Nationals Trump card
Written by David Duffin
The John Key National government have never had much to offer New Zealand. For the most part the majority of their policies and schemes for the future are the equivalent of appearing to do something whilst doing nothing at all. Then, when we are lulled into safety they slide a bigger card onto the table which actually means something, taking everyone by surprise. Shortly after this, they will play the trump card.
The most blaring example of this is when the 'zero' budget came out. Other than taking money off 14 year old paper deliverers (which raises a tiny amount of capital whilst punishing those without much) and increasing the rate which people have to re-pay their student loans (which doesn't bring in more money it just means we get it back quicker) there was little in it other than taking money off one government agency and filtering it into another.
There was however one big change which appeared to be a blunder. This was the highly controversial classroom saga which was recently in the press. It struck me at the time that National both highly underestimated how much of an effect the policy would have on schools and secondly were completely unprepared for the opposition against the move to increase classroom sizes. This lead to a rapid backing down on the policy, stating that no school will lose more than two teachers. However, this still didn't calm public anger toward the move. A move which seems even more ridiculous considering National paid out $51m in 2011 to help private schools keep their classroom sizes down (private schools should be just that; private companies). You'd expect a right wing party to reject the notion of tax payers subsidising big business but apparently this is just another case of one rule for everyone else and another for them.
Anyway, it was at this point National played one of those trump cards which they have used so many times during their leadership. In steps Paula Bennett to announce some outrageous policy to stir up anger in the New Zealand public. This 'outrageous' policy gives judges the right to remove children at birth from parents of child abusers. It’s outrageous because judges already have the right to remove children from violent homes. The minor change would be that judges could now direct people to not have children, and if they do their child will be taken off them at birth. Realistically how does this even work? Where do these kids end up? How open to abuse is such a policy? Is it right that a judge could rule that you cannot have children ten years before you have one? Can a person not change?
The point is I very much doubt that this policy is well thought through at all. It doesn't have to be. One thing National understands very well about New Zealand society is the nasty streak which runs through it. Each time National has found themselves on the ropes they have played on this ‘trump card’. During the campaign before the election, every time they found themselves in trouble they would resort to attacking beneficiaries, the lower class, single mothers, and other vulnerable groups. Each time this card was played the overwhelming support was for National. It didn't matter that the changes wouldn't raise significant capital or offer any actual positive change for the community. No, the idea that a lot of New Zealand lapped up was that of punishing those beneath them. Those on welfare have been particularly demonised which is unfair and unhelpful for numerous reasons. The most notable being that if there are less available jobs than people looking how can it be fair to punish those people for not being able to find work?
Yes, National’s and in particular Bennett’s approach to challenges is to punish. Ignore the factors which lead to the problems; poverty, health, education and intergenerational factors are all issues needing concentration. Punishing the outcome is simplistic and not a solution. But it's getting the backing of New Zealand. Why?
The issue here is not so much if this policy is right but rather why is this approach so successful? We seem to be stuck in a pattern of, rather than trying to lift others up we want to push them down.
Why has this negative attitude started to become so strong in New Zealand? Where has compassion and desire to help others gone? Have we been conditioned to feel this way? During the recent boom years top earners paid 66% tax; now 33% is seen as highly unfair. Less is expected from the well off in today’s world and far more is expected of the poor.
The number of poor has increased and the number of very rich has become tiny. Yet due to the aspirational attitude National and others like to push we now have a situation where people are desperately trying to climb the social ladder trampling those beneath them. People have been sold the lie that everyone can be rich. It's just not true. We need the so called lower class. We need cleaners and health care assistants to look after the elderly. These people deserve a decent pay package. They deserve respect. If someone loses their job they also deserve respect. They shouldn't be treated like some virus sucking New Zealand of valuable capital. We, as a whole country should be helping these people get back on their feet. Sure, there are people who abuse the system. But there will always be these people. You shouldn't punish the many to get at the few who will probably find new ways to cheat the system anyway.
It is also slightly disturbing to see how people now react to those who go on 'strike'. Overall the majority of public reaction will be against those striking. The common feeling is that these people have jobs and should not expect anymore. They are being 'ungrateful'. Shouldn't we take in both sides of the argument first? Shouldn't we stop and think “good on them, $13.50 to look after our elderly with dementia and other horrible illnesses isn't enough”. Shouldn't we reject the notion that Talley's can even try to decrease people’s wages?
Is the difference between New Zealand and Australia that their government still has compassion for the fellow man? When Brisbane suffered the floods not long ago very quickly an increased tax levy was put in place to pay for it. We stayed well clear of doing that with Christchurch though. Why? Is it because New Zealanders have become selfish, unwilling to give towards something which doesn't directly impact them in the short term? Ironically in the long term it will affect us all.
A friend of mine stated not long ago to me that 'people need to have a change of heart'. She was referring to those on the benefit. I believe the line is correct but the target is not. New Zealanders as a whole need a 'change of heart'. We need to become a more compassionate and caring society who values every single person within it. This is the only way forward. If this was the predominant attitude flowing through our country then everyone would be better off. Not just the top ten percent.
We also need to examine issues thoroughly before jumping to a conclusion. The overwhelming support for Bennett’s policies would drop greatly if people took time to think over the long term outcomes of such moves.
If this was to occur we would also see Nationals trump cards for what they really are. A joker aimed to distract.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Comments
- No comments found
Leave your comments