Parties leave real issues untouched
As the countdown to the election on November 26 proceeds, the two leading parties have been announcing their respective policies while attacking their opponents’ pronouncements with ferocity, even vitriol – as we saw in one of the televised debates.
Last week a survey revealed that some 48 percent of Kiwis said they had little money to get by in life.
This underscores the findings of numerous studies that show New Zealand to be at the bottom of the pile of OECD countries.
Whether it is wages or cost of living or broadband usage, New Zealand always finds itself at the poorer end of the OECD spectrum: “the third world of the first world,” as some acerbic commentators have chosen to call it from time to time.
Unfortunately, in the run up to the election, the two leading parties have shown a woeful lack of vision in dealing with the fundamental issues that plague this remote, high cost, low-wage economy. For the most part, they seem to be intensely focused on addressing the symptoms of the malaise than the malaise itself.
While the compulsions of realpolitik might dictate such “dynamic” tactics (to borrow John Key), a broader vision of achieving longer-term goals would have raised the confidence in the country’s thinking voters. Many such voters are increasingly disillusioned by the predicament this small country finds itself in amid the continuing turmoil that embroils the globe – and the seeming inability of its leaders to steer it clear of trouble with any deftness.
One hundred thousand skilled people have left the country in the past three years, most of them headed across the ditch to Australia, where intense growth foci like Perth and Western Australia beckon the qualified with wages two or three times bigger than what New Zealand employers can afford to offer.
Perth is the size of Auckland in terms of population but the amenities, the lifestyle – and obviously the wages – it offers its denizens is palpable enough to give Aucklanders a complex not unlike what former Prime Minister Helen Clark felt when she visited South Korea. Looking at its broadband, she had remarked she felt like a poor cousin. (Incidentally, South Korea and New Zealand are at nearly the opposite ends of the OECD broadband spectrum).
Back to some of this country’s most fundamental problems: To become financially viable and productive, New Zealand needs to not only stem the outflow of qualified people but to have in place a strategy to build its population to at least 7 to 8 million over the next few decades. This is an economic necessity and has to be achieved sensibly – not in the ham handed manner that has been attempted before that resulted in a pool of low quality migrants.
Second, it must get over its aversion to explore natural resources. The clean and green image has in any case taken a battering in recent times to the point that the nation’s tourism has decided to change its signature from “100% Pure” to a rather tame “10% You”.
There are enough advances in technology that ensure clean, controlled mining. Australia, whose government seems far more practical and with realistic goals for its people has achieved this and has put the economy on a growth path that will last years if not decades. Only this can create high paying jobs in any appreciable volumes – little else in New Zealand can.
National and Labour can’t seem to shake off the phony cloak of political correctness when it comes to taking hard decisions that will have a positive long term effect on this country. Soft-pedaling and half-measures are the stuff of their policies announced so far – whenever they have a semblance of practicality, that is. More often than not, they seem to boil down to just posturing to grab the headlines with little substance to back claims.
John Key’s decision to summarily drop the 2025 Taskforce’s recommendations to catch up with the Lucky Country is symptomatic of this. With that mindset, expect little to change no matter who wins on the night of November 26.
As the countdown to the election on November 26 proceeds, the two leading parties have been announcing their respective policies while attacking their opponents’ pronouncements with ferocity, even vitriol – as we saw in one of the televised debates.
Last week a survey revealed that some 48...
As the countdown to the election on November 26 proceeds, the two leading parties have been announcing their respective policies while attacking their opponents’ pronouncements with ferocity, even vitriol – as we saw in one of the televised debates.
Last week a survey revealed that some 48 percent of Kiwis said they had little money to get by in life.
This underscores the findings of numerous studies that show New Zealand to be at the bottom of the pile of OECD countries.
Whether it is wages or cost of living or broadband usage, New Zealand always finds itself at the poorer end of the OECD spectrum: “the third world of the first world,” as some acerbic commentators have chosen to call it from time to time.
Unfortunately, in the run up to the election, the two leading parties have shown a woeful lack of vision in dealing with the fundamental issues that plague this remote, high cost, low-wage economy. For the most part, they seem to be intensely focused on addressing the symptoms of the malaise than the malaise itself.
While the compulsions of realpolitik might dictate such “dynamic” tactics (to borrow John Key), a broader vision of achieving longer-term goals would have raised the confidence in the country’s thinking voters. Many such voters are increasingly disillusioned by the predicament this small country finds itself in amid the continuing turmoil that embroils the globe – and the seeming inability of its leaders to steer it clear of trouble with any deftness.
One hundred thousand skilled people have left the country in the past three years, most of them headed across the ditch to Australia, where intense growth foci like Perth and Western Australia beckon the qualified with wages two or three times bigger than what New Zealand employers can afford to offer.
Perth is the size of Auckland in terms of population but the amenities, the lifestyle – and obviously the wages – it offers its denizens is palpable enough to give Aucklanders a complex not unlike what former Prime Minister Helen Clark felt when she visited South Korea. Looking at its broadband, she had remarked she felt like a poor cousin. (Incidentally, South Korea and New Zealand are at nearly the opposite ends of the OECD broadband spectrum).
Back to some of this country’s most fundamental problems: To become financially viable and productive, New Zealand needs to not only stem the outflow of qualified people but to have in place a strategy to build its population to at least 7 to 8 million over the next few decades. This is an economic necessity and has to be achieved sensibly – not in the ham handed manner that has been attempted before that resulted in a pool of low quality migrants.
Second, it must get over its aversion to explore natural resources. The clean and green image has in any case taken a battering in recent times to the point that the nation’s tourism has decided to change its signature from “100% Pure” to a rather tame “10% You”.
There are enough advances in technology that ensure clean, controlled mining. Australia, whose government seems far more practical and with realistic goals for its people has achieved this and has put the economy on a growth path that will last years if not decades. Only this can create high paying jobs in any appreciable volumes – little else in New Zealand can.
National and Labour can’t seem to shake off the phony cloak of political correctness when it comes to taking hard decisions that will have a positive long term effect on this country. Soft-pedaling and half-measures are the stuff of their policies announced so far – whenever they have a semblance of practicality, that is. More often than not, they seem to boil down to just posturing to grab the headlines with little substance to back claims.
John Key’s decision to summarily drop the 2025 Taskforce’s recommendations to catch up with the Lucky Country is symptomatic of this. With that mindset, expect little to change no matter who wins on the night of November 26.
Leave a Comment