NZ % increase in unemployment rate since Dec 2008 vs OECD increase
The graph above compares the change in NZ’s unemployment rate since December 2008 to that of other developed countries. It shows that NZ’s unemployment rate has increased at about twice the rate of Europe.
JohnKey claimed that NZ’s unemployment rate is out of his control. He claimed that it’s the economic performance of Europe, Asia and the US that determines job growth in NZ. While there’s no arguing we live in a closely interconnected world and NZ is not immune to global down turns, Mr Key is somewhat passing the buck here.
The Govt can and does have massive influence on our economy and employment rates. For example the PSA reported more than 3500 public service jobs lost in last 3 years, as a result of Govt policy including the so called “capping” of the public sector policy, and with more public service job losses to come – recent announcement of 305 MFAT jobs to go.
The European debt crisis is not the only factor in our high unemployment rate and JohnKey’s govt as the most influential player domestically must take some responsibility.
New Zealand’s actual unemployment rate is still lower than the OECD average but this is because we started in 2009 at a lower rate, not because we haven’t suffered through the recession.
Why not simply show the increase in the unemployment rate over this period, rather than the % increase in that rate?
The rate of increase of the increase is the acceleration, and that’s a rather arcane thing to be writing blog posts about (and has little meaning if you don’t know the rates that various countries started from).
Lies, damn lies and statistics. I agree with Simon. Don’t show us massaged data to prove your point, if the numbers don’t speak for themselves then so be it. You could have used the total unemployed (as you have done previously) and that would have suggested that we are better than anyone in the world.
The previous two posters are quite correct. The use of percentage changes lacks an objective scale with which absolute levels of unemployment can be measured.
For example, the seasonally adjusted unemployment rates in the Euro area as at December 2011 = 10.4%; in USA as at January 2012 = 8.3%, in UK as at January 2012 = 8.4%; in Australia as at January 2012 = 5.1%
The use of percentage changes also hides the very small base numbers of unemployment in New Zealand where only 150,000 were unemployed as at the end of December 2011. It takes a change in the work situations of only 7.500 people to claim a movement of 5% – a drop in the bucket when compared with the 16.469 million people unemployed in the EA17 Euro.
When compared with unemployment rates in the 27 European countries that make up the wider EA27 zone, New Zealand would have the fifth lowest rate of unemployment.
Furthermore the unemployment statistics for the Euro area, USA, the UK and Australia are available through to December 2011 yet these have been omitted from your chart.
Perhaps because the results of the December 2011 quarter NZDOL Household Labour Force Survey (which was released on 9 February 2012 – two weeks before this post) showed that the unemployment rate in New Zealand fell from 6.6% to 6.3% during the quarter. Using your approach to measuring changes this is a 4.5% decline in unemployment in only one quarter. Not the sort of news that you would like to publicise?
You also overlook the NZDOL findings that employment has now risen by 67,000 jobs (3.1%) since its low-point in the September 2009 quarter, despite the continued European debt crisis.
Mr B , you could also mention the numbers ‘not in the labour force’ has increased by 1% in the last ( Dec) quarter.
Its clear that the unemployment numbers are down because they have ‘stopped looking’ for work and are thus no longer counted as unemployed.
Comments above are correct. You are a very silly Sio who is best suited for offering election bribes to low income polynesians. Stick to your knitting eh
What a load of drivel.
The facts are people are out of work.
Most of the out of work people want to work.
There is a vast social cost to all this unemployment, under employment and joblessness.
Adults, children and the social fabric of New Zeland is suffering greatly.
If we as a Nation truely wanted to reduce wasteful expenditure we would drive head long for a full employment society, full engagment in education, fitness for all with no overfatness or obesity, a mission into people abusing themselves with alcohol and drugs, and an absolute determination to reduce inequality in New Zealand.
The National government is determined to close the country down. So far they have shrunk the economy, increased unemployment, are extinguishing our ability in trade and enterprise, selling our assets, borrowed as no previous government has borrowed and all the rest of it.
The end result is the Greece of the South Pacific.
You forgot CHC, that must have had a huge impact on unemployement, Also the rena disaster would have impacted on unemployment, tere must be other things we can blame the fact that our unemployment rate is increasing faster than other countrys rather than blaming nice mr Key and hard working mr English.
I thought NZ had one of the lowest unemployment rates under labour, and now under national, NZ still has one of the lowest.
But the national govt is still to blame? No govt, be it labour, national, greens, NZFirst etc would have neutralised the increase in unemployment – the global economy has had, and continues to have, significant shocks!!
You graph shows an increases in unemployment accross the board – so its got to be more than the fault of the NZ govt huh?
How much do you MP’s get paid to pull wool over peoples eyes?
How about providing some solutions to drive the economy? I thought Labour was going to do things differently with your new leader? This is the same old rubbish.
If high rates of unemployment is a global phenomenon, why is this National government taking a leading role in sacking the public service?
Thus showing all and sundry that getting out of austerity is to sack and lay off people- Austerity breeds austerity.
The public service is the action arm of government.
This government has no need of an action arm as they have no constructive plans to implement.
As there is no plan to action they sack the service ensuring they can continiue as the do nothing constructive out fit, which they are.
This charade of a democratic government, which for a democracy is supposed to be off the people by the people and for the people, is bereft of any concern for the people, the environment and economy of New Zealand.
Who is the ventriloquist issuing the orders to the dummy?
Learn something from your leader :
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/6476037/Shearer-comes-out-fighting-over-image-and-SOE-sales
——- Labour leader David Shearer has attempted to counter criticism his leadership style has been too laid back, saying he doesn’t believe in bickering and partisanship.
In a speech to Grey Power in Auckland this afternoon, Shearer said he was not the kind of leader who believed in ”rival tribes playing gotcha”.
”Of course that’s what a lot of people look for. They want to score the game, give points for the best smart remark in Parliament. But that’s not what most New Zealanders want.”
There was no excuse for not being constructive.
”I want a new kind of politics, pragmatic and attentive to what works, not tied up in the squabbles of the past.” —–
Well the 15 guys who came into our office today to take down the quake damaged plaster were all from east Europe, one would have thought some of the UN employed from the far north would have been closer. Maybe when Mcully has finished with MFAT he could take a look at immigration.
we can’t build a future without being rooted in an understanding our history.
William do you think people are stupid enough to fall for stupid graphs like this? Give your voters a little credit, and stop your patronising and paternalistic feed people nonsense routine. It’s with stupid data like this that gives reason to why the unemployment rate among your party’s candidates has been so high since 2008.
I agree with the other comments, the Y axis should show absolute, not relative figures.
Moreover, the X axis should go back to 2008 at least, as that is your reference point!
Here is a graph addressing these two issues.
Good stuff Thomas. Classic. NZ is doing damn well really, in comparrison. MP’s need performance pay so they stop the subjective BS.
“NZ is doing damn well really, in comparrison.”
Over half the country doesn’t agree with you.
If we’re doing so well, why sell state assets off to chinese mum and dad investors?
Why introduce slave labour rates for teenagers?
Why no living minimum wage?
Why cull the public sector, putting thousands out of work?
Why have a 90 day sacking law that punishes employees and leaves them at the mercy of greedy, unscrupulous bosses?
Between ’99 and ’08, people did really well, and thanks to Cullen, so did the economy as a whole, with surpluses and record low unemployment throughout NZ.
Some voters may forget how they never had it so good, but reality is, they owe Helen and Michael a big debt of grattitude for the soft landing we were afforded after the global financial crisis hit for the first time.
That key remains that key and english have done very little for the rank and file of NZ since ’08.
By comparison, they have tarnished Labour’s golden years .
NZ is doing damn well? Nah, we’re NZ’s just cruising on a few natural advantages and the National Government propping things up using debt as fast as they can borrow.
We have the capability to lead the world and show them how to reform the economy to increase income levels for most, and reduce inequality across the country.
Instead we have a NACT government accelerating the drift of wealth and assets to the top 1% while kicking those in poverty and damaging our unemployed youth as a hobby.
I am actually impressed they increased the minimum wage by 50c/hr, however, mean as that small increase is.
You guys are funny, any Govt from 99 to 08, be it Labour, Nations, Act, Maori, Greens, NZFirst would also have been in power during a time of growth – since the rest of the world was in a good place.
Likewise, any Govt since 2008 would have faced a significant contraction due to the GFC and our trading partners underpeforming. Sure Labour may have done things differently, but they still would have had to make some hard decisions. Talk about National borrowing, Labour pre-election were going to borrow more in the short term – did you miss that one?
Theres an argument out there that says labour suppressed unemplyment in 07/08 by cranking up the number of civil servants – the time when NZ started its contraction. But oh no, it is all the fault of the National Govt.
Why can you not accept there is still low unemployment compared to elsewhere – in Spain it rocketed up to 20%!
Lose the subjective rubbish.
The failure of New Zealand to come out of recession “fairly aggressively” is the sole responsibility of this government and no-one elses… Though of course you wouldn’t have heard a tv pundit mention it throughout the election campaign.
I find it more concerning that despite relatively low unemployment so many New Zealanders are still teetering on the bread line. Isn’t it worrying that you have such massive inflation, a ridiculously high cost of living and (with the exception of the upper middle class) such miserable pay?
EDIT: which is to say nothing of the actual unemployed – who are either going to be forced out of the Auckland area, or be forced into crime, pretty soon at this rate…
Don’t agree with the assumption that being poor forces people into crime, though of course accept that for a lot of crimals being poor is a pre requisite. White collar crime, especially tax avoidance/evasion is a huge problem in most western countries. Even key noticed how all the rich listers weren’t paying their fair share, though it was a pity he didn’t take measures to ensure enforcement, instead choosing to reward their accountants skill with a lower top rate of income tax – The first ‘rich prick’ tax give away at everyone elses added expense.
However, you are quite right in noticing how low a wage economy NZ is for most of it’s families.
It’s what happens when the moneymen get hold of the reigns. The bottom line is always the goal – People, mere statistics on a spreadsheet.