Vote Labour To Support Your Job

Written By: - Date published: 8:30 am, September 24th, 2020 - 100 comments
Categories: covid-19, Economy, health, infrastructure, jacinda ardern, jobs, labour, Living Wage, minimum wage, uncategorized, wages, workers' rights - Tags:

This is a backpocket election – and that’s where most of Labour’s effort is going as it rightly should.

1.7 million of us now owe our jobs to Labour-led job subsidies. The ability to put food on the table, petrol in the car, and pay the bills, with work. As simple and as fundamental as that.

Hand-in-hand, most small and medium businesses in New Zealand now owe their continued existence to Labour-led business subsidies.

In the degree of economic stress New Zealand is now in, job insecurity remains high (though it was higher in May), so it’s Labour leading out the policies that sustain the strength of our employment.

By mid-July Finance Minister Robertson had spent an unheard of $13 billion to keep our jobs and businesses afloat, and that will have gone up since then.

Despite that massive spend and more, the New Zealand economy still contracted by 12% in the June quarter – the largest drop since records began in 1987.

That tells you the scale of trouble we would have been in had Ardern and Robertson not intervened on such a massive scale.

As Minister Robertson noted at the time, “This result was better than the treasury forecast of 16% and at the lower end of other commentators’ expectations. The June quarter includes almost the entire time New Zealand was in alert level 4 which we moved into on March 26 to this result is not surprising.”

Now, in an election, no one expects voters to be grateful. No one owes their vote to anyone. But apart from Prime Minister Ardern’s simple likeability, the next most important reason to give your vote to Labour is in managing the economy in the interests of the vast majority of New Zealanders.

  1.  MORE MONEY

National has been right to point out that proposing a minimum wage increase on a brittle and low-wage economy at this time is particularly hard on the small to medium businesses that make the great majority of our business numbers. But Labour is still pushing ahead with committing to lifting the minimum wage, again, from $17.70 per hour now to $20 per hour in 2021.

Absent the Multi Employer Collective Agreements many wish for, levering up the minimum wage is the most certain and across-New Zealand approach to higher incomes.

No business can say they didn’t see this coming, because this is what the campaigned on in 2017, to be implemented in 2021. Plus, you gain more sick leave under Labour, and they are proposing at least one more public holiday with Matariki.

Then there’s care and support workers getting well overdue pay increases.

That’s 55,000 New Zealand workers.

And 5,000 mental health and addiction support workers also got a decent settlement.

And 55,000 teachers got good increases.

And 30,000 nurses.

That’s not just a set of industry sectors – it’s a massive chunk of the whole of employed New Zealanders getting good pay increases. Well overdue, well deserved.

2. FREE CAREER TRAINING

For those industries where demand is still strong – such as infrastructure construction – Labour leader Jacinda Ardern has signalled that ALL apprenticeships will be free. No cost. This was set out in the budget this year, and has already started.

The fund covers course fees, compulsory course costs, and compulsory student services fees, whether paid by learner or employers. It’s targeting the staff needed most on a sustained basis, such as agriculture, forestry, construction, engineering, transport, mental health and counselling, and manufacturing.

And for those who lost their jobs during COVID’s worst days, that $490 a week (full time) or $250 a week (working part time) put a financial floor under so many when their employment world fell apart around them.

3. TAX THE RICH – AND DON’T TAX 98% OF US ANY MORE

Labour will increase the tax rate for the top 2% of earners – that’s where the wealth is. Income over $180,000 will get taxed at the new rate of 39%. Importantly, this levels the field with Australia who have that same income threshold but to an even steeper step of 47%.

The other big move some may have forgotten, was in extending the “Bright Line Test” to five years. That means if you sell an investment property within five years of owning it you pay a good chunk of the profit to the government in tax. Again, well signalled in what Labour campaigned on in 2017.

Government has got the tax signal right: target the wealthy and their property carefully, while seeking to support productive business, and leave well alone the tax impact on our incomes in this fragile and perilous job market.

4. KEEPING BUSINESS ALIVE

Businesses are the things that employ people in the private sector. Strangely, the current level of government support makes your job in the private sector arguably safer than those in many public sector industries, given the speed and scale of public sector restructures occurring this year especially in devastated local government and its businesses like airports.

During the worst of the COVID crisis, the Labour-led government provided $3.1 billion in tax-loss carry-back. In English, if you’re losing money this year or next, you can offset that against income from when you were profitable and get a good refund.

For all the thousands of little businesses trading products from their garage, they also made sure that all the big foreign companies paid GST on the smaller items. For multiple sectors, from tourism to the arts, there’s big chunks of money to keep their jobs going.

5. MORE LOCAL WORKERS SUPPORTED

While many of our parents and grandparents will tell stories of the season or two that they spent pickings apples in Nelson and elsewhere when they were young, it will take some persuading for Pacifika imported labour to be replaced by a new set of local young people. Because orchardists and viticulturalists need them to start on harvests in October this year, Labour hae announced that workers with expiring working holiday visas will be able to stay to fill short term work in horticulture and viticulture.

That’s 11,000 people – not enough to fulfil every role and leaving plenty of opportunity for young local workers in this next 6 months.

This gives horticultural farmers just this next few months to adjust and prepare for the fact that they probably won’t be coming back, and they will need to work very hard to attract local workers – on the new higher 2021 minimum wages of course. And also in this crisis year sustains faith with our special relationship with many Pacific island countries who rely on remittances from those making their way in New Zealand.

6. DOING PRODUCTIVE WORK

One dare not call it serendipity, but in March this year this Labour-led government outlined its $54 billion of transport projects, through the Government Policy Statement.

Then after the budget, in July they announced a further $3 billion in projects across 14 regions, which Labour expected to yield 20,000 jobs and unlock investment with a project value of over $5 billion. You can see how that is broken down by sector and by region here.

Then on August 18th Minister Robertson and Minister Twyford rolled out the projects that were going to get started the fastest, totalling $2.3 billion.

The list of projects near you keeps getting updated on the Crown Infrastructure partners site and you can see each one of them.

In terms of getting jobs started up, on projects in New Zealand worth doing, no New Zealand government has ever moved faster, or larger, than this Labour-led government.

7. HIGH TECH HIGH PAYING JOBS

Possibly the most astounding thing commercially about the COVID crisis is how much the crisis is a sectoral market shifter. New Zealand now has 29,000 tech firms with nearly 100,000 employees, contributing $16.2 billion to GDP and producing $6.3 billion in exports – it’s New Zealand’s third biggest revenue earner.

I can see it supplanting tourism in importance.

Locked in our studies and bedrooms with our laptops, the world doesn’t care about our location on the map, instead it recognises our innovation, safety, and ease of doing business. The nature of business – harbour bridge crises excluded – is more about connectivity and bandwidth as opposed to freight distances.

So from April this year this government has generated bigger R&D incentives.

As well as the longstanding biggies like Xero, Tait, and Endace, we now see Pushpay, Vend, and Timely pushing up fast. Yes, the new-generation jobs we thought were coming, are here and are growing. Check out Seek for all those unfulfilled tech jobs begging for your skills.

I have a sneaking suspicion there’s more to come from Labour in this space in the weeks to come.

It’s because 2020 has been an economic catastrophe that Ardern and Robertson threw more at sustaining us in employment than at any other time in our history.

For the great majority of New Zealand of us workers, and our families, Labour is defining itself in 2020 with the meaning of the very word labour: to keep people earning, on jobs that are worth doing, or shifting to careers that are needed onto projects that sustain our country into the long term. It’s the anxiety about the economy that is topmost in voters’ minds this election, quite reasonably.

When you set it out, Labour has set out policy measures on an massive scale to meet that anxiety and turn it into a believable employment future for New Zealanders.

100 comments on “Vote Labour To Support Your Job ”

  • Comments are now closed

  1. Gosman 1
    24 September 2020 at 8:41 am

    The government is keeping businesses afloat by pumping billions of dollars in to them so they don't go broke even if they are unlikely to be financially solvent for months if ever and you are seemingly stating the rest of us should be eternally grateful for our money to be spent in such a manner and we should all vote Labour despite the huge debt this is building up. I think I'll pass on that thanks.

  2. Pat 2
    24 September 2020 at 9:02 am

    Vote Green to support the existence of an economy

  3. Anker 3
    24 September 2020 at 9:17 am
    • Yeah didn’t think you’d vote Labour Gosman
    • Climaction 3.1
      24 September 2020 at 11:13 am

      Gosmans rebuttal to Advantages talking points are fair and reasonable and should give pause for thought before simply voting labour just because they aren't national

      • anker 3.1.1
        24 September 2020 at 12:21 pm

        I didn't say Gosman's rebuttal wasn't fair. Its no surprizes he isn't voting Labour.

        Govts around the world are doing what our govt has done ie. borrowed money and offered wage subsidy eg. UK and Oz. There will have been business that take the money and fold, but overwhelmingly I believe we will find that most will survive, all-be-it with a lot of stress and difficulty.

        I am not sure what the alternative would have been. I believe hard and early lockdown

        was the correct call. Look overseas to see what is happening in most other countries. The often vaulted Sweden where cases and deaths are rising again (around 200 cases a day).

        Gosman is allowed to rebute. He doesn't offer his take on things or which party he thinks would have done better. But that's o.k. he doesn't have too.

        • Climaction 3.1.1.1
          24 September 2020 at 1:20 pm

          Sweden daily death rate is below 10, well below what other european lockdown countries are currently experiencing.

          France recorded 78 yesterday.

          Spain 90.

          Sweden approached covid in the right manner. carefully and withouth panicking into a lockdown. it's economy has only shrunk 7%. versus 12.2% in New Zealand.

          Gosman is right to critique this approach to government and lockdown. He could be wrong, but not just because he won't vote labour. in this instance he is correct.

          For what it's worth, New Zealand was in recession before lockdowns. This government has a lacklustre track record on promises made vs promises kept. We should just accept the largesse without end as it's being promised again?

          • Incognito 3.1.1.1.1
            24 September 2020 at 2:11 pm

            Sweden approached covid in the right manner. carefully and withouth panicking into a lockdown. it's economy has only shrunk 7%. versus 12.2% in New Zealand. [sic]

            Please give a reliable link to back-up your assertion about the Swedish economy.

            The Swedish government did respond to the pandemic in a different way compared to most countries and they are similar to our Alert Level 2 at present, where they have been since the beginning of April. They also have an average daily new case rate of > 250.

            He could be wrong … in this instance he is correct.

            In that case, please provide the evidence that he is correct.

          • Gabby 3.1.1.1.2
            24 September 2020 at 2:22 pm

            Sweden's DAILY death rate is below 10? Fucking hell C, you think that's the right manner?

          • McFlock 3.1.1.1.3
            24 September 2020 at 3:11 pm

            New Zealand was in recession before lockdowns.

            That's an outright lie.

            We had a slight first quarter dip for the period that narrowly overlapped the start of lockdown, but included a longer period of travel restrictions (and the general slowdown in global travel).

            And even if it wasn't a lie, how many points of GDP would you exchange for roughly 5 NZers being killed by covid every single day?

            • roblogic 3.1.1.1.3.1
              25 September 2020 at 12:31 am

              In addition to the mortality stats, adding 100 people per day to the health system is nothing to sneeze at. GDP will crater anyway, as people choose to protect themselves rather than support the "economy" by going out

      • Incognito 3.1.2
        24 September 2020 at 1:40 pm

        Gosman didn’t rebut any of “Advantages talking points” [sic], and neither did you for that matter. He was just having a typical rant full of hot air. The gist of his rant appears to be that the Government should not have cushioned the blow of the pandemic and instead let all Hell break loose for businesses, large and small, and their thousands of employees. It sounds to me that Gosman was advocating some kind of scorched Earth approach in which only a few survive or maybe some Phoenix will rise from the ashes. We cannot ask Gosman, because he overstepped the line again in another post, and we could ask you but I’m not holding my breath.

      • Patricia Bremner 3.1.3
        24 September 2020 at 2:20 pm

        I listened to Judith and her agricultural mouthpiece this morning, Gosman.

        What is better about walking back on all advances made in the last 3 years?

        When our goods are stopped at borders for failing standards, and don't get bought

        how will that help workers?

        Short term fixes which are political whims.

        National did this last time and it fails on every level, as it says take today don't worry about tomorrow. Short sighted and selfish.

        I suppose you approve the tax cuts? They give to people earning over $30 000 which is about the median wage. So half get nothing at all. Many small businesses will fall into that category this year. So no help there then.

  4. infused 4
    24 September 2020 at 10:07 am

    lol – owe to the labour government? no, most of those jobs are going to be gone next year. it was a good scheme, but shouldn't have been extended except where the government was forcing businesses to close.

    this is the biggest cringe post if I've ever seen one.

    vote labours because we give you other peoples money.

    • Incognito 4.1
      24 September 2020 at 10:28 am

      Firstly, the Government responded to a pandemic, which could have killed and injured many Kiwis. Secondly, even if the lockdowns had been less severe, people would have stayed away en masse as happened in other places around the world; the negative impact on businesses would have been quite similar. Thirdly, the economy would have taken a hit regardless of local actions and efforts (cf. the Swedish economy). In short, the Government scheme cushioned the inevitable blow(s).

      • Infused 4.1.1
        24 September 2020 at 2:16 pm

        The models of tens of thousands dying was stupid. Regardless you now have people dying want for surgery, cancer treatment etc (its in stuff today). The cure is going to be proven worse than the disease

        • Gabby 4.1.1.1
          24 September 2020 at 2:25 pm

          Slick Britches tried that and it didn't take.

        • Incognito 4.1.1.2
          24 September 2020 at 2:27 pm

          Just as well, I didn’t refer to any particular number or model. Are you saying that the number of deaths due to Covid would have been this low (i.e., 25 or 5/million people) if the Government had not enforced lockdowns?

          Please show the death rate in NZ due to other causes has gone up since Covid hit NZ compared to historical baseline.

        • greywarshark 4.1.1.3
          24 September 2020 at 3:27 pm

          I don't think much of your diagnosis infused – shonky medicine man.

      • greywarshark 4.1.2
        24 September 2020 at 3:33 pm

        And 4th 5th and 6th – there are lots of deleterious effects that have come from Covid 19. If allowed to sweep through the country the hospitals and medics would have broken down. The cemeteries and crematorium would have been steaming, there would have been mass graves, there would have been floods of tears and more painful grieving and loss. There would have been sharp looks and assessment of anyone for signs of danger, everyone wary and ready to erupt in anger if something seemed wrong. STFU about what you think should have been done. You are all right, you've been kept perky to come here with your usual whine infused.

    • Draco T Bastard 4.2
      24 September 2020 at 10:48 am

      It's not other people's money – it's the government's money.

      If we go with the idea that taxes fund the government then those taxes are payment for services rendered. Either that or the shopkeeper is also spending your money after you buy some biccies off them.

      Any money you earn is yours only until you spend it and spending it includes paying taxes.

      • You_Fool 4.2.1
        24 September 2020 at 11:16 am

        I think of it as our money, but then it is then being spent on us as well… not others…

      • Foreign waka 4.2.2
        24 September 2020 at 12:15 pm

        Draco,
        No it is taxpayers money, you know like people who work and compulsory getting money deducted. The government has no money, it is not theirs.

        In principle, any civilisation pays taxes to maintain infrastructure. Either physical or services (Education, Health, etc) and the administration of it.

        Any "surplus" should in fact either be used to improve the same or be returned. Oh how wonderful it would be if women don't have to travel so far and have to give birth at the side of the road. Or if cancer treatment is being given to those in need before its too late. Or if schools support talent and initiative of students equally. Just learned that a student was not taken up in a course due to quotas that have been filled. Yes we have these now too where undeserving pakeha have to go and find something else. I know! So politically incorrect my statement, isn't it.

        But alas, as it was with the wage subsidy fiasco where the wealthy get more of what is ours, we don't see a brass rasu but the money is squandered on some pet projects.

        Still not convinced that the ministers in the labour caucus have a clue. And I have been a labour/green voter.

        • Draco T Bastard 4.2.2.1
          24 September 2020 at 12:40 pm

          No it is taxpayers money, you know like people who work and compulsory getting money deducted.

          And when you buy biccies you get the money compulsory deducted as well.

          In principle, any civilisation pays taxes to maintain infrastructure. Either physical or services (Education, Health, etc) and the administration of it.

          Except for the minor technicality that taxes aren't used for that. The government doesn't actually need taxes to pay for anything as they create the money.

          But alas, as it was with the wage subsidy fiasco where the wealthy get more of what is ours, we don't see a brass rasu but the money is squandered on some pet projects.

          Yes, the ongoing subsidies to the failing business models is stupid. I agree with Gosman on that. Of course, Gosman still thinks capitalism works despite the thousands of years of it failing.

          Still not convinced that the ministers in the labour caucus have a clue. And I have been a labour/green voter.

          They're all still stuck in the neo-liberal paradigm and don't want to admit that it doesn't work and so they keep throwing resources at it hoping that it will suddenly do so.

          • Foreign waka 4.2.2.1.1
            24 September 2020 at 12:56 pm

            Government cannot create money, they are representative of the people they govern, nothing more nothing less.
            Quantitively easing is not generally a prudent way to cover expenses.

            Money is an expression of an agreed value. If you print more money and put it into circulation, demand increases and with it the price (see housing). So it will fuel inflation. It was extreme in the 1920 where you could buy a loaf of bread with a wheel barrel full of money.

            https://www.economicshelp.org/blog/634/economics/the-problem-with-printing-money/

            And I stick with realities and sustainability not just this but the next generation, thank you.

            • McFlock 4.2.2.1.1.1
              24 September 2020 at 2:51 pm

              Yes, hyperinflation is bad.

              But running up some debt is a good idea if the shortfall is temporary, or it's to enable the economy to transition to a new normal.

              Personally, a whole bunch of companies going under and laying people off is a pretty bad thing, worth going into debt to avoid or at least buy them time to change their models.

            • roblogic 4.2.2.1.1.2
              25 September 2020 at 12:43 am

              "Government cannot create money"… who do you think writes the legislation that enables the private banks to do just that? Fiat Money is created ex nihilo by private fucken Aussie banks and loaned to the Reserve Bank at a rate of interest! We pay them for shit.

              Better that the RB just creates whatever the Fin Min wants. International banking is a massive scam against democracy, and is in the process of killing the host (our society) right now.

              https://www.positivemoney.org.nz/pm/

              http://rethinkingprosperity.org/finance-as-class-warfare-a-review-of-killing-the-host-by-michael-hudson/

            • Draco T Bastard 4.2.2.1.1.3
              25 September 2020 at 10:40 am

              Government cannot create money

              Yes they can.

              Quantitively easing is not generally a prudent way to cover expenses.

              1. Actually, it can be
              2. It may not be actual quantitative easing – taxes remove money from circulation
              3. Banks create money all the time – it's actually the most prevalent way for money to enter the economy. This is actually bad as it really does fuel inflation – primarily, house price inflation followed closely by share price inflation. Guess what most bank loans are used for?

              Money is an expression of an agreed value.

              No its not. Money has no value at all. No currency does as currency having a value is bad for the economy.

              What money is is a tool that assists in trade.

              It was extreme in the 1920 where you could buy a loaf of bread with a wheel barrel full of money.

              Where the private banks went over board with their money creation:

              Discussions of the dangers of inflation inevitably end up at the worst-ever case known – the German hyperinflation of 1923. Accompanied by economists' moralizing warnings of the dire results of governments' printing paper money, the German hyperinflation is used as a horror story by those who advocate a plutocratic control over money. However (as in other cases), when the monetary facts are actually examined, the argument falls apart as it becomes clear that the bankers themselves and speculators were the primary cause of the German hyperinflation, which was not stopped until the government took decisive action against them.

              My emphasis.

              So, like the hyper-inflation that we see today in house prices, the German hyper-inflation was caused by the private banks and speculators.

        • Stuart Munro 4.2.2.2
          24 September 2020 at 3:36 pm

          No it is taxpayers money,

          It's astonishing how reluctant those that peddle this crude fiction are to actually pay the tax they assert is the basis of their enfranchisement. It is the citizens' money – tax status is neither here nor there.

    • anker 4.3
      24 September 2020 at 12:23 pm

      Most of what jobs infused? Those who received the wage subsidy?

  5. Byd0nz 5
    24 September 2020 at 10:36 am

    Small businesses employ people, yea, and they pretend their your friend yea, and when things are busy the wotkerssort of help out a bit, quite often with no xtra reimbursment. In short these friendly employers rip the worker off. What are they in business for, to make a profit, yea, so dont they plan for a rainy day or to they just spend up on themselves. How many rainy days come along. They bludge off their workers, of course in a friendly way. No sympathy from me. They cry for help from the ( as they say Nanny State) then they go vote for the right wing parties. Pay your workers a living wage for once. So good on Labour uping the min-wage even though it aint close to a proper living wage.

    • Infused 5.1
      24 September 2020 at 2:14 pm

      Lay off the cracks. You don't even know what you're talking about.

      No one has rainy day money for a government enforced lockdown of 6 to 8 weeks. You're just being stupid.

      • Patricia Bremner 5.1.1
        24 September 2020 at 3:01 pm

        BydOnz is correct, some employers have taken from employees. Pleasing to see IRD catching and pinging them.

        Also, the last National Government said "workers should have savings to meet the 13 week stand down for a benefit." The Lockdown was 8 weeks or so, the subsidy was in week 2 of the 8 weeks.

        BydOnz is saying as the businesses have favoured National previously, perhaps that rule should have applied to them in this case, a 13 week stand down.

        You thought he was talking nonsense, but he was pointing out they should try their past beliefs. However the subsidy was about saving jobs as much as helping businesses.

  6. greywarshark 6
    24 September 2020 at 10:54 am

    Go for left politics!

    Plato muses:
    One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.

    Plato

    Another:

    When there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.
    Plato

  7. Stuart Munro 7
    24 September 2020 at 11:29 am

    It's a great line – but Labour is shamelessly bringing the slave fishermen back again. They need a few blunt lessons about not pissing away NZ jobs before they can claim the mantle of the workers' party they parasitized.

    • Patricia Bremner 7.1
      24 September 2020 at 2:35 pm

      They are allowing 500 odd back in with agreements to hire a % of kiwis at the NZ rate.

      Exaggeration and hyperbole do not prove anything.

      • Stuart Munro 7.1.1
        24 September 2020 at 3:18 pm

        500 is a lot in a small industry. And I am in the position of being able to say Labour not only did not save my job, but gave me the runaround about it – for decades – while my former colleagues were killing themselves. If they want to make claims, they need to be truthful – and the truth is that what they did to fishing is disgraceful, and far from acknowledging that, and working to remedy it, they deny it, they divert from it, they ridicule anyone who criticizes them over it, and as a result the industry remains exceptionally poorly developed, and employs relatively few New Zealanders – returning less than 1% of Japan's results from a biological resource of comparable size.

        Am I supposed to thank them for screwing me over? It ain't going to happen.

        • roblogic 7.1.1.1
          25 September 2020 at 12:59 am

          I blame Shane Jones

          • Stuart Munro 7.1.1.1.1
            25 September 2020 at 6:43 am

            It's older than him, though he has certainly done nothing to put it right.

            Make no mistake – these vessels are registered in NZ, and therefore subject to NZ laws in every respect, including labour laws. But the crews are not getting minimum wage or other protections. Both Labour and National have collaborated in this systematic lawbreaking, to their undying shame, and to the detriment of NZ developing a professional fishing industry.

            • Draco T Bastard 7.1.1.1.1.1
              26 September 2020 at 2:39 pm

              Considering the state of our fish stocks about the only thing that the government could do to develop our fishing industry is to ban fishing for twenty years just to ensure that there's fish to fish for.

              • Stuart Munro …
                26 September 2020 at 3:15 pm

                As with most complex problems, a coherent solution is also necessarily complex. Smaller, less monopsonistic companies would be more influenced by variation in fish stocks, and would have begun to adapt by now.

                Much of the effort of Asian fishing nations focuses on shorter life cycle species, especially those whose stocks are rising. Locally that might include things like various edible algae, t. murphyi, and of course the cephalopods favoured by rising ocean temperatures and acidification.

                Equally important however, is a move to lighter handed or even supportive interaction with the fishery – there is substantial pressure from the Greens in favour of regenerative agriculture, but nothing comparable for our much larger marine resources. The artisanal fishery model is successful elsewhere however, and like organic farming produces higher per kilo returns, less damaging fishing practices, and stable, more professional circumstances for fishermen.

                Slavery is never a particularly good economic model, even if certain fisheries personalities consider anything else "either decadent, or barbarous."

                • Draco T Bastard …
                  26 September 2020 at 11:22 pm

                  As with most complex problems, a coherent solution is also necessarily complex.

                  But we're not talking about a complex problem. Fish stocks are damn near the point of total collapse and we need to stop it going any further.

                  Smaller, less monopsonistic companies would be more influenced by variation in fish stocks, and would have begun to adapt by now.

                  No, it won't. IIRC, For a long time all we had was smaller businesses fishing our waters and they consistently lied about the catch resulting in the fish stocks being far below where the government thought they were and the research showed that happened before we had the large companies taking everything.

                  The artisanal fishery model is successful elsewhere however

                  Which does not mean that it would be successful here:

                  A surge in population around the region – an extra 87,500 people had moved to the Auckland area since the last report, with half a million households now living around the gulf's fringes – was singled out as the single biggest change from 2014.

                  Still, it does point to the idea that it needs to be investigated.

                  BTW, when I said a ban on fishing I meant commercial fishing and thus allowing for non-commercial fishing to continue which would be similar to the artisanal fishing.

                  • Stuart Munro …
                    26 September 2020 at 11:43 pm

                    For a long time all we had was smaller businesses fishing our waters and they consistently lied about the catch resulting in the fish stocks being far below where the government thought they were and the research showed that happened before we had the large companies taking everything.

                    The capacity for gross abuse is much less on a small vessel than on a BATM. However wicked the skipper of a 30 footer might be, he cannot kill 2-300 tonnes a day. He or she necessarily has a lighter ecological footprint, and the breakeven point for the vessel might be a few cases a day, not several 10s of tonnes.

                    The few surviving smaller outfits are already adapting, a number have given up bottom trawling already, and there is a fellow using net cameras to fish selectively.

                    I meant commercial fishing and thus allowing for non-commercial fishing to continue which would be similar to the artisanal fishing.

                    Environmental or quality reforms are invariably resisted by conservatives. The crude extraction model of resource depletion was used for sylphium, elephants, and slaves and plenty of other resources. The concept that better returns might result still needs to be beaten into the morbidly obtuse numbskulls setting policy – even though things like iki snapper getting a better return are common knowledge.

                    We should be aiming for the live market for most higher end species by now – they get higher returns, but they also foster a less destructive kind of fishing. The industry would assert that it is uneconomic – well so was organic dairy if you go back a bit. Smart, fast-adopting industries reap the leading edge of the price curve – dumb, slow-adopting ones become price takers.

                    • Draco T Bastard …
                      27 September 2020 at 2:19 pm

                      The capacity for gross abuse is much less on a small vessel than on a BATM.

                      But the capacity to perform the corrupt action is the same and then multiplied by the number of boats. End result – the amount of waste remains about the same. Same goes for ecological foot print – in fact, as the smaller boats are less efficient, they probably have a bigger ecological foot print especially in fuel burning.

                      The industry would assert that it is uneconomic

                      There's been a number of industries over the years that insisted that some action was uneconomic because it would cost them more. This is a prime example of me saying that people have lost sight of the economy due to money.

                      The diseconomy is that these people are taking all of the resources in such a way as to leave none. This also includes people doing damage to the environment to the extent that the environment can no longer support itself.

                      The latter applies to fishing – the fishing industry is taking so much fish that the fish will soon no longer be able to support themselves at which point there is no more fishing industry.

                  • Stuart Munro …
                    27 September 2020 at 2:40 pm

                    End result – the amount of waste remains about the same.

                    In fact it probably doesn't. Although there were a number of mighty dodgy smaller operators, there were also many quite scrupulous ones. The BATMs, looted from the remains of the soviet state fishing companies by criminals euphemistically described as oligarchs, have little or no respect for local ecology or legalities at the best of times. Any kind of price pressure makes them even worse corporate citizens.

                    There are efficiency limits in fishing technology. As it gets larger and heavier, the wastage through crushing of catch, and the environmental damage from heavier doors and ground lines increases.

                    the fishing industry is taking so much fish that the fish will soon no longer be able to support themselves at which point there is no more fishing industry.

                    Could they talk, the southern hake, the orange roughy, the Tasman scallops and many more would assert they were well down that road already. But remedial action would require government to acknowledge the scale of the failings of their f-witted neoliberal toy, the QMS. We will get that admission from their cold dead hands.

  8. bwaghorn 8
    24 September 2020 at 12:11 pm

    I was talking to a lady who's in aged care ,doing home support, labours pay raise means she can actually afford to pay her Bill's and maintain her car ,!!!

    It is that simple .

    I'm fucking grateful for labour being in ,they haven't saved my job ,it wasn't in danger or increased my income ,but they are at this time lightyears ahead of the other option,

    • greywarshark 8.1
      24 September 2020 at 12:19 pm

      bwaghorn yeslaugh

    • JanM 8.2
      24 September 2020 at 12:33 pm

      Well done you! It's really uplifting to see someone grateful for the help this hardworking government has given so many of us. Honestly I would love to see all these whiners offered a one way flight to the USA !!!

    • Patricia Bremner 8.3
      24 September 2020 at 2:41 pm

      Agreed bwaghorn, a young family we know said they have never been better off, as they had been 3 months on a job then a month off, searching for another job, with the 90 day fiasco, and went backwards over ten years before this government.

      Now they have certainty with better pay, better allowances and better rules at work.

      So the people we know are happier and even our National friends agree it is better for their families.

  9. McFlock 9
    24 September 2020 at 2:55 pm

    A couple I know, one has their employer creaming money in the new environment, the other's business is on government life support (but slowly adapting and recovering. Can't exist under L4, loses money at L3/2).

    But without too many more higher-level lockdowns too close together, both of them should do okay.

    • Chris T 9.1
      26 September 2020 at 1:13 pm

      I am pretty sure the govt will make sure everyone is back to L1 by the election and the rugby.

      Can't have no crowds at Bled' game at election time.

      People might be annoyed and that.

      • Incognito 9.1.1
        26 September 2020 at 1:38 pm

        I am pretty sure the govt will make sure everyone is back to L1 ASAP to protect the population against Covid-19 and eliminating it.

        I am pretty sure everybody is doing their utmost to fulfil their moral and civic duty and comply with the requests and guidance from MoH.

        I am pretty sure eliminating the virus should not become a political football.

      • Drowsy M. Kram 9.1.2
        26 September 2020 at 1:43 pm

        "I am pretty sure the govt will make sure everyone is back to L1 by the election and the rugby."

        Pretty sure the govt is doing everything it can (within reason) to get all of NZ to L1 as soon as it's safe to do so. It's even conceivable a National-led govt might have at least tried to do that too, but we’ll never know how successful Bridges Muller Collins & co. coulda woulda shoulda been.

        • Chris T 9.1.2.1
          26 September 2020 at 1:50 pm

          I like how you think I am a Nat supporter.

          laugh

          I am just a cynical of all politicians supporter.

          But now that you have brought it up at least we know how well Little (Oh that’s right, he did a Muller), sorry, Ardern is doing.

          • Incognito 9.1.2.1.1
            26 September 2020 at 2:00 pm

            Little did a Muller!?

            What a RWNJ troll thing to say 🙁

            In fact, it is an all-round despicable thing to say angryno

            • Chris T 9.1.2.1.1.1
              26 September 2020 at 2:04 pm

              Why?

              They both stood down by their own decision close to an election.

              • Incognito …
                26 September 2020 at 2:07 pm

                For completely different reasons. It was a low and cheap comment.

                • Chris T …
                  26 September 2020 at 2:16 pm

                  Well obviously

                  One. Little Bad polls

                  https://www.odt.co.nz/news/politics/andrew-little-stands-down

                  One. Muller. Mental illness

                  https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/426816/former-national-leader-todd-muller-opens-up-about-panic-attacks-days-into-job

                  I was simply pointing out it happens on both sides.

                  I also find it interesting you don't find Drowsy's post a cheap comment with Muller, given the circumstances for him standing down.

                  • Incognito …
                    26 September 2020 at 2:24 pm

                    I was simply pointing out it happens on both sides. [my italics]

                    What do you mean by “it”? That Leaders stand down under their own volition, for completely different reasons? In other words, Muller did a Key? Your false equivalence is insulting.

                    I find it interesting that you are trying to divert with whataboutery.

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 2:26 pm

                      That both sides can have leaders stand down extremely close to the next election, by their own choice.

                      Edit: Should have added, so it is a bit pottle, kettle black to criticise the other side for it happening.

                      ie Drowsy’s quip with the Muller strikeout and Collins comment.

                    • Incognito []
                      26 September 2020 at 2:40 pm

                      Yup, your lazy false equivalences are misguided and misplaced.

                      Striking out the names of two ex-Leaders of National is not the same as saying ‘Little did a Muller’, nor does it amount to criticism unless you want to see it that way. In any case, it would be more directed at the Party than at (the) individuals, IMO. BTW, Bridges was rolled.

                      Muller was more or less forced to stand down because of his health.

                      Little saw that a better candidate was waiting in the wings.

                      Muller did the right did for his health (and no doubt, for his family) but it has done his Party no favours.

                      Little did the right thing too, as we know, for his Party and for our country.

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 2:51 pm

                      If I am going to be brutally honest I was actually going to do a Little (Strike out) Ardern, to mirror Drowsy's just for a joke and as I am thick, could'nt work out the tags for strike to do it, so went for the "did a Muller".

                      You are right actually.

                      It was a bit vague the way I did it.

                      Sorry!

                    • Incognito []
                      26 September 2020 at 2:58 pm

                      In the text editor, there is an icon for strikethrough, a capital S with a strikethrough.

                      Alternatively, use tags.

              • Rapunzel …
                26 September 2020 at 3:28 pm

                Figuratively "falling over" isn't the same as stepping aside it's as different to winning an MMP election is to first past the post & they are entirely different

              • McFlock …
                26 September 2020 at 4:07 pm

                lol

                One did it after rolling the leader just a few weeks previously. Then discovered he wasn't the person for the job.

                • Chris T …
                  26 September 2020 at 4:16 pm

                  " Then discovered he wasn't the person for the job."

                  That would be one way of putting suffering from a mental illness.

                  Edit: I am just saying given Ardern’s actually sincere attitude to this type of thing and highlighting it, some people on here might want to have a re-check before taking the piss out of people, just because they happen to be “The other side”

                  • Rapunzel …
                    26 September 2020 at 4:45 pm

                    Can't you see the responses are to your rather disingenuous comparison of what Andrew Little did, in a very calculated way, 2 years ago to the varied reasons the National Party has had 3 leaders in about 6-7 months. The circumstances of one of those departures doesn't mean it can't be talked about.

                    "I am just saying given Ardern’s actually sincere attitude" is just sly sledging what people think & post here is nothing to do with the PM she's not responsible for people's views – alternatively you will be holding Collins to account for MPs telling lies as King & Hipango etc have done. Her responsibility for that is more immediate than poster on a blog site.

                    BTW you can edit without Edit: Bur I guess you know that

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 4:56 pm

                      Yeah what ever.

                      I think Ardern and Labour are genuinely concerned about mental health,

                      I think criticising only the the person on the "other team" without taking it into account what you know the circumstances are is not nice.

                      You want to read something more into it than what there is I don't care.

                      Have a good night, as I can't be arsed having every post analysed, and taken out of context, just because I see things from both sides.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      27 September 2020 at 3:40 pm

                      "Can't you see" – no, seems he can't.

                      "your lazy false equivalences " – says it all, Chris T. Be advised.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    26 September 2020 at 5:41 pm

                    "…some people on here might want to have a re-check before taking the piss out of people, just because they happen to be “The other side”"

                    Convenient advice from the self-proclaimed 'non-aligned' Chris T, who seems a little disappointed that not everyone here appreciates he’s only trying to “see things from both sides” – maybe we can all learn something from his insights.

                    "They will be too busy fawning and doing group “aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh… cuuuuttttteeeee”s over baby pics.
                    And I bet there are at least 2 “YOU GO GIIIIRRRRLLLL!!!”s"

                    "Great to see another Labour MP showing such great openness and transparency………."

                    "Depends on current polls whether Ardern breaks her most honest transparent election promise and gifts NZF a seat."

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 8:27 pm

                      ??

                      Would imagine I would be banned for posting something as stupid as that.

                      Way to make shit up

                    • Incognito []
                      27 September 2020 at 3:19 pm

                      Are you saying that you did not make those comments here?

                      Making up stupid shit is one thing, being dishonest about it is another one altogether.

                      You have a stupid habit of attracting unwanted attention to your comments that are “a bit vague”. We have been here before and it is becoming tiresome. Sharpen up or face the consequences.

                    • Drowsy M. Kram …
                      26 September 2020 at 9:45 pm

                      Chris T (@ 8:27 pm), kudos for owning your stupidity. IMHO your quoted comments ‘hint‘ at political bias – way to make shit up indeed.

                      "They will be too busy fawning and doing group “aaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh… cuuuuttttteeeee”s over baby pics.
                      And I bet there are at least 2 “YOU GO GIIIIRRRRLLLL!!!”s" https://thestandard.org.nz/daily-review-20-09-2018/#comment-1527185

                      "Great to see another Labour MP showing such great openness and transparency………." https://thestandard.org.nz/the-leak-inquiries/#comment-1534429

                      "Depends on current polls whether Ardern breaks her most honest transparent election promise and gifts NZF a seat." https://thestandard.org.nz/bridges-biggest-gamble/#comment-1682233

                    • Chris T …
                      27 September 2020 at 3:39 pm

                      As flattered as I am I still find it funny you had to trawl back 2 years to find some post of me being an idiot.

                      But thanks

                      And btw. What is wrong with the third one?

                      [

                      And btw. What is wrong with the third one?

                      Please stop acting like a moron!

                      And as you know, there are no election deals with Labour. End. Of.

                      I’m getting tired of your disingenuous fuckwittery that’s wasting time of others and of me. This is your last warning before you’ll be parked until after the Election – Incognito]

                    • Incognito []
                      27 September 2020 at 3:59 pm

                      See my Moderation note @ 3:39 PM.

                    • Robert Guyton …
                      27 September 2020 at 3:42 pm

                      "Would imagine I would be banned for posting something as stupid as that."

                      'k.

                  • McFlock …
                    26 September 2020 at 8:26 pm

                    Dude thought he could do the job. For whatever reason, he couldn't.

                    The point isn't that Muller left the job, the point is that he did the numbers and kicked Bridges out to get it, and within weeks had to leave. He severely underestimated his limitations.

                    Little, on the other hand, took over after a post-election leadership resignation, and did the job for over two years and put a lid on the caucus macchiavellis.

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 8:43 pm

                      I never said he didn't

                      The post I was replying to was obviously criticising one party for changing leaders before an election

                      I was just pointing out it happens with both

                      When did everyone get so fricken sensitive.

                      Just ignore it and pretend I didn’t mention they both have done it

                    • McFlock …
                      26 September 2020 at 8:55 pm

                      Not "changing leaders before an election".

                      Three leaders (so far) in an election year, while campaigning under the slogan "strong team".

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 9:08 pm

                      As I said. Sensitive.

                    • McFlock …
                      26 September 2020 at 9:45 pm

                      When did you start confusing a simple expression of disagreement with hypersensitivity?

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 11:47 pm

                      When I read your posts

                    • McFlock …
                      27 September 2020 at 12:02 am

                      I haven't written a post in ages. You should have said something sooner, so I could consider using smaller words to help you understand.

          • Drowsy M. Kram 9.1.2.1.2
            26 September 2020 at 2:14 pm

            "Staying on topic aeems [sic] to be a lost art with some people"

            Chris T, why would you assume that I think you're a Nat supporter?

            "If you prefer just basic truthful points rammed at you then you would go Collins."

            • Chris T 9.1.2.1.2.1
              26 September 2020 at 2:19 pm

              No idea

              Edit: But thanks for taking snippet of a post out of context to try to prove something you personally think

              • Drowsy M. Kram …
                26 September 2020 at 2:33 pm

                So you have "No idea" why you started your reply (@9.1.2.1) to me with:

                "I like how you think I am a Nat supporter."

                I don’t know whether or not you’re a Nat supporter. Do you also have "No idea" why you wrote this?

                "If you prefer just basic truthful points rammed at you then you would go Collins."

                • Chris T …
                  26 September 2020 at 2:42 pm

                  No I said it because I didn't hear any non truths and she was ranting points (hence ramming)

                  I know you find this hard to believe, but some people found the first debate quite even.

                  As I said in my post you are taking out of context, it was a comment about styles.

                  • Robert Guyton …
                    26 September 2020 at 2:47 pm

                    Chris; you are a Nat supporter.

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 2:53 pm

                      I am actually one of those annoying swingers.

                      Have voted for Labour, the Nats, and even Maori Party at certain times.

                  • Drowsy M. Kram …
                    26 September 2020 at 2:48 pm

                    Like you, I (still) have "No idea" why you started your reply (@9.1.2.1) to me with:

                    "I like how you think I am a Nat supporter."

                    Smarter minds than us may be able to figure it out wink

                    edit – thanks Robert, Chris T‘s reply makes sense in that context.

                    “I know you find this hard to believe, but some people found the first debate quite even.“

                    This mind-reading shtick is very revealing. Did you watch the debate Chris T? I didn’t.

                    • Chris T …
                      26 September 2020 at 3:05 pm

                      Was probably one of the only few who watched it right through.

                      I can understand how so many people I spoke to about it gave up half way.

        • Incognito 9.1.2.2
          26 September 2020 at 1:56 pm

          It's even conceivable a National-led govt might have at least tried to do that too …

          I think it’s highly likely that a National-led govt might have at least tried to score a try.

          https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/122897386/election-2020-judith-collins-says-if-she-was-pm-shed-be-out-on-the-training-field-with-all-blacks

          https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/judith-collins-claims-if-she-were-pm-all-blacks-would-winning

          National most definitely ‘scores’ in the headlines.

          • Robert Guyton 9.1.2.2.1
            26 September 2020 at 9:13 pm

            If Collins was PM, the All Blacks would be winning?

            If Collins was leader of the National Party, the National Party would be….hang on!

  10. Ad 10
    28 September 2020 at 7:22 am

    OK Cabinet, you can take us down a level now.