People forget that those outrageous costs are part of the drive to reduce legal firearms ownership.Quote:
Originally Posted by no1_49er
By law these 500M have to be recovered from firearms owners....
Printable View
People forget that those outrageous costs are part of the drive to reduce legal firearms ownership.Quote:
Originally Posted by no1_49er
By law these 500M have to be recovered from firearms owners....
100% recovery?? Police have proposed 25, 50 or 75% cost recovery in fees, haven't they? And no decision yet. Plus a new government.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
https://www.deerstalkers.org.nz/reso...m-fee-reforms/
For the recovery of license fees...Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
so are you suggesting that there will be 100% cost recovery for the set up and running of the registration scheme?Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
Read the act yourself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
@Finnwolf you appear to assume that law makers can read......I have my suspicions because a lot of what they write does not seem to make sense.....:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Finnwolf
I have...Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
Where in the list of "Activities for which fees or charges may be imposed" in Section 80 of the Act does it include recovering the cost of administering the registration database?
(https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/...LMS368857.html)
Or anywhere else in Sections 79-86? The sections of the Act that detail cost recovery.
The sign off for the new Fees Regime is sitting on the Minister of Police desk. It has been there for months untouched, "Gaslight" Ginny wouldn't sign-off pre-election. It is Mark Mitchell's baby now. Given what Police have signed off-on is kept secret it is looking ominous especially for a Govt that has inherited a virtually bankrupt economy. Lets hope ACT/Nicole McKee can talk sense into Mitchell/Willis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tahr
Reading the Act and interpreting the Act are quite different. You seem to have read it.Quote:
Originally Posted by STC
The maths seems a bit off........"annual increase from $100m to $500m mainly because of the 200 extra staff" yet the "$500m will pay for 2000 extra Police"....not quite got me convinced.
NO1_49er $500m annual mentioned in 2nd to last sentence of article.
Thar is that the same as making stuff up as you go along ? :-)
Reading the Act without analysis and then applying subjective meaning? Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by pennyless
From Te Tari Pureke:
The cost of the Firearms Registry
It has cost $10.4 million to establish the Firearms Registry. We estimate it will cost $8.5 million per annum to continue operating.
Eight and a half million is a tad over twenty three grand every day of the year. It would be interesting to understand what share of that the major operating costs of labour, premises rental and IT make up. Let’s say just a shade under three grand a day will be the depreciation on the original investment that would leave twenty grand per day to cover running costs. As a tax payer I do not struggle with that level of spending if there is a tangible benefit to society but it doesn’t escape me that that kind of money could fund another eighty odd coppers on the beat.
I doubt very much only 10 mil to establish.
You can't rebrand a business for that let alone do a new web system and employees.
It would have cost more than that in morning teas trying to work out how what PR company to use.....and they would probably have to get a consultant group in for that too....:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by csmiffy