sign up log in
Want to go ad-free? Find out how, here.

Bernard Hickey suggests a bipartisan deal to ensure any decision to unleash a migration surge happens as well as the long-required surge in infrastructure investment

Public Policy / opinion
Bernard Hickey suggests a bipartisan deal to ensure any decision to unleash a migration surge happens as well as the long-required surge in infrastructure investment
Immigration counter

The intensity of calls to wrench open the migration tap are building to a tipping point, either before or after the election.

But we can’t only pull the migration lever again. There should to be a bi-partisan agreement on how populated and productive we want Aotearoa-NZ to be, and who should pay for the $200 billion of infrastructure needed to grow much more productively, along with housing everyone affordably and cleanly.

Just pulling one lever would only embed and worsen the high-population-growth, low-productivity-growth, low-wage, low-investment and high-house-price model NZ Inc has become. Given the current state of the political economy, this sort of societal and economic Groundhog Day appears the most likely result. But I suggest some options below for what that bi-partisan set of truces and deals to make it happen could look like.

A polycrisis headed for a fast-twitch reaction

It’s now a crescendo that is reaching fever pitch and it’s only a matter of time before the Government relents, or the Government changes, and it happens anyway.

Deep in a winter of discontent, employers of all shapes and sizes, the Opposition and even many in public services such as hospitals and schools are now pleading for the Government to pull the migration lever. They want much easier access to lower-wage and usually temporary workers, although they’d also love to bring in as many higher skilled workers as possible with the carrot of an easier path to residency.

So far, the Government has held the line on its tighter ‘rebalanced’ system of only allowing accredited employers to import a restricted set and number of workers, and (mostly) only then at pay rates 31% above the minimum wage. But the pressure is building to breaking point, powered by signs everywhere of usually reliable essential services breaking down (suspended elective surgeries, school holiday flight cancellations, shortened shop and cafe hours, construction delays and building materials shortages, an age care sector near collapse), and growing fears of a wage-price spiral that worsens the inflationary cost-of-living crisis.

The trouble is this collective walk-run-stumble to looser migration settings is happening without any of the hard decisions on whether and how to fund $200b worth of infrastructure investment needed in tandem with this fresh surge. The end result of only pulling the one (migration) lever without pulling both levers (migration and infrastructure) will be the same intense pressure on capacity and prices of both the existing infrastructure and the new housing they are supposed to enable.

‘We’ve got to open the place up’

Ahead in the polls and with an anti-inflationary bellow at his back, Opposition leader Christopher Luxon said this week Aotearoa-NZ should pull the immigration lever urgently.

“We’ve got massive skills gaps everywhere, we’ve got to open the place up. And the accompanying piece to that is making sure we’ve got the infrastructure to support it as well because we’ve done a poor job of syncing those two bits together ... but yeah, we’re very pro-immigration.” Luxon telling the Sydney Morning Herald’s Latika Bourke in an interview in London that he urgently wanted more temporary and permanent migrants to boost productivity and alleviate inflation, including extending the eligibility for working holiday visas from 30 to 35 and allowing repeat visits.

Luxon understands the risk of only pulling one lever, but hasn’t developed any of the policy or political support for policies that would make a difference any time remotely fast enough to cope with another 500,000 people in five years or so. Spending the $200b over 30 years, as suggested by the Infrastructure Commission, would require either massive amounts of new debt issuance, and/or some form of new or higher regular tax on everyone to both keep the debt at a reasonable level and service it at higher interest rates.

Neither have permission to borrow, tax and build. Yet.

Finance Minister Grant Robertson has already ruled out that sort of level of investment by the state, which would effectively double Aotearoa-NZ’s overall investment level to 30% of GDP per year. He has airily suggested options for ‘demand management’, which essentially means water and congestion charges. He does not have the political license for either. Three Waters is actually just a sophisticated way to bring in water charges and lift water borrowing without having to ask for ratepayer permission. It appears doomed. Labour can only hope voters don’t notice the lack of either credible progress or a plan before the next election, or that they continue believing the magical thinking of some that the infrastructure can be done without big debt, taxes or congestion and water charges.

The daily drumbeat of non-delivery and the attempts to distract with the smoke-screens of funding reviews and business case development will eventually erode the magic from that thinking and turn into a Government-rejection voting machine.

Luxon has yet to propose a way to match anything like a $200b infrastructure funding plan to match his “very pro-immigration” stance. He has already ruled out Three Waters and has yet to commit to congestion charging. His spokespeople have ruled out Let’s Get Wellington Moving and Auckland Light Rail, although they do want to build more motorways. Luxon is also nowhere near a comprehensive and credible plan that produces affordable housing, transport, health and education at the same time as high population growth. That would require hospital, school and busways on a whole new level.

So what’s the problem right now?

On the face of it, there’s everything to love about a migration surge over the next couple of years. It would rev up an economy slowing towards at least a mild recession next year and take some pressure off some of the wage inflation building in the system. It would also deliver a huge morale boost to those in essential services such as hospitals, schools, transport operators and the food and grocery logistics system that help was coming. So many people are just plain exhausted after two and a half years of dislocations to work life, home life, school life and the intense pressure of constantly trying to deliver 100% of the 2019 level services with just 85% of the staff.

It could also be argued that a fresh surge of construction workers would re-energise the infrastructure build that is already underway, helping to fill some of the infrastructure deficit. And there’s plenty of people suggesting that the migration surge will only replace the exodus of Kiwis going overseas with their recently learned skills to earn higher wages, especially with the prospect of a path to citizenship in Australia and extra time on OE in Britain (an extra year to three years and a wider age window of 18 to 35 instead of 18 to 30).

The ready, fire, aim problem

The bigger problem is that pulling in an extra 500,000 people in five years would amplify the congestion, the housing unaffordability, the emissions reductions shortfall and all the other shortages in hospitals and schools.

It would also amplify the tax-free and leveraged capital gains on housing once Luxon reversed the interest deductibility and bright-line tax changes for property investors. That may not be the stated reason for only pulling the one lever (migration), but it sure is handy as ‘collateral (non) damage’ when trying to flip median-voting homeowners in the suburbs, which is the core task for Luxon.

There are other ways

So how could it be different? What truces would need to be declared and deals done to shift the consensus to pulling both levers in a more strategic way that planned to match the population growth with the infrastructure investment with a credibility and longevity that convinced private sector investors and home owners alike? Expectations management, as the Reserve Bank has found, is almost as important as matching those expectations and delivering.

We know the scale of the work needed for the existing (relatively low) forecasts for population growth (that’s the $200b), but we have yet to work out and agree what level of actual population growth both parties want. We have also yet to work out how to pay for the infrastructure, and more importantly, who should pay. These are all difficult conversations with supporters and the public. Centrist ‘low-target’ politicians avoid them like the plague, all the while hoping their opponents do walk into these minefields. Everyone has detonators at the ready.

To have these discussions sensibly and credibly, they require the sorts of bipartisan truces and deals that have been declared in the past 30 years around inflation targeting, consumption taxes, NZ Superannuation, urban densification and various middle-class welfare spending such as interest-free student fees, Working for Families and the Accommodation Supplement.

So what truces and deals are needed?

How could we build and pay for over $200b of infrastructure and public services over 30 years? What types of agreements would give voters and businesses the surety that the immigration would be matched with infrastructure?

In my view, those deals would have to include:

  • a new settlement of the financial relationship between central Government and Councils that ensures they are helped with debt and given new and reliable revenue streams (possibly GST or shares of any new wealth, capital and/or land tax/levies) that are able to leveraged up into multi-decade investments because the incentives are aligned in way that squashes regular ratepayer revolts;

  • both major political parties would have to agree to go forward with congestion and water charges, which are in effect an agreement to increase taxes to both pay for new infrastructure and manage demand in a way to minimises the scale and need for new concrete, steel and drilling of road and rail tunnels;

  • both parties would have to agree to reduce or give up the mega-project plans ($7.4b for Let’s Get Wellington Moving $14.6b for Auckland CBD to Airport Rail) and focus instead on much-more-immediate mode shift from cars to buses, bikes, scooters and walking; and,

  • both parties would have to agree on the scale and speed of the population growth they want over the next 30 years, and what they want to see achieved in housing affordability and emissions reductions over that time.

We’re closer than you might think

The key is removing the mega-plans in tandem with agreeing on congestion-charging funded mode shift. That massively reduces the scale of the problem of convincing voters to accept higher taxes, and it in-effect forces Labour-Green and National-ACT to give up a couple of their core demands in equal measure. It also means emissions reduction and the ‘just’ part of the ‘just transition’ might actually happen.

In effect:

  • the Labour-Green side would have to give up on their big train tunnels in Auckland and Wellington’s tunnels and light rail;

  • the National-ACT side would have to give up on their motorway plans and convince their own supporters of the benefits for motorists and taxpayers of a fast mode shift that frees up a few existing road and motorway lanes for (electric) Ferraris, (electric) double-cab utes, (electric) delivery vans, (electric) buses and (hopefully hydrogen-powered) trucks;

  • in return, Labour-Green would get the fast and just transition to subsidised bus-led, walking and (electric) cycling-driven big cities that encourage much more (affordable, safe and warm) new medium density housing;

  • Labour-Green would also get the sort of just transition they have talked about but not been able to win support for across the divide, along with air cover to fight off the political bombing runs of Groundswell-ish types protesting against ‘ute taxes’ and ‘toy train sets’;

  • in return, National-ACT would get to keep relatively low income tax rates and (possibly) low or even no wealth, capital or land taxes; and,

  • National would win electric vehicle-buying subsidies that help (their core supporters) farmers, suburban and provincial families and tradies into electric vehicles they can drive on clear roads (albeit with congestion charges).

All this may seem pipe-dreamish on my part, but there are signs there in recent years a deal could be done. Both National and Labour have flirted nervously with the idea of congestion charging for years, and both would like political air cover to do both congestion charging and subsidise electric vehicles. Labour and the Greens would also like the political air cover to ramp up public subsidies for cheaper, closer and more frequent bus and (existing) train use, along with subsidies for bikes and fast (partial) conversions of roads to cycleways and walkways.

National-ACT definitely don’t want to have to convince their suburban, rural and provincial supporters they should pay higher taxes for big railway and motorway tunnels in Auckland and Wellington. They’d also like to avoid land and capital taxes if they could.

A new deal for Councils is the key

The key to the whole package of deals is around council finances. Anything decided in and around the Beehive is now hostage to a myriad of ratepayer-revolts quashing investment, borrowing and rates rises. This is quite likely after this October’s elections.

The pathways are being built for this ‘new deal’ for councils. Not that anyone would know it because of the Three Waters and other noise, but there is actually a full-scale review going on right now around these issues of shared funding of infrastructure and new revenue tools for councils. It could be the vehicle to suggest and agree a deal.

The Productivity Commission and Infrastructure Commission have also both just produced major reports that scope out the potential risks and scale of rapid population growth without enough accompanying infrastructure spending. Ideas for congestion charges as demand management tools and the suggestions about avoiding big, expensive tunnels and rail lines are already out there in safe spaces.

The Productivity Commission has also recommended a Government Policy Statement that addresses the population planning issue and connects it directly to infrastructure planning in a way that means the economy and society have ‘absorbtive capacity’ for more migration.

The Climate Change Commission has also prepared the political ground for the types of electric vehicle subsidies and mode shift plans that both sides will need to call on when the time comes to convince their ‘tribes’.

Really? You’re joking right?

My base case is that none of these deals get done and the short term drivers will mean Opposition parties take the immediate opportunities in front of them to score political points (ute tax, ‘anti-car’ policies and ‘multi-billion-dollar toy train sets’) and for the Government to adopt a defensive crouch and ‘low target’ set of policies (no congestion charges, no mention of higher debts or any new taxes to fund them).

Back to the (crowded and expensive) future

The migration lever will then be pulled, either in desperation before the election by Labour, or by National once in power. The same infrastructure-lite approach will be taken by the Government that starts inflating house prices again and leads us back to where we were just before the pandemic.

Back then, we had the fastest population growth in the developed world, the highest rents relative to income in the developed world, the best performing housing market in the world for owners and the fourth highest proportion of residents living overseas in the OECD. We also had among the most expensive public transport fares in the world and were well under our targets for emissions reductions.

Now, our population isn’t growing nearly as fast, but would again once the migration lever is pulled. We still have the most expensive rents and houses in the developed world, and a new generation of residents are looking to move permanently overseas because wages are too low and living costs (mostly housing and food) are too high.

Readers may doubt it, but I remain hopeful and very keen to suggest options and solutions that I can’t be held responsible for delivering, but would be more than happy to hold those responsible accountable.

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.

185 Comments

I really hope this does not happen.  Look at Queenstown, short workers at $25 an hour but no where for them to live.....     Working holiday makers yes, nurses and drs yes, but wholesale cheap migration, no thanks....   

Up
41

All I can say is thank god Bernard is not in charge. An extra half a million people?...that's what got us into this mess.

Up
38

I find the argument always really weird. 

We want to import high paying jobs, but keep the low end cheap jobs for locals.

We hate paying more for things, but want to put as much pressure on wages as possible, past the point of getting value for money as we end up having to take on those who are borderline employable.

We want to be as cheap as a larger economy like Australia, with a tiny population.

That's a lot of free lunches.

Up
16

Totally agree. Most of this lot moan about population growth and then also moan about our high prices, lack of infrastructure, etc.

A little island in the middle of nowhere is never going to have cheap prices and great infrastructure with 5 million people. 

Up
4

We want wealth gains from land but don't want to pay for infrastructure maintenance and investment. Just too much grifter mentality around.

Up
5

Hope ain't a strategy. If national wins the next election, prepare for a big influx.

Up
15

I am not a fan of this government, but the more I think about what the Nats will do the more I think I might vote Labour to keep the Nats out.

Labour, overall, are probably the lesser of two evils.

Up
36

Same sh*t, different branding...

Up
9

Labour is National, but partially identifying there's problems, but lacking the fortitude and capability to do anything about it.

National is everything is ok, we don't like what lefty Labour did their last term but we won't reverse it.

Greens is everything sucks but we don't even want to form a government.

ACT is the free market will sort everything.

Up
6

Māori party?

Up
2

... school lunches would be a hangi ! ...

Up
3

In that case, I'm going to try and find a way to vote for them twice

Up
6

Maybe they could legislate compulsory workplace Hangis.  I'd turn up to the office more often.  

Up
4

Izard Irwin put a good hangi on….for 450 staff

whats your problem with having a hangi?

Up
1

Where did I say I had a problem with having a Hangi?  I'd turn up to the office more often if we had them.  My colleagues often sell tickets for fundraising Hangi, but it's never frequent enough.  

Up
1

... truth be told , the kids would benefit alot if there was an occasional hangi : real food , simple processes , time , natural elements of fire / rocks / flax / earth ...

When you think about it , it's a bloody good idea ...

Up
9

You make a fair point, but one counter argument is that rewarding incompetence is not going to help us.

We don't know what levels of stupidity a National led govt will achieve _yet_.

And we don't know the levels of stupidity a Labour led, Green, Maori coalition could achieve. But based on what we are observing right now, it could be emotional.

So I think the best strategy with our current set of available options is to change the govt. as often as possible.

Eventually the penny will drop.

And god help us if they somehow get a 4 year term through.

Up
8

Happy with co-governance? Happy with repealing Three Strikes? Happy with the new Health Authority? Happy with a party where the left leaning Law Society expresssed concern over the amount of legislation rushed through under urgency and no public debate? Happy with Robertson’s fiscal management?

Up
10

Hmmmm

good points…

what a diabolical choice!

cos we know the Nats will open the immigration floodgates again and do lots of favours for their property investor mates, things which I definitely don’t want to see.

I really don’t know, maybe I will go for TOP

Up
8

The problem is that I'm not happy with any of that. But I seriously doubt that 7-houses Luxon will do any better. This might be the first election where I intentionally spoil my ballot paper.

Up
9

... might I suggest that you cast a " protest vote " for a minnow ... TOP or something like that  ... those eensy teensy tiny partys need all the help they can get   ... go go go McGillicuddy Serious !

Up
8

Good advice, Gummy. Here's hoping that by election time, I'd have found a party that cares about the whole chicken - no preferential treatment for its left wing or the right wing, thanks.

Up
4

P.S.  On a good day, I still see Labour as the lesser of the two evils.

Up
4

.. each to their own  ... and , that is the beauty of a democracy , we get to make our own choice  , regardless if its completely barking mad  ... like Colin Craig's " Christian Conservatives " or Destiny Church's " Gays Cause Earthquakes " party ... its still legitimate , your right ... 

Up
5

Well if you are writing off people that believe in religion and the bible as barking mad, your voting options are a bit limited Gummy. 

Up
1

I am of the same opinion. Vote labour or a minority because national are still threatening to revert to all the stuff that has created the mess.

Unbelievable they cant read the room.. their current approach isnt electable.

Up
7

Imagine being a fly on the wall when Caesar, or William the conqueror bumped into old Blighty. Twas ever thus. Notwithstansinding all that hysterical nonesense (HT Gummy Bear Hero.. <my_hero>) wtf.. 

 

Up
0

' the $200 billion of infrastructure needed to grow much more productively,'

Bullshit, Bernard Hickey. I'm calling you.

Both Commissions based their proposals on said bullshit - yes, submissions were made and ignored - and the job of journalism is to expose said bullshit.

Come on man - NZ is facing the repercussions of a planet hitting the Limits to Growth. Infrastructure triage is what we are staring down the barrel of, not ' growing more productively'.

Up
25

Have some hope in our ability to innovate pdk. Sure we can't beat 21st century problems with 20th century tools but every hour of every day positive thinking and forward looking people across the globe are discovering tommorow solutions. You and I will not be arround to see all of them that implemented but I'm excited for my kids and grandkids futures!

 

Up
7

Have you seen those pics sent back by the James Webb telescope ? ... oh my gosh ... science will lead the way ... a brighter future beckons for our kids & grandkids , it's just we're flooded daily with too much hickeysterical gloomsterising in the media to be aware of that ...  

Up
1

You don't 'innovate' your way out of depletion.

Yes, you do things you hardly realised you could achieve - but every litre of fossil energy you burn today, they can't. Ever. And you left them the pollution, the waste, but not the energy to deal with it. That was fraud; what you had to do was establish the viability of the replacement technologies BEFORE you took their options away. We got our propter hocs muddled with our post hocs....

And that telescope has produced some pretty pictures. It's use to humanity as we enter the Limits to Growth, orders of magnitude overshot?

Nil.

Up
11

Every time I see these amazing scientific accomplishments/discoveries - it reminds me of this song;

https://genius.com/Joan-baez-song-of-bangladesh-lyrics

I just wish we could get it right - here at home - on our little blue planet.

 

Up
0

You can bet that the Bangladeshis will always take the lowest up front cost energy they can get, they don't have the luxury of choices.

Up
3

Every liter of fossil fuels we burn makes our country a better place for our future generations.  Grandpa and dad left me a much better environment than they had.  You doomsayers are the ones that are trying to take the energy from the next generation.  Replacement technologies of wind, solar and biofuels are the worst-performing sources of energy we have.  The fraud is people like you, trying to deny the underdeveloped world and our next generation a better life, by consuming cheap, plentiful, reliable energy in the form of fossil fuels.

Up
3

PDK world population growth to 10 billion over the next 20-30 years irrespective of whether you like it. The nz govt as well as all others should have done a sweden on the virus. Reduced population might solve and reduce most of the environmental problems we are concerned with. By golly we would not need to import coal of we had less people. The sweden approach wouldn't be accepted so we just printed money to plug the gap and created many more issues. Isolating nz by not allowing immigration achieves zip other than limiting small nz while others incl oz continue on. 

 

What is your answer (I wont say solution) to the world population. 

Up
4

There are also emerging signs that we actually NOT grow to 10 billion people and I hope that turns out to be the case

Up
9

Hope and wait scenario for you then. Nz has low birth rate but 25000 net positive (births less deaths)

Up
1

He doesn't agree with me, therefore he must be wrong.

Ever heard of belief superiority?

Up
1

Don't vote for one of those 4 parties. 

Up
8

I wouldnt discount such insanity....desperate people do stupid things.

Are you desperate Bernard?

Up
14

He's been desperate to avoid what has been put in front of him. That 2-cent's worth episode he did with Beckford and Tibshraney, was a classic. Massive recoil from the possibility that growth might not be permanent. He's not alone in that, but it has no place in journalism.

https://advisory.kpmg.us/articles/2021/limits-to-growth.html

From EU fires, to gas contention, to Sri Lanka, most of the Middle East, the lying clowns we are electing to perpetuate what is, at baseline, a lie, to supply-chain falterings, debt-repayment impossibilities; they are all part of the same story. Time we asked the questions.

This rave does not do that.

Up
6

Even if he is energy and resource blind (as he appears to be) he has the problem arse about face anyway...hes advocating the solution to a supply crunch is to increase demand...go figure.

We need to reallocate (prioritise) our existing resources.....do we need 10,000 baristas (and numerous other occupations) when we cant staff our health services? Innovation is not exclusively product based as some seem to believe.

Up
13

Well put. 
we probably have too many cafes, that have relied for too long on cheap labour. If they can’t survive, so be it.

And as you allude to, immigration to ‘solve’ labour shortages just perpetuates the issue… it’s just like a drug addict.

Having said that, we clearly need some significant targeted immigration in areas such as healthcare and education. 

Up
14

Targeted immigration - that is essential. Low wage immigration of any type to be avoided at all cost.  Every target is a clear argument for govt to change policy so for example a shortage of care nurses does need more Filipinos etc but it also needs serious review of why NZ students do not become nurses: the pay, the hours, the conditions, the lack of training, the cost of being trained.

Up
17

There's quite a long list of jobs kiwis aren't that interested in doing, for any money.

Up
1

Curiously thats what recessions determine....something I suspect the RBNZ understands.

Up
1

Got a small sample of that long list?

Up
6

Anything involving sustained periods of physical exertion. So the manual parts of agriculture, trades that aren't electrical, that sort of thing. 

Hard work is lame so why would anyone want to do it.

Up
3

Only the privileged have careers....most have jobs.

We have been lying to our offspring (and ourselves) that we can be whatever we want to be and that we should all do something we enjoy...sadly that is a crock for the majority...we do what needs to be done and what is available.

 

Up
14

At this point in my life, after being employee, contractor, and employer, I'd say the best path for someone is to develop a skill/trade they cultivate over time. Most work is now heading towards transitory jobs, meaning people often don't have the experience to both command a higher wage for themselves, or be productive and efficient workers.

Previous generations had pathways to this, but they were long and tedious. Who wants to spent a year or two sweeping a shop floor, people want to get straight into it.

Up
1

There's a breakdown of trust. Workers don't have any trust that if they spend some time learning the ropes on relatively poor pay, they'll be rewarded for it later. 

Ironically, we're in a position where they possibly could be, because labour is valuable again. But we've had decades of fire-at-will to undermine the relationship, and now young people don't feel much loyalty to employers and don't really conceive that they're owed any, either.

Up
5

Its a two way street. I went through a naive period of laying on much higher wages and conditions, because the best business model I've found if you have staff is employing the best people, keeping them happy and loyal. About half the employees saw that as something to exploit.

Everyone talks about morals but it's really an all about me culture we have now.

Up
3

And then they're lambasted for being "lazy".  We wonder why there's a brain drain.  

I know of a few instances lately where people have been given what they ask for only by handing in their notice, but the ambulance at the bottom of the cliff rarely works when the employee has made up their mind.  

Up
5

To increase productivity, skilled workers will work smarter, not harder.

Up
2

Assuming productivity is what motivates them.

Up
1

There is a limit to everything, even that.

Up
1

Bollarks, there are plenty. See them all the time.

But running exploitative housing and tax policy will ensure we continue to have shortages when wages just don't stack up.

Up
6

Exactly but I suspect we train enough nurses in NZ to fill any gaps, however, there has been a constant flow out of the country due to poor wages and conditions. Let's solve this problem first before having positions filled with immigration.

Up
10

Time is a bit of an enemy there, you really want 6 years or so to produce an experienced nurse, with no guarantee they'll stay.

I think the entry wage for a nurse should be 80 grand, heading to 100 after about 2-3 years.

Up
1

I can guarantee that if wages and conditions improved there would be an influx of experienced, senior, NZ educated nurses back into the country. Myself included.

Up
12

Yep. My understanding is pay parity with Australia got offered, but not backdated, and Andrew Little is implementing nothing until it goes to employment court.

There's a word for that behaviour, and it rhymes with "truckery"

Up
1

The offer made was far far short of what I'm currently being paid in Aus so I wouldn't call that pay parity. We need junior nurses but we really need senior nurses with advanced skills and education as they can take the load off many specialty areas. These positions in Aus get paid well and they would need to be paid well in NZ also. Nothing I've seen in the collective bargaining agreement is anywhere near pay parity with Aus.

Up
7

Judging by the salaries received by my adult daughters: logistics manager, senior social worker, admin secretary then you are about right. The first two earn over 100k and the last about 40k - none work shifts and the last one is allowed to finish at 2:45, collect her child from school and then work from home. Nurses salaries reflect olden times when general work conditions were far worse. make nurse training more on the job and pay their student fees.

Up
4

Nurses training/education is an ongoing debate but I am firmly in the academic foundation (university level degree), then experience in the workplace camp. I think modern health care requires nurses who are more knowledgeable and better educated and this can only be achieved through rigorous study. This is in the interests of the patients first and foremost.

Up
2

From other comments it is clear you are a nurse or closely associated with nurses so I've little choice but to accept your informed opinion over my ignorant opinion.  Is there a danger that you could do all the academic training and then not actually like the job?  Even a couple of months just washing the floors would give a student some idea of what they are getting into. Certainly applies to computer programming - some have got the essential thought processes and some don't and never will but there are also some who can do it but just don't enjoy it - even some who actively hate it.

Up
0

I think the risk of not liking a job following study isn't unique to a particular occupation. This is why studying at a well regarded institution is advisable so you can cross credit papers completed after your first year. I was in clinical placements in my second year so had a basic understanding of what I was in for. I don't think being a cleaner in a hospital ward would give much insight...

Up
1

The whole healthcare wage/labor shortage thing illustrates that immigration of low paid workers leads to ultimate failure.  The solution to the labor shortage in this sector is to raise wages massively.  Suppressing wages through immigration has lead us to the point where houses cost on average somewhere around a million and the current  average hourly rate for a nurses is about $29.    How is any Kiwi nurses ever going to afford a home?  So they are all leaving the workforce or the country.  What other rational choice do they have?  Any foreign nurses faced with these metrics has far more attractive options in other countries.  Why come here?  The rational reason for a nurse to come to NZ is if they particularly want to live here and nursing is a way to get in.  Having got in they certainly would not want to or could not afford to stay a nurse and the government know that.  Hence the two year sentence in purgatory before they can leave the health workforce.  The other class of immigrant that you will get are people who have either fake qualifications or very low quality ones.  And believe me, we have quite a few of those.  The aged care sector particularly.  A neighbor managed one of these facilities and said that government funding did not allow decent wages so they knew that they were hiring nurses with fake qualifications.  They just faked it until they made (sort of) it with some input from people who were educated (good luck finding them now). 

The solution is to pay decent wages and force ourselves to restructure our labor and employer market so that a lot of low paid low productivity activity fails and we are forced to adjust our priorities to that we absolutely need and those that are productive and profitable without the sugar rush of cheap imported labor.

Further more.  The government recently stated that it simply cannot afford to fund our present service and infrastructural shortfall (which we face from past rampant immigration).  More immigration amounts to insanity. We have no evidence that as a country immigration is profitable in the long term and able to provide the extra demands on our economy that it causes.  Quite the opposite in fact.  Bernard has been in Wellington too long and seems to be loosing his grip on reality like the rest of his neighbors. 

Up
12

More Big Pharma and more indoctrination?  The western world full of obese diabetics no longer knows what health is and education is the indoctrination of our new generation, to fit the globalists agenda.  After all you have to go to college to be successful.... and health is a drug dealing doctor prescribing a pharmaceutical.   Talk about drug addicts.

Up
3

To be fair, I don’t think Bernard is advocating for this level of immigration.

Up
3

Mass unfiltered migration is like McDonalds. Fills you up, and subjectively might taste goodish, but also makes you hungry, fat and prediabetic later on. Anyway, I think we could see net migration more like 1980 for a bit.

Ok here's my tentative predictions for next year:

We're going to be facing continued high inflation, an absolutely rooted property market, some unfortunate building or investment collapses and the worst, a lot of over-leveraged people under real pressure. A lot of the election talking points will be focused on that.

National and ACT will tell us it is Labour's fault, Labour will tell us it wasn't them and tell us we need co-governance in the RBNZ, and the Green party will say we need to tax fast food. 

I think I have covered all bases. 

Up
33

Nicely done.

Up
7

Good article.

Here’s a question - assuming the immigration floodgates were opened, would many people want to come here? There was a survey the other day that said NZ is currently pretty low down the desirability list, largely due to our high cost of living.

I think the answer is despite that survey, yes many would still want to come here, especially from poor, unsafe, corrupt countries such as India and the Philippines. For them, NZ still looks pretty desirable despite our cost of living.

Up
10

Apparently we're rated as the second worst country for new workers/immigrants ... only Kuwait gets a worse rating than us ... it was 50'c there yesterday , so I can understand that ...

Up
1

We cannot pay the true 'cost of living', either globally or locally. The reason we're in the ecological shyte, is that we weren't paying our way, already already.

From here on, increasingly, it will be about survival. And the odds of that are better in NZ, than just about anywhere.

Up
9

... " survival " is for troglodytes  , for cave dwelling Neanderthals  ...

Living , is for human beings ... 

Up
0

Name-calling is for the ignorant.

One hopes this commentator is not site-related.

Up
6

... pot calling the kettle black , cobber !

( P.S. look up your dictionary : the definition of troglodytes is cave dwellers ! ) 

Up
3

I agree, NZ is a pretty warm country, I burn a bit of firewood for about 3months a year , the rest i do not have to heat my house, solar hot water works well most days, I am thinking about a 10kw solar panel setup.  We cook mainly on gas and our power bills are very small.   We have 30 Wilshire sheep and 4 beef cows.  We have a big vege garden I am starting to make work.

Much talk of the need to put EV onto smart chargers today... not sure how we are going to double our generation. Probably needs to be local, ie panels on houses.

Up
2

Nah almost all our electricity comes from some water falling down a hill. We waste most of it at night, plenty to charge some batteries. 

Up
0

I think we all get it. The glass is half empty and we are all going to die.

Up
6

... true ... some of us are too busy enjoying the glass half full to waste our precious time gloomsterising that it's all going to hell in a handcart ... 

Because  : it isn't .

Up
1

Imagine if in 30 years PDK finds out it's all been a beat up and one of the best periods of human existence was wasted because he thought we'd past the peak.

Up
4

... that neatly sums up the last 220 years for followers of Thomas Malthus  .... bless them , their dedication for predicting  woe & misery ... sort of like being an Akld Warriors rugby league fan ... 

Up
2

Time to call this commentator too.

Bullshit.

We have been doing it on the depletion of finite resources, and we've been depleting them best-first.

No amount of self-excusing excuses the responsibility for that.

Malthus was absolutely right. Only the infusion of a one-off pulse of fossil fuels, staved off population-curtailment. We are now, therefore, overshot. Time some folk addressed the truth. We need to be addressing what happens from here on.

Up
5

Nuclear energy.

Up
6

... incredible amounts of potential power available available there ... and zero CO2 emmissions ...

Plus solar ... we're on the cusp of an energy boom ... expect fossil fuels to be stranded assets  as solar & nuclear ramp up ...

Up
3

I mean, pretty obviously we need to move towards renewables, and post consumerism. That's happening in a shattergun fashion.

Most of the growth arguments you're using I find to be less about peak resource and more about the maturation of existing business models.

Everyone's got their own religion I guess.

Up
0

Calling BS on your gloom ridden BS ,  pal ! ...

Up
0

Hi PDK,

I'm a fan of your seemingly impartial view of our forming energy crisis. I notice your comments mostly centre around usage and availability of energy sources however there are also quite shocking demographic factors playing out over the next few decade. For example (amazingly) China's population has peaked and is now expected to half closer to 2050 (rather than 2100 as previously thought), with it's workforce shrinking to a third by then. There is also a major sex imbalance there. Similar factors are happening everywhere and is pulling the brakes on globalization. 

If I were to live anywhere during this century/period it would be here or the USA. But if we bring in bucketloads of people our ability to be self sustaining diminishes.

Up
2

Hope you're happy to get another wave of South Africans - they're on their way: https://businesstech.co.za/news/lifestyle/603542/massive-wave-of-skilled-south-africans-moving-to-new-zealand/

Up
5

I forgot to mention that country - another one that is poor, corrupt and unsafe! Of course NZ would look comparatively desirable!

Up
9

Backdoor to Australia 🦘

Up
12

My Melanesian son in law was celebrating getting his NZ permanent residency earlier this week.  NZ is a better place for having him living here. Obviously my Kiwi daughter and their kiwi daughter need him living in NZ.  Genuine partnership is a valid source of immigrants - over 10k per year.  All other immigrants reveal failures in NZ - a society that doesn't care about citizens in care homes or training sufficient numbers of GPs.

Up
9

There are 106,000 people on the unemployment benefit that could fill low skilled jobs and to many immigrants compromising NZ culture and quality of life.

Up
20

Except for anyone having to employ, work next to, or be served by them.

Up
2

I've worked with someone (Kiwi - been here multiple generations) who managed to get fired from a DHB, mostly due to being the most incompetent person you could ever imagine.  It took the DHB's HR staff two years and multiple rounds of misconduct (including serious misconduct that impacted our service to patients) before they finally fired him, as DHB policy is apparently to bend over backwards to nurture lazy, overpaid incompetent admin staff.  The team manager's strategy during those 2 years was to scale down his responsibilities by offloading almost all his tasks onto other already overloaded team members.  (Mind you, the DHB didn't actually fire him.  They tried to move the guy into a different role that was more in line with his level of functioning and he signed the contracts, but never showed up to his new job.)

My point is: Anyone like that should without a doubt rather be on benefits than sitting around wasting everyone's time and being a massive liability to a team and organisation. 

I kid you not, I'm happy to even help pay for his bennies, as long as he gets out from under my feet so I can get my work done.  The team was much, much better off with one less team member, rather than carrying such a load of dead weight. (It's tempting to say 'brain-dead weight', but am trying my best here to not be too horribly unkind.)

Up
13

Its pretty hard. You need to protect workers from unscrupulous employers, but at the same time it creates a system where youre married to bad workers you have to "manage out".

Up
3

Re-watch " the Sopranos " or " Game of Thrones " if you're in need of ideas on how to " manage out " bad workers  ... 

Up
2

With reference to my little tale of woe above: If the manager had bothered to check his alleged qualifications before appointing him, the whole thing would definitely have played out differently - so don't feel too sorry for her.

Incidentally, she instantly appointed a new team member in his place.  A week after Mr New started, things were going pear-shaped again, so I spent 5 minutes checking the website of the university he allegedly graduated from.  Turns out Mr New didn't have the qualification he claimed to have, so back to square one..

On the plus side, the manager no longer works there (but she did work there for about 40 years).

Up
6

What university is it that publicly publishes student results/degrees?

 

Up
2

Every reputable university that I know of does that. And why shouldn't they?!

Here is where you can find Auckland University's student database: https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/for/current-students/cs-academic-information/cs-graduation-information/cs-graduation-search-and-confirmation.html

If someone has an Auckland Uni degree on their CV/LinkedIn and you can't find it in Auckland's graduate db, the next step is to ask them proof of their qualification.  Students have the option to ask for their names not to be published, although I can maybe think of only one or two scenarios where someone would choose that.  If they can't prove having gradated (e.g. show a degree certificate and academic record), I'd strongly suggest not employing them - I really can't emphasise this enough.

MIT (the one in Manukau, not Massachusetts) is one institution I know of that does NOT provide a student database online, which is just one of the many reasons I don't think much of them. 

Up
9

Wow - I had no idea - great tool.

Up
4

Thanks checked all the degrees were shown from multiple universities for myself, family and staff. Funnily they do not show specializations that show in the course name, and course degree which can be a pretty big difference in STEM and medical fields. So for the 4 of mine they are missing (including the honours level), for my partner though they show only the honours award but not the specialization etc. I guess if the job is just admin & management based most companies hire just knowing they have had some tertiary education most management study is complete rubbish these days. Had one office and they hired a music grad into a management role above engineers and the guy could not even use excel let alone the cloud systems software and deployment tracking applications. But picked up management study courses myself, reviewed the ones across the country and it was all brain dead and completely irrelevant to real business and project management. Any international student studying NZ business courses is not getting an education from it they are getting residency. We need to seriously look at the courses we subsidize and international student courses that are purely for residency.

If they think these pitiful excuses for management courses stack up against any professional study then they really do explain our low productivity, dependence on foreign labour to churn through as staff leave, and our dependency on residential investment as opposed to business investment.

 

Up
0

Back in the day , Canterbury University did so in the Christchurch Press  .... Mummy Gummy was so proud of moi ! ... 

Up
1

Go Gummy! Must have been a sweet moment.

Up
2

... surprised me  , too ... a complete failure at High School ...yet blazed through Lincoln College ( Canterbury Uni ) easily ... the lesson here ... never give up , dig deep , push on  ..

Up
2

Also a bunch sitting on a pension Benefit that is over half our welfare budget who could be gainfully employed.

Up
1

The irony is, many of them are also likely employed in desirable jobs taking the pay rise courtesy of the taxpayer and holding up career advancement for the next generations.  

Up
1

Correction most of those on the unemployment benefit are disabled and have been denied access to work and education for roles they are actually able to do. LETS NOT PRETEND A GUY WITH MUSCULAR DYSTROPHY IN A WHEELCHAIR CAN SUDDENLY BE A FRUIT PICKER, NURSE, OR WAITRESSING THEN CALL HIM LAZY BECAUSE HE PHYSICALLY CANNOT BE ONE. Even skilled engineers are turned away from jobs in NZ while employers cry that there were no NZ applications. All because of the judgement around people with a disability. I know you people like beneficiary bashing but please lets be honest about why over half the households in poverty have a member with a disability, why less than half disabled adults can access work and why near half disabled youth are denied education and training opportunities.

Up
1

New Zealand decided to kill off a significant portion of it's skilled and essential workforce with Labour's tyrannical vaccine mandates.

Plenty more working age people have and are been driven abroad by the insane cost of living and the extreme greed of the housing bubble.

Under co-governance, those born and raised in New Zealand have been demoted to second class citizens while a bunch of unelected racists take control.

Now there is wailing and moaning about not enough workers and tax donkeys to go around.

Boo hoo. Cry us a river. New Zealand is treading the same dark path as South Africa and Zimbabwe towards basket case status.

Up
28

When did you leave Brock? Was it post or pre pandemic. Where do you live now?

Up
1

January 2023 was the date. So only 5 months now, progress is splendid, interest rate is still low, builder is still solvent and on track at 2019 pricing.

Up
1

Old Pa1nter here has huffed too many fumes and become chronologically challenged.

March '23 @ 2021 prices would be more accurate.

Due diligence pays off. Interest rates @ 3.39% I think?  Irrelevant when you don't need to borrow much.

✈️☀️🦘🏡😎✅

Up
5

Rising rates in a flattening market.

Be quick.

Up
1

Be quick for what, exactly?

Up
5

7% interest and a house value that's below the cost to construct?

I don't know how much stress testing you did in your due diligence.

Up
1

It's unlikely, but possible I guess. Not sure why you think it's supposed to bother me?

7% is a problem for those that borrowed to the eyeballs.

Up
1

It wouldn't bother you, because you're a baller.

Some might find paying a hundred bucks or more extra a week for their mortgage irksome. Moan about the government and RBA, etc.

Brox News: Fair, and balanced.

Up
1

That's a really cool story bro.

Is there a coherent train of thought and a point behind your ramblings or have you just forgotten to take your medications again?

Up
3

Although NZ and South Africa are fortunately still worlds apart (I won't even mention Zimbabwe), NZ has been making noteworthy strides on the same dark path, that much is true.

To mention but one example, how ethical is it for Pharmac to fund a diabetes drug for Maori and Pacific patients due to them 'being a priority'?  As in, if you're from any other race of the human race, you're not a priority.

https://pharmac.govt.nz/news-and-resources/news/2021-08-13-media-release-you-are-a-priority/

I believe that race-based policies can only end in tears.

Up
18

I believe that race-based policies can only end in tears.

We have a government and civil service that actively discriminate based on skin colour and ethnicity.

Disgusting doesn't even start to cover it.

Up
10

And we have a private sector that…. 

Up
3

...in my 45 year working career (from the factory floor to the Boardroom in NZ SMEs & a couple of multinationals) generally recognises and rewards exceptional performance irrespective of ethnicity race or gender.

Because if you don't your competition will. That's the key difference with the Public sector monopoly.

 

Up
6

Ok boomer

Up
2

"I'm only responsible for what I say, not for what you understand." - John Wayne

Up
2

Except they don't as much of the biggest earners have been stung for harassment and discrimination based on gender, they knowingly discriminate based on disability and certainly employ race based class stratification. It is why the term old boys club is such a common turn of phrase. It came about because of the rampant discrimination in those industries and just because you have survivorship bias and blindness when it comes to discrimination and social stratification it does not mean we have none. It is a general rule though that if a CEO is caught killing people with their business decisions or with his pants down that his wages are not affected and the company as a collected mass of people still pulls through due to the weight and work of those beneath them... hmm anyway there is generally a lot of being screwed over going on but those underneath it all are still fighting to have a wage, and work the next day even if it does taste awful in their mouth.

Up
0

Argumentum ad Populum is a logical fallacy.

Any evidence from where you have actually worked ?

 

 

Up
0

Sure have been sexually assaulted in one office then stalked and forced to quit by management, assaults and threat from members of public to other staff were common and not managed either (given the former issue no wonder), paid half the rate of the new hire junior I was training beneath me while doing my own more advanced engineering work in another office (they had far less training and skills so I almost had to school them in intro which tripled my workload as I did their work, my work and the work a educator should have done), been denied access to deliver progress reports because women were not allowed into the meetings (exactly as reported by colleagues and manager), been disciplined for pointing out a security breach to management and some manageable solutions when I discovered past staff had been storing customer email account passwords in plain text enabling access to customer email accounts to scrape data and do identity theft (management did nothing and left the breach grow to capture even more customer email passwords).

 

Would you like the additional times where just disability discrimination occurred for 5 engineering employees as well or do you want more personal accounts of employer abuse from me personally because I have yet to go into the civil and mechanical engineering cases (all the above was just from 3 offices over 4 years being forced to leave over threats to safety or severe company lack of ethics worthy of massive legal cases in the US). Note the above examples are not exceptional they are rather common and in other countries where the industry is larger there are cases of thousands of workers being discriminated against directly, physically assaulted, underpaid, bullied, drugged, denied access, denied employment based on merit. You really do not want to touch the engineering industries and it actually a cleaner outside the office when you get to be on the tools and by tools these days it is large manufacturing equipment setups that take limbs or onsite inspections and site management with fans you can lose a bull in.

Up
0

Haha, yeah imagine if society roughly aligned with the colour and social standing of the womb you fell out of.

Oh wait.....

Up
2

Vote out the lefties and get our country back!

Up
1

It’s 2 drugs, empagliflozin and dulaglutide. Both are advances in the management of type 2 diabetes. Access (funding) is significant easier for Maori/Pasifika. Rosuvastatin is now the 3rd drug with an ethnic funding provision. A staple drug for secondary prevention of coronary heart disease. The health care system is biased against non-Maori. Te Kooti you want to chip in and highlight the unconscious racism in our health system? 100s $millions for Maori during COVID-19….all to keep the vocal critics quiet and pockets lined.

Up
9

Oh for goodness sakes - moan, moan, moan, moan, moan.  Have you been denied some sort of treatment or something?  This kind of whakapapa envy is totally weird.  

Up
4

Wow, Kate. Did you read the article I've linked above, the one to which Cheetah is replying?  If yes, you must have misunderstood.

To spell it out, everyone will be denied these Diabetes treatments unless they're a Maori or a Pacific patient, or have already survived a catastrophic event such as a heart attack. So many, many, many Kiwis will and have been denied access to these treatments.  

It would hardly be weird if a widow is upset that her recently deceased hubby had been denied a potentially life-changing drug based on the colour of his skin?  Or is that the kind of scenario you're happy with?

Up
15

.. crikey , Kate : do you believe some are more entitled than others  based on race ? ... surely a robust  healthcare system treats people on a needs must basis ... not on tribal affiliation ...

Up
7

It's a needs based initiative because Māori and Pasifika populations have greater needs/are more susceptible to Type 2 diabetes;  

https://www.healthline.com/health/type-2-diabetes/genetics

We would save the system so much cost in the long run if Type 2 diabetes is controlled/managed early on.  Dialysis and amputation are very expensive outcomes for the whole of society if people with diabetes aren't well managed.  As the woman in the article explained;

Awarau says the shame around having type 2 diabetes is huge. "When I had my toe amputated because of this disease, I was filled with whakamā. My lifestyle has completely changed as a result, but I need medication as well to keep healthy. 

 

Up
2

Of course it is important to manage diabetes well to prevent expensive outcomes for society, but why is this goal more important for Maori and Pacific patients? Indians and South Asians are much more susceptible to diabetes at a younger age too (there are many studies available on this), so why aren't they eligible for these diabetes drugs? (Fine, some of them of them are immigrants, but surely once they have citizenship, or once they have been born in NZ, or somewhere down the line, they should matter too?) 

Once an individual has diabetes, surely the focus should be on optimising health outcomes for that specific patient, regardless of skin colour? No?  

Up
5

so why aren't they eligible for these diabetes drugs?

The article doesn't say that the rest of the population aren't eligible to be prescribed the drugs - they just aren't a part of the targeted out-reach initiative.     

Up
0

OK, fair enough. I've actually seen the eligibility criteria before reading this article and you're right. It's not said explicitly in the article. Here are more details: 

https://pharmac.govt.nz/news-and-resources/consultations-and-decisions/decision-to-fund-two-new-medicines-for-type-2-diabetes/

It works as follows: Pacific and Maori patients with Type 2 diabetes are eligible if they fail treatment on more basic treatment such as metformin.

But if you're non-Maori or non-Pacific, you're only eligible if you're a Type 2 diabetic failing on stuff like metaformin and

  1. if you have already had (and, of course managed to survive) a prior cardiovascular disease event (i.e., angina, myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, coronary artery bypass grafting, transient ischaemic attack, ischaemic stroke, peripheral vascular disease), congestive heart failure or familial hypercholesterolemia. 
  2. Alternatively, you must have persistent albuminuria (albumin:creatinine ratio greater than or equal to 3 mg/mmol, in at least two out of three samples over a 3-6 month period) and/or eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73m2 in the presence of diabetes, without alternative cause.)

So the best current advice for non-Maori/non-Pacific patients who could benefit from these meds is to wait patiently till after your heart attack or stroke.

Up
5

You missed an additional two criteria for eligibility for non-Maori and non-Pasifika;

- Patient has an absolute 5-year cardiovascular disease risk of 15% or greater according to a validated cardiovascular risk assessment calculator; or

- Patient has a high lifetime cardiovascular risk due to being diagnosed with type 2 diabetes during childhood or as a young adult; 

For all intents and purposes, anyone needing the drugs (i.e., not well managed by existing treatments) will receive the subsidy, and there is a particular targeted out-reach programme to bring more awareness to our Māori and Pasifika populations.  And that makes perfect sense.

 

Up
0

And do you know what is needed for a patient to be assigned an absolute 5-year cardiovascular disease risk of 15% or greater according to a validated cardiovascular risk assessment calculator?  Most patients (not all, as familial hereditary conditions also come into play) would have needed to survive a serious cardiovascular catastrophe to get that score, just as I've mentioned.  I've simplified the criteria a bit to make it simpler and less tedious to understand.

Frankly, Kate, you clearly do not have a good understanding of the field of medicine and have not been involved in discussions on the criteria for these drugs with other health professionals, so it is a bit tedious arguing over this with you.

The targeted out-reach programme is another matter.

The fact is that these two drugs are the first drugs in NZ that have race-based criteria. It will be denied to many patients based on race in scenarios where Maori and Pacific patients will be funded. 

 

Up
4

Kate, let me make this very simple.

1. PHARMAC who decide what drugs are funded now has easier access to funded medicines for Maori.

2 . Do you think it is fair an Indian or Chinese person might not receive funding whilst a Maori or Pasifika does?

No. I have no Whakapapa envy. I stand on my own feet and take ownership for my outcome despite having a very working class family background.

Up
12

In an ideal world everyone is treated the same. But we don't live in an ideal world. The fact is that Maori and Pasifika are treated differently to others by way of practitioner bias ie. Doctors' treatment plans of patients are based on their internal stereotypes/bias of a race

I work in allied health and even I, aware of this problem (and of Pasifika decent) have to constantly check myself when offering a treatment plan to a patient. A good example is having to refer someone for specialist advice and assuming they don't have the money for a private referral and therefore not offering it as an option.

So until this problem doesn't exist the example you provided wrt access to drugs will continue. 

Up
2

… some animals are more equal than others

Up
9

Mate you should go to Murupara and get a consultation there… plenty of Maori there so I’m sure you’ll get a good GP

Up
2

It is the patient that needs to be Maori/Pacific to get funded empagliflozin / dulaglutide.  So how is going to a Maori GP going to help?

Up
3

I was being facetious…. Google Murapara and GP and you will see what I’m talking about

Murapara is Ngati Manawa territory with a whack job GP wanting to give them invermectim for covid

Up
3

Ah, thanks gnx.  I now get that you're talking about that GP who is a complete whack job.  

Up
2

Would it not just be easier to change your diet.  Hint.  It's the refined sugar.  Big Pharma to the rescue again $$$.

Up
2

Nah, a shocking number of people just want a quick fix and find changing their diets to be a long, hard, inconvenient slog.  But yes, you're spot on if you change the question to: "Would it not just be way, way, way better to change your diet?". 

Lifestyle changes are in general a far superior option that comes with a much lower price tag, not to mention loads of positive side effects as opposed to a Russian roulette game of negative side effects.

Honestly, a case could possibly be made for saying you disadvantage patients by lightly prescribing them potent drugs in cases where this might destroy their motive to at least try and improve their current lifestyles (or rather, deathstyles) first.

Up
4

Most foods are problematic. Think of all food staples and those carbohydrates, then take them out as they are harmful for those with diabetes, work with a budget that cannot afford fresh produce and meat and what you are left with is often something similar to mung beans. Lots and lots of legumes which is medically problematic for many with gut issues which those who have diabetes are prone to. In fact most marketed healthy foods are exceptionally problematic and prohibitively expensive. Even hospitals serve highly carbohydrate and sugar heavy foods that many patients cannot eat at all because they have medical conditions that will cause severe medical outcomes if they do. Meals on wheels for the elderly is worse. Many healthy marketed diets are high in allergens and oxalates, expensive and low on availability. So immune system issues, financial and access all play a part.

Then lets get to the other forms of diabetes commonly slotted in with type 2 discrimination, those auto immune, those pregnant, those elderly with diabetes etc. Now unlike limited cases of type 2 where diet can cure most with diabetes are not cured yet they still face the societal stigma of being blamed for medical conditions they did not cause and struggle to live with day to day. Go figure

 

Up
1

Boo hoo cry us a river. Those disabled and elderly you seem so keen on killing with your lack of basic medical ethics funnily enough would like to not be harmed by those performing medical care and who could blame them. Less than a generation before it was socially acceptable to imprison, beat, rape, electrocute, pull teeth and further torture the disabled and maori kids just for their birth so it is no surprise that medical ethics is kind of a bigger deal to them nowadays. Even though nowadays it is still socially acceptable to deny them education, housing, income and general living needs. You talk about discrimination when all you are doing is being an elitist drama queen with all the social benefits not available to those you would harm with your lack of medical ethics. Come back when you get a clue what discrimination actually is and learn at least about as much medical ethics as we would expect a child to know.

Up
0

Not directly related to Bernard's opinion here, I will be joining a conference 'ASEAN Forum 2022: Accelerating Towards 2023', which is being put together with a view towards NZ business. Some things about the conference concern me about the current attitudes in NZ:

-- Most of those speaking come from a govt or institutional background. They come with strategies, etc about NZ Inc. Not one speaker comes from a business background within ASEAN. This is not a dig against orgns like NZTE, etc but to be honest, they're not that groundbreaking and are little more than glossy brochures for NZ business. 

-- There is no real defined focus for the conference. Everything is broadly defined - keynote, business - so it's almost impossible to understand what the point is. 

The point of this is that it points out what I see is a kind of stasis on ideas. Resources are dedicated to blah, blah, blah; not to anything concrete. It makes me really wonder has the desire and courage to change.   

Up
2

Are you surprised ?

Up
2

We are so far away from our infrastructure needs we could stop immigrants for 10 years before we catch up 

Up
18

Or use bribes to increase emigration.

Up
2

... our emigration policy is called " Australia " ...

No bribes required , just stump up the cash for a one-way ticket ...

Up
3

do you mean paying all the moaners and haters to leave and revoke their citizenship?

Up
1

Migrating to New Zealand? Well, according to this survey, migrants are not that impressed with NZ:

100% pure rip-off? New Zealand voted second-worst place to move to | New Zealand | The Guardian

With labour shortages all around the OECD, migrants may well have better choices and chances to make a living than here, particularly at the so wanted lower end of the pay scale. Wanted by NZ employers that is.

And should a migrant after a few years/decades working in NZ decide to move away from NZ and work in another country (other than Australia), then those years of contributing to NZ Super will be lost. NZ Super is not portable, not even pro-rata, and the new home country will only pay pensions for the years worked there.

Overall, I get the impression NZ does not look that attractive to make a new life and living with a future. Unless you are rich and don't care about "little things like money". Then it's absolutely beautiful and amazing here!

 

Up
4

Imagine how we feel having worked and paid tax for 50 years and then you receive the same pension as an immigrants mother who has never worked a day in NZ in their life.  You can blame they right for the lack of proper transferable pension.

Up
6

I can't get as excited about any immigration as Bernard: I go for a steady state, keeping us at 5 million people. Why would we want to increase New Zealand's population when we know the globe is damned near dying of overpopulation, heading towards 10,000,000,000.

It's clear we need a short-term boost to our state health services, and that will mean improving the salaries and employment conditions of nurses, doctors, and other medical specialists to match what they can get in Australia.

But beyond that, the answer is to revive our education services and train rather than import.

Here, however, is more from Bernard Hickey on the same topic:

When the Facts Change: Time to pull the migration lever?
Businesses, hospitals and the opposition are pleading for a loosening of migrant worker restrictions to ease the intense labour shortages that are forcing cancellations and jury-rigged services up and down the motu. On this episode of When the Facts Change, Bernard Hickey sits down to interview Productivity Commission chair Ganesh Nana to find out if a migration surge would solve our productivity problem, and why any decision to pull the migration lever must also look to pull the infrastructure investment lever.
https://thespinoff.co.nz/live-updates/15-07-2022/when-the-facts-change-…

Up
16

There seems to be a mentality amongst NZers to shut down immigration at any cost. Labour recognised this and have had a populist, anti immigration stance for most of their tenure. And yet we are seeing the dire consequences of it. Businesses and public services failing because they can’t get the people they desperately need and we get rampant wage inflation to boot. There’s evidence of it everywhere. Yes, infrastructure’s a problem but using it as an excuse to confine us to a low productivity, bottom of the OECD performer is non sensical. And there plenty of evidence elsewhere of the same. Look at the UK post Brexit - it’s in a parlous state.

Up
1

Be sure to tell your boss you are anti rampant wage inflation. I think it's a great idea to keep up with CPI inflation to at least maintain your standard of living. 

Up
4

Or cause the CPI inflation. Wage inflation very rarely comes out the winner.

Up
1

Troll article. No one in NZ voted for the last million to arrive and the super banking profits to exit NZ as a result. Immigration of anything over replacement levels should have an electotal mandate.

Up
25

If you think that's bad imagine how the Tangata Whenua felt.

Up
3

He is a person of the land.

Up
2

Within 18 years of signing Te Tiriti, Europeans outnumbered Māori.  Yes, imagine that.

Up
1

That's because the carrying capacity of NZ, ex fossil energy, was already overshot BEFORE Europeans arrived. Likewise, the US was ecologically 'full', in 1870. Long before the Titanic sailed.

The cranial failure, is when people fail to account for the fact that their rates of consumption are unmaintainable. They seem not to understand that depletion ceases - that it is no basis for continuity.

We should have had that debate, but the media (and obfuscators, and I'm yet to be convinced a shrill commenter upthread isn't both) have smeared things with a lot of falsehood(s).

Time to put the pressure on.

Up
1

Bravo, you are entirely correct. The plantation economy of importing the entire world for cheap labour is driven by the disgusting economics and politics of neoliberalism. And we should push back on it.

Up
2

At this point I'm fairly sure the infrastructure lever isn't connected to anything at the other end. Governments could promise the earth but the only speed New Zealand infrastructure moves at is very slow.

This should be the end of low value, high volume emigration. If we need more doctors, nurses, engineers or developers we should up-skill some of the low value, low productivity workers already in the country.

Up
7

And that’s the crux of the problem….

we aren’t  doing what is right for the country

we are doing what the banks want

and that’s more growth

tough luck if it’s four hours waiting at a&e or eight

more people more lending

the more unaffordable the houses the better

Up
16

I think we've really turned a hard corner on immigration sentiment. Businesses leaders aren't even pretending this is a skills argument any more, they just want low wage workers but only because they don't have to suffer the negative externalities associated with those policies.

Up
14

We need:

a) A population strategy based on maximising wellbeing (economic+social+environmental) per capita growth.  This should be agreed between the political parties. It would mean low immigration given the housing hole we are in, and the total emissions (not per capita) targets we have.

b) The population strategy would set the rolling 12 month immigration quota.  Businesses would have to bid for the immigrants, leaving them the choice to train new zealanders instead.

c) The government requiring the reserve bank to put direct housing costs back in to the CPI.  Housing is the biggest consumer good and should not have been removed.  Interest rates would have never dropped so low if housing had been retained in the CPI.  With interest rates having been so low we have an overheated economy and overdemand for employees.

d) We need to amalgamate the councils into much larger economic unitary authorities, regulate them to provide the 3 waters to standard, and give the largest (Auckland, Wellington, Christchurch) the right to impose congestion charges and water charges.

Up
7

'wellbeing (economic+social+environmental) per capita growth. '

Oxymoron, plural.

Economic is what has causes environmental degradation, nothing else. Growth was what took it to life-threatening levels. We are orders-of-magnitude overshot, so logic says we have to go BELOW stasis until those things we've over-hammered (atmospheric CO2-absorption-capability, etc) revert to safe levels.

Means we have to go BELOW levels of activity - and in realistic terms, of population - before allowing levels to rise to sustainable. Mother Nature will do that for us anyway; overshoot always precedes crash in the natural world.

Up
3

“Just pulling one lever would only embed and worsen the high-population-growth, low-productivity-growth, low-wage, low-investment and high-house-price model NZ Inc has become.” - sounds good, just let us know to all go and buy some investment properties beforehand this time. 

Up
2

Wow, a reminder of how disgusting and warped the world views of economists are.

I don't give a shit for GDP, it is an imaginary accounting number which does nothing for me. How about no more immigration and we focus on investing in infrastructure during the recession to come?

Up
6

Investing in infrastructure.  Sure it is not more deficit government spending, debt fueled growth.

Time for a clean out, let the tide go out and we will see who has swim trunks on.

Up
2

"Opposition leader Christopher Luxon said this week Aotearoa-NZ should pull the immigration lever urgently." The stupid is strong with this one. Of course it went so well last time, why wouldn't you keep bashing your head against the wall? Cult thinking at its finest. 

Up
4

I get the impression Luxon just doesn't think deeply about any policy issues at all. Just another salesman with a childhood ambition to be PM. 

Up
10

Bi-partisan. You must be joking.

Up
1

"The migration lever will then be pulled, either in desperation before the election by Labour, or by National once in power. The same infrastructure-lite approach will be taken by the Government that starts inflating house prices again and leads us back to where we were just before the pandemic."

Like it or not, the young go on an OE, our talents like Hayley W, end up in London or elsewhere. Job opportunities are likely better in Aussie. And houses is far too expensive.

Will a positive net migration mean an increase in house prices, I don't know. Not after "foreign buyers", "lack of supply", "returning kiwis"..... coupled with media reports from +ve median prices, plight of FHBs.

For about two years, the RE agent was right about the "bid the highest that you can afford", in a rising market. Today, reality hits, that prices do fall.

Up
1

  > Now, our population isn’t growing nearly as fast

Might have something to do with the cost of living. I know many people 25-30+ holding off on having kids for financial reasons.

Up
4

With that attitude most people would never have kids. Just as well earlier generations generally made the best with what they had.

Up
1

So we ignore our productivity and infrastructure crises and just  import more cheap unskilled labour.  Remember this from 2021...

A new publication released today by the New Zealand Productivity Commission reveals that New Zealanders work longer hours: 34.2 hours per week compared with 31.9 hours per week in other OECD countries. And New Zealanders produce less: $68 of output per hour, compared with $85 of output per hour in other OECD countries.

And ..

New Zealand has a way to go before we pull ourselves up the international rankings. Chart 2 shows the latest non-dwelling investment figures for a range of countries for 2018. New Zealand lies in the bottom half of the pack, which is a fair reflection of our longer-term performance. Several countries with a lower GDP per capita regularly spend more on non-dwelling construction, including Chile and Estonia – countries that are hardly recognised as economic powerhouses.

Probably nz could aim to get to the bottom of the productivity and infrastructure lists too (on top if low rankibgs for choosing NZ as a place  to live, rugby, affordable housing... ).

Surely sooner or later we have to face up to the real issues... before we compoud them beyond repair

Up
4