Most people are lightweights compared to Robertson with the possible exception of Gerry Brownley.
Printable View
No I am not shooting the messenger.
Trevor Mallard continues to be the biggest bully Parliament has ever seen and practices it nearly daily in Parliament and shockingly, in his behaviour and actions against a former staffer that he has accused of sexual harassment and sacked him without proof. I don't know if this guy is guilty or not guilty but it seems rather an unfair treatment where the Speaker of Parliament can behave like this and have all his decisions/fights paid for by the taxpayer (like Winston) while the guy fighting to clear his name is facing bankruptcy trying to clear his name.
Sorry moka but we are miles apart on this one.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...hould-be-named
With respect I think its a bit more complex than that.
Yes the subsidy goes to the employee, but there is also a well recognised benefit to the employer which should also be acknowledged.
The sudden shock of the lockdown meant many businesses would have to lay off staff & it was recognised there is a huge disruption & cost to a business in finding, interviewing & re-employing new employees when business picks up.
While some businesses (e.g. dependent on foreign tourists or international students) have not seen a pick up, many businesses are humming again & having their employees meant a considerably quicker recovery than otherwise would have happened.
That's good economics for the country, good policy.
In a recent piece by Tony Alexander, he summarised the view of business owners that responded to him with stories from the GFC in 2008-2009. A large majority of them said their biggest mistake was to try far too much to hold onto staff for too long, leading to a much harder hit and more job losses than they would have if they had ruthlessly dealt with the situation at the start.
Your above post assumes most businesses will recover quickly and continue operation. I respectfully disagree and think we will sadly see a huge level of redundancies and bankruptcies.
I sincerely hope I'm wrong and you are right.
Just for the record, I’m not criticising the Government policy as they were faced with a no win situation. I’m disagreeing with the post saying employers using the wage subsidy are beneficiaries. They are not, by any stretch of the imagination
In the real world, Iceman, the layoffs and redundancies you have alerted & referred to have already started happening -
Employers (doing the right thing) by keeping staff on using the wage subsidy and doing the decent thing by topping up employees’ remuneration -
but post wage subsidy, having to lay staff off.
Start with The Warehouse (1,000+) and continue down the list to the latest AMI (100+).
Talk to business owners out there and most of them are having to cut staff numbers.
The wage subsidy was indeed simply staving off the inevitable.
Now, here's the crucial point per discussion about beneficiaries : if employers topping up employees’ remuneration = employers being beneficiaries, then we know where this country is heading with Comrade Cindy & her incompetents in charge.
Breeding beneficiaries - there’s no getting away with that basic principle of Labour’s economic strategy & policy.
It might really be different this time. The people losing their jobs have not been on the sofa for months or years. They are workers, and well used to and need an income greater than the dole, even the virus-dole. The former has partner income restrictions, the latter ends soon anyway.
They are going to be out there knocking on doors and applying for every job they can find.
Many of them will also be frustrated and angry.
Surely you aren't suggesting a worker's Utopia? Where everybody suckles at the breast of Mother State? What a wondrous idea! Just think how harmoniously we would all work together for the good of all! United in the common cause....a team of 5 million....a diverse rainbow of humanity toiling together. Rain those hammer blows....swing those sickles....
Oh wait....the 20th Century suggests otherwise.
As are many of the negatively labelled “beneficiaries” - but of course, the general judgemental public will never believe it, or give us any credit for working our arses off, trying to get a job. I am no longer in this category but I have been there, twice, and those here who are constantly beneficiary shaming (not you) literally have no clue.
https://www.newsroom.co.nz/economic-...ke-is-released
What happens when one of Comrade Cindy's incompetents is in charge - paralysis.
I think John Key said something along the lines of there are no words to describe the economic carnage caused by this global Covid pandemic. Its 10 x bigger than the GFC.
So if you're looking for perfect solutions, you're not going to get them & most recognise that, hense the 82% approval rating for the govt despite the forecast unemployment level of 9.8% by Treasury or 10.5% by ANZ, by Sept of this year dropping back to 7 or 8% by 2021.
As has been acknowledged many times, some businesses will fail. There's not much anyone can do about foreign tourists while the pandemic rages outside of NZ.
Covid has caused huge disruption in other ways too.
The trend to Online shopping has been hugely accelerated, some say brought forward by as much as 5 years, & many businesses like The Warehouse are having to respond to that by closing retail stores.
With the increasing disruption caused by giants like Amazon, Google & Apple etc with their mega profits, & increasing automation & use of robotics in everything from agriculture to surgery, there's going to be far fewer jobs in future & I can't see there's much any govt can do about that.
However, Govt's can & must mitigate the effects to avoid massive catastrophic social disruption & I think Grant Robertson (like Bill English before him), has a very good grasp of this.
Around the world, Govt's are starting to consider they may need to provide a Universal Income at some point in the future, esp when you consider the world's richest 26 people own as much wealth as the poorest half the worlds population, or just a tiny 5% of the worlds population now hold over 70% of the worlds wealth & that trend is only increasing.
The Covid pandemic has accelerated all these highly complex challenges.
So we will be looking at an increasing number of people needing some degree of welfare support & we had better start adjusting to that idea.
Covid-19 has played beautifully into the hands of the incompetents who cannot ever deliver 5% of the huge promise made on Kiwibuild.
Breeding beneficiaries under the guise of covid-19 will deliver plenty of votes though to keep the incompetents in power for a long long time.
Those of us who know their game will benefit from it - so Let's Do This!
After receiving the Francis report Trevor Mallard urged victims of serious sexual assault to seek support. A previous complaint was reopened and it was found substantiated and the man’s employment contract came to an end. I will let the judge decide if it is defamation or not.
https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/political/389766/parliament-bullying-mallard-urges-rape-victims-to-seek-support
Speaker of the House Trevor Mallard says it's his impression from the report on bullying at Parliament that people have been raped there, and he is urging the victims to go to police or support agencies. Some of the most serious accusations included allegations of sexual harassment, including three cases of serious sexual assault.
Mr Mallard told Morning Report's Susie Ferguson it was his interpretation that people had been raped at Parliament.
"We're talking about serious sexual assault, well that, for me, that's rape ... that is the impression I get from the report, yes."
He said his reading of the report was that the offences were all committed by one person, and said he did not know who that person was.
He urged the victims to go either to police or support agencies and report the assaults.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/122213171/speaker-trevor-mallard-loses-suppression-argument-in-defamation-claim
Amid allegations of bullying at Parliament an old complaint against the man that already been investigated and found not to be made out, was reopened. Ultimately it was found substantiated and the man’s employment contract came to an end, the judge said.
The complainant did not allege rape but the man said that Mallard expressly or by implication, told media that it was a rape complaint.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=12234879
A three-year-old complaint, laid two years after the alleged assault occurred, was investigated last year and the man was exonerated.
The investigation into those claims has now been reopened and he's been sent home with Mallard declaring at the time that "I can give an assurance that one of the key dangers is no longer in Parliament".
As Blue Skies said in the post "there's going to be far fewer jobs in future & I can't see there's much any govt can do about that." With fewer jobs we need a rethink about paid work and reducing the stigma about being unemployed. If there are not suitable jobs blaming the unemployed for the problem is one of the ills of society, and contributes to social problems - depression, addiction, and suicide.
How about some kindness towards beneficiaries who find themselves in an unfortunate position not of their making.
Tens of thousands of jobs are going begging in the agricultural sector and NZ employed over 200,000 short term workers to fill jobs.
Show kindness and compassion when said ‘beneficiaries’ get off their backsides and do something useful.
What a scam our beneficiary system is - an absolute and total scam.
Totally agree. There are so many jobs that could be taken by Kiwi's yet we get in foreigners because the kiwis here can't be arsed to do these jobs, either too lazy or beneath their dignity. However they are quite happy taking the benefit. The laws regarding accepting the benefit should be made that much more strict and it should be harder to get welfare, rather than easier. Don't want to work? That's ok, no benefit for you.
For those in the workforce with dependants, low wages for low skilled jobs are a disincentive to work. Although there are a couple of taxpayer transfers based on income, family size and location (eg Accommodation Supplement) for the most part wages don't increase along with family size.
About 6000 babies are born into benefit dependent households each year, with another 3-4000 in such a household before they are 12 months old. Benefit goes up.
Why work?
The previous government introduced a policy that parent/s of those 6000 babies must be work ready when they are a year old, provided the next youngest is school age. The idea was to put these parents on the same footing as those that get off the sofa and go to work every day. Policy well and truly ditched now, and quite possible it didn't work very well anyway.
The UK has a 2 child max policy for some child benefits. More parents entered the workforce.
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/pol...back-if-needed
And why would the Kiwis made redundant want to work when this government is encouraging them to become beneficiaries?
See the grinning photo of Grant Robertson promising plenty more social welfare benefits in the article, all in the name of Covid-19.
Not a word from him about doing a decent day’s work when there are employers out there pleading for workers!
Every time someone makes a comment like this, they are making an assumption about people they do not know. Yes, no doubt some of you “know someone” on a benefit who is exploiting the system, but the vast majority of beneficiaries want to work. Wanting to work and being able to are, however, two different things! Single parents are generally not in a position to uproot their family and move to Nelson to pick fruit for a season. They can’t just abandon their kids to go work on a fishing boat. They can’t afford to pay for full time child care while they go work on a dairy farm for minimum wage. It is damned difficult to make those kinds of situations work, if not impossible.
I was a single Mum raising four kids. I was on a benefit for more years than I ever anticipated. I managed to get a part time job in a furniture factory, paying $10/hour (back then) but I spent more on petrol, traveling to work, than what I earned. It was not doable. Yes, things have improved since then, but please don’t fall into the trap of believing beneficiaries have it easy. It is a bloody hard slog, and being constantly disparaged by people who have never walked in your shoes, does nothing to support us or help our self esteem. It is difficult enough to have to ask for help, visit food banks or apply for school “charity” funds so your kid can go on a school camp; without being sniggered at and condemned by the rest of the population.
And before anyone says it ... no, I am not an exception to the rule. The vast majority of beneficiaries were, and are, in the same boat as me - trying to dig ourselves out of the same black hole.
I understand your position. I am not saying that people should uproot and go to Nelson to pick fruit. That is insane. But if you are turning down dairy farm work because its too hard or beneath you, or get sacked because you are not reliable.... well sorry, no benefit for you. We have too many people in manual non-skilled labour that we import from the likes of the Phillipines etc. It is not good enough.
I've just been reading the news on charges for isolation costs for inbound passengers https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/300...uarantine-stay
But I've seen the NZF has said they've invoked the "agree to disagree" clause in their hidden coalition agreement. So does that mean the Government has no majority for this in Parliament as the PM said yesterday she saw no reason to talk to National about it !?
It should not be a problem for the Government to reach across the aisle and find an agreeable policy that National could support. Not so sure on what they are proposing though, seems at first read to be full of holes and ill defined exemptions, as so often happens when legislation is fast tracked through Parliament without proper debate and scrutiny.
Wheels fell off the coalition wagon a while ago - they could only cover up the cracks for so long.
Not everyone wants to work in the agricultural sector or is suitable for the work e.g. older workers. And often the work means moving to another area for fruit-picking etc. Do the sums and this is often not practical for short term work when you are renting or paying a mortgage. You can’t pay your mortgage or rent and also pay accommodation costs where you are working. It gets more complicated if you have children at school. Changing schools is very disruptive for children's education.
Not everyone wants to work on a dairy farm or is suitable, and an unwilling farm worker requires a lot of effort from the employer. It is not worth him wasting his time on someone who doesn’t want to be there. A good farm worker is actually a highly skilled person. A farm is different from the factory floor or the office. Working with animals is best done by someone who likes animals and treats them well. Getting up at 5am or earlier, milking cows, living in the country doesn’t appeal to everyone.
well sorry, no benefit for you…. So does the person starve if they get no benefit, or do they turn to crime? Paying a benefit is cheaper than the costs to society through the health, justice and also the economic system of not paying a benefit.
Do you like being forced to do something you don’t want to do? Why do you think it is okay to do to that to other people, such as beneficiaries? Treat others as you would like to be treated.
Why work?
If you are a parent of a baby or young child you do work. They are a lot of work. And if you are a single parent it is a 24/7 job. It is not paid work but it definitely is work and child care centres expect to be paid to do it.
What a strange world when unpaid work is not considered work, and raising children is not considered work. Is it any wonder there is a breakdown of the family when raising children is not valued?
Its all about mindset. Everyone can work on a farm if they want to. You do not need to like animals to work on a farm. I have worked on a farm and am not what you would call an animal lover (I do like animals but no more than anyone else). Getting up at 5am is not that difficult either with a bit of discipline.
If you really want to work and provide for your family that is a small sacrifice to pay. If someone does not want to do that, then sorry, no benefit. I am not forcing anyone to do anything by the way. They force it on themselves. There are other places where they can work too. Unfortunately the last 30 years or so we have cultivated an entitlement culture where people have become dependent on the state and are loath to look after themselves and their responsibilities. Your comments are full of entitlement.
I agree with the general sentiment expressed here, but also see blackcap's points about self reliance. There is always a tension between a handup and a handout. I think our modern capitalist libertarian society has it wrong on both fronts at the moment. And I fear an extreme pendulum swing to the Left will only worsen matters. Sadly that is where Labour seems determined to take us, with or without the help of the Greens.
My dairy farmer son (previously sheep farming) would disagree, as would many farmers.
Farming today requires:
Physical fitness and good health - if you have a bad back, a dodgy knee or asthma for instance, you might struggle with a job in farming.
Good maths skills - some of us are mathematically minded. Some are not (regardless of how much education one has)
A desire to work with animals and an understanding and commitment to animal welfare. If you don’t like animals you are far more likely to mistreat them (intentionally or not)
Common sense and the ability to find solutions to things.
Commitment and dedication-if you genuinely don’t enjoy the country life, farming isn’t for you.
It is no different from many other jobs. We have talked a lot about rest home caregiving in various threads lately. Not everyone is suited to that kind of work. I know lovely people who tried it because they wanted a job that was meaningful and rewarding. Smart, intelligent, caring, wonderful people - but they found they simply couldn’t deal with the personal cares side of the job. That doesn’t make them lazy or unwilling to make sacrifices. It makes them honest enough to admit they are not a good fit for the job. It is very easy to go down the “any job is better than no job” road, when you are not walking in job seekers’ shoes.
I’m pretty sure there are jobs out there you would not want to do, or would not be suited to. If someone forced you to do them anyway, you might see things a bit differently.
Breeding is useful to the country unless we want the population to decrease or just rely on importing our replacements.
And that is an option - we just have to have the conversation that that's what we, as a country, want to happen.
Without replacement we will run out of tax payers as the population ages.
I have had jobs I did not want to do or were not suited to me but I did them because it was my responsibility to provide for my family. However it incentivised me to find other lines of work that suited more. Saying that we should provide the dole because job seekers do not like some kinds of work is the wrong line of thinking. Farming as have other manual labour jobs have got a lot easier on the body with the increasing use of technology. Any job is definitely better than no job.
I am not saying we should provide the dole “because job seekers do not like some kinds of work.“ I am simply pointing out that you can’t just have a blanket expectation that a beneficiary can do any job that’s available. We all have different skills, abilities and levels of education. These are human beings we are talking about. We are not all the same!
I have a fear of heights. Do you seriously believe I should have been forced to train as a line mechanic and made to work up ladders or transmission lines? If someone has asthma, are you really going to send them to work in a seed cleaning factory? If someone faints at the sight of blood are you going to make them work at an abbatoir? If someone is scared of dogs are you sending them to work at a dog groomer?
Get real and have some modicum of understanding and common sense. One size does not fit all!
I know of a large fishing trawler in Nelson recently could not fill their crew, in an industry that is lucky enough to have plenty of work (and pay reasonably) still and despite huge numbers of so called "jobseekers". They ended up filling their numbers with young foreigners that they got from a backpacker hostel. Pathetic and lazy attitude.
I am not saying that you should be forced to do anything. But if needs require you will find a way. There are currently too many people who are not taking jobs not because they cannot, but because they want not. That needs to be fixed. If one does not want to take a dairy farming role because they do not want to get up at 4am then sorry that is no excuse. If there was no dole, then you watch those positions being filled. The problem we have is the alternative is too easy and pays too much. No wonder there is a huge influx of foreigners coming to NZ taking positions that Kiwis should really be taking themselves. Like Iceman said, pathetic and lazy attitude.
How about a few numbers rather than there are "far too many" There are not many dairy farms close to Auckland. So asking someone who may have dependents to shift to some rural area in another part of the country is not going to get too many takers. Very easy to say pathetic and lazy attitude but most rural jobs do not come with accomodation, require a vehicle for transport and so on.
As for crewing on a fishing boat good luck with that. :)
westerly
Right here is the exact attitude we are describing. I've made a career of fishing so find your comment strange to say the least, particularly implying as you do, that its preferable to stay on the dole. A job that pays reasonable money for hard manual low skilled labour for green hands, free food and free accommodation but young Kiwis today simple are not prepared to make sacrifices such as being away for a few weeks, when they can sit on the dole and do nothing. Shows how lazy and pathetic we as a country have become.
I think you will find that Balance was talking about a mindset. There is nothing wrong with being a beneficiary. Benefits were established to help those out temporarily in need when that arose. (with the emphasis on temporary) It was never the intent that that need became a lifestyle. That is what Balance is arguing against I feel.
If you feel that benefits should be a lifestyle choice then I am appalled and staggered at that mindset.
If I was unemployed I wouldn't take a fishing boat job - I get seasick!
I wouldn't expect to be forced into one either.
Some of the measures being suggested here make me think of the Great Depression job creation stuff - seems some people's mindset hasn't moved past this.
Each case will be different - forcing a single mother to work on a remote dairy farm probably isn't a good idea (though it may work for some), think issues around child care etc.
At the end of the day the numbers aren't actually that great. Figures now bandied about look for 5-8% unemployment rather than the 15-20% (or more) talked about in the past.
Just move around and see the jobs being done by workers on temporary visas - I actually know quite a few of them & some of them are employed by business contacts of mine :
- Shop assistants
- Cleaners
- Petrol Station Attendants
- Supermarket staff
- Construction workers
- Fast food staff
- Fruit pickers
- Restaurant staff
Plenty of jobs around so there's absolutely no excuse about having to stray out of town etc etc in search of a job.
I haven't seen any comments specifically advocating that single mothers work on remote dairy farms. The point appears to be that those capable of undertaking a job, whether they like it or not, should be. Your example would place them into a category that potentially wouldn't be able to, so I don't see that it invalidates the premise.
The signs still point towards 15%+ as subsidies are withdrawn, and the global economic beings to contract. We'll have some updates later tonight from the US.
I agree that those who can should - but it needs to be looked at case by case.
People here make blanket statements.
As for the unemployment - sure there is more to come when the subsidies come off (you can't keep propping up unviable business forever) but I haven't seen the 15% bandied around for a long time now.
If you have a projection of that please share.
Slight problem with requiring people to accept specific jobs. Have to find an employer who will take them on first. Unless they are make-work jobs paid by the taxpayer.
The newly unemployed will be much more likely to be offered jobs. They are work ready and have current references. Some others not so much.
I suppose the latest poll on 1 News is rogue as well for you Tory lovers?
You still haven't come up with any numbers as to how many unemployed turn down offered jobs.? It is your interpretation that I implied it is preferable to stay on the dole. I was lucky enough to never having been unemployed but times have changed and jobs are not easy to find at present.
Seasonal and agricultural jobs are not a career and are usually situated in areas without a high unemployed population.
I still wouldn't work on a fishing boat but you obviously were suited to a life at sea.
westerly
I can read pretty well thank you Balance and I can actually form my own opinions from what I read. I have never felt the need to ram my opinions down other peoples throats nor abuse people whose opinion differs from my own so I guess I dont understand your seemingly endless need to do so. But of course you are entitled to do so if thats what floats your boat it just gets a little tedious hearing the same thing over and over again. But each to their own.
And dont be sorry for me Balance you know absolutely nothing about me :)
Good call - a few weeks ago Balance when defending Mike Hosking said something along the lines that Hoskings big toe had achieved more than me - what concerned me was that Balance doesn't know me and that Balance had intimate knowledge of Hosking toe - a wee bit weird!
I do not need to be a bull to know where steak comes from. 😁
Yes, he was talking about a mindset. His mindset.
He seems to believe that beneficiaries are all lazy, incompetent people who have chosen to be jobless. He also apparently believes that once one is on a benefit one will be on it forever. So, as someone who has been a beneficiary twice during my life, I am offended by his ongoing criticism and disrespectful comments.
Of course I don't feel benefits should be a lifestyle choice! If that's what I believed I wouldn't have put myself through the hard slog and stress of completing a Level 5 ICT Diploma and an Office Management course while raising my kids. I also wouldn't have spent a year applying for countless jobs, stressing out about interviews, and breaking my heart over the pile of rejection letters I received. Let alone step outside my comfort zone and train for the job I now have (and love). You don't put yourself through all that if you think being on a benefit is a better "lifestyle choice."
Wasn't aware that I was supposed to come up with that number and wouldn't have a clue where you could find a reliable such number. The example I gave was clear, in a town where many young people are on the dole and unavailable for work that unduly interferes with their lifestyle. But honestly it's probably best to bypass them any way because most of them fail a drug test. Not sure where NZ is heading with this when an unfortunately large proportion of our young people don't want hard work or are unemployable as well as calls growing louder against work permits for foreign workers.
Quite right - anyone can lose their job and they do! Guess what they typically have to apply for income support out of necessity. Anyway there are plenty of people working who get accommodation supplement I guess they are beneficiaries too because of their rent or mortgage costs as their wages aren't sufficient enough, then there are people who get Working for Families so its not just the unemployed.
justakiwi I think most of the criticism here has not been leveled at all beneficiaries. It has been directed at the cohort of beneficiaries that has little or no intention of getting a job and if they do, it is only to clock up some time so they can go back on there. Sadly, I have recent examples of quite a lot of such behaviour at the same time as companies in their home towns are desperate for workers.
I think a huge majority of commentators on ST want our welfare system to be a good safety net for people that genuinely need it, normally temporarily due to circumstances out of their control. Furthermore, I think most people on here have gotten to where they are through hard work and determination, like you obviously have, not inherited great wealth..
The comments always get a bit more heated and personal (sadly) as we draw closer to elections. but hopefully they will all be kept relatively civil :-0
I love you justakiwi, in platonic way if that even needs to be said, honestly for someone I’ve never met, I’d much rather subscribe to your passion and perseverance for a better life for yourself and all the disadvantaged than any of the hard right or hard left trolls on here.
Wallow in your goodness and humility, you deserve it, much more than many of the ‘well off’ here who seek to diminish the majority who really do struggle to make ends meet.
Remember, “don’t let the fvckers get you down”. My mantra.
An excellent poll result after the rogue poll last week. 32% vs 24.5% - day & night!
In 4 weeks’ time, the 14% undecided will also firm up their preference and the picture will become clearer.
Down 5% for Labour, down 1% for Greens and it’s the start of sayanora comrade Cindy & her team of incompetents.
Meanwhile, some of us are positioned to win either way so enjoy!
One party wants to create jobs, the other party wants to breed more beneficiaries.
My comments are about human rights and treating people with respect, dignity and fairness.
It depends which definition of entitlement you choose- the fact of having a right to something, or the belief that one is inherently deserving of privileges or special treatment. I don’t think the right to receive a benefit is special treatment. We have made a lot of progress economically and in other ways in the last 30 years and the benefits should be shared, rather than the rich getting richer as jobs disappear and wages are stagnant or driven down.
An excellent poll result you have to be joking if you exclude the rouge poll the result is nothing short of disastrous for National a remember under soyman anything less than 40 was trouble territory. The fact that she keeps on spouting internal polling in the high 30s without providing this detail to even her own team speaks volumes, the fact nats are still leaking to the media shows the real mood of the party. Plenty of encumber Nat MPs will be out on the streets based on this polling simple as that.
I'm not sure what a "rouge" poll is but if the recent poll is any indication the election remains Labour's to lose. Provided there's no second wave of the virus, we can expect a further Labour term, sans NZF and probably also Greens. Wouldn't be such a bad result, IMO.
Just some observations.
National are down a further 6% on the previous Colmar Brunton poll, while Labour are up 3%. National would lose a quarter of its MP's while Labour could govern alone.
At 32% the level when previously the caucus (including Collins) has said they would need to change the leader, National itself (never mind anybody else) has said that would be a disaster.
Collins was saying the Reid poll was a rogue poll in which case she's saying it doesn't count. She & others can't now pretend Colmar B' is a good result, unless now admitting the Reid poll wasn't a rogue poll.
Which is it? Can't have it both ways.
Notably as explained, the earlier Reid poll was taken over a longer time frame & included the period just after most recent change of leadership & when National had several MP's being fired for unethical behaviour & it's number 2 & 3 ranked MP's Kaye & Adams resigned.
Any idea who's still advocating 15% unemployment (other than you)?
Any interesting article on how we are bouncing back
https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/300...ated-negatives
And do you see the likes of me worried?
Not in the least as we, who know how to play the game, win either way.
It's NZ which will be sinking into the economic swamp of despair if Comrade Cindy & her incompetents run the country into the ground for another 3 years.
Some of us don't really mind as come sunshine or rain, there's ways to make things work - Labour lop-sided 'beneficiaries breeding' policies are there to be taken advantage of.
Let's DO This!
The subsidy was paid out by MSD/Work and Income due to financial hardship because employers were significantly impacted by COVID-19.
Sounds like a hardship grant/benefit to me. Employers definitely benefited from the payment from the generous benefactor = the government.
A benefactor provides money or other resources to an individual, group, or organization. A beneficiary receives these benefits.
Special Needs Grant = Hardship Grant. A Special Needs Grant is a one-off payment to help you pay an essential or emergency cost if you can't pay it another way. You usually don't have to pay the money back.
https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/pr...rant.html#null
Sadly thats the sense of entitlement & extremely cynical selfish values which have become all too closely aligned with the National Party in recent years. The awful attitudes, sense of entitlement & values which Todd Muller & Nikki Kaye wanted to expunge from the National Party.
Look where its got them. A major party with over 20 of their MP's leaving for various reasons, this term, a crisis in leadership & disastrous polling.
And yet still so self- unaware.
They're the complete antithesis of the style of leadership of Jacinda Adern, and even when Labour make mistakes & are far from perfect, people want a more caring honest govt and politicians with integrity.
I did not vote National last election so you are way off beam with your observation.
As for honesty & integrity, try the hijab and the granting of asylum for the Iranian queue jumper as instances of how cynical & hypocritical Cindy is.
Burnishing her UN job credentials at the expense of oppressed Muslim women (hijab is a symbol of oppression in many Islamic countries like Iran, Afghanistan & Iraq) and going back on the commitment to Australia not to allow Manus Island refugees to jump queue.
An employer topping up the wage subsidy to keep employees on = a beneficiary? So paying money out = a beneficiary?
Guess that's why the Warehouse & FBU gave this government the one finger salute and laid thousands off.
Class 'A' garbage.
It's clear there's not one single job-creating employer amongst the Labourites here.
I did not vote National so you can put my postings in context instead of using the ole bogeyman trick.
The Iranian was released from Manus Island on a visitor's visa to NZ for a speaking engagement. He was there because he tried to queue jump.
Suddenly, he gets asylum - totally contradictory to what his visitor's visa was issued for.
Indefensible deceitful underhandedl behaviour by Cindy.
Great for Comrade Cindy’s UN job credentials but the rest of NZ will pay the price if the Australians tighten down on restrictions for NZers there.
And who can blame them?
Don't try to hood wink the rest of us - we are not so easily hoodwinked as you are.
Oh, you are hood winked Balance. Hood winked by your own obsessive, compulsive beliefs, which are no longer grounded in reality. You have created your “story” about our Prime Minister. You have obsessed and raged for months in your attempt to disparage her. Your story is now your reality. But that doesn’t make it true.
You are fast becoming the Kiwi equivalent of Trump.
Employers topping up the wage subsidy are beneficiaries according to tim23 - says everything about the state of mind of the Labourites posting on this thread (brainwashed by Cynical Cindy wearing the hijab and must be just about beyond redemption).
Pray explain the Manus Island queue jumping refugee being granted asylum - why taunt the Australians? Cynical, deceitful and totally irresponsible.
I refuse to be hoodwinked by style over substance. You are free to worship the ground she walks on but there are those of us who can see through all that pixie dust.
Hitler was extremely popular with the Germans too, remember? Popular does not = best for a country.
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/a...ectid=12352752
Meanwhile, she says she trusts the sly lying Winston 'Owen Glenn' Peters when an overwhelming majority of NZers say they do not. How cynical & hypocritical can you get?
Whats wrong with upsetting the Aussies? They don't exactly do us too many favours. Not long ago you were raving on about how well they did without a lockdown. Looks like they are going to have one now.
I see your friend Winston is now using your "woke pixie dust " terms of indearment now - strange?
Your popularity rating is possibly much the same.
westerly