The sound of one hand clapping

The phrase ‘the sound of one hand clapping’ sometimes comes to mind while reading some of the government-critical columns in the newspaper, Wairarapa Times-Age. This is a newspaper at which I work as a features writer. Some of the paper's columns seem to tell only half the story, and I’m left wondering whether the authors are uninformed or whether they have an unchallenged agenda.
I have remained silent out of deference to my hard-working colleagues and the many freelance contributors to the Times-Age and because, after all, I have moved on from my 35+ years working for government. But articles in last Friday’s paper were straws that broke my back. This blog outlines my disquiet. Publication of this letter in Times-Age was an option, but I would have had to cut 75 percent of the text.
A column in Friday's paper was written by Paul Glass in which he reviles New Zealand’s current levels of debts and our tax take, compared with Australia and New Zealand.
What isn’t mentioned is that during COVID, individuals and businesses were supported with wage subsidies, business relief, and bailouts, which has impacted debt levels. Air New Zealand, for example, was bailed out to the tune of nearly $1 billion. Today, the national carrier is making about $1 million a day in profit. Presumably Paul Glass’s business 'Devon Funds' chose not to accept any wage subsidies or business relief during COVID so not to add to the country’s debt – he would have been so worried about that.
New Zealand could have chosen not to help people and businesses so thoroughly and with so much commitment. Australia and America certainly didn’t, which is why their debt levels are comparatively lower than ours, and why, I have heard, more of their businesses have gone bust and more families have been financially ruined.
Thank you, New Zealand government, for supporting us so well – it was, I believe, our finest hour on the global stage. And some of us are grateful.
Glass’s column moves on to revile the Labour government’s ‘wastage’ of expenditure although no evidence of that is provided. And what outrageous disrespect for the extraordinary policy workers who, each year, run around like blue-arsed flies finding five or ten percent, or more, in savings across the board to allocate to new priorities – to respond to things like COVID, floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanic eruptions, terrorist attacks, or increased gang activity because Australia gave us its Killer Bees problem. When I think of the business cases, the cost-benefit analyses, the robust budget bids, the Cabinet papers – each of which requires the approval of a dozen departments, including Treasury, before they can be lodged with the Cabinet Office. And, so, I also question the veracity of the point made in Friday’s editorial that annual budgets simply rebrand three percent of expenditure each year.
Uniformed?
Glass wails that New Zealand should spend more on infrastructure.
Oh, like all those extra billions that have been allocated for health infrastructure, schools, roads, the repair of munted roads, rail, state housing, and infrastructure for fresh, waste and stormwater - additional allocations that National are now saying are wasteful, which they would repeal? All in sectors that suffered from severe under-investment in the period 2008 to 2017.
After the 2016 Kaikōura earthquake and the Whakatane floods, when I worked for our recovery agency, local leaders took me on a tour of their three-water infrastructure – dilapidated from years of under-investment (because councils couldn’t raise enough in rates from their small communities) and now further wrecked by disaster. Insurance would only cover the costs of addressing the impacts of the disasters, not the underlying dilapidation. The councils had already reached the top of their possible debt levels. They were desperate for central government help.
This Government is helping, despite the self-entitled squabbles among councils and communities. But National is quite clear it will not invest in this infrastructure – if it becomes government, it will require councils to sort three-waters out themselves by either raising their levels of debt (which they mostly cannot do and, anyway, according to Glass, increased debt is bad) or raise our rates significantly.
Mixed messages?
Paul Glass’s column also slams the number of consultants and bureaucrats working for government. Having been in that space for so many decades, I have heard this rhetoric from National before every election. But when they become government, nothing changes. Given the complexity of the work over so many aspects of our lives, with all of us ungrateful citizens demanding more and more, the number of workers is necessary.
Government is a big employer – nurses, police officers, fire fighters, teachers and more – all of which are demanding increases in their workforces and increases in their pay. The number of policy workers is small by comparison. Should half of them be let go, to sign up for the dole - with the amount of work the government can achieve each year also halved?
A couple of weeks ago, National announced it would reduce the number of backroom staff in the health sector, should it become government. This was covered in the Times-Age. That night, the PM Chris announced that because of the amalgamation of DHBs, fewer backroom staff in the health sector would be required. The other Chris professed outrage. Nothing about this turn-around in messaging was discussed in our newspaper the followed day.
Friday’s editorial opines there is little difference between Labour and National. Au contraire.
I don’t have answers, or complete information, or even all the questions, but I do know I’m interested in what is really going on rather than just reading ideas that pop into people’s heads that they decide are facts. It’s a wicked problem in both the traditional and non-traditional media.
So, I have a proposal.
Once finishing up at school, all young people could be required to do a two-year internship as an assistant policy analyst for government, no matter their abilities. A boot camp for the mind, if you like. That might help future generations, at least, understand how hard all this stuff is and how many different points of view need to be balanced. And while we’re ‘boot camping’ that problem, why don’t we also require the same people to take night classes to learn how to be parents. We could deal with that pernicious problem at the same time.
The phrase ‘the sound of one hand clapping’ actually refers, I think, to the philosophy that true wisdom cannot be taught but can only be found within oneself. Sure, but let’s provide a fertile ground to help enable that wisdom.