Return to the Welcome Page

 2007-8 letters to the 
New Zealand Prime Minister
from Dave McArthur 



Return to Update Page


Link here
 to a list of 
sustainable uses of key symbols - including

energy energy efficiency
global warming

Peak Oil
exponential growth







Recent letters to Rt Hon Helen Clark, 
Prime Minister of New Zealand 2007-8

See blog 28 October 2008


29 April 2008


Good Morning Prime Minister


I just heard your brief comment on National Radio concerning the proposed sale of the Wellington wiring grid used for powering many domestic and commercial appliances and for both local and global communication. You suggested it has no strategic value and implied it cannot be compared to the Auckland Airport.


You are correct in your comparison but not as you intended. The Wellington wiring grid is one of the region’s most potent resources whereas the Auckland Airport will soon have little value as such. This is because humanity is exiting the Cheap Oil/Gas Age. It is now transitioning to the Great Solar-Electrical Age. Air travel, as we know it, will soon be a sunset industry. The community wiring grids are about to become an essential and incredible source of wealth to those communities who can develop its broadband, Distributed Electrical Generation capacity and its intelligence potential.


The NZ Electricity Industry Reform Legislation (1993, 1998) is a most effective piece of legislation. It is designed to repress the capacity of all New Zealand communities to make intelligent uses of their local potential and this it does. It is now costing New Zealand many billions of dollars annually. However the Wellington region is at far greater risk than most because it has neither control of its local grid nor access to its potential intelligence.


It is true that two North American companies have owned the Wellington grid in the recent decade. There is much we can learn from this experience.  I worked for one of them – TransAlta- and directly experienced the systematic way the Calgary company, in conjunction with Arthur Andersen and Co, gutted the Wellington region’s electrical potential for the benefit of the company’s principal shareholders. I experienced the ruthless ways the management exposed Wellington families to threat and risk.


After TransAlta sold out I observed the further rapid deterioration of the region’s electrical potential to the point where if the trend had continued the pole structure would literally have fallen over in the next big storm. Fortunately the grid was returned to New Zealand control and I catalogued Vector’s active regeneration of critical elements of the pole system. You can see a small photo essay of this collapse at


Note: the essay is written in a spirit of kindness to the key players involved in the saga.


It only took one brief decade for this destruction to occur under the North American owners. The destruction is apparent in ways that are not immediately obvious. The future of the Wellington region, as with all regions, also lies in its capacity to use its electrical potential to provide cheap reliable transport systems. Wellington City had a considerable electrical transport resource in place by the 1980s and this too has been systematically run down in the last decade to the point where the trolley bus system is at the point of collapse. If it does collapse as “feeder lines” fail (I am not sure of the correct term) then we can expect the region’s economy to further implode in debt as the prices of mineral oil and gas rise - as they will.


I will paste below a letter I found recently that I had published February 2005 in my local community broadsheet here in Wellington. As you can see my predictions are being fulfilled with great accuracy. The inflationary pressures we are experiencing at present are relatively minor and are generated by our continued wasteful uses of mineral oil/gas at $US80 a barrel. The next wave of inflation from the fact the mineral oil is now over $US100 has yet to arrive with all its destructive mayhem. It may well sweep away the current maladapted Labour Party and vital elements of our nation’s civic structures.


I know I am not alone in understanding the epic transition humanity is in. I talk to many people in the street who comprehend the reality of the situation. They cannot comprehend the “idiocy” of our Parliament.


Perhaps it is because your advisors fail to inform you that each 42 gallon barrel of mineral oil contains the equivalent of 25000 man-hours of labour which we can use to do much of our pushing, pulling and lifting in our current economy. As such we should be valuing this extraordinary resource at thousands of dollars a barrel and ensuring we get maximal benefit from its consumption.


The reality is that New Zealand maintains vast systems of hidden subsidies to sustain our current wasteful uses of mineral oil/gas. A potent example is our mass use of combustion engines (cars/trucks) and their support systems, a national use of the resource that completely and needlessly wastes over 24,500 of those precious man-hours of labour potential, often in the process of performing non-productive tasks.


It has been apparent for at least a decade that you have been very poorly served by your advisors, including the Hon Michael Cullen. They have derided people like myself and I recall some of these advisors at the time of my 2005 letter confidently predicting mineral oil would be retailing at US35 a barrel in 2008. Check out your own advice flow and you will see history supports my observation.


I now predict the price of mineral oil will effectively reach thousands of dollars a barrel in our children’s life-time, thus putting global food and health supplies at enormous risk if the principle minority users of this potent resource do not adapt their behaviour.


I also predict that countries that begin now to voluntarily put such a high price on mineral oil/gas and adapt their systems accordingly will generate wealth and promote harmony.


I predict that those nations and communities that fail to voluntarily put such a price on mineral oil/gas will experience such prices regardless. They will experience the high price in the form of increasing inflation (loss of wealth), destruction of pension funds, loss of resources and “credit collapse”. These nations and communities will also tend to become great sources of conflict and violence among humanity.


It is clear that New Zealand is at present a leading example of these latter countries. We put little or no value on mineral oil/gas:

We subsidise wasteful uses of mineral oil by a factor of maybe $5 for every dollar the motorist pays at the pump.

We lead the world in promoting carbon trading (a psychology that puts zero value on mineral oil) and we reject carbon taxes (a psychology that places value on mineral oil).

Our troops play pivotal roles in pivotal places like Afghanistan maintaining the global use of drugs, weapons and wasteful uses of mineral oil/gas.


I like to think this will not be your ultimate legacy, Prime Minister.


I will forward this letter to others, including the Mayor of Wellington, Wellington regional councillors and others in the hope that our region can be salvaged. My hope is that people may catch of glimpse of our carbon, electrical and solar potential that results in them experiencing a new vision of the potential of the Wellington region’s wiring grid.


Yours sincerely


Dave McArthur



(85 Houghton Bay Road

Wellington 6023)



The Editor

The Cook Strait News


For publication please


A year or two back I stood up at a meeting discussing regional transport investment priorities and suggested the exercise was pointless. The investment programme was based on the recent Government predictions that oil would be $19 a barrel in 2004. I predicted it would be over $40. Many thought me a nutter. I will now predict that without the sudden appearance of an extraordinary leader like US President Carter, oil will be close to $80 a barrel in 2008. Already lower income people are being hit by the inflation resulting from rising oil and gas prices. Their plight is set to worsen sharply. In this context, the trolley bus wires are gold. Sure they are not pretty. However note how incomparably elegant they are compared to ugly, noisy monstrosities like car-clogged Adelaide Road, Riddiford St, Taranaki St or Jervois Quay.

Just know the wealth in those wires, folks!


Dave McArthur


May 2 2008


Prime Minister

New Zealand


Dear Hon Helen Clarke


A few months ago I wrote to you a note suggesting that Hon Michael Cullen is an immense liability to the Labour Party. I am now ready to go one step further. I believe history will judge him the worst Finance Minister since before 1935. He inherited remarkable favourable circumstances in 1999 with a mandate for sustainable change.  Mineral oil was retailing at $US9.98 a barrel and other commodities such as mineral gas, steel, copper etc were at historic lows too.  He has consistently dismissed people like myself who have attempted to point out this fact to him and he has continued to promote very wasteful uses of these extremely valuable resources. He had a fantastic opportunity to reshape our profoundly unsustainable economy using these cheap resources and he blew it.


Now with these resources increasing 1000% in price I am witnessing the inevitable inflation, loss of homeownership and rising household debt that I, and I know others, predicted to him if he continued with the folly of his ways.


I now predict New Zealand taxpayers and those investing in KiwiSaver will lose the vast proportion of these investments. It is a scheme destined to create much tragedy and misery. The only beneficiaries will be a few money pushers who are guaranteed small fortunes at the expense of the poor people in New Zealand.

I consider myself one of those “poor”. My income last year was $80 over the Community Services card threshold – thus I find my effective income has dropped some hundreds of dollars this year as I lose access to health services, home insulation investment schemes, rates rebates etc. My income is further eroded by inflation that far exceeds official figures – many of my essential items have increased by 100% since 2000.


Indeed this letter is stimulated by the fact that this room is now 16.8 C, which is below the WHO recommended levels of 18C, and I have just had to pull out a blanket to wrap around me as I write. It is a reminder that for the next several months I will struggle to keep warm and my cottage will often be 10C.

I am not writing for myself. I am writing to remind you and Hon Michael Cullen, surrounded by beautifully warmed air in your offices, of what many New Zealanders will again soon experience. We are forced through our taxes to subsidise car-owners, arms companies and money merchants with the result that we cannot afford sustainable housing.


History will judge your Administration very unkindly that you took the money of low paid people to prop up the rich. Here is one of the reasons why I am so certain that KiwiSaver will work to bankrupt the poor of New Zealand:,1518,druck-543588,00.html


Germans Fear Meltdown of Financial System


Germany and other industrialized nations are desperately trying to brace themselves against the threat of a collapse of the global financial system. The crisis has now taken its toll on the German economy, where the weak dollar is putting jobs in jeopardy and the credit crunch is paralyzing many businesses.


Political Dynamite

For some time, there has been a tacit agreement among central bankers and the financial ministers of key economies not to allow any bank large enough to jeopardize the system to go under -- no matter what the cost. But, on Sunday, the question arose whether this agreement should be formalized and made public. The central bankers decided against the idea, reasoning that it would practically be an invitation to speculators and large hedge funds to take advantage of this government guarantee.

Everyone involved knows how explosive the agreement is. It essentially means that while the profits of banks are privatized, society bears the cost of their losses. In a world in which the rich are getting richer and the poor poorer, that is political dynamite.

Nevertheless, central bankers are running out of options. They are anxious to avert the nightmare scenario of a financial crisis like the one that rocked Germany in 1931, when the failure of a major Berlin bank prompted a massive run on other banks by a nervous public, which plunged those banks into insolvency. For decades, a repetition of that disaster had seemed unthinkable. But ever since former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan dubbed the current financial crisis the worst since the end of World War II, old certainties have no longer applied…”

Alan Greenspan is correct and what is not stated in this article is the underlying reason for the credit collapse is that the vast expansion of credit was based on the premise that mineral oil/gas are cheap resources that will last forever. Hon Michael Cullen’s inability to understand the fatal flaw in this premise is why KiwiSaver will impoverish most New Zealanders. It is also why his investment of billions of dollars in motorways and air travel will mean they act as active drains on our nation’s wealth. Schemes like KiwiSaver and Carbon Trading also actively work to increase the now very high likelihood of a hideous global war by 2015 caused by as the world’s car-owners, jet users etc squandering our remaining easily accessed mineral oil/gas reserves.  Alan is correct about old certainties no longer applying – never before have 6.6 billion people relied on cheap mineral oil and gas to provided 5 out of every 6 calories required to put a calorie of food on the plate of the average human being.


I have been writing to you for 7 years now and have never had a response that indicates you get to read these letters. I will post it on my website so that the world can know that I tried to communicate with you.


There must be something you can do to wake Hon Michael Cullen up to the insanity of his policies.

Written in hope


Dave McArthur


85 Houghton Bay Road
Wellington 3
December 3 2007

 Dear Prime Minister 

 A few months ago I wrote to you and made what may have seemed an extreme statement: Michael Cullen and his KiwiSaver scheme put your Government and the nation at major risk. 

I made that statement on the basis of my knowledge of his understanding of climate issues, his continual inability to understand the issues surrounding our addictive use of mineral oil and its impact on inflation and credit, his approval of the Transpower Cayman Islands deal and his inability to understand that the Electricity Reforms are fundamentally flawed.  It is becoming clear to me that KiwiSaver is going to cost New Zealand billions of dollars and lead to great hardship as credit systems based on the equation Mineral Oil = Energy collapse. 

I have pasted below a few links that reinforce my case. 

I do not expect a reply to this. However I do expect you and your office to read it and I will publish accordingly. No one in the Labour Party will ever be able to say your Government was not advised of the risks of Michael’s policies and  KiwiSaver in particular. The tragedy is those valuable funds if invested in light rail, intelligent uses of our electrical and solar potential and quality design and insulated buildings could have been a great source of wealth and health for us 

Yours sincerely 

Dave McArthur 

Innovating Our Way to Financial Crisis 


Published: December 3, 2007

The financial crisis that began late last summer, then took a brief vacation in September and October, is back with a vengeance.

How bad is it? Well, I’ve never seen financial insiders this spooked — not even during the Asian crisis of 1997-98, when economic dominoes seemed to be falling all around the world.

This time, market players seem truly horrified — because they’ve suddenly realized that they don’t understand the complex financial system they created....

“What we are witnessing,” says Bill Gross of the bond manager Pimco, “is essentially the breakdown of our modern-day banking system, a complex of leveraged lending so hard to understand that Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke required a face-to-face refresher course from hedge fund managers in mid-August.”

..But what has really undermined trust is the fact that nobody knows where the financial toxic waste is buried. Citigroup wasn’t supposed to have tens of billions of dollars in subprime exposure; it did. Florida’s Local Government Investment Pool, which acts as a bank for the state’s school districts, was supposed to be risk-free; it wasn’t (and now schools don’t have the money to pay teachers).


Also from nyt

Narvik, Norway, is an unlikely link in a chain of investor misery.

Published: December 2, 2007

Ms. Kuvaas is the mayor of Narvik, a remote seaport where the season’s perpetual gloom deepened even further in recent days after news that the town — along with three other Norwegian municipalities — had lost about $64 million, and potentially much more, in complex securities investments that went sour.

...Tiny specks on the map, these Norwegian towns are links in a chain of misery that stretches from insolvent homeowners in California to the state treasury of Maine, and from regional banks in Germany to the mightiest names on Wall Street. Citigroup, among the hardest hit, created the investments bought by the towns through a Norwegian broker.

For Ms. Kuvaas, being in such company is no comfort. People here are angry and scared, fearing that the losses will hurt local services like kindergartens, nursing homes and cultural institutions. With Christmas only weeks away, Narvik has already missed a payroll for municipal workers.


As the losses begin to bite, the political finger-pointing has begun. Down the hall from Ms. Kuvaas, the town’s opposition leader, Torgeir Traeldal, is calling for an investigation of how and why Narvik could have made such an ill-advised investment.

“Heads are going to roll,” Mr. Traeldal said, repeating the phrase a few times to drive home his point.

State stops leaders from ditching fund

Palm Beach Post Capital Bureau

Friday, November 30, 2007

TALLAHASSEE — Gov. Charlie Crist and other state leaders Thursday temporarily halted all further withdrawals from a state-run investment pool in hopes of keeping the fund from becoming the latest casualty of the ever-expanding maw of the subprime mortgage meltdown.

Even though the fund has consistently made money for local governments since it was created 25 years ago, those governments had pulled nearly $13.5 billion from the pool in the past two weeks, including $3.7 billion on Thursday morning.

....If the pace of recent withdrawals had continued, the state board could have been forced to sell the pool's troubled securities at a deep discount and left some governments with the losses.

"What happens to the participants who have the last $2 billion in the pool?" Sink said. "They get zero."

Sink, who requested the emergency board meeting Thursday, said the remaining investors should help decide the next step so "the pain can be shared."


Dedert, whose most recent deposit into the pool was Wednesday, said she has only about $30 million on hand to pay the city's bills and is liquidating all available accounts. She said she hoped the state would let the city make some withdrawals to pay employees and make debt payments.

"All our excess cash is there," she said. "I'm robbing Peter to pay Paul."

At the emergency meeting Thursday, state board Director Coleman Stipanovich tried to offer a five-point plan that he said could reverse the run on withdrawals.

His first point was to use the Florida Retirement System to guarantee the riskiest debt in the local government pool. In return, the pool would pay an insurance premium to guarantee against any losses by the retirement system, which administers the pension fund used by state employees, including teachers, and many county officers and employees.

"If we don't do something quickly, we're not going to have a local government investment pool," Stipanovich said.

But Sink immediately rejected the proposal, saying it would leave the pension fund with the bad notes.

"We would be bailing out one fund, to which we have no legal obligation, with the star fund of Florida, which is our pension fund," Sink said. "I'm highly skeptical of it.



For a funny and terrifyingly accurate commentary watch this video.



18 Dec 2007

Dear Helen and all 

Recently I wrote to you attempting to alert you to the fact that the ignorance and arrogance of Hon Michael Cullen is a massive liability for your Government and our country. 

I draw your attention to this article today

'Host of risks' in super scheme

The Press | Tuesday, 18 December 2007


The Government's multibillion-dollar KiwiSaver superannuation scheme has been slated by the Retirement Commission, which questions its huge cost and its value for money.

I, and I know many others, have attempted to communicate with Michael Cullen over the last several years and attempted to alert him to the unsustainable nature of our use of carbon and the need to revoke the 1998 Electricity Industry Reform legislation so communities are re-enfranchised and can make intelligent use of our electrical potential again.  

Michael has refused to acknowledge that our current use of carbon is putting us all at great risk from the combine effects of human induced changes to the global climate and the destruction of fossil fuel reserves.  Instead he has poured public funds into more motorways and promoted wasteful uses of mineral oil, thus inducing a state of inflation into our economy that is now going to have exponentially destructive effects. He has destroyed the ability of many of our young to own a home, burdened families with huge personal debt and high interest rates and I predict he will become to be known as the man who destroyed our brilliant Universal Superannuation scheme. 

I write as a person who has been a labourer all my life (I am at present a school caretaker cleaner), have a heart murmur caused by a damaged bicuspid heart valve, am aged 60 and have damaged most limbs during my 40 years of physical work in all terrains in all weathers and I live in a partially insulated 80 year old cottage that in winter is often 11 degrees Centigrade. I earn $13 an hour - the same as I earned in 1990 though my council rates have gone up 50% since 2000 alone, my Bulk-generated electricity kWh charge has almost tripled in that time, my bus fares went up 30% this last year alone and other basic costs have risen with some foods doubling during the last two years. 

Michael has provided the next Government with all the political leeway it needs to say that we can no longer afford Universal Superannuation because we have the option of KiwiSaver.  

I, a common labourer, have been predicting for four years now that oil will be selling over $US80 a barrel in 2008 with huge inflationary impacts while Michael scorned people like me and predicted it would be about $US35.  I also predicted that if he invests on that about $US35 basis – which he proceeded to do - then we will suffer a massive credit crunch and one of the first resources to be destroyed is the equity of the KiwiSaver. I am 95% certain that all the taxes he is pouring into the fund will benefit no one but a few sharebrokers like Mark Weldon and company.  I am convinced Michael would have been far wiser to invest in electrical mass transport in our urban areas and let me keep my taxes on the proviso that I invest it in insulation and smart uses of my solar and electrical potential in my home where it will not be destroyed by the coming credit collapse. I fail to see why your Government is pouring such huge subsidies into the money brokers. It only increases the high risk of credit collapse! 

Excuse me if I sound slightly irritable – if I am it is perhaps understandable as I was woken in the night more than one by my right arm going numb, then waking me with a blaze in burning pins and needles as the blood flow started again down it. Years of repetitive work on picks on rocks, hammers, nearly five hours last night vacuuming and scrubbing toilets plus having had the shoulder blade torn off its mount when a meter box broke loose plus having had the should ripped out of its socket when a large man opened a lobby door in a hurry onto my arm as it was stretched into a meter cupboard plus a crunched thumb from a fall on a construction site makes me vulnerable. 

However I am not irritable. I am not complaining for myself. I am simply saying Michael Cullen, in his arrogance and his ignorance, is failing a large section of very vulnerable New Zealanders while pandering to the whims of uncaring money traders. For instance the taxpayer’s money he is committing to them via the $60 a year "transaction fee" could quickly amount to a billion dollars - especially as I predict a large number of the accounts will become dead accounts in quick time as poverty deepens and people emigrate. That billion dollars would have insulated many New Zealand homes. Yes I know you have programmes in place insulating homes but they are just token investments compared to the scale of the problem and your investment in inflation causing superschemes and car subsidies. 

In short KiwiSaver is far more of a terrorist threat to New Zealand than any and its proponents are to be fear far more than any group like Tuhoe or greenies or stroppy peacenicks. Kiwikiller is going to be a real killer. A KiwiKiller.  

I doubt that you want this as your main legacy. I suspect it will become quite a bit matter of discussion next year. Michael with his reframing of Universal Superannuation has accomplished what some National Party people have dreamed of doing for decades but did not know how. 

Understand this is not a request to dump Michael as Finance Minister. Rather it is a request for him to change, to listen to the people who have been correct in predicting the impacts of our carbon, solar and electrical use and give less regard to his current advisors who are clearly out of touch with reality. 

Respectfully yours 

Dave McArthur  

85 Houghton Bay Road

'Host of risks' in super scheme

The Press | Tuesday, 18 December 2007


The Government's multibillion-dollar KiwiSaver superannuation scheme has been slated by the Retirement Commission, which questions its huge cost and its value for money.

In its three-year review of Government retirement policy, the commission found KiwiSaver was a generous incentive scheme to kick-start the nation's woeful savings habits and was likely to provide a boost to the economy and capital markets.

However, it said there was a host of risks associated with the scheme, including an unknown cost, in-built unfairness, the scheme's complexity, bias against the self-employed and its hasty introduction.

The commission said costly additions made to KiwiSaver by Finance Minister Michael Cullen in the May Budget meant the retirement industry would never know whether the original scheme, without the taxpayer subsidies, would have been just as effective.

KiwiSaver was "turbocharged" by Cullen this year with the addition of a $20-a-week matching tax credit for everyone paying into the scheme through their employer.

Employers were required to match the contributions up to 4 per cent of salary, and the Government offered another $20 tax credit for employers. This was on top of a $1000 kick-start and a $5000 first-home buyers' bonus.

At the time, the cost of KiwiSaver Mark 2 was estimated at $2 billion a year by 2016-17.

However, the commission said that beyond that point the bill could balloon substantially, yet no forecasts appear to have been done.

"The swift introduction of more generous and costly incentives in KiwiSaver 2 has made the fiscal cost of KiwiSaver a more significant issue," the commission said in its report.

"The costs of KiwiSaver beyond 2017 are not available. These costs can be expected to continue to increase for some time as more people join than leave.

"The incentives are now a significant cost that future governments will have to consider.

"The danger is that these costs become too high, and something has to change."

The commission said that in a worst-case scenario, New Zealand's universal superannuation would have to be cut to fund KiwiSaver.

"Reducing the advantages of New Zealand Superannuation would hurt more people more seriously than cutting KiwiSaver would," it warned.

The commission said that if the original KiwiSaver had been left to run as planned, the Government would have gained a better understanding of the effectiveness of the design.

"Given the probable disinclination of politicians to reduce incentives, New Zealand is likely to be locked into a high-incentive, high-cost system without ever knowing whether a lower-incentive, lower-cost system would have been just as effective."

The commission said KiwiSaver would compound the gap between those who had saved and those who had not, threatening the equity and fairness of current retirement income policy. It was more likely to be taken up by people who were saving already. "The incentives in KiwiSaver come out of general taxpayer funds.

Whether the incentives are an unfair subsidy from non-savers to savers is a debatable point," the commission said.

It also raised concerns about the cost of universal superannuation, saying there was great uncertainty around how fast life expectancy would increase.

Current policy did not take into account the increase in life expectancy and New Zealand super was likely to cost more than envisaged, it said.

It also flagged concerns over falling home-ownership rates and rising house prices.

Retirement Commissioner Diana Crossan said Government retirement policies were working "reasonably well" for those in, and approaching, retirement, but there were danger signals.

"On balance, New Zealand's retirement income policy has been remarkably successful and is world-leading, but there are some unknowns creeping into the environment - some early signals that make us concerned."


85 Houghton Bay Road
Wellington 6023
10 August 2007

 The Prime Minister
Rt Hon Helen Clark

Dear Helen 

I am writing to you about what I believe are the most critical issues of our time – our unsustainable uses of our carbon, solar and electrical potential and our lack of science (democracy). If our children have a future, and this is very much in doubt now, I believe they will judge the failure of the Fifth Labour Administration to address these issues as a gross dereliction of duty. Their survival will have occurred despite, not because of your Administration. Indeed, if your Administration remains on its current course it will be seen to have set in place mechanisms that enabled fascism to flourish in New Zealand. 

First I state the prime objective of this letter, which is to again request your response to the following proposal as outlined in my letter to you 30 July 2007. 

The Electricity Reform legislation be amended to permit democratic communities to once again own local wiring grid and to trade electricity of all forms on them, including that generated from Bulk, Micro, dwelling and other means. While they may buy Bulk-generated electricity on the NZ Electricity market they are not permitted to own Bulk-generation plant (To be defined). They also will be permitted again to use community profits from these activities to promote local dwellings as generators using glass, insulation, solar water heating and other technologies. Democratic communities will also have the right to use Maria compliant metering of their choice, including reversible meters, and the right to broadcast dwelling information using broadband or radio based metering to all agencies that are approved using the democratic processes of the community e.g. broadcast to community based trading, research and consumer protection groups.


A prerequisite for the right to own a local wiring grid and to trade electricity over it is that all members of the community with rights to vote in national, regional or hospital board elections shall have the same right to vote in how local wiring and electrical trades are administered.


It seems wise to take this opportunity to enlarge onto a wider topic that I have been meaning to write to you about for some time now. I watch your Administration struggling as it fails to comprehend the reasons underlying the current collapse of our society as measured in excessive interest rates and debt, growing violence and poverty and homelessness. Central to your problem is our Parliament’s inability to understand that any economy that makes addictive use of our carbon resources and that relies on constantly expanding population will collapse amidst great misery.

Also central is that while you and many Members of Parliament show considerable awareness of the power of symbols your use of our most vital symbols  (e.g. energy, power, warming, greenhouse, change, science, climate and electricity) is unsustainable and puts us all at great risk.


All our political parties, including the Green Party, are unsustainable. I observe that the National Party, which epitomises this ignorance, is effectively dictating our legislative programme for at least three years now. The Labour Party has a choice: continue with the status quo and become ever more redundant and dangerous or to begin to articulate solutions to the great issues I outlined in my introductory sentence.


I can predict the redundancy of the current Labour Party with considerable confidence. I have developed a principle I call the Sustainability Principle of Energy:


“When a symbol use works to deny change it will materially alter the potential of the universe (energy) in a way that results in a reduction in the capacity of the symbol user to mirror reality. When a symbol use works for the acceptance of change it will increase the capacity of the symbol user to mirror reality.”


This is a tool that effectively enables us to predict whether a strategy puts humans at greater or lesser risk long term.  In brief, analysis of a wide range of your Administration’s policies suggests if they were adopted universally humanity would face catastrophic collapse.


I have some proposals, some quite simple, that will enable the Labour Party to become meaningful and sustainable. They will enable the Party to engage the New Zealand people with a realistic and hopeful vision of the future and thus assume leadership in Parliament.


The prime proposal is for a national review of the symbols we use to portray “science”, “energy”, “power” and of how thermodynamics and our climate works. I have made repeated calls to your Administration to contemplate such a review for six years now and have been treated with arrogance, dismissiveness and derision by your Party colleagues and Government officials. Without such a review the future for your party is hopeless and under your Administration our civil society will be corroded to the point of implosion by the current unsustainable legislation.


The second proposal is to engage New Zealanders with a sustainable vision of carbon.  I will quickly show you one brief application of the Sustainability Principle using your employment of the Carbon Neutrality symbol. It predicts that this use of the symbol is fatally flawed because it involves a grand denial of change. Mineral oil (and Gas and coal) took eons to form its fantastic energy potential (25,000 manhours of labour equivalent in each 42 gallon barrel). When we burn it in momentary act then that potential is destroyed for further eons, perhaps for the life of this planet. To believe this act is neutral for humanity is a massive denial of change – in this cases eons of change.


Your Administration makes the fatal error that has brought down all civilisations that have made it. You base our economy on a confusion of energy with one of the forms it takes. This mistake is one of the main roots of your current problems. It has the inevitable consequence of inflation and severe wealth loss. All nations that make addictive use of carbon or other resource are doomed.


The concept of Carbon Neutrality is a very dangerous nonsense (non-science). It prevents your Administration from communicating to New Zealanders and building on the great pool of commonsense (common science) that exists out here. We respond to issues in sane ways when they are presented clearly. Your concept of Carbon Neutrality, with its vast eonian denial of change, confounds the communication completely. And that is one reason why the National Party controls Parliament with the ease it does.


The Sustainability Principle suggests we cannot trade away our stewardship of carbon as is suggested in your use of the “carbon trading”, “carbon neutrality” and “carbon offsetting” symbols. It suggests we cannot escape our role as stewards of carbon. We cannot escape our obligation to place a high value on the resource, as with carbon taxes and limiting our population. Here is a link to a graph that gives graphic testimony to what happens to nations that use oil an addictive way as we do. Please take out time to reflect on the oil-inflation graph:


The third proposal is to review your Administration’s commitment to the use of “market driven solutions” symbol and the previous Labour Administration’s decision to cease the use the “service driven solutions” symbol. In 1987 I wrote to the Hon Sir Roger Douglas predicting his commitment to this symbol would result in societal breakdown and the doubling of our prison population within a decade. I was wrong on the latter – to my horror the doubling occurred sooner despite Hon David Lange’s intervention. It also contributed to the destruction of my family.


My prediction was made on the basis of my knowledge of psychology.  The concept of “Markets” as decision makers and arbitrators is dis-empowering. Stripped of human values Markets are inherently amoral. They inevitably become psychopathic structures when accorded minds of their own. Historically humans have employed this psychological device to deny our role as stewards and we have done so at our peril.

In 1987 I was also becoming aware that the employment of this symbol was being manifest in policies whereby our Public Service (including our Universities) were “restructuring” “service-driven” people out of existence and promoting “profit-driven people” to administer our nation.  The grim statistics and prognosis you now face are testimony to impacts of this policy. And this is at a time when oil and Gas are still ridiculously cheap!


The fourth proposal is to scrap the concept of a “Minister of Energy”. The Sustainability Principle suggests your employment of this symbol is extremely high risk.

The Principle also suggests it is wise to create Ministries that reflect our groups of resources we put prime value on.


Thus there will be for the first time in our history a Ministry for the development of our solar resources.


At present most of your Administration’s policies are pointless. An example is your announcement this week of the concept of Green Buildings. Current symbol use eg “Minister of Energy” is manifest in legislation that puts almost zero value on our solar resources. Hence a person can invest in the construction of a 5 star dwelling and find its value destroyed when spec builders destroy its access to solar energy the following year. It is interesting to observe that the greatest destruction of our urban solar-based generation capacity occurred under the Fourth and Fifth Labour Administrations.


Other useful symbol uses include a ministry for the conservation of mineral resources, a ministry for the development of our electrical potential (this includes broadband and radio) and a ministry for the care of our biomass potential (subsuming our current Agriculture Ministry).


The fifth proposal is to promote democracy so that New Zealanders can directly vote in the management of our most critical infrastructure again. The current legislation destroys the majority of our most sustainable options and history will show that under your Administration the essential structures were cemented in place that enabled fascism to flourish in our land. For instance, the implementation of Meridian’s ARC technology contains all the ingredients.


The proposed amendment to the Electricity Reforms that I invite you to comment on is designed to reduce the current risk of this occurring.

This amendment is possible, as your Administration proved with our community healthy systems. Already the benefits are becoming apparent in primary health care. Now you have to legislate to re-enfranchise New Zealanders and underpin our electrical systems with democracy. After all, these systems underpin our health, education and other systems.


This may be my last attempt to communicate with you, Helen. I shall detail below a brief summary of my attempts to communicate with your Administration. I am sure you will agree this is not sustainable and you can understand why I am giving up hope on your Administration.

At present I am near assuming its culture is hopeless, particularly with Hon Michael Cullen’s commitment of the nation to the environmentally and socially hostile KiwiSaver scheme at the expense of other social policies, such as giving us the option of saving in the form of sustainable infrastructure such as insulated dwellings and intelligent uses of electricity and rail.

I predict the wider population will quickly become aware of the scale of the transfer of taxpayer funds (subsidies) to unsustainable money merchants. It will soon see how the scheme undermines human rights in the form of Universal Superannuation, the Matrimonial Act, sustainable housing, social equity etc. I predict you will soon realise that the Hon Michael Cullen is a liability to us all because, like Hon Don Brash, he lacks science and does not understand the fundamentals of what sustains civilisation.


As I mention in the history summary, the National Party spokesperson displayed considerably more science in my 2005 survey of the parties that did the Labour Party. He not only stated clearly that his answers were his own work and not that of some official. He acknowledged his knowledge was not certain and indeed was unique among all the respondents: he wrote to me subsequently asking if his answers were correct!

I find considerable hope in that. It contrasts profoundly with your own response. To refresh:

Humans can save/conserve energy. True/False.


Labour Quite separately from the technical definition referred to in question 1,
the phrase "energy conservation" is also commonly used in New Zealand and
around the world to mean "a reduction in energy use".  In this context, the
answer is True, humans can conserve energy.


Green False in a technical sense but we can conserve its ability to do work which is what matters.


National  False because humans are not a closed system and do not operate in one. Therefore they cant conserve or save energy.


The denial of the Conservation Principle of Energy implicit in your response is manifest in the great flaws on which the greater body of your Administration’s policy is based. Green Party policy is similarly flawed* Energy by its very nature is conserved and humans take the first step on the road to a hellish existence when they deny this truth. In that moment they deny the nature of the universe(s) and fail to mirror reality. To associate conservation with “a reduction in energy use” is also fatally flawed. It associates energy efficiency with deprivation and that is not what the Conservation Principle teaches us. The issue is not how much energy we use but whether our use of energy forms is sustainable. This flaw delivers us EECA. It fails to deliver us a ministry for the development of solar resources.

* I have been a member of the Green Party during the years of your Administration and can catalogue a similar history of unsustainable responses from that party too to my requests for evidence of the science underpinning its communications.


These comparative responses are why I am contemplating breaking the paradigm of a lifetime. I am considering offering my material to the National Party in a desperate attempt to get Parliament to address the real issues.


The sad thing is that I know there is a body of considerable wisdom in the general public. At present people sense something is very wrong and know your Administration’s response is not credible. They sense its lack of science. The dilemma I have is that I know there is a risk the material I have gathered from your Administration (education resources etc) will be used by the National Party to expose the unsustainable reality of your policies and at the same time influential party members will fail to appreciate the lessons in your failure i.e. the material will be used to confuse and making cheap “political points”.


As mentioned I require only a short response from you on these general matters. It would be very helpful to have an assurance that you have read this letter. I have much reason not to trust or place much faith in the wisdom your officials or colleagues. They brought your Administration to its current unsustainable position.

I understand that you will have to call for wider comment from your advisors on the specific proposal I put to you as an amendment to the Electricity Reform legislation. However its central aim of valuing and promoting democracy is a personal call for you.


I look forward to your response.

(Here is that oil-inflation graph again.

 Yours sincerely

 Dave McArthur

From the Sustainability Principle

“The more we accept change the greater the harmony we know. The more we deny change the greater the misery we know.”

Brief History 1999-

Note – I write this without bitterness.  Each obstacle I have turned to opportunity with which to develop a greater vision of the nature of energy. I am human and so this personal capacity cannot be viewed as a sustainable process from a national point of view.

I believe the Sustainability Principle has extraordinary value and has the potential to transform human experiences. Just as Carnot was looking for a measure of the optimal efficiency of a steam engine and Landauer is looking for a measure of the optimal efficiency of computing machines the Sustainability Principle may give us a measure of the optimal efficiency of symbol (knowledge) use. Even though the Sustainability Principle was largely drawn from observation of our “Environmental Education” machine I am increasingly confident it has profound implications in the promotion of science and for all your Administrations education policies. The Principle contains within its truth an absolutely awe-inspiring vision that is the right of all our children to share. Recall how you came to power on dreams of creating a “knowledge economy”. This principle provides the tools for generating the wisdom it to be the reality in which humanity flourishes.


1999 September.

As a result of my traumatic experiences of the Electricity Reforms and using lessons learned I lobbied hard to have the Whistle Blowers legislation extended to cover private sector employees. This was successful and this was one of your first acts in 2000. Subsequent attempts to get your Administration to promote knowledge of the legislation among our most vulnerable through our schools vocational courses and WINZ have failed.


The legislation is too late to prevent the destruction of my career, the loss of our family home, my income and my family. For some years we were under threat that our house (lovingly hand-built by us over 10 years) would be “trashed” and my family raped if I “did not keep right out of the electricity industry”. I will just say it is not a sign of a civilised society when a man feels relieved, as I was, that his lover of 28 years and their beautiful daughter are safer when they become completely estranged from him.


2000 March

Still incoherent with grief at the final destruction of my family the previous month I make a personal submission to the Government Inquiry into Electricity headed by Hon David Caygill.

I know David is aware of my personal circumstances from as our families have long been acquainted. This knowledge gives me strength to make a personal presentation. Unlike David, my knowledge of our electrical potential is based on 20 years 1978-1997 at the public interface of the Bulk-generated electricity industry and 7 years in the NZ Post Office.


I do not need to tell you how David was a key driver of the “sale” of Telecom in 1990.


I try to explain to your 2000 Inquiry the fatal flaws inherent in the Electricity Reforms (and the sale of Telecom) and fail in my endeavour. I know David as a decent human being with considerable intellectual abilities and he is remarkable for his inability to comprehend that our utility grids have (had) enormous wealth potential when their communication and electrical potential are combined eg as with the ripple control system and as with broadband through 230volt grids.

Note: Recent insights from advances in quantum computing are suggesting the idea that “Knowledge is Physical” may well be a valuable principle of energy.


I know of no evidence that David understands this idea and its profound implications for the potential value of our utility grids. Your Administration accepted David’s recommendation to continue with the “market driven solutions” policy in our use of our electrical potential. This decision has cost the New Zealand people hundreds of billions of dollars. (See our growth in household debt during your Administration - even in these times of cheap oil.)

Knowledge is indeed physical and householders can no longer own it. It is now the property of the bankers who control how we use our electrical potential as a result of the Electricity Reforms and Telecom “sale”.



I make repeated attempts to alert Hon Pete Hodgson that New Zealand communities have produced the world leading carbon education resource (Energy Action) Peter knows of it and one of his first acts as Minister of Energy was to bestow on its creator, Grant Dunford, an award for communication. I alert Peter to the fact that the resource is at risk because of the Electricity Reforms. Peter’s response is to reaffirm your Administration’s belief in “market driven solutions”. He states his belief that the bankers of the Bulk-generated electricity companies are now providing appropriate education resources.


 “The market” decides there is no place for the Energy Action resource in New Zealand. This is logical because “the market” concerned is now in the form of companies driven by the interests of the fossil fuel sector. TransAlta pretends to your new Administration that it supports the Energy Action resource but withholds funding. I had predicted this based on my previous experience working as an employee of TransAlta as a meter reader and my direct experiences in that role with Arthur Andersen And Co, Peat Marwick KPMG and TransAlta’s other advisors.  

NGC (AGL) inherits the Energy Action resource when TransAlta exits New Zealand and, under CEO Mervyn English, demolishes the resource in June 2001. The corporation devotes funding to Karori Wildlife Reserve instead.  I am made redundant again and continue the work for next 6 years unpaid except for minimum dole payments for three years.



I make repeated attempts to alert your Climate Change Office officials and their Minister (Hon Pete Hodgson) to the probable fact (now proven) that their use of climate symbols* lacks science and is counterproductive of your Administrations stated objectives. These alerts are ignored, as are the alterative strategies I propose for teaching our people, particularly our farmers, the nature and power of trace gases. I anticipated the Fart Tax campaign by some years.

*Note: these symbol uses do accurately reflect your Administration’s effective objectives, as articulated in Mfe-CCO briefings to business groups.


2002 January 23(?)

Hon Marion Hobbs views the display stand* showing revised Energy Action 2008 in Hamilton at the Inaugural NZAEE national conference. Marion demands to know why she has not been informed of this resource and asks for all of our correspondence with your Administration.

*Note: The display stand, which took five hours to originally assemble, had just been reassembled after Enviroschools proponents had demolished it and put their resource in its place. They (especially the NZAEE president Pam Williams) also attempted to prevent the work being reassembled for display.


I supply Marion with all correspondence and continue the work on the minimum dole ($156 a week)* living in a converted garage supplied by supportive friends while I wait developments.

*Note: Despite repeated inquiries of your officials during my years on the minimum dole they refused me the accommodation supplement of $50 a week. At the end of the period they admitted this decision was incorrect and I had been denied my entitlement. They said I could not be paid retrospectively.)


2002 May.

Sustained by the dole I continue the work in the hope your Administration will support it. Your Administration publishes and delivers a profoundly flawed climate education resource into all of our primary and some of our secondary schools. I point some of the flaws out to Marion and she immediately issues an edict that a meeting of representatives of your Government departments implicated be called urgently. I continue my work on the dole living in the converted garage (as I will for a couple of years)


2002 June/July.

Your Administration commits $200,000 to Enviroschools. It does this through the NZAEE without knowledge of its treasurer and with the organization having no facility for such funds, thereby profoundly compromising the organization on a wide range of levels. I had repeated pointed out to its architects and your officials from the moments of its inception in 2000 that Enviroschools contains no carbon-atmosphere component, makes flawed uses of the energy and power symbols and works directly against your Administration’s stated objectives.

I publicly predict the failure of your Administration to be able to implement a carbon tax i.e. put a sustainable value on fossil fuels and biomass. This prediction proves accurate.


2002 October.

Marion’s edict has been completely ignored by your officials. I write directly to you, Helen, asking for a brief audience to show you the flaws in your climate communication strategy and a strategy for remedying the situation. Two weeks later I get an urgent email requesting my presence at a meeting at which a range of departmental representatives will be present. I begin my presentation and Pam Williams, present in her capacity as president of the NZAEE, immediately pulls my graphics down and shuts down meeting in disarray. Your officials responsible for organising this meeting keep no minutes.



 I continue my work on the dole, reviewing and attending as many of the “energy” and “climate” publications and public presentations as is possible on a minimal income. My correspondence with Hon Pete Hodgson (“Energy” Minister) Hon Trevor Mallard (Education Minister) and Hon Marion Hobbs (Environment Minister) all affirm their belief that Government communication strategy is underpinned by science but provide no evidence for this belief.

I also publicly predict global oil prices will be over $US40 a barrel in 2004 while your officials predict it will be $US19. My predictions are incorrect – it reaches $US45.



I continue as above as it is my belief that our current addictive uses of carbon and abuse of our electrical and solar potential are the most critical issues facing our country and New Zealand’s response is making our nation a liability for humanity.

I predict publicly that global oil prices will be $US80 a barrel in 2008 and that our addictive use of carbon will result in high inflation rates and serious wealth loss in New Zealand. I also predict carbon trading, offsetting and neutrality policies will be counterproductive to your Administration’s stated objectives and these will cost New Zealand.


2004 September

I write to you on two key issues.

 I now have considerable evidence that our use of key climate symbols is not supported by science and again call for a review of their use. I also urgently draw your attention to the fact that the planned privatisation of Vector Ltd will destroy a major portion of our electrical potential and result in a considerable loss of wealth to us - particularly people living in your electorate.  Your officials continually refuse my request that you acknowledge that you have read my letter. I receive a reply from Hon Michael Cullen in which he admits your Administration is powerless to amend the Electricity Reform legislation and cannot advise the Auckland community* (1) and endorses the use of the “greenhouse” symbol to communicate atmospheric processes *(2).


*Note (1): Vector Ltd is now severely dysfunctional because of the unsustainable objectives of its new part owners and majority controllers such as Brook Asset Management, Providence Resources (Sir Anthony O’Reilly) etc. It is also increasingly unsustainable because of your Administrations continuing endorsement of the Electricity Reform legislation (See 2007 statement to Electricity Commission.) This dysfunction is a direct consequence and reflection of the dysfunction within your Administration. Hon Michael Cullen’s clearly had the capacity to extend Government credit facilities to enable Vector Ltd to regain NZ control over critical elements of our electrical potential (NGC owned half of NZ 230 Volt meters). He refused.

Note: He also diverted the special Meridian Energy dividend away from intelligent uses of electricity and directed them into chronic high risk investments in carbon use/extreme wasteful uses of our electrical potential (more cars and motorways).


*Note (2): in 2006 research by the US based Frameworks Institution


using coast –coast polling, established that my hypothesis is correct and science does not support the beliefs of your colleagues (Rt Hon Michael Cullen, Marion Hobbs, Trevor Mallard and Peter Hodgson) that their use of the greenhouse symbol is sustainable. The Foundation concluded this use should be avoided as it fails its objectives.


Warning: The Sustainability Principle indicates the alternative strategies suggested by the Frameworks Institute contain major flaws too.

The Principle also suggests relatively risk-free strategies New Zealand can adopt eg the use of the “trace” symbol and conserving the “greenhouse” and “blanket” symbols for communicating best clothing, storage and dwelling design and practice.


2005 March.

Until now WINZ has not wanted to know of me. As a employment case I am then 57years old, have a heart condition which involves a damaged bicuspid valve, experience crippling migraines regularly and have many damaged and painful injuries from 37 years of almost non-stop labouring work, sometimes labouring twelve hours a day seven days a week for long periods.


I become subject to open public hostility as the result of our Parliament’s campaign to bash so-called dole bludgers. (In actual fact history knows I am freely researching perhaps the most critical issue humanity faces. and offering highly paid Government officials free advice, sometimes in response to particular questions that they have posed and which they do not have the time or the experience to generate further questions from to support research.)


I become subject to intense WINZ scrutiny and have the unpleasant experience of Hon Steve Maharey’s specially formed mobile WINZ squads knocking unannounced on my door at home. You will recall Labour’s “dawn raid” squads in 1975. The difference is that it is now New Zealanders of Polynesian origins knocking on the door of a New Zealander of European origins. These are good people and they appreciate the value of the work I am doing but make it clear that under your Administration it cannot be sustained.

My aging parents are being affected by this hostile national climate and to avoid further anguish for them I take a job as a school janitor and continue my work in my remaining waking hours. 


2005 August.

My research now suggests it is possible to predict Government outcomes from its use of key symbols. I perform a pre-election survey of all leaders in which I ask you to respond to the following brief questions. The questionnaire is designed to indicate the integrity of the leader as well as their religious beliefs.

I asked you:

1.What does the Principle of the Conservation of Energy state?

2. Humans can save/conserve energy. True/False.

3. If your answer is False, which manifestations of energy can humans save/conserve?

4. Electricity is energy. True/False


Your response (as evidenced by you lack of personal response) to the brief questionnaire indicates your policies are, on balance, more likely to put us all at greater risk of inflation, poverty and warfare. The response from the advisor to the Minister of Energy, Hon Trevor Mallard) who responded for you supports this indication.

You may be interested to note that Hon Don Brash was similarly unable to respond. This was predicted because it was clear that he believes the lowering of inflation pressures was due to his decade of fiscal activities when the reality is that it was the result of drastically cheap global oil ($US 9.98 a barrel by 1999) and Gas. What was a surprise is that his Energy spokesperson (Hon Phil Wheatley) rated the highest in the science of his response and he was unique in later inquiring if his answers were correct. This now leaves me in the dilemma I mentioned earlier.


2006 January
I devote three weeks of my moderate income and all my annual leave preparing a presentation for the NZAEE National conference in Auckland in the hope of communicating with your officials.

Two people attend my presentation. I witness the observation by the keynote speaker, Sir Jonathon Porritt, to the conference that Enviroschools completely omits any reference to the biggest issue facing humanity – our unsustainable use of carbon. I cannot overstate the shock and dismay he evidenced. I also witness the totally muted and dismissive responses of your officials to his profound observation subsequently. In his difficult moment of presenting this unpalatable truth I am alone in a hall of over 300 of our top educators in supporting him with applause.


2006 March
I approach my local MP (Hon Annette King) and again show her the prototype of the Energy Action 2008 resource to remind her that New Zealand was at the forefront in the creation and facilitation of these education resources until 2000. I also show her the fundamental flaws in Enviroschools. She immediately arranges a meeting with the new Minister of Energy (Hon David Parker) for the following week. Two days later David resigns the portfolio.


2006 June

Your administration commits a nominal $4.6 million dollars but effectively tens of millions of dollars to the promotion of Enviroschools in a deal with the Green Party. This commitment of taxpayer funds to this resource includes indirect funding to the resource through many Government agencies such as departments and universities as well.


2006 October
Hon David Parker is once again  “Energy Minister” and I remind Hon Annette King of the material. A 30-minute meeting is arranged. Unfortunately David is delayed. He is also clearly very tired and hungry. The presentation

is done at great speed and much of it has to be aborted in the 12 or so minutes remaining before he is called to the House. Analysis of his and Hon David Benson Pope speeches, media releases and policy decisions since suggests my communication failed on scale.

 2007 Aug
I am writing this letter to you, Prime Minister, with our nation suffering from profound inflationary pressures because of our abuse of our carbon resources, oil prices residing at over $US70 a barrel, the options of our young people becoming more constrained by the day and the net rate of outflow of our nation’s wealth increasing, despite higher commodity prices. The power of the Electricity Commission to conserve and enhance our electrical potential diminishes by the day and our Parliament and democracy is being made increasingly redundant by our national legislation.

I write with hope that you, and the Labour Party will join those of us who do see a way whereby our nation can realise its full and healthy potential.


I look forward to your response, particularly to the proposed amendment to the Electricity Reforms so we can be re-enfranchised and again begin to make use of our immense electrical potential.

Yours sincerely

Dave McArthur

Thank you Dinah

 I trust all concerned are aware that the fundamental issue is the state of New Zealand democracy.

 Secondary drivers of my proposed amendment to the Electricity Reform legislation are considerations of our telecommunication and electrical potential.

As recent events show clearly, it is becoming a matter of great urgency that communities be again given the right to develop their local utility grid potential to ensure use of its broadband capacity is developed in their interests, as well as its more general electrical potential. 

I trust, for instance, that the Prime Minister realises the scale of escalating costs to the nation caused by recent Telecom practices. It has effectively destroyed a range of national forums and suppressed discussion and research of many vital topics. I think many share my sense of crisis as we see our emails being destroyed on scale by Telecom.

 The Hon Pete Hodgson as Minister of Energy failed to comprehend that the Electricity Reform legislation affected far more than Bulk-generated electricity distribution.  He often expressed his preference for "market-derived" solutions compared to "community-derived" solutions during his long period as Minister. That preference has cost New Zealand tens of billions of dollars in lost opportunity. In particular the inability of he and Hon Michael Cullen to understand the wider issues has meant that they have served the Prime Minister's constituency in Auckland very poorly.

 Initially it looked as though the current Minister of Energy, Hon David Parker, understood the issues. (See his Parliamentary Biography)*. However his recent advice to the Electricity Commission confirming his approval of current ownership structures in the Utility sector plus his recent speeches indicates his attitudes have altered significantly. His current views may not be serving the best interests of New Zealand, the Prime Minister and her Auckland constituency.


Quote: David became active in Labour in the 1990s, incensed by the last National Government forcing local authorities to sell community-owned electricity assets.

 I humbly suggest it would be prudent that the Prime Minister be kept fully appraised of this correspondence.

 Your sincerely

Dave McArthur

 ----- Original Message -----

From: "Ministerial Office of the Prime Minister" <>

To: "Dave McArthur" <>

Sent: Wednesday, September 05, 2007 11:54 AM

Subject: Re: Fw: Attention Rt Hon Helen Clark


> Thank you for your email message to the Prime Minister, Helen Clark.
> Your emails have been forwarded to the Minister of Energy for his
> consideration as this is a matter which falls into his area of
> responsibility.
> Yours sincerely
> Dinah Okeby
> Private Secretary


Return to Update Page

Return to the Welcome Page