Archive
National Party Corporate welfare vs real welfare
People welfare, bad!
.
.
.
.
.
.
It’s fairly obvious what National thinks of New Zealanders who find themselves on the welfare safety net. Especially when those on welfare are there because of a global financial crisis brought on by unfettered, laissez-faire capitalism (aka naked greed) hitting a wall, and sending economies worldwide deep into recession.
But never mind. National has an answer for such dire events.
It’s called,
.
Corporate welfare, good!
.
Even as National continues to persecute, demonise, and blame the unemployed, solo-mothers (but never solo-dads), invalids, widows, etc, for their lot in life (because as we all know, the unemployed, solo-mothers (but never solo-dads), invalids, widows, etc, were directly responsible for the Global Financial Crisis that began in Wall Street’s boardrooms) – John Key and his cronies continue to lavish truck-loads of tax-payers’ money on corporate welfare.
.
1. ETS Subsidies for farmers
.
In June 2012, Business NZ CEO, Phil O’Reilly, wrote in the NZ Herald,
” There has been a lot of redesign and tinkering with the ETS. Established in 2008, reviewed and amended in 2009, reviewed again last year and about to be amended again – it’s no wonder that businesses involved in the scheme have review fatigue.”
See: Phil O’Reilly: Emissions trading scheme must bring investors certainty
Mr O’Reilly may well complain. But he is unfortunately too late. On the morning of 3 July, Dear Leader John Key announced that the 2015 postponement (of elements of the ETS) had formally become an “indefinite postponement” (ie; gone by lunchtime on that day).
Key stated,
“We’re not prepared to sacrifice jobs in a weak international environment when other countries are moving very slowly.”
See: Slow economy puts ETS plans on hold
Yet that hasn’t stopped National from levying ETS on the public. No fears there, evidently, of impacting on the pockets of ordinary Kiwis, and in effect, susidising farmers to the tune of $400 million per year since 2009.
In effect, this is a transfer of wealth from ordinary taxpayers to polluters [edited]. After all, what else can it be called when the public have to pay for an ETS – but farmers, industries, coal & oil companies, etc, – the very groups that produce CO2 and methane - are exempt?
See: Public to pay tab for polluters
So much for Tim Groser – Minister for Climate Change Issues and International Trade – insisting,
“The National-led Government remains committed to doing its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but it is worth noting that we are the only country outside Europe with a comprehensive ETS.”
National’s “committment” to reducing greenhouse gas emissions has gone up in smoke and carbon dioxide.
As the Sustainability Council NZ reported in November 2009,
- Households would bear half the total costs under the amended ETS
during its first five years (52%), while accounting for just a fifth of all
emissions (19%). Together with small-medium industry, commerce and
services, and transport operators, they would pay 90% of the costs resulting
from the ETS during CP1 while being responsible for 30% of total emissions.
- Pastoral farmers would gain a $1.1 billion subsidy and pay an amount equal
to 2% of their fair share of the Kyoto bill during CP1, while large industrial
emitters would gain a $488 million subsidy (at a carbon price of $30/t).
See: ETS – Bill to a Future Generation
On top of that, National appears unwilling to release actual financial data when it comes to the ETS. Critical data has been withheld, as the Sustainability Council discovered last year,
” Governments are legally required to provide an update of the nation’s financial position just before elections but those accounts do not recognise carbon obligations until they are in an international agreement, hence there is nothing concrete on the books until after 2012. “
See: Simon Terry: Carbon books reveal shocking gaps
And the Council report goes on to state,
” The Sustainability Council requested a copy of those projections eleven weeks ago.
After various delays, the Treasury delivered its projections the day before the election
- late in the afternoon and with much of the key material blanked out.
What arrived is the carbon equivalent of a finance minister presenting a budget and
saying:“Here is the estimated tax take for the next 40 years, and here is the total
spending. But we are not going to tell you how much tax is coming from any sector,
and we are certainly not going to tell you how tens of billions of dollars worth of
carbon subsidies and other payments are expected to be distributed. And no, we are
not giving you the figures for the past four years of the ETS either”.It looks to be the closest thing in the public domain to New Zealand’s carbon books
and yet: future agricultural emissions are a state secret; future deforestation rates are a
state secret; even projected fossil fuel emissions are a state secret – all blanked out. “
So what do we have here?
- Ongoing subsidies to polluting industries, with said subsidies paid by you and me, the taxpayer.
- Secrecy surrounding future ETS agricultural, deforestation, and fossil fuel emissions.
- Constant deferring of including polluters in a scheme that was designed specifically for dirty industries and farming practices.
- Importation of unlimited, cheap, foreign carbon credits.
Final point:
It seems a crying shame (as well as a fair degree of sheer madness) that we are paying subsidies to industry – whilst not offering the same deals to the generation of renewable energy and further research into renewable energy options (wind, solar, tidal, etc).
Ironically, the one subsidy that might have helped our economy and environment was scrapped in 2011, making Solid Energy’s biofuel programme uneconomic. (See: Biodiesel loses subsidy, prices to rise)
Instead, the taxpayer continues to subsidise polluters. On 27 August 2012, National finally ditched agriculture’s involvement in the ETS, giving farmers, horticulturalists, etc, a permanent “free ride” from paying for their polluting activities. (See: Farmers’ ETS exemption progresses )
This is the inevitable result of electing a corporate-friendly political party into government.
.
.
2. Subsidies to Private schools and Tertiary Providers
.
Subsidies to private tertiary education providers continues to increase,
” The Government is investing a further $29.503 million in the Private Training Establishment (PTE) sector over four years. This increases the funding rates for private training providers in line with the Government’s promise to treat them more equitably with public providers. The resulting funding difference is now half of what it was previously. “
See: Tertiary Education Commission – Private Training Establishments
So, if you’re a private company offering to train someone a course in “xyz” – expect a hand-out from a corporate-friendly National.
In the meantime,
- ” Student allowances are removed for post-graduate study the parental threshold for accessing allowances is frozen for the next four years. The Government says the changes will save $240 million in the first year and up to $70 million a year thereafter. The Budget cuts all funding for adult and community education in universities, saving $5.4 million over four years. “
See: Radio NZ - Benefits for research, science and engineering
- “ It also saves $22.4 million over four years by ending funding used to help tertiary education providers include literacy and numeracy teaching in low-level tertiary education courses...”
See: Radio NZ - Benefits for research, science and engineering
- ” Sunday Star-Times recently reported one in five young people left school without basic numeracy and literacy skills, despite the future workforce depending on advanced expertise. “
See: Not adding up on Easy Street
- ” Early childhood education subsidy cuts worth tens of millions of dollars are likely to be passed on to some parents through increased fees.
Education Minister Hekia Parata has kicked a total revamp of ECE funding into a future Budget, opting instead to stop cost increases to the Crown by cancelling the annual upward inflationary adjustment in rates.
The subsidy freeze takes effect on the next funding round, stripping about $40 million out of ECE payments to 5258 ECE centres. About 1427 of those centres are eligible for “equity funding,” however, and will get a boost through $49m extra directed to them over four years in a bid to enrol more children from the lowest socio-economic parts of the country.
But the scrapping of an annual inflationadjustment for other centres will be an effective funding cut as inflation pushes the cost of running ECE centres up. “
See: Parents face burden of preschool squeeze
National’s most recent hand-out went to private school, Whanganui Collegiate,
.
See: Govt ignored advice before private school’s integration
.
For a Party that advocates the “free market”, it certainly seems odd that they’re willing to throw bucketloads of our taxes at businesses such as private schools. After all, what is a private school, if not a profit-making business?
And don’t forget Charter Schools – which is the State paying private enterprise/institutions to run schools – whilst making a profit (at taxpayer’s expense) in the process. Why don’t exporters get this kind of support?
That was certainly Gerry Brownlee’s attitude when Christchurch’s post-earthquake housing crisis became apparent,
.
See: Christchurch rent crisis ‘best left to market’
.
3. Media Works subsidy
.
In 2011, this extraordinary story broke,
.
Prime Minister defends loan to MediaWorks
Published: 8:28PM Friday April 08, 2011 Source: ONE News
The Prime Minister is defending his decision to loan $43 million of taxpayer money to private media companies.
John Key claims the loan scheme was designed to help the whole radio industry.
But a ONE News investigation has revealed MediaWorks was the big winner after some hard lobbying.
Key is known for being media friendly, but he’s facing criticism from Labour that he’s become too cosy with MediaWorks which owns TV3 and half of New Zealand’s radio stations.
It has been revealed the government deferred $43 million in radio licensing fees for MediaWorks after some serious lobbying.
Key and the former head of MediaWorks, Brent Impey, talked at a TV3 Telethon event.
“I just raised it as an issue but we’d been looking at it for sometime. My view was it made sense. It’s a commercial loan, it’s a secured contract,” Key said.
It’s believed the loan is being made at 11% interest.
But in answer to parliamentary written questions, the Prime Minister said he had “no meetings” with representatives of MediaWorks to discuss the deal.
Two days later that answer was corrected, saying he “ran into” Brent Impey at a “social event” in Auckland where the issue was “briefly raised” and he “passed his comments on” to the responsible minister. ”
See: Prime Minister defends loan to MediaWorks
.
Aside from another example of Key’s mendacity, when he originally claimed to have had no contact with Mediaworks,
… in answer to parliamentary written questions, the Prime Minister said he had “no meetings” with representatives of MediaWorks to discuss the deal.
Two days later that answer was corrected, saying he “ran into” Brent Impey at a “social event” in Auckland where the issue was “briefly raised” and he “passed his comments on” to the responsible minister.
See: IBID
… this affair was another example of selective subsidies being offered to some business – whilst others are left to their own devices to survive,
.
.
We’ve lost 41,000 jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors over the last five years. To which National’s Minister-Of-Everything, Steven Joyce’s response was,
“Nobody’s arguing that being a manufacturer isn’t challenging. In fact, in my history in business, every time you’re in business it’s challenging.
“But going around and trying to talk down the New Zealand economy and talk about a crisis in manufacturing, I don’t think is particularly helpful.”
See: Exporters tell inquiry of threat from high dollar
“There is no doubt that economic conditions in the post GFC- world are challenging for some firms. The role of Government is to do things that help make firms more competitive and that is what our Business Growth Agenda is all about.”
See: Opposition parties determined to manufacture a crisis
Or Minister for Primary Industries, Nathan Guy saying,
“Our trading disadvantage has meant that we need to do more with less, and to work smarter.”
See: Innovation in New Zealand’s Agribusiness sector
To which exporters responded with this,
“We’re told to get smarter and I find that irritating and insulting. I’m about as smart as they get in my little field. How the hell do these people get smarter? For a politician to tell somebody else to get smarter – he’s risking his life.”
See: Exporters tell inquiry of threat from high dollar
Not very helpful, Mr Joyce. Though Opposition Parties may appreciate that you are pushing your core constituents into their waiting arms.
That’s how you alienate your voter-base.
.
4. Sporting subsidies
.
The Rugby World Cup
- Prime Minister John Key today announced a $15 million grant for an upgrade of Christchurch’s AMI Stadium for the Rugby World Cup in 2011.
See: Govt announces $15m for AMI Stadium (30 April 2009)
- Dunedin Mayor Peter Chin says he is “chuffed” the Government will contribute up to $15 million to cover shortfalls in private sector funding for the $198 million Otago Stadium project.
See: Chin ‘chuffed’ at $15m for stadium
- The Government blew out a $10 million budget to host VIPs at the Rugby World Cup – even though just a handful of foreign leaders attended.
See: $5 million overspend on World Cup VIP budget
- An extra $5.5 million will be spent on the Rugby World Cup to make sure there’s not a repeat of the chaos that unfolded on the evening of the tournament’s opening ceremony.
- Including the $350m spent to upgrade stadiums and provide IRB-approved facilities around the country and millions more pumped into infrastructure and preparations, the bill for the tournament has easily surpassed the $400m mark.
See: World Cup ‘absolutely worth’ price tag
Yacht Races
The Major Events Development Fund will invest $1.5 million on each of two Volvo Ocean Race Auckland stopovers to be held in 2015 and 2018 following an announcement today by Economic Development Minister Steven Joyce
See: Govt to support 2015 & 2018 Volvo Ocean Race Auckland stopovers
.
Meanwhile, Health Minister Tony Ryall refuses to provide additional funding for specialised medicines for patients with rare disorders. See: Letter from Tony Ryall, 5 December 2012
The message is crystal clear; National will subsidise rugby games and yacht races. But don’t expect help if you discover you have a rare disease.
.
5. Warner Bros subsidy
.
After Jackson made public noises in October 2010 that ‘The Hobbit’ could be taken offshore, there was a kind of mass-hysteria that pervaded the country.
Warner Bros wide-boys jetted down to meet Dear Leader, who kindly supplied a taxpayer-funded chauffeured limousine to bring the Holloywood execs to Parliament.
Dear Leader said “no more subsidies”.
Nek minit; Warner Bros demanded, and got, an extra $15 million. (see: Govt defends Hobbit jobs claim)
All up, the New Zealand taxpayer coughed up $67 million to give to Warner Bros. (Who sez crime doesn’t pay? Gangsterism obviously turns a healthy profit now and then.)
.
.
The film obviously didn’t do too badly at the Box Office – $1 billion is not too shabby by anyone’s standards,
.
.
Can we have our money back now, please?
.
6. Broadband subsidy
.
Funny isn’t it. Pro-business lobby groups always complain about State intrusion into the market place… Except when subsidies are being handing out.
One wonders why, if the Free Market” is more efficient than the State, that $1.5 billion in taxes has to be paid to private telcos to do what that they should already be doing.
Perhaps this is why it took the State to build this country’s infra-structure over the last hundred years. Infra-structure such as electricity generation. (See related blogpost: Greed is good?)
Which National is now preparing to part-privatise.
Private companies will soon be owning what taxpayers built up over decades, and which private enterprise was loathe to build in the first place. (If you’re wondering whether I’m referring to state power companies or broadband – there doesn’t seem to be much difference.)
.
Meanwhile, back in the Real World!
.
.
Dear Leader says,
“Some argue that people on a benefit can’t work. But that’s not correct.”
Correct.
Because as Welfare Minister Paula Bennett stated candidly on Q+A on 29 April,
“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. “
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview
Correct.
Which means that National’s “reforms” to push 46,000 of welfare is not just a meaningless exercise (the jobs simply aren’t there) – but is actually a political smokescreen to hide their own incompetance at forming constructive policies for job creation.
Unfortunately, there are too many right wing halfwits and Middle Class low-information voters who readily buy into National’s smokescreen. It’s called prejudice, and means not having to think too deeply on issues,
.
.
Fortunately, it is the job of those on the Left to dispel these unpleasant notions for the Middle Classes. (National’s right wing groupies are a lost cause.)
Let’s start by posing the question; why is welfare for corporations supposedly a good thing – but welfare for someone who has just lost their job, supposedly bad?
That’s what we need to keep asking the Middle Classes.
Eventually, they’ll start paying attention.
.
.
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 8 March 2013.
.
*
.
Additional
Scoop: Where’s National’s ‘corporate welfare’ reform?
Fairfax media: Doubt stalls biofuels growth (14 March 2011)
The Press: Solid Energy ‘wasted millions’ on biofuels (31 Aug 2012)
Southland Times: Biodiesel loses subsidy, prices to rise (30 May 2012)
TVNZ: Prime Minister defends loan to MediaWorks (8 April 2011)
Radio NZ: Data reveals drop in manufacturing, building jobs (22 Feb 2013)
Previous related blogpost
Once upon a time there was a solo-mum
Doing ‘the business’ with John Key – Here’s How
Acknowledgements
Tim Jones of Coal Action Network Aotearoa
.
.
= fs =
Karl Du Fresne has a public baby waa-waa cry-session – part rua
.
Continued from: Karl Du Fresne has a public baby waa-waa cry-session
On 27 march, Karl Du Fresne had a bit of a public melt-down over Radio NZ, complaining,
.
Acknowledgement: Fairfax Media – RNZ’s bias needs to be tackled
.
He accused Radio NZ on being a left wing organisation;
But on some programmes, a stubborn Left-wing bias persists.
Kim Hill is the worst offender. This is a problem for whoever runs RNZ, because she’s also its biggest name.
Chris Laidlaw lists to the Left too, as does Jeremy Rose, a journalist who frequently crops up on Laidlaw’s Sunday morning show. Rose appears to be on a lifelong mission to convince people that there are humane alternatives to nasty, heartless capitalism.
Acknowledgement: IBID
Part of the problem is that National Ministers regularly refuse to front on Radio NZ to explain government policy. An example this morning was typical of National ministers ducking for cover whenever negative stories hit the media.
The Salvation Army will be closing services and making staff redundant, as government funding is cut for critical social services;
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – Salvation Army warns of cuts to budgeting services
.
Cuts to services – such as provided by the Salvation Army – will hit the poorest; most down-trodden; people and their families, in our society. It would be like stealing coins from a blind beggar on the footpath.
All the while, National spends-up large on Tim Groser’s job-hunt at the WTO;
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – NZ First calls on Groser to refund travel costs
.
And National’s colossal spend-up on consultants and witch-hunts is now legendary;
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – ‘Consultancy culture’ cost $525m last year – Labour
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ – PM defends money spent on MFAT leak
.
The above stories all reflect badly on National. But is it the fault of state-owned, Radio NZ? Is the broadcaster “left-leaning”, as Du Fresne charges?
Or, is the reason somewhat more prosaic?
So, Minister for Social Development, Paula Bennett, was invited to appear on Radio NZ’s “Checkpoint” this morning (29 April) to explain why funding for social services for organisations such as the Salvation Army, will be cut.
When Bennett was invited to front on “Checkpoint” – she refused. Instead she provided a written statement. (Well, wasn’t that ‘big’ of her?)
Hear: Radio NZ – Checkpoint – Labour speaks out against recession funding cuts
.
Paula Bennett – too un-nerved to front on Radio NZ?
.
This is not the first (nor last) time that National Ministers have refused to front on Radio NZ. It happens with annoying regularity (with Dear Leader John Key being the worst offender).
On the other hand, Labour’s spokesperson on social issues, Jacinda Ardern, accepted an invitation to take part in the story.
.
Jacinda Ardern – accepted Radio NZ’s invitation to take part in interview.
.
If Ministers like Bennett, Ket, et al, – whose salaries are paid by taxpayers – do not have the courage of their convictions to appear on TV, radio, or other media to explain their policies – then they are not worthy of our electoral support nor attention. They are a waste of space.
And right wing munters like Karl Du Fresne should have nothing to whinge about.
.
.
= fs =
More dispatches from Planet Key
.
.
Planet Key’s #3 Moon “Brownlee”; Largest of the Moons, it tends to disturb other bodies through it’s presence. “Brownlee” has a rough surface and highly abrasive atmosphere that many find obnoxious. “Brownlee’s” gravitational influence has a negative, perturbing, influence on nearby bodies such as Planet Christchurch.
Brownlee recently let rip at Christchurch City Council for not carrying out repairs to council-owned community housing fast enough,
.
Acknowledgement: Radio NZ
.
Consider for a moment that Brownlee, as the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Minister, is in constant contact with CERA, Christchurch’s mayor, and anyone else remotely connected with that city and it’s re-build.
Brownlee has channels of communications that are open to him that allows him to discuss issues and problems as they arise.
So what was the purpose of this display of public excoriation of the Christchurch Council and especially the vilification of one Councillor, Yani Johanson?!
Does Mr Johanson not have a telephone?
Email? Skype? A paper letter? Smoke signals? (The latter seems to work well for the Vatican.)
Could Brownlee not have sat down around a table and asked the most basic of questions,
“How can we help?”
Or is the public display of testosterone-fuelled machismo Minister Brownlee’s new modus operandi when dealing with those who fall within his ministerial orbit?
This kind of authoritarianism may be the norm in Zimbabwe, Burma, or North Korea – but here in New Zealand it comes across as the cries and foot-stamping of a petulant child.
Meanwhile, National ministers should look in their own backyard when it comes to housing,
.
Acknowledgement: Dominion Post
.
Christchurch has been wracked by two massive earthquakes and thousands more quakes since. Every aspect of their basic infra-structure was damaged or ruined to varying degrees.
I think we can cut them some slack when it comes to re-building an entire city, from beneath ground-up.
Meanwhile, nearly eighteen months later, with no earthquakes or any other major disasters (unless one calls a National Government a major disaster), one wonders why National ministers have not progressed any further to re-build Pomare’s state housing?
After nearly a year and a half, all we’re seeing is a vast vacant lot, where once peoples’ homes existed,
.
.
.
Any ideas, Mr Brownlee?
(More on this issue in an up-coming blog-story)
.
Planet Key’s #4 Moon “Dunne”; covered in a dense, white atmosphere; “Dunne” is known to move from Planet Key to Planet Labour depending on which mass is greatest. The largest surface object on “Dunne” is the ‘Make Me a Minister’ volcano, which erupts whenever there is a nearby power-source.
As Minister of Revenue and Flashy Hairstyles, Peter Dunne is charged with taxation issues in this country.
No doubt his job was made considerably harder with two tax cuts (2009 and 2010) which considerably reduced taxation revenue for the State. (see: Govt’s 2010 tax cuts costing $2 billion and counting, see: Outlook slashes tax-take by $8b) Indeed, English was forced to tax children and their paper-rounds. (see: Key rejects criticism of ‘paperboy tax’)
Taxing kid’s meagre earnings. That’s how low and desperate National ministers have gone, to make up for the 2009/10 ‘lolly scrambles’ when the Nats gave away billions in unaffordable tax cuts.
To try to fill the fiscal hole that Bill English, Peter Dunne, et al, have put themselves into, they’ve been scrambling to raise government charges and tax everything and anything else that moves. (see: Prescription fees increase, see: Vulnerable children at risk from Family Court fees increase, see: Student fees rise faster than inflation, see: Petrol price rises to balance books)
The latest attempt to raise new taxes is Peter Dunne’s ‘carpark tax’,
.
Acknowledgement: Fairfax media
.
Well, well, well… a new tax?
A new fringe benefit tax?!
This is interesting.
Because John Key has always insisted that his Party cuts taxes and doesn’t increase them. Specifically, way back on 4 April 2005, when National was in Opposition,
.
National Party Finance spokesman John Key has signalled an overhaul of the Fringe Benefit Tax, during a speech to the Auckland Rotary Club today.
“The next National Government will cut the red tape and compliance costs that are choking our businesses and preventing them from getting off first base,” he says.
“A practical example of what I am talking about is in the area of Fringe Benefit Tax.
“Today I want to announce that National will revamp Fringe Benefit Tax to remove a substantial amount of the paperwork that currently occupies too much administrative time for many of our businesses, especially the small ones.
[...]
- We won’t entertain suggestions of applying FBT to on-premises car parks.”
Acknowledgement: Scoop.co.nz
And again in 2010, when a video was uncovered where Dear Leader was quoted as saying,
“National is not going to be raising GST. National wants to cut taxes, not raise taxes.”
See: Key ‘no GST rise’ video emerges
When challenged on this in the House, just recently, Minister for Everything, Steven Joyce, responded with this bit of bovine faecal material,
“I would say that I think a fair amount has changed since that statement was made back in April 2005, which was when Don Brash was leader of the National Party. Since that time we have had three leaders of the Labour Party, and maybe a fourth leader of the Labour Party—”
Source: Parliament Hansards – 9. Tax System Changes—Employee Car-parks
Yeah. Lot’s of things have changed. Like, for example, the difference between being in Opposition and Promising the Moon – and being in Government and having to explain why the Moon is still out of reach.
And when the Nats have to make smart-arse comments about Labour’s leaders, then you know they’re really on the ropes. Defensive much, Mr Joyce?
Like Key’s broken promise on GST, the “carpark” tax is another instance of National breaking it’s election promises. Which indicates, mainly, that National’s tax-cuts were never as affordable as they made out in 2008.
.
Acknowledgement: National Party
.
Planet Key’s #5 Moon “Bennett”; “Bennett” originated from the asteroid belt, where many poorer dwarf-planets with low mass; minimal mineral wealth; and mostly invisible, are locked in orbits that will take them nowhere. “Bennett” gravitated to the National Zone where her mass and mineral wealth increased by close association with Planet Key and it’s many moons.
.
To repeat and quote Bennett, when she stated on TVNZ’s Q+A on 29 April 2012,,
“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. “
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview
To quote Minister Bennett’s latest utterances on this issue, on 12 March 2013, when hundreds of people recently queued for just seven jobs at Carter Holt Harvey in Auckland,
“Well I am absolutely thrilled that 200 turned up quite frankly we’ve got more than 50,000 on the unemployment benefit but work expectations of them I think the fact that they are lining up that they want those jobs um speaks for itself and about peoples’ motivation to get work.”“There’s always a lot of people going for certain types of jobs and if in particular if they are lower skilled they feel they can do them, they don’t have a lot of work experience, they have been out of work for some time.”
“No I don’t feel there is a job for everyone and I think it’s damn tough but I am incredibly proud of New Zealanders and their motivation and the fact that they want them and I know that the economy is improving and we are going to see more happening.”
See: TV3 – Campbell Live: Sign of the times: hundreds queue for 7 jobs
Acknowledgement for transcript: Waitakere News – Don Elder, Paula Bennett and the rest of us
Ok, so the lightbulb has finally clicked in Bennett’s head. New Zealand has a problem. We do not have enough jobs for the number of unemployed and solo-parents who want to work.
It’s not often that a politician acknowledges the bleedin’ obvious – so kudos to her for having the courage to do so. (John Key might learn a thing from Bennett in terms of not ducking issues.)
However, if there are not sufficient jobs to go around – what is the point in wasting taxpayers’ money and Parliament’s time on this exercise in futility,
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald
.
And why is language like this used by Bennett,
.
Acknowledgement: NZ Herald
.
If there are insufficient jobs – as Bennett herself has now acknowledged on at least two occassions, then ipso facto, the following must be true;
- The only ‘trap’ is a lack of work – not welfare
- Why “reform” the welfare system when welfare itself is not broke – it’s the economy that is not working (as are 170,000 people)
- Why muddy the waters with rhetoric like “trap of benefit dependency“; “introduce expectations for partners of beneficiaries and make beneficiaries prepare for work“; or that welfare had “become a bit of a trap for quite a few people“?
What does “a bit of a trap for quite a few people” mean? That it’s a “little” trap as opposed to a “big” trap? Or is she attempting to minimise the impact of her beneficiary-bashing by trying to soften her rhetoric?
So the “dog whistle” rhetoric filters down to the right wing; the ill-informed; and other welfare-hating cliques in our society – but the message is watered-down for the Middle Classes who are uncomfortable with victimising the unemployed, or who may even know someone who recently lost their jobs.
That’s the trouble with beneficiary bashing during times of high unemployment. Most of us know someone who has lost their job through no fault of their own. Bennett is walking a tight-rope here.
Eventually, people will be asking; why are National ministers wasting time on pointless welfare “reform” when it’s jobs we need?
Once that message percolates into the collective consciousness of the masses, National will be left standing naked – their corrupt, bene-bashing, dog-whistle politics exposed for all to see.
A few questions for Ms Bennett,
Why are you messing around with welform “reform”, when it’s jobs that we need?
Why aren’t you and your well-paid ministerial colleagues reforming the economy to create more jobs?
How much are these “reforms” costing us, the tax-payer?
How many extra jobs will welfare “reforms” create?
I don’t expect answers to these questions because, really, they are unanswerable.
.
*
.
Links
Facebook: Pomare save our community
Copyright (c) Notice
All self-made images are freely available to be used, with following provisos,
- Use must be for non-commercial purposes.
- Where purpose of use is commercial, a donation to Child Poverty Action Group is requested.
- At all times, images must be used only in context, and not to denigrate individuals.
- Acknowledgement of source is requested.
.
.
= fs =
The Absurdities of National’s policies – a continuing saga
.
.
National’s policies continue to harm the most vulnerable in our society – including those working hard trying to make a “go” of it and better themselves.
Their latest exercise in absurdity and sheer mongrel stupidity is setting up barriers for people to get off welfare,
.
.
How this helps people attain an education; find a job; get off welfare; and pay taxes – is beyond my comprehension. It is simply erecting another barrier in front of people who are doing it tough already.
Worse still, some incredibly thick people (must be ACT supporters?) are actually supportive of this mean, penny-pinching policy. People like this individual,
RossRonald
“I count it, that she’d get around $620 in the hand per week – not counting an accommodation top up benefit if she’s entitled. The story’s pretty poorly written and somehow suggests the dpb is $172… Nup.
I pay a mortgage, have bought up 3 kids solo with Zero help beside working for families – and am trying to figure how to send my daughter to Uni next year…. and seeing non contributors like here sucking the system gets me riled. $6 grand student debt – please pass me the worlds smallest violin. Last thing NZ needs is another 50 year old shrink. BTW – Mr Anus? Hugh?? I think you’re assuming a lot – Cliff made perfect sense, it’s just that you don’t get to hear it said often enough, cos it’s a bit impolite to be honest about this sort of self indulgent waffle. Let her throw a few more K on the student loan, that’s what my kids have had to do. Welcome to the big sandpit”
Or this one,
Jackie10000
“Ms Merson also forgot to mention that she has shared custody and receives a good amount of child support each month! Student allowance, child support and DPB for the last two years!Time she got a real job and paid us tax payers back!”
Source: IBID
Such wilful ignorance… where does one start?!
Perhaps we could start with John Key, our current Prime Minister and owner of $50 million.
Dear Leader went to University at a time when tertiary education was free. No student fees. No student debt. In fact, the State paid students an allowance, to help with their studies and living costs.
Or we could start with Social Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett.
Ms Bennet was once receiving the DPB, as she raised her daughter. Nothing wrong with that.
(Bennett also used WINZ payments to buy a house for herself. See: Bennett knows about life on Struggle St)
She received a Training Incentice Allowance, to pay for her University Degree. Nothing wrong with that either.
She evidently tried part-time work whilst studying, but gave up her job because it was too hard to study and raise a child. Ok, we can understand that.
What I (and many others) find impossible to understand is why Bennett then canned the Training Incentive Allowance.
The same Training Incentive Allowance Bennett used to further her own education and get a job afterwards.
The same Training Incentive Allowance that an acquaintance of mine received, whilst she raised two sons single-handedly; one with ADHD and Aspergers; and completed a University course; and now earns a good salary paying taxes – instead of being on the DPB.
Isn’t that what we want?
Or is there a nasty, punitive, streak in our collective psyche – as expressed by the vile comments posted by RossRonald and Jackie10000 – that demands that those receiving welfare and the “undeserving poor” should be destined to rot in perpetual, unrelenting poverty? How can our once egalitarian society now be producing quasi-Scrooges with such malicious and monstrously shameful comments as RossRonald and Jackie10000 wrote?
One can only hope that those two represent only a tiny sector of our society – perhaps no more than the 23,889 who voted for ACT, in 2011.
Getting back to the issue, Ms Merson is quoted in the above story as saying,
“It seems a shame. It’s been my passion for years, and I was so close.”
Talk about pulling the rug out from under people.
All because we have a political Party in government that panders to the lowest common denominator; naked self-interest.
All because National blew $2 billion a year in unaffordable tax cuts in 2009 and 2010.
And all because, with the shortfall in tax revenue, National is having to scrimp and scrape and slash social and State services, to find the money to “balance their books”. Just like they did in the late 1990s.
The top income earners have done very well out of National’s unbridled generosity in giving money away. Key and his cronies practically hosed it from the Ninth Floor of the Beehive to the waiting One Percenters below.
But not Ms Merson.
She’s having to pay for those tax cuts by losing out on an education.
“Bright Future” my arse.
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
Hon. Paula Bennett, Minister of Hypocrisy
Hypocrisy – thy name be National
“One law for all” – except MPs. (Part Rua)
Once upon a time there was a solo-mum…
Class act, National – taking money of widows?!
References
Dominion Post: New law nips student mum’s dream in bud
.
.
= fs =
Parata, Bennett, and Collins – what have they been up to?
.
Muppet #1 – Hekia Parata
.
“I actually think she’s a very effective communicator; in fact if you look at her history in politics, she’s been one of the smoothest communicators we’ve actually had.” – John Key, 18 January 2013
See: Parata safe in her job – Key
Prime Minister John Key says Education Minister Hekia Parata will be safe in an upcoming Cabinet reshuffle, … because she is hugely talented and one of National’s best communicators.
See: Parata’s job safe in shuffle
*snort!*
I’d be a happy chappy if the Nats DID have more like her in Cabinet!!
If she’s one of the Nat’s “best communicators”, I’d luv to know why she’s kept ducking calls for media interviews and instead sent Lesley Longstone to cover for Parata’s f**k-ups,
.
2 October 2012
.
3 October 2012
.
4 October 2012
.
26 October 2012
.
29 October 2013
.
14 November 2012
.
28 November 2012
.
When Lesley Longstone’s resignation was announced last year on 19 December, Hekia Parata was still nowhere to be seen. The announcement was handled by State Services Commissioner Iain Rennie (see: Education secretary quits),
.
19 December 2012
.
20 December 2012
.
Parata’s office explained why she couldn’t front,
Parata is currently on holiday and has refused to front on Longstone’s resignation, but in a statement released this afternoon she thanked Longstone for her efforts in leading the Ministry.
See: Education Ministry boss quits after ‘strained relationship’
Hmmmm, judging by Parata not fronting for most of last year, was she on holiday for most of 2012?!
“Smooth communicator…”!?
Ye gods, this deserves a Tui billboard.
Roll on 2013 – it’s going to be a great year.
.
Muppet #2 – Paula Bennett
.
.
Social Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett, has a relationship with hypocrisy, bene-bashing, and mendacity that can only be described as “intimate”.
Since 2011, she has derided and denigrated the unemployed; solo-parents; widows, invalids, the sick, and young people, and blamed them for being in a position requiring welfare assistance.
Never mind the fact that the Global Financial Crisis of 2007/08 has seen unemployment skyrocket from 3.4% in 2007 to the current 7.3%.
Or that welfare recipients as a whole were at their lowest in 2008.
National’s entire strategy for getting people off welfare has not been about job creation – that has beemn left to the “Market” to sort out – but about punitive sanctions targetting those receiving welfare.
See previous blogpost for full list of sanctions targetting welfare recipients: Johnny’s Report Card – National Standards Assessment – the social welfare safety net
Even Dear Leader had a go at welfare recipients in February 2011,
“But it is also true that anyone on a benefit actually has a lifestyle choice. If one budgets properly, one can pay one’s bills.
And that is true because the bulk of New Zealanders on a benefit do actually pay for food, their rent and other things. Now some make poor choices and they don’t have money left.” – John Key, 17 February, 2011
See: Food parcel families made poor choices, says Key
Key had even more daft things to say about welfare recipients here; National to push 46,000 off welfare . But not a single word about generating jobs for the unemployed. Not. One. Word.
Now that 5,000 sole-parents have mysteriously “dropped off” from DPB welfare, I have a question for Ms Bennet and Dear Leader;
Will those sole parents be acknowledged for finding work (a questionable assumption in itself) in a tough marketplace where unemployment stands at 7.3% (175,000 people) and where, it was announced today, growth in the jobs market has slowed? (See: Unemployment rate set to hold as job ads flatten out – ANZ, Job growth slows, says Trade Me)
Will Bennett acknowledge that people are on welfare – not because it is an opulent lifestyle – but because of sheer necessity?
Will the Minister – who successfully exploited the welfare system for her own benefit; bought a house using WINZ funding; and gave up paid employment because it was “too tough” to study, work, and care for her daughter simultaneously – acknowledge that it was not National’s punitive bene-bashing policies that found work for 5,000 sole-parents, but the parents themselves?
Or will she grab the kudos for herself?
More than half of that drop happened in the last three months of the year, after the introduction of Ms Bennett’s policy required sole parents to get part-time work when their youngest child turned five and fulltime work for those whose children were older than 14.
Ms Bennett said 3221 sole parents had returned to work since that came into force in October.
See: Bennett trumpets 5000 fewer on DPB
Yup. She’s taken the credit for herself.
Addendum
The numbers quoted in the Heral story are at variance with those from the Ministry of Social Developement.
From the NZ Herald,
.
.
From the MSD,
.
.
Even the Herald’s own trance of figures is not consistent. The DPB figures are compared between 2011 and 2012. The remaining two trances – All Types of Benefits and Unemployment – are compared between 2010 and 2012.
Dodgy.
.
Muppet #3 – Judith Collins
.
Remember “Crusher” Collins? Remember New Zealand’s own Iron Lady who brooks no sh*t from criminals, boy racers, or stroppy Labour MPs?
Remember how Collins was going to deal to crims who had been awarded compensation for breaches of their rights,
.
.
The Nats love to thrash the Law & Order issues. It appeals to low information voters, rednecks, and right wing simpletons and is great for the Tories to score a few thousand extra votes at election time.
In reality it achieves zip to actually reform and rehabilitate prisoners, and address core problems in their offending; alcolhol/drug abuse; illiteracy; unresolved psychiatric problems; and off course the number one factor; no prospects for employment.
Which is why it’s a bit of a surprise when a National minister appears to See The Light, and backtracks on one of their core, Get-Tough-On-Crims policies,
.
.
It’s nice to see a National minister shy away from mindless knee-jerk law-making that appeals to the Talback Radio mindset – but achieves very little except nudge New Zealand closer to being an autocratic state.
Until the next election, of course,
.
.
*
.
Other blogs
Tumeke: Paula Bennett and her amazing vanishing beneficiaries
.
.
= fs =
WINZ Privacy for some – but not for others
.
.
Most of us remember this apalling episode of Paula Bennett’s career as Social Welfare minister,
.
.
In 2009, Bennett made public private details of two solo-mothers. She handed over personal information to the media without the knowledge of the two women, Jennifer Johnston and Natasha Fuller.
The information included each woman’s weekly income from the State, including benefits and allowances.
Her move was supported by misogynists; right wing nutjobs; assorted beneficiary bashers; and National’s core constituency of conservative cranks.
Bennett’s actions were roundly condemned by fair-minded New Zealanders who recognised the Minister’s actions as a gross abuse of her power and invasion of their privacy. No wonder that many who remembered Rob Muldoon’s style of authoritarian governance likened Bennett’s behaviour to the late, former, Prime Minister.
But Bennett defended her mis-use of Ministerial powers,
“If someone is deciding they’re happy to use their case to speak about or against something we are doing, I think it’s fair the full story be told.”
Three years later…
Deputy Chief Executive, Janet Grossman, who had been head-hunted from Britain and paid over $50,000 of taxpayer’s money to re-locate to New Zealand, resigned only eleven months after taking up her role with WINZ,
.
.
Despite quitting less than a year into her new job; and despite over $50,000 paid to relocate her to New Zealand; it is reported that Grossman was paid out $97,000 as some sort of severance pay.
When Labour MP Jacinda Ardern questioned this extraordinary payment in Parliament, this exchange took place with National Minister, Jonathan Coleman,
Jacinda Ardern: Was the only reason she was given for Janet Grossman’s departure in that briefing or information that “her husband has had job opportunities in the UK and she wishes to return back there.”?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: Yes.
Jacinda Ardern: Was Janet Grossman paid a termination benefit?
Hon Dr JONATHAN COLEMAN: As you know, $97,000 was allocated across five people who left that year, and there will be no breakdown given, for privacy reasons, of the allocation to any of those five executives.
See: Social Development, Ministry—Resignation of Deputy Chief Executive
Really? Dr Colemnan cited “privacy reasons “?!
Chief executive of Ministry of Social Development, Brendan Boyle, was reported by Radio New Zealand as stating,
Mr Boyle says there is nothing unusual in paying out someone their entitlements when they resign but he refuses to disclose just what payment Mrs Grossman got, saying to do so would breach her privacy.
See: MSD chief clashes with MP in committee
So let’s get this straight…
Two solo-parents who have done nothing wrong; and their only ‘misdemeanour’ was daring to criticise a politician; have their personal details of WINZ payments splashed all over the country’s media, inviting lunatics to attack and threaten them…
But the payout to a senior WINZ executive who resigned/sacked/? is suddenly a matter of “privacy”?
The double standards set by National, and their cronies at highest MSD levels, beggars belief. However, it is unsurprising.
National’s reputation for One Rule For Everyone and One Rule For Themselves, is by now fairly well known in this country.
It demonstrates their complete contempt they have for the rest of us.
This is the sort of arrogance that in other countries leads to authoritarian rule; jails full of political prisoners; eventual uprisings by the populace; and a bullet through the head of despots.
Here in New Zealand, we do things differently. Here, despots get elected to two terms of government.
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
“One law for all” – except MPs
Hypocrisy – thy name be National
Sources
NZ Herald: Bennett gets tough with outspoken solo mums
Fairfax Media: Paula Bennett accused of Muldoon-style bullying
NZ Herald: Work and Income boss quits
NZ Parliament: Social Development, Ministry—Resignation of Deputy Chief Executive
Fairfax Media: Social Development Ministry grilled over security
Radio NZ: MSD chief clashes with MP in committee
.
.
= fs =
Did this catch Dear Leader Key by surprise as well?
.
.
The sale of Hillside Workshops will affect it’s workers badly,
“KiwiRail is making 80 to 90 workers at the Hillside railway workshop in Dunedin redundant after making only a partial sale of the site.”
See: Dozens of railway workshop jobs to go
I wonder – was John Key as surprised with this announcement today as he was a week ago, when the HLFS figures were recently released, revealing that unemployment was now at 7.3%?
“I’m very surprised with the numbers I’ve seen this morning, goodness knows what the next one will look like.” – John Key, 8 November 2012
Perhaps he was. Perhaps, as Bryan Gould pointed out in the NZ Herald today,
“ In the wake of the grim news about factory closures and lay-offs over recent months, the figures were only to be expected. Indeed, the warnings about a crisis in manufacturing have been coming thick and fast, and from all quarters.
There was, though, one person, it seems, who was blindsided by the bad news. The Prime Minister, we were told by the television news, was “taken by surprise”. The only explanation for this is that John Key has paid little attention to the unemployment issue over the past four years, despite its destructive impact both on individuals and their families, and on society as a whole.”
See: Bryan Gould: Plight of jobless makes us all poorer
After four years of Key’s “leadership”, what do we have?
- High unemployment
- A shortage of housing, and rising house prices
- Exporters suffering under a high dollar
- National policy designed to drive down wages (see: John Key’s track record on raising wages)
- A stagnating economy
Adding to the above, this report out today,
” Continuing bad economic news is prompting forecasters to speculate the economy may have gone backwards for the first time in two years.
Retail figures for the September quarter showing a big fall in spending follow weak inflation and job numbers for the same period have been released in recent weeks.
Westpac economist Michael Gordon says there is a reasonable likelihood the economy contracted in the most recent quarter.
Deutsche Bank senior economist Darren Gibbs believes that at best, the economy failed to grow at all and possibly went backwards during the period.
He said a manufacturing survey for October due in the next fortnight will give the first indication of whether or not the economy’s loss of momentum is continuing in the current quarter.
Finance Minister Bill English told Morning Report that the numbers bounce from quarter to quarter and the latest figures are not of concern.
He said the economy is as uncertain as it has been for years, and the Government will continue to focus on straight forward objectives, like getting back to surplus and rebuilding Christchurch.”
See: Economy may be going backwards
No wonder New Zealanders are escaping to Australia faster than East Germans climbing The Wall, during the Soviet era,
“A net loss of 39,500 people to Australia contributed to New Zealand’s net loss of migrants in
the September 2012 year. This is down from the record net loss of 40,000 in the August 2012
year. The September figure resulted from 53,700 departures to Australia, offset by 14,200
arrivals from Australia. In both directions, most migrants were New Zealand citizens.”
See: International Travel and Migration: September 2012
It’s not just the low pay (which is being driven lower by National policies); nor the cost of housing rising higher and higher as a minority speculate on property for tax-free gains; nor rising unemployment; nor the growing wealth-divide.
What is driving New Zealanders to escape – and I use that word with precise deliberation – is that our society has a strong impulse for self-flagellation that manifests as constantly making wrong economic decisions. Instead of looking at the long term – sufficient numbers of New Zealand voters opt for short term benefits. The result is that few of our economic problems are actually addressed in a meaningful way.
The joke is that so many New Zealanders still hold a quasi-religious faith in the National Party as “prudent managers” of the economy.
Which is sad, really.
National is the last political body to earn the reputation of “prudent manager”.
Any Prime Minister who reveals surprise at a worsening economic situation – despite data screaming “Red Alert! Red Alert!” on every indicator, is one who is asleep at the wheel and hasn’t a clue what is going on around him.
How can a Prime Minister with an entire government department at his disposal, which spends $17,547,000 a year, be oblivious to 13,000 people losing their jobs in the last three months?
See: Household Labour Force Survey: September 2012 quarter
Does he not read a newspaper?
Or, as with the GCSB briefing in February, was Key simply not paying attention?
Or perhaps, as with the John Banks police file, did he wilfully choose not to look at the information?
Precisely why are we paying this man $411,510 each year?!
One other reason why so many New Zealand voters are so deluded into voting for National; the old ‘aspirational middle class‘ thing.
We all want to be affluent, succesful, and secure. The National Party is filled to the brim with millionaires, rich lawyers, businessmen and women, etc. Even Paula Bennett knew how to rort the welfare system when she was on the DPB, and bought a nice house with WINZ assistance.
Mowst of us want that. So by electing National, some of that success will rub of onto us, right?
Right?
So f*****g wrong.
Who benefitted from National’s 2009 and 2010 tax cuts? Check out the data,
.
2009 taxcuts
.
.
2010 taxcuts
.
.
As the numbers above show, the higher your earnings, the greater your tax cut. Conversely, the lower your earnings, the less you got.
If you earned $40,000 p.a. your tax-cuts in 2009 and 2010 was – $9.94.
At the same time, GST went up. That meant you were now paying 15% on food, electricity, fuel (more actually), rates, etc.
High income earners have done very nicely out of the tax cuts.
By contrast, the Australian governments treated their low-middle income earners somewhat differently,
“As part of the Government’s policy to spread the benefits of the mining boom, one million people will be freed from paying tax when the tax-free threshold is trebled from A$6000 to A$18,200.
More than seven million earning less than A$80,000 ($102,000) will receive tax cuts and parents with children at school will be paid A$410 a year for each primary school pupil and A$820 for each secondary student.”
See: Fed-up Kiwis head to Oz en masse
That is called re-distribution of wealth to those who need it.
As compared to National’s re-distribution of wealth to those who do not need it.
It takes a while for the Aspirationists to wake up and realise that they’ve been conned. In the meantime, Key smiles and waves and bats away serious economic problems; Paula Bennett targets and blames the unemployed for daring to be unemployed; Hekia Parata is busy undermining our education system; John Banks is throwing taxpayers money at private Charter schools; and the rest of the National Party are further dismantling our once egalitarian society, and doing dubious back-room deals with casinos, big business, foreign governments, and god-knows-who-else.
The only thing that would really, really, really piss me off is that National voters became disenchanted with their own “government” – a mess of their own making - and headed off to Australia. To hell with that!
It’s a shame that Aussie Customs can’t made a small addition to their Immigration Declaration Form,
Have you ever,
[] been convicted of a drugs offence?
[] been a part of a terrorist group?
[] voted National?
Ticking the last box should be grounds for immediate repatriation to New Zealand.
The Aussies may already have started: I understand that Paul Henry is being sent back to New Zealand?
.
.
= fs =
Job Hunting, Bennett-style
.
.
As unemployment continues in a decidely upward direction…
.
.
The response from National was swift and decisive…
John Key:
“I’m very surprised with the numbers I’ve seen this morning, goodness knows what the next one will look like.”
See: Key ‘surprised’ by high unemployment rate
Ain’t it a bugger when a Prime Minister is “surprised” with rising unemployment numbers. “Goodness knows”, it’s only been trending upward since the beginning of the year…
Bill English:
“What we have found through this recovery is that it has been a bit hard to predict and we’ve seen these sort of numbers jump around, they can be up one quarter and down another quarter.”
See: Jobless figures result of ‘grumpy’ recovery – English
“Jumping numbers“?! Has Little Leader been dropping a bit of bad acid lately?! What next; dancing flowers? Cartwheeling pigeons?
Get those “jumping numbers” under control, Mr English! They’re having waaaay too much fun!
But considering the thousands who’ve been made redundant this year alone…
- ANZ; 1,000 redundancies
- Air New Zealand: 441 redundancies
- Yellow Pages; 125 redundancies
- Wire by Design, 55 redundancies
- Hakes Marine; 15 redundancies
- Telecom; 400 redundancies
- Brightwater Engineering; 40 redundancies
- Pernod Ricard New Zealand; 13 redundancies
- Depart of Corrections; 130 redundancies
- Summit Wool Spinners; 80 redundancies
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; 80 redundancies
- Cavalier/Norman Ellison Carpets; 70 redundancies
- IRD; 51 redundancies
- Flotech; 70 redundancies
- NZ Police; 125 redundancies
- CRI Plant and Food; 25 redundancies
- Te Papa; 16 redundancies (?) 30 redundancies (?)
- PrimePort Timaru; 30 redundancies
- Kiwirail; 158 redundancies
- Fisher & Paykel; 29 redundancies
- Goulds Fine Foods; 60 redundancies
- Canterbury University; 150 redundancies (over three years)
- Solid Energy;
363 redundancies460 redundancies - Tiwai Pt aluminium smelter; 100 redundancies
- Axiam Metals; 44 redundancies
- Norske Skog; 120 redundancies
- Goodman Fielder; redundancy numbers t.b.a.
- Dunedin City Council/Delta: 30 redundancies
- Blue Sky Meats; 100 redundancies
- Kaipara Ltd/Stockton Alliance; 63 redundancies
- Wainuiomata New World; 44 redundancies
- Nuplex; 64 redundancies
- Newmont Waihi Gold; 20 redundancies
- Ministry of Justice; 70-200 redundancies
- Salisbury School in Nelson and McKenzie Residential School in Christchurch; 90 redundancies
- Rakon; 60 redundancies
- Dynamic Solutions; 40-60 redundancies
- Thorn Lighting; 8 redundancies
- Eastern Institute of Technology; 12 redundancies (?)
- UCOL; 30 – 50 redundancies
- Kiwirail Hillside Workshops; 90 redundancies
- SCA Hygiene Australasia; 140 redundancies
- Dunedin City Council: 10 redundancies
- Carter Holt Harvey; 70 redundancies
- NZ Herald: 8 redundancies
- Apata Fruit Packhouse: 25 redundancies
… how is it “hard to predict”?
But perhaps the top prize for Denial, Deflection, and Downright Dumbness has to go to the Minister for Social Welfare, ex-DPB recipient and expert at using taxpayer funds for her own benefit…
Paula Bennett:
.
.
Bennett responded with this very helpful advice,
“The Warehouse Group has 300 full-time and part-time jobs, across three stores, available between October and January. Brightwater Engineers Ltd is looking for 40 staff at the moment. Mitre 10 is opening a store in Rotorua, and it wants 50 permanent-”
See: Parliament – Questions for oral answer
Excellent! 430 jobs!
So that leaves 174, 570 out of 175,000 unemployed!
Oh wait, no. The Warehouse is seeking 430 only between October and January. After that, those 430 go back on the dole…
Bugger.
Bennett sympathises with the unemployed though, as she stated in Parliament, with great wailing and gnashing of teeth,
“It’s tough out there but there are jobs… people need to be actively looking to be able to take up the opportunities, it’s as simple as that.”
Yeah, ya losers. Everyone knows there are 175,000 jobs out there. Employers simply aren’t advertising them ‘cos they take a peculiar pleasure in keeping such things secret. But if you make a wish to the Magic Jobs Fairy (as well as the Magic Lotto Pixies), your dreams will come true.
.
“Yes, Pauline, here are the 175,000 jobs you wished for last night! Would you like me to do something about those nasty poll ratings as well?”
.
Good onya, Tinkerbell!
By the way, lose the red dress, sweetie – Dear Leader might think it looks a bit, y’know… gay?
.
.
= fs =
Guest Author: MSD. WINZ. IT. OMG!
- Alan Benton
.
.
I wonder who is handling the hiring of staff for the IT side of MSD. I highly suspect it is a private firm, such as Addecco who I know have a concrete and firmly locked up contract for instance at StudyLink, and adminster all their temps and contractors. Some of those staff have been rolled over for years my flatmate tells me, one person he works with had been rolled over for more than 6 years.
That means, to me, there is possibly a whacking great sum of budgeting that is just used as straight out corporate subsidy. This simply means in turn that there is a whacking great some of money that is not and cannot every be put into operational budgets, it’s literally flying out the door in “costs” to have an outside private firm do the work that internal management ought to probably be handling themselves.
My last contract at MOH was handled by an outside firm. I worked out they made just short of $15K off me on one stint there, even though the only work they did was sourcing me, and that was it. Absolutely nothing more. I was interviewed by internal staff, my workload was set by internal staff, my performance was monitored by internal staff and payments came from within the MOH’s system, not the Agency, YET the Agency actually still made money off me every single hour I worked there.
I couldn’t help wondering what would happen if this sort of thing was dropped, and the budget that gets set aside for such “management” using these outside companies actually went into operational matters.
And I was just one of many there at the time who got brought in to help oversee the next iteration of one of one of the systems there … multiply that by more staff and more departments across the Government, and you’re probably looking easily at millions and millions going to these private companies instead of the systems themselves.
And in one of my older roles as mentioned, when staffing was cut, it was still a case of crank out even better and “more efficient” systems but with a steadily diminishing ability to do it properly to start with. It seemed complete madness to demand that sort of thing. Kind of like MSD demanding people get off their butts to work and berating them for not having the ability to cope when they’ve gone and cut the programs that were helping people in the past get OFF the bloody thing in the first place – including one Ms Paula Bennett of all people!!!
I was constantly told that we couldn’t do this, couldn’t do that, didn’t have the money. And yet it never seemed to stop pay rises for the CEO, never seemed to stop splashing out on decor, never seemed to stop demands for the latest and greatest flashing lights and gizmos … but if I as Manager tried arguing for server investment, security investment, it was uphill all the bloody time. Yes, there was capital outlay involved. But it was banging my head against a concrete wall to make them see that if they did right first time, we wouldn’t constantly be mired in patchup jobs, make do workarounds and the threat of chronic system failure dangling above our heads. And I just got very apprehensive when this was happening in the security area. “Can we get a student to do that?”, always looking for the cheapest solution to fix highly complex problems. I’ve nothing against students, but we were laying off some real gun workers. As I said, we just ended up with burnouts and layoffs. Including myself.
I guess being insistant and not afraid to get up the noses of people who had no clue on what they were managing didn’t make me appeal to the Managers, but I happened to view critical infrastructure as a bloody important investment, especially when we would have rural Dr’s going mental because we couldn’t give them the appropriate technology resources to help them get on with their jobs in difficult to reach areas and the like. And I always viewed people who didn’t have a clue about it as the last people to be making the critical decisions on the support thereof of such technology and systems.
.
.
= fs =
Paula Bennett shows NZ how to take responsibility
.
.
Social Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett has been issuing edict after edict, demanding that welfare beneficiaries “take responsibility for their lives” and accept certain ‘obligations’ in return for receiving their welfare benefits,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
And not forgetting Dear Leader’s own 5 cents + 15% GST worth,
.
.
It’s very ‘helpful’ when a multi-millionaire explains to a person living in poverty, how to budget to buy food…
Bennett and Key expect a high degree of personal responsibility and expect obligations to be undertaken.
How does Paula Bennet, Minister for Social Welfare compare when it comes to taking personal responsibility and meeting her obligations to the public?
Let’s put it to the test, shall we?
When problems surrounding WINZ job-kiosks hit the headlines, and quickly became apparent to be the biggest leak of information in this country’s history, did Paula Bennet step up and take responsibility?
.
“At the end of the day I have a level of responsibility and certainly accountability. What I can’t be held to is to blame for something I have no control over.
“I set high standards for the ministry. They have not lived up to them in this case and I want … to be sure it will never happen again.”
.
Short answer: no.
It’s someone elses’ responsibility.
Which begs two questions,
- Can welfare beneficiaries be “held to blame for something they have no control over” ?
- Just why is Bennett collecting her ministerial salary of $257,800 p.a. plus perks and allowances?
Paula Bennett, Minister of Hypocrisy and Double standards.
.
*
.
Highly recommended
Gareth Morgan: Belt Tightening Won’t Reduce Unemployment
Sources
Parliament: Salaries payable under section 16 of Civil List Act 1979
NZ Herald: Bennett: Winz security process ‘atrocious’
TV3: Staff cuts blamed for WINZ computer woes
.
= fs =
Paula Bennett – massive *facepalm*
.
.
As Bennett laments,
“People buy 10 cooked chickens and then go and sell them in the carpark.
I can’t stop what individuals do. All I can do is try and put the right security around it.”
And no one – not one person in Bennett’s office; the Ministry of Social Development; or WINZ – guessed that this might happen?!?!
Such a system was bound to be easily circumvented, and once again National has wasted millions of our tax-dollars on a pointless exercise, rather than getting to the nub of the problem: job creation.
Where are the jobs, Mr Key, Ms Bennett, et al?
Idiots.
.
*
.
Other blogs
No Right Turn: WINZ doesn’t care
.
.
= fs =
5 October: Protest against Govt harrassment of the unemployed and solo-mums
.
.
NZ, Wellington, 5 October 2012 - Today marked a National Day Of Action Against Welfare “Reforms” around the country against National’s ongoing harassment and demonisation of unemployed, solo-mothers (but never solo-dads), and others receiving welfare assistance.
Dunedin: ODT – 150 protest welfare reforms in Dunedin
Christchurch: The Press – Protesters angry at benefit moves
Auckland: NZ Herald – Welfare protestors march on MP’s office
Hamilton: Waikato Times – Solutions sought to poverty
Wellington: Dominion Post – nil coverage
Radio NZ: Welfare reform protests held throughout country
The protest in Wellington was held outside the WINZ offices in Upper Willis St, on a cold, blustery day, and was attended by around 100 people,
.
.
The protest was joined by members of the CTU, who had been at a Conference, nearby,
.
.
The crowd swelled from around thirty, up to about 100,
.
.
.
.
Radio NZ and TV1 media were present to cover the event, and several folk were interviewed by the RNZ journalist (not in picture),
.
.
Heleyni and Michelle, voluntary advocate-at-large, addressed the gathering. Michelle had come from Napier on business, and had been keen to join the picket in support of beneficiaries.
Michelle was particularly scathing about National singling out welfare recipients with demands to undertake various “social obligations”,
“They should be reaching out to every parent. If they [National] want to interfere in our lives it should be across the board and be fair about it. So I’m here to support any beneficiary that’s having a headache with this department. But it’s the politicians that need to get a clear message in their heads.”
Bennett has never answered a simple question; if social obligations (such as compulsory early childhood education; school participation; enrollment at a doctor’s clinic) is such an excellent idea for beneficiaries – why has this policy not been rolled out for all New Zealand families? Why not have compulsion for everyone?
The answer, I submit, is fairly obvious.
Michelle said that she had kept Jenny Shipley’s “Code of Social Responsibility” booklet that National had mailed out to every household in the country in 1998. Michelle drew parallels with that taxpayer funded exercise to smear welfare recipients as the cause of society’s social problems – with current policies to achieve similar ends.
.
.
“On a current case that I’m advocating for in my home town, is a young guy who was the top apprentice in the course; was working; his boss laid him off, and it’s taken 13 weeks to get his unemployment benefit on. In the meantime he’s had no money; he’s absolutely depressed , he did all that training, he did everything right, and he ended up in the dole queue where he’d never been before actually.
And he is absolutely distraught because there are not enough jobs, let alone qualified ones around.
It’s jobs that the government need to be held to account to create. That’s the problem. It’s not about fault with WINZ. I did eleven years on DPB, worked part time, took me that bloody long to get of my benefit . I trained my way out of it and I’m really lucky now that I never have to go back to it. Who’s to say that one day I might not have to though. And that’s why our government needs to hear that we need the safety net and we need to have everybody treated with respect.“
.
Michelle
.
David shared his experiences with WINZ, with this blogger. His WINZ caseworker suggested that his mental disability was not a true disability, even though he “had been in and out of the mental health system since the age of 13″. He had been hospitalised four times for overdoses, and has self-harmed.
David showed me the angry-red scars on his wrists.
He described how the mental health system had let him down, and his subsequent contact with police and the justice system. (Unfortunately, David’s story is not that uncommon. See: Radio NZ - Suicides amongst mental health callouts – police )
David said he was worried about being taken off his invalid’s benefit and not having his mental condition taken seriously,
” Basically, because I was able to bike down to the WINZ appointment, my mental health is not that severe…
She saw me on one of my good days. She said because I’d been job hunting; because I do one paper a semester at University; which actually is part of my care-package to keep me going, and keep me engaged, instead of stagnating, then she looked at those two things and how I presented and wrote it all of.”
He added,
“They are looking at taking me of my invalid’s benefit.”
.
David
.
This gentleman arrived at the protest well prepared. He carried ‘urine’ samples to present to WINZ,
.
.
.
If the contant tooting of passing traffic car horns was anything to go by, there was strong support from the public for the protestors. Perhaps the public are starting to weary of constant job redundancies, rising unemployment, lack of movement on job creation – and in the meantime, National blaming beneficiaries for poor economic performance and indicators.
A government can fool people for only so long…
.
.
Green MP, Jan Logie, addressed the protest and cited National ‘s failure to create the jobs that unemployed needed to get of benefits,
“Kia Ora katou, I’m Jan Logie, I’m the Green Party spokesperson for income support. And I’ve gotta say it’s great to see the crowd out today, people who are in paid work, and those of you who are brave enough not to be in paid work and be out here today, because I know [wind noise].
I’m here because the Green Party believes in a society that we can all participate in. And this government is creating a society that is actively excluding many of our most important people; our parents, our thinkers, our artists, the soul of our society, which is you and every other person accepting income support. I’ve been on income support, most people in this country have been on income support at some stage in their life. And this government which is in deep denial, is creating a perception that it is only slackers and losers who are in need of any government support. Well, shame on them! [car honking background noise]
The chances are, the way they’re setting up the world, they’re going to have enough money to be able support their families for generations. Because they’re creating a divided country where the rich are getting so much wealthier and everyone else is just being bloody well left out. And that’s not a country I was brought up to believe I was part off. That’s a country that I looked at overseas and thought, ‘you poor people, to have a government that treats people and excludes people like that’. That is not the country I know, and that’s not a country I want to be part of.
So I’m so glad that this is a start of a fightback, a start of a fightback for a society we can all be part of. Kia ora katou.”
.
.
This woman had her own story to share with the crowd,
“Due to circumstance in our lives – I’m partnered – we had to ask for benefits. Just for two months as it turned out, my partner go a job. But when I came to ask for benefits, we asked not for a free hand out, but for a loan . A loan of $200 to buy our brand new baby clothes. You know what I was told? – “No”.
D’you know why? Because they said my baby wasn’t born yet and just in case something happens, that … what would the loan be for? [wind noise] They did not give me the loan. So this is the kind of system that is systematically telling us that our children aren’t worth anything, our lives are not worth anything. Anything can happen to you and fundamentally “we do not care”.
So this is what I’m standing against. I’m standing for human rights and against people who say “you don’t matter”, “your unborn child does not matter”… I’m standing against that; my child matters [car & wind noise] So thanks very much for nothing, Mr John Key.”
.
.
Solo-mum and Parliamentarian, Jan Logie (green scarf). The contrast between Ms Logie and Welfare Minister Paula Bennett is stark.
Considering Bennett’s own background as an ex welfare beneficiary, when will she stand with the unemployed, powerless, and dispossessed, on protest lines like these?
Bennett enjoyed full access to state social services; DPB, free tertiary education paid with the Training Incentive Allowance (which Bennett closed down), and even bought a house using WINZ assistance.
The people here today simply want what Bennett received, to get out of the poverty trap as she did,
.
.
Others had the opportunity to express their feelings and thoughts on issues surrounding beneficiary-bashing, lack of jobs, and Paula Bennett’s behaviour,
.
.
This protestor knew precisely where to sheet home responsibility for ongoing economic problems,
“There’s a lot of talk right now about debt and financial burden… This is actually scapegoating. The bulk of debt in this country is private debt, it’s not government debt…. By attacking beneficiaries, the poorest people, it’s a way of actually making people insecure and making people blame those who aren’t causing this problem. The people who are causing this problem are capitalists and banks. .. and we should not blame beneficiaries for causing this problem.”
.
.
A petition was passed around. It made a simple request,
.
.
This woman demanded to know how she could meet Bennett’s “obligations” to find work when employers preferred to hire able-bodied people rather than someone with a disability.
She said she couldn’t even speak to some at WINZ’s reception, at eye-level, because her line of sight was blocked by the reception-counter,
“I’ve been to this WINZ office.And I went up to the Counter. And unfortunately it was the Counter I saw. Because it is so inaccessible. I couldn’t see the staff – I could see the counter. I think it is disgraceful that Work and Income is so inaccessible … and that is discrimination. Do they not deal with disabled people? Perhaps some disabled people might be on a, I don’t know, an in-valid benefit. Perhaps they might be on a sickness benefit. Perhaps they might be receiving super. I don’t know… there may be the occassional disabled person coming to work at Work & Income And yet, it is inaccessible!”
She added,
“Social responsibility does go both ways. And this government must must get it’s act together.”
.
.
Protestors enjoyed a moment of spontaneous entertainment and humour when a streaker from the nearby university hostel, ‘Ustay’, ran across the street; back again; through the protestors; and back into the hostel-building.
He had guts (and lots of skin). The wind that blew up and down the street was bitterly cold.
Unfortunately, he was too quick to catch on-camera (his streaking was suitable for the Olympic 100m dash), but the reaction from the crowd is plain to see,
.
.
This particular sign perhaps says it all; whilst National demands that unemployed, solo-mums, etc meet certain “obligations” – where is National’s obligation to create the 170,000 new jobs they promised us during last year’s general elections?
Are obligations a one-way street?
Has National abrogated it’s obligations, and thrust responsibility for their job-creation policy-failures, onto the unemployed?
.
.
And finally, this shot of WINZ’s interior says a lot. It is emptly, save for the security guard lucky enough to have a job,
.
.
The reason that unemployed are not queuing up at WINZ offices is mind-numbingly simple; there are no jobs to be had at WINZ.
Instead, the unemployed, solo-mums, and other beneficiaries queue where the jobs are,
.
.
See: Employment-Unemployment Fact Sheet #1: Queues for Vacancies
.
Addendum 1
More images of the Protest action here.
Addendum 2
Right wing blogger; ex ACT candidate; critic of solo-mothers; and self-proclaimed “expert” on New Zealand’s welfare system, Lindsay Mitchell, had this to to write about today’s day-of-action,
“ WELFARE REFORM PROTESTS ALARM BENEFICIARIES
Friday, October 5, 2012
The language protesters are using to describe ongoing welfare reforms is unnecessarily frightening people on benefits, according to welfare commentator Lindsay Mitchell.
“Welfare reforms are being described as ‘cruel’, ‘punitive’, ‘brutal’, ‘vicious’ and ‘violent’ prompting beneficiaries to fear the worst – that they will lose their income. “
See: Welfare reform protests alarm beneficiaries
Mitchell did not name the mysterious people being “unnecessarily frightened”. Of course not. Mitchell does not move in circles where she would come into contact with the unemployed, solo-mums, and other such “riff-raff”.
She was merely interviewing her own keyboard. Making it up.
Mitchell went on to write,
” The reforms are focussed on getting more people into work and on creating better outcomes for children.”
Mitchell is deluding herself. The reforms are not “ focussed on getting more people into work“. The “reforms” will not create one single job. That is not the purpose of said “reforms” – which she well knows.
The actual purpose is to push people of welfare and make unemployment stats look better for National.
National has no policy on job creation and has stated on numerous occassions that it believes that only the private sector can create jobs – not government,
“Nothing creates jobs and boosts incomes better than business growth. For New Zealand to build a more productive and competitive economy, we need more innovative companies out there selling their products on the world stage.” – John Key, 24 August 2012
Now in her dotage, Mitchell is little more than an apologist for National’s nasty beneficiary-bashing agenda. Her views on social welfare are stated with crystal clarity on her blog,
“ This blog intends to debunk the myths surrounding the welfare state. The government is not caring and compassionate. It cannot replace families and community. The welfare state is unsustainable economically, socially and morally. “
Yeah, far better to let people sleep in alleyways and die in gutters. If it’s good enough for the slum-dwellers of Mumbai and Soweto…
Interestingly, the one response she had on her blogpost was an Invalid Beneficiary who was unashamedly honest in demolishing Mitchell’s bullshit.
.
*
.
Other blogs
Leftwing
The Standard: National Day of action against Bennett’s welfare reforms
Rightwing
Lindsay Mitchell: Welfare reform protests alarm beneficiaries
Copyright (c) Notice
All images are freely available to be used, with following provisos,
- Use must be for non-commercial purposes.
- Where purpose of use is commercial, a donation to Child Poverty Action Group is requested.
- For non-commercial use, images may be used only in context, and not to denigrate individuals.
- Acknowledgement of source is requested.
.
.
= fs =
National ramps up attack on unemployed and solo-mums (part rua)
.
.
Continued from: National ramps up attack on unemployed and solo-mums
Yesterday (12 September) Welfare Minister Paula Bennett released this piece of spectacular “data” to the media,
.
.
It was one of those “Shock! Horror!” stories that the media loves – great headlines, not much critical analysis. When you read the whole “story”, the questions that are not answered scream out at you,
- What is full meaning of the statement “An actuarial valuation conducted as part of the Government’s welfare reforms shows the average total cost of those who had received a working-age benefit in the year to June 30, 2011 was $78.1b”?
- Why did the Fairfax reporter not cross-reference invalid and sickness beneficiaries to ACC policy of “exiting” clients onto welfare, where ongoing rehabilitation was not available? (ACC staff rewarded for cutting off clients – MP)
- How accurate is the report?
- How does this report help create 170,000 new jobs, promised by John Key last year? (See: Budget 2011: Govt predicts 170,000 new jobs)
- What was the point of the report, when Bennett herself has admitted on TVNZ’zs Q+A,“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do.” – Paula Bennett, 29 April 2012 (See: http://tvnz.co.nz/q-and-a-news/transcript-paula-bennett-interview-4856860)
- Why has National spent $800,000 on this “report”, when previously Bennett refused to undertake further research to gain information on child poverty, “of course there is poverty in New Zealand. This has been acknowledged by the Government but it’s not a priority to have another measure on it” ? (See: Combating poverty more important than measuring it.)
It’s interesting that Paula Bennett rejected calls for further research to quantify the levels of child poverty in this country stating that, ” it’s not a priority to have another measure on it” – but feels it necessary to spend nearly a million dollars of our taxes on a study of “an actuarial valuation” on long-term costings of welfare.
If this doesn’t raise the hackles and outrage of New Zealanders then they are truly braindead.
Worse still is the timing of the realease of the Taylor Fry report.
The report – designed to paint unemployed and solo-mums in a maximum damning light – was released on 12 September.
A day later, this story became public,
.
Listen: Listen to more from Bill English on Morning Report
.
Thus far, that story does not seem to have appeared in any other media.
It has been quietly “buried” under a mountain of negative press releases from National.
This blogger has zero doubt that National was fully aware that Statistics New Zealand was in the process of releasing the data on job losses to the public. That story, plus ongoing redundancies and rising unemployment led National’s taxpayer-funded spin-meisters to pre-empt Statistics New Zealand’s bad news shocker, and instead release their own “Shock, Horror!” story.
Thus far, it seems to have worked.
But for how long?
Meanwhile, the Reserve Bank has released an astonishing report blaming National’s policies for low economic growth,,
” Fiscal consolidation is expected to have a substantial dampening influence on demand growth over the projected horizon. This consolidation will, all else equal, lead to a lower OCR (official cash rate) than would otherwise be the case.“
See: Govt austerity slows growth, keeps rates low – RBNZ
National fails to create the 170,000 new jobs they promised us last year, and blames beneficiaries for their incompetance? Noice.
.
Addendum
.
Yesterday, this blogger emailed Paula Minister on National’s recent bout of beneficiary bashing,
Date: Wednesday, 12 September 2012 2:23 PM
From: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Subject: Recent “welfare reforms” – Some questions for you.
To: “Paula.bennett@parliament.govt.nz” <Paula.bennett@parliament.govt.nz>
Cc: Chris Laidlaw RNZ <sunday@radionz.co.nz>,
“campbelllive@tv3.co.nz” <campbelllive@tv3.co.nz>,
Dominion Post <editor@dompost.co.nz>,
Daily News <editor@dailynews.co.nz>, Daily Post <editor@dailypost.co.nz>,
Hutt News <editor@huttnews.co.nz>, Jim Mora <afternoons@radionz.co.nz>,
“Joanna Norris ( DPT)” <joanna.norris@dompost.co.nz>,
Kim Hill <saturday@radionz.co.nz>,
“kate.chapman@fairfaxmedia.co.nz” <kate.chapman@fairfaxmedia.co.nz>,
John Key <john.key@parliament.govt.nz>, Listener <editor@listener.co.nz>,
Morning Report <morningreport@radionz.co.nz>,
NZ Herald <editor@herald.co.nz>,
Nine To Noon RNZ <ninetonoon@radionz.co.nz>,
“news@dompost.co.nz” <news@dompost.co.nz>,
“news@radionz.co.nz” <news@radionz.co.nz>,
Otago Daily Times <odt.editor@alliedpress.co.nz>,
“primenews@skytv.co.nz” <primenews@skytv.co.nz>, Q+A <Q+A@tvnz.co.nz>,
Southland Times <editor@stl.co.nz>, TVNZ News <news@tvnz.co.nz>,
The Press <letters@press.co.nz>,
The Wellingtonian <editor@thewellingtonian.co.nz>,
“tariana.turia@parliament.govt.nz” <tariana.turia@parliament.govt.nz>,
Waikato Times <editor@waikatotimes.co.nz>,
Wairarapa Times-Age <editor@age.co.nz>
Kia ora Ms Bennett,Regarding your proposals to compel the unemployed, solo-mothers, etc, to undertake various obligations, or face having their welfare payments cut, I have some questions to put to you;
- Will recipients of Working for Families – which some call a “welfare benefit – also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
- Will superannuitants who are caring for children also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
- Will children of all families, regardless of financial and/or employment circumstance also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
If compulsory early childhood education and doctor’s visits for children of unemployed, solo-mums, and other welfare recipients is such a good idea that National is willing to enact legislation, and financially penalise parents for failing to carry out this policy – why are other parents also not being compelled to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and medical clinics?Is there a basis upon which only the unemployed who have been made redundant from companies, government departments, and SOEs, are being targetted? What is that basis?If unemployed or low-income families are financially unable to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education, doctors, etc, what steps will National take to offer additional financial assistance?Do you still stand by your comment that you made on TVNZ’s Q+A on 29 April 2012, that, “there’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do”.And lastly; is this propopsal – plus your other so-called “welfare reforms” – simply not an attack on the unemployed and solo-mothers to deflect attention away from your government’s inability to generate the 170,000 new jobs that Prime Minister John Key promised us at the last election?I await any possible answer you might be able to provide to these questions.Regards,-Frank MacskasyBloggerPS: This correspondence is not to be regarded as permission, whether actual or implied, to release any personal details about me that the State might hold about me.
Her office has responded today (13 September),
Date: Thursday, 13 September 2012 9:06 AM
From: Natalie Hansen <Natalie.Hansen@parliament.govt.nz>
To: “‘fmacskasy@yahoo.com’” <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Subject: FW: Recent “welfare reforms” – Some questions for you.Hello Frank
The Hon Paula Bennett, Minister for Social Development has asked me to thank you for your email.
Consideration is currently being given to the matters you raise and you may expect a reply at the Minister’s earliest opportunity.
Kind regards
Natalie Hansen
Private Secretary, Office of Hon Paula Bennett Minister for Social Development | Minister of Youth Affairs Executive Wing 5.5, Parliament Buildings| Private Bag 18041 | Wellington 6160
Telephone: +64 4 817 6815 | Fax: +64 4 817 6515 | Email: Natalie.hansen@parliament.govt.nz
” Consideration is currently being given to the matters“ I raised?
It will be interesting to see what – if any – rational response Bennett comes up with. This should be good.
* Up-date*
Date: Monday, 24 September 2012 3.57PM
From: “J Key (MIN)” <J.Key@ministers.govt.nz>
To: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Recent “welfare reforms” – Some questions for you.Dear Mr Macskasy,
On behalf of the Prime Minister, Rt Hon John Key, I acknowledge the copy of your email sent for Mr Key’s information.
Regards,
E Tanga
Ministerial Assistant/Records Officer
Office of the Prime Minister
No further response received from Paula Bennett’s office as at 24 September.
.
*
.
Sources
Scoop.co.nz: Combating poverty more important than measuring it
NZ Herald: Fate of youth gloomiest stat of all
NZ Herald: Benefit tally ‘not an excuse for hard line’
NZ Herald: Andrew Cardow: Bennett out-nannies Labour’s nanny state
NZ Herald: Govt austerity slows growth, keeps rates low – RBNZ
.
.
= fs =
Paula Bennett: one strike and she’s out.
.
.
National’s diversionary strategem of inferring that our high rate of unemployment is a deliberate life-style choice, and the fault of the unemployed, continues unabated. In large part, with few exceptions, this strategem of Divert & Deflect, is aided and abetted by a compliant media.
People like Fairfax’s Tracey Watkins, and NZ Herald’s John Armstrong and Fran O’Sullivan, have been unquestioning in their slavish “reporting” of National’s assault against the unemployed.
The latest from National Politburo member, Comrade Bennett, is a new diktat imposed upon the unemployed that ” cancels payments for those who refuse [an] offer of ‘suitable’ job “,
.
.
To repeat and quote Bennett, when she stated on TVNZ’s Q+A on 29 April,
“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. “
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview
.
#1 – Where are the jobs?
.
Where are the jobs – especially the 170,000 that Dear Leader Key promised us last november?
This is not just a rhetorical question – National was re-elected upon their (undeserved) reputation as “prudent stewards of the economy”. And a pledge to create 170,000 new jobs.
That they have failed to produce these new jobs, is an understatement. Unemployment continues to rise.
See: Unemployment rate lifts to 6.7pc (May 2012)
See: Unemployment rises: 6.8pc (August 2012
And redundancies continue on an almost daily/weekly basis,
- ANZ; 1,000 redundancies
- Wire by Design, 55 redundancies
- Hakes Marine; 15 redundancies
- Telecom; 400 redundancies
- Brightwater Engineering; 40 redundancies
- Pernod Ricard New Zealand; 13 redundancies
- Depart of Corrections; 130 redundancies
- Summit Wool Spinners; 80 redundancies
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; 80 redundancies
- Cavalier/Norman Ellison Carpets; 70 redundancies
- IRD; 51 redundancies
- Flotech; 70 redundancies
- NZ Police; 125 redundancies
- CRI Plant and Food; 25 redundancies
- Te Papa; 16 redundancies (?)
- PrimePort Timaru; 30 redundancies
- Kiwirail; 158 redundancies
- Fisher & Paykel; 29 redundancies
- Goulds Fine Foods; 60 redundancies
- Canterbury University; 150 redundancies (over three years)
- Solid Energy; 363 redundancies
- Tiwai Pt aluminium smelter; 100 redundancies
- Axiam Metals; 44 redundancies
- Norske Skog; 120 redundancies
- Goodman Fielder; redundancy numbers t.b.a.
- Dunedin City Council/Delta: 30 redundancies
- Blue Sky Meats; 100 redundancies
- Kaipara Ltd/Stockton Alliance; 63 redundancies
- Wainuiomata New World; 44 redundancies
- Nuplex; 64 redundancies
- Newmont Waihi Gold; 20 redundancies
So, where are the jobs, Comrade Bennett?
Never mind turning down one job – with 162,000 unemployed all competing for a small, limited number of jobs – most jobless people will not even have the luxury of one job offer.
This blogger has a sneaking suspicion that Comrade Bennett is referring to pseudo-”jobs”,
- telemarketing (best done at dinner time)
- door-to-door salesperson (households love to greet strangers on their doorstep, flogging vacuum cleaners)
- prostitute (highly skilled/motivated to satisfy clients’ needs; someone with passionate people-skills)
- chimney cleaner (for small-builds, to facilitate easier access up chimneys)
- rent-a-womb (for rich, childless couples – males beneficiaries may be excused from this, at WINZ discretion)
- fruit picker (traditionally seasonal work – but still doable in winter time, lack of fruit is NO excuse!)
All growth industries, no doubt.
.
#2 – An alternative to the ‘One Strike’ policy?
.
The WINZ Charter, as follows,
What you can expect from us
We will:
- give you prompt and efficient service
- let you know about our services and how we can help
- give you information that is correct and easy to understand
- give you the assistance you are entitled to
- explain your rights and obligations
- explain why we ask you to do certain things
- listen carefully so we understand what you are telling us
- be understanding and caring about your needs
- be respectful, friendly and professional in the way we serve you
- tell you who may be able to help if we can’t.
You have the right to:
- be treated with courtesy and respect
- cultural sensitivity
- use any of our services
- be given information about the services we offer
- be given correct information and entitlements
- be listened to
- be given fair, non-judgemental service
- have your information kept private and confidential
- have any decisions we make explained to you
- have a support person there whenever you deal with us
- make a complaint or ask for a review if you disagree with us.
So that we can help, you need to:
- give us the information we need to assess your entitlements
- make sure any information you give us is correct
- tell us about any changes in your situation
- keep any agreements you have made with us
- attend and be prepared for our meetings
- tell us if you’re unable to keep an appointment
- treat our staff with courtesy and respect.
See: WINZ – Our Service Charter
I propose a minor amendment to the above Charter with one addition,
Our prime obligation to you:
- we are committed to honouring the Prime Minister’s pledge to create new 170,ooo jobs
- we will have one chance to provide suitable work from one of those 170,000 new jobs; at decent pay-rates; within reasonable travel time/distance
- failure to comply will mean that the Minister of Social Welfare will have her Ministerial salary docked at the rate of unemployment benefit, for each week that you remain unemployed
- if, after one year of failing to honour our committment to you, and you are still unemployed, the Prime Minister will personally apologise to you, and will either provide a meaningful job for you, or support you into retraining at a nearby polytech or University, to be paid out of his own $50 million bank account
I think that amendment is fair, and puts the onus on to John Key and Paula Bennett to fulfill their obligations to us, the public, and to those people who voted National on the basis of creating 170,000 new jobs.
Let’s see National meet their obligations: 170,000 new jobs, as promised.
.
.
*
.
Other Blogs
Why politicians like the beneficiary debate
.
.
= fs =
Class act, National – taking money of widows?!
.
.
Bennett sez that welfare has,
“…become a bit of a trap for quite a few people…
… That sounds to me like it’s trapping them there and not giving them the kind of opportunities that they need, so changing those will make a big difference for them.”
I would have thought that it’s a lack of jobs “trapping” people in welfare?!
Not enough jobs = people on welfare.
Seems simple enough to me. Even Bennett admitted this, on TVNZ’s Q+A,
“ No. There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. ” – Paula Bennett, 29 April 2012
See: Q+A: Paula Bennett interview
And just five months earlier, Key had stated,
“We agree with you, it’s the government’s responsibility to do everything within it’s powers to try to get people jobs.” -John Key, 17 November 2011
See: Key and Goff Q and A Creating jobs
So where are the jobs?
Key and Bennett make big noises about jobseekers’ and other beneficiaries having obligations to find work. Where is the obligation of National to create an economy that would produce these new jobs?
Thus far, not only has National failed to create the 170,000 new jobs they promised last November – but unemployment is on the rise.
And National’s respomnse is to threaten the unemployed with benefit cuts and force compulsion onto solo-mothers to undertake so-called “social obligations”?
It’s gotten to the point where this shabby government and it’s incompetant ministers have taken to robbing widows, for chrissakes,
“Apart from penalties, the only groups that will face an actual benefit cut are widows and women alone with no dependent children. The widows’ benefit, now $213.49 a week, will disappear next July and widows without dependent children will go on to Jobseeker Support at $204.96, a cut of $8.53 a week.”
$8.53 less: that’s a loaf of bread; a bottle of milk; and a tub of butter, less to put on the table. From women who’ve gone through the tragedy of losing their partners and husbands.
That’s how low National and this country has gone; taking food of the tables of widows.
Christ, New Zealand, how f*****g proud are you to elect people like these cockroaches to Parliament?
Meanwhile, that taxpayer-bloated, minister - charged with “protecting” the most vulnerable people in our society and who have suffered the most from the fallout of the Global Financial Crisis - enjoys a highly paid “job” with perks that the rest of us could only dream about.
A bit of background into Paula Bennett’s life before she came to Parliament…
- Paula Bennet was a solo-mother, at age 17
- Just two years later, she got a Housing Corporation loan to buy a $56,000 house in Taupo.
- All of this while on the domestic purposes benefit.
- Paula Bennet was a recipient of the Training Incentive Allowance (a WINZ special allowance)
- Paula Bennet obtained her degree at Massey University, through the TIA, at taxpayers’ expense (which she has since canned for other solo-parents
- She tried a part-time job whilst at at Uni, but gave it up, citing it was “too much for her” to study and be a solo-mum at the same time.
So that’s the sort of parasitic creature we now have, sitting in a well-padded ministerial chair, on her equally well-padded backside.
All at taxpayers’ expense.
The same could be said of John Key; speculator; millionaire; and now ‘esteemed’ Prime Minister.
The same John Key who,
- as a child, benefitted from living in a cheap, state owned house, at taxpayers’ expense,
- had a widowed mum who received a wideowers benefit (now cut) and Family Benefit ( now gone)
- aas a young man, benefitted from a free University education, at taxpayers’ expense (pre-student fees and loans)
These two well-paid politicians have enjoyed every assistance and benefit imaginable from our earlier social support mechanisms.
Now they have the utter hypocrisy to attack others receiving the same social support systems and welfare that they benefitted from?
And worse still – these two parasites have not even bothered to fulfill their end of the “contract” that they entered with the country and unemployed!
Paula Bennett is muck-raking when she says,
“It’s growing all the time … so if we can get them in, if we can give them the kind of help that they need, then I think that will make a big difference.”
See: Reforms to help beneficiaries out of ‘trap’
Rubbish.
The only “help” that welfare beneficiaries need are jobs. Bennett makes no reference to a lack of jobs and growing unemployment, because she is studiously avoiding her responsibilities and attempting to shift blame onto the victims of National’s ineptitude.
Cast our memories back to November, last year;
.
.
.
National committed itself, and pledged to voters, a programme of job creation. They were elected on the basis of a “bright new future” of 170,000 new jobs.
Instead we’ve had growing redundancies and rising unemployment.
Meanwhile, the unemployed are queuing up for any vancancies that do appear on the jobs market,
.
Jobseekers flood a new Hamilton call centre
.
“A “high volume” of people applied for jobs advertised with 1st Call, with at least 100 people applying for each administrative role.” – Source
.
10 applicants for every one shelf-stocking job
.
“The jobs are being welcomed by Bay job-hunters – about 1000 people applied for just 90 jobs at a new McDonald’s in Mount Maunganui, which is due to open next month.” – Source
.
2700 applicants for 150 jobs
.
“The 20-year-old is among at least 51 people who have been given jobs at Rotorua’s new Wendy’s Old-Fashioned Hamburgers, which opens next month. After reading about the restaurant’s open recruitment day in The Daily Post, Mr Watson joined 349 people who queued to be interviewed by Wendy’s staff on Thursday last week.” – Source
.
Applicants queue for 20 jobs at new KFC store
.
1200 applicants for 200 supermarket jobs
.
“He went for a job at a petrol station and found out he was one of about 60 applying for one position. He was also one of 40 who applied for three jobs at a supermarket.” – Source
“Advertisements were placed one week ago for the 124 jobs in sales, administration, customer-service and trade specialist areas, and over 1500 applications have been received so far. Complex Manager Derek Powell says that people from all backgrounds have applied for the roles, and that the positions suit those with a background or interest in customer service, retail or the building trades.” – Source
.
It is not the unemployed, solo-mums (but never solo-dads), widows, etc, who are not meeting their obligations in seeking employment. The evidence shows that they are queuing up at every opportunity.
It is National who has failed to meet their obligations in fulfilling their committment to create jobs.
Whilst National ministers are collecting generous ministerial salaries, they are not fulfilling any of their responsibilities to ensure that jobs are being created.
It is not the unemployed who are “work shy” – it is John Key, Paula Bennett, Steven Joyce, et al – who are failing to meet promises of job-creation, and yet they have the brazeness to blame the unemployed.
And worse still is that a sizeable portion of the population are foolish enough to buy this repulsive attempt to blame the victims of a stagnating economy. New Zealanders might try taking an interest in what is happening in their own society, rather than obsessed aver mother-daughter porn on television.
This blogger is disgusted with the like of Key and Bennett who blame the unemployed for their own failings.
But more than that, I hold every New Zealander, who was idiot enough to vote for National last year, responsible. Theirs is the ultimate responsibility for giving us a government that is hopeless at governing.
Are you people happy now?
National ramps up attack on unemployed and solo-mums
.
.
“There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do.” – Paula Bennett, 29 April 2012
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview
.
As National’s policies fail to generate jobs or economic growth, they are ramping up their attacks on the unemployed and solo-mums (but never solo-dads), demanding that,
“… education be compulsory from the age of 3 for children of welfare beneficiaries.
The decision, announced by Social Development Minister Paula Bennett yesterday, will apply from July to 31,500 children, aged 3 and 4, whose parents are either on sole parent or couple benefits.
Parents will have their benefits halved if they fail to take “all reasonable steps” to keep their children in licensed or certificated early education for at least 15 hours a week from the time they turn 3 until they go to school. “
See: Fear over beneficiary child changes
This is part of National’s ongoing diversion from their own failed policies to generate jobs and grow the economy.
This far, National has attempted to smear the unemployed – victims of the Global Finacial Crisis – as,
- lazy
- incompetant at budgetting (because benefits are so low)
- drug addicts
- irresponsible “breeders”
- criminals
- kidnappers
The next on their list is painting welfare recipients as “irresponsible parents”.
Make no mistake, this is a carefully planned, strategised attack on the victims of the Global Financial Crisis. It is an attempt to divert National’s inability to create jobs, and escape taking responsibility for meeting their own promises to create jobs,
“New Zealand can’t keep borrowing money at $380 million a week. We can’t have New Zealanders exposed to high interested rates, New Zealanders need a plan for jobs.
“This is a budget that actually delivers that.”
“Treasury say in the Budget, as a result of this platform on what we’ve delivered, 170,000 jobs created and 4% wage growth over the next three to four years.” – John Key
See: Budget 2011: Govt predicts 170,000 new jobs
With this failure in mind National Party strategists – fronted by ex-beneficiary Paula Bennett, and ex-state house boy, John Key – have created a climate of vilification against the unemployed, solo-mums (but never solo-dads), widowers, invalids, etc.
This is like the bad old days where rape victims were blamed for being sexually attacked because of the clothing they wore.
Some facts;
.
.
.
The data above clearly shows one thing; welfare recipients were dropping until 2008. When the Global Financial Crisis hit the world, unemployment rose as companies collapsed or cut staffing numbers.
So why is Paula Bennett, John Key, et al, targetting the unemployed simply because they have lost their jobs? Why is National targetting the poor and unemployed through media releases that generate vile headlines like this,
.
Beneficiaries cost $130,000 over lifetime
.
Cost of beneficiaries $78b – report
.
Will Bennett and Key be extending their welfare “reforms” to the redundant workers of these companies,
- ANZ; 1,000 redundancies
- Hakes Marine; 15 redundancies
- Telecom; 400 redundancies
- Brightwater Engineering; 40 redundancies
- Pernod Ricard New Zealand; 13 redundancies
- Depart of Corrections; 130 redundancies
- Summit Wool Spinners; 80 redundancies
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; 80 redundancies
- Cavalier/Norman Ellison Carpets; 70 redundancies
- IRD; 51 redundancies
- Flotech; 70 redundancies
- NZ Police; 125 redundancies
- CRI Plant and Food; 25 redundancies
- Te Papa; 16 redundancies (?)
- PrimePort Timaru; 30 redundancies
- Kiwirail; 220 redundancies
- Fisher & Paykel; 29 redundancies
- Goulds Fine Foods; 60 redundancies
- Canterbury University; 150 redundancies (over three years)
- Solid Energy; 363 redundancies
- Tiwai Pt aluminium smelter; 100 redundancies
- Norske Skog; redundancy numbers t.b.a.
- Goodman Fielder; redundancy numbers t.b.a.
- Dunedin City Council/Delta: 30 redundancies
- Blue Sky Meats; 100 redundancies
- Kaipara Ltd/Stockton Alliance; 63 redundancies
Some other facts,
- There are an estrimated 600,000 superannuitants in New Zealand (Source)
- There are an estimated 400,000 families receiving ‘Working for Families’ tax-credits (Source)
Other questions this blogger has for Paula Bennett,
- Will recipients of Working for Families – which some call a “welfare benefit” – also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors?? If not, why not?
- Will superannuitants who are caring for children also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors?? If not, why not?
- Will children of all families, regardless of financial and/or employment circumstance also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors?? If not, why not?
If compulsory early childhood education and doctor’s visits for children of unemployed, solo-mums, and other welfare recipients is such a good idea that National is willing to enact legislation, and financially penalise parents for failing to carry out this policy – why are other parents also not being compelled to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and medical clinics?
Is there a basis upon which only the unemployed who have been made redundant from companies, government departments, and SOEs, are being targetted? What is that basis?
If unemployed or low-income families are financially unable to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education, what steps will National take to offer additional financial assistance?
Welfare Minister Paula Bennett is a coward.
Not only is she maintaining an ongoing hate-campaign against the unemployed – but she refused to front on Radio New Zealand’s “Morning Report” on 12 September. She was bold enough to issue more of her hate-campaign – but too gutless to front and defend her programme,
“The Social Development Minister, Paula Bennett, did not want to be interviewed by Morning Report anytime today or last night, saying she was too busy.”
Listen: Govt welfare plan won’t help children says Labour
Instead, one of her right-wing lackeys – self-appointed “expert” on welfare, Lindsay Mitchell – stood in for Bennett and made all manner of pious statements about the children of the poor.
Listen: Nanny-state accusations levelled at the government
Mitchell is a member of the neo-conservative think tank, the “Institute for Liberal Values”; a right wing blogger; and has probably never known a hungry or desperate day in her life. People like her are usually the first to lecture the poor how to live.
(Note: The so-called “Institute for Liberal Values does not seem to exist except as an empty blogsite that contains no information. Quite simply, this organisation that Mitchell claims to represent, does not exist. See: http://liberalvalues.org.nz/ )
If the Minister (Bennett – not Mitchell) hasn’t the courage to explain and defend her policies, then that suggests her policies are indefensible. If a journalist asked any of the questions posited here, Bennett would be unable to answer, clear and simple.
There is no defensible argument that Bennett or Key could possibly provide. Everything that National has done thus far has been an attack on the unemployed – the victims of a global financial crisis none of us had a hand in making.
National doesn’t create jobs. National blames those who have lost their jobs.
National doesn’t address poverty. National blames people for being in poverty.
If, by now, you feel that National is waging war on the poor; the unemployed; solo-mums (but never solo-dads); then you’re not mistaken.
We are at war with our own government.
.
*
.
Email sent to Paul Bennett
Date: Wednesday, 12 September 2012 2:23 PM
From: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Frank Macskasy <fmacskasy@yahoo.com>
Subject: Recent “welfare reforms” – Some questions for you.
To: “Paula.bennett@parliament.govt.nz” <Paula.bennett@parliament.govt.nz>
Cc: Chris Laidlaw RNZ <sunday@radionz.co.nz>,
“campbelllive@tv3.co.nz” <campbelllive@tv3.co.nz>,
Dominion Post <editor@dompost.co.nz>,
Daily News <editor@dailynews.co.nz>, Daily Post <editor@dailypost.co.nz>,
Hutt News <editor@huttnews.co.nz>, Jim Mora <afternoons@radionz.co.nz>,
“Joanna Norris ( DPT)” <joanna.norris@dompost.co.nz>,
Kim Hill <saturday@radionz.co.nz>,
“kate.chapman@fairfaxmedia.co.nz” <kate.chapman@fairfaxmedia.co.nz>,
John Key <john.key@parliament.govt.nz>, Listener <editor@listener.co.nz>,
Morning Report <morningreport@radionz.co.nz>,
NZ Herald <editor@herald.co.nz>,
Nine To Noon RNZ <ninetonoon@radionz.co.nz>,
“news@dompost.co.nz” <news@dompost.co.nz>,
“news@radionz.co.nz” <news@radionz.co.nz>,
Otago Daily Times <odt.editor@alliedpress.co.nz>,
“primenews@skytv.co.nz” <primenews@skytv.co.nz>, Q+A <Q+A@tvnz.co.nz>,
Southland Times <editor@stl.co.nz>, TVNZ News <news@tvnz.co.nz>,
The Press <letters@press.co.nz>,
The Wellingtonian <editor@thewellingtonian.co.nz>,
“tariana.turia@parliament.govt.nz” <tariana.turia@parliament.govt.nz>,
Waikato Times <editor@waikatotimes.co.nz>,
Wairarapa Times-Age <editor@age.co.nz>
Kia ora Ms Bennett,Regarding your proposals to compel the unemployed, solo-mothers, etc, to undertake various obligations, or face having their welfare payments cut, I have some questions to put to you;
- Will recipients of Working for Families – which some call a “welfare benefit – also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
- Will superannuitants who are caring for children also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
- Will children of all families, regardless of financial and/or employment circumstance also be expected to compulsorily enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and doctors? If not, why not?
If compulsory early childhood education and doctor’s visits for children of unemployed, solo-mums, and other welfare recipients is such a good idea that National is willing to enact legislation, and financially penalise parents for failing to carry out this policy – why are other parents also not being compelled to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education and medical clinics?Is there a basis upon which only the unemployed who have been made redundant from companies, government departments, and SOEs, are being targetted? What is that basis?If unemployed or low-income families are financially unable to enroll their children in Early Childhood Education, doctors, etc, what steps will National take to offer additional financial assistance?Do you still stand by your comment that you made on TVNZ’s Q+A on 29 April 2012, that, “there’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do”.And lastly; is this propopsal – plus your other so-called “welfare reforms” – simply not an attack on the unemployed and solo-mothers to deflect attention away from your government’s inability to generate the 170,000 new jobs that Prime Minister John Key promised us at the last election?I await any possible answer you might be able to provide to these questions.Regards,-Frank MacskasyBloggerPS: This correspondence is not to be regarded as permission, whether actual or implied, to release any personal details about me that the State might hold about me.
.
*
.
Other blogs
Beneficiaries cost us $78 Billion and other ghost stories
Additional
Radio NZ Morning Report (audio): Latest welfare reforms dismissed by critics
Radio NZ Morning Report (audio): Bennett warned welfare crackdown could hurt not help kids
Poverty our biggest growth industry – academic
NZ inequality at highest level
Fed-up Kiwis head to Oz en masse
.
.
= fs =
“Dopey is as dopey does”, according to Dear Leader
.
.
For a man who was raised in a state house; in a single-parent family; and who had all the benefits of a free tertiary education, John Key’s attitude towards those at the bottom of the socio-economic scale leaves a lot to be desired.
Let’s re-cap,
- John Key’s father died, leaving his mother a solo-mum, to raise children by herself,
- She would have received the DPB or widow’s benefit (and quite rightly so)
- She would most likely have been eligible for the Family Benefit, paid to families with children until Ruth Richardson scrapped it in her 1991 “Mother of all Budgets”
- John Key’s family enjoyed a state house, with low-rent and security of tenure
- And lastly, John Key was given a free, tax-payer funded University education (no student fees or debt)
When the Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group (EAG) report was released, it’s recommendations included,
“ First, the group will call for a Warrant of Fitness for landlords. Given John Key has this weekend stressing the success of the Green-inspired home insulation scheme, but the disappointing uptake from landlords, it’s a timely bit of advice.
A WOF on rental homes would ensure poor kids don’t grow up in leaky, cold and unhealthy homes. Really, a safe, warm house should be a basic requirement if you’re going to charge rent. Who can argue with that?
Second, it’ll call for meals to be provided more widely in schools. Some, such as Deborah Morris-Travers from Every Child Counts says that’s a no-brainer. Children need food if they’re to learn and deal with the social demands of school. Some are less keen, however, arguing it takes the onus off parents and puts more pressure on teachers to feed as well as teach our children.
But another study shows this could just be the thin end of the school wedge. Every Child Counts’ Netherlands study this week talked about schools becoming a community hub, with not only meals but before and after school care, nurses, social workers and clubs.
It’s a bold prescription, but one that works overseas by helping working parents and keeping families connected to their schools.
Third, the EAG is expected to call for some form of long-term and universal state assistance for kids – maybe a Universal Child Benefit, or some money every week for every child born. Until 1991 we had such a thing – a Family Benefit. That went in the Bolger/Richardson years. “
See: Tim Watkin: It’s time to talk about child poverty again
These three options could put a serious dent into child poverty. A Universal Child Benefit – along the lines of the old Family Benefit – could add an extra $150 and extra food on the tables of low-income families.
John Key’s response? In Parliament, responding to a point made by Greens co-leader, Metiria Turei [error correction], he bellowed with great gusto,
“We are in an unequal society in New Zealand in her view because the rich are getting richer. And now she is on her feet telling me ‘give the rich families even more for their kids’. What a dopey idea that is.”
See: Key dismisses payment for all parents as ‘dopey’
What a mean-spirited, shallow-thinking man we have as a leader of our nation.
without a doubt, John Key has a constituency of many other selfish, mean-spirited, short-sighted people in this country. There are a fair number of ill-educated and self-centered who think that the only solution to poverty is to do nothing, and let the poor struggle on. These people have no compassion.
That is the kind of shallow-thinking that will eventually doom a society to growing income-disparity; increasing gap between the Haves and Have Nots; and eventual social dislocation and violence.
Such people who think that the poor are poor because they deserve it are a far greater menace to the fabric of our social cohesion, than all the patched gang-members in our community.
For John Key to dismiss a proposed Universal Child Benefit as “dopey” shows us only one thing; he has forgotten his roots. He has forgotten where he came from. He has forgotten not just the sacrifices of his family – but the strong community support that he benefitted from, and gave him the opportunity to make himself rich.
John Key is where he is because other taxpayers contributed to his housing, education, healthcare, and well-being.
He did not do it by himself.
This blogger does not begrudge Dear Leader’s bulging bank account of $50 million.
What I find reprehensible is that he would deny other families the chance to access similar support to give their children a decent start in life.
Paula Bennett did the same with the Training Incentive Allowance. Bennett used the TIA to gain a free tertiary education for herself – and then cut the Allowance in 2009. Other solo-mothers can no longer use the same TIA to put themselves through University, and get of the DPB.
See: Bennett rejects ‘hypocrite’ claims
This blogger wonders at the like of John Key and Paula Bennett, and how they can deny others the same state-funded assistance that they themselves benefitted from.
What kind of human beings are these people?
How can they forget the assistance that they received when in need?
And what possible satisfaction do they get when they deny state assistance to their fellow New Zealanders? Especially the same assistance that Key and Bennett personally benefitted from?
The greatest poverty that a society can endure is not monetary. It is a paucity of leadership. It is a lack of hope. And it is a disconnect in social compassion.
When we allow cruelty over compassion, then we are in deep trouble.
It is said that when facing a problem, the three challenges are,
- Identify the problem,
- Come up with solutions,
- Have the Will to implement those solution.
We know the problem.
We have the solutions.
Our leaders are still looking for #3.
.
*
.
Previous related blogposts
Once upon a time there was a solo-mum
Hypocrisy – thy name be National
Hon. Paula Bennett, Minister of Hypocrisy
.
.
= fs =
Drug Testing the Unemployed – National’s Epic Fail at Job Creation
.
.
This blogger has three questions for John Key and the National Party,
1. Is is true that Paula Bennett made a correct statement when she admitted on TVNZ’s Q+A, on 29 April 2012,
” No. There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do. ” – Source
2. If National can claim the Global Financial Crisis as the reason for New Zealand’s low economic growth – why does the same rationale not apply to the unemployed, and if it does, why spend an estimated $14 million on drug testing when joblessness is a result of economic circumstances, and not drug-induced laziness?
3. How is National’s pledge to create 170,000 new jobs – made in November last year – working out? Especially when unemployment recently increased from 6.7% to 6.8%?
A day after National announced it’s intentions to drug-test the unemployed, Solid Energy broke the news that it was planning to make up to 263 of it’s miners, contractors, and other staff, redundandant. Workers from Huntly East Mine and Spring Creek on the West Coast will lose their jobs.
See: Beneficiary drug testing plans unveiled
See: Spring Creek mine work suspended
This follows on from other redundancies announced just this year alone,
- ANZ; 1,000 redundancies
- Hakes Marine; 15 redundancies
- Telecom; 400 redundancies
- Brightwater Engineering; 40 redundancies
- Pernod Ricard New Zealand; 13 redundancies
- Depart of Corrections; 130 redundancies
- Summit Wool Spinners; 80 redundancies
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; 80 redundancies
- Norman Ellison Carpets; 70 redundancies
- IRD; 51 redundancies
- Flotech; 70 redundancies
- NZ Police; 125 redundancies
- CRI Plant and Food; 25 redundancies
- Te Papa; 16 redundancies (?)
- PrimePort Timaru; 50 redundancies (?)
- Kiwirail; 220 redundancies
- Fisher & Paykel; 29 redundancies
- Goulds Fine Foods; 60 redundancies
- Canterbury University; 150 redundancies (over three years)
- Solid Energy; 363 redundancies
- Tiwai Pt aluminium smelter; 100 redundancies
How many of the above redundant workers will Bennett insist be drug-tested?
.
.
But more to the point – is this really a problem? Or, as is likely, is this a shameful attempt by National to deflect attention away from rising unemployment; their failure to manage an economy to generate new jobs; and to deflect blame onto the unemployed?
Because any sane, dispassionate analysis of this problem does not indicate that drug taking is the cause of 162,000 people currently out of work.
See: Unemployment rises: 6.8pc
Especially when in 2007, unemployment stood at 3.4% – or 77,000 people!
See: Household Labour Force Survey December 2007 quarter
What has changed?
As National ministers like John Key, Bill English, Gerry Brownlee, et al like to consistently remind us – when their economic track record is held up for scrutiny – it’s called the “Global Financial Crisis”,
“We did inherit a pretty bad situation with the global financial crisis. ” – John Key
See: View from the Top
“In the midst of a very deep global downturn we expect volatility and low growth, as we are seeing around the world economies.” – Steven Joyce
See: Parliamentary Questions and Answers – August 29
“However, the government deferred the increase due to the challenging economic circumstances New Zealand was experiencing as it continued to recover from the global financial crisis and the Canterbury earthquakes.” – Gerry Brownlee
See: Petrol excise, road user charges increases
“The global economic situation is like a dark cloud on the horizon and it’s not going to go away possibly for a generation – certainly for 15 or 20 years.” – Bill English
See: English warns of financial crisis lasting a generation
It’s abundantly clear that National has no reservation in blaming the Global Financial Crisis for the sad state of our economy. They refer to overseas influences time and time again.
So why does the same economic situation not apply to other economic indicators – like unemployment?
Why try to smear unemployed – who up until recently were in full-time, paid, employment – and brand them as drug-taking, lazy, “bludgers”?
Why did Bennett make this statement,
“Recreational drug use is simply not an acceptable excuse for avoiding available work. Thousands of working New Zealanders are in jobs requiring they be clean of drugs; it’s reasonable to expect someone looking for work to do the same.”
See: Beneficiary drug testing plans unveiled
Bennett is implying that someone looking for work must be on drugs? Why?
The answer, I submit to the reader, is that National is playing to it’s audience of middle class, low-information voters; right wing extremists; and the plain crazy nutjobs. These are the target demographics for the Nats.
Because any sane person will look at the above list of redundancies from the likes of Brightwater Engineering, Telecom, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, etc, – and wonder – WTF?! Why is National spending $14 million of my tax dollars on drug-testing redundant engineers, telecommunication workers, diplomats, etc?!
Because it plays to an audience of predominantly middle class (and quite a segment of the working class), who find it all to easy to believe the cliched stereotypes that depict All Welfare Beneficiaries Are There By Choice. Internet fora are full of uninformed, prejudiced, and outright crazy ‘trolls’ who revel in their distorted view of those on welfare, or low-paying jobs.
Never mind that four years ago we had half the unemployment we do now.
Do those ignorant fools believe that unemployed are out of work by choice, having given up their average wage/salary of $800 to $900 per week, so they could live in luxury on $204.96 (net, weekly unemployed benefit)?
See: WINZ Unemployment Benefit (current)
Drug testing the unemployed has nothing to do with any perceived problem with drug abuse.
This is a carefully constructed, skillfully diseminated, lie.
National is spending $14 million on a problem that does not exist.
National is desperate to turn public attention away from,
- Increasing unemployment
- Increasing poverty levels
- More and more New Zealanders heading overseas
- A stagnating economy
- National’s lack of traction in creating the 170,000 new jobs they pledged last year
Middle Class voters are being targetted by National’s tax-payer funded spin doctors and political strategists. Their agenda is clear and simple;
- Brand the unemployed as “lazy” and “on drugs”.
- So it can’t be a failure on the part of National to create the 170,000 new jobs they promised us.
See: Budget 2011: Govt predicts 170,000 new jobs
Above all else, National’s nasty little strategy is an admission of failure on their part. They have failed utterly to,
- grow the economy
- create jobs
- raise wages
- stem the flow of skilled New Zealanders to Australia
Because clearly, if a government was building an economy that was generating more and more jobs, then what would be the need to create a bogeyman of lazy, drugged unemployed?
Especially when Labour presided over a growing economy with low unemployment,
.
.
There was no talk of “lazy/drugged unemployed” in 2007.
No Global Financial Crisis either.
Truly, National has hit rock bottom with this vile strategy. How long, one wonders, before the middle classes out in Voterland realise that they are being conned by some very cunning politicians and their back-room strategists?
A question for the Middle Classes;
We live in uncertain times. Any one of us are only one step away from being unemployed ourselves. How would you feel being branded a possible drug-user by the likes of Paula Bennett and John Key?
Not too happy I’d suspect?
And one final question for the Prime Minister,
Where are the jobs?
.
*
.
Previous related blogpost
Jobs, jobs, everywhere – but not a one for me? (Part Toru)
What’s up with the Nats? (Part rua)
Related Information
Employment-Unemployment Fact Sheet #1: Queues for Vacancies
Other blogs
Tumeke: What the real aim of drug testing beneficiaries is
.
.
= fs =
Guest Author: Reactionary distractions hide NZ’s 9.1% unemployment
- Neil Watts, Blogger, Fearfactsexposed
28 August 2012
.
Shocking new unemployment figures hidden by hard-Right red herrings.
Damning new unemployment statistics released by Roy Morgan Research yesterday reveal that the true rate of unemployment in New Zealand is much greater than the official 6.9% claimed by the Government.
According to Roy Morgan’s figures, unemployment is sitting at 9.1%, with a further 9.6% under-employed and looking for work. That’s almost 20% of New Zealanders not achieving their productive potential and not contributing to the economy. These figures are an economic disaster, and point to the single worst management of the economy in New Zealand’s history. Little wonder the Government were busy rolling out Paula Bennett’s latest poor-hate policy this week, to give their friends in the mainstream media something else to talk about.
And, of course, John Key’s favourite Rightwing propagandists at Fairfax Media were more than happy to ignore the shocking new figures and concentrate instead on National’s latest initiative to demonise the poor; forcing beneficieries to take complulsary drug tests.
Here we go yet again. It’s as predictable as the sunrise – as soon as National are likely to be tarnished by bad news, they simply get Herr Paula to pull out another piece of dog-whistle poor-hate to remind the rest of the proletariat that all of our problems are caused by the dirty, filthy, lazy, unemployed, and not by the failed free market dogma that crashed the world’s economy, and is now being touted as the only way to fix it.
There isn’t a single word on Stuff about the Roy Morgan report, which is interesting, considering that when their polls show National doing well with voters, Fairfax struggle to find a font big enough. Instead, they do National the usual courtesy of focussing on the distraction, with the bold headline “Beneficiery drug testing plans unveiled”. They are effectively making scapegoats of the most vulnerable to justify the unthinkable. Now, in what kind of historical regimes have we seen this strategy before? It’s a dangerous and morally bankrupt Government that attempts to blame soaring unemployment on the unemployed themselves.
While unemployment is an increasingly worrying issue for struggling New Zealanders, Fairfax revealed their abject contempt for our concerns, by making a facetious joke out of the Opposition’s attempts to save jobs at Dunedin’s Hillside manufacturing plant. Labour Leader David Shearer’s visit to the plant yesterday and his calls to save New Zealand’s manufacturing industry might be serious to ordinary Kiwis, but Fairfax didn’t even bother reporting his comments, instead publishing the following maliscious, poor taste comments:
“LABOUR MPS CAN’T GET ENOUGH OF HILLSIDE
Office sceptics are wondering . . . would productivity rise at Dunedin’s Hillside engineering workshops and would they get more contracts if Labour MPs would just leave them alone to do their jobs? Labour leader David Shearer was the latest to visit yesterday, and our reporters can recall two visits by former leader Phil Goff and one by David Cunliffe in the past year.
Mr Shearer said the workshops were “a national asset” and their future had to be secured to protect skilled jobs and flow-on economic benefits to other businesses.”
Clearly, New Zealanders losing their jobs is something of a big joke to Fairfax. It certainly isn’t a big deal to their mega-wealthy shareholders, like climate change denying serial polluter Gina Rinehart, who owns most of the corporation’s shares. Perhaps that’s why big news today of a record Arctic ice melt, resembling a giant slushie, hasn’t been reported by Ms Rinehart’s own personal propaganda company. According to the story published on the more reliable New Zealand Herald’s website:
“Michael E. Mann, a lead author of a major UN report in 2001 on climate change, said the latest data reflected that scientists who were criticised as alarmists may have shown “perhaps too great a degree of reticence.”
“I think, unfortunately, this is an example that points more to the worst-case scenario side of things,” said Mann, director of the Earth System Science Center at Penn State University. “There are a number of areas where in fact climate change seems to be proceeding faster and with a greater magnitude than what the models predicted,” Mann told AFP. “The sea ice decline is perhaps the most profound of those cautionary tales because the models have basically predicted that we shouldn’t see what we’re seeing now for several decades,” he added.”
Outrageous isn’t it? But, what can you do about it? Well, you can share this page, you can join our ever-growing protest on Facebook , you can boycott Fairfax’s publications, and you can avoid stuff.co.nz. Oh, and please tell your friends! Kia ora New Zealand.
.
*
.
Links
Roy Morgan: New Zealand unemployment was 9.1% with a further 9.6% of workforce under-employed
Tumeke: NZ real unemployment rate 9.1%?
NZ Herald: Record Arctic ice melt ‘like a giant slushie’
Fairfax Media: Today in politics: Tuesday, August 28
Fairfax Media: Beneficiary drug testing plans unveiled
Radio NZ: Hillside shouldn’t be broken up – Labour
ODT: ‘Crying shame’ if Hillside closed
Acknowledgement
.
.
= fs =
What’s up with the Nats? (Part rua)
.
Continued from: What’s up with the Nats? (Part tahi)
.
.
If there’s somethin’ strange in your neighborhood
Who ya gonna call?
Natbusters!
If it’s somethin’ weird an it won’t look good
Who ya gonna call?
Natbusters!
Intro
Ever since the National Party conference at the end of July, the National Party has been strutting the political stage like a bunch of patched gang-members, strutting about the main street of some small town in the back-blocks.
Key, Bennett, Joyce, Collins, Parata, Banks – even lowly backbenchers like Maggie Barry – have been obnoxiously aggressive in policy announcements and dealing with the media and critics.
The Nats have been unrelentingly in our faces ever since John Key uttered the threat,
.
.
This is not just about confidence.
This is something new. This is about a new, hyped-up, aggressive style of taking criticisms and failings, and turning it back on the critic.
Steven Joyce was on-style on TV3′s “The Nation” (19 August), when he belittled and badgered two journalists (John Hartevelt and Alex Tarrant) who asked him pointedly about National’s short-comings. Joyce’s response was typical Muldoon-style pugnacity.
This interview with Joyce is charachteristic of how National Ministers have been belligerent in their responses. It is singularly instructive,
.
.
Interestingly, Joyce has a “go” at Labour; then the Greens; and even Hone Harawira throughout the course of the interview. He even blames the global financial crisis and throws that in the face of Alex Tarrant, as he responds to a point.
Everyone gets a dose of blame – except the one party that is currently in power. So much for National’s creed that we should all take personal responsibility for our actions.
It appears that National’s back-room Party strategists have been analysing the first few months of this year and have realised that when things go horribly wrong, or the latest string of economic indicators reveal more bad news, the relevant Minister(s) responds with aggression and with defiance.
If the old say “explaining-is-losing” is a truism, then any explanation offered automatically puts a Minister on the back-foot.
The best way out of such a sticky moment; take a page out of Rob Muldoon’s book, ‘How To Win Friends/Enemies and Influence the Media‘.
And National’s Ministers have been playing this ‘new’ game perfectly…
.
Paula Bennett
.
Of all National ministers, Bennett’s behaviour has become most irrational, offensive, and just downright bizarre.
Not content with “offering” sterilisation to solo-mums (but never solo-dads) and their daughters, her views on poverty are so breathtakingly, woefully ignorant that this blogger has come to the conclusion that her tax-payer funded tertiary education was a complete waste of time and money.
See: Hypocrisy – thy name be National
Bennett’s latest weird comments raised eyebrows and and a few hackles,
” Get in the real world.
One week they can be in poverty, then their parent can get a job or increase their income and they are no longer in poverty … This is the real world, and actually children move in and out of poverty at times on a weekly basis.”
See: Bennett slammed over child poverty claim
Bennet then lashed out, saying she “wasn’t interested in measuring child poverty“, and instead her government was more focused on addressing the problems,
“Of course there is poverty in New Zealand. This has been acknowledged by the Government but it’s not a priority to have another measure on it.”
See: scoop.co.nz – Combating poverty more important than measuring it
How can National “combat poverty” if they are not aware of the scale of it? How can a government budget appropriately, without knowing the numbers involved?
Are they just going to guess?
Which then brings us to the issue of Bennett’s instance that the unemployed be drug-tested,
“There is certainly a line between recreational use and addiction and that is challenging in itself and it’s something we’ll have to work through.
“At the end of the day you’ve potentially got thousands of New Zealanders who are unable to work because of recreational use and this paper also identifies that as a real problem, so we need to keep working our way through a solution“.”
See: Bennett ignored advice from Health Ministry – Logie
Again, the question needs to be asked – how many unemployed are on drugs?
Is it 99%?
Is it 50%?
Is it 10%?
Is it 2%?
Is it 0.00001%?
We need to know this, because National may be about to throw $14 million of our tax dollars at this “problem”,
“The plan to cut benefits for job seekers who fail drug tests has been met with criticism by the Ministry of Health, saying it could cost up to $14 million a year.
[abridged]
Ms Bennett told Radio New Zealand she would not reconsider sanctioning only drug users based on the Ministry of Health’s concerns and said she was going ahead with the policy.”
See: Bennett ignored advice from Health Ministry – Logie
Bennett’s response?
“I just don’t feel that we need to trawl through evidence and give that much kind of evidence to something that is just so obvious.“
And added, that she was acting on information from,
“…the visits, from face to face meetings, I don’t know, from some of the international research I’ve seen.”
See: Paula Bennett so sure she’s right
Never let facts get in the way of some damned good prejudice, eh, Ms Bennett?
National’s intention to throw millions of our tax dollars at a problem that may or may not exist, and has not been quantified, beggars belief. It also makes a hollow mockery of John Key’s 2008 pledge to spend our money wisely,
” We will be more careful with how we spend the cash in the public purse, monitoring not just the quantity but also the quality of government spending.”
See: John Key – A Fresh Start for New Zealand
National was in opposition when Dear Leader made that pledge. Things change, I guess, when a Party becomes government and has access to our taxes.
The ‘bullishness’ of a cornered National Minister is clearly coming through on this issue.
So if Paula Bennett is ignoring Health Ministry advice,
- Where is she getting her advice and data from?
- Does she know the number of unemployed who are using recreational drugs?
- How much has National budgetted for this programme?
- If National has budgetted for drug testing – they must have an idea how many unemployed will be affected?
- In which case, we’re back to #1; Where is she getting her advice and data from?
Would Bennett know, for example, how many of these recently-made redundant workers are on drugs;
- Hakes Marine; 15 redundancies
- Telecom; 400 redundancies
- Brightwater Engineering; 40 redundancies
- Pernod Ricard New Zealand; 13 redundancies
- Depart of Corrections; 130 redundancies
- Summit Wool Spinners; 80 redundancies
- Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade; 80 redundancies
- Norman Ellison Carpets; 70 redundancies
- IRD; 51 redundancies
- Flotech; 70 redundancies
- NZ Police; 125 redundancies
- CRI Plant and Food; 25 redundancies
- Te Papa; 16 redundancies (?)
- PrimePort Timaru; 50 redundancies (?)
- Kiwirail; 220 redundancies
- Fisher & Paykel; 29 redundancies
- Goulds Fine Foods; 60 redundancies
- Canterbury University; 150 redundancies (over three years)
See previous blogpost: Jobs, jobs, everywhere – but not a one for me? (Part Toru)
The answer, my friends, is not blown in the wind – it’s blown out her —- !
Let’s dispense with the bovine excrement and stop the tip-toeing on this issue.
National was elected in 2008 on a pledge to raise our wages to parity with Australia.
See: John Key – A Fresh Start for New Zealand
Not only have they failed, but our wage-gap with our Aussie cuzzies is actually widening.
See: Wage gap grows $1 a month – Labour
National was elected in 2011 on a pledge to create 170,000 new jobs.
See: Budget 2011: Govt predicts 170,000 new jobs
Instead, our unemployment has risen to 6.8%.
See: Unemployment rises: 6.8pc
In almost every respect, National’s policies – which are heavily reliant on the free market to deliver desired outcomes like growth and jobs – have failed.
John Key is presiding over,
- a stagnant economy
- rising unemployment
- a low wage economy
- wide gap with Australia
- rising government debt
- more New Zealanders escaping to Australia
- and no plans to fix this mess except cuts to the state sector, asset sales, charter schools, crushing cars, and “reforming” the welfare system
That’s it. The “Grand Plan”. That’s as good as it get’s folks.
With more and more redundancies (see above) and unemployment continuing to creep upward, Bennett’s plans to drug test the jobless is a deflection – an attempt to blame the victims of National’s (lack of) policies.
Drug testing the unemployed is a ploy.
The unemployed are victims of the global financial crisis. Just as National likes to make out that that it’s economic policies are also impacted by the recent GFC and resultant recession. It’s obscene that National uses the GFC as an excuse for their failings – and yet deny the unemployed the very same rationale for having lost their jobs.
By demanding drug testing, Bennett is sending a clear message to National’s redneck constituency, and to low information voters, that all unemployed are drug-addled, lazy, ne’er-do-wells.
Because as we all know, being on the dole on $204.96 (nett, weekly) is a “lifestyle choice”, rather than working and earning the average wage; $800.
National has no idea how many unemployed are on drugs.
But they are still prepared to waste millions of dollars on pursuing a policy of drug testing.
All because they have failed to create the jobs they promised.
All because they need a scapegoat to show their dim-witted constituents that it’s the welfare beneficiaries at fault.
The Nazis used the scapegoating technique well well in the 1930s, when they blamed Jews, communists, gypsies, trade unionists, etc, for Germany’s economic problems.
National’s strategy here should be crystal-clear to us all; they are dangling the unemployed as scapegoats to the ill-informed; the prejudiced; and low-information voters, for whom unemployment is a vague concept; the Global Financial Crisis happened “somewhere else“; and the dole is some unimaginably generous payment.
Very few low-information voters understand that the dole for a single person is only $204.96 (nett, weekly).
Very few National supporters understand that unemployment was 3.7% in 2007 and is now 6.8% because of an event that was sparked thousands of kilometres away in Wall St, USA.
And very few low-information and National voters want to understand this. Because to understand the realities of unemployment means that the next step is; what are they going to do about it?!
Like, this gentleman, posting on Facebook, who had no interest in anything except spouting his own narrow, ill-informed, prejudice. I thought I’d share his “considered opinion” with the reader,
.
.
These are the people that Paula Bennett, and National, are pandering to.
Prejudice is easier.
It means they can blame someone else.
It means not having to think about the issues involved.
Because it’s always someone elses’ fault.
Like Steven Joyce, who blamed Labour, the Greens, and Hone Harawira on TV3′s ‘The Nation‘, on 19 August. It’s always “someone elses’ fault”.
Unfortunately for Bennett, though, her repugnant behaviour has become so entrenched that she is unable to behave appropriately even to her own colleagues,
.
Listen: Listen to more on Checkpoint
The more that National fails to deliver results, the more they will blame others.
Why should National take responsibility for a lack of jobs and rising unemployment? After all…
… they’re only the government.
.
Continued at: What’s up with the Nats? (Part toru: John Banks)
.
.
= fs =
Guest Author: Bennett’s child poverty shocker ignored by Stuff
- Neil Watts, Blogger, Fearfactsexposed
July 16, 2012
.
Fairfax avoid today’s leading political news, again.
Fairfax Media have yet again applied their eerie “1984″ technique of ignoring big news when it is likely to cost the National Party votes.
Yesterday’s outbursts in Parliament from “Social Development” Minister Paula Bennett, in which she made flippant remarks about child poverty, was leading the political news at other, more moderate media today, but there wasn’t a word about it from Gina Rinehart’s Fairfaxian double-thinkers at stuff.co.nz.
The New Zealand Herald ran the story under the headline, “Bennett slammed over child poverty claim”, while Radio New Zealand used Speaker Lockwood Smith’s assessment that “Bennett’s behaviour was worse than a three-year-old”. Such newsworthy fair would delight any real news editor, and is indeed the sort of hard-edged information that has traditionally sold newspapers. But, over at Fairfax – where news values takes a back seat to partisan loyalty to the National Party – readers were denied anything at all on Bennett’s latest lapse of judgement.
In fact, avoiding the worst of Paula Bennett’s ourageous, reactionary bile over the years, has effectively made this Minister a one-woman credibility disaster for Fairfax Media, who appear to simply groan and then bury their Rightwing heads in the sand every time a National Party member makes an embarassing gaff.
I won’t pretend otherwise; Paula Bennett truly disgusts me. That’s the only way I can describe the feeling that fills my stomach every time I’m reminded of her existence. Aside from being a despicable bully and a nasty little fascist, her role in cultivating policies that contribute to child poverty is abhorrent. Denying child poverty is even worse. She makes ‘Ministry of Social Development’ sound nothing short of Orwellian, and embodies all that is vulgar and immoral about the current Government. To see a major news corporation avoid the worst of her faux pas is simpy offensive to fair-minded and thinking New Zealanders.
Fairfax’s coverage of Bennett’s bullying of beneficiaries three years ago was woefully inadequate at the time, and they seem to be deflecting any criticism this time around by distracting readers with one of those dodgy, un-scrutinized on-line polls about whether beneficieries should be drug testesd; cue their army of brainwashed, redneck readers, dog-whistled into beneficiery bashing action.
Come on New Zealand! We need NEWS from our news media, not daily doses of Rightwing propaganda. Please help make a difference by sharing this blog, boycotting Fairfax’s publications, avoiding stuff.co.nz, joining us on facebook (Fearfacts) and telling your friends to do the same. Kia ora.
.
NZ Herald: Bennett slammed over child poverty claim
Radio NZ: Bennett’s behaviour worse than 3 year old speaker
Tumeke: Paula Bennett sees no child poverty
Tumeke: Paula Bennett misleads country on drug
.
*
.
Acknowledgement
Reprinted with kind permission from Fearfactsexposed
.
.
= fs =
A music moment
.
.
Dedicated to Paula Bennett.
.
.
= fs =
Jobs, jobs, everywhere – but not a one for me? (Part Rua)
.
.
Isn’t it strange how Key and National have a funny habit of making promises about jobs and growth – promises that never, ever eventuate?
It’s fairly easy to keep track of our elected representatives and their utterances. Such a handy little gadget, the “In-ter-Net”. Just the handy tool needed to hold them to account for their promises.
Let’s check out Dear Leader’s track record, shall we?
.
= 2008 – 2009 =
.
Key’s Promise
” More than 25,000 Kiwis aged 15-19 are not in any form of education, training or work – that’s despite Labour’s promise to get that number down to zero. Those young people are disengaged from education and are at a loose end…
… Today, I’m going to announce a new education entitlement – National’s Youth Guarantee. It’s based on National’s expectation that all young people under the age of 18 should be in work, education, or training. “
See: 2008 A Fresh Start for New Zealand
The Reality
” Social Development and Employment Minister Paula Bennett said the unemployment rise was a concern…
… She said young people were being affected more than any other age group with unemployment among 15 to 19 year olds rising 7.5 per cent compared to a year ago and 20 – 24 year-olds rising by 4.7 per cent…
… We know how tough that’ll be – that’s why we’ve created the Youth Opportunities Package, to give them some experience in the labour market. “
See: Unemployment surges to 9 year high
.
= 2011 – 2012 =
.
Key’s Promise
“ We’ve grown eight out of nine quarters, we have low interest rates, unemployment is falling, we are on track to create 170,000 jobs…
… I believe we can,” he said. “We created 45,000 this year and we’re on track to create the 170,000 in the budget. “
See: Key optimistic despite global economic fears
” 4% economic growth forecast in 2012.
170,000 new jobs forecast by 2015, with wages growing faster than inflation. “
See: Budget 2011 – Building Our Future
The Reality
” The Budget deficit is running $1.2 billion worse than forecast as tax revenue continues to lag. Treasury today released the Government’s financial statements for the eight months to the end of February showing an operating deficit of $8.8 billion. “
See: Budget deficit keeps getting worse
” The unemployment rate rose 0.3 percentage points to 6.7 per cent in the three months ended March 31, from a revised 6.4 per cent in the prior quarter, according to Statistics New Zealand’s household labour force survey. That’s higher than the 6.3 per cent forecast in a Reuters survey of economists. “
See: Unemployment rate lifts to 6.7pc
” Stronger food manufacturing is expected to lift economic growth to 0.6 per for the first three months of the year, economists say. “
See: GDP growth likely to be slow, patchy
.
= 2012 =
.
Key’s Promise
” The number of pokie machines in New Zealand will continue to fall despite a deal the government is negotiating which will give Sky City casino more of them, Prime Minister John Key says.
Opposition parties are accusing the government of selling legislation through an agreement that will see Auckland’s Sky City build a $350 million convention centre in return for more pokie machines.
Labour says Sky City wants an extra 500 and the government is offering 350.
But Mr Key says it’s a good deal for New Zealand.
“It produces 1000 jobs to build a convention centre, about 900 jobs to run it, and overall the number of pokie machines will be falling although at a slightly lower rate,” he said on Monday on TV One. “
See: Key defends casino pokie machine deal
The Reality
” Job numbers touted by Prime Minister John Key for a proposed international convention centre at SkyCity are much higher than official estimates.
Mr Key has said a deal allowing SkyCity more gambling facilities in exchange for funding the convention centre would provide 900 construction jobs and work for 800 people at the centre.
But the figures are much higher than those in a feasibility study done for the Government by hospitality and travel specialist analyst Horwath Ltd.
Horwath director Stephen Hamilton said he was concerned over reports the convention centre would employ 800 staff – a fulltime-equivalent total of 500.
He said the feasibility study put the number of people who would be hired at between 318 and 479. ” – Source
See: Puzzle of Key’s extra casino jobs
.
The Stats
Labour Government
Total Unemployment March 2008: 3.6%
Youth (15-19) Unemployment March 2008: 24,200 (13.9%)
Wage Growth to March 2008: 3.4% (adjusted LCI)
See: Employment and Unemployment – March 2008 Quarter
See: Wage Growth – March 2008 Quarter
See: Youth Labour Market Factsheet – March 2008
National Government
Total Unemployment March 2012: 6.7%
Youth (15-19) Uemployment March 2012: 65,600 (17.1%)
Wage Growth to March 2012: 2% (adjusted LCI)
See: Employment and Unemployment – March 2012 Quarter
See: Wage Growth – March 2012 Quarter
See: Youth Labour Market Factsheet – March 2012
.
Conclusion
The term “mickey mouse” springs to mind, in describing National’s handling of the economy. Their promises for job creation and economic growth are a fantasy, predicated on religious-like faith in a failed free market ideology. (The same ideology that resulted in the global financial crisis in 2008, and the resulting Great Recession.)
The problem with National is that their blind belief in the “Market” to create jobs is a trap of their own making. The “Market” will not create jobs until the economy improves. And the economy will not improve until we have more jobs, so people can buy more goods and services. This kind of economic “Catch 22″ is fairly obvious to most people – hence why the French and Icelanders have elected centre-left governments, and the Conservatives in the UK are polling badly.
With National leaving economic growth and job creation to the “Market”, any budgetary predictions on their part are meaningless. Thus far practically every prediction made by Key and his Party has failed abysmally.
John Key, especially, has a tendency to make hopelessly optimistic predictions. Yet, as with his Sky City/Convention Centre pronouncements, promising around 1,800 jobs – reality soon catches up and shows his promises as little more than wishing-thinking.
Quite simply, Key is not to be trusted on any numbers he conjures up. They are Lotto numbers.
.
.
*
.
Additional
Business NZ sees no economic plan
Key defends casino pokie machine deal
Unemployment surges to 9 year high
Puzzle of Key’s extra casino jobs
NZ rich-poor gap widens faster than rest of world
Government policy impacting child poverty levels
Low income households less likely to move up scale – study
.
.
= fs =
The Shining Path according to Dear Leader (Part Tahi)
.
.
After a damning interview on TV3′s ‘60 Minutes‘, Bronwyn Pullar and ex-National Party president, Michelle Boag, left the viewer in little doubt that there were serious concerns surrounding ACC’s management and Judith Collin’s handling of the entire affair.
See: TV3 60 Minutes -The Eye of the Storm
”What is clear is that ACC deals with a huge number of complaints, a huge amount of data and there are always people who feel the system hasn’t treated them fairly and that is partly because the big dispute always comes around the definition of a pre-existing condition.
That at one level is at the heart of what sits with this Bronwyn Pullar claim.”
See: PM wades into ACC Pullar debate
Pardon?!
Since when did Dear Leader become privy to Ms Pullar’s personal file to such an extent that he could utter pronouncements that she had a “pre-existing condition ” ?!
Not since Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett, accessed and mis-used the personal files of two women on the domestic purposes benefit has a Minister referred to a private citizens personal details.
See: Hypocrisy – thy name be National
Dear Leader’s desperation is becoming obvious when he becomes a self-professed expert on medical “pre existing conditions” and attempts to mis-use his position of Ministerial authority to try to dis-credit a critic of his administration.
Rob Muldoon would’ve been proud.
A word to the wise, Dear Leader – keep your nose out of other people’s business and their personal files.
.
.
= fs =
Three Jokers and an Ace
.
.
This has been one of those strange weeks that only a National-led government can give us. Part of that strangeness has been described in a previous blog, with the antics of Paula Bennett, Pita Sharples, and a slow train-wreck called ACT.
See: 20 May: End of the Week Bouquets, Brickbats, & Epic Fails
But before the weekend was over, there was more neo-liberal nonsense to follow. One thing you can always count on with the Nats – they’re good for a facepalm on a regular basis…
First Joker: David Carter
Local Government Minister, David Carter’s performance on TVNZ’s Q+A, on 20 May, was an exercise in National’s ‘Daddy State‘ policies revving up several notches.
Not content with forcing assets sales, fracking, and deep sea drilling on us – the NPPB (National Party Politburo of Bunnies) is now issuing diktats from on-high to local body councils.
Firstly, Kommissar Karter instructed local bodies what was acceptable “core services” by local body councils,
” GREG
Okay, core services – what on earth are core services? Because there seems to be a lot of scope in what a core service is and what a council should be taking care of.
DAVID
Well, it’s certainly clear what core services are, and they are rates and rubbish and water, et cetera. But this legislation’s not about saying to councils, ‘You can only embark on core services.’ It is still the responsibility of the council to engage with its community and find out what services that community wants. But we want that debate to be far more transparent than it has been in the past.
GREG
Well, hold on. It sounds like the Government’s wanting a bob each way in this. They’re wanting to say they keep in touch with what’s happening with the rates, but they’re only to go and do core services at a local level or not. Which way is it to go?
DAVID
We are not saying that councils can only do core services. If you take my Christchurch City Council, for example, and it runs the Ellerslie Flower Show in Hagley Park. You could argue that’s not a core service. The council has determined that there is value in delivering that show for the people of Christchurch, and, frankly, I meet a lot of people on planes who are travelling from all over New Zealand to come to that. The council’s decision is to run the Ellerslie Flower Show, and that is a decision for the council to make. It’s certainly not a decision for central government to make or for myself as minister. “
Then the Minister advised the Great Unwashed what was not acceptable “core services”,
“ DAVID
We’re certainly going to get local government to be far more focused on what activities it undertakes. In the past, some councils have stepped too far and undertaken activities, Hamilton city, for example, with the Grand Prix racing. I think that was an activity that went far beyond where local government should have gone. It cost local government in that area a lot of money. We’re not saying you cannot run race cars; we’re saying you need to think very very carefully before undertaking that activity. And by putting these financial management tests in place, I think councils will think more carefully about some of those longer-term extraneous activities they’re undertaking than they did in the past. “
So according to Kommissar Karter,
- V8 car races – out
- Flower shows - in
- Asset sales – in
- local democracy to choose our own expenditure: out
- centralised, National Party control over expenditure: in
- core service by councils – tba
The Minister then added, for good measure in case the proles had not understood his Diktat from On High,
“ DAVID
You’re hitting on the essence of the relationship that should be between local government and central government. It has to be truly a partnership, but it’s not on for local government then to step into the space which is clearly central government’s role. And it is central government’s role to establish the education system in this country. It is central government’s role to establish parameters of measuring the success of that. We can then work with Len Brown and his council, particularly as he tries to develop solutions to some of the social problems in South Auckland, and we’re happy to work with him in a partnership. But the core responsibility still remains with central government. “
Which, if implemented, would mean that Otorohanga’s Council-led and community-based initiatives – which has seen unemployment and youth problems plummet – would not be a core Council responsibility?
.
.
Had National’s policy of curtailing Council activities been in full-force, youth unemployment and associated problems would remain unchanged, or probably much worse in that small town.
See also: Youth unemployment a growing problem
Or was the Minister expecting Otorohanga to wait for Central Government to address the worsening crisis of youth unemployment? Youth unemployment which has rocketed from 58,000 to 87,000 this year?
How would National’s policy, to “reign in” local Councils, impact on other towns and cities that attempted to take steps to address our growing social problems? Would Auckland prohibited from pursuing a programme similar to Otorohanga?
.
.
David Carter’s performance on Q+A was simply breath-taking. If anyone thought that Labour was guilty of creating a “Nanny State” – they had to watch Carter to see National go several steps further. In effect, central government will be dictating to local bodies what they can or can’t do.
Democracy? Not in our towns or cities, according to Minister Carter.
National is taking over. Curfew at 7PM.
See transcript: Q+ALocal Government Minister David Carter interview
See video: Q+A: Local Government Minister David Carter (15:28)
The irony here is that whilst National stands by and watches unemployment soar, local communities, through their elected representatives, are taking steps to address this growing problem.
Meanwhile, National’s response to unemployment is not to implement job creation programmes – their response is to fiddle with welfare.
Which leads us to the next issue…
.
Second Joker: Paula Rebstock
Q+A’s interview with Paula Rebstock – appointed by Welfare Minister Paula Bennett to head a board to oversee the implementation of National’s welfare “reforms” – is continuing National’s mission to demonise the unemployed; widows; solo-mums (but never solo-dads), and others who rely on social welfare to survive.
Since National has no job-creation plan, Dear Leader and Paula Bennett are shifting responsibility for lack of jobs onto welfare beneficiaries. (Because we know that welfare pays for the mansion, limousine in the drive-way, and the beach house in Hawaii. Oh, wait, no, that’s John Key.)
It is a most pernicious form of scape-goating.
It is shameful, and panders to the nasty prejudices that reside in the dark depths of our vestigial reptilian hind-brain. For the Working and Middle Classes, who have always had the sneaking suspicion that welfare offers an opulent lifestyle – until they themselves are made redundant – only to then discover the true nature of just how paltry welfare actually is.
To put this issue into some context, New Zealand’s unemployment doubled after the global financial crisis and resulting recession,
.
.
Rebstock headed the infamous “Welfare Working Group” in 2010. Some of the recommendations of the WWG were so punitive and inhumane as to return to the Victorian Era. Even John Key was moved to reject many of Rebstock’s extreme proposals.
In November 2010, Rebstock was interviewed by Paul Holmes on Q+A,
“ PAUL
So that means a bit of government intervention, that means government providing these [jobs], presumably.
PAULA
Well, I don’t know if it does, and I think this is a really important point. If we look at how the labour market in New Zealand has performed, it is true we’ve been in a recession and we’re now moving into a slow recovery and jobs have been an issue, but since 1986 this economy has created more than 500,000 jobs. Now, it responded as well as almost any economy in the world to the economic environment. We had one of the highest employment rates in the OECD. I think that it is a little bit of a cop-out to say that we can’t deal to some of the issues around long-term benefit dependency because of the job market.
PAUL
Oh, come on, Paula, the jobs simply aren’t there. I mean, if you look at 2006, there was a 30,000 net gain of jobs. In 2008 it had gone down a bit – 9,000 net gain. God knows what it is this year.
PAULA
We actually are experiencing a gain in jobs. The labour statistics that came out last week show that. I’m not saying that we haven’t been in a recession, Paul, but this is the time right now to prepare people for the recovery. They need to be ready to take the jobs that are there. “
See: Holmes interviews Paula Rebstock (15 November 2010)
Unfortunately for everyone, the jobs were not “out there”. With the recession is full swing, exports were down, and companies were laying off staff in their hundreds.
Unemployment in November 2010 was 6.4%. By January 2011, it had reach 6.8%. The rate moved up and down, and currently sits on 6.7%.
See: Unemployment rate lifts to 6.7pc
Fast forward 18 months, and despite the economy continuing to stagnate, National is pursuing it’s scape-goating of unemployed and solo-mothers (but never solo-dads), and Rebstock and Bennett are both still ‘singing the same song’.
On 16 May, Bennett said,
” The cost of today’s total number of beneficiaries is estimated at $45 billion. It makes good economic and social sense to provide targeted support up front to get more people into work sooner.
This new approach will be embedded at all levels of the welfare system and the board will be responsible for ensuring accountability and overseeing the delivery of reforms that will see fewer people on welfare for long periods. “
See: Minister defends new welfare board
Not. One. Word. About. Job. Creation.
National is displaying an almost Obsessive-Compulsive antipathy on welfare issues. Their sole focus is on welfare and welfare beneficiaries.
As if 80,000+ New Zealanders decided to chuck in their jobs in the last few years, and instead live the life of luxury on $204.96 a week (net).
See: WINZ Unemployment Benefit (current)
Yet, not too long ago (29 April), Social Welfare Minister Paula Bennett actually admitted,
PAULA
No. There’s not a job for everyone that would want one right now, or else we wouldn’t have the unemployment figures that we do.
See: TVNZ Q+A: Transcript of Paula Bennett interview (29 April)
So why is National spending $1.1 million on Rebstock’s ‘Work and Income Board’ to oversee WINZ – when it ain’t welfare that’s broke. It’s the job market that is 160,000 jobs short?!
See: Rebstock to head welfare watchdog panel
Bennett goes on to say,
“ I’ve got fantastic frontline staff, I’ve got fantastic upper and middle management that are working hands on with policy changes and implementing that frontline. “
“Fantastic front line staff”.
“Fantastic upper and middle management”.
“Working hands on with policy changes”.
But no jobs.
.
Third Joker: John Key
National’s “Gateway” scheme had its origins during the Mana by-election, in 2010. As some will recall, it was National’s grand plan to beat the Labour candidate, Kris Faafoi.
National’s candidate was… Hekia Parata – the current Minister for Education.
Ms Parata lost by 1,406 votes to Labour’s candidate. (The margin widens when adding centre-left votes for the Greens and Matt McCarten.)
It appears that the “Gateway” scheme was little more than an election bribe for Mana voters; a “lolly” to entice people to vote for Parata. National lost, and were stuck with fulfilling their policy pledge.
(Damned inconvenient when that happens, I guess.)
.
.
Heatley touted the scheme, grandly proclaiming,
“It is important the government provides opportunities for people to move into home ownership. Affordable homes schemes such as Gateway is another way we can assist more people into a home of their own.”
But by May of this year, it seems that it was ‘no longer important the government provides opportunities for people to move into home ownership’.
John Key announced it’s cancellation last week.
For a man who was raised in a taxpayer funded, and subsidised, state home with his siblings and widowed mum, and who benefitted from a societal value that decent housing was a basic human right – John Key has some very strange attitudes toward providing shelter for the poor and vulnerable,
.
.
The Gateway scheme details,
GATEWAY SCHEME
* For first home buyers earning under $100,000 a year
* They can get a mortgage to build or buy a house on state land
* Must have at least a 10% deposit
* Have 10 years to buy the land
It’s interesting to note that Key is unable to deliver “low cost” housing for couples earning under$100,000 and says,
“The Government has looked at that programme and decided that’s now not the most effective way of going forward.
So we think the capacity for lower income New Zealanders to own their own home is greatly enhanced by the fact interest rates are lower.
“If you have a look at the average home owner in New Zealand, they are paying about $200 a week less in interest than they were under the previous Labour Government.” – Ibid
His comments raises several issues,
- It says a lot about Key’s impression of what constitutes “lower income New Zealanders” when the threshold is up to $100,000 per couple. Perhaps by his multi-million dollar standards, a couple on $100,000 is “poor”?
- Derides the previous Labour government and claims credit for lower interest rates, by stating “they are paying about $200 a week less in interest than they were under the previous Labour Government“. As if current low interest rates are a result of National’s intervention? (Interest rates are determined by the Reserve Bank, and are currently low because our economy is stagnant. National can take credit for the latter, but not the former.)
- How can providing decent, affordable housing for low income earners be “not the most effective way of going forward” ?
- Key is living in a millionaire’s fantasyland if he seriously believes that “ the capacity for lower income New Zealanders to own their own home is greatly enhanced by the fact interest rates are lower“. Dear Leader doesn’t understand that the interest rate can be irrelevant if people can’t afford to buy a home in the first place.
If ever there was ever an instance of the Silver Spoon mentality – look no further than our current Prime Minister, the Rt Honourable John Key.
New Zealanders are deluded if they think this man can relate to their ordinary, everyday, lives.
.
The Ace: John Tamihere
As mentioned in a previous blogpost, John Tamihere is hosting an excellent, low-key, intelligent, current affairs chat show on TV3 (Sunday mornings) called “Think Tank“. Last Sunday’s (20 May) episode focused on child poverty in New Zealand and what practical steps were required to address this growing social crisis.
Last week, it was pokie machines and their effects on communities.
As the show’s name suggests, the goal is not just to look into critical social issues – but to come up with solutions. The show’s panel of four people offers solutions; and the guests scrutinises each suggestion.
It’s a chat show for sure – but instead of superficial inanities, the conversation is serious and fit for adult consumption.
This is good television. This treats the viewer as intelligent and capable of considering complex issues.
This blogger can only live in hope that this is the turning point of 21st century television, and we are seeing an end (or at least slow reduction) of the execrable rubbish we have been served up, since commercialisation and dumbing down became the norm for broadcasting in this country.
John Tamihere is perfect for the role of host for the show. Not a polished or trained media front-person, John Tamihere has walked the hard yards in life and has moved from the tough neighbourhoods of South Auckland to the halls of power in Parliament. He’s lived life. He’s seen things that Middle Class New Zealand has no wish to see or experience, outside of comfortable television shows.
This blogger’s only criticisms revolve around scheduling and lack of promotion.
Scheduling “Think Tank” on Sunday mornings ghettoises the show. It relegates it almost as an ‘after thought’. It would be an act of naked political subversion to broadcast it during prime time viewing. (That should give National’s/NZ on Air’s, Stephen McElrea something to howl about!)
The show also needs more promo on TV3. This blogger discovered it only by sheer fluke. Not promoting it leaves us wondering if TV3 doesn’t really want to draw attention to it? Perhaps doesn’t want to draw the ire of certain National Party ministers?
One hopes not.
TV3, as your print-media colleagues used to say, Publish and be damned !
It’s a good show.
Be proud of it.
.
*
.
Media sources
Loans for housing on crown land
Holmes interviews Paula Rebstock (15 November 2010)
Council goes solo to help young jobless
Key backs cut-off for cheap homes plan
Minister defends new welfare board
TVNZ Q+A: Local Government Minister David Carter (video)
Reserve Bank to keep OCR unchanged though hikes flicker on horizon
References
Official Cash Rate (OCR) decisions and current rate
Previous blogposts
Fear and loathing in the Fascist State of New Zealand
Bennett confirms: there are not enough jobs!
.
.
= fs =
