Red Alert

Archive for the ‘economy’ Category

National’s job claims vs reality

Posted by Sua William Sio on February 23rd, 2012

National's job claims vs reality

Even though the Household Labour Force Survey report reveals that John Key’s ‘brighter future’ promise has utterly failed to materialise in terms of jobs for a growing group of New Zealanders, it hasn’t stopped Mr Key claiming it won’t still come true. Yet we know he has no overall plan, no vision for how this will happen. Last year he made the incredible claim that Budget 2011 would create 170,000 jobs over the next 5 years. He continued to make this claim despite not being able to show anything in the Budget that would actually lead to job creation other than low interest rates and ECE funding. Simply managing the economy and ticking off boxes and hoping that market forces will deliver on the jobs is unbelievable. As expected the Govt is on track to once again fall short of its promise. The 2011 Budget documents predicted 36,000 jobs would be created in the year to March 2012. As at Dec 2011 just 10,000 jobs have been created, leaving the Govt to create a massive 26,000 jobs in the final quarter. If JohnKey keeps promising New Zealanders the world but not delivering, his credibility will be on the line, and we all know the story of the boy who cried wolf, don’t we?

Filed under: Budget, Unemployment, business, economy, employment, jobs, workforce, youth

8 Comments

Total Employment Change from 2008 Reveals Imminent Crisis

Posted by Sua William Sio on February 21st, 2012

Increase in unemployment under National

The Household Labour Force Survey Survey report of the December 2011 Quarter released last week revealed that our unemployment rate slipped slightly to 6.3% from 6.6%. While a rate of 6.3% in itself doesn’t necessarily mean we have reached crisis levels, the focus on the overall unemployment rate does conceal detail about our employment situation that if brought to the surface will shine light on what I believe is an immiment crisis looming in our economic horizon.

Since JohnKey’s National took office in November 2008, 53,000 New Zealanders have joined the unemployment ranks. That’s a 54% increase in the number of people unemployed to a total of 150,000. For these people, National’s promise of a ‘brighter future’ has utterly failed to materialise, especially if you have a mortgage and teenage children you are supporting through school.

While the impact of the recession cannot be ignored, the number of people unemployed has actually increased since the recession officially ended in mid-2009. The official unemployment figures only tell part of the story. Many more people are without work but are not counted as being unemployed. Many are described by the Salvation Army as being “discouraged unemployed”. They would like to work and would accept a job offer if given, but they would not be deemed as actively seeking work because for instance looking for work through a newspaper does not meet the threshold of “actively seeking work”. The number of Kiwis jobless has increased by almost 100,000 under National’s watch to now 261,300 people as of December 2011. In the meantime 59,964 people are receiving the Unemployment Benefit as at December 2011 a fall of 7% from 67,084 as of the December 2010.
So is this it? Is this the brighter future promised to all New Zealanders?

Uptitling

Posted by Darien Fenton on February 17th, 2012

As we’ve gone through three decades of painful economic change, a whole new language has emerged as part of the managerialist efforts to soft soap hard decisions.

Along with “human resources” and “people management” (as if working people are cattle that need to be herded in the right direction), we’ve also got the deceptive language of the destruction of decent work.

We have “re-engineering, “right-sizing”, “right fit,’’downsizing” and other euphemisms designed to sugarcoat the harmful and very human outcomes of firings and job losses.

Productivity has become another word for expecting a whole lot more for a whole lot less.

And the latest fad is “Uptitling”, where having a fancy title for a job is supposed to compensate for lousy pay and insecure work.

The term “Associates” came to New Zealand a few years ago. Caterair and Marriott introduced this at Auckland Airport for their highly casualised catering staff, as if being given a fancy title meant the workers had some stake in a business, where they really had no say or control.

Uptitling is rampant overseas and it’s becoming a trend here too.

Receptionists have become “Heads of Verbal Communications”, Staff in Call Centres are “Client Liaison Officers” and the local rubbish collector is an “Environmental Facilitation Officer.”

Toilet cleaners are ”sanitation consultants” and leaflet delivers are “media distribution officers”.

From a financial perspective, uptitling is appealing to employers. They believe that rather than increasing somebody’s pay, all they have to do is give them a new fancy title. Employees will feel validated by their new status and maybe won’t pester their bosses for a raise for a little longer.

We’ll see.

Tags: Future of work
Filed under: Employers, Workers, economy, management

36 Comments

A Big Ask

Posted by David Cunliffe on February 12th, 2012

I knew it was a big ask.

Simon Collins’ provocative Herald series on inequality was closing with “Bridging the Wealth Gap“. Would it rail against the changes to our tax and workplace laws that have driven the widening gap? Would cry from the heart like “Ill Fares The Land”?

Would it call for a fundamental change of direction? Would it unpick the platitudes around “equality of opportunity”?

Ah, no.

Instead it levers off the new Auckland Council’s Spatial Plan, including targets to reduce inequality. Worthy, sure. Right track? Undoubtedly. Sufficient condition for change? No way.

Collins explains ” how we got there” by condensing modern economic history into one sentence:

“The driving forces have been both technological changes, which have strengthened the power of the skilled at the expense of the unskilled; and policy changes, which have weakened unions, opened markets to free trade, cut taxes on the rich and imposed new taxes on spending that bear most heavily on the poor.”

Although the outcome is “not immutable”, neoliberalism dodges the bullet.

The genial Michael Barnett and the earnest Allan Johnston represent the “competitiveness” vs “compassion” debate.

But has Collins not read The Spirit Level? There is a strong case that more equal societies do better. Including economically. If so, fairness ain’t just compassion, it’s common sense.

The bottom line is that rampant inequality is driven by the combination of unfettered capitalism and neoliberal government policy.

So if Kiwis want a change they will need to vote for it at national as well as council levels.

Yet voter turnout was the lowest in decades this last election, despite inequality being at its worst.

We have more to do to make a reasoned case for a clear alternative.

We have made a good start: capital gains tax, tax free zone at the bottom (which could be abated over a certain income level like Working for Families), raising the top tax rate, decile weighted education investment, and public health and housing programmes to promote healthy families and kids. There will be more to come.

We have to balance this with a clear narrative, based on sound strategy, for growing the pie for all. That means encouraging Kiwi businesses. Helping markets when they work well. And sorting out the mess when they don’t. I will be blogging more about economic growth, as it must partner efforts to reducing inequality by raising income levels for all.

And we need to expose the tricks this Government uses to lull hard working Kiwis into apathy or submission; the smile and wave routine; their dog whistles that turn Kiwis against their neighbours; their sly deals and cronyism to maintain control.

So reversing inequality will take more than a newspaper series, it will take winning the country for a new direction for us all.

Tags: inequality
Filed under: economy, inequality, poverty, social democracy

91 Comments

Why Rudman is wrong

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 1st, 2012

It is pretty unusual for me to disagree with Brian Rudman, the thinking man’s curmudgeon. But today he accuses Labour of wrapping ourselves in the flag over the sale of the Crafar farms. Brian you have crossed the line, and provoked my first Red Alert post of 2012!

Free marketeers (and Rudman is not one of those) have long resorted to branding as racist anyone who opposes foreign ownership. But I don’t buy it, and never have.

If Labour didn’t have a policy of opposition to rural land sales to foreign buyers and we opposed the Chinese bid, then yes that would look like xenophobia aimed at the Chinese. But during the last parliamentary term we adopted new policy in this area, proposing to clamp down on the sale of rural land to foreign buyers unless significant benefits to the national interest could be demonstrated. And as David Parker pointed out on Monday, we have criticised sales to German, US, Chinese and other foreign investors.

So is it xenophobic to oppose any measure that promotes the New Zealand economy and limits foreign ownership in our economy? Is it racist of China and numerous other countries to place limits on the sale of land to foreigners in their countries? Of course not.

During the election campaign I did a talkback radio debate with National MP Jami-Lee Ross on the ethnic Indian station Humm FM. Jamie accused me of racism when I said National’s asset sales policy risked putting our most valuable SOEs in foreign hands. Two callers responded: newly arrived Indian migrants who disagreed strongly with Mr Ross, both saying they were Kiwis and wanted the assets to stay in New Zealand ownership, and that the issue wasn’t about race at all.

Brian also seems to think that because so much of our economy is foreign-owned we may as well sell what is left:

With our banks and insurance companies and much else long sold off – $45 billion worth in the hands of Australians the last time I checked – it seems a little late in the day for Labour to espouse this particular principle.

I don’t want to sell what is left. Labour learned the lessons of the botched privatisations of the 80s and 90s. The challenge for our generation in politics is to build up New Zealand’s assets. That is why we need to make Kiwisaver universal to build our capital markets. It is why we need to build successful Kiwi firms through investing in research and development. It is why we should not be selling down our most successful state owned enterprises, nor KiwiBank. And it is why we should not be selling prime rural land to overseas buyers.

Tags: brian rudman, Crafar Farms, Overseas investment
Filed under: asset sales, economy

32 Comments

The Sad State of Key’s Nation

Posted by Grant Robertson on January 27th, 2012

There is an old joke about the politician who dies, and arrives in heaven to find that market forces have taken hold, and that heaven and hell are offering one day trials so that he can decide where to spend eternity. The politician takes up the offer and spends a delightful, restful day in heaven listening to harp music. He goes down to Hell and has a great time partying, eating, drinking and generally having fun. He goes back to heaven and tells St Peter his decision’s made, its Hell for him. When he gets back there he finds none of the fun, but just a brutal, cold, barren landscape. He seeks out Satan, and asks what’s happened to the Hell he saw the day before, and Satan says, ” you’re a politician you should understand, yesterday we were campaigning, today we’re in office.”

In the election campaign we have just had, the paying down of debt and the return to surplus were big issues. The “show me the money” moment was just one where John Key brandished his credentials to lead us to the promised land of surplus by 2014-15. It was a certainty, and it could happen even earlier. Yet, six weeks on, the dampners are on. Key now says its only a “reasonable probability”. Another $1 billion have been knocked off the forecast. Truth is little is different in the challenging global environment now from when the promises were made, except the PM is not campaigning any more, he is in office. Not for the first time he gave the public the message they wanted to hear about economic growth, but now its time to lower expectations.

The so-called State of the Nation speech from the PM yesterday was a dull and miserable affair. Gone is the brighter future we were all promised just a few weeks ago. What plan there is has at is centrepiece more cuts to the public service. Regardless of the wisdom of those, they will be a drop in the bucket of improving the government’s finances.

No one is underestimating the challenge in front of the government. But what’s happened to the sunny optimisim of our PM? Actually there is every reason to be optimistic about New Zealand’s future if the government is prepared to do things differently. The world has changed, will the government? There is opportunity to reset fiscal and economic policy, and make the investments that will support innovative growing companies, grow our skills base and ensure that everyone reaches their potential.

But there was none of that in the speech. Not just a lack of economic vision either. And as Pita Sharples (yes, he is a Minister in the government) points out nothing on dealing with poverty or inequality. Nothing on the issues that need to be dealt with to unlock the potential of thousands of New Zealanders.

It was a defeatist, sad and tired effort. A bit like an old joke.

Tags: John Key, State of the Nation Speech
Filed under: economy, inequality, national

38 Comments

A nation of makers #8

Posted by Clare Curran on January 24th, 2012

The ODT reports today yesterday:

Dunedin-based technology company PocketSmith is one of six finalists in the BNZ Start-Up Alley competition.

The competition is to help grow New Zealand’s web and technology start-up businesses.

Pocketsmith has a competitive personal finance management tool that allows users to track their expenses.

Pocketsmith is part of the University of Otago’s Centre for Innovation Distiller community.

I first visited Pocketsmith at the Distiller about two year’s ago. They were starting to make an impact then. The Distiller is a group of people (they call themselves technopreneurs) who work on their own projects, but work co-operatively and sometimes collaborate. They share space, ideas out of their creative enviroment comes great ideas. They call it social entrepeneurship.

NBR wrote about them mid last year;

PocketSmith co-founder Jason Leong told NBR his company’s success was all down to the power of open source development, the software-as-a-service (or SaaS) model for delivering your product over the internet, and the viral power of social networking and professional community sites.

Read more about how they have become a success story here.

Good on them.

Tags: innovation, nation of makers
Filed under: comms & IT, economy, internet

2 Comments

How important is IP to our economy

Posted by Clare Curran on January 17th, 2012

Last night a proposed law passing through the United States Congress was blocked by Obama.

California congressman Darrell Issa, an opponent of Sopa, the Stop Online Piracy Act, said he had been told by House majority leader Eric Cantor that there would be no vote unless there is consensus on the bill.

Congressional leaders are preparing to shelve controversial legislation aimed at tackling online piracy after president Barack Obama said he would not support it.

The tech community has fought hard to stop Sopa and a rival bill, Protect IP, also known as the Enforcing and Protecting American Rights Against Sites Intent on Theft and Exploitation Act, or the e-Parasite act. Websites including Reddit and Wikipedia are planning to “go dark” on Wednesday in protest against the legislation. Issa said he remained concerned about Protect IP, which will go before the Senate on 24 January.

But both bills now look severely damaged after the White House came out firmly against their biggest proposals at the weekend.

“Let us be clear – online piracy is a real problem that harms the American economy, threatens jobs for significant numbers of middle-class workers and hurts some of our nation’s most creative and innovative companies and entrepreneurs,” the White House said in its first official comment on Sopa and Protect IP.

However, the White House said it would not support legislation that “reduces freedom of expression, increases cybersecurity risks or undermines the dynamic, innovative global internet.”

Though it doesn’t get a lot of coverage in mainstream media, and it’s not a well understood issue, the battle between the entertainment industry and the technology sector has been raging for some time. (Rupert Murdoch has weighed into it in the last few days as well). The biggest manifestation of that battle has been the row over online piracy and the punitive laws that countries across the world are being pressured to comply with. Laws that include a provision to disconnect people from the internet from infringing copyright. Laws concerning patents are also under the spotlight.

In New Zealand, there’s a law waiting to complete its passage through parliament which excludes computer software from being patented. The Commerce Committee recommendation, which was accepted by the then Minister Simon Power, believed this would free up NZ software developers to be innovative without fear of being trampled on by big patent suits. Copyright was seen as the appropriate form of protection for software (which is built on code), along with music, books and other creative endeavours. But that law has sat on our books for more than 18 months.

There have been worrying signs for a while that New Zealand’s creative and innovation sector could get caught up in the international battle being waged.

In December, Paul Matthews, the head of the NZ Computer Society wrote a column about how how changes to NZ’s patent law could be caught up in the negotiations going on for the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

I’ve been watching the SOPA issue develop over the summer with concern. Others may have views about the implications for NZ and our part of the world.

Thankfully Obama has stepped into the fray. The issues are complex. Online piracy is an issue. But it’s mostly an issue because ordinary people can’t access the material they want easily through legal means. Sensible laws are required to protect creators and their intellectual property. Laws and policies are also required to help promote new business models that use the enormous power of the internet to give people more access to services and material and to help spark innovation.

What lies behind this is about who controls the internet. Thankfully the White House seems to understand that.

The two bills aim to tackle online piracy by preventing American search engines like Google and Yahoo from directing users to sites distributing stolen materials. The bills would also allow people and companies to sue if their copyright was being infringed.

The White House expressed concern about both these elements and about passing legislation that threatened the openness of the internet. In the online statement it said any new legislation must be “narrowly targeted”.

Vikram Kumar, the CEO of InternetNZ, a respected and thoughtful think tank, also wrote about the two US laws in yesterday’s NBR. He warned of threats to our national interest by:

laws written by powerful corporates and expeditiously passed into law word-for-word.

He was echoing the sentiments of internet guru Lawrence Lessig, who spoke at last year’s Nethui in NZ about the corruption destroying the United States’ democratic foundations.

Chris Keall from NBR wrote about the streetfight battle in yesterday’s NBR.

These issues aren’t always easy to get your head around. But like most things they have some principles at their core. Ownership of intellectual property is one. Intellectual property means exclusive rights to a variety of intangible assets, such as musical, literary, and artistic works; discoveries and inventions.

Yesterday I got a tip off that the mysterious visit to our shores by a high powered US delegation of congress and senate reps last week wasn’t just about a first-hand look at Christchurch’s earthquake damage. Talks were also being held about the TPPA. Who with? and what was the substance?

I think New Zealand needs to consider its own best interests and the importance of our intellectual property and innovation to our own economy. Quantifying that should be a priority. We can’t sell ourselves short.

We are a lot more than a high protein export nation. I’d like more discussion about this issue across the parliament. The copyright debates we’ve had in the last few years are just a subset of a much bigger economic discussion. What is the value of our IP to our nation?

Tags: intellectual property
Filed under: #ownourfuture, comms & IT, economy, internet

18 Comments

A nation of makers #7

Posted by Clare Curran on January 16th, 2012

Profiled in today’s Dom Post Nathan Li’s online application Educa, which allows parents to see and comment on their pre-schooler’s e-portfolio – an online record of their development, including photos and videos, created by teachers at her preschool.

Li developed Educa with input from early childhood teachers and parents, and launched the web application in April last year.

22 pre-schools using it so far. They are hoping to expand into Australia.

Wish this was available when my kids were in pre-school.

We need more Nathan Li’s.

Tags: innovation, weightless exports
Filed under: comms & IT, economy

7 Comments

A nation of makers #6

Posted by Clare Curran on January 5th, 2012

Dene Mackenzie writes in the ODT about Jade Software and their innovative JOOB product. The story is a few days old but worth reading. Think they deserve the award.

We need more companies like Jade. Hopefully who think it’s worth it to stay based in NZ.

A year ago, Jade Software was preparing to invade Silicon Valley and California. After battling through the Christchurch earthquakes, unprecedented travel and successfully establishing a beach-head in California, Jade Software has earned the title of the Otago Daily Times Southern Business of the Year.

Opening an office during the year in San Francisco paid dividends for Jade Software, but there is much more to the company than just establishing a beach-head in the United States.

The US was seen as the big unknown for the Christchurch-based company which has a significant operation in Dunedin.

The product at the forefront of the big push into the US was JOOB, with which jade had previously been successful when presenting at a huge technology fair in Berlin.

Tags: innovation
Filed under: comms & IT, economy

11 Comments

Just do it

Posted by Clare Curran on December 27th, 2011

I meant to write about this a few days ago.

US comedian Louis CK (I hadn’t heard of him, but he seems pretty popular) decided to produce a good version of his latest live show and make it available online for $5.

Nek Minnit (well 12 days later) he made $1 million.

The Age reported today:

Comedian Louis CK has proved a point: People are willing to pay a reasonable amount of money for DRM-free content from a performer they love, even though it would be trivial for them to pirate the same content for free.

Twelve days ago, Louis CK decided to skip the distribution, DRM, ads and everything else that goes into marketing and sale of a video, and simply offer the video of his latest performance on his website for $US5.

It took four days for Louis to earn $US200,000, and another 8 days to earn a whopping $US1 million.

It blows out the water the view that content has to be locked up with laws to enforce it because too many people will only steal it. In fact people will pay money to get access to new content. If the price is right and the product is what they want.

Louis CK posted a blog saying he would keep just $220,000 from his $1m.

He said:

So I’m breaking the million into four pieces.

the first 250k is going to pay back what the special cost to produce and the website to build.

The second 250k is going back to my staff and the people who work for me on the special and on my show. I’m giving them a big fat bonus.

The third 280k is going to a few different charities. They are listed below in case you’d like to donate to them also. Some of these i learned about through friends, some were recomended through twitter.

The Fistula Foundation

The Pablove Foundation

charity: water

Kiva

Green Chimneys

That leaves me with 220k for myself. Some of that will pay my rent and will care for my children. The rest I will do terrible, horrible things with and none of that is any of your business. In any case, to me, 220k is enough out of a million.

I had a quick look at Louis CK’s stuff. Here is is a clip on Youtube (not the $5 version). Pretty out there, but worth paying for. I think the business model is pretty obvious. It’s just a pity that he had to spend the money himself upfront to develop the tools to distribute his work.

Imagine if that technology was readily available to artists for a small fee. Imagine if the New Zealand tech industry was encouraged to go for it.

Another point to end on. Digital Rights Management (DRM) is the technology used by hardware manufacturers, publishers, copyright holders and individuals with the intent to limit the use of digital content and devices after sale.

Companies such as Amazon, AOL, Apple Inc., the BBC, Microsoft and Sony use digital rights management. In 1998 the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) was passed in the United States to impose criminal penalties on those who make available technologies whose primary purpose and function is to circumvent content protection technologies.^[1] The use of digital rights management is controversial. Corporations claim that DRM is necessary to fight copyright infringement online and that it can help the copyright holder maintain artistic control^[2] or ensure continued revenue streams.^[3] Those opposed to DRM argue that there is no evidence that DRM helps prevent copyright infringement and that DRM helps big business stifle innovation and competition.^[4] Proponents argue that digital locks should be considered necessary to prevent intellectual property from being stolen, just as physical locks are needed to prevent personal property from being stolen.

I thought it was interesting that I learnt about Louis CK’s online business endeavours through twitter via the ABC’s managing director Mark Scott who tweeted:

“The comedian (is) providing lessons in the future of digital rights management”.

Prescience from the head of Australia’s public broadcaster. It would be good to have a bit more debate about it here.

Filed under: Arts and Culture, broadcasting, comms & IT, digital, economy

16 Comments

It’s About Jobs

Posted by Grant Robertson on November 15th, 2011

There is one issue that comes up at almost every meeting, in every town that I have visited in this election, and that is Jobs. Either the general lack of them, or the kinds of jobs that might bring home the children(and grandchildren) that have left, and seem unlikely to return.

Today Labour released our plan for jobs. Its six points and it brings together some key strands of our policy that we believe will drive job growth. The six areas are

• A savings scheme that will provide new investment for New Zealand businesses;

• Support innovation to develop new products to sell to the rest of the world;(including restoring the R and D Tax Credit)

• Change monetary policy to support exporters against a volatile New Zealand dollar;

• Help unemployed youth into training and apprenticeships;

• Stimulate the economy by putting money into the pockets of those who need it;

• Making Kiwi jobs a consideration when issuing government contracts.

The details behind each of these policies is in the attached document. This is about an active government that works with business to create jobs instead of sitting on the sidelines. Its an important building block to owning our future.

Filed under: #ownourfuture, economy, jobs

15 Comments

Now its time for your show and tell Mr Key

Posted by Grant Robertson on November 4th, 2011

Labour has released the fiscal framework that underpins our policy to grow the economy, keep our assets and invest in our future. You can find all the details here, (scroll to bottom for fact sheets).

The main points to note

Labour will return the country to surplus in 2014/15 and will clear debt in 10 years – all without the sale of assets.
There is slightly more borrowing in the short term because we need to invest in our children and our country. We are willing to pay that price because we will not trade away the assets that will be valuable to those future generations to make that investment.
2013/14 is the only year in which Labour will have a larger operating deficit than National. After that the CGT kicks in, and we can move more quickly to clear debt than National
National’s predictions on Labour’s fiscal framework are plain wrong. They failed to factor in the asset created by re-investing the Super Fund, and they have conveniently forgotten that the CBD Auckland Rail Link is funded by cancelling the holiday highway

Labour’s numbers have been under the microscope. Fair enough. Now let’s hear from John Key how it works to bank the sales of the assets in their accounts, but not factor in the lost dividends from those sales? What kind of calculator lets you do that? Time for show and tell John.

Filed under: #ownourfuture, asset sales, economy

51 Comments

English v Key on Occupy

Posted by Trevor Mallard on November 1st, 2011

We heard John Key slamming the Occupy movement last night.

Here Bill English is on their side against the money dealers who have ripped us off.

Tags: double dipton, the leader of the national party
Filed under: economy

7 Comments

Trade policy released

Posted by Maryan Street on October 28th, 2011

I released our Trade policy this evening, as promised. Trade is a bipartisan issue because both National and Labour recognise that we are too small and our electoral cycle is too short to risk our exporters’ efforts and foreign direct investment in our industries, by potentially pulling the policy rug out from under them every three years. So we both promote New Zealand’s trading interests overseas equally.

So it will come as no surprise that we wish to build on the international market access we have gained in recent years, particularly in Asia after the successful FTA with China, signed by Phil Goff.

Labour will support the Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations as they proceed but Pharmac remains a bottom line for us. It works for the public good of New Zealanders and should not be compromised, despite pressure from large multinational pharmaceutical companies.

We need more openness and better engagement of civil society in our trade relationships, and so we will establish a Trade Advisory Commission to give contestable advice to the Minister about trade relationships. This Commission would comprise union, business, exporter, academic and NGO interests.

Where we differ from the National Party however in the Trade area is in the fundamentals of monetary policy which underpins the environment in which our struggling exporters work. We will alter monetary policy by introducing a Capital Gains Tax which will moderate interest rates, which will in turn take pressure off the exchange rate. We will broaden the Reserve Bank’s objectives to include employment and the health of the export sector amongst other things in its brief. We will put an exporter on the Board of the Reserve Bank to represent their interests.

And more besides……to see the whole policy, go here.

Filed under: economy, international, monetary policy, trade

8 Comments

Trade policy to be released tomorrow

Posted by Maryan Street on October 27th, 2011

I will be releasing Labour’s trade policy tomorrow at my campaign launch in Nelson. That is a good place to do it because the Nelson region is built on fine primary tradeable commodities. And yet our exporters, from pipfruit growers to the forestry sector, are having difficulties of one sort or another. It should be up on the website by about 5.30pm. Watch this space – or one like it!

Filed under: #ownourfuture, Manufacturing, agriculture, business, economy, international, trade

No Comments

Labour’s First Campaign TV Ad

Posted by Grant Robertson on October 26th, 2011

Here it is folks, the first of our TV ads. It features Phil Goff talking about policy. We are really pleased with how the ads have turned out. We are focusing on asset sales in this ad, and elsewhere in the campaign, because it is a great example of the clear choice at this election. It’s a choice between keeping our assets in Kiwi hands or selling them off. Its a choice between a Labour Party with a team, a plan and the policy that take the hard decisions for the future of New Zealand, and a National Party that is a one man band focused on photo opportunities and short term political decisions.

Tomorrow we kick off our campaign with a major policy announcement around securing our economic future. There will be several other announcements over the next couple of weeks, in various forms. We are taking this election seriously. There is a serious choice, not just about any one person, but about the future we want for the next generations in New Zealand.

Filed under: Elections, asset sales, economy

35 Comments

TINA’s back

Posted by Darien Fenton on October 21st, 2011

Since Labour announced its Work and Wages Policy, there’s been the editorials repeating the “TINA” (There is no Alternative) lines of yesteryear and arguing for trickle down. Then there’s those who have an in-built opposition to anything that might improve the lot of working people, and an aversion to those dreadful organisations called “unions” – the 370,000 New Zealanders who are part of today’s unions.

This is old National at their worse. It’s they who haven’t changed and who are out of touch. They need to catch up with the reality of work and wages for most New Zealanders and they need to tune into the debate that’s happening around the world about the failure of the orthodoxy of the last 20 years.

When Labour introduced the Employment Relations Act (ERA) in 2000, we heard the same rubbish from some National MPs who are now Ministers and others best forgotten. The ERA was going to be the end of the world, while today, most will concede that it was very modest regulation indeed.

Eleven years ago, this is what Jenny Shipley, Max Bradford, Gerry Brownlee and Richard Prebble said in Parliament.

Rt Hon. JENNY SHIPLEY (Leader of the Opposition): Welcome to Jurassic Park. This is a step backwards for New Zealand…… Taking New Zealand back to ideas that most people thought were extinct is no way to forge the future for this country. I do give notice here that the Government would have been far better to build on the strengths of the Employment Contracts Act, rather than destroy them and try to reintroduce some notions that most people thought had seriously gone 50 years ago, or more.

Hon. MAX BRADFORD (NZ National): … why is the Labour-Alliance Government digging up all the old processes, the old institutions, the old dinosaurs of the past in order to get it? One of the reasons that the Employment Contracts Act was introduced in 1991 was the old system under the industrial relations legislation, the Labour Relations Act, was not working. Yet here we have a grand march backwards into the past to try to assert—because that is all it is; an assertion—that somehow or other employment relationships will improve, growth will improve, and we will get more jobs out of this approach to industrial relations……. there are people who are waiting to leave this country because it will be too difficult under this legislation to employ people and to invest.

Hon. RICHARD PREBBLE (Leader—ACT NZ):…. Who do the Alliance, the Labour Party, and the Greens think they are fooling? This bill is compulsory unionism by the back door. We know what the consequences will be. It is well known that the country’s port unions have already been meeting. They have already agreed that they will be asking for a collective agreement. When this bill comes into effect on 1 August, they will be making a demand to every single port in the country for a collective agreement—in other words, a national award. They are prepared to go on strike to get it. It is already well known that the North Island freezing works sheds—the unions—have already met. They have already agreed on their collective agreement, and the moment this law comes into effect they intend to exercise industrial muscle to get that agreement.

GERRY BROWNLEE (NZ National—Ilam): …… This bill, dressed up as a herald of integrity and individual choice in industrial relations, is nothing more than another step on the long march backward that this Labour-Alliance Government is determined to inflict on New Zealand. This bill rips out any element of trust and mutual respect from industrial relations in this country. It is based on the premise that the employer is always wrong. It is based on the premise that there is an intrinsic, irreconcilable difference between employers and employees. Always it is the employer who is the guilty party, regardless of the circumstances. This bill is the most unbalanced legislation that could ever have been introduced in the industrial relations area.

Eleven years ago, according to the National Party, employment law change was going to be the end of the world. Did the world end? No, of course it didn’t. In fact we had good growth, low unemployment, no debt and an improving social outlook.

Thank goodness there are some real thinkers contributing to the modern conversation about how we build a better and fairer economy and society.

Here’s a good piece on wages from Bill Rosenberg today.

Tags: economy, National Party, TINA
Filed under: #ownourfuture, Work and Wages, Workers, economy, low pay

17 Comments

Debt – what has Key done ?

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 16th, 2011

Brian Gaynor is a must read :-

The latest $18.4 billion deficit represents 9.2 per cent of gross national product – one of the worst amongst the 30 OECD member countries.

Only Greece, Ireland, United Kingdom and United States have Budget deficit/ GDP ratios in excess of 9.2 per cent last year or this year.

Deficits have to be financed through additional borrowing, and the Crown’s gross debt went from $53.6 billion to $72.4 billion in the year to June.

This equals additional Government borrowing of $362 million a week for the year.

and

Soon after the Key Government came to power in November 2008, the Treasury was still forecasting a deficit of only $3.1 million for 2011.

This deficit forecast was raised to $8.6 billion in the 2010 Budget, when income and corporate tax cuts – and an increase in GST from 12.5 per cent to 15 per cent – were introduced.

Tags: the leader of the national party
Filed under: economy

9 Comments

Red Alert

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘economy’ Category

National’s job claims vs reality

Uptitling

Why Rudman is wrong

The Sad State of Key’s Nation

A nation of makers #8

How important is IP to our economy

A nation of makers #7

A nation of makers #6

Just do it

It’s About Jobs

Now its time for your show and tell Mr Key

English v Key on Occupy

Trade policy released

Trade policy to be released tomorrow

Labour’s First Campaign TV Ad

TINA’s back

Debt – what has Key done ?

About

Frequently asked questions

Recent posts

Recent comments

Categories

Archives

Meta