web analytics
The Standard

Real social security; real jobs – not bennie bashing

Written By: - Date published: 10:41 am, March 27th, 2013 - 55 comments
Categories: ACC, benefits, child welfare, families, greens, jobs, labour, nz first, paula bennett, phil goff, unemployment, welfare - Tags: ,

Yesterday, I watched a lot of the speeches, mainly by opposition MPs, in the committee stages (parts 1 and 2) of the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Bill.  Green, Labour and NZ First MPs highlighted much of the evils of this piece of legislation.

Today on the Daily Blog,  Sue Bradford has posted (“Destroying lives to win votes: National’s anti-beneficiary rampage continues“) an excellent  summary of what the Bill does and doesn’t do.  She outlines the punitive measures included in Social Security (Youth Support and Work Focus) Amendment Act, that passed last year, and summarises the latest Bill as follows:

The second bill going through this week adds to this by (among other things):

• Replacing a number of current benefits, including the Sickness Benefit, with one ‘Job Seeker Support’ category, subject to a wide range of compulsory work tests and sanctions if tests aren’t fulfilled to Work & Income’s satisfaction.

• Introducing a Work Ability Assessment …

• Adding even further sanctions to those who don’t meet Work & Income requirements, including drug testing. …

To add insult to injury, there is zero Government commitment to job creation either – decent jobs at decent wages being the best solution to unemployment and poverty. …

These changes to our welfare system are all about making extra profits for big business while shoring up National’s vote at the next election from people who just need to have a section of society to hate and despise. I hope you will join me and groups like Auckland Action Against Poverty in exposing and opposing this for the vicious game it is.

Jacinda Ardern, whose performances can be patchy, gave a couple of very good speeches for parts 1 and 2 in the committee stages yesterday.  The first speech laid out a lot of the destructive aspects of the Bill, and the underlying government agenda.  In the second speech, she exposed some of the dodgy medical assessment processes.

Ardern is concerned that one of the most important parts of the Bill, on medical assessments, provides no information on how the assessments will work (around 7 minutes in the video).  She refers to a submission from CCS Disability Action, which expresses concerns about the UK-style contracting out of assessments.  Labour has tabled an SOP asking for the processes to be used for medical assessments to be debated in the House before any changes are passed.  Ardern says that “any government who denies our ability to do that, is a government that has something to hide.”

Ardern then refers to the worrying approach of Dr David Bratt, Chief Medical Adviser.  She refers to a recent presentation by Dr Bratt: Ready, Steady, Crook: Are we killing our patients with kindness?   Ardern says:

He openly spreads the notion that access to social security is bad for people’s health.  Do you know what’s bad for people’s health Mr Speaker: an undignified system that doesn’t focus on people’s strengths and abilities to get back into work; a system that doesn’t focus on their wellness; a system that instead allows them to squander (?) in poverty without the means necessary to even ensure they are one day employable again.

She goes on to argue that Bennett’s “cruel to be kind” approach had been tried back in Ruth Richardson’s time, and it had failed resulting in an increase in harm and a rise in child poverty.

Ardern also made excellent points about the way Bennett’s focus is on demonising single mothers, and ignoring the fathers.  She says she missed the memo on immaculate conception.  She exposes the myth of families aspiring solely to a life on welfare, and the destructive impact of the work overload on case managers.

Nevertheless, Ardern continues to focus on getting people back to work, rather than the importance of social security for those unable to engage in paid work for whatever reason.

The Greens focused more on other aspects of the role of social security. Mojo Mathers focused on the barriers to paid employment for disabled people.  She is concerned that the Bill is following the UK’s failed model that focuses on work assessment.  She also argues against the social obligation aspects and their negative impacts on parents of children with disabilities.

xtasy has frequently commented on the TS, about the problems with the medical assessments, and on Dr Bratt in particular.

NB: Phil Goff  showed he can produce some very good speeches.

55 comments on “Real social security; real jobs – not bennie bashing”

  1. One Tāne Huna 1

    The sooner “Dr.” Bratt is hauled before the ethics committee the better.

    • just saying 1.1

      What ethics committee is Bratt accountable to?

      And the medical assessors hired by the MSoD aren’t accountable either because the medical council will not hear any complaint from a patient, because MSoD is the client, and only the client can complain about mistreatment, negligence, or malpractice

      This is exactly the same barrier that prevents ACC claimants from having complaints about non-treating (ie toady assessor) doctors, heard. The medical council has been aware of the anomaly for decades but has not chosen to review the rule.

      These people are untouchable.

      • One Tāne Huna 1.1.1

        There appear to be layers of corrupt sophistry set up between Dr. Bratt and his kind and normal medical ethics. However, the NZ Medical Association, for example is reviewing its code of ethics and seeks submissions. The new draft document (pdf) adds several clauses to the “Doctors in a just and caring society” section.

        The existing code requires that medical professionals “Adhere to the scientific basis for medical practice while acknowledging the limits of current knowledge.”

        Where is the scientific basis for “Dr.” Bratt’s assertions about welfare and addiction?

        I suggest that “Dr.” Bratt’s methods be subjected to professional scrutiny, and that the opposition parties apply pressure to the medical council and any other appropriate authorities to investigate his activities.

        • xtasy 1.1.1.1

          One Tane Huna: That Code only applies for “medical practice”, but Bratt is an ADVISOR, so he is in that role for his employer (MSD) NOT BOUND by the Code of Ethics of the NZ medical profession!

          • AsleepWhileWalking 1.1.1.1.1

            And the Regional Health and Disability Advisors hide behind that very same cloak, passing judgement over Doctors notes, or that of other registered health professionals while they themselves have no durisdication other than MSD decided to employ them to do this.

            • xtasy 1.1.1.1.1.1

              AsleepWhileWalking “strong”: Yes, you are right, and it has all been designed to be this way, by MSD!!!

              The same will happen with the new regime they will bring in with outsourced “specialist assessors”. They will “merely” make recommendations, and then WINZ staff will make the ultimate decisions, in virtually all cases relying on those recommendations.

              Chicken and egg debates will distract from and avoid pinning down responsibility.

              Trouble is, the assessors may in many cases not be delivering a “health service”, they may only be “advisors” or “assessors” of types. Where the present law in NZ still kicks in is, where a medical practitioner or similarly qualified person under the relevant Act sees a person face to face to assess (not just on papers) for a third party, or their own client, then they are still bound by the ‘Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights’!

              This may be somewhat different with outsourced service providers, as it will depend on how they will set it all up and do the assessments for work capacity or anything else.

              The government is of course NOT HONEST on the planned medical and work capacity assessments, and hence they have not come out with details, still wanting the law with the legal provisions to allow them to outsource and do such assessing passed a.s.a.p., without revealing details.

              Parliament and the public are being conned something big here. The law should NOT be passed and consented to until it is clear what these future assessments will look like, until they will have been scrutinised and debated, evaluated on legality, fairness, objectivity, scientific reason and more.

              Outsourcing and not allowing any legal accountability is contempt of fair process and natural justice. This is a BIG ISSUE.

              • just saying

                Trouble is, the assessors may in many cases not be delivering a “health service”, they may only be “advisors” or “assessors” of types. Where the present law in NZ still kicks in is, where a medical practitioner or similarly qualified person under the relevant Act sees a person face to face to assess (not just on papers) for a third party, or their own client, then they are still bound by the ‘Code of Health and Disability Services Consumers’ Rights’!

                Actually they aren’t. The H&D commissioner has stated that he has no jurisdiction to hear complaints unless they relate to sexual or physical assault. Because MSD is the client. This issue has been around for a long time.

                • xtasy

                  just saying: This is not quite true! Read this PDF to be found under this link:

                  http://www.mcnz.org.nz/assets/News-and-Publications/Statements/Non-treating-doctors.pdf

                  If there is a face to face encounter during an assessment, the H+D Commissioner is still going to be looking at it. Trouble is, the present one is pretty useless.

                  All the Commissioners that hold office – and the Ombudsman – have been installed to be buffers to keep people from taking issues to court. And they only deal with the tip of the iceberg of issues in the end. I have ample knowledge and experience with this.

                  The whole system is designed to stifle any efforts by aggrieved to get justice.

                  In some ways, it may be better to have the US system to be able to sue and get the shits out of so many poorly performing, and harm creating medical and other practitioners, and also engaging in consultancy.

                  It does indeed stink to heaven what goes on in NZ. I have had to deal with a mental health flatmate, who was totally treated like crap, and the ADHB used Privacy Act and more to cover up. Sadly she was in an abusive relationship, so the abuser was on good terms with her psychiatrist, working for ADHB, so they all covered up, she in “co dependence” and as a “disempowered abused”.

                  NZ is a SHIT SOCIETY, for standards, and I have volumes of records proving this. So the “nationalists” here can stick this SHIT up their noses about NZ being world class and so. It is a total dirty lie, like so much about this country.

                  • just saying

                    Yeah I’ve read this before.
                    It says the non-treating doctor must comply with the code, not that the patient may complain to the H&D if they have a genuine grievance about their treatment (outside of assault).

                    I know of more than ten people who have been told by the H&D that their complaints about assessors are outside of the H&D jurisdiction, and to take their complaint to the “client” whether MSD or ACC.

                    I agree with you about the real role of these so-called watch-dogs. However with a well put together case and decent legal representation a minority of patients can get some vestige of justice. I’ve won a case, though, of course, not against a non-treating doctor.

                    But even this slim chance is denied patients of non-treating doctors.

                    • xtasy

                      just saying:
                      “I know of more than ten people who have been told by the H&D that their complaints about assessors are outside of the H&D jurisdiction, and to take their complaint to the “client” whether MSD or ACC.”

                      Well, that is interesting.

                      I know of a case where an examining doctor (technically “assessor”) for a third party is being investigated by the Commissioner at present.

                      It may have depended on how those people presented their case.

                      Using the wrong choice of words and explanations can lead to a swift fob off, and the Health and Disability Commissioner does not seem to be obligated to assess and examine each complaint of such nature, but the paper from the Medical Council says at least, that he may or can.

                      So it may depend on how well a complainant words and argues her/his case. I agree though, that there is far too little scrutiny, and there is a lack of redress that can be ensured and enforced.

                      Few will even succeed to file a case before the courts, get legal aid perhaps, or have the brains, knowledge and skill to argue their own case successfully. MSD and WINZ have Crown Law, paid for by the taxpayer by the way. They can get the best lawyers if they want or need to, and a person representing her-/himself or with a newbie legal aid lawyer will have a shit show. Justice does exist in theory, and seldom in practice.

                • xtasy

                  The Commissioner will not look into complaints about 3rd party assessors, if they only did the assessment “on the papers”. That means if the assessment was done without a face to face encounter and interview, then the Commissioner will not bother with it, as it is considered outside of their scope.

                  Yet when there was a face to face examination and interview, which was done as part of an assessment, then the H + D Commissioner may actually look at it, as that is within the scope of his/her office.

                  • just saying

                    Xtasy,
                    I know of a case where an examining doctor (technically “assessor”) for a third party is being investigated by the Commissioner at present.

                    That’s interesting. Let me know how it turns out.

                    I was told (face to face) by the commissioner, in a crowded meeting, that the office would not investigate any complaints about doctors commisioned by third parties unless sexual or physical assault was alleged.

                    In the cases I know of, which the commission refused to investigate, the complainants were explicitly told that the office had no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about “third party assessors”. The cases were in regard to face to face assessments.

                    I will be delighted if there has been a change of policy.

                    And please don’t patronise me Xtasy, as I said, I have taken a case against a doctor and won. So I know every step of the process

                    They can get the best lawyers if they want or need to,…

                    No, they get who the medical council appoints – been there tried to get someone else.

                    • xtasy

                      “MSD and WINZ have Crown Law, paid for by the taxpayer by the way. They can get the best lawyers if they want or need to, and a person representing her-/himself or with a newbie legal aid lawyer will have a shit show.”

                      I am not sure, whether you misunderstood the above, perhaps, just saying?

                      With that I meant the “third party”. But you will be right with lawyers representing the assessor, getting a lawyer appointed by the professional organisation (Medical Council).

                    • just saying

                      They can get the best lawyers if they want or need to, and a person representing her-/himself or with a newbie legal aid lawyer will have a shit show.

                      Sorry, I misread and thought you were talking about the complainant in the whole sentence, not just the second half.

                      When the medical council decides to prosecute, they appoint (and pay for) a lawyer for the plaintiff. The doctor chooses his or her own lawyer. Usually a QC if the charges are serious. Inevitably a better representative than the lawyer appointed for the plaintiff.

          • One Tāne Huna 1.1.1.1.2

            I think that “advisory” status should be properly tested by a court of law.

            He took an oath. Just because some wingnut government passes a law doesn’t absolve him.

          • Mary 1.1.1.1.3

            I understand that currently this is accepted as the way things are, but surely this could be challenged? Surely a medical professional, with a current practicing certificate or not, is subject to the prevailing ethical rules? For example, the disciplinary authorities certainly have jurisdiction over those who try to practise after being struck off, whether it’s doctors, nurses, lawyers, etc. Surely if Bratt is dishing out medical advice, to whomever, this potentially brings him under the scrutiny of the relevant ethical complaints body? Perhaps this needs to be tested?

            • xtasy 1.1.1.1.3.1

              Sorry, Mary, Dr Bratt is not performing a role in delivering “medical services” in his role as Principal Health Advisor. Only a medical practitioner or other professional registered under the Health and Competency Assurance Act (I believe that is the right name) AND performing medicine, or delivering medical or health care and treatment services, is bound directly by the Code of Ethics, NOT any person, practicing or not, who is merely giving “advice” to another party, not receiving such health care or treatment services.

              And the Health and Disability Commissioner’s code will not apply to advisors either.

              Other codes for psychologists, counsellors and the likes have their limitations also.

              The law would need to be changed, or a new law brought in, to cover advisory activities. Naturally the agency, department or company that employs or contracts with such an advisor, has means to discipline for breach of contract.

              BUT have WINZ or MSD done anything to even raise some warning words to Dr Bratt and his bizarre claims and comparisons in his presentations (comparing beneficiaries with drug takers)??? NO, and that speaks for itself. Bratt’s master is apparently condoning what he is doing (using WINZ and MSD symbols and their names on his presentations)!

            • xtasy 1.1.1.1.3.2

              What comes to mind re his misdeeds is perhaps “discrimination” based on employment status (being unemployed, which in NZ usually goes hand in hand with being a beneficiary). So the Human Rights Act may be of some use there. But someone would neet to take it up. And then, is he strictly “discriminating” after all? Well we know he does in his peculiar ways, but the words he uses are “pseudo-science” and bizarre, largely unproved claims, not necessarily intended to discriminate.

              He does after all arrogantly pretend to “do good” and “want to rescue” clients from “suffering”.

      • Olwyn 1.1.2

        That is something I did not know, and I find it shocking. The DoS may count as “the client” but the DoS is not a person getting assessed by the doctor. This is extremely fishy, since it means that people who are not medical experts are in the position to determine whether or not a complaint made on medical grounds is worthy of further action.

        • just saying 1.1.2.1

          I, amongst others, have tried. I suspect it would require political intervention.

          Btw it is worth mentioning that Labour set this direction, and have always been aware of the injustice and inquity in patients’ inability to complain. This suited their purposes just as well.

          Unfortunately it is very seldom that anyone “important” is adversely affected

          • Colonial Viper 1.1.2.1.1

            Setting up torture rack mechanisms which the Tories can then crank up real tight in a subsequent term.

            Thanks Labour! Just fucking brilliant work, as usual.

        • One Tāne Huna 1.1.2.2

          I wonder whether this corrupt arrangement would survive judicial review.

          • xtasy 1.1.2.2.1

            Judicial review is possible if a decision by a Medical Appeal Board can be seen as in breach of the law (e.g. natural justice). Otherwise judicial review is only possible for certain administrative, legislative or executive decisions made. A decision or recommendation by an outsourced assessor will not fall under a category where judicial review may be sought. Also a simple administrative decision by a WINZ case manager will not necessarily do so. But within the Social Security Act there are steps for reviews and appeals that can be taken.

            If a “statutory” decision seriously restricts or denies a person a right, then JR may be an option though.

            For medical appeals section 53A is relevant!

            If a decision by a “judicial” kind of administrative body, like such a Medical Appeal Board, does not comply with the law, then judicial review is an option, indeed the only further legal step that is possible. It has to be filed at a High Court, but one should get a lawyer (not easy to get for such “civil” cases under legal aid).

            There the issues continue for the average beneficiary, not having the means to pay a lawyer themselves.

            See some basic info on judicial review:

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_New_Zealand
            http://www.vuw.ac.nz/staff/dean_knight/Cassie_Knight_Scope.pdf

    • xtasy 1.2

      As a “Principal Health Advisor” Bratt is NOT offering medical SERVICES, that is the problem. He is not employed as a GP (which is his qualification), as a doctor to perform and deliver services in the health area.

      He is “merely” an advisor (a damned biased, bizarre and poor one for that sake, but still accepted “advisor” for his employer, MSD), and that does enable him to get away with this, as only “practicing” doctors or other registered medical staff under certain Acts are accountable to standards in law and the Code of Ethics for the NZ medical profession.

      So Bratt is like a smart eel, getting through all the gaps, and he knows he can get away with all these bizarre claims and comparisons.

      The one who could make a difference is his employer, and guess, who that is.

      The MSD cannot pretend they do not know that he presents such one sided, scandalous presentations on pages bearing Work and Income logos.

      They do apparently condone this, there is NO other answer, and that is the bloody scandal. MSD are ultimately responsible for letting a staff member get away with using biased, unqualified, unscientific information, and by making absurd, unfounded claims, which also pressurise and “blame” clients that are supposed to be looked after by MSD!

  2. Colonial Viper 2

    Goff is a strong, passionate speaker once he gets going. Good off the cuff, and able to talk through opposing static from the government benches or from a journalist.

    I’ve only met Sue Bradford once, and she impressed me with her insight into beneficiary issues.

  3. Rogue Trooper 3

    WINZ are already “overloaded”; heard it from case-managers directly.
    Bennett / MSD ignored numerous MOH advice that these reforms (sanctions in particular) are going to cause as much harm as they attempt to alleviate. Watch and see.

    • Colonial Viper 3.1

      Usual strategy; if the Nats can’t undo something they don’t like, they underfund it until it is crippled.

      • Ennui 3.1.1

        That is standard Nat practice BUT what if there are no funds?

        PS I could get a short term extra 10% budget saving plus out of the Public Service if the executives were put into a set pay scale the way it used to be. Around Wellington I still see far too many fat cat bloated “public servants”. And you and I are paying for them.

        • Colonial Viper 3.1.1.1

          It’s a problem. And they’re followed around by a younger set who aspire to be exactly the same, if not fatter. Striving for the wellbeing of the nation and serving the public good? Don’t be stupid.

    • AsleepWhileWalking 3.2

      Some of the workload of CM’s is self inflicted – declining assistance that the beneficiary is eligible for leading to a review of decision creates massive increases in workload in a very short time.

      Do this enough and the system starts to collapse. Today I spoke with a benefit rights advocate and was told that because MSD are obstructing review of decisions, I should try writing the words, “I want to review your decision not to assist with _____”, as opposed to, “I am reviewing the decision not to fund____”.

      I can’t see a hell of a lot of difference, but apparently it is designed to prevent the ministry from saying that:
      – they haven’t made a decision yet (this can drag out months or forever)
      – they are waiting on information about _____
      – they are waiting to see if there is a cheaper option (even when multiple quotes are already provided)

      My advocate warns me that MSD will still likely run obstructions. It’s what they do.

      These are common phrases they use to usurp the legal process. Does the minister know this is happening? I doubt the minister cares.

      And in the meantime who is paying for the costs or going without? The client’s who are being disentitled on a daily basis.

      • Descendant Of Sssmith 3.2.1

        My son’s having issues at moment so I’ve had to put my advocate hat back on for him.

        The advice I gave him applies to all:

        Always fill out an application form – do not accept any verbal no we can’t do that
        Always ask for a decision in writing before you leave – most letters are computer generated and can be printed off
        Food grant declines have a 24 hour review period if declined – while it’s a review by staff it must be by a manager
        If you have used your annual food entitlement and the reason for needing food is outside your control e.g. Paid for an ambulance to go to hospital then managers have the authority to go over those limits

        http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/manuals-and-procedures.html

        If you have access to the internet somehow understand the policy and what you can and can’t get. Print it off and take it in with you if you think it will help.

        Policy is here:

        http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/manuals-and-procedures.html

        The better informed you are about entitlements the less difficulty there should be.

        Keep receipts and provide evidence such as payslips and bank balances – yeah it can be a pain to keep em and I’m hopeless at it myself and as it turns out so is my son but to be honest you shouldn’t put anyone in the position of trying to work out if you are telling the truth or not.

        One issue I’m hearing about from my kids friends is around the non-telling to people than you can still be paid a benefit when you have left your job/ been fired.

        While you might get a 13 week stand down you should be told you can be paid if you do what they call recomply.

        http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/manuals-and-procedures/income_support/main_benefits/unemployment_benefit/unemployment_benefit-269.htm

        Too many kids in my view just get told that they will get a 13 week stand down without an application even being taken, let alone being tod about this other info.

        Also if there was good reason for leaving your job e.g. Sexual harassment, employer not paying your wages, being paid less than minimum wage, bullying etc then no stand-down should be imposed.

        Some things the staff can’t do anything about such as if you spend your six weeks holiday pay by paying off all your bills or if your income is too high to get any help.

        I’d also suggest if you can, fill out an application on-line if you lose your job / seperate, etc

        This gives the clearest date for seeking assistance and if you get delayed in getting an appointment there’s a application in place.

        There’s a few others that post here who probably have more current knowledge who might be able to add more but hope this is useful.

  4. Ad 4

    Imagine if those kind of measures were applied to those seeking to become directors on banks, or public companies, or other entities with public scrutiny like Fonterra …

    … at the other end of town, South Canterbury Finance cost the taxpayers $805 million. That’s our taxed money yours and mine. Surely such company directors are New Zealand’s most damaging beneficiaries.

  5. Ennui 5

    Nice post Karol, BUT I have one major issue.

    It is not the speeches and well placed opposition to the governments “reforms” which are basically designed to “save money” and in the words of the Dead Kennedys “kill the poor”. I totally believe that benefits are there because we cannot rely upon the public or private sector to create jobs.

    So Karol, where are these jobs coming from? Let me give you an employers viewpoint.

    We as employers need infrastructure and legal services etc from the government so we pay taxes. These we expect will create or maintain positions which we benefit from, which is fine so long as we are making profits and paying the tax to support this. At the moment we have a severely constrained economy, so there is no extra tax to create government jobs.

    We could of course “create” credit to pay for these jobs but all we are doing then is creating debt to be paid by tax in the future. Which worked fine when economies could grow, but as an aggregate economic growth ended with peak energy and peak resources, and will now decline (permanently). So that wont create sustainable public sector jobs. Did I forget we also have a financial crisis ongoing since 2008 based around debt.

    Now us employers….we stick our necks out on the basis that we invest some cash on the principle that the extra work performed will pay for the employee and leave a profit (otherwise why do it)? We don’t do this as a charitable act, we do it for private gain. The cash we invest is “ours” (or a debt we personally incur). And when times are tough we don’t take the risk. When it gets tougher we retrench (or go bust), lay off staff, cut wages.

    Times are tough now. So where are the jobs going to come from? Where are the taxes going to come from?

    • ghostrider888 5.1

      and then there is “Too Drunk To F*ck” (Punk is not dead, only just having a snooze by the Marshall).

      • AsleepWhileWalking 5.1.1

        We don’t need jobs as much as we need to mobilise people into business IMHO. It is easier and quicker for people to find something needed and turn it into a business than it is to try and re-suss the job creation model.

        • Colonial Viper 5.1.1.1

          BEEEEP! Well intentioned but wrong, I’m afraid to say.

          The real economy is being deprived of cash, aggregate demand is down, and foreign corporates are siphoning money out of NZ. Expect small business failures to climb and jobs to be destroyed. Yes a few people will do well in niche markets that they identify, but the investment capital is not available for this to occur on a wider, bigger scale.

          The other nasty truth of our money system: large scale job creation can only happen with large scale debt creation.

    • Draco T Bastard 5.2

      So where are the jobs going to come from?

      The public sector. Build more wind turbines (lots of ship building and heavy engineering in that), upgrade existing rail to electric and extend the lines, start building up the infrastructure to run trolley buses in towns and cities. Buy up enough farms that the country can be fed no matter what happens to the international markets.

      Where are the taxes going to come from?

      Don’t need taxes first – just print the money. This money can also be loaned into the private sector at 0% interest. A lot of those government services carry a user charge and so that’s one part of the taxing system, income tax is another and land tax a third. There’s probably more that can be done.

      Under the scenario of the government printing money at 0% interest the government will always run at a deficit (it’s not really a loss, after all, it’s only money and the society gets the social good of whatever the government spent money on) due to the dead weight loss of profit. The trick there is to make it so that accumulating money won’t be of any benefit.

  6. johnm 6

    John Yankee represents the market and money both of these categories are amoral.The Market and Money know no Motherland and hence come before the persons who have no money but only New Zealand as their motherland. Can you not see the cruel immorality of that attitude? :-(

  7. Ennui, this is why capitalism is an outmoded system.

    It relies on the profit motive which is killing us. The market is no good at matching supply and demand because goods will only be supplied when profitable and then at the expense of destroying the planet.

    Instead we need to socialise production.

    We would do this by regulating business to make it pay the true costs of public subsidies plus taxes. Then we would offer to socialise those companies that can be made to produce something useful. Instead of privatising public assets we socialise private assets and take the risk out of business.

    As collective shareholders of productive assets we all decide what is to be produced to meet the needs that we also decide as consumer collectives. We decide to create jobs for all who want to work by spreading all the now ‘social’ labour around at reduced hours.

    For the time being everyone would get back what they put into work, minus a surplus that becomes a public fund for social and economic development.

    This is all very straightforward and rational, and the first stages regulating and nationalising strategic business could be done by a left social democratic government. This assumes that NZ workers wake up and vote in a left government that breaks with neo-liberal orthodoxy and introduces a full frontal nationalisation program.

    However, monopoly capital would unleash a thousand dotcoms on us, capital strikes and Rimpac marines to protect their private property rights. So any plans to socialise the NZ economy would have to be based on a powerful social movement capable of defending NZ from US and/or Chinese invasions. Even then we would only get away with it if US and Chinese workers kept their military occupied at home.

    • So, job creation is a simple matter of completely changing everyone’s political views, putting a left-wing govt in total control of the economy and fighting a desperate war against the rest of the western world? Sounds great – when do we start?

      • red rattler 7.1.1

        People’s political views are conditioned by capitalism so they think that individual competition is natural.
        But possessive individualism came only with capitalism.
        As I said above when they ‘wake’ up to the con the solutions will seem very obvious.
        Workers cooperate when they produce.
        Workers produce the wealth.
        Without bosses cooperation will become the norm.
        Workers can run the economy and cooperate with workers in other countries to swap their products. There is no need for rapid industrial growth dependent on fossil fuels.
        Socialism today has nothing to do with growth as such but rather production for need.
        Our survival depends on using technology to conserve nature and sustain our existence without destroying the planet.
        The transition from capitalism to socialism is mainly a technical problem solvable by cooperation.
        The only difficulty is that the rich ruling class will not give up without a fight.
        But when it comes to a fight, they are few and we are many.

        • Psycho Milt 7.1.1.1

          Well, there is also the difficulty that so far, every time it’s been tried it’s resulted almost immediately in the enslavement of the population by a murderous totalitarian dictatorship. Oddly enough, commos never seem to mention that one…

    • Ennui 7.2

      Quite frankly the socialist model comes out of the same stable as the capitalism of neo liberalism. Both of them depend upon industrialism, and centralized banking control. Both follow materialist constructs, both doom us to ecocide and resource depletion. Both are control freaks which enslave individuals.

      The good news is that neither are any longer possible as the tools required utilise vast energy resources that are on their way out. We will be building on a strictly local scale within the forseeable (and probably on foot).

      • Draco T Bastard 7.2.1

        oth of them depend upon industrialism, and centralized banking control. Both follow materialist constructs, both doom us to ecocide and resource depletion. Both are control freaks which enslave individuals.

        One has moved on, the other hasn’t.

  8. David H 8

    But at the end of the day, a bankrupt NZ would suit the rapacious thieves in big business around the world. And John Key is delivering it to them on a plate. They are setting us up to become another Greece or Cyprus.

  9. xtasy 9

    Karol:

    “Ardern then refers to the worrying approach of Dr David Bratt, Chief Medical Adviser. She refers to a recent presentation by Dr Bratt: Ready, Steady, Crook: Are we killing our patients with kindness? Ardern says:

    He openly spreads the notion that access to social security is bad for people’s health. Do you know what’s bad for people’s health Mr Speaker: an undignified system that doesn’t focus on people’s strengths and abilities to get back into work; a system that doesn’t focus on their wellness; a system that instead allows them to squander (?) in poverty without the means necessary to even ensure they are one day employable again.”

    I heard a bit of Jacinda’s speech re this, and I was for once SO PLEASED, to hear this come from her lips. I felt, my much persistent efforts to raise awareness on all this appalling stuff, that already has been going on since even before the start of Future Focus, ARE FINALLY PAYING OFF! The messages are reaching the ones in Labour and other parties, and advocacy groups, who have all been informed about this, to take it up and challenge the existing process, certainly also the new processes to be put into place soon, kept secret so far.

    The FIGHT must go on!

    Good on you, writing about this again!

  10. Jenny 10

    $2 billion to well off SCF investors and speculators.$1billion to an insurance company that wouldn’t pay up, and not even the slightest suggestion of misappropriation, or fraud. And the directors of AMI are still taking people’s home and contents insurance and collecting their bloated salaries.

    Not to mention a number of other less heralded bailouts and pay offs.

    These are the biggest Social Welfare bludgers in the country.

    Roger Kerr already one of the richest men in the country was gifted $100 million by the taxpayer. There were no suggestions made in parliament on how he should spend it.

    The war on beneficiaries is needed to pay for all this largess for the rich.

    Honesty in Advertising

    • Descendant Of Sssmith 10.1

      Aye.

      Someone worked out once that the money Faye Richwhite had to eventually pay following the wine box enquiry was equivalent to what had been saved by the benefit cuts.

      If they had paid their proper dues at the time then the cuts needn’t have happened.

      It a sad indictment of course that our much vaunted left wing labour government of 9 years never reversed those cuts except for vote catching baby boomers on super.

Recent Comments

Recent Posts

  • Bullying contributes to Auckland being stripped of ICU training
    Complaints of bullying and harassment by supervisors which have contributed to Auckland’s critical care department losing its training accreditation are further evidence of the appalling culture at executive level, Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King says. “The department had its accreditation… ...
    23 hours ago
  • Broadband failure sucks up more cash
    The Commerce Committee has blocked an inquiry into the $300 million rural broadband initiative (RBI) despite mounting evidence it’s a massive policy failure and waste of money, says Labour’s ICT spokesperson Clare Curran. “The Government is about to spend an… ...
    2 days ago
  • TISA – Another secret trade deal you may never have heard of
      This post first appeared on The Daily Blog You’ve probably heard of the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) by now and the widespread concerns around it but what about the Trade in Services Agreement (TISA) also being currently negotiated by… ...
    GreensBy Gareth Hughes MP
    2 days ago
  • Health chickens coming home to roost as Dunedin loses right to train doctor...
    News today that Dunedin Hospital has lost orthopaedic training accreditation is a major blow and proves the Government’s prevarication is having devastating consequences, Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King says. “Losing orthopaedic advanced training is serious. There is a knock on… ...
    3 days ago
  • $74,000 quarterly rise shows crisis out of control
    New figures out today showing Auckland house prices have spiked by a massive $74,000 in the past quarter is further evidence the city’s housing crisis has spiralled out of control, Labour’s “In spite of constant announcements and photo opportunities from… ...
    3 days ago
  • Democracy for Nauru now
    Murray McCully must send the strongest possible message to the Nauruan Government that New Zealand does not condone its actions given the disturbing developments there, Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson David Shearer says. “Right now we are seeing Nauru stripped of… ...
    3 days ago
  • Recovery needs more than a rebrand
    Today’s announcement of new governance arrangements for Canterbury seems to be nothing more than a fresh coat of paint on the same old approach, says Labour’s Canterbury Earthquake Recovery spokesperson Ruth Dyson. “The Canterbury Recovery has been too slow, with… ...
    3 days ago
  • Copper decision a victory for status quo, not Kiwi households
    New Zealanders hoping for cheaper copper broadband will be disappointed by the Commerce Commission’s latest decision in the long running saga to determine the price of copper, Labour’s ICT spokesperson Clare Curran says. “In an apparent attempt to appease everyone,… ...
    3 days ago
  • It’s time for hard decisions in the Bay
     The Ruataniwha dam project is turning into a huge white elephant as the economics fail to stack up, says Labour’s Water spokesperson Meka Whaitiri.  “Ruataniwha simply doesn’t make economic sense when you look at other major irrigation schemes around the… ...
    3 days ago
  • More testing won’t lift student achievement
    Hekia Parata’s latest plan to subject school students to even more testing and assessment won’t do anything to lift the educational achievement of the kids who are struggling, Labour’s Education spokesperson Chris Hipkins says. “New Zealand school students are already… ...
    3 days ago
  • Bad week for NZ economy gets worse
    The bad news for the New Zealand economy got worse this morning with the 8th successive drop in dairy prices at this morning’s global dairy auction, again exposing the absence of any Plan B from the National Government, Labour’s Finance… ...
    3 days ago
  • System failing to protect women and children from family violence
    Last week we called for mandatory child safety investigations in domestic violence cases. This came after the coronial inquiry into the deaths of Bradley and Ellen Livingstone and the verdict in the trial of the west Auckland boys charged with… ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie MP
    4 days ago
  • Backers banking on social bonds cash?
    The Government is refusing to say what the $29 million it has set aside for its controversial social bonds programme is for, raising suspicions it is an upfront payment to the project backers, Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King says. A… ...
    4 days ago
  • Plastic Free July
    Today is the start of Plastic Free July. Since its inception in Perth, Western Australia four years ago, more and more people and organisations from around the world have joined the call to refuse single use plastic products. Nearly all… ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche MP
    4 days ago
  • State house sell off Bill gives extraordinary powers
    The Government is about to give Ministers extraordinary powers to take direct personal control of selling state houses, exempting Ministers from normal legal requirements and leaving the sale process wide open for corruption, Labour's Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. The… ...
    4 days ago
  • Cash for charter schools, mould for state schools
    At a time when state schools are struggling in old, cold, mouldy buildings and can barely make ends meet, the National Government is shovelling cash at charter schools which aren’t even spending the funding on kids’ education, Labour’s Education spokesperson… ...
    4 days ago
  • New Zealand needs a wise response to climate change
    Today in Parliament I got to hear from a group of New Zealanders who are concerned for the future of our country. Called Wise Response, the group is a broad coalition of academics, engineers, lawyers, artists, sportspeople and others who… ...
    GreensBy Russel Norman MP
    4 days ago
  • No alternative as waste scheme trashed
    Nick Smith must explain how he is going to prevent contamination of New Zealand’s ground and water with liquid and hazardous waste after scrapping the only monitoring scheme and offering no replacement, says Labour’s Environment Spokesperson Megan Woods. “From today,… ...
    4 days ago
  • Flawed system rates death traps as safe
    ACC Minister Nikki Kaye needs to come clean about what really lies behind the reclassification of 18 vehicles in her new motor vehicle registration system introduced today, Labour’s ACC spokesperson Sue Moroney says. "New Zealanders deserve the truth about the… ...
    4 days ago
  • Tiwai Smelter and 800 workers left in limbo
     Workers at Tiwai smelter and the people of Southland have once again been left in limbo over their future in the ongoing debacle over whether the plant stays open, says Labour’s Leader Andrew Little.  “It’s not good enough that after two years of… ...
    4 days ago
  • New twist in state house sell-off saga
    The Government has opened the door to buyers of state houses simply being landlords and not required to provide social services, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. The Prime Minister said at his post-Cabinet press conference buyers would not “have… ...
    4 days ago
  • Government fees will hit charities hard
    National’s decision to ignore the concerns of charities will see the voluntary sector face hundreds of thousands of dollars in new costs if the Policing (Cost Recovery) Amendment Bill passes, says Labour's Community and Voluntary Sector spokesperson Poto Williams. “National’s… ...
    5 days ago
  • Four out of ten for Simon’s Bridges
    The Transport Authority’s decision to fund only four of the 10 bridges promised in National’s shameless Northland by-election bribe is a huge embarrassment for Transport Minister Simon Bridges, Labour’s Transport spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “After one by-election poll showed they… ...
    5 days ago
  • Falling consents adding to Auckland housing woes
    Falling numbers of building consents being issued in Auckland will add to the city’s housing shortfall and fuel skyrocketing house prices, Labour’s Housing spokesperson Phil Twyford “The Productivity Commission found there was a shortfall of around 32,000 houses by the… ...
    5 days ago
  • So Mr English, do you have a plan?
    DIpping confidence about jobs, wages and shrinking exports are highlighting the lack of a plan from the government to diversify the economy and build sustainable growth, Grant Robertson  Labour’s Finance Spokesperson said. " Data released over the last week… ...
    5 days ago
  • Serious risks to tenants and assets in sell-off
    Overseas evidence shows there are serious risks around the Government's plan to sell off state houses to social housing providers, Opposition Leader Andrew Little says. “In the Netherlands – where community housing providers supply the majority of social housing –… ...
    5 days ago
  • Land of milk and money
    Kiwi families are paying over the top prices for their milk and someone is creaming off big profits, says Labour’s Consumer Affairs spokesperson David Shearer. “In 2011 the Government told us high New Zealand milk prices were a natural result… ...
    7 days ago
  • MoBIE largesse doesn’t stop with TVs and hair-straighteners
    The number of MoBIE staff earning more than $150,000 has risen 23 per cent in just a year, Labour’s Economic Development Spokesperson David Clark says. Documents obtained from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment show there are now nearly… ...
    7 days ago
  • English wants to flog state houses to Aussies
    Bill English’s admission that he would sell hundreds of New Zealand’s state houses to the Australians is the latest lurch in the Government’s stumbling, half-baked housing policy, Labour’s housing spokesperson Phil Twyford says. “Bill English should face reality and admit his… ...
    1 week ago
  • Exports continue to fall as Government fails to diversify
    The Government quickly needs a plan to diversify our economy after new figures show that exports are continuing to fall due to the collapse in dairy exports, Labour's Finance Spokesperson Grant Robertson says. “Dairy exports fell 28 per cent compared… ...
    1 week ago
  • Government inaction leads to blurring of roles
    The Treasury wouldn’t have had to warn the Reserve Bank to stick to its core functions if the Government had taken prompt and substantial measures to rein in skyrocketing Auckland house prices, Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson says. “The problems… ...
    1 week ago
  • Courthouse closures hitting regions
    The Government’s decision to shut down up to eight regional courthouses, some supposedly only temporarily for seismic reasons, looks unlikely to be reversed, Labour’s Justice spokesperson Jacinda Ardern says.“The move has hit these regions hard, but appears to be a… ...
    1 week ago
  • A Victory for Te Tiriti o Waitangi
    This week my partner, who has a number of professions, was doing an archaeological assessment for a District Council. He showed me the new rules around archaeologists which require them to demonstrate “sufficient skill and competency in relation to Māori… ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty MP
    1 week ago
  • Tough bar set for Ruataniwha dam
     Today’s final decision by the Tukituki Catchment Board of Inquiry is good news for the river and the environment, says Labour’s Water spokesperson Meka Whaitiri. “Setting a strict level of dissolved nitrogen in the catchment’s waters will ensure that the… ...
    1 week ago
  • Minister for Women and National missing the mark – part two
    The Minister for Women was in front of the select committee yesterday answering questions about her plans for women. Some useful context is that we used to have a Pay and Employment Equity Unit within the then Department of Labour… ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie MP
    1 week ago
  • Lavish penthouse spend confirms culture of extravagance
    At the same time thousands of New Zealanders are being locked out of the property market, the Government is spending up on a lavish New York penthouse for its diplomats, Labour’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson David Shearer says. News that taxpayers… ...
    1 week ago
  • Māori Television exodus cause for concern
    The shock departure of yet another leading journalist from the Native Affairs team raises further concern the Board and Chief Executive are dissatisfied with the team’s editorial content, says Labour’s Māori Development spokesperson Nanaia Mahuta. “Annabelle Lee is an experienced… ...
    1 week ago
  • Million-plus car owners to pay too much ACC
    More than a million car owners will pay higher ACC motor vehicle registration than necessary from July, Labour’s ACC spokesperson Sue Moroney says. “During a select committee hearing this morning it was revealed that car owners would have been charged… ...
    1 week ago
  • Bill will restore democracy to local councils
    A new Labour Member’s Bill will restore democracy to local authorities and stop amalgamations being forced on councils. Napier MP Stuart Nash’s Local Government Act 2002 (Greater Local Democracy) Bill will be debated by Parliament after being pulled from the… ...
    1 week ago
  • Minister for Women again misses the mark – part one
    Yesterday I asked the Minister for Women about the government’s poor performance on it’s own target of appointing women to 45% of state board positions. I challenged why she’d put out a media release celebrating progress this year when the… ...
    GreensBy Jan Logie MP
    1 week ago
  • Banks enter Dragon’s Den in pitch for Government’s mental health experi...
    Overseas banks and their preferred providers were asked to pitch their ideas for bankrolling the Government’s social bonds scheme to a Dragon’s Den-style panel, Labour’s Health spokesperson Annette King says. Dragon’s Den was a reality television series where prospective ‘entrepreneurs’… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Global Mode bullying won’t stop people accessing content
    It’s disappointing that strong-arm tactics from powerful media companies have meant Global Mode will not get its day in court. Today a settlement was reached terminating the Global Mode service, developed in New Zealand by ByPass Network Services and used… ...
    GreensBy Gareth Hughes MP
    2 weeks ago
  • More questions – why was the Former National Party President involved wit...
    Today in Parliament Murray  McCully said the reason Michelle Boag was involved in 2011 in the Saudi farm scandal was in her capacity as a member of the New Zealand Middle East Business Council. The problem with that answer is… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Minister must explain Maori TV interference
    Te Ururoa Flavell must explain why he told Maori TV staff all complaints about the CEO must come to him – months before he became the Minister responsible for the broadcaster, Labour’s Broadcasting Spokesperson Clare Curran says. “Sources have told… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • KiwiSaver takes a hammering after the end of kick-start
    National seems hell bent on destroying New Zealand’s saving culture given today’s news that there has been a drop in new enrolments for KiwiSaver, says Labour’s Finance spokesperson Grant Robertson.  “New enrolments for the ANZ Investments KiwiSaver scheme have plunged… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Straight answers needed on CYF role
    The Government needs to explain the role that Child, Youth and Family plays in cases where there is evidence that family violence was flagged as a concern, Labour’s Children’s spokesperson Jacinda Arden says. “The fact that CYF is refusing to… ...
    2 weeks ago
  • Prime Minister confuses his political interests with NZ’s interest
    The Prime Minister’s statement in Parliament yesterday that a Minister who paid a facilitation payment to unlock a free trade agreement would retain his confidence is an abhorrent development in the Saudi sheep scandal, Opposition leader Andrew Little says.  ...
    2 weeks ago
  • #raisethequota
    Last Saturday was World Refugee Day. I was privileged to spend most of my day with the amazing refugee communities in Auckland. Their stories have been inspiring and reflect the ‘can-do’ Kiwi spirit, even though they come from all different… ...
    GreensBy Denise Roche MP
    2 weeks ago
  • Dairy conversions causing more pollution than ever, report shows
    The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment (PCE) released two reports on freshwater quality and management last Friday. The water quality report shows that dairy conversions are hurting water quality and says that despite great efforts with fencing and planting, large… ...
    GreensBy Catherine Delahunty MP
    2 weeks ago
  • Employers want urgent action on health and safety
    Moves by National to water down health and safety reforms have been slammed by employers – the very group the Government claims is pushing for change, says Labour’s spokesperson for Labour Relations Iain Lees-Galloway. “The Employers and Manufacturers’ Association has… ...
    2 weeks ago

Public service advertisements by The Standard

Current CO2 level in the atmosphere