Daily review 04/04/2024

40 comments on “Daily review 04/04/2024 ”

• Comment on post

1. Grey Area 1

   4 April 2024 at 5:50 pm

   These evil f*cks want to rip the heart out of NZ. This is not some esoteric online discussion. These cruel arseholes have to be stopped. What can we actually do about it?

   I'm not interested in pounding the keyboard. I mean actually.

   In case if anyone's wondering tomorrow I'm off to SS4C and a GP branch meeting.

   https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350231627/nz-politics-live-government-will-require-referendums-every-recently-created-maori

   Reply
   • Grey Area 1.1

     4 April 2024 at 6:06 pm

     We have to fight back but I don't know how or who with.

     Suicide Prevention Office to close in Health Ministry cuts – union

     Reply
     • Phillip ure 1.1.1

       4 April 2024 at 7:11 pm

       I can't guess what the trigger(s) will be..but we are heading into a period of direct action…

       I'm doing weights… getting ready..

       Non-violent direct action looks to be our only option..

       (It worked for Gandhi..)

       Reply
     • Phillip ure 1.1.2

       4 April 2024 at 8:14 pm

       I am also pinning some hopes on the millennials..

       What this govt is doing goes against pretty much against a lot of what they have learnt(been taught..(thank you..teachers..!)

       Especially around areas like trashing the environment.. imperiling their very future…

       And the good news is that the millennials are a demographic bulge…much like the boomers…

       And if these right-wing barbarians piss off enough of them..

       Those right-wing barbarians/environmental-visigoths will have shown that demographic-bulge just what they are…and they will be out of office for the foreseeable future…

       Reply
   • Res Publica 1.2

     5 April 2024 at 7:54 am

     Racists gonna racism, I guess.

     Reply
2. Phillip ure 2

   4 April 2024 at 7:54 pm

   Memo to those buying into the bloated public service bullshit:

   Radio nz reported today that we spend one third (per head of population) of the amount australia spends on their public service..

   'bloated'..my arse…!

   ..more like emaciated..

   So those who have drunk the kool-ade should just take a deep breath..and see this for what it is..

   A right-wing attack …an attempt to further shrink the state..to further neoliberal/capitalist aims..

   Reply
   • Rose 2.1

     4 April 2024 at 8:20 pm

     Radio nz reported today that we spend one third (per head of population) of the amount australia spends on their public service..

     Without a link to support, even a basic sniff test would suggest that statistic is bullshit. A quick google search supports the sniff test.

     https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NE.CON.GOVT.ZS?locations=NZ-AU

     https://www.stuff.co.nz/nz-news/350164796/heres-what-our-63000-public-servants-actually-do-and-why-we-have-so-many-them-now

     Reply
     • Phillip ure 2.1.1

       4 April 2024 at 8:45 pm

       Are you deliberately spreading mistruths…

       Yr first link is about something different to what I reported from rnz..

       And is a textbook example of the link being used as a tool to mislead..

       And I can't link to yr second one..after my critique on their output..I was blocked from their site..somewhat petty on their part..you'd think..?

       Reply
       • Rose 2.1.1.1

         4 April 2024 at 8:48 pm

         How inconvenient that you can’t read the second link. It says the complete opposite of your unlinked bullshit.

         Reply
         • weka 2.1.1.1.1

           4 April 2024 at 9:04 pm

           From your Stuff link,

           If we look across the ditch, we can see the difficulty in making this a like-for-like comparison. On the face of it we have far more public servants per person than Australia – with one public servant for every 83 people compared to one in 139 in Australia.

           But Australia has a federal system, where many things that we would leave to the central government are done by states, which are not included in the national figure.

           Reply
           • Rose 2.1.1.1.1.1

             4 April 2024 at 9:35 pm

             Did you read the bit about Ireland, with a comparable population?

             Waiting for Philip to support his ludicrous claim. Thought you demanded links, even for mundane statements like parliament oral questions?

             [I was in town, on my phone, you numpty. Now that I am home I’m giving you some time out.

             1. don’t tell moderators what to do. You have a habit of poking at moderation, what you haven’t learned yet is we will slap you don’t hard because it’s just tedious as fuck (especially when you essentially lie about moderation as you did last time).
             2. read the Policy
             3. start figuring out how things work here because I have no more patience with your trolling
             4. don’t expect people to read whole articles to try and parse what you are on about. Instead, explain in your own words and use short quotes and links to back that up.
             5. Your comment below “Public sector v public service. Swat up on the difference.” is a classic example. You may have an interesting point there, but you fail to explain what you mean. This is why I am calling it trolling. This isn’t twitter or FB, you are expected to use your words.
             6. what really pisses me off as a moderator is that we need a better class of RWNJ here. You could easily be bringing good RW political arguments to the table, but instead continually revert to these lazy throwaway comments.

             3 day ban – weka]

             [Based on your reply to your Mod note early this morning that went straight into the Trash folder that Mods however can read in the back end, and to back up my fellow Mod and show my solidarity, I’ve upgraded your ban to one month.

             Despite the lenient rules of engagement of this free site, which you can read in the this site’s Policy (https://thestandard.org.nz/policy/), you behave like the typical RWNJ troll who obviously doesn’t give a shit about any limitations on your own behaviour here and you blatantly ignore the clear points of the Mod note, which took time to write.

             You also seem to have conveniently forgotten that you had already received a Mod note previously (https://thestandard.org.nz/open-mike-21-03-2024/#comment-1993370).

             Personally, I don’t see any reason why you should be allowed to waste anymore time of other commenters and Mods here, but let’s see if this educational ban will suffice for you to keep your commenting privileges here – Incognito]

             Reply
             • Incognito …

               5 April 2024 at 1:00 pm

               Mod note

               Reply
         • Rose 2.1.1.1.2

           4 April 2024 at 9:30 pm

           Still waiting for the link to support your frankly ludicrous claim.

           Reply
   • weka 2.2

     4 April 2024 at 10:39 pm

     Radio nz reported today

     From now on, please either link, or if you were listening to broadcast, give the time of day and some detail eg the Panel at around 4.30pm were discussing…

     That way people can get the context for what you are talking about.

     Reply
     • Phillip ure 2.2.1

       5 April 2024 at 9:00 am

       It was on morning report..and what was read out was a comparison between nz and a bunch of other countries..

       And the comparisons made were on the amount each country spends..per head of population..

       And was presented to provide context ..

       Now ..I am not lying…I did hear it..and I think rnz has a reasonable degree of credibility..so we can dismiss any claims of dishonesty on their part.

       btw..did anyone else hear it..?

       [I’m not saying you are lying. I am telling you as a moderator:

       From now on, please either link, or if you were listening to broadcast, give the time of day and some detail eg the Panel at around 4.30pm were discussing.

       This is so people know more specifically what you are referring to.

       • weka]

       Reply
       • weka 2.2.1.1

         5 April 2024 at 9:11 am

         mod note. Please reply letting me know you have read and agree to do this going forward.

         Reply
         • Phillip ure 2.2.1.1.1

           5 April 2024 at 10:39 am

           Sure..

           Reply
           • Phillip ure 2.2.1.1.1.1

             5 April 2024 at 10:50 am

             And it was rose who accused me of 'spreading bullshit'…

             Reply
             • Incognito …

               5 April 2024 at 1:14 pm

               FFS, Phil, are you 5 years old?

               Stop with this tedious BS and playing the victim and link to what you heard on RNZ Morning Report. Here’s the link to the archive (https://www.rnz.co.nz/national/programmes/morningreport/library), find the episode, find the segment, and then post it (i.e. the link) here.

               Reply
               • Phillip ure …

                 5 April 2024 at 5:53 pm

                 Where exactly am I 'playing the victim's..?

                 I was clarifying for weka that it was not her who said I was lying..

                 And I have no idea where to find what was a context adding aside on that subject.

                 And unsure why you made the 'five year old' question..

                 What exactly triggered that..?

                 And I am puzzled that nobody else on this site..also heard what was a heads-up on that topic..

                 Reply
                 • Incognito …

                   5 April 2024 at 6:15 pm

                   Where exactly am I 'playing the victim's..?

                   Hmmm, let me see:

                   “I was blocked from their site”

                   “Now ..I am not lying”

                   “And it was rose who accused me of 'spreading bullshit'…”

                   I was clarifying for weka that it was not her who said I was lying..

                   Weka doesn’t suffer from the same reading comprehension deficit as you do.

                   And I have no idea where to find what was a context adding aside on that subject.

                   It shows. You don’t have to use your imagination on speculation, just read the Mod and pre-Mod notes and follow the simplest of instructions.

                   And unsure why you made the 'five year old' question..

                   Your commenting pattern here.

                   What exactly triggered that..?

                   As above, and it was a logical & predictable continuation of the moderation in response to your continued stubborn refusal to cough up a link.

                   And I am puzzled that nobody else on this site..also heard what was a heads-up on that topic..

                   All the more reason to dig up that link and show the World that you’re not making up things in your head. So far, you’ve managed to waste a lot of our time and only produced unsubstantiated reckons, hot air, and whingy-whiny replies. The only reply I want to see from you here now is the link to that illustrious segment on RNZ Morning Report, i.e., put up or shut up.

                   Reply
   • Traveller 2.3

     4 April 2024 at 11:24 pm

     Hi Phillip.

     I'm one who is of the view the public service has become too large, and I'll try to make my case.

     1. This blog post The complex and bloated Executive | Kiwiblog contains a link to a NZ Initiative report that compares the size of NZ's Executive with that of a group of smaller and a group of larger nations. It is a detailed analysis, including comparisons based on the number of Ministers, the number of Ministries and the number of portfolios.

     The central findings are:

     • New Zealand has a massively outsized Executive. Taking the average of parliamentary democracies of similar size to New Zealand, we have 44% more ministers, nearly triple (282%) the number of portfolios, and one and a half times (156%) as many departments.
     • It is likely that this size causes a suite of serious issues in New Zealand’s policymaking institutions, particularly relating to coordination, efficiency, selection effects, and resource allocation.
     • The exact reasons for this increase in size are not clear, but it is likely due to a combination of factors, like the absence of legislative restrictions, political expedience, and government signaling. Given the political advantages it bestows on those in government, it will likely be difficult to rectify.

     2. There have been other recent reports showing the extent to which government spending has risen in recent years, including this Core Crown tax revenue hits 30% of GDP. Expenses 1/3 of GDP. – theFacts. Note – the graph toggles between $'s and % of GDP.

     3. This data Workforce Data – Workforce size – Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission shows the growth in public sector employees since 2000. I have calculated the numbers excluding local government employees. In 2000, the number of central government employees was 254,971. In 2017 the number was 341,394. and by 2023 the count was 407,178. So, in 17 years between 2000 and 2017, the number of central government employees grew by 34%, but in just 6 years to 2023 it grew by 20%.

     Public sector employees now number close to 20% of the total workforce (up from 14% in 2017 Public-Service-Workforce-Data-2017.pdf (publicservice.govt.nz))

     I would also note this:

     "Over the last 5 years, the overall public sector workforce increased by 15% (with central government up 15.3% and local government up 13%). This compares with an 9% growth in the private sector over the same period. " Workforce Data – Workforce size – Te Kawa Mataaho Public Service Commission

     I don't believe for one moment we are receiving anywhere near good value for that increase, nor do I consider it remotely reasonable to assert our public service is "emaciated".

     Reply
     • Res Publica 2.3.1

       5 April 2024 at 7:52 am

       Hi Traveller

       While you present an interesting thesis, there's really no empirical basis or consensus for there being a "right" size for public services, or percentage of GDP that we should be spending on it.

       All we've got is a bunch of reckons and competing theories of public service organization and structure to go by.

       The prevailing ideology around the public service in New Zealand for the last 40 odd years has been New Public Management (NPM), which is basically neoliberal economic theory applied to the public sector.

       Its proponents are really good at making broad, dramatic statements about how it makes services more efficient and effective by introducing quasi-market systems and treating them like businesses. But there's precious little evidence it actually delivers on that.

       Trust me, I spent the better part of 2 years looking really hard for some when I was doing my Master's thesis.

       What the evidence does show is:

       1. There's no single, universal prescription for the size or structure of the public sector. It depends on the economic and cultural context.
       2. Public services and businesses are driven by fundamentally different factors. You can't just apply strategies from one to other. Because organizations don't exist in a vacuum.

          Also no, you can't run your country like it's an airline.

       3. Cutting budgets or reducing the size of the public sector doesn't introduce additional efficiencies, but instead erodes capacity and undermines the ability of organizations to deliver.
       4. It's politically popular to focus cost savings on "back end" services such as IT, comms, or HR. But all that does is mean public sector organizations either come to reply on (expensive) consultants to deliver these or are reduced to throwing warm bodies at problems rather than leveraging technology to become more efficient or effective.

       I've got plenty of issues with the NZI report you've referenced: in particular the countries they selected for comparison (e.g. Australia has massive bureaucracies at the state level that aren't counted), and the weird focus on the size of the executive – which has no relation to the number of ministries.

       Where I do (sort of) agree is that the separation of services into policy and delivery arms was a huge mistake that causes enormous inefficiencies and hampers the effective co-ordination and delivery of policy.

       So yeah, drink the NACT kool-aid all you want. But don't try and pretend this is anything more than a bunch of partisan reckons dressed up with some shitty research and badly formatted graphs.

       Reply
       • Traveller 2.3.1.1

         5 April 2024 at 9:06 am

         "there's really no empirical basis or consensus for there being a "right" size for public services, or percentage of GDP that we should be spending on it."

         "All we've got is a bunch of reckons and competing theories of public service organization and structure to go by."

         Well, of course. The 'right' size of the public sector is to a fair degree ideological, and so naturally there are 'competing theories'. However there is a significant body of work that has looked at this issue over time, including papers such as 335309_OptimalSizeOfGovernment.pdf (ime.bg) (which takes a declared market based approach). The 'empirical' evidence is that NZ has a disproportionately large number of elements of our executive when compared to other countries. The 'empirical' evidence is that the number of public sector employees has risen significantly in recent years, disproportionately so when compared to an extended period of recent history covering both Labour and National led governments.

         "and the weird focus on the size of the executive – which has no relation to the number of ministries."

         It's not a 'weird' focus. The report covers the number of ministers, portfolios and departments. It is these elements that comprise the executive arm of government and feed into the size of the public service.

         "Public services and businesses are driven by fundamentally different factors. "

         They operate in the same financial and economic environment. The 20% of NZ'ers employed by the state are paid for by the 80% who are not. When the growth in public sector employees outstrips the growth in the sector that funds them, there is a problem.

         Reply
         • Res Publica 2.3.1.1.1

           5 April 2024 at 10:03 am

           They operate in the same financial and economic environment. The 20% of NZ'ers employed by the state are paid for by the 80% who are not. When the growth in public sector employees outstrips the growth in the sector that funds them, there is a problem.

           The problem is when voters demand world class public services but aren't prepared to pay for them.

           Or, even worse, when right wing politicians spruik bullshit theories (like the Laffer curve) about the size of the public sector to fulfil their wet dream of smashing the regulatory state. Despite the overwhelming evidence suggesting it doesn't deliver on it's promises.

           It's not a 'weird' focus. The report covers the number of ministers, portfolios and departments. It is these elements that comprise the executive arm of government and feed into the size of the public service.

           The size of any given cabinet is a political rather than a policy decision and s nothing to do with the size of the wider public service.

           Maybe the growth in the public sector reflects a natural progression towards a size that's actually appropriate for the services it needs to provide, and demands placed on it by New Zealanders.

           Have you ever entertained the notion that rather than being too large, the public sector in New Zealand may instead be too small?

           Reply
           • Traveller 2.3.1.1.1.1

             5 April 2024 at 10:21 am

             "The problem is when voters demand world class public services but aren't prepared to pay for them."

             It's a balance. However, it's also a problem when voters pay for world class public services and they aren't delivered.

             "The size of any given cabinet is a political rather than a policy decision and s nothing to do with the size of the wider public service."

             Policy decisions ARE political decisions. The size of the wider public service is a function of political decision making, and the size of the executive, the number of departments, of course they have an impact on the size of the wider public service.

             Reply
             • Res Publica …

               5 April 2024 at 11:46 am

               It's a balance. However, it's also a problem when voters pay for world class public services and they aren't delivered.

               Ok, let's unpack that.

               Let's say instead of delivering a public service I'm a builder and tell you that it will cost you a million dollars to build the house you want.

               You agree on the price, but 3 months down the line decide you don't want to pay a million dollars and reduce the budget by 6.5%.

               If that happens, and your house isn't finished, whose fault is it?

               Reply
               • Traveller …

                 5 April 2024 at 12:09 pm

                 Let's restate the scenario.

                 Let's say that the builder has only completed a fraction of the work for the 93.5% already spent, and still "the ongoing carnage of non-achievement and non-delivery just continues on,” . Newshub Nation: National polytechnic merger Te Pūkenga buckling as it asks for more money and fails students, staff | Newshub

                 Let's say the builder has spent some of the budget on items that have no value to the home owner, and with "no evidence of an agreed budget" and "limited monitoring or oversight of expenditure". (Ministry of Pacific Peoples blasted for $40,000 farewell by public service watchdog | Newshub

                 I'd be asking the builder to stick to his or her knitting.

                 Reply
       • Phillip ure 2.3.1.2

         5 April 2024 at 10:38 am

         Wot res publica said..

         Reply
3. Robert Guyton 3

   4 April 2024 at 9:06 pm

   This article is going to prove days, weeks, nay months of heated discussion here on TS!

   Not.

   https://www.queermajority.com/essays-all/was-foreskin-evolutions-great-mistake

   Reply
   • tWig 3.1

     5 April 2024 at 4:15 pm

     Male circumcision is ritual scarification to identify in groups and out groups (viz, drop your trou in Nazi Germany). What I can never understand are the convoluted theories sprouted round the role of the female orgasm. It's obvious to me that the reproductive musculature involved in the heavy exercise of birthing obviously benefits from regular exercise of those same muscles before ((and after) their function during labour.

     The number of girls undergoing female genital circumcision is increasing. Loss of a foreskin is mutilation, but function is maintained. Not the case with more extreme. female GM, alas.

     Reply
4. Robert Guyton 4

   4 April 2024 at 9:08 pm

   Climate-marches across the motu tomorrow…
   I plan to carry a placard that says,

   “Genuinely concerned”

   Reply
5. John G 5

   4 April 2024 at 9:20 pm

   I couldn't find Philips link from RNZ

   However I did find this :

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_public_sector_size

   He is absolutely correct. We have one of the LOWEST public sectors relative to most of the coutries we compare ourselves to !

   NZ 11.5 %

   Germany 12.9 %

   USA 13.4 %

   UK 22.5 %

   Australia 28.9 % FFS !!

   Reply
   • Rose 5.1

     4 April 2024 at 9:39 pm

     Public sector v public service. Swat up on the difference.

     Reply
     • Patricia Bremner 5.1.1

       4 April 2024 at 10:30 pm

       Sector/service?…. Last time the right did this cutting… it was called "The Sinking Lid"

       Many of us had a visual of headless chickens running in tight pointless circles. MPs trying to convince reporters there was meaning to the madness.

       Round after round of redundancies, encouraging "Dog eat Dog"

       Those who "Lost" had to sell their assets to survive… Garage sales abounded.

       Mortgagee sales were a regular feature as well as "Business Opportunities"

       Predictable soulless lot not caring about the ruined lives. Just "Picking up the bargains" while spreading a narrative of "Self Help"

       Voters have gone for the glitter of shiny things, paltry trinkets of tax cuts, soon gone.

       Reply
   • Traveller 5.2

     4 April 2024 at 11:41 pm

     Unfortunately that data is well out of date (for NZ it's from 2011). As I wrote above:

     "Public sector employees now number close to 20% of the total workforce (up from 14% in 2017 Public-Service-Workforce-Data-2017.pdf (publicservice.govt.nz))"

     The latest numbers I can find for Australia (Public sector growing with Australia: Australian Bureau of Statistics (afr.com)) is there it's around 16%.

     In the UK it's about 17% (UK public sector employment share by region 2023 | Statista).

     Reply
6. John G 6

   4 April 2024 at 10:19 pm

   I stand corrected.

   Reply
7. weka 7

   4 April 2024 at 11:05 pm

   Yet another tribunal hearing in the UK over gender identity ideology and women's rights.

   Rape crisis centre run by trans woman ‘hid sex of its counsellors’

   A rape crisis centre run by a trans woman has been “illegitimately” hiding the biological sex of its counsellors from victims of sexual assault, an employment tribunal has heard.

   Edinburgh Rape Crisis Centre, whose chief executive is Mridul Wadhwa, a trans woman and activist, was said to have used “disciplinary processes to enforce its extreme and uncompromising version of gender identity theory”.

   The case of constructive dismissal centres on Roz Adams, a support worker at the charity, who is claiming she was wrongly accused of “transphobia” and endured a nine-month disciplinary process.

   …

   In her written evidence Adams cited the case of a 60-year-old woman who was abused as a child and only “just begun [to] talk about it”. The woman approached the crisis centre about group work and asked: “Can you reassure me it is just a woman-only group?”

   The woman was repeatedly told that such meetings were “trans-inclusive”.

   Cunningham said: “The tone of the conversation changed and a few days later she got an email saying: ‘You are not suitable for our services.’”

   The Telegraph https://archive.is/CBPNy#selection-2733.38-2751.142

   This is what happens when men are allowed in women's spaces. There is zero reason why RC services for trans women cannot be set up in parallel with women's services, other than trans identified males want validation or they want women's spaces.

   Reply
   • Obtrectator 7.1

     5 April 2024 at 12:27 am

     The link to the Telegraph story doesn't seem to be working properly, but I was able to look it up via Duckduckgo.

     I stand with Roz. How in hell did that "Whadareya" character get to be appointed to that sort of position? Cis- and trans-women have to have separate services.

     Reply
     • SPC 7.1.1

       5 April 2024 at 2:34 pm

       My preference would be for women's refugees (and lesbian groups) to determine who they provide services/access to, with management by those born of the female sex.

       Keeping out those drunk and aggressive and others deemed a risk to others – there are known cases of people having to be allowed in because of "no discrimination" and then assaulting staff – is part of a safe workplace.

       Given the practice of some men who assault women to then seek to access women's prisons, this is a known risk for women's refuges.

       That might mean that the LGBT+ community provide alternative safe spaces.

       Reply

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS