[Closed] The PM of NZ and priorities

I have long admired (in my limited knowledge) <span style="font-size: 0.8rem;">what  Jacinda Ardern is doing in NZ and do think other politicians could take a leaf out her book. That said my admiration is based on what press over here report and I don’t really know what the people of NZ think of her but she does seem to be doing a decent job and taking a different approach to lots of things.  She is alright in my book.</span>

I wish.

I'm ****ing sick of hearing about the economy at all the time. I get it's relevant at the moment because half the country's suddenly doing nack all, but it snows - lost productivity, it floods - insurance industry pay outs. Money, money, money. I'm sure someone will be along to remind us of where our pensions come from but money's not the only thing that'll put a smile on your face. In all likelihood it's the pursuit of money that wipes it off in the first place.

I wish we had Ardern driving our bus and not that Etonian dingbat.

She has a lot of good ideas, but also some fairly suspect ones. Cutting about in a hijab for example wasn't a great move. I was fairly moved listening to Yasmine Mohammed explain what that meant to her.

Also I don't think there is a direction in which she/NZ is going. It gets disproportionally reported in our press because they speak English. In global terms it's like getting excited about Latvia's brave new foreign policy or Portugal's election.

Not just NZ. Iceland are in

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-50650155

Hopefully the start of new direction. Little steps but maybe we are in the twilight years of capitalism

Not going to jump on the Ardern bandwagon, as she's had some issues, but the UN has been doing the World Happiness Report since 2012. That said, there are happy people in shite countries and unhappy people in countries that top the Happiness report.

The problem is everyone likes to say "wouldn't it be great if everyone wasn't chasing money all the time?".

When what they actually mean is "wouldn't it be great if everyone else wasn't chasing money all the time, so I and everyone I think is slightly more deserving could get slightly ahead?"

Whether your a Jerremy Corbyn thinking it could be done for everyone below the average line. Or Jacob Reese Mogg thinking how to squeeze poor people a bit harder so his ohh so clever and hard working hedge fund chums can get a new mega yacht. No one is actually thinking:

"I wish the world was actually a bit less affordable for me". Because if they did, they could do it, but most people don't. You don't need the government to tell you to work a bit less hard, take a pay cut and move to a smaller house.

You don’t need the government to tell you to work a bit less hard, take a pay cut and move to a smaller house.

Funny enough, I’ve just decided that for myself, and when others told me I needed a bigger house, refused to move. /smug

NZ is far from anywhere and has the luxury of it being a difficult place to get to. Even so, the NZ govt initially dragged its feet on closing the border and plenty of covid cases returned from overseas.

Meanwhile the govt closed pretty much every business for 5 weeks and the economy is going to hell in a hand basket. meanwhile jacinda gets on tv every day and says soothing words.

NZ has seen its main income earner, tourism collapse, so there are going to be some very tough times for the people of that country

Was that not partly the point of the OP’s comment? That the success or otherwise of policy isn’t just judged by measurables in the economy? Of course measures taken have had an economic impact in the short term, but they are saving lives and possibly better preparing the country to move out of the most drastic measures sooner and more safely than, ahem, some other places.

In many ways the UK and the US are outliers on this. The nordic countries and much of europe has gone in a different direction to us over the last 40 years

I am disgusted by what England has become and how it has dragged the UK down

Tinas - there are an awful lot of us that do not think that way. That believe in public service and in improving the lot of our fellows

In many ways the UK and the US are outliers on this. The nordic countries and much of europe has gone in a different direction to us over the last 40 years

I am disgusted by what England has become and how it has dragged the UK down

Damnit I'm going to have to agree with TJ.

As ever, different countries all lie on a spectrum from some perceived NZ type paradise at one end to the US at the other.

I would add that I'm disgusted at what maybe a third of the English have done to drag us all down, and the apathy of the other third who have enabled it to happen.

I'm an Australian, and also a Brit.

I think the reason people like Jacinda (including me - I think she's great), is because she seems to be smart, compassionate, and above all: competent.

All of which seem to be conspicuously lacking it both the UK and Australia's current crop of politicians. People can clearly see what they are missing.

John_Key Member

NZ is far from anywhere and has the luxury of it being a difficult place to get to. Even so, the NZ govt initially dragged its feet on closing the border and plenty of covid cases returned from overseas.

True, but the majority of those returning were NZ citizens who were overseas and were at risk of being stranded overseas. Everyone coming in was initially required to self-isolate; those returning in later weeks had to go into full isolation. The vast majority of NZ cases were from those returning overseas, and they have been largely contained due to the lockdown - there are very few cases of community transmission.

Meanwhile the govt closed pretty much every business for 5 weeks and the economy is going to hell in a hand basket. meanwhile jacinda gets on tv every day and says soothing words.

NZ has seen its main income earner, tourism collapse, so there are going to be some very tough times for the people of that country

The government didn't close pretty much every business - hyperbole doesn't help in discussions on subjects like this. A lot of people did have to stop work with essentially no notice, while a lot of the workforce has been working from home or soldiering on in adverse conditions due to being essential workers. Around half the economy has been shut down - rough estimate from a recent interview with your namesame Sir J.K. (unless that's actually you!!??? 🤔 😁) but even he reckons the gov has basically done ok. I'd be interested to hear how you think Jacinda & co could have done things any better with regard to tourism, the only other option would be to keep letting people in from countries where C19 is nowhere near under control. What has been done was extremely damaging, but I think is still the lesser of two evils.

meanwhile jacinda gets on tv every day and says soothing words.

To be fair, that is kind of the PM's job in a crisis. Can you imagine Simon Bridges up there instead? I have nothing against National but Bridges is a twerp whose first istinct is to nay-say whatever Labour are doing, regardless of the situation. He came out with some nonsense about two days into the lockdown, and clearly got a bollocking from the party and told to change his tune as he was coming across a a dickhead. His later comments were a bit more appropriate for a party leader. And I know, he's leader of the oppostion so it's his job to hold the govt to account, but he does it in a whiney, sour-grapes way. There's an art to criticizing the opposition while sounding measured and like you could have done things better - after the afore-mentioned bollocking he got it right, but it doesn't come naturally to him.

batfink Subscriber

I’m an Australian, and also a Brit.

I think the reason people like Jacinda (including me – I think she’s great), is because she seems to be smart, compassionate, and above all: competent.

I think one of her best attributes is that she seems to be in politics for the right reasons, i.e. making things better. You know that saying that anyone who's actively seeking power probably shouldn't have it? Or words to that effect. She'd kind of the opposite, i.e. she has a manner (humility?) that says she's not doing whatever she's doing for the glory, but because she actually cares. Hard to put into words - lack of ego perhaps?

She’s done a good job which is no surprise as she is a good leader and starting to form a bit of a legacy. However, I’m not going to say it’s simple in Nz but as an island with easily controlled international borders, 4 actually outside Ports, cutting the string makes life easier.
Bear in mind that Tourism is something like 10% of GDP and places like Queenstown exist purely for international tourists, they ditched locals a long time ago, the impact in an already quite poor population will be deep and long. I know Ngai Tahu have essentially halved their workforce and things like the Shotover Jet are closed poss not to return. Domestic travel will thrive and if they can bubble with Oz then that opens up 20 odd million Ozzies that travel elsewhere so some bright light in the horizon. Do not ever underestimate the levels of poverty, DV and social imbalance in that population. It’s not oft reported in the Telegraph or Times travel supplements but in places like BoO and East Cape if the export markets for meat or wood soften then they will be decimated. Yes it’s lovely , yes Jacinda puts a human face to it but no it’s not nirvana and has a lot of challenges.

Tinas – there are an awful lot of us that do not think that way. That believe in public service and in improving the lot of our fellows

Read back my post. Because that was pretty much my point.

Measuring sucess based on gross national happiness is all well and good. But if everyone downed tool on Thursday to spend more time eith their families then sonething has to give, you cant pay the NHS with a bit of happy clapping. Want to knock a third off your working week and still maintain the same standard of living would only work if you get rid if whatever that 30% paid for. Which for most people is probably their tax bill.

Reductio ad absurdum:

If the country decides it wants to go back to an episode of the good life to reduce its stress levels, then we would also have to accept Medieval health care and that things like bikes couldnt be bought with the new happiness credits.

Socialism isn't bad, I can't imagine ever voting otherwise, but if everyone decided to cut their work by even a small percent in pursuit of another metric then that would be a big hit to the economy. Otherwise you just end up in that aniti-communist trope that without incentive some people wont work and others shoulder an ever increasing burden.

The modern world is a zero sum game, a very big and very complicated sum, but at the end of it if the economy shrinks you do need to chose between your alturistic luxuries like cancer drugs or income suppourt, either work harder and pay more taxes or vote the other way for austerity.

thisisnotaspoon
...but if everyone decided to cut their work by even a small percent in pursuit of another metric then that would be a big hit to the economy.

Are we not already operating under even worse conditions? How does our economy benefit by all the tax evaded by mega corps?

If they paid their share of the infrastructure costs of this country we could lighten the load on the ordinary person.

If we devoted the same amount of resources to pursuing them as we do to persecuting the welfare dependent poor and vulnerable, maybe we could cut our working weeks.

The 8 day was supposedly impossible once. Maybe it's time we got the benefit of all the work reducing technology too.

As for NZ's PM, what I like about her is the lack of a string connecting her to the likes of the big money party donors so she acts in the interests of her country and its people, not foreign corporations and financiers.

Are we not already operating under even worse conditions? How does our economy benefit by all the tax evaded by mega corps?

If they paid their share of the infrastructure costs of this country we could lighten the load on the ordinary person.

I dunno, that in itself is a zero sum, if starbucks and vodafone actually paid their share of tax then would that not just mean the money isnt somewhere else (a slightly more expensive coffee and phone bill). It wouldnt be 1:1 but I can appreciate the argument that if you recouped 100% of the tax they morally owe rather than whats technically owed then 90% of that would probably come from somehwere other than a Scrooge McDuck style vault.

If your phone bill went up by a £9 to cover £10 of vodafones tax bill, you'd be a £9 worse off unless the government could also reduce your income tax by £10 otherwise you're worse off.

Should they pay more tax, yes. What actuall difference to tax recipts for HMRC would it eventually make, Im less sure about. But it would allow smaller companies to compete on a more even basis.

Also, we're back down that "if everyone else paid more tax I could work less and be happier" rabbit hole.

Tinas - we are a ow tax economy. If we paid more tax as a nation and if we removed tax avoidence that sucks money out of our economy we could have a fairer society with better public services - that would make this nation a happier place. Other countries manage this. They have much lower levels of inequality and thus happier societies.

Can I just mention the Jacinda is really fit?

I think the reason people like Jacinda (including me – I think she’s great), is because she seems to be smart, compassionate, and above all: competent.

Indeed. You don't have to believe that she's perfect in order to believe that she's a hell of a lot better than our political leadership.

Impressed that we got a former prime minister of NZ posting on this thread! @John_Key

The modern world is a zero sum game, a very big and very complicated sum

And the levers that control who benefits and at the expense of who in this zero sum game are policy decisions** that are weighted hugely in favour of the free-market and economic growth. From what I can tell Ardern/NZ are looking to retune those policy mechanisms to take into account more than just economic growth as a measure of success.

** (policy decisions are ultimately defined in a democracy by society at the ballot box but that's a different discussion)

we are a ow tax economy. If we paid more tax as a nation and if we removed tax avoidence that sucks money out of our economy we could have a fairer society with better public services – that would make this nation a happier place. Other countries manage this. They have much lower levels of inequality and thus happier societies.

Does that argument stack up though? Sweden for example get's mentioned a lot but has a higher tax rate on those earning £25k (i.e. just below the UK average)? although yes it does have much higher tax rates on those earning >£100k.

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/may/27/tax-britons-pay-europe-australia-us

And the levers that control who benefits and at the expense of who in this zero sum game are policy decisions** that are weighted hugely in favour of the free-market and economic growth. From what I can tell Ardern/NZ are looking to retune those policy mechanisms to take into account more than just economic growth as a measure of success.

Which is fine, but then you have to accept that if you don't get that ~2% growth next year, then your NHS isn't 2% better than it was either, those workers don't get their 2% pay rise etc etc.

If you don't at least try and peg your economy to the rate of inflation then your standard of living drops. Money might not make you happy, but I can guarantee a lack of it has the potential to make you pretty miserable.

Look at this league table, America is wayyyyy more right wing than us, and happier.

Swizerland, maybe chocolate, fondue, watches and decent mountain biking offset the ability to hide and launder your money.

Netherlands, the country that gives us the Dutch Sandwich tax avoidance scheme.

yes it does stack up. Relative levels of inequality is a huge indicator of happiness in a society - for those at both ends of the pay scale - not income. So even if most of us ended up with lower incomes, lower inequality and high quality public services mean a happier society.

Which is fine, but then you have to accept that if you don’t get that ~2% growth next year, then your NHS isn’t 2% better than it was either, those workers don’t get their 2% pay rise etc etc.

Or maybe you go for 1% economic growth and something else that is harder to put on a spreadsheet. No one's saying abandon the economy.

Economic growth is not necessarily filtered down to benefit those on lower incomes. If we did we wouldn't need to pay the income support element of UC. Why don't companies pay a relative living wage? Especially when managers and CEO's are sitting on property and savings and spending their pound in the Alps. CEO's aren't just paid what the market will bear, they're paid what the culture will accept.
Jacinda seems to have recognised that they cannot rely on tourism to boost the economy and is investing in its citizens instead. Her campaign manifesto was centered around improving welfare and reducing poverty, the pandemic has allowed her to push through with those ideas. They are going to come out of this a lot stronger than the UK, a clap won't improve anything for your Amazon delivery driver as Bezos squirrels away our economic growth.

No Derek Starship, you can't. Thanks.

There's a lot of comments on this thread that I agree with, but to be fair I also want a bigger house and more money....and even worse there's only 2 countries in the top 15 happiest that I would have any interest in living in, and even then only as a second home destination.

I'm pretty much with TINAS on this - I think it is a much more nuanced and balanced argument than is sometimes presented. If it wasn't then we would have found the perfect solution a long time ago, and we haven't.

we would have found the perfect solution a long time ago, and we haven’t.

Depends who 'we' is.

We society?
We the educated middle classes?
We the leaders?

One of 'em seems to have nailed it.