New Zealand First Leader Winston Peters wants the country to come through the COVID-19 crisis with “far greater autonomy” from the world.
Delivering a ministerial statement to Parliament, as it resumed in a restricted capacity on Tuesday, Peters said the “fragility and the vulnerability inherent in the highly interconnected and networked global economy have been revealed”.
“In short, if we can grow it or make it at near competitive prices, then we will grow it or make it, use it or export it, rather than use valuable offshore funds importing it,” he said.
“The pitfalls of globalism have been laid out dramatically before us, and some of us have known that for a long, long time and have been saying it.”
While Peters made the speech wearing his New Zealand First hat, his comments precede a speech he'll deliver as Foreign Affairs Minister on Wednesday, in which he’s expected to provide an update on New Zealand’s foreign policy in the COVID-19 environment.
Peters went on to say: “In 1882, our first export of frozen meat left New Zealand and confirmed that we were going to be then, and thereafter, an export nation. All our policy should be focused on that as well as import substitution.
“We're going to go back, dare I say it, to make New Zealand the great country it has been in the past, not because we have some nostalgic dream, but because in past times our country got it right. And of late, for far too long before this happened, as we tried to change our economy, we've been getting it wrong.
“New Zealand has enormous wealth and natural products above ground, below ground, and at sea, and it has, as the Prime Minister has referred to, a truly amazing people when put to the test.”
Facing an 'unprecedented deflationary shock' from a 'troubled' starting point
Echoing the sentiment of the speech he delivered when he announced he wanted to form a government with Labour after the 2017 election, Peters said: “Before the COVID-19 pandemic, the global economy was already in a troubled state.
“Already struggling with slowing economic growth and a massive accumulation of debt, the fundamental factors behind the 2008-2009 recession were never resolved; they were just plastered over, and then along came COVID-19.
“The global economy was only being sustained by unprecedented monetary stimulus, quantitative easing, which is shorthand for printing money, and ultra-low interest rates—rates that were already at bedrock; couldn't go any lower.
“That catastrophe is not a singular crisis like COVID-19, for which a vaccine may ultimately be found.
“The COVID-19 crisis is an unprecedented deflationary shock to the entire global economy.
“Responding to the crisis will lead to huge increases in budget deficits and a government debt in New Zealand, as everywhere else. All the rules on fiscal prudence are now obsolete, and here's the uneven impact…
“The economy will not pick up where it started in 2020. The notion of returning to business as usual fades minute by minute every day now, as global output collapses and unemployment soars.
“So - into the future - with all the uncertainty, there is no clear global consensus on what's needed."
'We need to put up the shutters to more offshore ownership'
Peters said: "If the job can be filled by a New Zealander, then that job should be filled by a New Zealander trained, skilled, and paid properly to do it...
"We need to put up the shutters to more offshore ownership of this country's economy and go back to owning as much of it as we possibly can.
"If there is to be an overseas investment, which is a good thing, it must be in terms of the New Zealand economy's needs, the New Zealand people's interests, and building resilience by means of our - not foreign - ownership.
"It means overseas investment should be encouraged where it expands our employment, our wealth creation, and export capacity in a way that is clearly new and not just an offshore takeover or raid of something we already owned before."
144 Comments
“The economy will not pick up where it started in 2020. The notion of returning to business as usual fades minute by minute every day now, as global output collapses and unemployment soars.
Good on him - BAU is gone. Therefore, it would be so good to see him starting up a public register of superannuitants who voluntarily choose to SUSPEND their super payments. And he ought to be the first person to put his name on the list.
If he says, I don't need it, a whole lot of others will follow.
But i do need it unless I contribute nothing and live on my wife's income. I do reckon Super is fairly generous compared to other countries - if cut by 10% we would survive and those who were hit hardest would just claim more accommodation allowance. But it would be good to see all those in safe civil servant jobs taking a hit of say 10% of everything over living wage - especially academics.
BTW even if I was a millionaire I would take every cent of super - I may well give it to charity but in the past the govt did not give me money when I needed it and I know for a certainty the less virtuous will take all their super whatever Winston does so why on earth would I sacrifice my Super while the greedy hang on to it?
If you need it of course you should keep it and not feel guilty about it either.
Super should remain universal but we should have a mechanism whereby those that don't need it can be recognised for their wish to contribute to the public effort in this time of financial crisis. Kind of like the 'pay it forward' initiative but fully public/transparent;
In my case the 'need' is self-respect. My wife would look after me and we would still have accommmodation and food. How does that equate for you -do you have a partner like mine earning roughly the NZ median wage (between $50k and $60k)? If so would you donate your salary to the govt and live on your partners income? If not why should I or do you consider income from Super significantly different from wages from the govt?
Whatever your situation I know I will never ever give the govt a cent of what I am due because they ave never waived their demands for income tax, GST, etc. I will continue donating to and collecting for charities of my choice. Give the govt my super and they will spend it in ways I seriously do not approve off.
The median wage isn't excess wealth whatsoever and I see absolutely no reason why you (and your wife when she gets to her age) shouldn't collect the super with pride. I'm talking about all the 65+ yo NZers who have so much wealth they know they could never spend it during their lifetime. Those who know they'll be leaving the kids millions. I'm not saying they don't leave the kids those millions, I'm only saying they make a socially respectable decision not to collect their super which is a pittance to them anyway.
As to the fact you'd rather be a philanthropist. That's like Bill Gates and yes, alot more people in NZ are the same - they'd rather give away their money, than give it to government. But it's as if they don't see that super is paid for via our taxes (yes, super is paid from taxes collected today - it is not pre-funded). Government is the biggest philanthropist in the nation. It educates all our children; it paves the roads we drive on; it provides our police protection; it funds the rule of law; it hospitalizes and treats our sick; it provides a welfare net for people in need; it pays super to all those over 65 years old.
Why people, especially wealthy people, hate "giving" the government money (i.e., paying their taxes) - I'll never understand.
I'm not sure of your age group Kate, but most boomers will be able to tell you that their retirement savings were first 'stolen' then squandered by politicians, specifically Piggy Muldoon and his National Government. Retirement today has to be funded from current tax takings for this very reason.
Generations, including my parents, and my very first years of employment, we were told that we did not have to worry about retirement as a portion of our taxes was being put aside to fund our pensions. A financial crisis, a Prime minister who thought he knew it all but was embarrassed by his failings and a comparatively 'huge' pot of money called the Government Super Fund sitting within arms reach and only needing a little law change to allow them to dump it into the consolidated fund to be squandered on ideological dreams for the country. People today who are being asked to retire later, or be means tested to set a standard of living which is shamefully close to the poverty line dig their feet in because they see this as just being shafted AGAIN! It is literally Bend Over, Here It Comes Again! Although Piggy had come and gone by the 80s, many who started work then still heard the retirement message reverberating from the politicians. But the consequences of arrogant politicians who are too self serving, and a gullible voting public can reverberate across generations. It is not the boomers and current or soon to be retirees who are stealing from the current working generations, it is the politicians who are perpetuating the crimes against the people of their predecessors.
It is only since 2000 I think that there has been a clear message that people have to provide for their own retirement, but then that is a part of the capitalist economic model adopted as a part of the free market, which deplores anything that might look or smell like socialism!
Those aren't facts, they are subjective opinion.
Unless you've been under a rock in the last few months you will have noticed that we have spent billions to protect the old from Covid-19 and even gave them more money for their winter energy payment. Affordability comes down to priorities and it's clear that the lefties prioritise the old so we can afford this. Strike 1.
Means testing is fraught with difficulty. What income will many have given interest rates and rents are low? $1,000,000 on deposit will return $5,000 in six month kiwi bonds, pre tax. If you try to class deposits as liquid, I'll put it an asset class you wont touch e.g. family home. Strike 2.
Politically this is suicide. Key knew it, English now knows it and so do Labour. If I don't have Super then I have to borrow elsewhere. Children (voters) won't be happy and old stalwarts of the Left or Right will vote their own party down if they propose it. Strike 3.
So it is affordable, means testing isn't practical and it's political suicide. You may hate the fact that people like me will get to suck on the public teat (finally) but you are dreaming if you think I won't get it.
To use your own words unless you have been under a rock the last 20 years you will realise that all these words kiwis use such as political suicide, too hard, too leftish are just kiwis making excuses for not doing things the rest of the world take for granted.
Kiwis so dumb lah
Muldoon dismantled the compulsory super-an installed by the preceding Kirk Labour government. That was as popular as it was wrong so called boomers and others, should have known better for sure.When much later I was finally achieving some level of a senior salary I began paying into a private super fund but along came Dr Cullen (under the cover of Jim Anderton) and whipped that ability out from under me, I was a rich earner apparently. Never fear if Labour are returned your super will be means tested alright. Oh everybody will still get the same universal gross amount each fortnight but a special tax bracket will be introduced so there will be a claw back by IRD, take your pick pay as you go or front up after each 31/3.
Oh & ps Murray. The government greedies did it too with the Natural Disaster Fund, a straight levy on our Insurance premiums. The Lange/Douglas lot “incorporated” that under treasury. Result Canterbury EQs EQC debacle.
"retirement, but then that is a part of the capitalist economic model adopted as a part of the free market, which deplores anything that might look or smell like socialism!"
There is now no such thing as capitalism and realistically there hasn't been true capitalism ever. So someone needs to work out what we really have. Now would be good.
Austerity doesn't work - tried so many times before to no avail.
Your suggestions end up with more people at food banks, more sick children and adults, and more people made redundant competing for what will become limited new jobs in the private sector during a time of recession.
He was not proposing austerity just making an effort to reduce the massive debts our govt is building up. There is nothing wrong with cutting super and civil servant salaries by 10% - we would still be far better off than the tens of thousands who are now unexpectedly unemployed. If every single dollar of those wage and benefit cuts were dierected to food banks, sick children and adults and people made redundant how could you complain? The new society wil be one of haves and have-nots with the object changing from wealth as it was pre-Covid to jobs post Covid.
Unless you own your own home - you cannot get by comfortably on superannuation (hence the winter energy payment). So it would be futile cutting super for those that need it - all that would do is have them turning up at the food banks and the hospitals more often.
Cutting all civil servant salaries isn't needed either - too complicated and unfair. If you want those salaries reduced over time, government should just change new hire (and new transfers) salary brackets. Existing hires stay on existing wages and brackets and all new hires and transfers (from whatever date you set) move onto the new ones. Government effectively did this when they closed the GSF scheme. So there are plenty of ways to skin that cat.
Is the last point that you think in the post Covid society only those with jobs will be the new 'haves'? Point there is that for years we've had a large number of working poor. A job certainly does not make everyone who has one a 'have' - not by a long shot. I think WP said, during the lock down it was 'test, test, test' - now that we are coming out of it, it will be 'jobs, jobs, jobs'. Having a job does give you dignity and beyond that the government needs to move us in the direction of better wages.
I recall when I was in government (Ministry of Commerce in those days), we got a new Minister, Jim Anderton - and he changed our name to the Ministry of Economic Development. He called the entire Ministry staff into the foyer at Parliament and he told us, he didn't care about all our policy or economic models that said differently --- from now on our single objective was full employment. I thought then - gee, perhaps it's the end of the neoliberal era in NZ.
You seem to have a good argument for people unlike you (earning well above median salary with millions in wealth) giving their money to the govt and an equal argument for making sure it doesn't apply to people like you and I - the middle class. [ Well I reckon I'm middle class with income mainly pension but half the national medium wage and owning a house in Auckland so therefore a millionaire (or I was pre-Covid - house is and was worth about $250,000 and the land was worth $900,000).]
We should be thinking like JFK about what we can do for our country not what others should be doing.
I don't think of owner occupied housing as an indicator of wealth. That's Gareth Morgan's way of looking at it - which I think is wrong. The worth of an owner-occupied house is only relative to other properties you might otherwise accommodate yourself in. Greypower refer to this as being "asset rich, cash poor".
So, yes, I am talking about the middle class / median income earners needing to be excluded from any form of 'wealth' taxation. In fact, I'd advocate that the median income here is low compared to cost-of-living that those on median incomes likely pay enough taxes via GST, rates, fuel and other excise taxes.
Cutting benefits bad idea. Unless you mean working for families in which case maybe cut it.
But job seekers and sickness beneficiaries no. Apart from some rorting it most are barely able to survive so cutting them further would be very bad. Very, very bad. Like French revolution bad.
Yes. People who wants to cut benefits ought to go and live in one of the worlds more unequal countries - like Mexico or Brazil or SA or (becoming more so) America. I don't even like to travel to these places as I don't like walking and driving past abject poverty everywhere I go.
That's the beauty of Winnie. If anyone every paid attention to what he was actually saying, they'd hear someone saying what was needed to be said rather than singing some ideological song. What most people see instead is his manoeuvrings to stay relevant in Government. If he lost his seat, he'd just be another voice in the wilderness. Shane Jones has no hope to fill his shoes. By comparison he is just a clown. Ron Marks might do it though, although he is much more dignified.
It's not who is saying it that matters, but that someone is.
Peters has nothing to lose. He's out at the next election, and he knows it.
National has effectively told everyone "a vote for NZF is a vote for Labour, so you may as well vote Labour" and that will be the end of NZF.
What he's saying is what most of us would similarly say.
What matters most, is that it is said.
Dont think we need worry too much about them this election. Ximon is gallantly holding the reins but as a party I suspect they have written off this election and are looking fwd to putting the training wheels on Luxon asap if he can get over Jamie in Howick.
Ximon holds up to Sept unless JA falters at which pt Punch n Judy makes her move.
So you think both our education sector and the Labour party do not think our education sector can stand on its reputation for education but needs to add in the right to work while studying,the right to continue working after study has finished and the right for the partners of some immigrant students to work as well. I've often wondered why the very best Indian computer graduates end up in Oxford, Camberidge or Silicon Valley California rather than NZ - it just needs English language and great universities.
It was John Key's government that brought in the ability for overseas students to work part time while in New Zealand and allowed the Private Training Establishments (PTEs) to grow like wildfire on the back of that newly created student work visa.
The new coalition government has made a number of regulatory amendments to standards in that sector and no longer are PTE students allowed to work while in NZ. The sector has shrunk big time.
It's not so much a problem anymore and given the pandemic - the ITPs, Unis and secondary schools that used to rely on overseas students for additional revenue will most likely have to go to distance (offshore) learning for that revenue in near-term future.
Which is good. We will have time to re-think that earlier reliance on overseas revenue in the education sector.
It has improved. But Labour have extended the period they can work after graduation - in other words pushing the problem down the road. To be fair with only one exception all the young asian immigrants I meet (actually hard to tell which are on work or resident visas and which are citizen or even born here) are well spoken pleasant generally hard working people. Given a reasonable number I'd have no complaint (and that goes for POMs like myself - it is just easier to identify visible immigrants) with our immigration policy. What drives me mad is (a) no population plan (b) low wage immigrants holding low paid Kiwis back (c) selling education with the carrot of residency rather than treating education like everything else NZ sells. Let me promise residency with the sale of every cabbage in my garden and suddenly my garden would be a major export business.
Thank you Kate. A lot of politicians say they'l do things in office and Winnie arguing to drop immigration is a case in point. He may well have argued strongly for it, but MMP, the one man one vote issue gets in the way and Winnie is just one vote. When the majority of the rest are afraid of the consequences of curtailing immigration, Winnie was not going to get much traction. But that doesn't mean he hasn't stopped fighting for it.
Is it correct to say that the vast majority of NZrs have had a total gutsful of open slather immigration. Why then is not one political party alert to that, the will of the people, and prepared to halt it. Do we have to petition parliament for another blasted referendum to get the message to sink in to our MPs. Are they stone tone deaf on the matter or what?
The pro-immigration lobby will not let the mere Covid glitch stop them! E.g. The tertiary Education sector, whose dominant strategy is to focus on international student growth, are now lobbying to cater for international students online in their home country if they can’t get here or are delayed. Maybe they’ll push a purely online offshore model going forward?
And why not!!!! It's perfect. Online/distance education is exactly the kind of foreign exchange earnings we want - it's a high value, highly skilled employment sector - and you don't need bricks and mortar infrastructure to provide it offshore. What could be more ideal?
Kate, you really think that Massey can continue to attract foreign enrollments once tertiary education is commoditized through online learning?
I doubt it.
New Zealand institutions get the enrollments they do because of New Zealand. Not because of the quality of the institutions.
Exactly.
But those students who currently run our petrol stations and liquor stores aren't the ones attending universities (broad, sweeping statement).
As soon as education goes online, New Zealand universities cannot compete with Australian, European, and American institutions. If they do want to, the only solution is to lower the quality of education to match the second tier educators which supply us with all our 20 hour per week workers.
You're right, you have to start with the question - why New Zealand? So, you look for NZ-specific USPs - soil science; marine science; indigenous/development studies; environmental management, etc . And for the subject areas, such as engineering (where we do not compete well with the 'powerhouse' countries) we could choose to bundle distance learning degree completion with local work placement/internships, as a path toward residency if it is a particular area of knowledge/expertise that we have market shortages of in NZ.
I suspect ongoing success in overseas enrollments will depend on the subject area of the study. Just as in any export market, I think NZ Inc. in tertiary education markets needs to focus on NZ strengths/differentiation by subject areas. And in undergraduate distance study, the quality of the education, not only in terms of course materials/delivery, but in areas of pastoral care; students support services; distance learning interface capability/functionality; library services... i.e., the 'wrap-around' aspects of one-on-one, or individual learning, is equally as important.
Providing relevant, effective and enjoyable learning by distance is not easy at all.
I certainly don't want to stop immigration nor to restrict its diversity but I would like the numbers to be similar to other countries (about a third of what we have taken for several decades) and be part of a population plan. It has been crazy living in Auckland and seeing the population boom way beyond all plans - no wonder Aucland council cannot build the infrastructure, the enveronment gets worse and our poor live in cars and garages.
Nationalism is afoot. So too is populism. For instance Trump & Brexit courtesy of Farage. On the grand scale, NZ will always need “others’ more than they need us. To put it in brutal reality if both islands sunk how long would it take the rest of the world to find what NZ can offer, elsewhere. Would NZ be that much missed in other words. Therefore if NZ is to turn inwards to self reliance it will still need partners, trade partners that is, food for oil, food for minerals etc etc. A return then to the tried and tested of days of old, The Commonwealth and the old alliances established during the war, the USA at Guadalcanal for example. Can bring in the like of Japan, Singapore. Things may become more expensive but at least NZ would be dealing with relationships that have been proven and are trustworthy.
I would not support Mr Peters with my vote but I think he's far from being a populist as you seem to suggest, some tend use the word too often in the same way some used to throw the communist wildcard during the witch hunt in the US. Both Trumpists and Brexiters can be qualified as such since they do not have real proposals except flag worshiping and blaming minorities and outsiders for all of their own countries issues, but this is not what I hear in this video.
Well, everything he said is right, the economy was in the doldrums already when COVID-19, let's no forget that as now many will use it as a scapegoat to defend an already expired and unsustainable economic system. More national production means more jobs here, jobs in productive, real economy unlike the housing bubble that's been fueling the economy for way too long. It also means producing and consuming locally which we need to do if we are really serious about global warming.
Let alone NZ, the entire western world does not even have the economic framework and political system to support an inward looking and sustainable economy.
If one can think logically and critically, the world economic development since 1800s until about 1950s has been accompanied by rapid technical advancement, war, invasion, colonization, slaving, confiscation, robbing.
After more than 300 hundred years of outward economic development, how can one suddenly turn it into the opposite?
It is like reverse a speeding car and you know what will happen to it.
Here's to put into logical healthy mindset: to walk straight you need both legs, left/labour, right/national.. you can set to be more on left or right in order to steer the direction, even backward walk, but only using one leg? guaranteed you to walk in circle. Out of control speeding car, is that what we need? or fine a perfect timing to glide, change gear, engine brake etc. ONLY idiot pilot advocating the danger.. eg. while speeding you hit the reverse, BUT if you have many of vested interest? one would advocating those irrational moves, mocking others etc. and can only forwarded your view/believe system, herein lies the danger - What does yin-yang tell us? ouh.. forgot, 'confuse us'/confucius.
Not really. The English arrived in India roughly when the Han chinese arrived in Taiwan. The East India company did rip India off by taking over from the Islamic elite who had perfected it. The UK govt as ruler was just over 100 years - during their very poor rule the population of India doubled, the railways and hospitals were built, the study of Indian history and pre-history began (sanscrit etc) and whether the British spent poor or took more during the last 100 years depends on whether you judge expenditure on the Indian army was for the benefit of India or Briton. The British gave indepence because if they hadn't the Indians would have taken it. Empire was always expensive - a point noticed by D'Israeli and seen by the poverty of Portugal and Spain because of their foreign empires. The han chinese are now 98% of the taiwanese population - higher than the mainland.
Nobody is proposing what you say.
Instead people are talking about a sustainable economy where everyone should produce and consume locally _as_much_as_we_can_.
There will always be trade between regions of the world that will always need each other which can result in a healthy exchange, however the current mechanics is nonsensical and the current crisis has very much highlighted this and how brittle this also makes us as a society.
The CCP has let its mask slip to the ozzies and they are having none of it now. I wish JA would show true leadership and stop dealing with this evil bullying regime.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/china-s-man-in-canberra-has-unmasked-th…
China's day of reckoning coming : Global Experts.
China retaliates :
https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/6736562/china-threatens-to-stop-…
This is the future..... World will be divided........
He is gonna tap into a voting segment which is possibly big enough to raft him and NZF over the 5% Reef. That's about the depth of his pitch.
As for the fond wishes for a genteel Autarky, the wishers had better start:
- Mining for Cu, Li, Al, Sn, Pb and not forgetting the many Rare Earths needed for electrification.
- Planting Rubber trees, Cotton, Rice and not forgetting all of those Spices to -er - Spice up them veggie curries.
- Training up a bunch of Whole-Earthers, to a point where each and every one of 'em can Mine, Refine, Cast, Fettle, Machine, Market and Sell useful stuff like solar panels, micro-hydro plants, and keep old Tractors and welders running. Just for the metal-bashing....
Or we could just all Specialise in what we are actually good at, Sell the proceeds to (trigger alert) Furriners who have what we lack but need, in exchange for what They lack but Want. We could even include buying old-but-good stuff, to Recycle where feasible, and thus keep our Clean Green image well burnished.... oh, wait, done that, they're called Cars.
Furriners like Australians.....
Read an article - interesting.
https://m.economictimes.com/news/international/world-news/trump-says-us…
Seems everyone is after master of National party
Cynical tyrannical evil regime needs stopping before its too late.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/beijings-aggressive-south-chi…
Selling our souls and freedoms for profit. Disrespecting our fallen soldiers who gave their lives for our democratic freedoms. Turning our backs to the plight of the Uighurs and Tibetans, not to mentions the cruelty to animals and the decimation of endangered species. Putting up with constant threats to our sovereignty, ignoring the abuses in the South China Sea. The likes of John Key, Simon Bridges and Mike Hosking need to decide who's side they on?
BL - too much assumption (propaganda-derived, if you trace it) in there. The West actually screwed China, and that was what the Long March was a reaction to. As was Castro kicking out those who were screwing Cuba. I don't condone repressive regimes for a minute, but don't believe your way of life could be had at the level you have it, without others being repressed. And worse.
Globalism is indeed part of the problem, but if you want to define it I'd go for 'We've reached the Limits to Growth'
But I suspect you'd be a denier of any Limits, from what I recall.
This sort of announcement is why I could never vote for him or his party.
Peters is and always has been a massive hypocrite. The biggest trougher ever in NZ politics. Been at the trough for near on 40 years. Peters number one concern is himself, and keeping that troughing going.
Shame he allowed new mining permits to be canned then isn't it. If there was any spine to this announcement he would've intervened and stopped JA from her publicity stunt.
Without basic inputs like fuel NZ are always going to be reliant on importing it.
NZ has tons natural resources. We're just not allowed to use them. Intelligent. No.
Global financial policy and stupid levels of foreign cash creating asset bubbles via speculation. Winston finally realises this is destroying the savings of his core voting block, and makes some noise.
Must be election year....
Add in Ximons bowing to China, it looks like a more left leaning govt for sure.
Winston knows how to talk the talk but fails to walk the walk . Pseudo student education schemes need to stop pay nzers to do the work and start our own manufacturing again we used to make things but stopped about thirty years ago . All over the world globalization is under scrutiny and the people don't like what they are seeing. There are no votes in supporting more of the same particularly in regard to foreign ownership with particular emphasis on Chinese and the corrupt ccp . Ximon and co should listen to the electorate if they don't no point in participating in next election . Jacinda and co also need to listen up .
Thank you WP, you have endorsed my economic theory of 'the 10 year wave' it encapsulates the theory NZ takes a whole decade
to follow international trends. And we dare call ourselves innovative! Recently we have uptaken quantitive easing only 10 years after everyone else...now we are getting some nationalism going too. I am all for onshoring as much as we can here, only problem is NZ Inc can't wipe its own ass much less organise efficient long run, lean and just on time production of anything except raw logs and methane. We don't have the business leadership to deliver the goods. Literally!
How can widgets be made competitively in NZ when we are 6 weeks shipping from worlds markets + 6 weeks from supply chains + have nearly highest minimum wage in world + have low productivity + lack large pool of industrial competence and tech worker skill base + will never have Asia/Europe/US economies of scale. It's like believing in fairies, magical thinking. We can do niche products that no one else can be bothered competing with or for local markets on bulky low value items where shipping makes imports expensive, or on products that use NZ primary production as inputs (though not timber products it seems). That's it.
Think software, electrical and mechanical engineering. Think intellectual property which has zero weight but generates wealth. What if we had a national campaign like we did in the 80s to "buy NZ made and keep your country working"? How about targeted generous tax breaks for R&D? I'm in Germany at the moment where people are proud to buy German made products, not just for patriotic reasons but because the products are better made and well designed. These are just ideas. You know a short while ago Windflow went out of business in NZ over 20 million of debt. That company would have had +ve cash flow were it not for it's debt. What if they'd been given an interest free loan of 20 mill for 20 years. Engineers would have kept working and developing their technology. Yeah I know that's picking winners, but we're competing against mercantile countries who're doing just that.
He sees his snout being removed from the trough at the next election. So he starts spouting policies that are popular. Last time it was limit immigration, he then participates in a government that allows record immigration.
His statement makes sense, problem is if he is required to forget it to score a ministeral limo he will and bugger the voters. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. He's done it many times to his voters, when will they wake up ?
In my opinion, Winston does not believe in or understand free trade - which is one of the basic tenets of economics and made Britain the richest country in the world as of 1900
He may be right that immigration has to be reduced and based on talent, but becoming, "self reliant" like poverty stricken Mahatma Gandhi's India in the 1960's, is dumb.
In addition, the bug will not go away and we have to open our borders tomorrow. This bug is only as deadly as the flu.
These things are meaningless without a detailed plan."if we can grow it or make it at near competitive prices," that sounds grand, but what are the things that we can grow or make near "competitive prices"? when you have the details you can then say, yes that makes sense to have even if costs more to produce it locally because of its strategic importance, but how on earth we are going to locally produce the other one that requires raw material, technology etc that is not available in NZ.
Here is NZ top 10 imports in 2019: http://www.worldstopexports.com/new-zealands-top-10-imports/
Go there, look at it and say which ones we can locally produce or make. WP is a populist because he tells what people like to hear, as opposed to the truth that they do not like to hear.
Yep, for small businesses attempting to manufacture in NZ in many if not most cases purchasing materials alone will cost more than the finished goods do sourced out of China. Peters spouting populist romantic notions of on-shoring is all sound and fury signifying nothing, as is always the case with him. He's a perennial blow-hard.
We cannot even have competitive supermarkets in NZ. SUPERMARKETS for god sake. Imagine how much it will cost Kiwis to want to buy a NZ made computer or mobile phone. As they will cost too much, most people cannot afford it, the government (who has to own this uneconomic enterprise) will then create a register for families who need a phone or computer. One phone per family, and the waiting list is 3 years.
Australia in asking for an investigation into Chinas handling of recent events has been dissed as being "the gum stuck on Chinas shoes."
Waiting for China to be portrayed as "the scabby virus stuck to the worlds lungs"
https://www.google.com/amp/s/7news.com.au/politics/china-threat-inappro…
He is stating a lot of truths, but we need to be careful that we do not react hastily to what he clearly stated is an issue that has been brewing over a very long time
This all sounds very protectionistic wanting to revert our economy back to 'what it was' which is idealistic, not realistic - we live in a global village now and you cannot reverse what technology has enabled over the last couple of centuries
Global trade is here to stay, global investment and international manufacturing will remain.. the real issue is about prioritising WHAT sectors pose the highest risk to the welfare of NZ'ers and understanding those supply chains well, and if they are 100% dependent on overseas suppliers, then we need to reduce, eliminate or mitigate those risks by having suppliers locally who can competitively supply at least a % of those goods locally
I agree with some of what you say.
Technology has allowed and enabled us to get to this point however technology can also enable us to bring some industries back on shore. Granted we will still be reliant on other countries for some products, technology and affordability has advanced to the point that with a little investment locally we should be able to create jobs and become a little more self sustaining as Peters says.
"then we need to reduce, eliminate or mitigate those risks by having suppliers locally who can competitively supply at least a % of those goods locally"
This sounds like a load of empty theory to me.
We don't have oil, steel, copper, cobalt, cotton, sugar cane or even a deep investment pool and a government that is against investment. We don't make solar panels, or cars, or computers, or fridges, or phones, or tractors, or machine tools, or even our own clothing. Never mind the supply chain required to support such activities and ignoring the probability it wouldn't be economic to do so.
Production and export should always be a focus
COVID 19 did not cause this economic whirlpool, it was created over years by central banks
The virus was simply the somber reminder to the world that risk exists... even if you do not see it.. oftentimes it is the risks you don't see that cause the most damage
People had forgotten this after years of central banks bailing everyone out... widening the wealth gap
I think they need to read Ray Dalios New World Order series, to gain some perspective as there is nothing new here...
This is not the first time protectionism has followed economic turmoil
Someone above mentioned that you could not reverse a speeding car. That's true because it could result in a deadly crash. However, you may slow it down, you may change the lane or even change the path. Reversing is not the only option. COVID19 is an event that slows things down forcefully. It also offers the world a chance to reflect and look within. Does over-consumption make sense? How much more do we want to sacrifice to continue what we have perceived as prosperity? Last time, the Black Death led Europe to the path of the Renaissance. It will be China's call this time.
This man is so set in the 1960's and 70's , just as the Greens are set in Communistic central planning ideas of the same era .
Next Peters will want exchange controls too
We all know those policies all failed , we dont have the economies of scale or scope for mass production that will get us "self -sufficient " in anything other than food
In my opinion who delivered this message is irrelevant as it is a pertinent subject for the future of NZ.
Perhaps a start point for growing export earnings is compulsory acquisition of strong wool to establish the critical mass to underpin innovation, added value and market power in the application and marketing of NZ wool. Return wool to a net income earner for the majority of sheep farmers. Now essentially shearing is a necessary animal welfare operation on farms with negligible contribution to earnings.
The universal truth that the auction system used in NZ only determines the highest price the under-bidder will pay needs to change (perhaps trial the Dutch auction system) The current system serves the beyond farm gate operators (both within and beyond NZ) pretty well but reinforces the cliche: farmer, buy retail, sell wholesale and pay the cartage both ways - not far away from peasantry really.
Leverage greater market power back to the primary producers in NZ I reckon.
1. Historically speaking, a country that limits trade limits wealth and poverty is its hallmark.
2. New Zealand was 'great' when it exported everything it could make. Which is trading.
3. Less investment means less business, means less jobs, means less wealth, means more poverty.
4. He is not part of a government driving us into the biggest debt hole since the Great Depression?
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.