The Other Side of the Story

Flipping what is spoon fed around - so we don’t swallow it.

1. ) ACT leader David Seymour is calling for a 'reality check' after the outcry over the latest round of job cuts.

David Seymour says everyone is gnashing their teeth over 3,000 jobs being slashed in the public service when the number of jobs hired was far greater over the past two terms and that these new jobs did not equate to better outcomes. Seymour says job cuts dwindle in comparison to growth across the public service under the previous Government.

Thomas Coughlan at the NZ Herald wasted no time rushing to support this view with the usual blur of charts, graphs and generalised statements in a long wordy article.

“During the Key-English Government’s final term, new operating spending each Budget would be about $1.5b. During Labour’s first term new spending each Budget would be about double.” - Thomas Coughlan

Plus :

“In fact, if you look at Budgets delivered by National versus those delivered by Labour, the difference in new spending has tended to be more than $1.5b. A cut of that amount is almost like turning one Labour Budget into a National one.” - Thomas Coughlan.

Thomas examined the growth of public sector in Wellington and the growth of GDP in Wellington before turning to Brad from the Flat - who said the cuts represent bout 1% of the workforce in Wellington and this would cause a noticeable ( but not catastrophic ) effect. There’s a huge amount of private sector jobs supporting the public sector in Wellington but nobody can say what it all means.

The other side of the story is Nicola Willis did not know any of the downstream effects of her 6.5% - 7.5% cuts before proceeding with them at pace and failed to request advice and evidence about these effects from Treasury before rushing like an Atlas Network Bull at an arbitrary gate just to find $1.5 Billion in savings that will help fund election bribe tax cuts.

The other side to this story is also that Thomas did not consult economist Craig Renney who unlike Brad - had actually worked on Budgets - and had expressed that there is no evidence any of these job changes will help reduce the cost of living and no evidence this is fixing the economy. Craig Renney exposed the fact that there is no sound foundation for National Party rhetoric - and here at G News we think this is exactly where the Press Gallery should be focused, in order to hold Zombie Neoliberal policies to account.

The other side to the story about the analysis provided by Thomas is that he fails to include The Pandemic, the Cyclone and the Global Economic Slowdown as well as making assumptions that the starting point in 2017 was “the right size” for the public service. In other words - Thomas has attempted to normalise and generalise the size of Labour Budgets and National Budgets by removing the “real context” behind spending decisions.

Thomas failed to use the right size numbers used by the Public Service Commission and failed to show us how the trend is declining in most areas - after the pandemic anyway. The press seem unable to tell us about the increased scope of work and ambition in Ministries as well.

Finally the other side of the story when it comes to David Seymour’s suggestion that we need a reality check - betrays the counterfactual that Seymour cannot tell us how many jobs are required to achieve the outcomes he talks about.

Big Hairy News covered this yesterday when they applied resource numbers to the equation - for example - if we know it takes 100 public service jobs to achieve an outcome but in 2017 there were only 40 jobs and Labour came along and added 50 new jobs by 2023, that still means we are 10 jobs short and need to hire another 10 people to get that outcome. Then along comes Seymour slashing things back to 40 jobs but National saying nah make it only 6 jobs that are slashed ( 6.5% ) - so 84…but all along we needed 100 jobs to achieve the outcome.

This illustrates the way the press have failed to get after these specifics and deal in the detail adequately on behalf of the public.

The details remain shrouded behind a curtain of Public Service CE silence.

There’s a hole in the public debate which has everyone - including Seymour running around like headless chooks. How many jobs are required to achieve the outcomes desired? That is the question before any jobs are added or subtracted or anyone says Government Spending is unsustainable. Luxon, Willis and Seymour need a reality check about the resources required for outcomes - and so do the media.

2. ) Bishop is determined to sidestep Green and Red Tape to get those projects fast tracked.

Chris Bishop said - :

"The public has the opportunity to submit applications for listed projects to be considered by the Fast-track Projects Advisory Group. These projects will be subject to assessment by that Group, and Ministers will make final decisions on which projects should be listed in the Bill.”

The other side of the story is the public have no say about any of these projects in the submissions process because they are being kept secret using Cabinet Approval as a mechanism to shut out the public - and the proposed legislation allows applicants to weigh in on their own applications, but blocks expert panels considering individual applications to seek public input.

Bishop basically said the public can submit about the wider Bill but they can get stuffed about any of the projects. Push off you lot, that sort of thing.

Marama Davidson said she thought Bishop's answers were dismissive and equated to gas lighting - which is a fair cop in my book.

Chris Bishop is pretty popular according to Atlas Network Taxpayer Union polling - but in reality he’s had a dream ride in the media ( just like Nicola Willis and her press immunity ) and is a shambolic mess with low EQ and a tendency to rant like a manic flapping flounder if pushed into a corner.

The public deserves to have their say in a liberal democracy and Bishop’s antidemocratic methods simply divide and outrage the nation as they see crooks gaming the system like a pack of Beagle Boys awarding themselves unprecedented executive power in order to make crony short term plunder a reality.

The other side of the story is the Atlas Network vested interests are riding rough shod over democracy again in broad daylight and laughing in our faces while most of the press stand back and watch it all happen.

3. ) “The Waitangi Tribunal’s attempt to summons Minister Karen Chhour makes me deeply fearful for them” says Seymour

According to David Seymour Karen Chhour has more mana than the Waitangi Tribunal

“Karen is a Māori woman who survived the state care system. By their own standards, they are buying a fight with someone of much greater mana. It’s not just Karen. They don’t seem to understand the subject either. Karen is removing section 7AA from the Oranga Tamariki Act because a child’s safety and welfare matter more than their race.” - said Seymour

“Section 7AA has led to Māori children being uplifted from loving homes due to the ethnicity of the carers. The tribunal seems to think that’s okay. I call it race fanaticism.” - Seymour.

The other side of the story is if Karen Chhour has evidence that Section 7AA has damaged children then she should be leaping at the opportunity to provide that evidence instead of running like a coward and hiding behind Seymour’s legs on this one.

Even Audrey Young wrote that it “It seems rather unusual that the minister could not have furnished the tribunal with a written statement.”

Instead Seymour and his mates have called in a wall of Crown Lawyers to shield Karen from having to provide evidence before wrecking this law- willy nilly based on anecdotal stories alone.

The other side to this story is it’s all part of the Atlas Network determination to crush obstacles to their vested interests - ideally by painting over the Treaty of Waitaingi, removing clauses in statutes and tearing down the Tribunal itself…using a few useful “Uncle Toms” as battering rams.

This is the same issue Shane Jones was pontificating about the other day and now Seymour is rattling sabres of bravado and spin to keep his mostly racist and neoliberal constituency onside. The heart of the matter is a refusal to front up with the evidence justifying a proposed controversial neoliberal law change - and a contempt for the judiciary that looks like a breach of the Cabinet manual.

If there’s nothing to hide there should be nothing to fear and no need for Seymour to yap like a small dog behind a fence while Crown Lawyers try to block and delay the proper processes that we rely upon in a functioning democracy.

The Other Side of the Story

Morena

G