Unemployment worse than it looks

67 comments on “Unemployment worse than it looks ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Moreen 1

   9 August 2012 at 3:39 pm

   This is not the true number, so many unemployed don’t get to register because even after working for 35 years they are not intitled to a benefit so do not appear in the statistics. A win/ win for the government
2. Socialist Paddy 2

   9 August 2012 at 4:11 pm

   Key was on radio calling it a “technical increase”. The bastard should say that to the 2,400 extra unemployed people. And he should tell the 160,000 currently unemployed people what he is doing to get them work.
   • locus 2.1

     9 August 2012 at 5:28 pm

     rwnj ideology. Maintain unemployment level high enough to ensure sufficient desperation to keep wages low. Put on a show of hiring 25 people in Christchurch to hide total lack of concern. Blame the unemployed for ‘poor’ choices or laziness.then swan off business class to be entertained by your mates in Vegas.
     • McFlock 2.1.1

       9 August 2012 at 5:51 pm

       I seem to recall in the late 80s and through the 90s that tories were talking about NAIRU (Non-Accelerating Inflation Rate of Unemployment) of 6-8%?
              
       Probably pure coincidence that that’s what we see when National are in charge. 
       • bad12 2.1.1.1

         9 August 2012 at 6:15 pm

         True, it is not often that anyone addresses the economics of unemployment and the relationship of killing off demand in an economy thus ‘creating’ unemployment is understood by very few,

         Needless to say, without addressing the ‘Chicago School of Economics’ premise on using unemployment as a ‘tool’ in defeating inflationary pushes in an economy, while demand is stifled
         the Reserve Bank will hold or lower the interest rate on money borrowed,

         Given that a 2% rise in the cash rate would make the median mortgage payments rise by a third its so very easy to see why unemployment is allowed to occur,

         Of course the simple ‘fix’ to that is for the Government to become the ‘lender’ thus having the ability to not only produce the money,(if necessary),but also having the ability to also ‘fix’ the interest rates at an appropriate level…
       • rosy 2.1.1.2

         9 August 2012 at 6:35 pm

         Probably pure coincidence that that’s what we see when National are in charge

         Yeah, coincidence.

         Funny how they seem surprised. What I’m ‘surprised’ about is how New Zealand’s economy is close to recession when it’s major trading partners are not. Notice half of Europe is still growing (albeit slowly), with lower rates of unemployment, despite the Eurocrisis*. Look out when our major trading partners fall over is all I can say.

         *when does a crisis stop being a crisis and become chronic?
         • Colonial Viper 2.1.1.2.1

           9 August 2012 at 6:50 pm

           http://www.energybulletin.net/stories/2008-08-31/review-long-descent-john-michael-greer
           • Rose 2.1.1.2.1.1

             9 August 2012 at 9:04 pm

             Fascinating. People might be happier too going back to smaller communities and moving away from consumerism.
         • McFlock 2.1.1.2.2

           9 August 2012 at 6:53 pm

           Personally, I love the terror of inflation as the “rust” of an economy.
                   
           Inflation only affects you badly if you hold onto money.
           If you hold onto goods, and skills, and things of worth, then they gain nominal value.
                  
           Sure, hyperinflation screws the pooch, but 6-8% unemployment is more damaging to the general welfare of the nation than 6-8% inflation. 
           • rosy 2.1.1.2.2.1

             9 August 2012 at 8:37 pm

             The thing is they can break the link between inflation and unemployment if the will to do so was there, but it isn’t – doesn’t fit the ideology. There’e no way to get a casualised workforce if the unemployment rate is low.
         • Georgecom 2.1.1.2.3

           9 August 2012 at 9:38 pm

           Abot 2008 onward Rosy. Don’t expect the current bunch to have any idea of this though.
       • Draco T Bastard 2.1.1.3

         9 August 2012 at 9:50 pm

         Yep, the Tories don’t believe in employment rates above 94% and the reason is to keep wages low.
   • Hami Shearlie 2.2

     9 August 2012 at 6:18 pm

     Aren’t his turns of phrase fascinating SP? I’m sure the “technical increase” is all down to our “dinnimik environment”!!
     • rosy 2.2.1

       9 August 2012 at 7:02 pm

       the ‘dinnimik enviroment’ causes a decrease in the employment rate – not an increase in unemployment. Language people! or CT will be on to you.
   • Mooloo magic 2.3

     9 August 2012 at 6:22 pm

     I also heard Key’s comments , the PM will not tolerate bad news , Why is he so popular when he is such recidivist liar. Why are his often glib or
     disingenuous remarks invariably remain unchallenged . Where is Labour? they too often miss the opportunity to challenge Key. I guess too busy trying to destroy Cunnliffe.
     I despair we have a cruel callous government and the main opposition party that rather attack each puget then the government
     • muzza 2.3.1

       9 August 2012 at 8:43 pm

       No we have a parliamentary system that is controlled on all sides, thats whats happening to Labour, its not bloody rocket science
     • Roy 2.3.2

       10 August 2012 at 11:04 am

       I think Key is popular with some people exactly because he refuses to acknowledge bad news, just Ronnie Reagan was popular with some people because he was eternally optimistic, unlike the more intellectually honest Jimmy Carter who preceded him. Some people seem to like a benignly smiling leader who tells them everything is just fine, and refuse to consider the evidence that he is lying through his teeth.
3. mike e 3

   9 August 2012 at 4:20 pm

   No he’s not he’s going to get them to join gangs and go to Australia.
4. bad12 4

   9 August 2012 at 4:51 pm

   National’s score for economic success remains at a lowly F for Failed, teacher says little Johnny must concentrate more on the basics,

   A note on the bottom of little Johnny’s school report notes that He must stop lying to the rest of the class….
5. Vicky32 5

   9 August 2012 at 6:51 pm

   I’ll just say what I said on FB – ironically, I had not worked all year until last week, and now I have more offers – it’ll amount to 3-4 weeks in all! But it is a solution (in my personal case)? Is it hecks as like!
   It’s still all casual. The call centre has not asked me back after the first week.
   A day here, a day there – it’s better only by contrast with a complete nothing which is what I’ve had from January to July – (not counting 4 days in April-May).
   In Italy, we’re called ‘i precari’, and in Italy we protest. Why not here?
   • Tiger Mountain 5.1

     9 August 2012 at 7:07 pm

     Precarious ‘employment’ is a worry world over. Friend of mine has just gone to work for the IUF cited at start of this brief piece.
     http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSiIen1hMqU&feature=plcp
   • Dr Terry 5.2

     9 August 2012 at 8:58 pm

     People actively protest in many countries, and they wonder at the incredible passivity of New Zealanders. “Opposition” parties (Labour more than others) encourage passivity by example. With no hearty opposition, nothing will ever change for the better. Key loves to keep the populace as a pack of dummies. Maybe that is what we are!! Shearer is almost tripping over himself to be obliging to the Great Master (Key), and that is exactly the way Key always wanted it. He would hate to be obliged to deal with Cunliffe (or the like), who is much too intelligent for him (and for his own party). Dumb, dumb, dumb.
     Those who want not to remain dumb are flocking to fairer fields, and that too suits Key and his lot (helps keep down unemployment figures. Just great!) But I hope that I am not being too “technical”for our Glorious Leader. Dumb, dumb, dumb!
   • Draco T Bastard 5.3

     9 August 2012 at 9:56 pm

     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precariat
     • rosy 5.3.1

       9 August 2012 at 10:05 pm

       ah, thanks… I knew there must be a word for it apart from casualisation (which confused people who have self-chosen labour market flexibility).
       Definition:

       Precarity is a general term to describe how large parts of the population are being subjected to flexible exploitation or flexploitation (low pay, high blackmailability, intermittent income, etc.), and existential precariousness (high risk of social exclusion because of low incomes, welfare cuts, high cost of living, etc.) The condition of precarity is said to affect all of service sector labor in a narrow sense, and the whole of society in a wider sense, but particularly youth, women, and immigrants.

       Actually I’d put unskilled labourers in that list as well.
6. infused 6

   9 August 2012 at 7:19 pm

   Look outside of NZ. There is no growth, anywhere.
   • rosy 6.1

     9 August 2012 at 7:31 pm

     I’m looking…
     http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG

     or
     http://www.tradingeconomics.com/gdp-growth-rates-list-by-country
     • infused 6.1.1

       9 August 2012 at 7:44 pm

       :rollseyes:
       • rosy 6.1.1.1

         9 August 2012 at 10:12 pm

         That’s 🙄 and no need to thank me, you’re welcome.
     • bad12 6.1.2

       9 August 2012 at 8:14 pm

       Not exactly a holiday in Cambodia but in the vicinity is Mongolia basking in the economic sunshine of a massive 17.3% ‘growth’,

       For fun in the sun closer to home you just cannot go past Timor-Leste registering an impressive 10.6% ‘growth’, perhaps we could trade Ministers of Finance with them,

       Much of this of course depends upon what baseline the growth is measured from, the fact that here in Godsown we are still borrowing at 300 million bucks a week makes our current rate of growth meaningless as we are still behind where we were prior to the latest ‘event’ in capitalism’s slow train-wreck of self destruction…
       • UpandComer 6.1.2.1

         9 August 2012 at 11:27 pm

         Interesting countries to choose. You will get impressive growth when you are coming out of years of war (Timor-Leste). For instance, businesses aren’t getting blown up.

         Haha and again a wonderful choice – guess what is driving their growth? 95% of it is fuelled (pun) by petroleum. Natural gas and oil.

         http://www.foreignpolicy.com/timor/content/economics/this_is_what_reform_is_about.php

         Mongolia. Great choice. Guess what is driving Mongolia’s growth?

         Primarily it’s coal. Then gold, iron ore, copper and crude oil. Then agriculture. Also some tin in there. Haha and of course, it’s banking industry is thriving.

         http://moneymorning.com/2012/03/15/investing-in-mongolia-is-it-time-to-buy-the-worlds-fastest-growing-economy/

         http://www.eurasiac.com/files/research_note/Mongolia_Outlook_2020.pdf

         So, if the Mongolian finance Minister turned up in NZ, what would Labour’s reaction be to him emulating that growth in NZ, by seeking to vastly expand our mining, banking, and agriculture?
         • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.1.1

           9 August 2012 at 11:34 pm

           Those countries are being mined out by foreign multinationals, and their populations garnering only a tiny fraction of the value of the resources.

           But that’s usual neolib corporate practice and I’m sure you are OK with it.
           • UpandComer 6.1.2.1.1.1

             10 August 2012 at 12:34 am

             It’s not a tiny fraction. The projection is for Mongolia’s GDP per capita to increase from 2500 per person to over 10000 by 2020. That wealth by definition is not travelling off-shore. That growth will give them the impetus they need to move into a more sustainable commodity based economy or non-commodity based.

             Timor-Leste is also very militant in ensuring the wealth stays in the country, but realistic about the foreign investment needed to exploit it.

             The point is that the huge growth of these two countries is being driven by precisely the policies that Labour and the Greens disparage, and the unreasonable ideological opposition just seems really really silly to me, and most of Labour’s traditional constituents.
             • Draco T Bastard …

               10 August 2012 at 1:19 am

               And once all the resources are gone the people of both countries will still be in poverty. A few people will be very well off though – for a short while.
         • bad12 6.1.2.1.2

           9 August 2012 at 11:41 pm

           Aha, just my little attempt at levity, Rwanda also has quite high ‘growth’ figures i am sure no real damage would be done if we were to swap Finance Ministers with that country…
           • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.1.2.1

             9 August 2012 at 11:51 pm

             Notice digging shit up to fuel the inefficient consumer junk devouring west is what the neolibs are left with now.

             That and monetary and financial market rorts on a massive scale.
           • McFlock 6.1.2.1.2.2

             10 August 2012 at 12:08 am

             Quite a few developed nations are outperforming NZ, too. 
             • rosy …

               10 August 2012 at 12:22 am

               Yep – I compare Austria with NZ everyday – similar population, relies on a larger neighbour, fairly decent agricultural base with limited extractive industries and a potential problem with debt.

               How in the middle of the Eurozone crisis (that NZ is barely exposed to, no matter how many times Key and English use it as an excuse) does Austria have a better GDP than New Zealand, and lower unemployment? Without inflation getting out of control?

               A rhetorical question, of course, but it bugs me to see people being looked after in Austria and dumped into precarity in New Zealand. They certainly don’t use the Austrian School of Economics for the economic template in Austria!
               • bad12 …

                 10 August 2012 at 12:29 am

                 Nah, the grad students just made all that up and exported it so they could have a laugh at anyone stupid enough to actually use it,

                 Guess who…
               • UpandComer …

                 10 August 2012 at 1:29 am

                 If you compare Austria’s and New Zealand’s GDP profiles, you will see that since 1990 we have come out ahead the majority of years.

                 Their growth from 2000-2008 was lower then ours on average. As a result of our 90’s reforms, our growth in this period was high, and potentially could have been very high but for well, you know what.

                 They were like us in 2009 – negative 3% +.

                 If you look at 2000-2010 our economy has performed much better then Austria, at least certainly until 2005 when Micheal Cullen’s solid managment was overridden by Helen.

                 Austria is utterly different to us in almost every way aside from population.

                 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/au.html

                 Also they don’t just rely like we do on one state like Australia, because of where they are they can export to these places:

                 http://www.advantageaustria.org/international/zentral/business-guide-oesterreich/exportieren-nach-oesterreich/zahlen-und-fakten/wirtschaft/aussenwirtschaft.en.html

                 Note they can get to the US, because they have ties going all the way back to the Marshall plan and their exports don’t offend America’s execrable farming lobby.

                 They are a service economy, we are an agricultural economy. The former is a bit easier to run when you are in the middle of Europe, surrounded by powerful economies on every side. They are also an industrial/manufacturing economy – again pretty different situation for us and them.

                 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/au.html

                 You will note that National actually did some of the same things as Austria to lessen unemployment – such as subsidize employers so they would retain and hire in 2009.

                 Austria has a good welfare state, I’m not going to disagree with that at all. Their per capita GDP is 42000, ours is 29000. They can afford their excellent welfare state. We actually can’t afford one. I’d like us to be able to afford one without taxing everyone 50% of their earnings.

                 But thanks for pointing me to Austria. I need to think about this some more. I admit I don’t have all the answers at all, but I think we can do better then Austria, and will do better then Austria.
                 • rosy …

                   10 August 2012 at 2:54 am

                   Yeah, it was a rhetorical question, I know some similarities are superficial but it does have some pretty strong structural adjustments it’s making to keep ahead. As for lack of massive growth in the good times, I think there’s more interest in stability – so in the coming low/nil growth environment I think they may be a jump or two ahead of the pack. (notice all the ‘I thinks’ – I’m working on improving that to ‘I understand’)

                   Some of those differences between NZ and Austria are because they didn’t take on the neo-liberal stuff in the ’80s. I’m quite interested in how some of he more regulated market economies have survived the downturn. As Merkel said to Blair when he asked why Germany was doing better she said we still make things.

                   If you really are interested in why their labour market survived take a look at the Labour Market Promotion Act. A couple of sources that might be useful are:
                   – Labour market policy (.pdf)
                   – why Austria survived the recession with relatively low unemployment (.pdf).
                   – Chamber of Labour

                   Some things I’ve noticed:
                   – Unions are voluntary, but with high membership rates
                   – Belonging to the Chamber of Labour, a policy think tank for employees, is compulsory.
                   – long-term unemployed are re-trained – quickly.
                   – government policy is analysed for impacts on employment and adjusted if needs be.
                   – job subsidisation as required
                   – collectively agreed (not legislated) minimum wages cover 98% of the workforce
                   – technical training
                   – support for small industries and little outsourcing

                   Some of the policies are ones that the left in NZ objects to, but in Austria there are employee safeguards e.g. union/labour council interaction (these safeguards are not the bits of policy picked up by NZ).

                   A personal observation from living here is that employees also take their status seriously – in Vienna, the May Day parades are amazing – the city turns red, and it’s not just protests – it’s a recognition from all sectors of society of the importance of the labour movement. There doesn’t appear to be a conflict between employers and employees at the strategic level. Although they might piss each other off on the detail, they generally understand the need to accommodate each others interests. Anyway just a little hobby of mine to note the differences and similarities.
                   • UpandComer …

                     10 August 2012 at 3:53 am

                     You live in Austria? That must be a great experience.

                     Your post led me to hours of research on Austria. I’ve never compared them with us before.

                     I now know an awful lot about the Austrian system of welfare, tax system, health system, and economy. Cheers.
                   • rosy …

                     10 August 2012 at 4:15 am

                     I do, and yes, it’s a fantastic experience. I’m hoping when I go home I can transfer some of the best bits of the way of life with me. First up will be no personal car and no shopping on Sundays, but I’ll so enjoy getting back to a NZ coffee :-).
                   • UpandComer …

                     10 August 2012 at 4:40 am

                     Hmm. Sorry last comment. I’m on a proletariat night shift watching the goods of the usurious wealthy. The masses seem quiet. The purloined goods under my watchful eye remain undisturbed by any righteous revolutionary (nah I can’t do Chris Trotter, but that’s what I’m actually doing).

                     I think the difference between Austria (Or any generic successful European welfare state) and our own is productivity, and I’m not convinced that the welfare state necessarily compels that productivity. In my view it has to come first, otherwise we get the situation in 2009 with -4% GDP and no return to surplus.

                     The reason I say that is because in reviewing our growth since 1980 I’ve been doing a lot of reading regarding our economy before the infamous mother of all budgets.

                     We certainly had a welfare state prior to Ruth Richardson’s budget. But it didn’t look like Austria’s.

                     In 1991 we only had 80000 more full-time workers then welfare recipients.
                     All of NZ’s PAYE tax was insufficient to cover our welfare payments.
                     A full one third of everything the country could spend had to be spent on welfare.
                     Unemployment was 11%
                     In 1986 when our welfare state was in full flow inflation was 15%
                     Our top marginal rate in 1991 was 66% at 38 thousand! So naturally the tax take was low.
                     We had 330 thousand strike days in 1990. In Austria they don’t seem to strike much. I actually will side with NZ workers here. I’m constantly amazed by the Dilbert middle management, but we couldn’t ‘get on’ with all those strikes.
                     I know I’m leaving a bit out, but ultimately I hope if we do have an attempt to create a real welfare state again, that it looks like Austria’s, and not New Zealand’s in 1991. In order for us to get there, we need to up our GDP per capita so it looks like Austria’s. To do that we need money for education. To do that, we need to mine and change the CGT etc.
                   • UpandComer …

                     10 August 2012 at 4:47 am

                     I always remember that scene in Indiana Jones, when Harrison Ford is about to be shot. The Nazi oberlutant comes forward and strikes him in the face and says ‘zis is how ve say goodbye in germany’. Then the Blonde Austrian beauty comes forward and gives him a sultry kiss and says ‘and zis is how we say goodbye in Austria’. Han solo quips ‘I like the Austrian way better’. Austria seems like a warmer, fuzzier, less odd sense of humour Germany. My cousin’s family had an Austrian demi-pere living with them, and she was lovely and said goodbye to me the Austrian way 🙂 I hope I can go there one day.
                   • rosy …

                     10 August 2012 at 5:08 am

                     Argh I don’t envy you for the nightshift!

                     I don’t think it’s an either/for GDP growth and the welfare state. As for productivity, New Zealand’s is pretty high in terms of labour output. Of more importance is capital and innovation – we’re pretty low on investment-driven productivity. I also think you need to look back to the 1970s oil shocks, and loss of Britain as a major trading partner for what went wrong in the 1980s that led to all that industrial unrest and the takeover by the 1st ACT government. In this, a comparison with how Australia dealt with the shocks can be informative. Australia never had a neo-liberal turn either.

                     Anyway – I appreciate the thought-provoking chat… and I hope no-one disturbs your daytime sleep.
                   • Draco T Bastard …

                     10 August 2012 at 10:25 am

                     I also think you need to look back to the 1970s oil shocks, and loss of Britain as a major trading partner for what went wrong in the 1980s that led to all that industrial unrest and the takeover by the 1st ACT government.

                     The collapse actually started in the 1960s, worsened through the 70s with the final collapse in the 80s. Effectively the Keynesian means of propping up capitalism had come to it’s end. Unfortunately, the path chosen by the politicians was to take us back to the same policies of the 19th century which resulted in the Great Depression and who are now acting surprised by the Great Recession.
                   • rosy …

                     10 August 2012 at 9:55 pm

                     Austria seems like a warmer, fuzzier, less odd sense of humour Germany.
                     I can’t comment on the Germans – I don’t know any… but people are people, a mix of good and bad. Austrians are pretty easy-going as long as you observe the social niceties (that you have to find out for yourself). I’ve meet a couple of ex-pats taken aback by some abruptness, but mostly I find people are pretty good, friendly – and almost all are willing to speak English (although that doesn’t help my German).

                     There is, of course, the nationalist underbelly – but you soon work that out. I think the Austrians got off pretty easy post-war, but they are recognising that. I have had it mentioned to me that that is part of of the reason for worker protection being taken so seriously – that the poor, deprived, downtrodden workers led to the rise of the n@zis. So there you go – history matters.
                 • Draco T Bastard …

                   10 August 2012 at 10:16 am

                   Their per capita GDP is 42000, ours is 29000. They can afford their excellent welfare state. We actually can’t afford one.

                   Yes we can. We have an average income of ~$60k/annum. That means that we have the economy to pay every working age adult ~$30k/annum.

                   I’d like us to be able to afford one without taxing everyone 50% of their earnings.

                   There’s two options:
                   1.) Pay everyone equitably from the economy or
                   2.) Tax the beejesus out of the rich

                   You’ll note that the people complaining about taxes are the rich who are paid far more than they’re worth and use tax minimisation schemes to avoid paying the taxes they should.
                   • Plastic Tolstoy …

                     10 August 2012 at 10:50 am

                     “You’ll note that the people complaining about taxes are the rich who are paid far more than they’re worth”

                     Yes indeed, and so desperate to hold onto their inflated self-importance that they will tell you just about anything to justify why they consider themselves worth so much more than others, the most common story being that all you have to do is work harder and you too can ‘earn’ the right to become egotistical, shallow, lacking in empathy and a burden on society.

                     I expect National’s next trick to appear to be trying to solve the unemployment problem will be to increase the tax cuts for the wealthy even further, seeing as the last tax cuts obviously didn’t instill enough confidence in the mystical job-creators for them to start handing out jobs like candy at Halloween. I’m sure the rest of us serfs wont mind another increase in gst or similar to prop up the tax take while those mystical job-creators think deeply about what kinds of jobs they will create with their increased earnings.
                 • tracey …

                   10 August 2012 at 10:52 am

                   Arent we selling assets to not be like other countries with no growth? Anyone care to outline the plan following the sales?
                   • Plastic Tolstoy …

                     10 August 2012 at 10:58 am

                     Hope, pretty much. Hope that the ideology that National follows actually works out in the real world for once, even though it is logically unlikely.
                 • McFlock …

                   10 August 2012 at 1:45 pm

                   Their growth from 2000-2008 was lower then ours on average. As a result of our 90′s reforms, our growth in this period was high, and potentially could have been very high but for well, you know what.

                   Fuck I love that bullshit. When things go well under Labour, tories reckon it’s all the effect of the previous tory govt. When things go bad under national, toryboys blame the previous labour govt and the global economy.
                        
                   They never seem to notice that, no matter the length of the previous term, everything takes a nosedive months after tories move in (or improve months after centrist/notsotories move in) and stay that way until the next govt.
         • rosy 6.1.2.1.3

           9 August 2012 at 11:49 pm

           Or at 4.5% (2012 Q1) growth they could ask the Iceland PM what’s the best way to get moving forward.
           • Colonial Viper 6.1.2.1.3.1

             9 August 2012 at 11:53 pm

             Let the banks fail on a massive scale, and let bondholders and shareholders get wiped out. Foreign investors in the scams can go hang.

             And prosecute lots and lots of the bankster scum to return confidence to the real economy.
             • rosy …

               9 August 2012 at 11:57 pm

               Exactly. Can’t see the Nacts asking Iceland for advice anytime soon lol.
               • Colonial Viper …

                 9 August 2012 at 11:59 pm

                 Can’t see LAB asking Iceland for advice anytime soon lol.

                 right back at ya 😛
                 • rosy …

                   10 August 2012 at 12:04 am

                   You win… :-p
             • UpandComer …

               10 August 2012 at 12:23 am

               I don’t disagree with you.

               I think too big to fail is a travesty.

               Fraud should be criminally sanctioned, and Banks should not indulge in the worst forms of hypocritical socialism.

               I think NZ is blessed to have the Financial Markets Authority and the Banking Ombudsman.
               • xtasy …

                 10 August 2012 at 4:58 am

                 Ha, if the Banking Ombudsman is as well resourced as the whole so-called Office of Ombudsmen, then I reserve myself the right to laught out loud at your peculiar comments.

                 I filed a complaint with the Office of Ombudsmen in mid February, about a Health Board refusing to make available info about their own staff having failed in their duties to not take action when being informed about a mental health patient being entrusted in the care of a caregiver, who abused her.

                 It all smelled too much of a cover up, as their response to refuse information about the persons involved and their positions came swiftly within only a couple of days.

                 So I made the complaint. Strangely I never got a response, so in early July I sent an email to them, asking for an update from the Ombudsman. An automated reply assured me they would reply within A MONTH. Nothing ever came though. Hence early this week I phoned their 0800 number, spoke to a staff member, raised the reference file number and myself getting no replies. I was told she would pass the matter on and I would get a call back within 1 to 2 days. NOTHING came after that.

                 So I phoned the 0800 number again on Thursday late afternoon. This time a message left after much debate finally resulted in a team member returning the call.

                 To my absolute astonishment I was told that NOTHING had so far been done re my complaint! They admittedly have a large back-log of complaints to handle, so my one was one of the many “not progressed”. When I raised the serious issues associated with my complaint the woman then assured me that it would now be treated as a priority matter and be dealt with now.

                 Hence take note: The Office of Ombudsmen has a large back-log of complaints about non compliance with the Official Information Act and other legal requirements by various government agencies, health boards and whatever. Many cases have NOT BEEN PROCESSED over 6 months! The excuse given was a large work load and recent restructuring.

                 Does anyone remember Beverley Wakem as Chief Ombudsman complaining not so long ago, that her office does not have the resources to do its job?

                 Maybe inform yourself and do a reality chekc, dear ‘UpAndComer’ down the gurgler.
   • Dr Terry 6.2

     9 August 2012 at 9:02 pm

     Yes, we are indeed “ïnfused” with stupid and uninformed bullshit like this much too often. Are you being paid to make such obtuse utterances?
7. Rodel 7

   9 August 2012 at 7:20 pm

   Interesting how the Christchurch Press shows a back view photo of Bennet ( thanks for that) with happy workers ( actually I think it was one) getting jobs and lauding the wonderful need for 1000 workers in he city…On the same day that real (not media fabricated) data) shows the unemployment rate at 6.8% the highest for 2 years ‘…or is it the highest number of unemployed for 18 years

   ( heeeey just a technical hitch… .”.Look ..excuse me . I have to go to USA to watch my son play baseball…”
   162,000 people out of work!!! on the same day that Australia records a decrease in thhe number of unemployed.
   One really has to wonder about the professionalism of people in our news media.. I guess it’s at about the same level as the National party caucus, but a bit above the ethics of John Banks.
   But do we have to put up with novelists instead of journalists??
8. tc 8

   9 August 2012 at 8:03 pm

   ‘Just how many more years of the Nats’ economic “genius” do you want NZ?’

   Based on the pathetic labour caucus as it stands, at least another term…..onya Trev and co.
9. Dr Terry 9

   9 August 2012 at 9:09 pm

   tc A half decent novelist would not lack in professionalism. We have to endure, for the most part, journalists employed by news outlets which are slanted much to the Right (otherwise they are sacked, as was Tracey Barnett). Usually just one journalist of the Left is tolerated so as to give a false impression of “moderation”. As for ethics, how many know the meaning of that word today?
10. Palmerston North Property Management 10

    10 August 2012 at 12:44 am

    It doesn’t surprise me anymore when the unemployment numbers gathered doesn’t reflect the reality of things in the country. This post is spot on, and I can vouch for the situation to be much worse than the numbers on my end.
11. mike 11

    10 August 2012 at 12:50 am

    People relax this is a non-issue because John Key has said he will create 170,000 new jobs.* BAM! QED! Problem solved!

    * (Unless things get dinnamic in which case John Key’s glib promises assume the same value as those of a banker. Oh sh*t hang on…)
12. xtasy 12

    10 August 2012 at 4:44 am

    Key had the audacity to claim the House Hold Labour Force Survey by Statistics NZ was not the best and most reliable survey.

    I could not believe it, when I heard it on National Radio news.

    Not so long ago he answered to questions about growth in poverty and unemployment in NZ by either Jacinda Ardern or another opposition MP, that a Christian Social Services survey that member quoted was not very reliable. Instead the asking member was told BY KEY, that the Department of Statistics offered more reliable surveys.

    So you cannot have it both ways, Prime Minister! Calling it just a “technical” increase is absurd also.

    Every person who knows a bit about unemployment and statistics knows full well, that there are many unemployed that are not included in official statistics. They may be partners of a working person, so they rely on the income of that partner. They may be in some form of training, have extended study or else, knowing that there are no jobs. Others have health issues and are covered by other benefits.

    WINZ does to my information also not count people as unemployed, if they work more than 15 hours a week.

    The true figure is likely to be around 9 or 10 per cent, that is my best guess.
    • Vicky32 12.1

      10 August 2012 at 5:17 pm

      Key had the audacity to claim the House Hold Labour Force Survey by Statistics NZ was not the best and most reliable survey.

      My ghastly call centre experience the other week was with the HLFS…  I did only 3 days on the phones, as their IT and HR systems went into meltdown (I am waiting to see what happens next – being a casual! We’ll see)
      But I had enough experience to know that it’s a very good and very detailed study!

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS