web analytics
The Standard

Nats’ 170,000 jobs evaporate

Written By: - Date published: 6:46 am, December 19th, 2012 - 32 comments
Categories: jobs - Tags:

In Budget 2011, National made a big song and dance over the projection that ‘they’ would create 170,000 jobs in the next four years. Leaving aside the fact that they usually claim the government doesn’t create jobs and that they were counting jobs from the year before in their four year total, the promise basically rested on creating 57,000 jobs this year. So, what’s the latest update on that figure? … 0.

That’s right, the Half-Year Fiscal and Economic Update released yesterday shows zero net change in employment in the year to March 2013. That’s the same period where National promised 57,000 more jobs in Budget 2011.

Unemployment is rising and National’s election promise of 170,000 more jobs has disappeared into the unrememberable past for John Key. But the new projections are still promising 108,000 more jobs in the four years to 2015.

How? Why by claiming there will 50,000 more jobs next year, of course.

That’s the great thing about the brighter future, it’s always just ahead of you….

32 comments on “Nats’ 170,000 jobs evaporate”

  1. vto 1

    They are quite clearly lying bastards.

    • shorts 1.1

      they quite clearly don’t care

      and no one is holding them accountable to the wider public

      • Tom Gould 1.1.1

        Pity we do not have a functioning media in this country. You would think that having screamed the 170,000 promise for days they might feel a bit hurt by being so easily duped. But no, not a chance. I guess they must be in cahoots?

  2. Bill 2

    Today’s cheery thought…

    Something that has been sitting on my mind for quite a while is the fact that governments have been pursuing policies that seem designed to deepen of prolong the recession/depression of the ‘real’ economy. It’s been particularly noticable with the NZ government – that has pursued degrees of austerity even though NZ was largely cushioned from the international financial collapse.

    I’ve been suspecting that something along the lines of shifting economic activity into a more abstact form was related to the fact that a lot of peaks were showing up on the resource front. So, by shifting the focus of the market away from ‘real stuff’ and dumping ever more people outside the perimeter of the (now increasingly abstract) market economy, those in power could maintain and even augment the economic power they already enjoyed.

    Society gets gutted in the process and more and more people relegated to positions of non-participation or precarious participation. I have no idea if this is correct, but I’ve this notion that it’s not the size of the market per se that matters in terms of capitalism, but the size of any individual market share ; ie, market share and that alone determines amounts of power and influence. If this wasn’t the case, then the market would surely have gone ‘hell for leather’ over the past hundred years or so to enable the participation of the millions of people across Africa and elsewhere who live in really dire material poverty. But that hasn’t happened.

    Meanwhile, the only reason ‘we’ got to participate at any meaningful level was because of compromises made by economic elites following WWII who were faced with a competing ideology emanating from the USSR – that would have stripped them of their power base if it had caught on among the general population.

    Two things. When the command economies imploded the process of cutting us adrift began in earnest- the reprise of neo-liberal or neo-classical economic policies that had seen inter-generational declines in living standards suddenly blossomed. And now (and yup, I’ve maybe been too immersed in this stuff lately) all neo-classical economists are saying that we cannot reduce our carbon use without the market collapsing. But if you entrench the market in a space away from the real world of production and distribution and let the real world market economy wither, then the power and wealth you formerly enjoyed is preserved…while the majority are shunted via the vehicle of ‘necessary’ austerity towards ‘thrid world’ levels of poverty, disengagement and disempowerment…and carbon emissions drop.

    • Green Viper 2.1


    • tc 2.2

      +1 and also growing the meme that polly’s are self serving troughers with no real regard for the everyday person.
      IMO this disconnect was reflected in voter turnout in 2011 as folk seemed to think both major parties were just shades of the same.

    • Bill,
      I believe some of what you are observing is about getting the punters (NZers) “readied” for planned drilling, mining activities.

      Historically unpopular, we will be far more pliable, and divide and rule far more easy to achieve when those with concerns over the dinosaur-style plunder-and-rape approach can be targetted as “not caring” about and “obstructing” jobs for the increasingly impoverished and jobless ones (yeah, yeah, I know, jobs in these industries are sought internationally and Mr X, the jobless one, hasn’t got a shit-show in hell of benefitting from such activities, however a lot of people DON’T know that).
      This tactic has already been applied to the Denniston Mine issue by this Government.

  3. vto 3

    I can’t believe that in our far-flung modern times we are unable to have everybody gainfully engaged in society and day to day machinations.

    I guess it says something about our system that it results in superfluous humans.

    Pretty damn poor system

    • Bill 3.1

      I can’t believe that in our far-flung modern times we are unable to have everybody gainfully engaged in society and day to day machinations.

      Curious as to whether you’re just referring to unemployed people there or acknowledging that many, if not most jobs do not offer ‘gainful engagement with society’? Serving at McD’s might be said to be gainfully engaged with the market…albeit a fairly disempowered position of engagement. And the same might be said for workiing at a solicitors office (though that might be more empowered).
      Regardless, they don’t offer any means to be ‘gainfully engaged with society’ and might be said to preclude any such engagement because they chew up peoples’ time in fairly pointless activities.

    • Draco T Bastard 3.2

      It’s the nature of capitalism and other forms of authoritarianism. Having everyone engaged in the running of society is detrimental to those in power and so such engagement is prevented first through keeping people away from the decision making process (representative democracy) then through poverty (capitalism channeling all wealth to the few) and then through backroom deals (TPPA).

      • Populuxe1 3.2.1

        “Having everyone engaged in the running of society is detrimental” to getting anything done and is far too complicated. Mob rule is ugly and most people are either too busy or too stupid to be involved in the endless complexities of governance. How are you going to make that work? Referenda by mobile phone every ten minutes?

        • Draco T Bastard

          “Having everyone engaged in the running of society is detrimental” to getting anything done and is far too complicated.

          Wrong and your prejudice is showing again.

          Mob rule is ugly and most people are either too busy or too stupid…

          That’s why we now have human rights, wars are frowned upon and the justice system is far less arbitrary than it was under feudalism.

          What you’re spouting there is the BS that the authoritarians want people to believe. The fact that you believe it just shows that you’re incapable of questioning what you’re told.

  4. Talk bout song and dance while the country rises up in the list of most unequal in pay to the 10th place and our debt goes out of control and jobs disappear. Here is John Key doing it Gangnam style!

    • Akldnut 4.1

      Dancing and joking while the economy burns and the country sinks – he’s not a PM he’s a clown, the only thing missing is the face paint.
      Here he comes, meet The Amazing Lovable “JOKEY”

  5. erentz 5

    Yeah, I’ve been back in the country since start of November. I haven’t seen so little work since right after the 2008 GFC when everyone stopped everything. It’s pretty annoying when on the one hand you have articles claiming NZ needs ICT skills, then you’re home and low and behold, big joke, we don’t need you. Funny right.

  6. Matthew Hooton 6

    James, I can’t see anywhere on the internet National making a “big song and dance” that they would create 170,000 jobs, let alone an “election promise”.
    I can see here http://www.treasury.govt.nz/budget/2012/speech/b12-spch.pdf Bill English reporting in his 2012 Budget speech what the Treasury forecasts were.
    I can see in its economic policy a forecast at http://www.national.org.nz/PDF_General/Economic_Development_policy.pdf that by 2016 there would be 170,000 more jobs than in 2011.
    I also note there is no mention of 170,000 jobs in its 2011 employment policy at http://www.national.org.nz/PDF_General/Employment_Relations_Policy.pdf
    If you google “170,000 jobs john key” it seems the claim is most often used by the left to attack him rather than by the government.
    So nice try building your “John Key lied when he made a big song and dance that he would create 170,000 jobs” narrative, but there are no facts to support it.
    Surely you can find enough things in the E&F Update that are true and able to be used to attack the government instead of making things up.

    • Napkins 6.1

      Interesting, it appears that the National Government didn’t set any such goal to create more jobs. And they achieved it admirably.

      • Jim Viperald - Once was colonised 6.1.1

        Matthew Hooton is surely capable of coming up with better bullshit than that.

        And where did the following come from: “National’s Brighter Future Plan will help business create 170,000 new jobs over the next four years. John Key and National – Building a Brighter Future” ?

        What about John Key’s National Party Northern Region Conference 2011 speech?

        Let’s see what excuses can be pulled out – that John Key did not read his own electioneering material? That he cannot recall his own speech?? That he did not read his own speech??? That he now has a brain fade????

    • One Tāne Viper 6.2

      Hey, spinner, I did a simple (well, obviously that’s a matter of opinion and/or ability, but…) Google search: it’s time for your reality check.

      GUYON So you’re still expecting 170,000 jobs over four years and back in surplus by 2014/2015?

      JOHN We’ve got no reason to back away from that.

    • freedom 6.3

      i think what the troll is dancing around is that Bill English was the one who actually articulated the words most often
      he also seems to ignore the fact that if National had not said it, we sure as hell would have heard all about how the opposition are fabricating statements etc
      pity the troll conveniently forgets that Bill English is part of John Key’s Government, and hence John Key is ultimately responsible for the policy/election statements made on behalf of his Government

    • ColonialPete 6.4

      Page four of the National Party Finance Policy leading up to the election under “our results so far”:
      “Government finances are steadily improving, the economy is growing, and this is already bearing fruit for New Zealand families.The Pre-Election Economic and Fiscal Update issued on 25 October shows …
      More jobs
      • 43,000 jobs were created in the past year.
      • 170,000 more new jobs are expected by 2016 than at the time of Budget 2011.
      • Unemployment will fall steadily to less than 5 per cent.”
      National was campaigning on the expectation of 170,000 jobs.

    • mike 6.5

      Matthew, open your Control Panel, go to Internet Connections, Preferences, and unclick the box next to “NAct scum spin merchant filter”. See if that helps.
      Hon David Cunliffe: Why is the Prime Minister content to roar about the success of the Rugby World Cup and the record dairy payout, outside the Chamber, but barely able to squeak about the performance of his Government—because it is all someone else’s fault, such as the global recession or previous Governments—when he gets into the Chamber?
      Rt Hon JOHN KEY: I was actually slightly conscious that I was roaring inside the Chamber, but, for the purposes, let us go through it one more time. We have grown in eight out of the last nine quarters—not bad. We have interest rates at a 45-year low—not bad. Unemployment is starting to fall—not too bad. We are likely to create 170,000 jobs in the next 4 years, we have reformed the Resource Management Act, and, by the way, we are on track to win the Rugby World Cup.
      Hon Members: Yay!”

    • saarbo 6.6

      http://www.national.org.nz/PDF_General/Economic_Development_policy.pdf that by 2016 there would be 170,000 more jobs than in 2011.”
      Im just sitting here trying to understand why you made this post Matthew? National have clearly been  talking about 170,000 more jobs. You stated it yourself.
      Matthew, you are very brave defending this National government, as a business owner I have seen the business environment really head south since National come in in 2008. It is incredibly slow out there, mostly because National are choosing to allocate millions of dollars towards the huge roading projects instead of allocating to more stimulating areas such as welfare and education. The tax cuts to the top tax rate also withdrew huge sums from the spending part of the economy which slowed things up also (I understand that English wants to encourage Saving, but the trade off with jobs and growth isn’t balancing), and then they wonder why tax revenue keeps falling??? (This is the reason that historically Labour has an average GDP rowth rate a full 1% higher than National’s, Labour tends to allocate more to welfare, education and Health rather than infrastucture which leads to more jobs and growth…basically a bigger pie, more velocity, a free lunch).
      I reckon that this National government is the most inept government we have had in NZ for years. I do know that many people who I have spoken to who voted for them in 2008 and 2011 are really having a careful think about alternatives. The conundrum for these people is that Labour seems to be controlled by a bunch of self serving lightweights and there is a huge divide between the membership and the caucus, so they are sticking with the status quo (I for one wont be donating any more than the minimum ($25 per year) until Cunliffe and co are promoted back to positions that they should be in and there is some sort of meaningful reconciliation with members).
      But if Labour can get its shit together, then this National government is history, and for the sake of this country, the sooner the better. This National government is hopeless.

      • blue leopard 6.6.1

        Well said Saarbo

        I am guessing it is not much point trying to understand someone who probably hasn’t any concept of understanding themselves, plus spin doctors keep repeating shit under the knowledge the more people hear something the more they are likely to accept it as fact. It would be interesting to hear Mr Hootons response to your comments; although probably nauseatingly twisted.

  7. ruup 7

    The jobs are going to come from the Kiwi’s going to Australia (assuming they had jobs)

  8. SouthDeezViper 8

    Hooton, why do you even bother?

    I can appreciate the fact you’re well known for having a right-wing bias and that, more often than not, you’re going to be paddling up shit creek whenever you post on The Standard because of such. So, I guess, I have to give you a smidgen of respect for trying to engage here. However, what I find a little odd is that you’re not just your ‘average’ blog user, but a ‘journalist’ who regularly appears in the mainstream media, and that you’re forever coming here and posting shit that is just fucking littered with outright fabrications.

    Are you making a sly attempt to convert us to neoliberalism with your falsehoods, or something? Otherwise, what’s the point in disseminating your drivel here? The I-call-bullshit-on-that-that-one radar is in full effect around these ways, buddy.

    • ColonialPete 8.1

      I disagree with Matthew most of the time, but I do give him credit for turning up here. He doesn’t really troll, although he does present the National spin. I’ve never seen him incur the wrath of the mods. It gives us the opportunity to counter that spin without us being entirely in our own echo chamber.

  9. IrishViper 9

    And from 2009: http://thestandard.org.nz/jam-tomorrow/ 

  10. The Stepper 10

    Bear with me, I’m a bit confused by the article.

    It states that unemployment is rising, but goes on to say that the net change in unemployment is zero.

    How do those two things reconcile?

    • Draco T Bastard 10.1

      The population is growing. Same number of people employed but there’s more people resulting in an increase in unemployment.

Links to post

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere