Opinion by Jeremy Elwood

Part of my job, onstage and in this forum, is to try and make jokes about the news. Quite frankly, for the last month, I’ve been struggling to keep up – during the comedy festival, for example, I had two nights off in the course of my season, and during that time Don Brash’s ACT takeover was completed, there was a Tornado in Auckland and by all accounts there was a small development in the hunt for Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan.

Case in point, I log onto Twitter this morning, and the first two headlines that catch my eye are the following: “Celebs Could Pay Big For Endorsements” and “Buy State Asset Shares or Foreigners Will.” Oh come on, I only have so much time, people.

The first refers to the announcement by Simon Power that, as part of the review of securities legislation, anyone caught making misleading statements in advertising may be liable for a fine of up to $1 million. That apparently includes those people fronting the ads for Finance companies if they should go bust, the most obvious recent example being Richard Long in the Hanover Finance ads.

Consumer New Zealand, unbelievably, have not only endorsed this idea (presumably meaning if it goes tits up, we can levy a fine on them?) but suggested that it could go further, making anyone with a profile who appears in an ad liable in case the product they are endorsing fails to live up to expectation. Hence we can expect big legal cases in the future of The People vs. Dan Carter when your heat pump breaks, and The Heart Foundation vs. the Ever-Swindells every time some rampant carnivore goes into cardiac arrest. Personally, as soon as I get the tests back proving that drinking iced tea had no effect on my ability to dance, Hugh Jackman can expect to be served.

As someone who, several years ago, fronted a TV commercial for a lending company, I can tell you right now that if any one of you borrowed money off of them because you thought I was a credible source of financial advice, you deserve to go broke.

The same goes for anyone who puts large amounts of money into a speculation scheme because an ex-All Black, newsreader or cricket commentator tells you to. Investment is, after all, nothing more than socially acceptable, high-stakes gambling. Are we now going to be able to take Sky City to court when we lose the mortgage money, because their ads suggested that we were going to have a much better time there than we did?

I hate to be the one to break this to people, but people who appear in ads are paid to be there, told what to say by an advertising agency who are in turn told what message to convey by the company being advertised.

Ads are a significant source of income for actors in this country, and part of the retirement plan for celebrities when their 15 minutes is up, and so it should be. So by all means clamp down on misleading statements from people who should, and often do, know better (I’m looking at you, Mark Hotchin), but give the public some credit when it comes to due diligence. If you want independent investment advice, I believe there are people called, um, Independent Financial Advisors out there who might just be able to help. 

Speaking of which, Bill English suggesting that local investors should be queuing up to buy shares in State Owned Assets to prevent overseas investors snapping them up, has so many things wrong with it that I don’t even know where to start. If he’s so worried about these assets being bought by foreigners, why on earth is he planning to sell them in the first place? If the country is so broke we have to sell off the national nest egg, where does he think local investors are going to find the cash to buy it back with? Has he even read his own budget?

I guess all it proves is that perhaps the only thing dumber than trusting a ex-celebrity for your own financial advice is trusting an ex-farmer from Dipton with the entire economy. 

3 News