Similar Posts

- Advertisement -

18 Comments

  1. “Absolutely, they are completely punitive towards those most in need and the cost is another generation of disempowered people.”

    And death, don’t forget the death that they cause as well.

    Political parties in this country often talk about ‘job creation’, but rarely do politicians speak of meaningful job creation.

    they talk about job creation and saying that people out of work should get a job while running policies that ensure 6%+ unemployment and signing free-trade agreements that shift work offshore.

    We need employers that guarantee hours and act with their workers best interests at heart.

    We need to turn all businesses into cooperatives to ensure that workers have a say in their conditions and pay.

    What needs to be a priority of political parties in this country is the creation of jobs that contribute to society and our communities, not the profit margins of massively lucrative companies.

    There’s plenty of work that needs to be done (Building renewable energy generation and decommissioning the fossil fueled generators for starters) but the governments aren’t willing to do it because it reduces the number of employed and thus increases wages for the private sector. It’s been a complaint of the private sector since the 1980s that the government doing anything forces the private sector aside. The lack of unemployed people is the reason for that complaint.

    Our governments, since the 1980s, have been working exclusively for the business sector and against the nation.

    1. That is the terrible tragedy of it all. There’s plenty of work to be done, and it can be financed by reserve bank credit. The current political philosophies of both Nact and Labour, however, would never embrace this. The country is governed by philosophical beliefs. How stupid is that.

    2. “businesses into cooperatives”

      I don’t think I’d agree with ‘all’ because micro-enterprises, and family-based enterprises, need to be free to serve their customers as they choose.

      However, generally I agree with you. The models I have in mind are Ricardo Semler’s and Mondragon. I liked those. I liked their agility and their ability to provide the corporate overhead component for ‘the little guys’ so they, too, get the benefits of economies of scale.

      The archetypal American models of corporates – well, they’re not as fit for purpose and production as they pretend.

      I wonder if, perhaps, Chris Trotter or Frank Macskasy could explore this topic?

      Forming functioning and profitable co-ops seems a lot more effective than revolutions and uprisings. More practical and agile and less likely to be hijacked…

      If the Co-op Bank can expand and pay its members dividends – yeah. Co-ops. Like ’em.

      1. I don’t think I’d agree with ‘all’ because micro-enterprises, and family-based enterprises, need to be free to serve their customers as they choose.

        I don’t see how changing them into cooperatives is going to change that at all. The people working there would still choose how to serve their customers.

        1. Draco, like so many other passionate, thoughtful bloggers and commenters who frequent this site, every time I see a comment posted by you I find myself thinking, “I’m not the only one who sees the naked emperor!” I agree with you and Andrea that cooperative businesses run as workplace democracies are the way to go.

          Andrew asks above how things are working out for the South American companies who have rejected neo-liberalism. The situations in South America are far from perfect, but the models they are experimenting with are a distinct improvement on the decades of IMF-imposed austerity (“Structural Adjustment Programs”). Check out this great TED Talk by Pia Mancini of Argentina did on the potential of using deep democracy platforms to run whole countries (http://www.ted.com/talks/pia_mancini_how_to_upgrade_democracy_for_the_internet_era).

          I notice that Draco was (maybe still is) involved in the online policy incubator of the Internet Party hosted by Loomio – an inspiring experiment. Like Pia, I believe that such deep democracy platforms can be used to make political decisions at all levels, including the running of political parties. The NZ Pirate Party also have a Loomio group, and we are toying with the idea of dissolving our Board, and having all decisions which affect the whole party made by the membership using Loomio.

  2. Great article. You have expressed the patronising attitude of many MSD employees really well. It’s your attitude that is the problem, apparently.
    There is a peculiar vibe in our nation and I am having trouble figuring it out. It is a mystery to me why the mass action you mention in the last paragraph is not happening. There is plenty of suffering. You articulate the plight of the job seeker perfectly. I work with job seekers who are in the so-called “revolving door”. The dole is pitiful. Wages are really low. Work is casualised, part-time, and if you are in a low-wage job that is 30 hours a week, congratulations! You have achieved full-time work. never mind that you can’t live off your wages. People can’t afford to rent, let alone buy. There are very few jobs. So why aren’t we rioting, as they did in the 1930s?
    Somehow, the gubbamint manages to keep us just comfortable enough, so the anger never gets to boiling point. We can still watch X factor/idol/block/bachelor/chef. We still have the All Blacks and the Black Caps and other kiwi heroes to make us feel good about ourselves.
    And the nats, form the top down, are modelling values of greed, callousness, and apathy towards the plight of others (Hello Christchurch). They have somehow driven a wedge between the working poor, and those on benefits. So empathy is lacking, and greed is good.

  3. It’s such a shame that articles are not checked for accuracy.

    The DPB is the Domestic Purposes Benefit, not the Dependant Parent Benefit. A Parent is not a dependant.
    The Domestic Purposes Benefit came in in 1975, after 10 years of protest by women’s groups from 1966, in response to rising divorce rates and unequal matrimonial property laws, when women did not get anything from the husband on divorce.

    Check your facts before you comment on welfare, otherwise you undermine your whole argument.

  4. Very well written article Chloe, from your heart. I honestly believe our system has been created, deliberately, with the use of human psychology, to keep us down to the point of being too overwhelmed to fight back and to be in fear. Being armed with this knowledge and creating awareness with articles such as this is the first step in the fight. Another, is to educate the next generation because I guarantee, this information is never going to be something our kids will be taught at school.

  5. The fix???, for the low waged workers who are suffering revolving door employment with equally unstable hours of employment,

    The Government that takes control of the Treasury Benches from National’s present cluster-f**k need to Impose an award system across whole industries,

    A tripartite negotiation between Government/Employers/Council of Trade Unions which would set minimum hours of work, minimum wages for particular industries, and, work conditions,

    IF and when Andrew Little and the Labour Party awaken from their collective slumber and navel gazing and advocate Direct Government Intervention in Tripartite Industry Awards for all industry Labour may gain a little electoral traction,

    The ‘rot’ has set far too deeply in the corpse of low waged working New Zealand to be able to expect what’s left of the weakened union movement to be able to make substantial and lasting change to the employment landscape,

    It is up to Andrew Little to ‘see’ that such ‘rot’ can only be fixed by him as the Prime Minister IMPOSING in some cases such minimum standards across whole industries where employers refuse to agree,

    IF Andrew Little cannot ‘see’ that then i am afraid there is little point in his continued occupancy of his current position…

  6. A very good piece, one I can really relate to. And yes, there has been very little support from any government for years now, but the Natskeys are probably the worst. Viva la revolution.

  7. “National’s recent 2015 budget will push parents on the DPB into work when their tamariki turn three, instead of the previous five”

    This is done purposefully. The government will now be raising your kid as soon as they turn 3.

  8. “think ‘positive’ about my situation” (as if a change in attitude is going to change a stagnate job market) as I hold back tears, ”

    Chloe excellently written that tugs at my heart and I well tears.

    The upper class are so cold and hard, and Government is paid by the people to represent the people so they need to understand who pays them?

    To often those in power and government should realise they are only there because we all pay to keep them there to look after us all not carry out punitive actions in a way of trying to get blood out of a stone!!!

    Don’t we wish they should be on the under end of this stick and they would squeal that they cant stand it either, after all we are all members of the human race aren’t we?

    Keep well Chloe.

  9. Paula “Beneshit” has moved on from being the Minister for Social Development to be the “Social Housing Minister” now, where she and Bill English plan to further hollow out the rights of Housing NZ tenants, same as she did while in charge of beneficiaries depending on WINZ.

    https://www.beehive.govt.nz/minister/Paula-Bennett

    Selling state homes to “community providers” is her job now, and that means forcing them into working within consortia with private real estate developers, who will use much of the Housing NZ land to build new homes on, most of which will be sold to middle class and upper class buyers.

    Under Paula Bennett various social services were outsourced and privatised by the Ministry of Social Development and WiNZ, now using private “providers” for “mental health employment services” and also “sole parent employment services”.

    The one who was quick to kick the lower rungs off the ladder for many, by abolishing the Training Incentive Allowance for those wanting to study beyond level 3, she is a willing mercenary for her government and her masters Key and English.

    Indeed, the mostly casual, part time, marginal jobs there are, they are “suitable” enough in their eyes for sick and disabled to be pressured into, no matter what risk, it seems. But such work is actually not that “healthy” at all, as some research, and also a CTU study from a few years back reveals:
    http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/16737-work-has-fewer-%e2%80%9chealth-benefits%e2%80%9d-than-mansel-aylward-and-other-so-called-experts-claim-it-can-cause-serious-harm/

    But that did not deter Bennett, and does not deter her successor Anne Tolley one bit, they faithfully follow that mantra from seemingly biased “researchers” in the UK, for whom work is deemed as being “therapeutic” and “beneficial” to health:
    http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15188-medical-and-work-capability-assessments-based-on-the-bps-model-aimed-at-disentiteling-affected-from-welfare-benefits-and-acc-compo/

    When preparing the “reforms” that came into force in July 2013, they had “experts” like Aylward et al fly in from the UK, to present their “findings”, ignoring much of what happened in the UK:
    http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15264-welfare-reform-the-health-and-disability-panel-msd-the-truth-behind-the-agenda/

    So we got what we have now, a slightly “softer” version of the UK approach, but still “firm” and “relentless” enough to get the results, by exiting more from benefits, into whatever jobs there are.

    But when challenged for presenting REAL and reliable figures about the supposed great “success” of “mental health employment services”, MSD was rather reluctant to present anything that tells us much:
    http://accforum.org/forums/index.php?/topic/17163-mental-health-employment-service-sole-parent-employment-service-oia-info-implies-msd-trials-a-failure/

    An online version of the response can be found via this link:
    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/msd-oia-rqst-mhes-waa-other-support-services-issues-reply-anon-26-02-2015.pdf

    Some earlier info they released upon an OIA request:
    https://nzsocialjusticeblog2013.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/msd-o-i-a-reply-d-power-mhes-waa-information-complete-24-04-2014.pdf

    You would think that if these “reforms” and new approaches were such a success, they would proudly present us more information, rather than statistics about more abuse and threats WINZ workers face now. It seems though, that many people that go through such contracted service providers and end up in precarious jobs experience similar situations as Chloe has, and simply go back to WINZ through ever revolving doors.

  10. I noted that it was the Zero-Hour contract pieces on Campbell Live that preceded and most likely finally precipitated his demise.

    Whether there was truth to the ‘urban myth’ that Key wanted ‘that left-wing bastard gone’, or not, the casualisation, no overtime, mimimal wage economy started by Roger Douglas, Richard Prebble and Stan Rodger back in the 80’s has now consigned many kiwis to a life of neo-liberal serfdom and wage slavery.

    With control of a compliant media, the installation of Come Dine With Me NZ to opiatise the masses, the neoliberal revolution is 95% complete and all social conscience and care for fellow kiwis is all but extinguished.

    All we need now is a new flag to erase any past allegiances and create the symbol of the “Big Brother’ Key cult and Brave New Neoliberal colony.

    1. Never “mess” with the “boss”, and his flag agenda:

      https://www.govt.nz/browse/engaging-with-government/the-nz-flag-your-chance-to-decide/your-questions-answered

      Quote – second video down from the top:
      “Are you listening to what the public are saying?” Answered by Julie Christie, ONZM. Director of Julie Christie Inc and board member.

      The Mediaworks board member is loyal to the cause, I suppose, and was likely even behind getting rid of Campbell Live:

      http://publicaddress.net/hardnews/about-campbell-live/

      Some “profile” info:
      https://www.nzte.govt.nz/en/about-us/our-people/board-members/julie-christie/

      1. I was amused by this quote in the Public Address link:

        “On TV, Hosking was quietly hauled in after Seven Sharp’s sponsor, RaboBank, got antsy about a flood of complaints via its Facebook page. And yes, now you’re asking, things have reached a strange pass when the grown-up editorial voice in the room belongs to the damn sponsor.”

Comments are closed.