Consistency is regarded by some as a hallmark of a good politician, so by this logic Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce should be commended for steadfastly fronting the government's apparent commitment to ensuring that expensive recreational pastimes get well-rewarded.

The latest beneficiary of the taxpayers’ purse is the New Zealand Open pro-am, an annual golf tournament which takes place at The Hills and Millbrook course in Queenstown.

According to The New Zealand Herald the event has received $2 million in funding over the past three years from the Major Events and Development Fund, and is on track to receive another $1.5 million for next year’s televised event. 

Why should non-golfing taxpayers subsidise golf? The world is short of many important things, but televised golf is not one of them. As if to rub salt into the wound, the event is being hosted by jewellery magnate Sir Michael Hill, who occupies the enviable 35th position on the NBR Rich List, with an estimated wealth of $300 million. Much worse, the tournament has failed to achieve its projected ticket sales, secure a spot on the One Asia tour, and to submit a financial stability report detailing how it will wean itself from the government’s purse. And yet Mr Joyce continues to back it, saying it is a hair's breadth from succeeding. So what? So are many other struggling enterprises.

The government’s decision is consistent with other dubious handouts for expensive pastimes. Earlier this year it provided a bigger tax break for Hollywood in the form of James Cameron’s Avatar film franchise (against Treasury’s advice).

In similar vein, spending in New Zealand by Emirates Team New Zealand in the last America Cup challenge largely went to boost the incomes of highly-skilled people, including internationally-mobile crew and boat builders. Asserted benefits for hapless taxpayers appear to assume arbitrarily there is no better way to attract overseas funds to soak up unemployed resources—that is, if any were soaked up.

With this track record, one would could forgive even polo, croquet, fly fishing and show jumping event organisers for devising plans to obtain a seat at the corporate welfare table.

Subsidies to attract overseas funds for events make no more sense intrinsically than subsidies for exports. The government should look first and foremost to Treasury for advice on these matters.