as has been the case with so many of New Zealand's best businesses.
 
But this approach also has a significant lead in time.
 
The third option could be implemented within a few short months. A dividend paid to New Zealand citizens would not be a handout. It would be their return on the investment in time, innovation, and hard work that they, their parents, grandparents, and great grandparents have made in creating the assets and economic base the country now enjoys.
 
It could be paid in 3 monthly instalments, initially to those on the lowest incomes, and progressively to all New   Zealand citizens.
 
The consumer spending that would result would go a long way to providing the boost to the economy that the Reserve Bank itself is now calling for.
 
It would result in more business for retailers and manufacturers, as well as significant additional tax income, repaying some of the distributed dividend.
 
The irony is that the Bank itself has in its hands the power to solve the problem.
*****************************
Update on injunction to stop Westland Milk takeover
Media Release 31st July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit has been seeking financial and legal support to lodge an urgent injunction to stop the takeover of Westland Milk Products by Chinese conglomerate Inner Mongolian Yili which is 25% owned by the Chinese government.
That application for an injunction needed to be lodged before August 1st – the date the Scheme of Arrangement for the sale kicked in.
Party Leader Chris Leitch says there were a number of grounds the party and its legal team were considering but they have decided not to contest the Scheme of Arrangement or the High Court decision to approve it.
Consequently an injunction will not be lodged today.
The legal team are now focussing on the Overseas Investment Office decision.
Given that the Board presented shareholders with only one option, and have been unwilling to give shareholders any information about the process undertaken, the potential to proceed against the directors in their individual capacities is also under the microscope.
The board did not pursue investigation of two significant options, one being a merger with Fonterra, and the other being an approach to the government for assistance by way of a Reserve Bank loan and/or assistance from the Provincial Growth Fund.
Regional Economic Development Minister and Associate Finance Minister, Shane Jones, claimed, in a report in the Herald on July 18th that “as steward of the Provincial Growth Fund, I was never approached [by Westland directors] as to whether or not we could look at restructuring  and help shore up that company.”
But Radio New Zealand reported on July 8th that it “understands ministers might be breathing a sigh of relief that farmer-shareholders gave Yili the thumbs up.
That is because rejection of the Yili deal might have left the taxpayer being forced to pick up the tab.
It went on to say it “knows that this possibility was considered at the highest levels of Wellington bureaucracy.”
And that “It was further told that there had been discussions about a potential bailout by government ministers.”
Clearly something doesn’t add up.
Board members who were shareholders in the company also stood to make significant personal gain from the outright sale.
The interest in the potential action has been enormous with a pleasing inflow of donations to support it.
Donations are still being accepted to this account - Kiwibank 38-9000-0601245-02  
Donations will only be used for the legal action unless otherwise indicated by the donor.
We would still welcome offers of legal assistance to leader@socialcredit.nz

Note: Government assistance for the company would not have had to come from taxpayer funds. As Reserve Bank Governor, Adrian Orr, said in an interview in February "Money is created. The central bank is given the right to do that”.
That mechanism is how the first Labour government provided funding for the building of 30,000 state houses during its 14 years in government.
It’s also what quantitative easing carried out by central banks in numerous countries is. The European Central Bank has created around 35 billion Euros per month for some time, the Bank of England 435 billion pounds since 2009, and the Federal Reserve 4.5 trillion dollars.
The Bank of Japan currently holds about 50% of Japanese government bonds financed using that mechanism, and it is how China finances the many government owned companies like Yili.
*****************************
Media Release 28th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is seeking financial and legal support to lodge an urgent injunction to stop the takeover of Westland Milk Products by Chinese conglomerate Inner Mongolian Yili which is 25% owned by the Chinese government.
Party Leader Chris Leitch says there are a number of grounds the party is considering for the injunction but it doesn’t have the financial and legal resources to lodge an application before the takeover date of August 1st.
This takeover will leave Fonterra as the only significant New Zealand owned processor of milk products.
Should Fonterra get into further difficulties no New Zealand purchaser would have the capacity to take ownership of company, with the likely purchaser therefore being another Chinese corporate. This would leave virtually New   Zealand's entire milk processing capacity in the hands of overseas companies, mainly Chinese, with Tatua (which processes milk from only 114 farms) the only locally owned processor.
The Board presented only one option to farmer shareholders in the Westland cooperative and that was the outright sale of the company to Yili, when there were other options it could have and should have put to the shareholders for them to vote on.
The board did not pursue investigation of two significant options, one being a merger with Fonterra, and the other being an approach to the government for assistance by way of a Reserve Bank loan and/or assistance from the Provincial Growth Fund.
Board members who were shareholders in the company stood to make significant personal gain from the outright sale.
For example, Board Chairman Peter Morrison, whose company P&L Holdings is the second largest shareholder, stands to gain $7.1 million dollars if the sale proceeds. Federated Farmers President Katie Milne is also a director and shareholder in the company as is Pat McEvedy. Rebecca Keoghan is employed by Landcorp which is Westland’s largest shareholder.
Because of the pecuniary interests involved the Board should have set up an Independent Assessment Panel to consider the various expressions of interest and conduct negotiations with interested parties. I believe board members who were also shareholders should not have taken part in any decision regarding the options chosen.
The Overseas Investment Office decision is likely to come under the microscope.

Donations can be paid to this account - Kiwibank 38-9000-0601245-02  Donations will only be used for the injunction and the subsequent substantive action unless otherwise indicated by you.
Please email us at secretary@socialcredit.nz so we know who you are and what you have donated so we can thank you for your support.
We welcome offers of legal assistance to leader@socialcredit.nz
Ends
For further comment contact:-
Chris Leitch
Social Credit Party Leader
chris.leitch@socialcredit.nz
Ph 021 922098

Note: Overdraft finance at 1% interest was available from the Reserve Bank for New   Zealand’s producer boards from 1936 until 1985.

Some of the agribusiness companies that are now owned by Chinese Companies
(many of which are wholly or partially owned by the Chinese Government)

Synlait Milk - Canterbury - 51% owned by Bright Dairy & Food Co of Shanghai - subsidiary of Shanghai provincial government.
Oceania Dairy Co - Waimate - owned by Inner Mongolia Yili.
Yashili NZ Dairy - Pokeno - owned by Yashili International.
Blue River Dairy - Invercargill - owned by Blueriver Nutrician Hong Kong.
Cowala - Auckland - 51% owned by GMP Dairy & 49% by GMP Pharmaceuticals.
Fernbaby - Auckland - owned by Tianxi Zhao MD of Sotx.
Mataura Valley Milk Plant - Gore - 71% owned by China Animal Husbandry.
BODCO - Hamilton - 40% owned by China Animal Husbandry.
Allied Faxi - Kerepehi - owned by Allied Faxi Food Co.
Silver Fern Farms (NZ's largest meat processor and exporter) - 50% owned by Shanghai Maling.
Lean Meats Oamaru - owned by NZ Binxi Oamaru.
Taranaki Abattoirs - Stratford - owned by Gold International Holdings.
Prime Range Meats - Invercargill - owned by Culiam Industry.
PGG Wrightson - NZWide - 50.2%  owned by Agria Group.
 
Chinese companies also have shareholdings in Scales Group (NZ’s largest exporter of apples), Fern Ridge (a primary produce exporter), Longview Orchard, Whakatu Coldstores, Scales logistics, and honey processors Oceania Natural and Comvita.
 
The list of wine making businesses under Chinese ownership include Music Bay, Mud House, O:Tu, Waipara Hills, Dashwood Wines, Vynfields, Murdoch James, Alana Estate, Stone Paddock, Sacred Hill, Ferngrove Franklin River, Chateau Yaldara, 1847, Gemtree, Hollicks, Reis Creek, and most of the land the grapes grow on.
 
Shanghai Pengxin which purchased the former Crafar farms now owns 26 farms across New Zealand.
 
This list is not exhaustive, and does not include Chinese ownership of other farmland, water bottling companies or forestry.

*****************************
Media Release 17th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The government's silence on the fact that the country's second-largest milk processor is on the brink of becoming 25% Chinese Government owned has been deafening.
It has had much more to say about US President Donald Trump's most recent tweet than it has about the whole of the Westland Milk situation.
Its silence is a clear statement that it would rather have overseas governments owning a key slice of New Zealand agriculture and residential land than take a stand, as the real Labour government of the 1930's did, and act in the best interests of New Zealanders.
That 1935 Labour government, backed by the Social Credit movement, passed an act that provided for the dairy industry and other producer boards to access a 1% overdraft at the country's central bank, the Reserve Bank.
This government, by doing nothing over the potential Westland Milk sale, has allowed the Central Bank of China to fund the purchase of a strategic stake in the New Zealand's dairy industry on behalf of the Chinese government.
It has ensured that the Chinese company will be able to establish a vertically integrated ownership of the supply chain, from the grass in New Zealand to the table in China and clip the ticket at every stage, with the profits being shipped off overseas along with the product.
Our government could have provided the funding needed by the cooperative and its shareholder farmers through the Reserve Bank at no cost to the taxpayer and without additional borrowing.
Such a scheme would be a win-win for all the New Zealand parties involved, and the country, and would ensure that New Zealand's dairy processing was retained in New Zealand hands.
Labour's iconic prime minister, Michael Joseph Savage, would be hiding his head in shame at the inaction of a supposedly Labour government.

*****************************
Media Release 7th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is calling for a Government enquiry into the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board over it's handling of the Sarah Preece attack in 2017 and its subsequent report.
Party leader Chris Leitch says Nelson MP Nick Smith is right to call on the board to formally apologise to Sarah Preece but that doesn't go anywhere near far enough.
The Board's report is not simply deficient, it is the ultimate in butt covering when it says Mrs Preece's attacker presented at the emergency department with no risk when all the records clearly show he was assessed as psychotic and at risk of self-harm and of harming others.
Sarah Preece was brutally attacked and raped because of a failure in emergency department procedures yet she has been treated abysmally by the board.
The fact that the board has made changes to its procedures to ensure that people who present in a psychotic state are treated in a timely manner is cold comfort to Sarah Preece.
Furthermore, the fact the Board and Mrs Preece have reached a confidential settlement, after her having battled it for nearly two years,  cannot it be relied upon by the Board as  it having discharged its duty in the matter.
I congratulate Nick Smith for having taken up Mrs Preece’s case and tried to get the board to respond appropriately, but he has had little success.
It’s now time for the government to step up and take action.
A government enquiry should not be hunting for heads to roll, or apportioning blame for this unfortunate incident.
What it should be doing is ensuring that the board fronts up, owns up, and apologises publicly to Sarah Preece for the way in which it has treated her.
The enquiry should also ensure that the DHB’s report reflects the truth and not the white wash that it currently does.

*****************************
8th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The dairy industry is New Zealand’s largest exporter, bringing in our greatest amount of overseas exchange.

You must be aware the second largest processor of milk in the country is about to be sold to a Chinese conglomerate substantially owned by the government of China.
 
The farmer shareholders in Westland Milk have been left in a situation where they have little option but to sell their shares, to their long-term detriment through lost dividends, and to the detriment of the West Coast (as the new owner will undoubtedly install new technology and cut jobs).
 
Westland Milk is the largest employer on the West Coast. The potential for significant job losses should be a cause for concern.
 
What should be ringing alarm bells louder however, from New Zealand's economic and strategic perspective, is the potential for this to be a stepping stone to the control by the government of another country of our entire milk processing capability, giving them the power to dictate the price that New Zealand's milk producers will receive for their product.
 
This would ultimately lead to many New Zealand farmers selling their land to the overseas buyers, likely hailing substantially from mainland China, who are keen to acquire New Zealand farmland.
 
That would prove disastrous for New Zealand's economic future.
 
Strategically there is ample evidence that China is working hard to increase its influence in the Pacific. Australia is awake to that fact, and New Zealand has been warned by the likes of Ron Asher (The Jaws of the Dragon - How China is taking over New Zealand and Australia), Anne Marie Brady, and others.
 
To date New Zealand's governments, chasing the short-term economic benefits of relying on China as our biggest export market, have buried their collective heads in the sand.
 
The economic benefits of China as a major customer will disappear when they have vertical control of our biggest industry. Profits at every level will accrue to Chinese companies and worsen our balance of payments overseas.
 
As the three most powerful people in New Zealand's government you have the ability, and the responsibility, to ensure this takeover does not happen.
 
The Labour Party’s first Prime Minister, Michael Joseph Savage, toured the country prior to the 1935 election promising that Labour's first priority was gaining control of the monetary system, and then using the Reserve Bank for the benefit of the people.
 
A coalition of Labour and the Douglas Credit (social credit) movement delivered Labour onto the treasury benches.
 
It did not sit on its hands, watching from the sidelines as you appear to be doing.
 
Amongst other banking reforms, it put in place a 1% overdraft facility at the Reserve Bank for the Dairy Board (in fact all the producer boards).
 
The Honourable Walter Nash, Minister of Finance, introducing the bill to parliament that implemented that facility, said -
 
"The object is the organisation of credit resources so as to ensure the maximum utilisation of our natural resources and the distribution of the product in a manner that will ensure the highest standard of living for all who render useful service. That is the objective of the Labour movement today”.
 
The capacity, the power, to provide an overdraft facility to Westland Milk and to its dairy farmer shareholders remains available to this day.
 
The concept is supported by a host of international experts such as Lord Adair Turner, former chairman of Britain's Financial Services Authority, professor Richard Werner, European Commission-sponsored Marie Curie fellow at the Institute for economics and statistics at Oxford, the International Monetary Fund in a 2012 report, and leading economics commentators such as Martin Wolf and Anatole Kaletsky from the Financial Times and The Economist.
 
A growing number of New Zealand economists and commentators support it.
 
You have in your hands the ability to keep Westland Milk in the ownership of New Zealand and its West Coast farmer shareholders - at no cost to the government or New   Zealand taxpayers.
 
New Zealand is under attack economically and strategically. Any general, who in a time of war did not use resources that were readily available to him, would be tried for treason.
 
Will history remember you as the coalition who sat on their hands watching
 
New   Zealand's dairy industry being taken over by China?  
 
Or do you have the courage to step onto the world stage as leaders in the field of economic common sense, protecting New Zealand’s sovereignty by using our own bank to the benefit of the country you govern, and the West Coast in particular.
 
New Zealand is waiting for you to act.

*****************************
Media Release 7th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
ANZ's offer to pull out of the New Zealand banking market would be the best thing since sliced bread.
It should be welcomed with open arms by the Government and the Reserve Bank and a timetable put in place for its exit.
Such a move would allow the development of a much greater number of smaller New Zealand owned community banks such as the former Trust Bank network, and allow the TSB, Cooperative Bank, SBS and Kiwibank to grow.
ANZ’s exit would also mean that its profit of around $2 billion a year would stay in New   Zealand and benefit our economy instead of being shipped off overseas to foreign owners.
The export of that profit increases our balance of payments deficit so that would also reduce when ANZ leaves.
The New Zealand small business sector in particular has been severely disadvantaged since the network of community banks was sold off to the Australian owned monoliths in the 1990's.
The strength of the small and medium business sector which is what powers the German economy and generates the most employment and it could do the same for ours.
By contrast New Zealand's banks have had all their focus on the lucrative housing market and have gone hell for leather with their lending into the sector which has contributed to the insane rise in house prices.
As a consequence the small and medium business sector has found it difficult to access working capital.
Germany is a prime example of small to medium sized businesses having access to dozens of community owned banks whose focus is building up their productive capacity.
The small business sector, and that includes agriculture, should be where the focus is for the country’s economic development.
That's unlikely to happen while four Australian owned banks have a stranglehold on banking in this country.
The exit of ANZ would be a great start towards reclaiming control of our banking sector and our economy.

*****************************
Media Release 6th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is calling on the government to stop sitting on its hands and take an active part in protecting New Zealand's dairy processing industry from complete foreign takeover.
The decision by Westland Milk farmers to sell their shares in New Zealand's second largest dairy company to China's Inner Mongolian Yili group, will give Yili a major foothold in the market, and put Fonterra on notice that it is the next likely target of the Chinese conglomerate.
Song Liang, an independent dairy analyst, has said the deal will further complete the supply chain of Yili. He added this deal was only a beginning of Yili's large-scale acquisitions in the next 1 or 2 years.
As China is estimated to overtake the US as the largest dairy market in the world by 2022, Yili is clearly making a pitch for efficiency by aiming to control the production and shipping of product from New Zealand.
Federated Farmers president Katie Milne has called the overwhelming vote of farmers for the Westland sale "absolutely stunning" due to the 94% turnout.
I have to wonder what superlatives she will use to describe Fonterra farmers selling their shares in a similar situation.
Yili's dominance in the Chinese market and its ability to manipulate the price it pays for Fonterra's product, could well make that situation much closer on the horizon than most people realise.
What would have been “absolutely stunning” was for the government to offer Westland Milk and it's farmers an overdraft facility from New Zealand’s Reserve Bank to tide them over their current problems.
It's ludicrous that foreign capital is seen as an investment, yet local capital provided by the country's own bank is seen as socialism or subsidy.
One sees profits being exported overseas adding to our balance of payments problems, and the other sees profits staying in New Zealand being spent in the communities in which they were generated.
It's time the government decided which is best for New Zealanders.
It's not too late to get off its hands and rescue Westland Milk, its farmer shareholders, and the dairy industry.
Katie Milne and Federated Farmers could lead that approach to the government.

*****************************
Media Release 4th July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit Party leader, Chris  Leitch, is calling for Federated Farmers President Katie Milne to step down following her statement that the sale of Westland Milk Products to a Chinese conglomerate was an "absolutely stunning" result for West Coast farmers.
Every farmer in New Zealand should now be very worried about their future prospects given that New Zealand's top farmer representative has stated her position on overseas ownership of the industry.
“I wouldn't be surprised to see her shortly stating that selling  Fonterra  to the same Chinese company would be “a stunning result” given that it's payout to farmers has not been wonderful, it's shares are the lowest level since listing and it has a debt of over $7 billion dollars.
Suggesting that selling out your long-term ownership of a cooperative like Westland Milk is a “stunning result” shows a level of short-term thinking that is mind-boggling.
Yili have not purchased the company because they like the scenery they can see from its West Coast base.
They've paid an over-the-top price because they are aware that the demand for milk products worldwide is skyrocketing so they're going to make a handsome profit from the deal long term.
Sadly West Coast farmers have thrown away the opportunity for those on-going dividends.
Admittedly many of those farmers had been backed into a corner with high debt and poor company performance, so their decision under those circumstances is understandable.
But one has to ask the question ‘where was the leadership from their industry body and its president’ who is also a director of the company.
Where was the range of options presented to farmers on which to base a longer-term strategic decision.
For instance, where was the request to the government from Federated Farmers or the board of the company to put in place an overdraft facility at the Reserve Bank at a cost of just one percent interest or less to tide Westland and its farmers over the current problems?
And where was the leadership from the government, who seem blissfully happy to see millions of dollars in profit going overseas, adding to the country’s balance of payments problems as Yili extract value out of Westland and the Aussie banks transfer out their profit from West Coast farmers paying down their loans, instead of initiating options that would have seen that money stay in New Zealand.

*****************************
Media Release 3rd July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is urging farmers attending the Westland Milk shareholders meeting to vote against the sale of the company to Chinese government owned Yili.
Yili has access to unlimited sums of money from China's central bank which allows it to make the kind of offer it has for Westland, while West Coast farmers are being hung out to dry by their own government.
Farmers, and the whole dairy industry, should be putting pressure on the government to provide the same sort of support for the industry that Yili is getting from its government.
They need to remind the Labour Party that it was the party that put in place an overdraft facility at the Reserve Bank at a cost of just one percent interest for the Dairy Board, at no cost to taxpayers, back in 1936.
That facility stayed in place until the mid 80's and was a major driver of the strength the industry now has.
The Reserve Bank wouldn't need to borrow the money to provide the overdraft facility because it has the ability to create the necessary funds in exactly the same way as commercial banks do now when they make loans.
A similar facility could be provided on a short term basis for farmers under pressure from the banks over their loans, until the company is back on its feet.
The government's failure to act will see Westland owned by the Chinese government with the profits going offshore instead of staying on the West Coast.
That may well be the outcome for the whole of our dairy industry if Fonterra can't satisfactorily deal with its $7 billion debt mountain.
The legacy of this government could well be that it oversaw the ownership of New Zealand’s dairy industry transferred to Chinese government, while it sat on its hands, when it could easily have retained that ownership in New Zealand.
*****************************
Media Release 2nd July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is accusing the Australian owned banks of crying ‘wolf’ over the Reserve Bank's proposals for banks to hold higher capital ratios.
Party leader Chris  Leitch says any extra costs involved in the higher capital ratios should not be passed on to consumers nor should they hurt the economy.
Adrian Orr and the Reserve Bank should not be put off by threats from the banks or from John Key who is acting in the best interests of the bank he is chairman of, not in the interests of New Zealand.
It should be remembered that every single loan a bank grants to a borrower is created by the bank out of thin air. Banks don't lend money people have deposited with them. They create new money in the process of lending.
This was confirmed by the Bank of England in two reports it produced in 2014 as well as the German Central Bank, and our own Reserve Bank. The Bank of England report noted "Whenever a bank makes a loan it simultaneously creates a matching deposit in the borrower’s bank account thereby creating new money."
This ‘licence to print money’ has seen substantial year on year profit increases by the four big overseas owned banks which saw them pull 5.1 billion out of the New Zealand economy last year - four times more profit than the ten largest companies on the New Zealand stock exchange.
The banks are huge money making machines that can well withstand the higher capital ratios the Reserve Bank is proposing without the need to pass any additional costs on to bank customers.
Any moves by the big banks to do so should be met by the Reserve Bank directly creating funds to either support government spending on infrastructure, or re-establish a State Advances Corporation to lend to first home buyers at rates below those offered by the banks.
 Banks already have the ability to skim money out of depositors’ accounts should a banking crisis eventuate. The Reserve Bank’s move to make them increase their capital reserves should make such action much less likely.
The banks have had it too good for too long and the move by the Reserve Bank is a breath of fresh air to rein them in.
*****************************
Media Release 1st July
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Westland farmers are in danger of voting for the sale of their company this week based on an offer that appears to be ‘too good to be true’.
The offer from China's Yili group is clearly not based on commercial reality, given the over-valued share price being offered, the guarantee of a milk price to match that paid by Fonterra, and the 1.5 million dollars in bonuses promised to top company executives to ensure the sale proceeds.
It's obviously based on strategic considerations.
What Yili is doing is surrounding Fonterra in a pincer movement by buying up competitors, and due to its size and vertically integrated ownership of the supply chain, being able to add more value to milk production than Fonterra.
The outcome, in a few short years, will be a collapse in Fonterra, allowing the Chinese company to buy their assets for next to nothing.
While NZ first and Labour MPs are bemoaning the sale prospect, and questioning the big bonus payouts to the company's executives, in reality they are not doing anything to avert either the short term or long-term consequences.
What the government should do is put in place an arrangement similar to the 1% Reserve Bank overdraft that the Dairy Board had access to from 1936 to the mid 80's, and make it available to Westland Milk.
That would enable them to swap the expensive Commercial Bank created debt with much cheaper Reserve Bank created debt and allow the company to use its income for the benefit of West Coast farmers rather than Australian owned banks.
Such an arrangement would not result in an increase in the country's money supply, nor would it generate any inflation.
That facility should be based on 100% New Zealand ownership of the company's shares which may require some overseas shareholders to relinquish their stake.
The overdraft facility should be extended to Fonterra on a similar basis.
Such a scheme would be a win-win for all the New Zealand parties involved, and the country, and would ensure that New Zealand's dairy processing was retained in New Zealand hands.
*****************************
Media Release 24th June
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The bank deposit insurance scheme just announced by government is no more then a licence for banks to create even more money out of thin air than they already do and be less responsible about who they lend it to, knowing the taxpayer will bail them out if they get it wrong.
Taxpayers and bank customers will end up footing the bill for the new scheme as banks will pass on additional costs in their lending rates and taxpayers will be the final backstop for any bad bank decisions.
Banks already have the right to take money out of depositors’ accounts to bail themselves out should they get into financial trouble.
Why should banks which are, in the main, overseas owned corporate businesses, get bailed out for bad decisions when no such largess applies to other major New Zealand businesses like Fonterra, Fisher & Paykel Healthcare, or A2 milk.
The big four Australian based banks pulled six billion dollars in profit out of the pockets of New Zealanders last year and those profits continue to increase every year.
Those profits should be funding the banks’ own retail deposit scheme.
Additionally there should be a re-instatement of a reserve to assets ratio where banks are required to hold a substantial value of reserves with the central bank.
The Bank of England, the German Central Bank, and our own Reserve Bank, confirm that our money supply is created by banks out of thin air when they lend to customers.
The Reserve Bank (the country's central bank) should take over some of that money supply creation and use those funds for government and local body projects, to reduce the exposure of the commercial banks.
Those three measures would mean a taxpayer funded retail deposit scheme was not necessary.

*****************************
Media Release 11th June
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Cameron Bagrie’s call for the government to bring back interest on student loans and cancel the fees free scheme is simply attempt to boost the already obscene profits of his former buddies in the banking industry, says Social Credit leader Chris Leitch.
Instead of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic and taking money away from university students to use for children, Mr Bagrie should be targeting the six billion dollars each year that government pays to financial institutions on its borrowing.
A big chunk of that six billion dollars is a direct transfer out of the pockets of kiwi taxpayers and into the coffers of banks like his former employer ANZ, and then into the pockets of rich overseas shareholders.
I challenge Mr Bagrie to confirm whether he agrees with the Bank of England and the New Zealand Reserve Bank that money lent by banks to the public and the government is conjured up out of thin air by those commercial banks and is not saver’s funds.
If he does agree that banks create money out of thin air when they make loans then he should be targeting that six billion dollars of government expenditure and advocating a chunk of that be poured into the education of younger children.
There's more than enough in that six billion dollars to invest in both better education for younger children and in university students and still have several billion left over to put into hospitals and build houses for the homeless.
Mr Bagrie should stop protecting his former bank employers and be pressuring the government to borrow from its own to Central Bank, the Reserve Bank, which it owns, and which it could access funds from without the need to pay any interest at all.
The six billion dollars saved could provide the funding for the transformational choice he thinks should be made.

*****************************
Media Release 30th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit party leader Chris Leitch is calling on both National and Labour politicians to stop playing politics and get on with governing the country.
There were thousands of teachers marching yesterday to gain better resources to benefit the future of New Zealand's children, hundreds of families living in poor housing, food banks overrun with people unable to put food on the table.
Meanwhile Simon Bridges is crowing about the fact that he's been able to gain access to budget data ahead of time and calling for resignations.
He should be calling for combined action with the government on reducing poverty and getting resources for teachers.
Over 600 people committed suicide last year and mental health and other health services are in crisis, failing and non-existent infrastructure is causing massive economic consequences, and the economy is slowing.
Instead of addressing those issues our finance minister is spending his valuable time making claims about National Party hacking and endeavouring to cover up Treasury's website error.
Politicians on all sides of the house should stop the petty political point scoring, take a trip into the suburbs, and provinces and talk to the people whose lives are being affected by real things and get a grip on their reality.
Social Credit has long been advocating a reform of the money system that would provide the economic fuel for many of New Zealand's problems to be addressed.
It's time politicians took a look at the potential of those proposals and got on with doing what they’re elected to do - crafting a better future for New Zealanders, and the environment, in the fabulous country we are lucky enough to live in.

*****************************
Media Release 28th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s claim that ‘there is simply no more money to go into the [education] sector” is a lie, according to Social Credit Party Leader, Chris Leitch.
I challenge him to explain to teachers and parents why he would rather pay $6,000,000,000 dollars every year to bank shareholders and PPP scheme financiers, yet refuse teachers, support staff, and principals the funding needed to provide children with the best education possible.
That’s the amount paid out of taxes every year in interest payments on the government’s borrowing – sourced from the private sector, when it could be sourced from the country’s central bank.
Our government is putting wealthy bank shareholders ahead of children - the next generation of wealth generators – which is exactly what National’s finance ministers did.
Finance Ministers in Japan and China access funding from their central bank at no interest and use the money saved on interest payments to benefit their citizens.
That approach was recommended by an International Monetary Fund report released in 2012, which the government has chosen to ignore.
The Chicago Plan Revisited said this – “Allowing the Government to issue money directly at zero interest, rather than borrowing that same money from banks at interest, would lead to a reduction in the interest burden on government finances and to a dramatic reduction of (net) government debt…..”
Grant Robertson could stave off the forthcoming teacher’s strike overnight if he was bold enough to ignore the reaction of the “markets” and put kiwi teachers and children first.
The European Central Bank was creating credit at the rate of $35 billion Euros per month through its quantitative easing programme, without any sign of inflation, so there’s no reason why the Reserve Bank here couldn’t fund our government in a similar way, without charging interest.
Putting bankers ahead of children shows that Labour’s economic policies are no different from National’s.

*****************************
Media Release 27th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Napier's port would be retained in public ownership if Social Credit had been a force in parliament, party leader Chris Leitch told the party's regional conference in Napier on Saturday.
In his speech to the conference, Mr Leitch said the Regional Council's action in selling off a major chunk of the shares was short sighted and not in the best interests of Hawke’s Bay residents.
A major income earning public asset was now in the hands of private interests, with ratepayers losing the dividends the port produced.
“Regional councillors had been hoodwinked into the sale which delivered short term gains for the Council and long term pain for ratepayers”.
“Ratepayers would soon face significant ongoing increases in rates”.
"I'll stake my reputation on the next move being to sell off the remaining shares so that the port becomes fully privately owned".
"That would add one more to the list of assets built up by the public that had been transferred to private owners”.
"With the ongoing development of the local economy those private owners will be rubbing their hands with glee at the enormous profits they stand to make".
"Social Credit would have directly invested in the port expansion using funds from the country's central bank, at no cost to either ratepayers or taxpayers, in a manner recommended recently by economics commentators like Bernard Hickey and Bryan Gould, and used by the first Labour government".
"That way profits would have continued to flow into the local economy to benefit the region for years to come".
“Sadly that potential is now lost”.
*****************************
Media Release 24th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
National’s response to the government loosening of it's debt target shows it has learnt nothing from it's 9 years in government or it's electoral defeat.
The budget's fiscal responsibility rules are a false constraint, manufactured mainly to keep the financial pariahs of the money markets happy. They have little to do with the needs of people in the real economy.
National’s finance spokesperson Amy Adams has proven that she's far more interested in pleasing the markets than in housing kiwis, providing people with decent health care, making sure pensioners live without fear of being robbed, or ensuring children get a good education.
Finance Minister Grant Robertson should now go one step further and access funding from the Reserve Bank at zero interest as provided for in the Public Finance Act.
Section 47 of the act gives him the power to borrow from whatever source he chooses provided it's in the public interest.
Accessing funds from the Reserve Bank at zero interest would fit that requirement perfectly, and cut to shreds the $6 billion in taxpayer’s money currently squandered paying interest on loans from the private sector.
An interest-free debt owed to oneself that is rolled over from year to year is effectively void -- a debt "jubilee."
Japan currently funds 49% of government borrowing directly from its own central bank and there's absolutely no reason why New Zealand could not do the same.
Amy Adams would be better to adopt the stance of the 3rd wise monkey rather than reminding people about her party's dismal performance in providing services that people desperately needed.Continuing down the road she is going will simply remind people about why they should no longer support National.
*****************************
Media Release 20th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is accusing the New Zealand Bankers Association of crying crocodile tears over the Reserve Bank's proposals for banks to hold higher capital ratios.
Party leader Chris  Leitch says any extra costs involved in the higher capital ratios should not be passed on to consumers nor should they hurt the economy.
Those pronouncements are simply scare mongering by the Bankers Association in support of the big banks they represent.
It should be remembered that every single loan a bank grants to a borrower is created by the bank out of thin air. Banks don't lend money people have deposited with them. They create new money in the process of lending.
This was confirmed by the Bank of England in two reports it produced in 2014 as highlighted by investment specialist Brian Gaynor in a NZ Herald column on the 9th of February. The Bank of England report noted "Whenever a bank makes a loan it simultaneously creates a matching deposit in the borrower’s bank account thereby creating new money."
This ‘licence to print money’ has seen substantial year on year profit increases by the four big overseas owned banks which saw them pull 5.1 billion out of the New Zealand economy last year - four times more profit than the ten largest companies on the New Zealand stock exchange.
The banks are huge money making machines that can well withstand the higher capital ratios the Reserve Bank is proposing without the need to pass any additional costs on to bank customers.
Any moves by the big banks to do so should be met by the Reserve Bank directly creating funds to either support government spending on infrastructure, or re-establish a State Advances Corporation to lend to first home buyers at rates below those offered by the banks.
 Banks already have the ability to skim money out of depositors’ accounts should a banking crisis eventuate. The Reserve Bank’s move to make them increase their capital reserves should make such action much less likely.
The banks have had it too good for too long and the move by the Reserve Bank is a breath of fresh air to rein them in.


*****************************
Media Release 20th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s budget later this month could have contained an additional $6 billion in spending without costing taxpayers a single cent more, Social Credit Party Leader, Chris  Leitch told the party’s Canterbury Regional conference yesterday.
But it won’t, Mr Leitch said, because the Finance Minister doesn’t understand that he could save that amount every year on interest payments on the government’s borrowing.
Finance Ministers in Japan and China access funding from their central bank at no interest and use the money saved on interest payments to benefit their citizens.
! challenge him to explain why he would rather pay $6,000,000,000 dollars every year to overseas bank shareholders and PPP scheme financiers, rather than New Zealand’s  teachers, doctors, mental health patients. Environmental projects, building roads, rail, and other infrastructure are all desperately in need of funding.
Mr Robertson’s understanding of how the money system works is patently paper thin, and he’s relying on what advisers in Treasury, who have been sourced from the private banking industry, are telling him.
Commercial banks create money every time they grant a loan – to individuals to buy houses or to the government.
This has been confirmed by leading figures in the banking industry like Mervyn King, former governor of the Bank of England, and Graham Towers, former governor of the Bank of Canada, as well as local commentators like Bernard Hickey, Bryan Gaynor, Raf Manji, Shamubeel Equab, and Bryan Gould.
The country’s central bank, the Reserve Bank, also has that power, so Mr Robertson could, and should, be accessing funding from that source.
That would give him an additional $6 billion dollars every single year to spend on New Zealanders.
The people of Canterbury and Kaikoura would have recovered for the natural disasters much faster had National also used the Reserve Bank to fund their recovery programmes.
 The conference was held in Christchurch yesterday.

*****************************
Media Release 15th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s claim that ‘there is simply no more money to go into the [education] sector” is a lie, according to Social Credit Party Leader, Chris Leitch.
I challenge him to explain why he would rather pay $6,000,000,000 dollars every year to bank shareholders and PPP scheme financiers, yet refuse teachers, support staff, and principals the funding needed to provide our children with the best education possible.
He’s putting wealthy bank shareholders ahead of children - the next generation of wealth generators – which is exactly what National’s finance ministers did.
Mr Robertson’s understanding of how the money system works is patently paper thin, and he’s relying on what advisers in Treasury, who have been sourced from the private banking industry, are telling him.
He could stave off the forthcoming teacher’s strike overnight if he understood anything about Labour Party history, and took a leaf out of Michael Joseph Savage’s book.
Labour’s first Prime Minister used the Reserve Bank to create the credit necessary to rebuild the nation.
5,000 houses were built by 1939, and 30,000 by 1949, financed by Reserve Bank credit.
The European Central Bank was creating credit at the rate of $35 billion Euros per month through its quantitative easing programme, without any sign of inflation, so there’s no reason why the Reserve Bank here couldn’t fund our government in a similar way, without charging interest.
That would give him $6 billion dollars every year to spend on New Zealanders instead.
Putting bankers ahead of children shows that Labour’s economic policies are no different from National’s.

*****************************
Media Release 9th May
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The Social Credit party is calling on the country’s banks to pass on to borrowers the full amount of yesterday's cut in the OCR rate by the Reserve Bank.
At a time when banks are making more profit then they ever have, despite tightening economic conditions, they should not be holding back some of the OCR cut to further increase their already massive profits.
Home buyers in the country's largest cities, and first home buyers particularly, have faced massively over inflated house prices, and they deserve to feel the full benefit of the Reserve Banks’ move.
Additionally businesses needing working capital and the capacity to upgrade or install new technology to become more productive and benefit the country's economy should not be disadvantaged by banks not reducing their lending rates on current and future loans by the full amount of the Reserve Banks’ cut in rates.
On the other hand, given the banks massively increasing annual profits, banks have no need to chop their deposit rates for savers by the same extent, especially given that the loans they make are not funded from savings of those depositors, but rather by them creating new money out of thin air as pointed out by both Bryan Gaynor and Bernard Hickey in articles in major newspapers recently.
New Zealanders should be the beneficiaries of the Reserve Banks’ move, not foreign shareholders of the country's major banks.

*****************************
Media Release 14th April
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is calling on all New Zealand’s political parties to join it in condemning Ecuador’s capitulation on asylum for Julian Assange and it’s handing him over to British authorities.
That capitulation appears to have been facilitated by a $4.3 Billion (USD) loan to Ecuador from the US dominated International Monetary Fund on the day Assange's asylum was revoked.
Social Credit unreservedly supports freedom of the press and protection of whistle-blowers, which should be at the forefront of every free country.
We support journalists such as Assange who strive to hold the powerful to account.
Too many decisions are made behind closed doors with the public being given the least information possible. A classic example is the way the Trans Pacific Partnership deal was negotiated in secret, with basic details, even when requested through the Official Information Act, being withheld.
An informed public is paramount to a functional democracy and civil society's health.
We would strengthen the ability of the public to gain access to official information, make changes to lessen the power of the government executive in favour of more power for Parliament as a whole, and implement the Single Transferable Vote system for parliamentary elections to provide better voter representation.                           
Should the UK bow to United States pressure and extradite Assange, it will endanger journalistic freedom and whistle-blower protection on a global scale.
Journalists all over the world will need to take note: toe the line or you are next.
If Ecuador was influenced by a fiscal incentive in exchange for giving up the principles of press freedom, it is another example of the real cost of the present monetary system.
Social Credit has long said that if sovereign nations took control of their own monetary issuance via their own central bank, such loans would not be necessary.
We are already accustomed to standing up to powerful international interests, such as the banking cartel and we would apply the same stance to any threat to journalistic freedoms.

*****************************
Media Release 11th April
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The National Party is responsible for the greatest health crisis the country has ever faced.
The Sunday programme on TV One highlighted a crisis in maternal health care that providers of mental health services clearly identified as caused by a major lack of funding.
New mothers are trying to cope with mental health issues without the support they deserve and this is affecting not only them, but also their babies, and their family.
Waiting lists for hip and knee surgery, colonoscopy, cancer treatment, and a host of other serious health issues are being managed to look acceptable only because people are being dropped off rather than being dealt with.
National had nine years in government during which it cut health services and demanded higher returns on property from District Health Boards.
It also fostered net immigration at an average of 70,000 people per year without providing the additional facilities and services to cope with that population increase.
Hospitals are short staffed, again largely due to funding cuts, and the staff on duty are overworked and stressed.
Those funding cuts to health and numerous other community services were so that Bill English, Stephen Joyce, and John Key could boast about what a great job they had done as economic managers to produce a rock star economy.
Those who paid the price for that boast were the elderly, the low paid, and middle income kiwis.
Meanwhile National was happy to pay international investors and bankers $5 billion dollars per year in interest on government borrowing, when it could have sourced that funding from the Reserve Bank, which it owns, and not cut services at all.
The current government has continued with the same stupidity.
A simple change in economic thinking would free up $5 billion dollars per year to put into health, education, social services, and other things that would benefit kiwis.
Social Credit is the only political party in New Zealand that is committed to making that change.

*****************************
Media Release 2nd April
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Claims by Waste Management that Auckland needs a new waste disposal site are rubbish.
While it is true that the current site at Redvale is approaching its use by date, landfills are a third world option for rubbish disposal while waste to energy plants have the potential to be carbon negative and ecologically sound.
A planned new rubbish dump site in the Dome Valley will cover 1000 hectares and, in addition to being a blot on the landscape, will waste an enormous resource that could be turned into profit.
While the vast majority of waste collected in New Zealand goes into rubbish dumps, over 2000 pyrolytic plants operate across the world in countries like Japan, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, Belgium and other European countries and recover a substantial value of material from the waste stream before turning the remainder into electricity, slag for use in road building, and ash.
Emissions from the new generation plants are negligible, while rubbish dumps generated methane, said to be the worst of greenhouse gases, CO2, and have the possibility of leaching into waterways, killing fish and plant life.
A waste-to-energy plant south of Auckland would be close to New   Zealand’s fastest growing cities, and could take rubbish from the whole of the country. Railways could carry the bulk of the load with a combination of rail and coastal shipping handling South Island rubbish.
This would take large numbers of heavy trucks off the road and be far more efficient, less polluting and make roads safer for other users. In the case of the Dome Valley site, that would mean 300 fewer return trips by truck and trailer units on the main road north daily.
The Green Party in Germany are promoting a complete ban on land-filling by 2020. They maintain that landfill sites are “black boxes with uncontrolled biological and chemical processes that need intensive care for generations, with a permanent danger of leaks and tears”, likely to cause “major impacts on groundwater and soil”.
No wonder Dome Valley residents are up in arms.
Government rhetoric about climate change, waste reduction, and road safety won’t cut it. It needs to take action now to stop the proposed dump site and pass legislation requiring at least 60% of waste to be re-processed by 2025 rather than being dumped into landfills.

*****************************
Media Release 20th February
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The report of Michael Cullen's tax working group will be about as innovative and forward looking as a bowl of yesterday's cold porridge.
It will be as complicated to work through, and the recommendations will leave as unpleasant an after-taste for the vast majority of New Zealanders.
The innovations it could have shone the way on, like the scrapping of GST at 15% and the introduction of a financial transaction tax at under 1% will be sadly missing.
A FTT would automatically haul into the net the likes of Google and Facebook, along with a raft of speculative fancy financial transactions that currently escape GST.
Without GST, businesses would face less accounting and compliance costs, would have a level playing field with overseas internet sellers, and consumers would get a significant reduction in the price they pay at supermarkets and retailers across the board.
There will be no major tax cuts for those earning less than $50,000 per year, which there could have been if the working group had recommended the government fund it's borrowing, and it's infrastructure spending needs, from the Central Bank (Reserve Bank) as recommended by an IMF report in 2012, a mechanism that would currently save $4.6 billion annually.
Instead of floating the idea of a home carers wage that would allow one parent to stay at home and invest time into the most important period of a child's development, the first five years, the working group will recommend an increased range of taxes that, far from being tax neutral, will ensure that parents have to work harder just to maintain their present financial position, spending less time with their children.
The irony is that the working group will have cost taxpayers several million dollars to propose a more complex tax system that will extract more money out of their pockets and benefit only accountants and tax lawyers.

*****************************
Media Release 16th January
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The Minister of Immigration should find a way to deport, within 24 hrs, the English group wrecking a trail of havoc across the country.
The suggestion that they should have 14 days to appeal the deportation notice to Immigration NZ and a further 28 days before a further appeal is a nonsense.
So is getting them to front up in court on minor burglary charges.
These yobbos have made it patently clear that they have no respect for New Zealand or the hard working people in the hospitality industry who have had to put up with treatment that is totally unacceptable.
New Zealand needs to make an example of them to show others who might think of visiting this country that we will not put up with behaviour of that nature.
Otherwise we will become a laughing stock and will be inviting others of similar ilk to put this country on their destination list.
Not taking that action will mean many more Kiwis will be abused by this group and many more businesses subjected to appalling behaviour and loss of income.
If it's good enough for Australia to deport New Zealanders who do not have any history of living in this country, on the basis of mere association with possible undesirables then it's good enough for New Zealand to act decisively in this case.
The Minister should be working with the airline that this group have tickets to depart New Zealand on, to get them on the earliest possible flight.
They should be accompanied by two policemen to ensure that other passengers and aircrew are not harassed.
If that means they need to be shipped out in handcuffs, then so be it.
The cost to the taxpayer and the public will be significantly less if this course of action is adopted.

*****************************
Media Release 1st January
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Kiwis should make a New Year’s resolution to move their bank accounts to Kiwibank, or one of the other wholly owned New Zealand banks, said Social Credit Leader Chris Leitch.
New Year is the ideal time for Kiwis to display some patriotism, and get themselves out of the clutches of the overseas owned banks.
The big four Aussie owned banks dragged over $5,128 million in profit out of the back pockets of Kiwis last year – four times more profit than the 10 largest companies on the NZ Stock Exchange.
Those profits have increased substantially over the past few years, proving the banks are huge money-making machines who ship the majority of it offshore to their Australian and US owners creating a major drain on the New Zealand economy.
Most of the profit was made by the banks charging fees and interest on money they didn’t have - money created on their computer keyboards at the time of the loan.
The idea that banks lend out money people deposit with them is a myth, a fact confirmed by Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England from 2003 to 2013 in a recent speech “When banks extend loans to their customers they create money by crediting their customer’s account”.
Had even a quarter of that massive profit gone instead to Kiwibank, through Kiwis having moved their accounts last year, dividends to the Government would have provided over a billion dollars extra for health care, and education.
The Government should take a lead by swapping its own borrowing to Kiwibank, rather than seeking money from the Aussie big four or other overseas-owned financial institutions as it currently does.
If it had any backbone it would instruct Kiwibank to marginally lower their lending rates and slightly increase their deposit rates as an incentive for people to make the switch.
This in turn would provide some real competition for the Aussie banks and benefit all New Zealanders through better borrowing and deposit rates.
That extra money in people’s pockets would further boost the New Zealand economy.
It’s time Kiwis stopped propping up the Aussie economy and supported their own by switching their accounts this New Year.

*****************************
National Hypocrites Over Surf Lifesaving Funding
Media Release 23rd December
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The National Party’s launch of a petition calling for government funding for surf lifesavers is one of the most hypocritical actions by a political party in recent memory.
National had nine years in government during which it could have done exactly what the petition is calling for, but it didn’t.
Instead it was the biggest slasher of funding ever, to numerous organisations that provided much needed community services.
In a 2014 report BERL economist Ganesh Nana pointed to a real (ie, after inflation) cut in health spending of 4.5% between 2014 and 2017. Since inflation in the health sector routinely runs well ahead of general inflation, the projected cut was more like 9.8%. In the same period, he calculated a 1.7% cut in education spending and a 13.9% cut in spending on the environment.
In 2016, District Health Board budgets were cut by $138 million, meaning psychological services in Canterbury faced cuts from $1.6 million to $200,000, while trauma counselling was halved to $400,000.
Also in 2016 they cut $7.3 million for Parents as First Teachers, and operational grants for public schools were frozen. In 2009 $13 million was cut from adult community education, and a 2017 study showed cuts of $260 million per year for preschool childcare and education since 2010.
National denied there was a housing crisis while selling off thousands of state houses, and extracted $664 million in dividends over seven years from Housing NZ that could have been spent on new houses, all while immigration was running at record levels exceeding 70,000 per year.
Meanwhile a 2014 report showed National had generously increased its own ministerial funding.
The National government put paying $4,500,000,000 dollars in interest every year to the private banks they borrowed from, loans created on bank computer keyboards, ahead of services for New Zealanders.
As Adam Creighton, Economics Editor of The Australian newspaper says, “without any reserve requirements and, by historical standards, pitiful minimum capital ratios, banks in effect create as much money as borrowers want”.
The European Central Bank has been creating credit at the rate of $35 billion Euros per month, through its quantitative easing programme, without any sign of inflation, so there’s no reason the Reserve Bank here couldn’t fund the government in a similar way, instead of taxpayer dollars enriching the profits of overseas owned financial institutions.
That would free up $4.5 billion per year for lifesavers and a host of other groups, along with hospitals, schools and agencies providing much needed services for Kiwis.

*****************************
Call For Govt Not To Sign Migration Compact
Media Release 7th December
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Social Credit is calling on the government not to sign the UN sponsored Global Compact on Migration in Morocco in three days time.
It’s time New Zealand stood on its own two feet and demonstrated by its actions that it adheres to values we can be proud of instead of joining a me-two movement promoted by the United Nations that will see us giving up more of our sovereignty over our own decisions.
We once stood proudly and demonstrated our commitment to the rest of the world on anti-nuclear legislation yet we’re now becoming just followers.
New Zealand would be hypocritical to sign a document that requires the signatories to invest in sustainable development in potential migrants own countries so that they can lead peaceful, productive and sustainable lives, when it can’t meet those goals in its own country.
There are policy goals on education, health, access to decent employment, and economic, social and environmental conditions that allow people to improve their lives and meet their aspirations.
Tens of thousands of Kiwis would dearly love to live in conditions that match those policy goals.
While the compact is supposedly non-binding, countries that sign the compact are clearly indicating they intend to apply its provisions – otherwise what reason would they have for signing?
The government should not be considering an expensive taxpayer funded trip to a convention anywhere in the world, to sign a non-binding agreement with conditions we can’t meet in our own country, when that money would be better spent on feeding and housing New Zealanders.
New Zealand needs a government that will scrap the neo-liberal economic ideology that both National and Labour adhere to, and implements an alternative like social credit that has a chance of meeting the policy goals the agreement proposes.

*****************************
Wage Claim Disruption Easily Fixed
Media Release 7th December
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The government could head off the avalanche of wage claims that will cause significant disruption for the public, and drive up inflation, by scrapping GST and replacing it with a transactions tax.
The wage claims, from anaesthetists, teachers, public servants, aircraft engineers, and others while justified, have the potential to wreck the economy by kick starting inflation and pushing up interest rates.
More private sector employers will likewise be under pressure to raise wages, increasing their costs substantially along with the cost of their products and services.
The cumulative effect will be to drive up interest rates, with the potential to cause hundreds of house mortgage and farm mortgage defaults.
Replacing GST with a transactions tax at less than a quarter of one percent (25 cents in every hundred dollars) on all withdrawals from bank accounts would give workers across the board a substantial increase in purchasing power far greater than they would get from wage rises.
It would generate roughly the same in tax revenue as GST, but with the majority coming from the speculative sector, rather than the productive sector, of the economy.
That raft of financial transactions such as credit default swaps, debt securities, convertible and exchangeable bonds, currency trading, derivatives etc, currently avoid the GST net.
The recent introduction of GST to on-line purchases is complicated and messy and will produce minimal tax revenue, but scrapping GST and implementing a simple transactions tax would immediately put Kiwi retailers on an even footing with all overseas sellers.
Additionally businesses would be relieved of the burden of accounting for GST, filing returns, and audits.
It will be very simple for the banking system to implement FTT, and very difficult for anyone to avoid payment.
Banks would deduct the tax automatically in the same way they already withdraw their own account fees and Resident Withholding Tax, and remit it straight to the IRD.
The removal of GST would contribute to a reduction in child poverty by putting more money in the hands of lower paid New Zealanders who currently pay tax far out of proportion to their incomes.
It would be fitting that Labour, the party that first introduced GST and unleashed the neo-liberal economic experiment on the country were the ones that finally scrapped it

******************************
Minister's Door Closed on Waste-to-Energy Plants
Media Release 18th November
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
Despite attempts for months by experts in waste-to-energy plants to get an appointment to see her, Green’s Associate Environment Minister Eugenie Sage has refused all approaches, claiming WtE plants “don’t fit with the government’s waste reduction plans”.
But the German Federal Environment Agency says that “there are several reasons that the claim that waste incineration is thwarting waste prevention efforts is unsustainable’.
They also say “waste incineration is making a contribution to climate protection and helps save natural resources” in Germany.
Emissions from the new generation plants are negligible, while rubbish dumps generated methane, said to be the worst of greenhouse gases, and CO2.
Ms Sage appears to have a luddite view of new technology in the waste disposal field preferring to see waste buried in the ground leaving the after effects, like the possibility of toxins leaching into waterways, for future generations to deal with.
She is out of step with the Green Party in Germany who are promoting a complete ban on land-filling by 2020.
They maintain that landfill sites are “black boxes with uncontrolled biological and chemical processes that need intensive care for generations, with a permanent danger of leaks and tears”, likely to “cause major impacts on groundwater and soil”.
Over 2000 pyrolytic plants operate across the world in countries like Japan, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, Belgium and other European countries and recover a substantial value of material from the waste stream before turning the remainder into electricity, slag for use in road building, and ash.
Social Credit would fund the building of a WtE plant south of Auckland where demand for rubbish disposal and electricity are both fastest growing, and ensure ownership remained in New Zealand hands.
We want the government to pass legislation requiring at least 60% of waste to be re-processed by 2025 rather than being dumped into landfills.
Those countries with waste to energy plants are taking responsibility for their own rubbish disposal where-as Ms Sage appears happy for New Zealandto send much of ours off-shore for someone else to deal with and simply bury the rest in the ground and hope it goes away.

******************************
Govt Should Invest in Waste to Energy Plant
Media Release 13th November
From: Chris Leitch, Leader
The Government should invest in building a waste to energy plant south of Auckland.
Landfills are the least preferable option for rubbish disposal, and with new technologies, waste to energy plants have the potential to be carbon negative.
In addition the government should pass legislation requiring at least 60% of waste to be re-processed by 2025 rather than being dumped into landfills.
A planned new rubbish dump site in the Dome Valley will cover 1000 hectares and, in addition to being a blot on the landscape, will waste an enormous resource that could be turned into profit.
While the vast majority of waste collected in New Zealand goes into rubbish dumps, waste to energy plants like those in Norway recycle a much greater amount of usable material from the waste stream, and what is left is burnt at very high temperatures and turned into energy.  
Emissions from the new generation plants are negligible, while rubbish dumps generated methane, said to be the worst of greenhouse gases, CO2, and have the possibility of leaching into waterways, killing fish and plant life.
A plant south of Auckland would be close to New  Zealand’s fastest growing cities, and take rubbish from the whole of the country. Railways could carry the bulk of the load with a combination of rail and coastal shipping handling South Island rubbish.
This would take large numbers of heavy trucks off the road and be far more efficient, less polluting and make roads safer for other users. In the case of the Dome Valley site, that would mean 300 fewer return trips by truck and trailer units on the main road North daily.
Carbon capture is underway in Norway as is production of fuel from captured carbon in Canada.
Government rhetoric about climate change, waste reduction, and road safety won’t cut it. It needs to take action now.

******************************
Banks Slapped With Wet Bus Ticket By FMA and Reserve Bank
Media Release 6th November
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
The recommendations of the report from the Financial Markets Authority and Reserve Bank into the conduct and culture of 11 New Zealand banks are no more than a slap across the wrist with a wet bus ticket.
The report’s statement that “the regulators identified significant weaknesses in the governance and management of conduct risks” is simply window dressing to make it look like there was an enquiry of some substance, when there was not.
The recommendations of the review should be seen as more of a self protection exercise for the reviewers given that it was carried out by the regulators of the banks, who in Australia were shown by the Royal Commission to be just as culpable as the banks themselves.
Why did the report not deal with how the ANZ in New Zealand was able to extract $2 billion in profit out of the pockets of 4.8 million Kiwis?
That’s equivalent to the population of Sydney, yet despite all the shenanigans the banks got up to in Australia, it only managed to make $6 billion out of the whole of Australia?
Why have the banks got a strangle hold on our money supply, creating 98 percent of it, when the Reserve Bank has the ability to create some and enable government investment into health, education, housing, and infrastructure projects.
The same could be done to provide low interest loans for first home buyers.
This would grow the economy, reduce debt, and save taxpayers and first home buyers enormous sums of interest.
How is it that the banks charge Kiwi home buyers as much as 5.9 percent interest on money they don’t have until it is created on their computer keyboards.
The loan fees and interest are the major contributors to the massive profits the banks are extracting out of the New Zealand economy and shipping off to their overseas owners, depleting our economy of much needed capital.
The idea that banks lend out money people deposit with them is a myth, a fact confirmed by the former governors of both the Bank of England and the Bank of Canada.
The report is a whitewash claiming all is well, and that despite a few minor misdemeanours, we can have confidence in our banking sector.
They should have asked the hard questions.

******************************
John Key's Cynical Pre-emptive Banking Strike
Media Release 3rd November
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
John Key’s call for stricter regulations for banks is a cynical and carefully planned pre-emptive strike on behalf of the ANZ and other banks ahead of the release of a report from the Financial Markets Authority and Reserve Bank next week.
As ANZ’s New Zealand chairman and a member of the Australian ANZ board he hopes to be able to argue that “all is well, we have already put in place measures that will address the issues the Australian Royal Commission and this inquiry has raised”, and, as he has already attempted to portray “NZ banks don’t operate the same as the Australian banks”.
But if there isn’t a problem, then why call for stricter regulations?
The strategy is designed to try and avoid a more detailed investigation into banks operating in New Zealand, and deflect attention from the enormous two thousand million profit that ANZ has made in the last year.
97% of that profit, over $400 for every person in the country, was pulled out of New Zealand and shipped off to ANZ’s overseas owners, depleting our economy of much needed capital.
Most of the profit was made by the bank lending money it doesn’t have and then charging interest on those loans.
The idea that banks lend out money people deposit with them is a myth, a fact confirmed by the 1955 Royal Commission on Money and Banking in New Zealand.
Bernard Hickey put it succinctly recently – “They invent money out of nothing whenever they lend. The only thing stopping them from going completely berserk is central banks force them to keep some of their capital aside whenever they make a loan. So that's the dirty little secret of international finance.”
Social Credit would make banks keep a much larger percentage of their capital on deposit with the central bank (Reserve Bank) which would restrict their debt creating activities and reduce their profit.
The Reserve Bank would tasked with replacing that private bank lending with funds for the government and local bodies to invest in health, education, housing, and infrastructure projects, and for low interest loans for first home buyers, saving taxpayers, ratepayers and first home buyers enormous sums of interest.
We would also provide Kiwibank with the capacity to reduce its interest rates and its fees, which would introduce some real home grown competition for the big four Aussie banks.

******************************
Winston's great TPPA con job
Media Release 1st November
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
Winston Peters can today celebrate how he got away with the greatest political con job in recent years.
With Australia having now signed the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement which triggers its formal activation, Peters, who was the most vocal critic of the deal while in opposition, can now, as Foreign Minister with all the baubles of office, oversee putting it into operation.
Thousands of New Zealanders will be kicking themselves for voting for NZ First at the last election on the promise the party would continue to campaign against the toxic deal if they got into parliament.
Their vote was reinforced by the private members bill the party promoted through its current deputy leader Fletcher Tabuteau which sought to ban both the TPPA and all further agreements of its type.
They must be choking to hear Trade Minister David Parker make the preposterous claim that the deal “has benefits that will spread throughout the economy to every person in New Zealand from the factory floor to the farm owner”.
The underwhelming benefit of $200 million in tariffs that would supposedly be saved each year equates to the enormous sum of 81 cents per week if it were distributed to every person in New Zealand, which it won’t be.
Even the “estimated” $3 billion a year in GDP benefit in 10 years time would make Kiwis better off by just $12.14 per week it they got it, but in reality, the largest share of it will go to the overseas corporations that already own nearly half the country’s biggest businesses.
That pales in insignificance when compared to the benefit all Kiwis would gain from the investment back into the country of the $6 billion every year the government currently pays in interest to mostly foreign owned financial institutions who fund its borrowing.
The government could instead use the central bank (Reserve Bank) to access the funds it needs, as Japan is doing, using that wasted interest to fund major investment in health, education, housing, and infrastructure projects – a solution that was implemented by the government in the 1930’s.
Social Credit would not compromise on restoring New Zealand’s sovereignty over its own affairs should it be in any position such as Winston Peters found himself just 12 months ago.

******************************
Barnett's "foolish" statement laughable
Media Release 20th October
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
The statement from Auckland Chamber of Commerce head Michael Barnett that "being afraid of where the money comes from [for the Penlink project] to my mind is foolish” is laughable if only it wasn’t so tragic.
Mr Barnett is advocating that Penlink users pay an additional $700 million in tax (because that is what a toll actually is) over and above the actual cost of building the highway.
According to his figures revenue from the toll expected to be levied amounts to an average of $125,000 per day. Over the 25 year life of the BOOT (Build, Own, Operate & Transfer) that amounts to $1.1 billion for a project costing $400 million to build.
Finance for the Chinese consortium offering to build and operate the project will be provided through one of the six Chinese Development Banks by the Central Bank of China.
Why is Mr Barnett proposing to use the Chinese Central Bank to fund the project when New Zealand’s central bank could just as easily provide that finance?
It could do so with minimal interest, saving commuters around $500 million dollars – profit the Chinese financiers will ship off overseas, adding to our overseas debt.
Mr Barnett is one of a number of business and political leaders who, through either ignorance, naivety or stupidity, are being seduced by China’s ready supply of money into believing there is mutual benefit in its involvement in New  Zealand’s economy.
The list includes many former National and Labour Party high flyers.
Ruth Richardson and Chris Tremain are directors of Bank of China in New Zealand; Don Brash chairs the Industrial Bank of China in New  Zealand; and former Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley chairs the New  Zealand subsidiary of the China Construction Bank.
Sir Bob Harvey fronts the One Belt One Road Promotional Council, and Sir Bob Parker chairs the Hauxin Group, a partnership for the Christchurch rebuild, and is CEO of Huadu International NZ.
Is it their business expertise or their ability to open doors that has made them attractive?
Let’s be clear, overseas investors are interested in only one thing – profit.
Mr Barnett’s last word on Penlink was “In our opinion, it could/should start tomorrow.” Yes it could – financed by our own bank – the Reserve Bank.

******************************
Chinese Government To Own Penlink Highway
Media Release 8th October
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
If the bid by a Chinese construction company goes ahead, the Chinese Government will effectively finance the Penlink highway and own it for the next 25 years.
This is because the group offering to finance and build it is majority owned by the Chinese Government.
We should not allow an overseas government to own a major piece of transport infrastructure and despite comments from Ministers and Auckland Chamber of Commerce head Michael Barnett, the New Zealand Government could easily finance the construction.
In an article in the NZ Herald on February 26th 2012, financial commentator Bernard Hickey wrote “It's time the Reserve Bank of New Zealand started printing money and lending to our government to build houses and infrastructure”. “We've been here before and right now our major trading partners are doing exactly this”.
The findings of an International Monetary Fund report released in August 2012 titled “The Chicago Plan Revisited” fully support funding of that nature.
The report recommends funding direct from the central bank (the government owned Reserve Bank) with no attached interest cost, which could be used for infrastructure development.
Michael Barnett is wrong when he states it doesn’t really matter where the money comes from, because will cost twice as much if the project is financed from overseas.
Tolls would not be necessary If the money comes from the Reserve Bank.
The Public Finance Act (1989) permits the borrowing of funds from the Reserve Bank of NZ on terms favourable to the public interest.

******************************
Port Sale A Dumb Decision
Media Release 5th October
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
The Hawke's Bay Regional Council's preferred option of selling off nearly half the shares in the port is a dumb decision, the equivalent of the best restaurant in town selling off its kitchen so it can extend the dining room.
In an address to a meeting in Napier, party leader Chris Leitch said the loss of half its income from the port would make rates rises a certainty.
In a few years the Council will be facing the same issue again, leading to either a further sale of shares or sky high rates rises in the future.
Those advising the Council were acting in the best interests of potential purchasers of the shares not the Council nor Hawke's Bay ratepayers.
The Council should be joining with other councils to petition the government to make funds available through the country's central bank as recommended in a 2012 report from the International Monetary Fund.
Reserve Bank funding could be provided at a nominal interest charge, with repayments matched by the income an expanded port would provide.
The legislation is already in place in the Finance Act that allows the Minister of Finance to set up a funding arrangement from the bank.
The government has already signed off on interest free loans of $158 million for Tauranga, $339 million for Auckland, and $181 million for Hamilton, the money coming from taxes or borrowing.
If the money was sourced from the Reserve Bank the result would be a "fit for purpose" port that would assist with the expansion of economic activity in the region at no cost to ratepayers or taxpayers.
Ratepayers should demand a referendum, not rely on a "mock" consultation process where the council will ignore submissions in favour of advice from its overpaid consultants.
Councillors who vote in favour of such a dumb decision as selling off port shares should be put on notice that they will not retain their seats at next year's local body elections.

******************************
Call To Remove Fuel Taxes
Media Release 3rd October
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
Social Credit is calling on the government to remove all taxes on fuel.
In an address to a meeting in Whanganui, party leader Chris  Leitch said the high price of fuel was strangling small to medium sized  businesses and putting undue pressure on the budgets of low and middle income families.
Those families were getting hit with a double whammy due to the extra they needed to find for fuel costs, and the rising prices of the goods and services they purchased, the price of which was being forced up by fuel price hikes.
Cutting government taxes would reduce the price of fuel by 85 cents per litre, bringing prices on food, clothing, and everything else in the shops down, leaving more money in consumer's pockets, and help restore small business profitability.
The loss in revenue to the government could be replaced by copying what the third largest economy in the world, Japan, is doing and accessing funding from the country's central  bank.
Currently the Bank of Japan holds 46% of Japanese government debt, which is costing the government zero in interest payments.
By comparison New Zealand taxpayers pay $5 billion every year in  interest on the government's borrowing, most of it going to overseas pension funds and the American owned Aussie banks that dominate the New Zealand banking landscape.

******************************
No Globalist Agenda
Media Release 30th September
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
"The Prime Minister's address to the United Nations has put her, and the Government's mulit-lateral globalist agenda front and centre. That's not an agenda that Social Credit agrees with", party leader Chris Leitch said in an address to the party's Waikato Regional meeting in Hamilton yesterday.
It's now clear why Labour, and their partner NZ First, despite loud protestations before the election, proceeded apace with the ratification of the TPPA and are negotiating several more similar agreements that threaten NZ's sovereignty.
It's now clear why they've allowed the high level of immigration to continue, and why more refugees are to be let in, despite the needs of NZ citizens not yet being met.
Its now clear why weak-kneed legislation on stopping just a few overseas buyers acquiring houses was the best they could do and why high country stations are being gobbled up by overseas rich-listers and massive chunks of our best farmland sold to Chinese buyers.
Despite the country voting for change, they're following the same agenda as the previous National government.
Social Credit would re-negotiate the TPPA and if necessary withdraw from it completely. The projected benefits from it of $4.6 billion in ten years are less than the $5 billion the government pays every year in interest on its borrowing.
Social Credit would deliver that benefit immediately by funding government from the Reserve Bank like Japan is doing right now, and spend that $5 billion annually on hospitals, roads, rail, and education.
We would dramatically cut the level of immigration, at least until the country's housing and infrastructure had caught up with the needs of New Zealanders.
Rich-listers and Chinese buyers would have to look to some other country for land purchases because such sales would be off the table if we were playing a part in government.
Social Credit would not compromise on New Zealand's sovereignty.

******************************
Taxation Group Report A Major Disappointment
Media Release 20th September
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
The report of Michael Cullen’s Taxation Working Group is a major disappointment.
It is bereft of innovative ideas, signals increasing bureaucracy, and is a regurgitation of outdated tax concepts.
Rather than focussing its attention on speculators, money market manipulators, and those who make money from non-productive sources, it has recommended that small businesses, farmers, and ordinary Kiwi’s trying to get ahead should be hit with yet more tax.  
Cullen’s recommendations are exactly what we would have expected from a National Party working group that was intent on protecting the privileged position of its biggest campaign donors.
There is no indication that our submission to the working group that GST should be scrapped and replaced with a Financial Transactions Tax was even considered.
Replacing GST with a transactions tax at less than a quarter of one percent (25 cents in every hundred dollars) on all withdrawals from bank accounts would give workers across the board a substantial increase in purchasing power.
It would generate roughly the same in tax revenue as GST, but with a substantial amount coming from the speculative sector of the economy.
That raft of financial transactions such as credit default swaps, debt securities, convertible and exchangeable bonds, currency trading, derivatives etc, currently avoid the GST net.
It would significantly benefit smaller businesses as people would have more money in their pockets.
Additionally businesses would be relieved of the burden of accounting for GST, filing returns, and audits
The recent introduction of GST to on-line purchases is complicated and messy and will produce minimal tax revenue, whereas transactions tax is simple and would immediately put Kiwi retailers on an even footing with all overseas sellers.
It will be very simple for the banking system to implement FTT, and very difficult for anyone to avoid payment.
Banks would deduct the tax automatically in the same way they already withdraw their own account fees and Resident Withholding Tax, and remit it straight to the IRD.
The removal of GST would also contribute to a reduction in child poverty by putting more money in the hands of lower paid New Zealanders who currently pay tax far out of proportion to their incomes.

******************************
The Awareness Party Joins With Social Credit
Joint Media Release 9th August
From: Chris Leitch, Leader, Social Credit Party
From: Lisa Er, Leader, The Awareness Party
Awareness Party leader Lisa Er and the party’s key personnel have joined Social Credit, and recommended to their members that they do likewise.
In an announcement today, Lisa Er told party members ‘Social Credit is very similar to us, so we are going to personally join with them.”
“You are welcome to do the same and we hope you do.”
“Social Credit has coherent environmental views and doesn’t support the dropping of 1080 or enforcing fluoridation as other parties do.”
“Their main platform is monetary reform, very similar to ours. We must take money creation out of the hands of private banks.”
“All the good work this government is attempting to do would be much more fundable with Social Credit’s financial policy.”
“You may like to listen to this interview on Green Planet FM with Chris Leitch, the leader of Social Credit – the established party that is growing because its time is here.”
“The interview is called ‘is Social Credit heading to be New Zealand’s third political party’.”
“Social Credit was formed in 1953 and has proved it has stickability and commitment to principle and that’s a rare quality in New Zealand politics.”
Social Credit leader Chris Leitch said he was looking forward to working with Lisa and others from the Awareness Party to build a stronger force to counter the neo-liberal economic agenda that Labour and National were wedded to, which had wrought so much havoc to the fabric of New Zealand society.
The results speak for themselves - hundreds sleeping on the streets, in cars, in sheds and garages, hundreds more living in taxpayer funded motel units because they have no homes, full time workers unable to afford their rent.
Our health and education system is in crisis, inequality at its highest level ever, roads, sewage systems, water supply and other infrastructure in disrepair, and our "clean green" country under threat.
Chris Leitch said monetary reform was gaining significant support internationally from economists, professors and commentators, many of whom acknowledged its time is coming.

******************************
Government Pays Out Counterfeiters
Media Release 5th August
The government has put paying out counterfeiters ahead of children’s education and health care on its list of priorities.
With a nurses strike already having disrupted hospitals and a teachers strike looming those priorities urgently need to change.
According to Mervyn King, former governor of the Bank of England, “When banks extend loans to customers, they create money by crediting their customer’s accounts”.
This is backed up by former governor of the Bank of Canada, Graham Towers - “Each and every time a bank makes a loan, new bank credit is created – brand new money”.
And by local commentator Bernard Hickey – “at the moment, it is private banks that print money. They invent money out of nothing whenever they lend”.
So if banks are creating new money out of thin air, just like counterfeiters do, then why is the government paying four thousand five hundred million dollars every year in interest on counterfeit loans, then claiming there’s no money for teachers and nurses?
An International Monetary Fund report recommends the government should source those loans from the Reserve Bank, which it owns, at no interest.
If the Prime Minister really wants “to foster a kinder, more caring  society” it’s time to put her money (or rather taxpayer’s money) where her mouth is.
That means putting a decent education for our children and world class health care for the elderly, the sick and the injured, ahead of massive profits for overseas owned counterfeiting banks.
Teachers, doctors, police, nurses, IRD staff and other public servants need  better pay, more staff and support, and better facilities if they’re  going to be able to play their part in creating that “caring society”.
The National Party created the uncaring society we have today.
The Labour, NZ First, Greens coalition has the chance to prove their economic policy is not the same as National’s and to use that $4.5  billion in wasted interest to turn that uncaring society around.
Chris Leitch, Leader


******************************
Easy Fix for Avalanche of Wage Claims
Media Release 22nd July
The government could head off the avalanche of wage claims that is coming  at them like a runaway freight train by scrapping GST and replacing it with a financial transactions tax.
The wage claims, from nurses, teachers, police, IRD and MBIE staff, and  others, have the potential to wreck the economy by kick starting inflation and pushing up interest rates.
Private sector employers will likewise be under pressure to raise wages, increasing their costs substantially.
The cumulative effect will be to drive up interest rates, causing a major correction in house prices and hundreds of mortgage defaults.
Replacing GST with a financial transactions tax at less than a quarter of one percent (25 cents in every hundred dollars) on all withdrawals from bank accounts would give workers across the board a substantial increase in purchasing power greater than they would get from wage rises.
It would generate roughly the same in tax revenue as GST, but with a substantial amount coming from the speculative sector of the economy.
That raft of financial transactions such as credit default swaps, debt securities, convertible and exchangeable bonds, currency trading, derivatives etc, currently avoid the GST net.
The recent introduction of GST to on-line purchases is complicated and messy and will produce minimal tax revenue, whereas transactions tax is simple and would immediately put Kiwi retailers on an even footing with all overseas sellers.
Additionally businesses would be relieved of the burden of accounting for GST, filing returns, and audits.
It will be very simple for the banking system to implement FTT, and very difficult for anyone to avoid payment.
Banks would deduct the tax automatically in the same way they already withdraw their own account fees and Resident Withholding Tax, and remit it straight to the IRD.
The removal of GST would contribute to a reduction in child poverty by putting more money in the hands of lower paid New Zealanders who currently pay tax far out of proportion to their incomes.
It would be fitting that Labour, the party that first introduced GST and unleashed the neo-liberal economic experiment on the country were the ones that finally scrapped it
Chris Leitch, Leader
Note: More than forty other countries already have some form of transactions tax.

******************************
Government Would Find Money If War Was Declared
Media Release 11th July
If America declared war on Russia, North Korea, or Iran and called on New Zealand to assist, Acting Prime Minister Winston Peters’ government would immediately find the money necessary to provide the resources our armed forces required.
Mr Peters’ claim that there is no money to increase the offer to nurses is patently untrue.
If we were at war, there would be no limit to the money made available to kill people.
And he can find $12 million dollars every single day to pay interest to the private banks the government has borrowed from.
How is it he can't find the funds to ensure doctors and nurses save lives!
Obviously we have the resources, so why is an accounting system stopping them being used?
He could solve the nurses strike overnight by borrowing from the Reserve Bank, just like the Japanese government is doing.
The Reserve Bank can create the credit for the loans in the same way the Australian owned private banks do.
As economic commentator Bernard Hickey says “that's the dirty little secret of international finance”.
Putting bombs and bankers ahead of doctors and nurses shows that the economic policies of Labour and NZ First are no better from National’s.
Chris Leitch, Leader
******************************
Yet Another Party Dashes Kiwi’s Hopes
Media Release 9th July
The demise of the Opportunities Party is another example of a rich  entrepreneur having “a go” at politics without any real commitment to a philosophy or core policy.
Gareth Morgan joins a long list of similar people who thought money was going to buy them an easy road into parliament and who gave up when the going  got tough.
Bob Jones and Colin Craig were others.
They were, as his party name suggested, “opportunists”, who promised much and didn’t deliver.
There was no solid foundation that people could commit to, that would make them contribute time and money at great personal cost over many years.
While Social Credit hasn’t had rich donors and corporate backing that would have allowed it to buy media time and tour the country like Mr Morgan, it has survived the test of time.
It has done so because of its commitment to reforming the money system to deliver a better life for people – particularly middle and low income earners – rather than bankers, money manipulators, and corporates.
First formed in 1953 it has proved it has stickability and commitment to principle and that’s a rare quality in New Zealand politics.
In doing so it has proved Bob Jones wrong.
His taunts about “Skodas and crimplene suits” have come back to haunt him.
Skodas are now a luxury vehicle, and monetary reform is gaining support internationally from economists, professors and commentators.
Its time is coming.
Chris Leitch, Leader
******************************
There Is More Money For Nurses
Media Release 24th June
Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s claim that any new pay offer to nurses “would have to be made using funds already allocated, as there's no more” is nonsense, according to new Social Credit Party Leader, Chris Leitch.
Mr Robertson’s understanding of how the money system works is patently paper thin, and he’s relying on what advisers in Treasury, who have been sourced from the private banking industry, are telling him.
Just like his predecessor Bill English, he puts paying $4,500,000,000 dollars every year unnecessarily to the private banks the government has borrowed from, ahead of decent pay for doctors and nurses and decent health care for Kiwis.
He could solve the nurses strike overnight if he understood anything about Labour Party history, and took a leaf out of Michael Joseph Savage’s book.
Labour’s first Prime Minister used the Reserve Bank to create the credit necessary to rebuild the nation.
5,000 houses were built by 1939, and 30,000 by 1949, financed by Reserve Bank credit.
The European Central Bank is creating credit at the rate of $35 billion Euros per month, through its quantitative easing programme, without any sign of inflation, so there’s no reason the Reserve Bank here couldn’t fund our government in a similar way.
That would give him $4.5 billion dollars every year to spend on New Zealanders instead.
Putting bankers ahead of doctors and nurses shows that Labour’s economic policies are no different from National’s.
Chris Leitch, Leader
******************************
Petrol Taxes A Needless Roundabout
Media Release 1st July
The combination of petrol tax increases and a higher families package is a needless roundabout that will be self cancelling for some households and unnecessarily expensive for many others.
The petrol taxes will have a double whammy effect by also raising the price of food and most other goods as freight companies and shops seek to recover their additional costs.
This will hit low income supporters of the Greens and Labour hardest despite the boost in the families package, and will stoke inflationary pressures.
CEO’s, those in management, property speculation, money market manipulation, and earners of higher incomes, will barely notice a ripple.
Labour should have looked to the lessons of the real Labour Party of 1935, who didn’t impose more taxes, but instead used the country’s Reserve Bank, at virtually no cost, to provide funding for housing and infrastructure projects. (see 1949 Ministry of Works report “State Housing In NZ”)
It could also have taken the $4.5 billion dollars in interest annually - $12 million per day, seven days per week - it pays to banks and financial institutions that create the money it borrows out of thin air, and channelled that into improving the country’s transport networks.
Introducing his Reserve Bank Amendment bill to Parliament in 1936, Labour Finance Minister, Walter Nash said “it is proposed to save a good deal of money in connection with the underwriting of Government loans. It is our work to see that the necessary stimulus of credit is given to the labour and the materials to enable the asset to be produced, and the asset, when produced, is the security given against the loan made by the Reserve Bank to the Government.
That approach was analysed by an International Monetary Fund report in 2012.
The Chicago Plan Revisited said this – “Allowing the Government to issue money directly at zero interest, rather than borrowing that same money from banks at interest, would lead to a reduction in the interest burden on government finances and to a dramatic reduction of (net) government debt…..”
Labour should have looked to its history instead of taxing its most loyal supporters.
Chris Leitch, Leader

             If you want
  - Better Housing            - More Say
  - Better Roads                - Lower Rates
  - Better Health Care     - Less Tax
  - Better Education        - Clean Rivers
                      


© Copyright 2019   Social Credit NZ
Authorised by Anne Leitch, Secretary
42 Reyburn House Lane, Whangarei
If you want
 - Better Housing           - More Say
 - Better Roads         - Lower Rates
 - Better Health Care     - Less Tax
 - Better Education  - Clean Rivers
                    
Back to content