Gordon Campbell | Parliament TV | Parliament Today | Video | Questions Of the Day | Search

 


An Update from National's Finance Spokesman


An Update from National's Finance Spokesman



19 February 2003

In my Orewa speech on 28 January, I argued that policy changes in seven areas would be important to ensure New Zealand remained the place our children and grandchildren would want to regard as home. Perhaps it's not surprising most media comment focused on my views on social welfare reform.

Despite some negative reactions, with suggestions that I wanted to return New Zealand to the dark days of the 1930s, most people have been very positive. I've been inundated with letters, phone calls and emails, but two struck me with particular force.

One was from a young policeman, describing the situation in a small North Island town:

"When I was a teenager I went on the dole, and was on it for four years.

The only reason I was on the dole was because I was too lazy to work. I wanted to do what I wanted to do, when I wanted to do it. If I had been told to go and pick up rubbish, I would have gone and got a job. There are tens of thousands on the dole right now that would simply get a job if they were made to do community work. Although (the town I work in) has a way over 50 per cent unemployment rate, local farmers can't even get workers to pick up their hay. It rots in the fields after the first summer rains!"

The second was from a woman running a small business north of Auckland: "My husband and I have been in business for six years (and boy have they been a hard six years - we have worked every spare hour of the day and night, totally given up all social life and outings, and have totally dedicated ourselves to building our business). We now employ up to 12 people; we have even managed to get some staff off benefits, something we feel proud about. Then a couple of months ago we needed more people. As our work is mostly part-time (we have three full-time) outside normal working hours, we do realise it is not easy to find the right person but really thought there must be people who still want to work! Oh am I sadly mistaken. We have placed two ads in the local paper and we contacted WINZ to list the jobs. Three months down the track I have only employed one person and I need four more. I feel for the staff at WINZ - they must go home and want to scream. People don't bother turning up for interviews, they only want the job to earn $80 per week but no more, they are lazy, they are living on taxpayers' money, and they love it."

These comments are echoed by employers nation-wide, desperate to employ more staff; some requiring skills to be sure, but many requiring only a willingness to work.

So it's surely a scandal that on 31 January more than 134,000 adults of working age were receiving the unemployment benefit - and of course that doesn't include any of those on the DPB, the invalids' benefit, or the sickness benefit.

In my Orewa speech I did NOT suggest that the dole could be scrapped in isolation, but rather that it might be scrapped in conjunction with some other policy changes. I suggested local governments could become "employers of last resort - offering a job to anybody who turned up at, say, the local post office at 8 am, with payment for that day's work at the end of the day, in cash".

Some of the reactions were rather silly, based on the misunderstanding that I imagined that New Zealand Post could provide jobs for tens of thousands of unemployed people. Reference to the "local post office" was only shorthand for some convenient local spot. Suggesting cash payment wasn't an endorsement of the black economy, but simply a recommendation that part of the community work deal would be prompt payment when the work was done, not having to wait until the following week.

Most of the reactions were much more positive, including one from someone in Switzerland pointing out that my recommendations were closely similar to the Swiss system.

There's no simple solution to this complex problem, and the National Party will be working hard to ensure that, when we return to Government, our policies will deal with it effectively. Katherine Rich, National's Social Services Spokesperson, is already doing work in this area. In principle, there will be four facets to the solution:

1) Ensuring sufficient demand in the economy so there are lots of jobs available. There's plenty of demand at present, thanks to the low exchange rate and strong export prices of the 1999-2001 period, the strong surge in immigration last year, and the easing of monetary policy in 2001 - all factors, incidentally, having little or nothing to do with this Government's policies.

2) Ensuring young people have the basic skills of literacy and numeracy; otherwise their employment prospects will remain bleak.

3) Reducing or eliminating all disincentives to hiring people. The present Government has made hiring people more risky. For example, just before Christmas a law change made employers liable for employee 'stress', hugely increased the fines to which employers could be liable, and prevented employers from insuring against these risks. The recent decision of the Employment Court in which an employer was criticised for not giving a Maori employee a formal Maori farewell (even though the employee had been fired!), can only tempt employers "to avoid the mysteries of whakama or the punitive sting of the Employment Court for unwitting cultural transgressions by discreetly favouring non-Maori candidates when they hire staff" (editorial in The Independent, 5 February 2003).

4) Ensuring people have an incentive to take the jobs offered. Whether that means scrapping the dole and arranging for local governments to be the employers of last resort, or introducing a time limit on the benefit, or some other policy can be debated. Nobody doubts there are many unemployed people who want a job - I have heard from some of them over the last few weeks.

Those who want to work should have the opportunity to do so - even if that means doing simple jobs to enhance the local community. Those who don't want to work should be required to do so if they want to continue getting money from taxpayers. Getting money for doing nothing should not be an option.

When I emailed my first newsletter on 3 February, I attached a link to my Orewa speech. Unfortunately, the link didn't work for everyone, so I've attached the speech below.

Don Brash

www.donbrash.com

http://vrl2.tag.co.nz:8080/vrl_intranet/StatisticsClick?c=115&i=1838&u=http://www.donbrash.com/

WHERE TO FROM HERE?

An address to the Orewa Rotary Club

by Don Brash

National Party Finance spokesman

28 January 2003

Mr Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen,

A few weeks ago, I was asked what my vision for the Auckland business community was. I said I didn't really have a vision for the Auckland business community, nor even for the business community more generally.

Rather, as National Party Finance spokesman what I had was a vision for New Zealand.

This evening, near the start of another year, I want to share that vision with you.

New Zealand is a great country, with so much to offer us all. We enjoy a wonderful natural environment. Every child has the opportunity to enjoy free primary and secondary education, and heavily subsidised tertiary education. Every person suffering an accident or acute illness has the opportunity to enjoy free hospital care. We have none of the ethnic or religious violence which plagues so many other countries. We have inherited a British legal system which gives us access to impartial justice. We have a public service which is almost entirely free of corruption. As Chris Trotter remarked after a pleasant dinner overlooking a beach on the Whangaparaoa peninsula last year, "New Zealand is an unqualified success. We are free. We are at peace. And we are rich in all the things that matter."

Yes, but....

What Chris Trotter overlooked was why we are an "unqualified success". In the past, the National Party has led Governments that have seen New Zealand succeed. National's values were New Zealand's values. The present Labour Government is reaping the benefits of past policies, but is not only failing to make further progress but is actually undermining past progress - coasting on the back of strong commodity prices, strong net immigration and, until recently, a very low exchange rate.

I worry that Trotter's "unqualified success" faces challenges which could rip us apart. At a time when a trained mind has never been more important for earning a decent income than it is today, more than 40 per cent of adult New Zealanders are unable to read and write well enough to perform adequately in a modern economy - with more illiterate people coming out of our schools every year. At a time when government spending on healthcare has never been higher - either in dollars or as a share of the national cake - we have hospitals up and down the land asking those with serious heart conditions to wait, and wait, and wait. At a time of almost unprecedented buoyancy in the domestic economy, we have some 400,000 adults of working age (to say nothing of their tens of thousands of children) living on a benefit. At a time of near-record export prices, we are still spending more overseas than we are earning, thereby adding about $10 million a day to our already-huge external debt. At a time when successive Governments have made a serious effort to right the wrongs of the past, we have a minority of Maori New Zealanders determined to slow everything from improvements on State Highway 1 to research on the growth of paua and lobster.

Reading my Christmas mail this year I was struck by how many letters were from people whose young adult children had just left for overseas, or who were just about to leave. Some will come back of course, as they have always done in the past. But the risk is that an increasing number will never come back, or at least will come back only to visit Mum and Dad on holiday. They will take their training and their flair to other countries, and we will be the poorer, both in personal and in economic terms. A growing diaspora of our brightest and best is not the way to future prosperity, and it's not the kind of export industry that I want to see in my country. These are your children, my children, our children - the future of New Zealand.

And why are they less likely to return now than in the past? Essentially because, while New Zealand is still a pleasant place to live, our standard of living fell during the sixties, seventies and eighties relative to that in many other developed countries. In 1960, New Zealand's living standard was closely similar to that in Australia. Now, Australia's living standard is about one-third higher than that in New Zealand. This means that the average Australian is better off to the tune of about $250 per week than the average New Zealander. As a direct consequence of this, a nurse can leave a job in Auckland and fly to Brisbane and earn substantially more.

And a person with cancer in Australia has a better life expectancy than a person with the same disease in New Zealand.

If, as seems entirely possible, we lose an increasing proportion of our brightest and best to the bright lights of Sydney, London and New York, there must be a serious danger that the pleasant society which Chris Trotter rightly praised will gradually unwind - with a whimper rather than a bang, but unwind nevertheless. We might end up like Argentina perhaps or, worse still, like some of the troubled societies of the South Pacific, with racial tensions and conflict to add to the economic woes.

I want something much better - a society where every child is loved; where every child has a good education; where every person is free to pursue his or her dreams provided they don't cause nightmares for others or expect other people to fund their dreams; where the state protects the natural environment and provides security for all; where all can live at peace, irrespective of race or religious belief.

There are no doubt many ways to achieve this goal, but I believe seven steps are essential.

First, we must be willing to acknowledge that most of the policy changes wrought between 1984 and 1999, first by a Labour Government and then by a National Government, were steps in the right direction. We will get nowhere as long as we pretend that those policy changes were mistaken. Of course, no 15 year period is totally devoid of policy mistakes, but by and large that period saw policies changed for the better - inflation reduced, public sector debt reduced, employment laws freed up, shopping hours deregulated, the banking sector liberalised, import controls abolished and tariffs drastically reduced, telecommunications deregulated, public sector entities privatised. Overwhelmingly, those policy changes have been for the better, and have benefited most New Zealanders. Pretending otherwise is dishonest and, perhaps even more serious, is likely to take us off in directions which will damage our future prospects. It's a relief that, for all they profess to disagree with the policies of the late eighties and nineties, the present Government recognises that most of them were sensible and has so far reversed very few of them.

Second, our education system must be improved and National is committed to doing so. It would be nice if all that was needed was more money, but alas the problems are more deep-seated than that. In New Zealand, the government already spends more on education, relative to the size of our economy, than in almost all other developed countries. In the last 50 years, per pupil government spending on education has quadrupled, even after adjusting for inflation; indeed, it has more than doubled in the last 30 years. And we have some good schools to show for that expenditure; and some very well educated people.

But too many children come out of school unable to read and write, or to perform basic arithmetical functions. I have often told the story of the managing director of a small company in Hawke's Bay whom I met early last year. He had advertised for a forklift-truck driver, and was dismayed to find that three-quarters of the applicants could not read well enough to be considered for the job: they could not read the pallet labels or the safety instructions.

We need to look again at how we teach children to read; at how we give parents more choice about the kind of education their children get and the kind of school they attend; and at how we give schools themselves more control over their own destiny. As long as the state is funding education, so that all children get an opportunity to be educated to the best of their ability, we should not be afraid to use private education providers.

Tragically, the present Government is moving in absolutely the wrong direction in education - towards less parental choice, towards a more highly centralised system, and towards a system where teacher unions have even more power. National is committed to making improvement in our education system a key priority in the months and years ahead.

Third, I believe we need to take a fresh look at the way in which the welfare system has evolved over the last half century, and what we can do to change it. More than 60 years ago, Apirana Ngata warned that the unemployment benefit would destroy the Maori people, while Peter Fraser was desperately concerned that too many people expected welfare to provide an armchair ride to prosperity. There is a depressing amount of evidence that the current benefit system has indeed destroyed a great many people, both Maori and Pakeha. I realise that roughly one-quarter of the 400,000 adults of working age on a benefit today are not able to work, being physically or mentally incapacitated in one way or another. But that still leaves something like 300,000 who are able to work but for one reason or another do not do so, despite a desperate shortage of workers in many parts of the country.

This is one of the biggest challenges facing New Zealand today - not just because of the economic cost of paying those benefits, though that is substantial, but because of the even more serious social and human cost of having hundreds of thousands of adults and their children relying on hand-outs. Solutions will not be easy, though I am optimistic enough to believe that there would be a great deal of public support right across the political spectrum for fundamental change. I well recall, for example, talking to a Maori leader in South Auckland in the early nineties, when unemployment was much higher than it is at present: she told me that, in her opinion, the only way to solve Maori unemployment was to abolish the unemployment benefit completely. I don't believe that that could be done in isolation, but it might well be done in conjunction with other measures, such as having local governments become employers of last resort - offering a job to anybody who turned up at, say, the local post office at 8 a.m., with payment for that day's work at the end of the day, in cash.

Too many people see benefits as an absolute and indefinite entitlement, carrying no reciprocal obligation to actively seek employment.

My purpose this evening is not to set out a blue-print for social welfare reform, but rather to argue that fundamental reform of the current system is long overdue, and will be an important part of ensuring that New Zealand remains a desirable place to live. Again, National is committed to looking hard at the social welfare system and to finding ways of improving it - continuing to provide help for those who genuinely need it but assisting others to find employment.

Fourth, we need to look again at the healthcare system, which is suffering serious strains because of the way it is funded and provided. District Health Boards are under huge pressure from their staff for higher salaries, from their patients and would-be patients for better or faster service, and from the Government to live within their budgets.

And yet government spending on healthcare has been rising steadily for many years, both in dollar terms and relative to the size of the economy.

Indeed, at the present time government spending per head of population is 40 per cent higher than it was just 20 years ago, even after adjusting for inflation. With the impending epidemic of lifestyle diseases such as diabetes, the increasing range of pharmaceuticals available, and the ageing of the population, there can be no doubt that there will be pressure for health expenditure to continue growing faster than the economy.

No country has devised an entirely satisfactory way of dealing with this conundrum - and I admit I haven't yet found the complete answer either, but I am absolutely sure we ought to be making better use of the private sector in providing hospital care, just as we make use of the private sector in providing medical services.

Fifth, I believe we must be moving towards a colour-blind society, not towards a society where people have special rights and privileges on the basis of their race. The National Party has an honourable record of trying to resolve Treaty of Waitangi grievances. We are committed to continuing that process, fairly and expeditiously, and indeed to finishing it.

But from that point on, as Bill English said in his speech last week, there can be no basis for special privileges for any race: no obligation for local governments to consult Maori in preference to other citizens, no obligation on government agencies funding research to consider the impact of that research on any particular racial group, and no obligation on the Inland Revenue Department to consider the impact of tax laws on any particular racial group.

And perhaps it is time for us to be honest: much of that special consideration is window-dressing, and totally unproductive - indeed, much of it is counter-productive.

As Bill English argued in an important and under-reported speech last year, the Treaty of Waitangi established a single sovereignty in New Zealand, and not two sovereignties - and therefore, a single citizenship, and not two citizenships. Indeed, it is quite unclear to me why we now need separate Maori electorates.

Sixth, I believe that the Government needs to take more seriously one of the most fundamental responsibilities of all governments, namely the protection and security of all New Zealanders. And by that I mean both security from external threats and security from local criminals.

This is not simply a criticism of the present Government. Successive governments have allowed our defence forces to run down to the point where the number of people we could deploy in a hostile environment is very limited - and even that small number would be poorly equipped. Over the past two years, no doubt in response to the more difficult international environment, the United States has increased defence spending by 18 per cent, and Australia by 15 per cent. We, by contrast, have reduced our defence spending over the same period by 13 per cent.

A great many New Zealanders feel very insecure within New Zealand also.

They worry about violent, capricious, crime; they worry about child abuse; they worry about home invasions. That's hardly surprising when a recent United Nations report found that New Zealand has one of the highest crime rates in the developed world - worse than the United States, Germany, or any other of the world's 20 largest nations. And the Government's response? A reduction in spending on the police, at least relative to the size of the economy, and a situation where there is a chronic shortage of front-line police officers, particularly in Auckland.

Finally, we need a more serious commitment to increase our rate of economic growth, because without more growth we will never close the gap between the living standards in New Zealand and those in other developed countries, such as Australia. Until we close that gap, we will constantly be vulnerable to the loss of our kids and their friends to foreign parts; we will not be able to afford the first-world health care which Aussies take for granted; we will not be able to afford the first-world universities which we want for our children; and we will see a steady increase in income disparities as we are forced to pay some approximation of Aussie salaries to those with skills who remain.

To be sure, we now talk the talk - even the present Government claims it wants to restore New Zealand to the top half of the OECD in terms of living standards. But everything it actually does reduces the chance of achieving that.

In the past few months alone, we have seen a whole series of measures introduced - the Local Government Act, the Health and Safety in Employment Act, the Kyoto Protocol, and all the rest - which will reduce the chances of our increasing our growth rate in any sustainable way. Late last year, Business New Zealand estimated that the costs facing a small company employing just 20 people would increase by about $44,000 a year because of various Government-initiated measures - hardly the sign of a Government actually committed to increasing our growth rate.

In my view, Government should be required to seek and publish a report from the Treasury on every new law or regulation, assessing whether that law or regulation would enhance our growth prospects - or detract from them.

The reality is, if we are serious about reducing the gap between our living standards and those of Australia and other developed countries, we need to attack the problem on a whole range of fronts - reducing the compliance costs facing the businesses which alone can create the growth we need, reducing the tax burden on those most likely to introduce new technology and invest in additional plant and equipment, and building the infrastructure which is fundamental to growth.

Mr Chairman, New Zealand is at risk. We're at risk of ending up like Argentina, or worse still like Papua New Guinea or Fiji, yet another Pacific Island basket case where none of us will want to live.

Or we can take some tough decisions, with less gravy now but the prospect of plenty later.

What we desperately need is political vision and political leadership - not the mediocre and complacent management which panders to every union official, every Maori radical, every Greenie that we have now. I have not the slightest doubt that, with vision and strong leadership of the kind which National can provide, New Zealand can once again return to its historical position - one of the wealthiest countries in the world.


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
 
 
Parliament Headlines | Politics Headlines | Regional Headlines

 

Scoop Images:
Dame Patsy Reddy Sworn In As Governor-General

This morning Dame Patsy Reddy was sworn in as the New Zealand Realm’s 21st Governor-General. The ceremony began with a pōwhiri to welcome Dame Patsy and her husband Sir David Gascoigne to Parliament. More>>

ALSO:

Ruataniwha: DOC, Hawke's Bay Council Developer Take Supreme Court Appeal

The Department of Conservation and Hawke's Bay Regional Investment Company (HBRIC) are appealing to the Supreme Court over a conservation land swap which the Court of Appeal halted. More>>

ALSO:

With NZ's Marama Davidson: Women’s Flotilla Leaves Sicily – Heading For Gaza

Women representing 13 countries spanning five continents began their journey yesterday on Zaytouna-Oliva to the shores of Gaza, which has been under blockade since 2007. On board are a Nobel Peace Laureate, three parliamentarians, a decorated US diplomat, journalists, an Olympic athlete, and a physician. A list of the women with their background can be found here. More>>

Gordon Campbell: On The Key Style Of Crisis Management

At Monday’s post Cabinet press conference Key was in his finest wide- eyed “Problem? What problem?” mode. No, there wasn’t really a problem that top MPI officials had been at odds with each other over the meaning of the fisheries policy and how that policy should be pursued... More>>

ALSO:

Mt Roskill: Greens Will Not Stand In Likely Post-Goff By-Election

“The Green Party’s priority is changing the Government in 2017, and as part of that we’ve decided that we won’t stand a candidate in the probable Mt Roskill by-election... This decision shows the Memorandum of Understanding between Labour and the Green Party is working." More>>

ALSO:

Wellington: Predator Free Capital Plan

Wellington City Council (WCC), the Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) and NEXT Foundation, today announced a joint collaboration to make Wellington the first Predator Free capital city in the world. More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On Judith Collins’ Efforts At Self Correction

Thousands of prisoners currently in prison may be entitled to an earlier release than expected – and compensation – because Corrections has incorrectly calculated their term of imprisonment. Unless of course, the government buries its mistakes by changing the law and retro-actively getting itself off the hook… More>>

ALSO:

More Justice & Corrections

Get More From Scoop

 

LATEST HEADLINES

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Parliament
Search Scoop  
 
 
Powered by Vodafone
NZ independent news