There's no special reason why, as minister for tourism, Bennett should know it's cheaper than ever to come here, although you'd think someone in her ministry might have mentioned it.
Air travel is one of the few consumer items that has grown cheaper in real terms pretty much since it was invented.
Bennett was supported in her view of New Zealand as a bit of a pain for visitors by Tourism Industry Aotearoa chief executive Chris Roberts, who described us as being at "the far end of the world" - as though there is a Real World somewhere else far away.
It's worrying that someone whose job is to promote us has such a view.
In Australia I once worked for a newspaper whose editor quite rightly banned the use of "Antipodes" to refer to this part of the world on the grounds that we were no more antipodean - that is, at the opposite end of the Earth - than anywhere else.
Earth being a globe and all.
Bennett and Roberts might like to consult the World Economic Forum's Travel & Tourism Competitiveness
Index (WEFTTCI) which ranks New Zealand 16th out of 141 countries for cost-competitiveness for tourists.
That's ahead of the likes of tourist industry big noters such as Japan, Ireland and China.
Opponents of extra tourist levies point out visitors already contribute by paying GST.
Roberts and Bennett might like to reflect that many countries not unpopular with tourists, such as the United States and France - also have special tourist levies, as well as GST-type taxes.
France, for instance, has a taxe de sejour of up to four euros a person a night, as well as the standard taxe sur la valeur ajoutee (trust the French to give their taxes sexy names).
Bhutan approaches the problem from the other end, requiring visitors to spend a minimum of $287 (US$200) a day.
Britain and Switzerland have the highest fees for visitors, according to the WEFTTCI.
And yet - people keep visiting these countries, just as they would keep visiting here even if we asked them to make more of a contribution to keeping this the sort of place they would want to visit.
• The decision not to hold an inquiry into the actions of the SAS as described in Nicky Hager and Jon Stephenson's Hit & Run is regrettable as it means a cloud will be left hanging over the New Zealand Defence Force.
The impression will remain there is something to hide. Whatever your view of the authors' credibility or motives, one aspect of the story gives it credibility.
The members of the SAS are a tightly knit bunch, the very definition of staunch and loyal, to each other and their superiors.
For some of them to break ranks, as they did to be sources for the book, indicates something serious and counter to all their values went wrong.
We have a right to know what that is.
