Sometimes the National Party’s arrogance and contempt for ordinary people just blows me away.
This week the news coming into Parliament has been horrible and unrelenting. We have received report after report after report of lost jobs and lost hope.
The thousands of layoffs haven’t happened because Kiwis workers haven’t been putting in their fair share of work. Normal wage earners are working longer hours than they were a few years ago – they’re just getting less back for it.
What’s actually happening is working New Zealand families are being victimised by ideological National Government policies which force contraction and ever-more job losses.
Steven Joyce is the economic development and employment minister. It’s his job to grow the economy and grow jobs. But he doesn’t seem to care enough to even get the basics right.
There are several recognised measures of unemployment in New Zealand, including the Household Labour Force Survey (HLFS) and the Linked Employer Employee Data (LEED).
Statistics New Zealand says LEED is the best measure of what’s really happening in the jobs economy. But today Steven Joyce decided the HLFS is the best measure – if only because he thought a focus on the HLFS would make the dire unemployment situation look slightly better. It doesn’t.
If Joyce consistently quoted from the HLFS that would be one thing, but he never seems to. Just this past Tuesday the minister told Parliament that quarter of a million jobs are being created every year under National. It’s complete rubbish, and today I called him on it, but Steven Joyce is not the kind to be accountable and answer questions.
Next we discovered Joyce is not only unsure what the LEED is called but, much worse, he doesn’t even know that certain self-employed people are covered in the data set! This is absolutely basic stuff for an economic development and employment minister, and when someone in his position gets it so wrong the outcome is ordinary Kiwis lose their jobs.
Evidently Steven Joyce just doesn’t care. Finance Minister Bill English doesn’t care either because he does the same thing with jobs data. John Key certainly doesn’t care because he’s on record for criticising the HLFS as “notoriously volatile”, so he sets the tone which allows these ministers to get away with it.
However, as Radio New Zealand covered today, Statistics New Zealand was very clear. From 2008 to 2011, 452,000 jobs were created but 465,000 jobs were lost. The result was a net loss of 13,000 jobs. It’s ordinary working families who are paying the price.
A change in New Zealand’s government cannot come soon enough.
Dear Mr Cunliffe,
Is it true that the the 452, 000 jobs created were almost entirely the extra WINZ staff required in response to National’s policies?
:l
It’s time to stop treating Steven Joyce as some kind of superman gifted with super intellect. Nothing could be further from the truth and we should remember the days of this quack doctor running radio out of a caravan in a paddock in Palmerston North. What’s more he’s dumb enough to admit it took him 20 years to finish his basic degree.
He’s joyless clown, an arrogant fool and quite frankly this self styled emperor has no clothes — and boy, is he ugly!
It is very difficult to compete with China which pays it’s workers $1 per day.
Hopefully New Zealanders are waking up to John Key, Bill English, Simon Joyce and Gerry Brownlee.
These guys are steering this country down a very dangerous path, the arrogance of these guys is mindboggling, they honestly don’t give a rats arse about the country.
Key’s answer to John Bank’s behaviour over the Mayoral Donations has me gobsmacked. Obviously it is fine for any member of society to sign documents and then pleed innocence on the basis that he/she did not read them. Get off the grass, John Banks is an opportunist, and has been bludging off the country’s hind tit for years.
Come on New Zealand Wake Up to what is going on in your country.
The wealth transfer is continuing the rish are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. National’s only answer to correcting Budget Deficits is to Sell State Assets, this is like selling the Family Home/Farm to keep the Bank off your back.
Once again, great rhetoric and I am sure the nodding dogs are going, but what are Labour going to do to actually fix the issue?
So David – easy to criticise – and also ignore external factors such as the on going GFC. Easy to criticise yet labour object to every measure to free up the job market – so what specific policy of Labour will increase the number of real jobs out there? What are the details on how this will work?
All I see from Labour is increased effort of further restrict the job market – for instance by increasing the minimum wage to a level that will make it uneconomic for some employers to bring on additional staff.
Where are your solutions David? Show us how you would create 60,000 jobs? I do not believe any Labour policy would be capable of doing this.
Steven Joyce is so stupid. I can’t believe he ever became a Minister. What has he ever done? How did he manage to convince those hundreds of thousands of voters, three times, that National wasn’t as stupid as the Labour Party?
What a good thing, David, you have such detailed and objective plans to fix the situation. Please keep coming back with more detail because I am really worried that if you don’t spell it out very clearly to voters, then they will fall for the charms of the greasy fella in the blue suit again.
Please tell us what you learned when you were on that five week family holiday in Europe over winter, tasting those very nice wines in those Welsh castles, just how to keep in touch with voters.
We are witnessing this country implode,in every direction
there are huge problems for the people,for the economy
in nz,its depressing.
Nacts are telling people find a job,while there are more
and more loosing jobs.
The reserve bank governer even said that national are wrong
using austerity and in turn hampering growth,where is the
intelligence? we so dearly need an early election,to save
nz.
Not to mention child poverty and nact style of benefit
changes, oppresive governence.
“increasing the minimum wage to a level that will make it uneconomic for some employers to bring on additional staff”
Any company or employer that can’t or won’t pay at least $15ph doesn’t deserve the right to hire or fire.
Peanuts are for monkey, monty.
If you can’t be successful without factoring piss poor wages into the bottom line, get out of the way and let professionals run the show.
“Where are your solutions David? Show us how you would create 60,000 jobs? I do not believe any Labour policy would be capable of doing this”
Cycle track, anyone?
The only answer that I can see is
Free markets and competition
Free markets and competition are not however efficient, but they are very efficient is soaking up large numbers of people into work. Importantly National have shown that they have no interest at all in free markets and competition.
Actual free markets and competition would look something a bit like the hairdressing industry- lots of players, lots of price points. From chains, franchises, multi store, one shop, single chair, mobile, or even cut your own hair- plenty of choices at plenty of price points, also low/no barrier to entry- except scissors.
Free markets and competition are also really useful in that they allow us to experiment with a wide variety of possible answers- from this some may do better than others. However it is up to governments to ensure that competition and free markets are real. Say one hairdresser became so successful that he took over nearly half the market and another one copied and finally got nearly the other half. At that point could you say that there is still free market and competition. I would say not. In industry after industry , sector after sector New Zealand has allowed a few firms to dominate – our lack of understanding as to what free markets and competition can do for us is interesting to say the least. Competition is not efficient. but efficiency is a myth anyway. It is always in the eye of the beholder. To the two hairdressing companies it may be efficient t o have two suppliers with different brand names, walking in lockstep in regards to wages, terms and conditions and product type and pricing. As a customer it may be efficient for me to have lots of choice.
Anyway if you want lots of work, lots of employment for entrepreneurs and works and suppliers- look to free markets and competition- Just because the right use the terms does not mean that they actually believe in them or understand what they mean. If Labour became the party of people who work, people who believe in work people who depend on work in all its forms from entrepreneurs to wage workers and everyone in between, to take ownership of work. and free markets and competition- the real sort- then we have an answer to a whole bunch of stuff.
Like- what is the roll of government, how do we get people into work, provide a future etc.
It is tricky stuff because the meaning of the words has been used against us. So Free markets has been stolen from us and competition means having to work for nothing. But it does not have to be like this. Dismantling protected industries and restructuring them for a change would actually do us a lot more good as a nation than tearing public services apart all the time looking for efficiency and competition.
National won’t do it Labour can and should.
Get your vote back by standing for something. Kiwis will love it. The more industries that move to real free markets and competition the more work there will be for everyone. Capitalism is great at this. But it should stay away from doing what governments are best at doing.
Al1ens
In respect of the minimum wage, it is Labour policy to increase it – obviously you have never run a business, of any size – but there are instances of business owners struggling to pay themselves let alone the wage bill. Are you suggesting that any business that is barely viable (for any reason) should be forced to close up shop making even more people unemployed – such is the logic of the left I suppose. That is not going to increase the numberof jobs.
Then you talk about the cycle track – still not a labour party policy – and that does not address the answer as to how Labour will create 60,000 jobs. Please – I am very interested in what Labour policy will create 60,000 jobs – do you know? Or from the luxury of opposition you just fire bullets across the bow without any idea or policy that will stand up to critique?
So I will ask again – How will Labour create 60,000 jobs?
If the LEED is such a good measure of employment, why did Labour politicians such as you in your time in govt never issue any press releases about it, yet plenty were issued on the HLFS? http://beehive.govt.nz/search/apachesolr_search/hlfs?filters=tid%3A4637
Sounds like you are not being entirely honest about the status of the LEED…
“obviously you have never run a business, of any size”
There’s ignorance, and there’s damn ignorance
“there are instances of business owners struggling to pay themselves let alone the wage bill”
No doubt. That’s why they need to let proper business people run businesses and stop insulting people with shockingly poor wages.
“Are you suggesting that any business that is barely viable (for any reason) should be forced to close up shop making even more people unemployed”
If you’re a success, there’s no need to pay crap wages to the staff that are indeed a companies greatest asset.
“such is the logic of the left I suppose”
Humanity is the preserve of the left? Thanks for the clarity. That’s the nat slogan that won’t make it past the focus groups.
“that does not address the answer as to how Labour will create 60,000 jobs”
Create more than a dozen and Labour will have surpassed the total created by a nothing policy from a nothing government.
“I am very interested in what Labour policy will create 60,000 jobs”
As are the tens of thousands made unemployed on key’s watch.
“do you know?”
I’m not in the polit bureau, but if I were, I’d be sat next to MR C, ogling Miss C.
xoxoxo (edit that Clare) 
“from the luxury of opposition you just fire bullets across the bow without any idea or policy that will stand up to critique?”
That’s words and nothing else. I still walk my daughter to school past kids with no shoes on in the middle of winter, no doubt still hungry from the night before.
I’ll fire more than verbal bullets once my album gets made, sells a billion and funds a free food program that negates the effects of money men buying the office of PM.
“So I will ask again”
And no doubt carry on feasting on every tidbit that comes your way.
“How will Labour create 60,000 jobs?”
How will national?
Monty. It is actually pure capitalist principal that says any business that cannot pay their true costs should fail. Allowing a more efficient use of the resources that business is wasting.
Google “creative destruction”.
Carrying A business which is paying employees such low wages that the rest of us, and successful businesses, have to support them with our taxes, paying their employees working for families etc so they can survive, is not even good capitalism. Working for families is actually welfare for employers, so they can keep wages down at tax payers expense.
Why should that employers successful competitors, who do pay decent wages, be forced to subsidise their competition, who cut wages, so they can in turn be undercut.
Part of the reason why both wages and business profits are spiraling downhill.
Don’t forget also that one businesses employees are another businesses customers. When wages are forced to spiral down, to prop businesses who cannot or will not cover the true costs of labour, we all suffer.
David I think you hit the nail on the head.
John Key, Bill English and Steven Joyce don’t care their ego’s are too big.
Do you really think they have an economic policy and are acting in the best interests of all New Zealanders.
They are destroying New Zealand’s economic fabric and they do not care, meanwhile their offsider Paula Bennett wants to take to the beneficaries with the hickory stick.
Bill English has already taken to the lower classes financially with the GST increases.
I actually feel these people are purposely vindictive towards the lower socio economic people and are intent on creating a two tiered society of them and us.
Fix the dollar again at 67c and that’ll take care of the pain. maybe we could let in a nuclear powered U.S. ship or two to offset the U.S. disapproval. Take the world by surprise. IE: “Here’s what you get for that your third round of quantitative easing Obama”.
Jack Ramaka
You should go to China and then come back and talk about paying $1 a day.
You have a GIGO syndrom.
Fixing the dollar? Are you kidding? This magical ‘lower the dollar’ call ignores the fact that we’re weaker against the Aussie than we were before. The reason we’re up against the USD is because they’re absolutely boned. You can’t claim the dollar is only high because it’s traded so much on the market and then expect to be able to lower it on the market. Plus if you lower the dollar, the cost of living goes up for everyone. Fuel, petrol, food, consumer goods… and then what happens to your economic recovery?
Lowering the exchange rate has about as much credibility when it comes to the NZD as the power of prayer.
ppt for a new ‘globe gate way’ to help create IT companies access to the world and create new jobs for a new future
Is this the same party that cared so little for local jobs that they allowed Burger King to import foreign labour? Is this the same party that now wants to welcome shiploads of queue jumping economic migrants posing as refugees? Labour you have no credibility on this issue.
Key is only concerned about flicking off the Energy Companies to his well healed mates, nothing else matters his ego is to big to worry about unemployment issues and the lack of organic growth in this country.
David, how many billions of dollars of taxpayers money are you planning to spend to bring the dollar down? I know you don’t like currency traders but you must know something they don’t about how to trade currencies if you think you can do a lot to bring the dollar down.
“I know you don’t like currency traders…”
And there is no rational reason in the world why someone considering the interests of NZers would hold any disdain for such types….
Andy Krieger vs the Kiwi
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/forex/08/greatest-currency-trades.asp#axzz26bYs69sy
I wonder if any protections have been put in place since the event listed 3rd on Investopedia under “Greatest Currency Trades Ever” ?
Looks like the time is ripe for another go at it…perhaps it will beat the last try?
SJW if you think as David does that it’s a good idea for the taxpayer to gamble against the likes of Andy Krieger then you should tell David to spell out to the taxpayer just how much he’s going to gamble.
Fix the Kiwi to a weighted index made up our major trading partners, an APEC Dollar for arguments sake.
Give the Reserve Bank some alternative tools, so we don’t need to rely on OCR, but allow for economic grow and job creation. Make the Kiwi a less attractive currency to trade in.
It all possible; Labour missed the opportunity last time around, English is yesterday man and Key is a wheeler dealer who has mates the current system make incredibly wealthy.
Watch the hot money poor into NZ over the next 6 months.
Blarney Stone,
Nah, I was suggesting that the time must be about ripe for a currency trader to make a profit on our currency by shorting it and in doing so destroy our economy and also was questioning whether there had been any safety measures put in place to safeguard this from happening.
SJW yes of course there are safeguard measures to stop this from happening. It’s called dipping into taxpayers’ money to gamble against international foreign currency traders. It would cost billions and billions of dollars to try and beat them, and even then we would fail. How many schools and hospitals will Labour close to fund this stupidity? I think Labour should spell out just how much they are prepared to gamble on the dollar.
Blarney Stone
Links please.
Here is another approach that can be employed
http://tumeke.blogspot.co.nz/2012/09/while-labour-are-taking-manas-feed-kids.html
Oh god – not the old Robin Hood tax again.
The IMF investigated it –
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2011/wp1154.pdf
from the conclusion –
An STT is also an inefficient instrument for regulating financial markets and preventing bubbles. There is no convincing evidence that STTs lower short-term price volatility, and high transaction costs are likely to increase it.
Rob S
Thanks for the link.
I don’t see that this document is saying ‘no’ to a financial tax?
It appears to be discussing what is the best manner in which to apply a tax in order to effectively address problems such as volatility and the gathering of revenue from the financial sector.
FAT came out as being considered a good possibility
This document also relayed
“The value of world financial transactions, which was 25 times world GDP in 1995, rose to70 times that value by 2007 (European Parliament, 2010). ”
(hmm what has been done about that?)
It relays concern over the effect of price discovery on the application of STT
It doesn’t appear to matter that price discovery is being warped by the very market that these approaches are trying to curb.
http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/26/markets/oil_speculators/index.htm
I am thankful for links to reports yet get frustrated that every report I clap my eyes on happily describes how the volatility of markets has been developing for years, that it appears to have been not only ignored, yet given more and more of a free reign and that despite this having been going on for 30 years we still are in the position where “more research is needed”
Do I hear the silent cries of Lobbyists: “Wait, wait just let me rort the system for a wee bit longer before you curb my excesses”
” Do I hear the silent cries of Lobbyists: “Wait, wait just let me rort the system for a wee bit longer before you curb my excesses” ”
You must have good hearing. All I can hear is fever pitch trough feeding.
@ The AL!EN
Lol!
Certainly does support an activity tax, although a broad based one, and I know what I would do in the providers position – up the fees to remain profit neutral. Self defeating if it is their own money they are moving around of course.
Troughing that has been going on for years, on both sides unfortunately (I always remember Tuku Morgan and the underpants saga from my school days – I suppose he WAS NZ First though…)