Archive
Un-employment; under-employment; and the plain unvarnished truth… *** UP DATE ***
Continued from: Un-employment; under-employment; and the plain unvarnished truth
.
.
Additional to my original blogpost on The Daily Blog on 6 February.
In up-coming unemployment stats, I’ll be focusing on the Jobless and under-employed numbers, as well as the narrower “unemployed” stats from the Household Labour Force Survey (HLFS). It is evident from the numbers of under-employed and the extremely narrow defining on what constitutes an unemployed person, that we are not getting the full picture from the HLFS.
Coupled to that, the Census last year revealed unemployment to be at an astonishing 7.1% whilst Roy Morgan poll (5 December 2013) had the figure at 8.5%.
By comparison, the HLFS (at roughly the same time) had unemployment at 6.2%.
So unemployment stats ranged from 6.2% (HLFS) to 8.5% (Roy Morgan).
Coupled to that is the narrow definition of the HLFS used by Statistics NZ (see below), and we begin to see why the “official unemployment rate” appears more ‘benign’.
From the January 2014 Parliamentary report, Unemployment and employment statistics: the Household Labour Force Survey in context;
The Reserve Bank has expressed concern at its variance with other indicators. [2] A commentator in the Westpac Bulletin, puzzled by the continued weakness of the HLFS in 2012 compared to the Quarterly Employment Survey (QES) and other labour market indicators, described it as ‘confusion reigns’ and suggested that survey ‘volatility’ played a role. [3] The ANZ commentator is cautious: ‘The HLFS has been very volatile in recent years, and we and the Reserve Bank will treat the result with a degree of scepticism, preferring to take note of a wide range of labour market indicators.’ [4]
These broader labour market indicators include external ones such as business and consumer surveys and job advertisements. These are in addition to those derived from official statistics such as changes in the employment and labour force participation rates, full- and part-time work, and hours worked, together with fine-grained analysis of changes by region, industry and age.
Various reasons for the volatility of the unemployment rate and its variance with other labour market indicators have been discussed – the impact of the recession, the dynamic nature of the labour market, the survey nature of the HLFS, and differences in coverage of the statistics. It has been suggested that the HLFS is more volatile at a turning point – either going into or out of recession…
The latest Household Labour Force Survey (HLFS) stats;
Officially unemployed stats;
The unemployment rate decreased over the quarter, down 0.2 percentage points to 6.0 percent. This decrease reflected 2,000 fewer people being unemployed [147,000]. The fall in unemployment was from fewer men unemployed.
Official unemployment: down
The under-employment stats;
Over the year, the total number of under-employed people increased by 27,200 to 122,600. As a result, the under-employment rate increased 1.0 percentage points to 5.3 percent.
Official under-employment: up
The HLFS Jobless stats;
In the year to December 2013, the number of people in the jobless category fell 27,400 to 257,100. Alongside the 15,000 fall in the number of people unemployed, there was also a 10,200 fall in the number of people without a job who were available for work but not actively seeking.
Official Jobless: down
Observation #1: Under-employment is increasing, which brings into question how effective the “drop” in unemployment and Jobless actually is. As being “employed” is defined as working for one hour (or more) per week; with or without pay: the whole statistical reporting of true unemployment in New Zealand is now called into question. Especially with regards to the next point.
Observation #2: “A 10,200 fall in the number of people without a job who were available for work but not actively seeking” signifies that the drop in Unemployment/Jobless can also be attributed to people giving up, as this Radio NZ report stated in February last year (2013).
Observation #3: As stated in the “Definitions” below, a person who is job seeking only through newspapers is not considered in the “Unemployed” category, but under the wider “Jobless” definition. Considering that a number of households cannot afford the internet, and do not qualify for WINZ registration, this makes a sizeable “chunk” of unemployed effectively invisible.
Observation #4: The above Observation suits successive governments, which are desperate to report lower unemployed so as to gain support from voters.
Definitions
Jobless: people who are either officially unemployed, available but not seeking work, or actively seeking but not available for work. The ‘available but not seeking work’ category is made up of the ‘seeking through newspaper only’, ‘discouraged’, and ‘other’ categories.
Under-employment: employed people who work part time (ie usually work less than 30 hours in all jobs) and are willing and available to work more hours than they usually do.
Employed: people in the working-age population who, during the reference week, did one of the following:
-
worked for one hour or more for pay or profit in the context of an employee/employer relationship or self-employment
-
worked without pay for one hour or more in work which contributed directly to the operation of a farm, business, or professional practice owned or operated by a relative
-
had a job but were not at work due to: own illness or injury, personal or family responsibilities, bad weather or mechanical breakdown, direct involvement in an industrial dispute, or leave or holiday.
Up-coming unemployment stats will focus on Jobless and under-employed numbers, as well as the more restrictive “unemployed” stats from the HLFS. Hopefully this will create a more comprehensive ‘snapshot’ of what is happening in the jobs ‘market’.
Further Information
“4 out of 5 New Zealand homes had access to the Internet, up 5 percent since 2009.”
The corollary to that is that one in five households – a staggering 20%! – do not have internet access.
Which means that job seekers on little or no income (especially if they do not qualify for WINZ support) may rely solely on newspapers to look for jobs.
But as I’ve reported above, using a newspaper to be job-seeking does not quality you as “unemployed”.
20%.
That’s quite a number.
No wonder of official unemployment stats are dodgy as hell.
.
*
.
References
NZ Parliament: Unemployment and employment statistics: the Household Labour Force Survey in context
Roy Morgan: New Zealand real unemployment steady at 8.5% and a further 11.3% (up 2.7%) of workforce are under-employed
Roy Morgan: Roy Morgan measures real unemployment in Australia not the “perception” of unemployment
Statistics NZ: 2013 Census QuickStats about national highlights
Statistics NZ: Household Labour Force Survey: September 2013 quarter
Statistics NZ: Household Labour Force Survey: December 2013 quarter
Statistics NZ: Definitions – About the Household Labour Force Survey
Statistics NZ: Household Use of Information and Communication Technology: 2012
Radio NZ: Unemployment rate falls as more give up job hunt
Previous related blogpost
The REAL level of unemployment
Roy Morgan Poll: Unemployment and Under-employment up in New Zealand!
.
*
.
Above image acknowledgment: Francis Owen
This blogpost was first published on The Daily Blog on 9 February 2014.
.
.
= fs =
Jobs, jobs, everywhere – but not a one for me?
.
Every so often, we see media articles like this recent ‘Herald‘ report,
.
.
The story presents a picture of lazy, unprepared, unwilling unemployed – the usual cliched stereotype so beloved by the right wing who begrudge spending their taxes on a social welfare net (but at the same time prefer to live in a First World society without beggars lining the streets like some Third World, poverty-stricken nation).
The story refers to unemployment at 6.7% – and fails to mention that in December 2007, unemployment stood at 3.4% – placing us fifth fifth among twentyseven OECD nations, behind Norway, The Netherlands, South Korea and Denmark.
In fact, contrast the above story with this one from the Herald, four years ago,
.
.
The two headings could not be more contrasting – polar-opposites, in fact,
The miracle of full employment
Monday April 7, 2008
Jobless unprepared for realities of workforce
Sunday May 27, 2012
A further scrutiny of the first story reveals the following;
- A grand-total of four employers were interviewed
- Two of the four offered minimum wage, two did not specify the rate offered
- The jobs are not specified whether full time, part time, or casual
- One employer admits that some employees had walked out, but she does not disclose why
Too many questions are left unanswered.
Reading between the lines, though, one gets the impression that we are not being given the full story.
After all, even on $13.50 an hour, the gross wage is $540 for a 40 hour week.
Contrast that to $229.01 a week (gross) unemployment benefit for someone 25 and over.
The minimum wage is barely livable – but still vastly preferable to the dole. Our Rest Homes are staffed by hundreds of hard-working, dedicated people earning $13.61 – just eleven cents above the dole,
.
.
Rest home work is hard and stressful – and yet we have people willing to put up with the pressures and do the work necessary to look after our aged and infirm.
Which then poses questions as to why the four employers in the top article are unable to attract and retain staff?
In this bloggers experience, employers who find it hard to attract and/or retain staff generally have “issues” with their managagement style; working conditions; pay and hours; and other related matters.
To further drive home some simple truths, these media reports should serve to dispel the nasty and manipulative myths surrounding those who are jobless,
.
1000 apply for 150 K Mart jobs – Otago Daily Times – 11 June 1997
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Lazy journalists who write inept stories without due diligence in research, and offering balance, add nothing to the sum total of human knowledge. Nor even a wee bit of insight as to what is really happening in our communities.
It’s easy-peasy to write a story that reinforces preconceived prejudices against a minority in society. No real talent required.
When politicians do it, it’s because they are utterly clueless and have no plan or policy to address unemployment. “Bene-bashing” is the de-fault setting of right-wing politicians who have no other options except to shift blame for poor economic activity onto the heads of welfare recipients. (Because as we all know, the unemployed, solo-mums, widows, invalids, etc, are the ones who actually govern this country. Right?)
.
.
But we expect better from journalists who are charged with asking questions; probing behind official lines; and holding our elected representatives to account.
Not assisting politicians’ to avoid responsibility.
.
*
.
Media
Jobless unprepared for realities of workforce
The miracle of full employment
Unemployment rate lifts to 6.7pc
Reference
WINZ: Unemployment Benefit (as at 1 April 2012)
.
.
= fs =
Jobs up, jobless down?
Two articles in the Dominion Post today (7 October) seem to suggest that unemployment was on it’s way down and that the country was witnessing a growth in jobs,
.
.
The article states that “more than 4000 people came off the unemployment benefit and more than 2200 youths came off welfare, including 351 youths who came the unemployment benefit.”
However, the article continues with this, “Bennett said the total number of people on welfare remained high, rising by 0.1 per cent in September to 328,496.”
So, the reality is that a certain number of those 4,000 people who “ came off the unemployment benefit ” may well have moved on to another benefit? Because that is what Bennett is saying, quite clearly, ” the total number of people on welfare … [rose] by 0.1 per cent in September to 328,496 “.
The article also does not state where those 2200 youths who “came off welfare ” went. Did they find employment? Is is full time or part time – and if the latter, are their wages still being subsidised by WINZ? Have they move “side ways” onto another benefit? Are they in training/education, or one of WINZ’s many, ultimately-futile “training” programmes?
The story simply does not enlighten us.
Paula Bennett’s comment here may be somewhat less-than-helpful,
“Job hunting isn’t easy, but it’s fair to say that if you’re not looking, you won’t find a job…”
Thank you, Paula, you’re a real fountain of wisdom.
The second Dominion Post article is also vague and contradictory,
.
.
The article states “SEEK Employment Index rose half a per cent in the last month, showing the new jobs listed on the employment website have grown faster than job applications.”
But then continues with “when seasonally adjusted, the index actually fell by 1.1 per cent in September…”.
It also seems bizarre to read that, “The five most sought category of employees in September were accounting, government and defence, healthcare and medical; engineering and automotive trades. ”
“Government and defence”?
This seems clearly at odds with current government policy of curring back the civil service. The military and other government sectors have lost at least 2000 workers, with more job losses planned.
The above articles may sound optimistic, but redundancies are still hitting our economy and impacting on society,
.
.
.
The question that springs to mind is that if the drop in unemployed is real – is it due to new jobs or new job vacancies? The difference may seem subtle, but is very real. New jobs are an indicator that the economy is beginning to grow again.
Job vacancies are existing jobs that have been vacated for one reason or another, and are being replaced. It is sometimes referred to as “churn“.
With current wages low and not keeping pace with inflation and the recent increase in gst, it is hardly surprising that most New Zealanders have had the lowest wage increases in a decade,
.
.
By contrast, we had somewhat more generous wage increases during the previous, unfairly-maligned, Labour Government,
“Wage growth at a record high
Annual wage growth in the adjusted LCI (which measures changes in pay rates for a fixed set of jobs and excludes performance related pay increases) remained steady at 3.4% in the March 2008 quarter. This is the equal highest rate recorded since the LCI began in 1992 matching the annual increase for the December 2007 year.
The unadjusted LCI (which includes performance related pay increases) shows annual wage growth of 5.4% in the March 2008 quarter, up from 5.0% at December 2007.
Annual wage growth in the QES (which includes performance related pay increases and is affected by the composition of employment) increased to 4.6% for the year to March 2008, up from 4.1% in the previous quarter.” Source
Good times, eh, my fellow New Zealanders?
Despite John Key’s priority-pledge to raise wages – and not just by 38 cents!!! – we now have a record flight of New Zealanders moving to Australia – 3300!
.
.
As Ms Visser said,
“It’s definitely a wake-up call – with 20 per cent of our workforce looking to leave at any one time it’s a scary thought. “
Which indicates that this current government has done very little of practical value to motivate New Zealanders to stay and help build our own economy. Two tax cuts have certainly not worked the “magic” that Key, English, et al, had hoped.
Which suggests that Bill English’s May 2011 Budget statement, promising 170,000 new jobs may be a tad over-optimistic.,
.
.
I guess the ‘moral’ of this piece is two-fold,
- Be cautious about media stories that do not present the full story. A bit of ‘digging’ soon yields a fuller picture.
- Be cautious about politicians who promise you the world (you’ll be the one paying for it).
And I’ll finish this piece with a message from our Prime Minister, John Key,
.
"The billboard also highlights Labour's failure to stem the tide of people voting with their feet and leaving New Zealand." - John Key, 1 Sept 2008
.
***
.
Additional reading
Inflation outpaces income growth
Bill English: Focus on Finance – Budget 2011
Labour Market Reports – Archive Wage Growth – March 2008 Quarter
.
.
Great Myths Of The 21st Century (#1)
Perhaps the greatest urban-myth, perpetrated and perpetuated by those whose interests it serves, is that the unemployed are there-by-choice, and unwilling to work.
Of course, this is absurd and an outright falsehood.
Fact 1: The New Zealand December 2007 Quarter Household Labourforce Survey unemployment stood at 3.4% . This was prior to the global recession hitting NZ.
Fact 2: By the end of 2008, the New Zealand December Quarter Household Labourforce Survey unemployed rose to 4.6%.
Fact 3: The New Zealand December 2010 Quarter Household Labourforce Survey unemployed rate increased to 6.8% .
Fact 4: In three years, the Household Labourforce Survey unemployed doubled from 3.4% to 6.8%
Fact 5: In other countries such as the US, unemployment went from 4.8% in the fourth quarter of 2007 to stand at 9.1% by July of this year.
Whether the largest economy on Earth, or one of the smallest, the impact of the global banking crisis and following recession caused companies to collapse; down-size; and “rationalise” (reduce) staff. This caused unemployment to skyrocket.
Events in Wall St, USA, had an impact on Main Sts, New Zealand;
“Jobs to go at textile factories”
“Headlines do not reveal true picture of job losses”
“‘Another kick in the guts for rural NZ'”
“Job losses to hit military next week”
“Lower Hutt jobs to go as shops shut”
“Hellaby’s closes: 18 jobs go”
“Australasian Colorado shops closing”
“Jobs to go at troubled baker Yarrows”
“KiwiRail plans to lay off Dunedin staff”
“Thirty-five jobs may go at Niwa”
“Ovation confirms 304 job losses “
“Dunne defends Greymouth IRD job cuts announcement”
“NZ Post shutting stores, axing jobs”
“Ballantynes faces post-quake job cuts”
“Lane Walker Rudkin 470 Redundancies A Tragedy”
And many more here .
As unemployment increased, the number of job-seekers increased. Even the Prime Minister, John Key, has remarked,
“We’re part of a global environment so we can’t control all of the factors that affect New Zealand, but all the indications we have is that 2011 will be a better year.”
Dozens, and often hundreds of unemployed job-seekers would turn up at businesses, that were hiring staff;
It is apparent that the global recession has caused the demise of some businesses, and forced others to greatly reduce staffing numbers. This is beyond the control of any individual in this country.
So why is there a perception amongst some individuals and groups that the jobless have chosen their unemployment as some kind of “lifestyle choice”? Especially when is it clear that WINZ unemployment benefits are nowhere as generous as some might believe.
Trying to apportion responsibility for people losing their jobs is victim-blaming and is utterly repugnant. Such victim-blaming is an unwelcome aspect of the human capacity for bigotry.
Why do people do it?
* The Opportunists.
It serves the purpose of some political parties such as National and ACT to blame unemployed for their predicament.
It allows National the opportunity to escape any possibility of responsibility at addressing this critical economic and social problem. And it’s a vote-winner with the next group,
* The Greedy.
For many neo-liberals who cherish the ideology of the free-market and minimalist-government, any form of taxation by the State is “theft”. And when the State hands over some of that tax-money to the Unemployed so that they can survive – they resent it. And do they complain bitterly!
These neo-liberal free-marketeers resent having to contribute their fair share to the society they live in. (Though they think nothing of driving on tax-payer funded roads; being cared for in tax-payer funded A&E Hospital Wards; protected by tax-payer funded Police; educated in tax-payer funded schools, etc.)
Greed – it does funny things to peoples’ humanity.
* The Perpetually Angry.
The uninformed, perpetually angry, people who obtain their information through TV news and/or Talkback radio. They have friends,, who know someone who has heard of a person, who apparently lives in luxury on the dole…
These are people who have very little experience of the society they live in and generally have a circle of friends who validate their misconceptions. For them, everyone is a dole-bludger; the recession happened to Someone, Somewhere Else; and everyone should be living comfortably, regardless of circumstances. Their worldview generally doesn’t extend much past their front door.
Anger – it stops people thinking clearly.
Unfortunately, The Greedy and The Perpetually Angry have no constructive solutions to offer us.
One hopes that the National government will reconsider their decision to cut almost $146 million from skills training.
Nor does it help when we export jobs overseas,
“Army shifts $2m contract to China”
“Chinese firm beats Hillside to KiwiRail contract”
So not only are New Zealanders losing their jobs because of corporate greed and mis-management in Wall St, USA – but our current policies actually encourage contracts to be awarded to other countries, in effect “exporting” jobs.
Is this making sense to anyone?
Is it little wonder we have high unemployment, who need the dole to simply survive?
Because demonising a vulnerable group in our society will not achieve a single damn thing; create a single damn job; nor give us the Decent Society that we once enjoyed living in.
So far, my fellow New Zealanders, there is precious little decency going on here.
Capitalism, top heavy and toppling – Bernard Hickey
This is must-read stuff…
It is worth noting that, here in New Zealand, recent tax cuts gave $2.5 billion a year to the top 10 per cent of earners and “practically nothing to the bottom 20 per cent of earners, who got 3 per cent of those cuts”.
It is also worth noting that, as a country, we are having to borrow $380 million per week to – in part – fund those tax cuts. That’s $17.6 billion this year alone.
Far from being a “prudent fiscal manager”, National is being highly irresponsible as it continues to woo the Middle Class for their votes.
Only thing is: eventually it all has to be paid back. Even selling all out SOEs won’t cover that debt mountain, as we simply don’t have enough state assets left after the 1980s and 1990s.
From “Nanny State” to “Daddy State”…
I don’t think there’s much question that serious social problems in this country are not being addressed in any meaningful way by this current government…
So is the Prime Minister, John Key, really aware of what is actually going on in New Zealand right now? Well, judge for yourself…
So what is National doing about soaring youth unemployment?
At their recent Conference, held in Wellington, they came up with this…
(Article abbreviated)
They’re going to clamp down on booze and cigarettes?!?!
That’s it?
Oh good lord! And people thought that Labour was “Nanny Statist”?!?!
I wonder who will be next to feel the iron fist of National’s Polit-buro state control? The retired? Civil Servants? Anyone using state hospitals???
Congratulations, my fellow New Zealanders: we have gone past Nanny State to Big Brother.
It might be worthwhile considering that,
- Not all unemployed youth smoke
- Not all unemployed youth drink
- Even if they do, Key says that they will still receive “a limited amount of money for young people to spend at their discretion“. Like… on booze and ciggies?!
- Even if they won’t have enough “discretionary pocket money” – what is to stop them stealing it? Or selling their Food Card for cash, and then buying ciggies and booze?
In the meantime, how many jobs will this piece of neo-Nanny Statism create?
The answer, I submit, is: 
Even the NZ Herald was quick to acknowledge this simple fact in their August 16 editorial,
“Yet there is also nothing in the Prime Minister’s announcement that creates jobs for young people. There, the Government still has work to do.”
Meanwhile, as National blames the young unemployed of this country for the world recession, and proposes to penalise them by tinkering with their only means of survival – the problem continues unabated,
The last time youth unemployment was this high was in 1992…
1992?
Wasn’t that the previous National government led by Jim Bolger, with Ruth Richardson as Minister of Finance? And didn’t she implement a slash and burn economic policy in her “Mother of All Budgets” that resulted in unemployment reaching over 10%?!?!
Why, yes. It was.
Are we starting to see a pattern develop here, folks?
It is abundantly clear that National has no clue how to address this problem. Attacking welfare benefits which keep people from starving to death, or more likely, breaking into our homes to find food, is not an answer. It is a cheap shot geared toward winning votes from uneducated voters who hold the illusion that living on a benefit is a cosy arrangement (it is not).
There are no policies being announced to create jobs, or to train young people into a trade or profession.
National should be throwing open the doors of our polytechs to train young people into tradespeople that the community desperately needs. With the re-building of Christchurch shortly to commence – where are the necessary tradespeople going to come from? (Most have buggered of to Australia.)
If this is the best that National can come up with, then, my fellow New Zealanders, we are in deep ka-ka.
Meanwhile…
Dr Mapp said the research science and technology was the way to create jobs, economic growth and a higher living standard for the country.
“To that end, it is vital that high-tech, exporting companies maintain their competitive edge in global markets.”
The grants range from $300,000 to $5.9m and run for three years.
They are valued at 20 per cent of the research and development spend in each business and provide a maximum $2.4m a year for three years.
Dr Mapp said they provide the businesses involved with more financial security over that period.
Businesses to get grants in the latest round were involved in software development, biotechnology, manufacturing and electronics.
Wellington companies which received grants:
Core Technology: $629,400
Open Cloud: $2,394,920
Xero: $4,040,000
Xero was founded by Rod Drury in 2006, who made $65 million in the same year after selling his email archiving system AfterMail. Xero purchased Australian online payroll company, Paycycle, in July of this year for A$1.5 million.
Which begs the question as to why the government has given away $4 million of tax-payers money when the owner is ‘flush’ with $65 million and has enough capital to buy off-shore companies elsewhere.
Is this a prudent use of tax-payers’ money, especially when,
* government is cutting back on social services?
* government has cut back on youth training programmes?
* government is borrowing $380 million a week, and telling the rest of us to “tighten our belts”?
At a time when government is berrating unemployed 16 and 17 year olds for being on the dole and “smoking ciggies”, instead of providing meaningful training and/or employment, it seems that National is still “picking winners” in the field of commerce.
$4 million could go a long way in providing training, and a future, for many 16 year olds.
By contrast, how much do young people, living away from home, recieve from WINZ? It must be a grand sum, to earn the Prime Minister’s stern attention. The answer is:
It’s a shame they’re not “picking winners” with our unemployed youth.
Unemployment; A right way and the Government way…
As per usual, the National Party conference this year has focused on beneficiaries and social welfare. Listening to these people, who seem utterly oblivious to the harsh realities of New Zealand in a recession, we have the Prime Minister, John Key, saying that the current social welfare system,
“…is not working and needs to change.
When young people go on welfare, by definition, they stay there longer and cost the state more…and rob themselves of a tremendous opportunity.
Every New Zealander can be entitled to that brighter future, no moreso than young people”.
?!?!
Nowhere does Key or any of his colleagues acknowledge that 160,000 people are currently jobless. The current rate of 6.6% is double that prior to the beginning of the recession in 2008, when it stood at 3.8%.
I wonder – does John Key or any other National MP believe that 80,000 New Zealanders woke up one morning in late 2008 and decided to chuck in their jobs, where they earned $600, $700, $800 or more – to go onto the dole to receive $201.40 (nett, p/w, single person 25+)? Or $335.66 (nett, p/w, married couple)?
I doubt it.
I harbour a suspicion – not backed up by any firm evidence, I admit – that National MPs are not actually thick enough to believe that the vast majority of unemployed New Zealanders prefer to be jobless.
So why target unemployed Kiwis who happen to have had the mis-fortune to have lost their jobs – and are still being made redundant every day?
Simple. Beneficiary bashing – or “welfare reforms” to give it a more palatable, acceptable term – wins votes. There is a part of middle class New Zealand that envisions every single welfare recipient to be a character out of “Once Were Warriors” or a dope-smoking hippy.
This chunk of middle-class New Zealand is harshly punitive in it’s attitude toward poverty, welfare, and solo-mothers (but not solo-fathers). They see the poor; the unemployed; and solo-mothers as being there because of deliberate “bad lifestyle choices”. Holding such prejudiced views is easier than having to think hard and deep about the complex economic and social causes that have created our own under-class in New Zealand. If someone is to blame, for their own mis-fortune, we don’t have to act.
And if there’s one thing that human beings love; it’s simplistic answers to hard questions.
National (and it’s right-wing cousin, ACT) understand this dark streak in our collective psyche and exploit it to the last possible vote.
However, it does nothing to address the very real social and economic problem of unemployment. Bashing beneficiaries is like criticising someone for getting sick – ultimately futile and counter-productive.
To date, this National government has done very little to create jobs; to reduce barriers to education; to train young New Zealanders for life in the 21st Century.
National’s contribution to job creation has been… the cycleway. They have also cut the TIA (Training Incentive Allowance) which, for many, was a ticket off welfare and into paid employment. That happens to be the same TIA that Welfare Minister, Paula Bennett used to get off the DPB.
Nice one, Ms Bennett.
John Key says that the “current system is not working”.
Wrong, Mr Key. The current system is functioning as it should; feeding people who are without incomes.
It is the unemployed who are “not working”.
Where are the jobs, Mr Key; where are the jobs?
BoP Times : 1,000 people applied for just 90 jobs
Food parcel families made poor choices, says Key
Jobs to go at textile factories
10 applicants for every one shelf-stocking job
National Party Conference – Day One
Employment Blow as Vbase cuts 151 jobs
National promises to unleash welfare reforms
Lower Hutt jobs to go as shops shut
Applicants queue for 20 jobs at new KFC store
Getting young people off welfare a priority
Demand Strong for New Jobs Up for Grabs in Glenfield
National Party Conference – Day One
News Archives
Crony Watch
Keeping an eye on dodgy government appointees, crony-by-crony!
Frankly Speaking... 
