Matt McCarten at the HoS has a column pointing out what people are beginning to understand – that real wages especially for lower income families are dropping under John Key. Remember that time he told the truth in the campaign and said it would happen.
And as John smiles and waves the gap with Aussie just keeps getting bigger.
I’m glad McCarten is speaking out!
So NZers are worse off. That is no suprise to me really.
“Key seems to be a decent sort of bloke who gives the impression he genuinely cares about the people on Struggle St. That’s why many of them deserted Labour for him.”
Yes, appearances are most definitely deceiving – so many of our most vulnerable in the workforce have been provided with a snow job – Key continues to brush it off with his ‘smile and wave’ in the hopes that the public will continue to buy it and while they watch him ‘smile and wave’ issues off, he and his mates use the slight of hand magician tricks to hoodwink the public. Have to give him credit for his ability to manipulate. I bet he would be a good player on survivor – while one hand assists the smile with a wave, the other would be stabbing in the back.
How does the saying go? something like The devil is in the detail I think…
People believed him and his campaigning. Can’t blame them for that. Now they have proof that his words, were, well just words. He spoke of not having talk-fests but do-fests… all we have seen is talking and smiling. Admittedly they have to be able to see between the cracks, and some will have better eyesight than others.
It all reminds me of Ruth Richardson. I can rememebr telling us we all had to tightenour belts, for now, the good times would come. of course the good times came quickly for some and not others, guess which some? Same is happening now.
So smile more and wave even more to take attention from the mask ?
Methinks the do-fests are shaping up to be DOH-fests !
Well Gary I assume, at great risk, that Labour has a nice list of all the things National was going to DO, and hasn’t… but I can see Nats election campaign now
got tough on sentences for baddies tick
national standards for testing our children tick
made employment law easier for employers tick
tax cuts tick
harder on welfare tick
and so on… it’s a tough road ahead fro Labour
The ticked list of ‘have dones’ superficially conveys action but doesn’t actually make many of us really better off
And lab needs to come back with the check list and compare to a ’standard’; EG:
Outcome ……………..Standard.reached
got tough on sentences for baddies tick – well below std
national standards for testing our children tick – well below
made employment law easier for employers tick – below
tax cuts tick – well below
harder on welfare tick – below
GST – WELL below
Etc..
So, ticked the box but at a very below average standard – hence, failure.
then there are the promises: eg
less crime – did not reach standard – in fact slipped below
etc
If Labour is the party for the people, why did they let power prices get out of control?
If Labour care about those on Struggle St. why weren’t there higher increases in the minimum wage sooner and at a greater percentage?
It doesn’t seem to matter who is in power in this country, as soon as they win the election they do bugger all for the people at the bottom, this problem just keeps getting worse with every successive govt.
At least Labour did increase minimum wage, would’ve been $14 something soon. WFF great idea, Kiwisaver great idea. I miss Labour
No government can do anything about power prices.
Our low price power comes from hydro – it is not increasing in production, but the population and new power sources are more expensive.
The best way to keep prices down is more efficient use of energy and constraints on population/new dwelling growth.
I’m over the lies and the spin. We can only afford to give you this much pay rise, yet we won’t tell NZ you will have less in the hand. Be thankful that you got that amount attitude.
They are hurting NZers.
@SPC Before National created ‘competition’ in our power market power was cheap, those were the days when govt controlled our power, the power provided by dams funded by taxpayers, now with ‘regulation to provide competition’ most of us are living in power poverty. Labour had 9 years to give us a fair deal but did nothing and as a result power prices rose over 70%.
What this did the the average voter by way of stealth taxation means most of what the average voter now earns goes back to govt in dividends from the assets taxpayers own.
Labour does have the means to change the situation, stop providing them with excuses.
Good point about power mark. Brownlee must have tutored under Bradford inhis early parliamentarian days I think.
As for the minimum wage, National voted down every rise during Labour’s 9 years, so we can assume they wouldllike it to be still at $7. I DO agree that the minimum wage has to be managed within a context of burden on business, but cannot see any reason for it to have only risen 0.25 so far nder national, other than their proven dislike for moving it at all.
Gary, I agree that the tick list can be countered, was merely suggesting how National will soundbit eit. Labour can nay-say BUT will be seen as being negative and still under the shadow of the previous 9 years.
Like the reign of Douglas and Richardson, I am genuinely fearful of where these current Govt policies will leave the vulnerable sections of society in ten years.
Competition laws need some serious work in this country too, take the supermarket duopoly for example, we pay far more for food than Australians, we pay higher bank fees, telecommunications are too expensive, power prices are too high.
If Govt is happy to keep workers pay at the rate it currently is at then work needs to be done on what that worker pays for stuff to give that worker more bang for his buck.
Currently we pay far too much for stuff simply because of lack of regulation.
If we are paying too much then it indicates employers do have the funds to pay us more but are not being pushed enough to do so.
@ Tracey The vulnerable are already at breaking point. Forget 10 years time, think about now.
All the talk of up-skilling yourself to get a better income is just poppycock, 20 years ago I was a freezing worker earning $500 a week with a Saturday, my last job was in IT and I was earning less, that was working for the govt!
It was noted by a union representative at the freezing works that in 10 years we had lost 12% due to inflation and wages that didn’t match.
The job in IT got a payrise of 2.5% when inflation that year was 5%.
This indicates a culture has developed to keep wages below inflation to increase profit, a culture that is within govt too!
Is it any wonder so many cross the ditch to get an instant 30% payrise!
Mark, you and I are in agreement on most things you’ve written. There is little doubt in my mind, basedon experience, that most businesses which say, we can’t afford a pay rise now, but when things get better, dont give much if any when things get better.
I understand about business owners not being able to check in at 9 and go home at 5, and they take the burden of their workers, the business, turnover, sales, debt with them every wakingmoment. BUT without workers, skilled or otherwise they cannot function.
Most business owners Iknow, and I know a few, say they dont have time for certain things I suggest to them around productivity etc. When I was in a law firm I acted for a lot of employers, early 1990’s. I would harp and harp at them, give them simple to follow instructions on procedures but most didn’t want to know, then they would call e because they had just instantly dismissed a worker and wanted me to make it better. Then they would claim about the procedure and the law being against them. They would then pay the partners in my firm 10,000+ to defend a claim in court which they would likely lose…rather than spend a couple of thousand and some time stopping it all at the first step. many small and not so small business owners still think this way.
Still see their workers as a burden and a group who ought to be. largely, grateful to them for having a job at all. There is some great stuff out there about lifting productivity via good worker schemes and initiatives which are proven to save time and money in employee turnover and satisfaction. A happy and satisfied workforce is a productive workforce. It’s not rocket science and workers respond very positively to all kinds of incentives, not just monetary…
Of course there are some great employers out there and I do nknow a couple, but I can name them. There’s too many on the other side of the equation for me to recall their names.
What structural changes would you make to our economy to improve the situation….
There has been no major diversion from the economic principles/policies put in place by Douglas Richardson et al Instead of administrative tinkering how about some real change
Mark – the population pre the Bradford reforms was lower than it is now. And every further rise brings with it higher power prices. The only restraint is increased energy efficiency.
If power companies are paying for new generation they have costs – it comes in borrowing or provision out of profits.
As for government – they receive dividends (tax on profits) which pay for public services and public employee wages.
Those calling for lower prices are effectively asking government to pay for new power generation independent of power price charging – that means government borrowing the money and meeting the cost out of revenues, reducing money for public services and wages.
Given that reduces incentives to conserve power, that leads to increasing costs from the subsidy. Such an approach is not sustainable over time.
It’s not stealth taxation to pay for the cost of a service provided and to say most of what an average taxpayer now earns goes back to govt in dividends from the assets taxpayers own is manifestly not true. The major necessity costs people face are mortgage or rent housing and food, and they spend as much on clothing and transport as power.
A law needs to be passed stating that wages will increase with the CPI every quarter. It’s not completely accurate but it will, at least, keep wages at about the same level that they were agreed upon at the beginning of the job. Wage increases beyond that would be up for negotiation.
Actually, what it means is higher taxes.
Well yes, one or the other.
What’s interesting about power pricing, is the extent to which householders costs have gone up much faster than other users (business/industry).
I dont agree that south islanders, for example, ought to pay more for electricity than, say, Aucklanders. Where it’s colder we are stupid to leave people choosing between being cold (and the associated health problems) and not paying bills.
I thought most power was generated in the south???? Therefore they shouldn’t pay more.
@SPC business should pay more, households pay some sort of ‘average’ with this high rate, yet business use more power than we do and I think overall pay less.
If these high prices are to pay for future generation, given that the taxpayer has already paid billions back to govt for this, why hasn’t new generation been created thus bringing the price down. How long do we have to pay to get a surplus?
One problem with separate companies is that all are planning on providing new power as the population grows (and it is this population/demand growth which means the provision of new higher priced power is an on-going cycle), and there is no planning to ensure there is no over-supply.
Of course – given our continuing dependence on water flows into the dams, quantifying this is difficult as we need spare capacity for dry years (the cost of this spare capacity grows as the amount involved grows with total demand growth).
One argument for business paying a living wage (rising minimum wage and tax credits to families) is that their own cheaper power is only available if their workers and consumers can afford to pay the power prices which subsidise their own operating costs.
If I remember correctly during the Green-Labour coalition last time round a policy was developed for subsidies on solar water heating, this is something that would have reduced power usage during dry times (summer) and reduced consumers power bills.
Why wasn’t it implemented?
They will be worse off when GST goes up too.