ALL CONTEMPT AND NO RESPONSIBILITY

Now here’s an interesting article;

Māori have 'gone back like a beaten wife to the abuser',defiant Marama Fox says [Maori TV, www.stuff.co.nz]

Oops, and here’s another;

Te Ururoa Flavell won't be part of a Māori Party revival [ELTON RIKIHANA SMALLMAN, stuff.co.nz]

Well, the Maori Party has been booted out of the New Zealand parliament, in last weekend’s general election.  And wait . . . the leaders are ripping into their own voters!

For my international readers, let me set some context before I go any further.  We had a general election on Saturday.  New Zealand’s proportional representation system (MMP) gives us two votes (two ticks on the ballot paper); one for your preferred MP (Electorate Vote), and the other for your preferred party (Party Vote).  To complicate things further, the country has two, parallel electoral roles; 

• the general role, where the country is divided into 64 electorates for all New Zealand voters,
• the Maori role, where the country is divided into 7 Maori electorates for Maori voters or voters of Maori descent.

Voters can vote in either role, but must choose which role they wish to vote in by registering in one or the other before the election.  Traditionally, the Maori Party has contested only the seven Maori seats in the Maori role.  However, anyone can vote for the Maori Party in the general role by giving it their “Party Vote.”  The Party Vote is crucial, because for any party to sit in parliament, that party must secure 5% of the vote or win at least one electorate seat.  While Maori could win seven electorate seats, they could have “topped up” those seats with a higher percentage party vote.  However, the Maori Party reached none of the two thresholds, and is thus now consigned to the political wilderness for the next three years.  So, how did that happen?

Well, Maori Party Co-Leader, Marama Fox, is bemoaning the fact that Maori voters have sided with the mainstream Labour Party again, as they did before the Maori Party was formed.  Labour NZ contested and won all seven seats in the Maori role, thereby sending the Maori Party back to obscurity.  A bitter Fox likened the Maori shift back to Labour, “like a beaten wife [gone back] to the abuser.”  Maori Party Co-Leader, Te Ururoa Flavell, was equally resentful;

“[Flavell] said Māori may have shot themselves in the foot by going with Labour.  If it does turn bad for Māori voters, Flavell said don't call him for a shoulder to cry on.  ‘I hope they don't wake up tomorrow and start shaking their heads, saying, I feel sorry for you, because I don't want to hear it.’”

Call me old fashioned, but it’s incredibly bad form for politicians to slam into their support base – even if what they say is the truth.  Astute political leaders shrug off such political shifts by praising democracy then using words like, “We’ll have to do better next election.”  Kicking Maori, the way Fox and Flavell have done, shows remarkable immaturity, naivety and a distinct lack of political shrewdness.

Frankly, I have no sympathy for Fox and Flavell (pictured above); the Maori Party sold its soul for a few crumbs.  It was invited into government by the ruling National Party - when National had no need to do so.  I think it's fair to say that, the National Party is the party representing the New Zealand establishment; the wealthy, the business leaders, the civil servants and the corporations.  So the invite by National was a brilliant piece of counter-thrust politics; a stroke of John Key genius.  Maori were lulled into thinking they would secure more progress for the Maori people by being in government than in opposition.  In reality, the right-wing National government silenced the most radical party in parliament by wooing them with trinkets and false promises.

Well my friends, when you bed with the devil, there’s always a price.  I think voter shift back to Labour had nothing to do with the Jacinda Ardern effect.  I think Maori voters punished the Maori Party for cuddling up to the right-wing hacks.  Maori voters clearly perceived no value from the relationship with the monetarists.  All those years of spreading their cheeks for the National Party, and what was to show for it?  Maori are still over-represented in prisons, in obesity, in unemployment, in poverty and in domestic abuse figures. No sign of any change there soon.

On Duncan Garner's AM Show this morning, a whining Fox tried to explain what had been acheived by cuddling up to the establishment.  She bleated that every Law passed while Maori were part of Government had Treaty of Waitangi clauses in it. Well, big deal!  If I was a disenfranchised Maori voter, living on the breadline, I wouldn't see the value either!  I'd also stick two fingers up at the party which was supposed to represent me. I think that, sadly, the Maori Party in recent years has represented the Maori establishment - who really benefit from lucrative Treaty settlements - rather than the average Maori in the street.  No wonder Maori went back to Labour!

Fox and Flavell’s lack-of-contrition and contempt for their own people is bad enough.  However, their unwillingness to take responsibility for the party’s demise is nothing short of repugnant.  They've taken no responsibility for siding with the neoliberals, taken no responsibility for failing Maori, and taken no responsibility for the real reason Maori voters see a better deal in Labour.  Did the Maori leaders really believe their unholy alliance with the monetarists would have no consequences?!

Why am I also bitter about the Maori Party’s demise?  I'm bitter, because there aren’t enough radical parties in New Zealand’s parliament.  Before the Maori Party went into bed with the devil, I thought they were a party with some good, radical ideals which this country needed.  This country needs radicalism.  We’re not going to turn back 40 years of monetarism with faint hearts and lovely speeches about “values.”  Only radical politics and taxing the rich will put an end to the dreadful consumerism and inequality that has been the hallmark of monetarist economics.  But clearly, New Zealand voters don’t want to hear that.  It might be bad form for a politician to slam into their electorate, but I have no such remit or compunction.  New Zealand voted for a born-to-rule sheepshagger and an extra $20 a week.

Crumbs from the rich man’s table [Luke 16:21].

 Further Reading;

Mike Hosking says he 'confused' the Māori Party by sayingonly Māori could vote for them

 

Mike Hosking offers 'clarification' over his Maori Partyvoting comments on Seven Sharp

Māori Party founder Dame Tariana Turia plans return to helpsave the party

Winston Peters hints at backing down over Māori seats

WHAT PRICE LOYALTY, NEW ZEALAND?

Now here’s an interesting article:

“Made in NZ - do you buy into it?” [Nikki MacDonald, Stuff, July 2013]

I de-based myself today.  I went lower than I ever thought it was possible to go.  No, I didn’t buy instant coffee.  Worse; I bought a bottle of Australian wine.  

Now, here in New Zealand, buying Aussie wine is a bit like an American buying an AK-47.  It’s not yet a crime, but it’s pretty bad, eh?

Before you grab your torch and pitchfork, here me out: I bought on price.  The simple fact is that Australian red wines are – by and large – cheaper than our own wines here in Godzone.  As I was looking at the expensive NZ wines, I thought to myself for the first time, “What loyalty do I owe these companies?”

When I was growing up in the UK, I remember the advertising campaign that seemed to run for years; “British goods mean British jobs.”  This was a reflection that cheaper goods were starting to filter in from Taiwan, Japan and China.  The reality was that – to pay British workers a fair wage – British goods were more expensive than those from the Far East.  And we accepted that in good faith.  Indeed, it’s still a wonder today, that Chinese factories can exploit their workforce to the degree that a Chinese worker can roll a car off the production line for the cost of a bowl of rice.  That is the economic reality in China.  But Chinese workers don’t have the same protection ours do; Chinese factories don’t have the rigorous regulation, employment or Health and Safety regimentation that the West does, so their cost of labour is far lower.

So if we consumers are being fed messages to Buy New Zealand-Made, why am I struggling more and more every year - as an earning employee - to afford those New Zealand goods?  Why am I not feeling the love?

Let’s come back to the economic conditions here in NZ – compared with Oz.  Goods bought here - even NZ-made - are often more expensive than abroad, including Australia.  Is it because our wages are too high?  Are we being paid a fair wage?  Well, Australian workers continue to outstrip us in terms of wages, despite their downturn.  Indeed, over the last 30 years, New Zealand wages have hardly risen at all in real terms.  This means that our ability to keep up with the rising cost of goods actually falls shorter every year.  And yet, our productivity continues to soar!  If there is ever a Case Study for exploitation, I think it’s here in New Zealand.  In other words, we are working harder, longer, and for less money.  It's little consolation we're not alone.

If New Zealand wages are so low, why are NZ goods so damned expensive here?  Milk is an obvious one after wine.  Our wines are good - exported around the world - but we’re the international HUB of milk production.  And the reason for that is that it costs less to make milk here; cheaper water, cheaper wages, and relatively cheaper land.  Yet, it’s dearer to buy a litre of milk here than in most European countries!   

I'll tell you why that is.  It’s because price has NOTHING to do with cost-of-production.  Price has everything to do with our willingness to pay.  Yes, yes, yes; basic economic theory tells us that profit = sales – cost, so price depends on that equation.  However, if the customer isn’t willing to pay the price, the theory falls over.  If it costs $100 to make the widget, but the customer will only pay $1, then widgets aren’t made.  However, if a widget costs $1 to make, and the customer is willing to pay $100, then you can bet the customer will be charged $100.  It might not be fair, but that’s capitalism.  So if we are going to be charged more for NZ milk and NZ wine, how far should our loyalty stretch?  Frankly, there are some large and high-profile companies here in New Zealand, pulling on our heartstrings.  They pull out the “Loyal” card – but they ain’t givin’ back.

Let’s look at the theory of NZ goods keeping NZ jobs.  Well broadly, that’s still a truism today – but it’s not quite as “true” as it once was.  NZ corporates focus on “productivity” – "We need to be more productive," they cry.  But, if we are more productive, we actually do ourselves out of jobs!  We HAVE been more productive - and our continued broad increased productivity means less jobs across the NZ economy!  However, the statistics continue to show that we are not seeing the benefits of our productivity.  Not only are New Zealanders being exploited, but the corporate, right-wing spin today, is that we should have some sort of loyalty for our large NZ companies with those limited budgets of ours. We're told that NZ money spent on NZ goods trickles down into the economy, instead of going overseas.  Well I can tell you, the trickle down theory is the biggest bag of shite since Margaret Thatcher filled her rubber underpants.   Despite the right-wing spin doctors CONTINUING to promote “Trickle Down”, the economists and the statistics do not support the fact.  Indeed, money does NOT “trickle down”; money trickles UP.

I’m not saying that every business here in New Zealand is like this.  Indeed, there are some cracking businesses that earn our loyalty by the directors/owners’ hard work, their dedication to their staff, and their exceptional, true respect for the customer.  But there are many NZ businesses that don’t.  

So in summary, there are a lot of businesses in New Zealand that aren't paying their way in our country;

• As employees, businesses in New Zealand aren’t giving us the return for our hard work
• As customers, businesses in New Zealand aren't giving us lower prices for their lower cost-of-production – they can’t have it both ways!
• There are New Zealand businesses who are fleecing the consumer – charging us more than our overseas counterparts, playing on our heartstrings, but not passing that increased revenue component onto New Zealand workers.
• Directors in New Zealand continually award themselves annual pay rises MANY TIMES higher than inflation, but plead poverty when it comes to staff pay rises.
• New Zealand businesses want consumer loyalty from kiwis, but won’t reward staff for their productivity and won’t pass on the lower cost-of production to the consumer, in terms of lower prices.  So why should be loyal?

With all of that said, let’s be choosy about how freely we give our loyalty.  Let us not be blindly sucked into the "Buy NZ" game - until we have the incomes to have that luxury!  Instead, let’s give our loyalty to those great kiwi companies who have earned it, not to those who demand it.

FURTHER READING:

"Real Wages - the Brutal Truth" [ Mike Treen, Unite News, Feb 2014]

https://unitenews.wordpress.com/2014/02/19/real-wages-the-brutal-truth/

“The lag in wages vs. productivity costs you hundreds of dollars per week” [Systemic Disorder, Sept 2014]

https://systemicdisorder.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/wages-lag-vs-productivity/

"Re-run: Unemployment up, productivity up" [Marty G, The Standard, March 2011]

http://thestandard.org.nz/re-run-unemployment-up-productivity-up/

"Does your company give you a $148,000 bonus?" [Sydney Morning Herald, Dec 2015]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/world/75001193/Does-your-company-give-you-a-148-000-bonus-No-This-US-firm-does

"Are the fat cats pouring their own milk?" [Nicholas Blumsky-Gibbs, Otago University, Oct 2012]

http://www.otago.ac.nz/law/research/journals/otago043943.pdf http://www.otago.ac.nz/law/research/journals/otago043943.pdf